# Wolf killers Anything new?



## pibjr (Dec 5, 2013)

Has anybody heard if any penalties were handed down to the guys who shot the wolf near beaver?


----------



## Kingfisher (Jul 25, 2008)

way to premature. as i understand it, there have been no charges filed as yet, case still under review. penalties would only come after charges, court case, verdict, etc.


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

They should be rewarded..........;-)


----------



## pibjr (Dec 5, 2013)

I find it hard to swallow that no one knew this wolf was there. When I ran hounds, the tracking collars I had, had batteries that were good for 16,000 hours. I saw a show Sun. where they were studying a sow bear. The con. officer was telling the people with him the collar they put on her was guaranteed for 4 years and should go 6. He also said they now have collars that can be tracked by satellite, GPS and cell phone, although the one they had was just an older radio collar.

With all the money involved in the wolf recovery and given the age of the collar, somebody had to have been keeping track of her.

Perhaps in hindsight, they are thinking they should have let the public know she was in the area rather than hoping she could stay undetected as long as possible.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

pibjr said:


> With all the money involved in the wolf recovery and given the age of the collar, somebody had to have been keeping track of her.


sometimes technology fails.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

pibjr said:


> I find it hard to swallow that no one knew this wolf was there. When I ran hounds, the tracking collars I had, had batteries that were good for 16,000 hours. I saw a show Sun. where they were studying a sow bear. The con. officer was telling the people with him the collar they put on her was guaranteed for 4 years and should go 6. He also said they now have collars that can be tracked by satellite, GPS and cell phone, although the one they had was just an older radio collar.
> 
> With all the money involved in the wolf recovery and given the age of the collar, somebody had to have been keeping track of her.
> 
> Perhaps in hindsight, they are thinking they should have let the public know she was in the area rather than hoping she could stay undetected as long as possible.


There is a huge cost disparity between the older telemetry collars and the latest GPS satellite tracking collars. No question the technology is out there for satellite tracking collars that can do some amazing things, but they are expensive. A biologist with a limited budget has to determine what would yield the most useful data, 10 wolves wearing $150 telemetry collars, or one wolf wearing a $1,500 collar. This is why telemetry collars are still the most common system in use today, they are cheap and plentiful.

Also, the biologists tracking the wolves are likely in Wyoming. They are not going to want to spend their time living in motels tracking a single wolf sighted in Arizona. They may have flown down to confirm a signal, but I'm sure they turned around and went home afterward. It is too cost prohibitive trying to keep track of all the random wolves that may stray from the herd.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

I believe the original story was this wolf was attacking livestock and the guy shot it thinking it was a coyote. So my question is, if an animal is on the protected list does a person not have a right to protect his property?


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Fowlmouth said:


> I believe the original story was this wolf was attacking livestock and the guy shot it thinking it was a coyote. So my question is, if an animal is on the protected list does a person not have a right to protect his property?


This^^^^

Did anybody read the story the other day where the "hunting preserve" (assuming it was a CWMU?) shot the 2 dogs that were running around together?

Edit: http://www.ksl.com/?sid=33117965&nid=960&s_cid=rec3

The guy has the Grey wolf - coyote looking thing going for him. And all the things he can print saying we don't have wolves in Utah.....


----------



## Lobowatcher (Nov 25, 2014)

Fowlmouth said:


> I believe the original story was this wolf was attacking livestock and the guy shot it thinking it was a coyote. So my question is, if an animal is on the protected list does a person not have a right to protect his property?


There is only a small portion of Northern Utah that is part of the 'delisted' zone for Gray Wolves. In that area, yes, a landowner can indeed shoot a wolf that is threatening livestock. Outside of that area no, a landowner cannot kill an animal that is on the endangered list if it is going after livestock. If the shooter did in fact claim the animal was attacking livestock, that isn't a legal reason to kill the wolf.

There are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding this killing and one can speculate till the cows come home. But, in the end that's all it is, speculation, until some hard facts are presented.


----------



## Lobowatcher (Nov 25, 2014)

RandomElk16 said:


> This^^^^
> 
> Did anybody read the story the other day where the "hunting preserve" (assuming it was a CWMU?) shot the 2 dogs that were running around together?
> 
> ...


Nope, the guy_ doesn't_ have the Gray Wolf thing going for him at all. His 'hunting preserve' is located outside the delisted zone.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

> 18-1-3. Dogs attacking domestic animals, service animals, hoofed protected wildlife, or domestic fowls.
> Any person may injure or kill a dog while:
> (1)	the dog is attacking, chasing, or worrying:
> (a)	a domestic animal having a commercial value;
> ...


Utah state law says you can kill a dog that is attacking livestock. Who can say whether he knew what kind of dog it was.

⫸<{{{{{⦇°>


----------



## Lobowatcher (Nov 25, 2014)

I agree, he can kill dogs on his property all day long if they are going after livestock, but when it comes to animals on the endangered species list, it doesn't matter what kind of 'dog' he thought it was or wasn't. If it turns out to be a protected animal, he is breaking federal law. If things are on the up and up with the guy, I would hope the feds take that into consideration when it comes time to make a final judgement on the matter.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

I would hope after all the details are known- common sense is used


----------



## trapper12 (Dec 27, 2012)

Me personally I think the Yukon wolf or Mexican gray wolf should be kill on site, the Yukon is not close either is Mexico. The shoot shovel shh is a good plan on wolves not native to this area.


----------

