Liberal’s Wolves murder 2 women hikers

Read Part 2 here.

by Dr. Ed Berry, aka badassberry


Let’s cut the politically correct crap. But for the mentally defective, wolf-loving liberals, these 2 women would still be alive. Against the objections of common sense conservatives, the environmentalist-controlled US Department of Fish and Wildlife forced non-indigenous Canadian Wolves on several states in America.

These wolves have decimated Montana’s elk herds, killed cattle on ranch lands, killed hunting dogs, and now they have killed 2 women who were hiking in Idaho’s Craters of the Moon National Monument.

Now, to protect the liberal agenda for America, government agents are hiding evidence that might clarify the horrific event.

Wolf populations, now far larger than the so-called federally required minimums, have inundated the states of Montana, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. The feds are still adding wolf populations in Arizona, New Mexico, California, Colorado, Utah, and Texas. Wolves mate with other dog species. Dangerous wolf-hybrids have been sighted in Illinois, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

I recommend the feds put wolves in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. This is the dominant area of the Sierra Club and other eco groups who are behind the federal placement of the large Canadian wolves in America. Some day, a pack of wolves will devour a Sierra Club hiking group, armed with bear spray useless against wolves.

Read more on The Western Center of Journalism. (2863)

Copyright (c) 2013 by PolyMontana LLC or by the author. All rights reserved.


  1. 1

    Are you serious? Suffering from PTSD? What is your agenda ? Wow…No really. Wow.

  2. 2

    Hi Melissa, Not sure where you are coming from. Here’s how I connect the dots:

    1. The liberal eco-freaks are responsible for forcing Canadian wolf packs into our western states. There was no need to introduce these non-indigenous wolves into America.

    2. These wolves kill big game, livestock, pets, and even people. They cause economic and social damage. I personally know 3 people who have had close encounters with these wolves and but for their guns would have been dead. Wolf packs are the most dangerous predators in our land.

    3. Now we have an event where two women went hiking and did not return. The remains of one woman has been found and death has been attributed to wolves. The government is hindering public investigation of this event.

    4. Something is very wrong with this picture. Why is the government that forces and protects these wolves now stopping public investigation? Likely answer is because they don’t want the news to get out that their pet wolves are killing people.

    In addition, one jerk commented that the terrain in Craters of the Moon does not accommodate wolves but his comment was so vulgar that I had to remove it. But he missed the thread of evidence, namely, if one woman was killed by wolves according to the report then, obviously, wolves are there.

    If we don’t have more evidence it is because the feds are hiding it.

    Are you telling me you think all this is just neat? That we need these wolves in America? Are you one of those eco-freaks who thinks these 200-pound wolves are sweet cuddly creatures?

  3. 3

    Wow is right, Melissa. How do you make this stuff up, Dr. Ed? Are there any photos of these two women? Have you seen them? Or did the aliens land before anyone could snap any pics? It’s amazing that there are any humans, let alone millions of cows, left in MT and ID after 19 years. Where is this report? I mean, in real life, where is it? How terrible it must be to live in constant fear and hysteria and anger. Must be a miserable existence especially having to live with those 200 lb. eating machines from Canada. Would wolves from MN have been ok with you? You know, those good ol’ ‘Merikan wolves. What’s to investigate about these, apparently there has already been a conclusion reached and why would the government care about Idaho anyway? I’d like to see this report. Got it handy?

  4. 4
    Eilish Palmer says:

    Hi there, liberal eco-freak here. So are you saying the same government that has worked tirelessly to delist the wolves through backroom budget deals is now covering up that two women were actually killed by wolves instead of just being separated while hiking and dying due to the elements and the fact that search and rescue could not access all areas due to the govt shutdown? Sounds reasonable to me…

  5. 5

    It sure seems that these women’s families are happy the feds were involved in the search. Doesn’t look like a wildlife haven for elk, deer, wolves. I wonder how these families would feel if you are using their deaths to spread lies, ignorance and hysteria amongst your wolf-hating crowd. Shame on you for using them like this.

  6. 6

    No links to credible sources? No pictures? Namecalling? And just take your word for it? I think not.

  7. 7
    Mike Grant says:

    According to one of ‘those’ pages a few months back there are a dozen wolf attacks a month but the Government covers it up by ordering MEs and Coroners to list the cause of death as ‘unknown’ or ‘undetermined”…a posting by one man went so far as to say that he watched his father and grandfather get ‘torn from limb to limb’ by a pack of wolves but he was ordered to keep quiet about it. In lieu of facts there’s nothing like a good story, like the current one stating that a fully grown grey wolf was ‘trying to get through my patio screen’. If a wolf wants through a patio screen he doesn’t ‘try’…he simply goes through. My sons Pit-cross is half that size and he went through ours like it wasn’t there. Problem is this results in the old ‘boy who cried wolf’ fable. You can’t take these stories seriously unless there’s qualified independent confirmation and for this story there is none that I can find at this time. What I do find interesting is that all these reports are coming at the same time as the wolf delisting debate. Never too late to spread a little paranoia under the guise of “journalism”…Lord whatever happened to true journalistic integrity? Anyone with a keyboard can spew anything they want these days and there are more than enough weak-minded people that will buy into it without expending the minimal amount of energy it would take to check out the validity and the source.

  8. 8

    This is so paranoid that it’s past the point of interesting. Are you saying that one of the biggest problems we, as a nation, face is Canadian wolves eating female hikers? Frankly, I think more women are afraid of men legislating what can and cannot occur in their uteruses, but that’s difficult for a wolf-fearing man to understand. We liberals do not fear wolves because we know the secret code that allows us to peacefully coexist with wolves, and I’m not being the least bit ironic here. You haven’t figured it out and that’s why you and many other “outdoorsmen” are fearful. That’s sad, but it’s not the fault of the wolf who has a very specific and important job to do. Leave it alone and reap the very positive benefits. Continue to annihilate it and then apologize to your grandchildren who won’t have much of a wilderness to enjoy.

  9. 9

    For starters, here are excerpts from the link at the end of my post to The Western Center of Journalism:

    …the US Department of Fish and Wildlife continues to force predatory wolf packs into already inundated Western rural communities and wilderness areas.

    The recent disappearance and death of two female hikers in and around the Boise, ID Craters of the Moon hiking trails are causing outrage among residents who fear a massive scale cover up of what really happened to the two women.

    The body of Amy Linkert has been found, but attempts to find out what really happened to Dr. JoElliot-Blakeslee, an employee of the Oregon Dept. of Corrections, are hitting major stonewalling by authorities who should be in the know.

    Retired US Fish & Wildlife Biologist Jim Beers ( and other area citizens fear that a marauding wolf pack or other predators like a bear or a cougar may have attacked, killed and eaten the women.

    “Distortions of the evidence to exonerate the wolves” may serve the larger aim of the feds who want the Gray Wolf to remain listed on the Endangered Species registry. Local residents want local control of wolf packs; they are demanding that wolf packs in their local zones be kept under jurisdiction of their local authorities.

    But the back story really may involve a federal effort to push Western ranchers, homeowners, hikers, and nature lovers indoors and off of ever shrinking American lands in order to give more control to the federal government!

    US citizens nationwide are being urged by Western residents to comment at this address:!docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0073 by the December 17, 2013 deadline for public comments. Two talking points include the fact that the Gray Wolf is not in danger of extinction.

    In fact, populations now far exceed the numbers originally proposed for the recovery effort. Beers warns that wolf populations have inundated the states of MT, ID, OR, and WA. AZ and NM are slated to receive more wolf populations, courtesy of the feds, and CA, CO, UT, & TX are facing forcible injections of wolves. Very dangerous wolf-hybrids are being sighted from IL, MO, and the Dakotas into OH & PA!

    In addition, the PolyMontana category/feds/wolves has several articles about these wolves. In particular, please read:

  10. 10

    Do you make up all of this stuff, or just most of it? I’m not sure why you think you are so important that the government needs to lie to you? That’s usually something that’s only done to high-ranking allies.

  11. 11

    Hi Donna, its the Idaho residents who are complaining about being stonewalled by the feds. I am just reporting the news on this event.

  12. 12
    Kenneth Cole says:

    Where in the world did you get you phd? Whatsamatta U? This is the most ridiculous conspiracy theory I’ve ever seen. Obviously you don’t know the first thing about wolves, Craters of the Moon, or the weather. These women died of exposure because they were lost in extremely rugged terrain when a cold weather front came into the area.

    You theory that they were killed by wolves is beyond absurd. I have, on many occasions, been around wolves in the wild. I’ve been surrounded by them at night. I’ve called them to me by howling. I’ve been in the middle of their rendezvous sites. I have never once felt threatened by them.

    Quit with this asinine theory and just accept that these unfortunate women died of exposure.

  13. 13

    “howling” wonder if you also chase cars and bite at tires.

  14. 14

    Dear Kenneth, clearly you have not read the many reports about these wolves. Several reports are in the category link I noted in @9. While you claim the 2 women died of exposure, the article I referenced concluded otherwise. Maybe you have more recent information. If so, please provide a link.

    You also show your ignorance of the scientific method when you say my “theory” is “absurd” and then mention your experiences.

    First, in science, facts trump theories. I am not making any theory in this post. I am reporting the facts that are available. Provide new facts and I and everyone else will accept them.

    Second, your experience does not in any way prove these imported wolves are friendly to humans. And your experience is countered by the experiences of many who have been threatened by wolves, some as close as 10 feet. The fact that these wolves are dangerous has been proven.

  15. 15
    Kenneth Cole says:

    Remind me never to get into an argument with someone who just makes crap up. This is not reporting, this is repeating of every wive’s tale ever made up by the wild-eyed anti-wolf clan in the northern Rockies. You sir, are an idiot. Goodbye.

  16. 16
    Mike Grant says:

    I’m not disputing any claims but the fact that it seems to be spearheaded by Beers says more than enough although he does say it could have been bears or cougars. Regardless, the whole story is still based on speculation. As far as ““Distortions of the evidence to exonerate the wolves” may serve the larger aim of the feds who want the Gray Wolf to remain listed on the Endangered Species registry.” is concerned, according to every study and report I have read it is the Feds who want the animal delisted or at least getting the responsibility turned over to the individual states. Keep in mind that all ofthese stories play into the ongoing conspiracy theory claiming that the Canadian and American governments got together and created this super-wolf…a killer hybrid that was genetically ‘engineered’ to eliminate native ungulates in order to thwart hunters (for some reason) and eventually disarm the American public, which will never happen. Thus is the Gospel according to Beers, Rockholm, Heming, Hoppe, and the rest.
    I lived on a farm with cows, chickens, goats, rabbits…and wolves. It was in Ontario, Canada so I suppose these were the same ‘killer’ Canucks that seem to be raising a little hell down south. I heard them often and on three occasions witnessed them from my bedroom window as they crossed the field along the fence that housed the cattle. Unlike you folks we never had a problem…maybe our wolves were just better behaved? Or maybe it was simply that this was before they were ‘modified’? Geez I would never suggest that because we left them alone they went about their own business and left us alone.
    But I still maintain (other than the usual speculative rhetoric from Beers) there are still no hard facts and in my day (working in the radio broadcasting industry) if you didn’t have the hard facts and absolute proof you kept your mouth shut until you did.
    We live in an age where people love sensationalism and conspiracy and feeding the frenzy without proper and accurate documentation is irresponsible, especially under the guise of ‘journalism’.
    The fact that wolves are dangerous…duh. They’re wild, predatory, and carnivorous. So are bears, cougars, wolverines…even elk, moose and domesticated dogs yet it is always the wolf that gets singled out. I don’t know about where you are but where I live there are at least three cougar and countless bear sighting every year but never a wolf despite the fact that within a 50 mile radius of my small town there are (by government wildlife department figures) approximately 1,600 of the critters. Yes I realize every case and every area is different but I think to be fair all sides of the story should be presented and accepted…not necessarily without criticism but with at least due respect.

  17. 17

    Make that “good ol boy cries wolf”. I live within the wolf recovery area in the southwest and have seen Mexican wolves. They are not frightening or dangerous. They have run away when they’ve seen us. It is a wild and very empty land. When you say that a population of 75 wolves spread out over more than 5 million acres have ‘inundated’ them, the thing that has been annihilated is your credibility. You have none sir!

  18. 18

    As badly as I feel for these two women who died in bad weather conditions, this is something that could befall any of us. I find it curious that your first inclination is to assume that wolves attacked, killed and ate these women. Oddly enough, my first inclination would be that heavily armed men killed these women and left them to die, alone and out in the elements. I think that past numbers would support my thinking far more than yours. Man kills many more people than wild animals ever have.

  19. 19

    Wow, looks like the “greenies” pay these obats plenty to spread manure in blogs. If you think this is such a laughing matter, how about we capture a few for your back yard? Oh, you probably live in one of the high rise pack and stack in the city.
    It does no earthly good to try to talk common sense to a socialist liberal, they are deaf and dumb.

    When all of you have chased the farmers/ranchers from the country, taken the water so the rest of the country population has to re-locate, would you be so kind as to tell me where you think your food will come from? China?

  20. 20

    By the way, manure is the product that come out of the rear end of cattle. Cattle are cows, where you get your steaks from.

  21. 21

    The biggest, baddest predator on the land ain’t wolves, sir. It’s our fellow redundancies, and no animal, wild or domestic, is safe on this continent. Get rid of hunting lobbyists and nature might just balance out without disruption from bipeds. Wolves eat ungulates; the fewer wolves, the more elk and deer for men to kill. That’s the simple truth. But bipeds are no longer a part of nature, and need to butt out of the equation.

  22. 22

    One died of exposure. Search for yourselves. The women’s names were Amy Linkert and Jo Elliott-Blakeslee.

  23. 23

    Dr. Ed: As a former scientist you should know the importance of checking your sources before passing on information or stating strong opinions. In short, you were “punked” by Jim Beers an old, bitter and discredited USFWS employee who used this unfortunate tragedy (and you) to forward his anti-wolf venom and agenda. That you spread this unsubstantiated gossip says something about Jim Beer, but it also reflects on your credibility too. You spread this far and wide and it is clearly false. Will you show some scientific credibility and retract your statements in an equally public way? That would show some character. So would resigning from the American Meteorological Society because you clearly disagree with their position on climate change and its causes.

  24. 24
    Mike Panno says:

    Dr. Berry,
    About eight months ago, I was asked to write the screenplay for the upcoming film OR-7 The Journey. Because I had limited knowledge regarding wolves, I had to do extensive research. I had no bias either way as I undertook this project. Here, in a nutshell, is what I found out: wolves are no danger to humans. Are there exceptions to this rule? As with any wild animal there is always some potential for injury to humans, but the same holds true for household pets. Wolves are not depleting the Elk or Deer herds. To the contrary. The herds are made healthier by the wolves culling the old and the weak. Wolves do, on occasion, take livestock, for which the rancher is compensated. Wolves provide a myriad of ecological benefits. This has been thoroughly documented in Yellowstone National Park. And, the wolves in the states are the same as the wolves in Canada. Read Carter Niemeyer’s book Wolfer. He’s the biologist who trapped the wolves in Canada and relocated them to the U.S. You’re a doctor, so I assume you are reasonably intelligent. The truth is out there, if you are interested in getting at it. But I suspect you care little about the truth,at all. You have some vested interest in getting rid of wolves and so you close your eyes to the facts.

  25. 25

    No, I am not an eco-freak. Name calling further proves a point that you are inciting paranoia here. I live in the Bitterroot where a “Neighbor” stated that she had killed two large (About 180-200 lb.s) wolves. They were in fact 4 month old pups. Not harassing her goats. They were under weight and mal-nurished because she had shot and killed their mother earlier in the year. Exaggerating stories and inciting anger and fear will do nothing for your “Foundation” Ed. You need to examine your own fears and demons and figure out why you are so hell bent on eradicating one species from the earth. Is it because like the other “Hunters” you feel the Elk and deer belong to you and your skills are not up to par? Educate yourself on the Gray Wolf, Timber Wolf and Red Wolf. You may learn some interesting facts you will want to share with others and come away with another point of view. I am sorry your anger and fear consumes you.

  26. 26

    WOW! dude, you just got OWNED! LOL. Seriously, do some research (real research, not Jim Beers bs).

  27. 27
    Ross Kardon says:

    Perhaps dear readers, you may consider me to be an idiot who is on the border of being both a wolf lover and wildlife realist.

    Wolves, cougars, coyotes, foxes, and other predators belong in the ecosystem.
    So bringing back wolves to Yellowstone National Park was the right thing to do. And wolves should be reintroduced to other wilderness eco-systems throughout North America

    But when wolves reach certain high numbers, taking out an ecologically sustainable number of them is necessary. This can and should be done with ecologically sustainable, fair chase trophy hunting. Hunting, contrary to what animal rights extremists would have you believe, is not all bad. It just needs to be reformed so that it does not favor prey species over predator species. In other words, hunting needs to be reformed so that wolves can benefit, but not be completely exterminated, from having status as game animals, and not be regarded as an unwanted menace.

    Extremists on one side who would want to exterminate all of the wolves, cougars, coyotes, and other predators, just because they will not tolerate anything that will compete with them for hunting prey species. And extremists who would want to abolish all hunting. Are both completely wrong!

  28. 28
    Roger Hewitt says:

    Wolves are not decimating elk herds nor cattle herds nor killing people; and the Canadian wolf thing is a myth. This guy is far right bat sh– crazy. Elk herds are up in every state wherein there are wolves. Wolves kill about 0.0002 %, less really, of cattle. There have been 2 people killed by wolves in recorded history in North America, one in Alaska, one near Saskatchewan. Dogs kill 35 Americans a year. Lions and bears have killed more people and even with them the risk is very low. The guy sounds like far right wing nut stuff: Just throw myths, lies and folklore out there and see what sticks. They live in an alternative universe made up by them. Wolves are elusive, shy of people, mostly respectful of humans and their stuff. There is something primordial, loupophobia, Three Pigs, Little Red Riding Hood, Big Bad Wolf, about this and anti-wolf hysterics.

  29. 29

    Yo “Doctor”…. I live in Idaho in the middle of “wolf country”…I hunt deer ad elk….I’ve seen wolves from my house…I’ll just say elk and deer are NOT being decimated…there’s plenty out there and I still get numerous opportunities to harvest each in the same places I’ve always hunted despite the presence of wolf tracks…maybe those “hunters” who complain about lack of success (lack of game because of wolves) should get off their four wheelers, get out of their trucks and put on some miles sneaking along a ridge then maybe their “luck” might change!! And, as Mike P. stated read Carter Niemeyers “The Wolfer”-its not pro or anti wolf…its THE most factual and honest account of the whole where, why and how of wolf reintroduction. Anybody who has any opinion at all on this subject needs to read this

  30. 30

    Actually Dr. BAB’s issue is not wolf related. I am rather surprised he would bring this much attention to himself. This is really about not getting votes needed to be FVCC Trustee and badly losing to individuals who promote wildlife. I am sure when he put this falsehood out there he wasn’t prepared for the intelligent response from all of you. (They were great) BAB, PhD, stick to your many lawsuits, focus on what you really know. If you wish to sling mud, do so at the “Hasan’s” of this world, people killing people.

  31. 31
    Jerry O'Neil says:

    While there have only been “2 people killed by wolves in recorded history in North America,” it appears there have been thousands of people killed by wolves in other parts of the world.
    Are our numbers lower because our history doesn’t go back as far as these other countries, or is it because our citizens are armed? Maybe it is because our wolves are kinder and gentler.

  32. 32

    You are a strange fellow, Dr. Berry. I looked up your profile and your educational/scientific credentials are, to say the least, impressive. As well-trained in the scientific method as you clearly are how on earth you can publish something like this? It doesn’t even qualify as hearsay. All we know is that two hikers met with an untimely death in an area where wolves are known to have been. The rest is wild speculation from a comparatively small individuals who, i suspect, have an agenda themselves. To say something as definitive as ‘But for the mentally defective, wolf-loving liberals, these 2 women would still be alive.’ based on that is outrageous, and would have earned you a failing grade on a first year lab report. So, what’s going on here…do you really loath wolves so much that you’d use virtually any occasion to fan the flames of hysteria or did you, through some accident or illness, forget all your scientific training?

  33. 33

    Interesting article and I see a lot of favor for the wolves. First I am from Idaho and live 60 miles from the Craters. For someone to become dehydrated and die from the elements there in September has to be attributed to a injury occurring. There is nowhere in the Craters that is more than a days walk to a facility and really hard to become lost,especially by hikers. There are just too many landmarks present.
    As for wolves,they are there,and everywhere else in this state. Decimating herds,yes they are. In my personal view the elk,deer,coyotes,antelope and especially moose have been impacted. Recreation in this state, if your a dog owner is risky, and being shadowed by a pack is not at all exciting like some people tell you.
    There is a real problem with them here,when they are seen in towns, showing no fear,killing for the sake of killing, and eradicating the other wildlife. They need controlled,there is not enough country even here to support the numbers of wolves.

  34. 34

    Can’t say I believe this article without facts, but, I must comment on Mike Panno’s comment, “Wolves are not depleting elk and deer herds, to the contrary, the herds are made healthier by the wolves culling the old and the week.”
    I live in the Yellowstone eco-system, and your comment is pure BS. The Yellowstone elk herds have been decimated, the moose, as well. The stats are out there, I watch very closely, there are local videos of wolves separating calves from the mothers,(old?), attacking in numbers and killing healthy, in their prime, bulls and cows,(weak?). Don’t know where you got yer info, but, you’d best re-check the sources, I live in the midst of it, I see with my own eyes the destruction these non-native wolves create.

  35. 35

    I thank all of you who have come to to comment on this post, and also the readers who outnumber the commenters by 25 to 1.

    I appreciate your comments. Now that most of the machine gun fire (at me) has tapered off, it is a good time for me to respond and to summarize where the debate on this issue now stands as I see it.

    First, some things about me.

    I am certainly willing to admit I am wrong when facts demonstrate I am wrong. For an example of this, please see “I was wrong about the HR 2775 vote. Steve Daines was right.”

    Admitting when proven wrong by good data is fundamental to being a scientist. Data always wins. And so we shall talk about data.

    As you all know, my subject matter expertise is in physics, math, meteorology, and climate physics. I do know about Craters of the Moon and meteorology.

    But I know nothing about wolves except what they look like. Therefore, I must accept the possibility that your claims about wolves may be more valid than my claims and more valid than the claims of those whom I have relied upon.

    Indeed as some of you have suggested, I relied on the credibility of others when I formed my opinion about wolves. I assumed those involved in the original report by The Western Center of Journalism had made a reliable report. I assumed those who had written previous reports about the danger of wolves were correct because they were generally in my peer group. However, I acknowledge relying on one’s peer group is a risky way to form opinions about facts.

    I accept your criticism that I should be more careful about whom I trust on matters outside my own area of expertise. It is a valid criticism and one I will remember in my future posts.

    Second, some of your comments wondered off subject in your personal criticisms of me, not that I mind personal criticism because it comes with the territory of hosting an opinion blog. But in logical reasoning and debate, nothing is gained by ad hominem attacks. So, let’s focus on getting the facts on wolves.

    To the person who suggested I resign from the American Meteorological Society because its unscientific directors issued a statement that relied upon the IPCC’s invalid claims about climate change, I will respectfully deny your suggestion.

    I will debate the subject of climate change to the mat elsewhere but here the subject is about wolves. When we do debate climate change, I would expect all who engage to openly accept facts rather than hold an opinion that is falsified by facts, just as I am willing to do here.

    Third, let’s get to the subject of wolves.

    I claimed wolves kill big game, livestock, and even people. While I am correct factually, clearly my implication was that wolves kill significant big game, significant livestock, and are a danger to people. As some of you have suggested, I may be wrong on the “significant” implication.

    I will summarize your many comments as follows:

    1. @4: The feds want wolves delisted.
    2. @12: The two women died of exposure to the elements, not to wolves or other animals.
    3. @16: The whole story is based upon speculation.
    4. @16: The feds want wolves delisted.
    5. @16: The claim that wolves are dangerous derives from Beers, Rockholm, Heming, Hoppe, and others.
    6. @17: Mexican wolves are not frightening or dangerous.
    7. @21: Wolves eat ungulates; the fewer wolves, the more elk and deer for men to kill.
    8. @22: One women died of exposure. Search for yourselves.
    9. @23: Dr. Ed was “punked” by Jim Beers.
    10. @24: Wolves are no danger to humans.
    11. @24: Wolves are not depleting Elk or Deer herds.
    12. @24: Herds are healthier because wolves cull the old and weak.
    13. @24: Wolves occasionally take livestock for which the rancher is compensated.
    14. @24: Wolves provide a myriad of ecological benefits, as documented in Yellowstone National Park.
    15. @24: The wolves in the states are the same as the wolves in Canada (Carter Niemeyer: Wolfer).
    16. @27: Bringing wolves back to Yellowstone was the right thing to do.
    17. @27: Wolves should be introduced into other wilderness eco-systems throughout North America.
    18. @27: It is necessary to take wolves out when they reach a sustainable number.
    19. @28: Wolves are not decimating elk herds, nor cattle, nor killing people.
    20. @28: The Canadian wolf is a myth.
    21. @28: Elk herds are up in every state where there are wolves.
    22. @28: Wolves kill less than 0.2 percent of cattle.
    23. @28: Wolves are elusive, shy of people, mostly respectful of humans.
    24. @29: Elk and deer are not being decimated.
    25. @31: While only 2 people have been killed in North America, wolves have killed thousands in other parts of the world.
    26. @33: To die from the elements in the Craters in September must be attributed to injury.
    27. @33: Wolves are in the Craters and everywhere else in Idaho.
    28. @33: Wolves have decimated herds, and impacted elk, deer, coyotes, antelope and especially moose.
    29. @33: The real problem is when wolves come into town showing no fear to kill wildlife.
    30. @34: Countering @24, wolves are depleting elk and deer and moose, and they do not only kill the old and weak.

    In summary, we have many claims and counter claims. Let’s focus on providing good data or references to substantiate our claims. Our goal should be to search for the truth.

    I would certainly like to see some direct input by Jim Beers, Toby Bridges, Bob Fanning and others who have studied wolves and their impact on our wildlife. If they have a case to make, now is the time to make it.

    And, yes, if you provide good substantiated data that demonstrates I am wrong, I will admit my error publicly.

    Thank you again for joining this conversation.

  36. 36

    Wolves are much more beneficial to ecosystems than human hunters. Wolves are back and they will continue managing the elk, deer, and moose from here on out. What makes wolves so beneficial to ecosystems is that all of the elk, deer, and moose that they harvest not only feed the wolves themselves, but many other wild animals as well. Moose, elk, and deer leftovers provide much needed food for a whole variety of wildlife. Wolves are conservationists and they are the top apex predator and they will be the elk, deer, and moose top predator from here on out.

  37. 37

    The wolves aren’t eradicating wildlife, they are managing it and the more elk, deer, and moose that wolves harvest, the better all wildlife will be. Elk, deer, and moose leftovers feed a ton of wild animals. Hunters need to stop being hypocrites. Hunters kill more wildlife than wolves. Hunters need to accept they are not the top apex predator, the wolf is and the wolf is the animal that will continue harvesting and managing the elk, deer, and moose populations from here on out. If you hunters don’t like it, too bad. Move to CO if you want a high elk population.

  38. 38

    Dr. Ed Berry, you made numerous comments that are incorrect. You’re a misinformed imbecile and I will leave it at that. Gray wolves are native to Montana while cattle and livestock are not.

  39. 39

    Conservatives don’t have common sense. Conservatives have a mental illness that we call conservatism.

  40. 40

    @38, Dear Tom, your statement about my numerous “incorrect” comments is lacking intelligence. Would you fill us in on the exact statements you are referring to and give us the advantage of your infinite wisdom by telling us what you think are the correct answers?

    I already said I am open to new data. What can you provide to this discussion?

  41. 41

    @37, @37, Mike, thank you for your detailed comment. You have made your position very clear and you have focused on the subject. You are an example for others to follow.

  42. 42
    Granite Girl says:

    “The feds are still adding wolf populations in Arizona, New Mexico, California, Colorado, Utah, and Texas.”

    And do you have proof that the Feds are still adding Wolf populations in CA, CO, UT and TX?…Still? when did the feds ever add Wolves to the states of CA, CO, UT and TX? Where are the locations they did this in those states? Where did they get these Wolves to do this?….Please show documentation of all this.

  43. 43

    I will have to disagree on the wolf being the apex predator. Man has occupied that spot from the time we learned to sharpen a stick and throw a rock.
    I am starting to see what my Grandfather talked about when he was young and protected the family’s sheep herd from wolves in Eastern Idaho.
    There were no elk,deer or moose. No sage grouse,sharptail or forest grouse. There was only the wolves back then and you carried a rifle everywhere you went.
    I think I will take his word on it,he lived,experienced and seen this country with and without the wolf. He liked it better without.

  44. 44

    Troy, wolves are more native to Idaho than you or your grandfather will ever be. What is wrong with people like you? Why do you hate wildlife? Wolves, bears and cougars are all native to Idaho and they benefit the ecosystem much more than all hunters combined. Hunters need to stop hating wildlife. Dr. Ed, why are you being dishonest with this false article? Do you have real evidence that wolves killed these two hikers or are you one of those extremists that blames wolves for everything? Wolves are NATIVE wildlife. Why do you hate wildlife? You call them canadian wolves, but they aren’t canadian wolves. They’re gray wolves, the same exact SPECIES that has always lived in Idaho. Gray wolves from Canada have been naturally migrating into Idaho for god knows how many years. The feds didn’t force anything on you. Gray wolves are native to Idaho and they have every right to be there. Most of your claims are 100% false. There has never been a gray wolf that weighed 200 pounds. Most of the wolves in idaho weigh anywhere from 80-120 pounds. Your claims about wolves are wrong.

  45. 45

    Rumors of 150-pound wolves abound in the Idaho Panhandle, but most of the wolves taken by hunters are much smaller.

    Adult females averaged 86 pounds, according to Idaho Department of Fish and Game officials, who also included the weights of wolves struck by vehicles in the survey. For adult males, 101 pounds was the average.

    The exception was a 130-pound adult male killed in Boundary County that was weighed after its stomach had been removed.

    It’s not surprising that wolf weights get exaggerated, said Jim Hayden, Fish and Game’s regional wildlife manager in Coeur d’Alene.

    “They look huge,” he said. “They’ve got long legs, big heads and lots of fur.”

    Wolves have 2- to 4-inch-long guard hairs around their necks, reinforcing the impression of a bulky body, said Jason Husseman, a Fish and Game wolf biologist in Salmon, Idaho. People see wolves, compare them to their dogs, and estimate that the wolves weigh 150 pounds.

    “It’s a human tendency to overestimate. You see the same thing with bear sightings,” Husseman said.

    In actuality, wolves have the lean, rangy build of distance runners – an adaption that helps them chase down prey, he said.

    Some opponents of wolf reintroduction claim that the Canadian gray wolves released in Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in the mid-1990s are a larger, more aggressive subspecies than native wolves, which were extinct by the 1930s. Biologists say there’s little or no evidence to back up that assertion.

    “I’m curious that they throw out those numbers – that the Canadian wolves are 50 to 100 pounds bigger than the native Idaho wolves,” Husseman said. “I don’t know where those numbers come from.”

    Hayden said the most authoritative research on wolf subspecies comes from a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service zoologist, Ronald Nowak, who studied 580 historic skulls of full-grown male wolves. Nowak concluded that North America had five subspecies of gray wolves. Two subspecies had historic ranges in Idaho – the Rocky Mountain wolf and the Great Plains wolf.

    The Rocky Mountain subspecies outweighed the Great Plains wolf by about 20 pounds, Hayden said. But their ranges overlapped in the Idaho Panhandle, according to Nowak’s research.

    “Realistically, there’s no difference between the subspecies. They interbreed,” Hayden said.

    In addition, “we’ve got wolves that are walking here from Canada,” he said. “They’re the same species that would have been here in the past.”

    It is time for the right wing anti-wolf extremists to get educated in the real facts.

  46. 46

    @45 Tom, Thank you for your excellent comment. I wrote my comment below before your comment arrived. I appreciate your excellent presentation of facts relevant to this discussion.

    @44 Roy (and others), please read my comment @35, and thank you for your comment.

    Assuming we are all interested in getting to the truth about wolves in America, then we all must seek to report facts, including me.

    I admit I do not personally have facts to support all my claims in this post. Unfortunately, I trusted the original report in Western Journalism and other conservative articles about wolves.

    Was Jim Beers wrong in his comment to Western Journalism? All I can say is he knows about this post and your comments but so far he will not join the conversation.

    Also informed are others who publish and send emails critical of wolves. But none of them will come here to defend their positions against your challenges.

    I know, it’s beginning to sound like you liberals are winning this wolf debate by conservative default. Maybe conservatives do not have a good case against introduced wolves after all.

    Do you know what the problem is in this discussion so far?

    None of us have referenced any published data or study to support our positions on wolves.

    I have published other articles showing the danger of wolves, which you may read below this post, but I admit these articles by themselves are not sufficient to make a general case against imported wolves.

    Now here’s the thing about how the logic must proceed.

    Whereas in climate change, the burden of proof rests upon those who claim the alarm, so also the burden of proof about wolves being dangerous rests upon those who claim the alarm. (This is based upon using the null hypothesis according to the scientific method.)

    This is an interesting twist of positions between conservatives and liberals. The liberal side claims climate change is dangerous, while the conservative side claims introduced wolves are dangerous.

    In climate change, liberals must prove that human carbon dioxide emissions cause dangerous climate change, but, in the wolf debate, conservatives must prove introduced wolves are dangerous to big game, livestock, and humans.

    On this score, I must admit that the conservatives have not so far made their case against wolves with solid evidence, good statistics, and good science. At least I have not seen the evidence.

    We must dispense with liberal arguments that wolves are “part of nature” and man is not. This is a religious argument, not a scientific argument.

    Also invalid are ad hominem arguments that claim opponents of introduced wolves “hate wolves” or are “idiots”.

    The only arguments that matter are facts. For example:

    1. What is the effect of introduced wolves on big game?

    2. How dangerous are introduced wolves to livestock?

    3. How dangerous are introduced wolves to people? Are wolves dangerous to people in other countries where wolf populations are larger?

    These questions can and should be answered by producing solid evidence. But the burden of proof rests with those who claim the alarm.

  47. 47

    Congrats Dr. Ed. Polymontana has been discovered by the Montana Cowgirl cadre. Or at least this topic. LOL

    My suggestion: Same you do to the other kind of 4 legged “wolves”. Stop feeding them with responses. BTW You know what they say about arguing with idiots.

  48. 48

    Dr.Ed; Before we bought into being political correct, women were told not to hike in Glacier Nation park if you were having your period . Bears can smell the blood for many miles, I imagine this applies to the wolf.

  49. 49

    BOTH women died of exposure, there was NO animal activity whatsoever…what a big load of crap this whole thing is. Lets remember this is the LIVES of two wonderful women who suffered tragic ends. Unbelievably some moron is using their deaths to fuel their sick agenda, yes I believe wolves are decimating our elk and other populations, and I would be the first to kill one anywhere NEAR my house, my family or my animals. I am totally DISGUSTED that some person sick enough to blacken the memory of these two beloved women, who are someones sisters, aunt, friend and co-worker. No words can express the rubbish and blatant lies this ‘person’ has spread….

  50. 50
    J Doug Swallow says:

    I am just now becoming involved in this discussion and it is full of conjecture, which is the common approach that the far left tends to take when they have no facts to back up their point of view.

    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such trifling investment of facts.” Mark Twain

    We all should know except for some of the wolf lovers on here that coyotes are much smaller than wolves and this account is BACKED up by CBC news and makes the lies that Roger Hewitt claims

    There have been 2 people killed by wolves in recorded history in North America, one in Alaska, one near Saskatchewan.”

    all the more implausible. Roger has never even seen a wolf in the wild and sure didn’t see any in Texas where he learned to lie so poorly.

    Coyotes kill Toronto singer in Cape Breton.” Park official says 1 coyote dead, staff looking for 2nd animal.

    A 19-year-old folk singer from Toronto has died after being attacked by two coyotes in Cape Breton Highlands National Park. Taylor Josephine Stephanie Luciow, who went by the stage name Taylor Mitchell, died overnight at the QEII Health Sciences Centre in Halifax. She had been on tour in the Maritimes.”

    First fatal wolf attack recorded in North America?

    Conservationists have long assuaged the public’s fear of wolves by saying that there have been no documented instances of a healthy wild wolf killing a human being in North America. Until now, that is.

    On Nov. 8, a search party found the partially consumed body of 22-year-old Kenton Joel Carnegie in the woods of northern Saskatchewan. Carnegie had gone for a walk and didn’t return to the surveyors camp where he was working.

    Fatal wolf attack unnerves Alaska village.

    The death of 32-year-old Candice Berner stunned not only the village of a few dozen residents but also wildlife officials, who say wolf attacks are very, very rare — and fatal attacks, even more so.

    Officials say Berner, a special education teacher who moved to Alaska last summer, was set on by at least two wolves while out for a late-afternoon jog on a road outside Chignik Lake, a fishing village on the Alaska Peninsula, about 475 miles southwest of Anchorage.

    List of fatal wolf attacks worldwide

    List of non fatal wolf attacks in North America

    Since Canada has been mentioned several times, I will throw this in for you liberals consideration.
    “Killer Cougars”

    A tragic attack in British Columbia underscores the failed logic of preservationists who turned mountain lion management into a ballot-box issue
    On arriving, Manion heard the mother’s screams. Moving toward the agonized sounds, he came upon Cindy Parolin, still battling the cougar. She turned to Manion, a look of raging defiance in her eyes.

    Are my children all right?
    Yes,” Manion answered.
    On hearing they were okay, she said in a half-whisper, “I am dying now.”

  51. 51
    J Doug Swallow says:

    If any of you fine liberal wolf lovers do not believe the linked sources that I present, do not take it up with me but go to the sources.

    Thought for the day: Since smallpox is or was a naturally occurring virus; should it also be reintroduced to plague humanity as some are suggesting that the wolf should be?

    Photos: Wolf chases BC motorcyclist

    June 16, 2013 8:09 a.m.

    Woman says timber wolf attacked her while she was near side of road helping motorist

    Washington Wolf News, Videos, Wolf Plan, Recovery, Reintroduction, Facts,

    German farmers demand the right to hunt wolves

    Wolves were hunted nearly to extinction in Germany in the 20th century. But over the past decade, they have been making a slow return. Farmers say the wolves are pests and should be hunted down.

    Wolves kill 120 sheep near Dillon, Mont.

    Wolf kills Iraqi boy in palm grove
    (AFP) – Sep 24, 2012  
    HILLA, Iraq — A five-year-old Iraqi boy was pounced upon and killed by a wolf as he picked dates in a palm grove near the town of Hilla in central Iraq, a witness and a doctor said on Monday.

    Wolf Attacks Mother Walking with Child in Sweden

    Tok trapper says he was attacked by wolf while on snowmachine
    Alaska Dispatch
    December 18, 2012

    Russia: Raids by wolves spark ‘emergency’ in Sakha

    Wolf makes a comeback in France

    Ontario man killed in wolf attack, coroner’s jury finds
    First documented case in North America of a healthy wolf killing a human in the wild>

    Motorcyclist dies after hitting wolf>

    Cyclist narrowly escapes wolf attack
    Friday July 12, 2013

    An American cyclist was shaken but unharmed last week after being chased down the Alaska Highway by a wolf.

  52. 52
    Truth Searcher says:

    If you “don’t personally have all the facts about this article” … How can you write such garbage? It’s obviously to push your agenda. And you sir are a dumbazz.

Speak Your Mind


Please enter the CAPTCHA text