Since many people have either never encountered wolves or are just now beginning to sense a new presence in the woods, while out hunting or even on your back forty... This article (copied verbatim) will bring you up to speed on just how clever the modern wolf is and give you a few facts (such as 20% larger brains) brandish. People love facts, they my be still spell bound but they love facts.
In the past five years there has been an explosion of opportunity for
hunting and trapping wolves across the U.S. First in the West, then in
Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan, the chance to take a wolf appeared
for the first time in nearly a century.
This has led to a hunger among outdoorsmen for information about how
to hunt and trap these amazing but wary canines. In this first of two
parts, I will examine strategies and techniques for trapping and snaring
wolves; in part two, I will cover hunting over bait and predator
calling.
The best way to learn how to catch a wolf is to look to those who
have been doing it. In Canada and Alaska, wolves have not had the
protection they’ve known in the Lower 48, and many hunters and trappers
have developed and refined techniques that have served them well.
Alberta’s Gordy Klassen is recognized as Canada’s premier wolf trapper.
He travels around Canada giving wolf-trapping seminars both privately
and for government animal control agencies. He offers what he calls a
college course in wolf trapping and hunting each year, and the week-long
event is booked well in advance.
I spoke with Gordy at length, and he offered some advice to first
time trappers. “Wolves are not hard to trap,” he says, “but you have to
do it by their rules.” A fox or coyote trapper might catch an animal and
soon have another in the same trap. Not so with wolves. “Their brain is
20 percent larger than a comparable-sized dog, and they learn very
quickly,” he says. “You have to realize that each time you catch one,
you are educating an entire pack.”
They figure things out very quickly, so you can’t make mistakes. You
rarely get more than one chance at a wolf. One of the keys to the
equation is scent control.
Clean Freak
Whether using traps or snares, Klassen is a self-confessed
scent-reduction fanatic. “You can’t fool a wolf’s nose,” he says, “so
you have to come as close to eliminating scent as possible and make your
set so appealing that it overcomes the fear of the remaining scent.”
He uses Scent Killer spray when he sets traps and never touches any
equipment with his bare hands. He is careful to never breathe on the
snare or trap and even chews spearmint gum to avoid the smell of his
breath in the area while constructing a set. “One drop of sweat will
ruin the whole deal,” he says, so he even uses sweat bands on his head
and arms when trapping in warm weather.
His equipment is clean and free from human scent or foreign odors. He
uses a product called Insta-Boil to boil the scent away from the
equipment and adds some pine, balsam or spruce to the mix to give the
equipment a natural smell.
When making a snare or trap set, Klassen uses a clean ground cloth to
stand or kneel on. Then when a catch is made, he uses a tarp to roll
the animal up and carries it out of the area. He says if there is any
blood in the area, other wolves may avoid it, so he shoots the wolf
behind the ear and then quickly rolls it onto the tarp to avoid blood on
the ground. Dragging the wolf out might offer the animals a clue as to
where it went, so that’s a no-no. Even in the winter when there is a
great deal of snow cover, the caught wolves are carried out of the area,
not dragged.
Tactics
The wolf’s amazing ability to smell is also his undoing. Wolves are
very attracted to the scent of any canine that is not a regular visitor
to their hunting area. Urine and feces from wolves outside their home
range is the best attractor possible if you can get it. Klassen says
many serious wolf trappers have set up exchanges where each collects
feces in sealed bags which they can trade to trappers from other areas.
These are then used for bait at wolf sets. The typical sets that
trappers use to catch the smaller canines also catch wolves. Fox and
coyote sets like dirtholes, flat sets and urine post sets all work.
Bait stations are one of the most effective ways to snare wolves.
When the going is tough, wolves will come to fresh bait and are
vulnerable to properly set snares around bait stations. But Klassen
doesn’t do things in the order that you might think. Rather than put out
a bait and surround it with snares as the trails develop, he chooses an
area for the bait and sets the snares first. He tries to anticipate the
wolves’ approach to the bait site and sets 20 to 30 snares around the
area in any possible trail. After a few days, any human scent that might
be on or immediately in the area of each snare has dissipated. He then
brings in the bait.
Snaring wolves in winter is made easier by deep snow. Wolves will
follow the path of least resistance, even if it is a snowmobile trail.
Setting snares in these trails and in places where he has shuffled his
feet to create a trail can be very effective. The same is true of game
trails, but snares must be used with great caution where other animals
are using the same trails.
A simple set that has accounted for a lot of wolves in the winter
involves nothing more than a paper cup with a couple of tiny holes in it
filled with urine and suspended so it slowly drips onto the ground.
Snares are set in foot-trails around the scent. You can add stool from
outside the area for extra appeal.
Location, Location, Location
Wolves spend the majority of their time on the fringes of their home
range. A wolf pack’s home range is well defined, but they do not
regularly cover every square inch of it. In fact, just the opposite is
true. Often people are confused by the issue of home ranges when it
comes to canines, since home ranges are usually defined by a certain
number of acres. The animals do not aimlessly wander all around in their
“home range.”
“Wolves spend 95 percent of their time on the fringes of their
territory,” Klassen says. “They like trails and roads and will follow
these. Power line cuts and rivers are also followed.” The edges of the
territory will be defined by such a feature, and the wolves make regular
trips along these boundaries. Lakeshores, cliffs, swamps and other
barriers that are difficult to cross often make up the edge of the
territory. Or it might be something like a logging road.
Once you find one of these areas, the sign will be abundant. Wolves
will leave droppings and urinate every couple hundred feet along the
boundaries of their territory. Tracks from regular use will be visible.
Of course, it stands to reason that these are the high-percentage places
to set your traps, and the time it takes to find these boundaries is
well worth the effort.
The Tools Of The Trade
Snares are made of either 1⁄8-inch or 3⁄32-inch galvanized aircraft
cable. Klassen primarily uses 3⁄32, 7×7 strand cable in 60-inch lengths.
He then adds a swivel and another 60 inches of cable that leads to the
anchor point. He is very specific about the particulars of his sets. He
makes the snare loop 19 inches in diameter and sets it 18 inches above
the ground. A plastic collar is used directly above the lock so the
snare is held firmly in place. A support wire is held firmly in this
collar.
He “loads” his snares by bending it with his fingers so it drops
quickly upon first contact. He claims most of his snares hit the wolf
right behind the ears and it’s lights out very shortly, because the
arteries that lead to the brain are affected. No blood to the brain
means the wolf basically goes to sleep within seconds.If the snare
misses slightly, the wolf might be alive for some time, collared like a
pet. But wolves have very sharp teeth and their jaws can exert 1,100
pounds of pressure on a snare cable. It might take some time, but it’s
possible the wolf could chew the cable in two. Klassen prevents that by
anchoring the snare high or to the ground, so the lock settles either on
the back of the wolf’s neck or the throat area, and he cannot get his
teeth onto the cable in either case.
The RAM Power Snare in the Wolfmaster model is used where no
anchoring is available. Klassen uses this setup exclusively where sign
shows that the wolves are crossing beaver dams, one of his favorite
places to snare them. This snare has a large spring that triggers when a
wolf enters the snare, quickly closing it.
Foothold traps used include the Bridger Broad, the Alaska #9 and the 76
LAY, which is his favorite because it is center swiveled and tough, and
it has offset jaws and strong springs. These big traps do not need pan
covers; they are big and strong and you can sift dirt or snow right over
the trap.
All traps are anchored solid; in no case is a drag or grapple used.
Wolves can be dangerous and you want to know exactly where it is.
Klassen uses long stakes, 3 feet long, made of 5⁄8-inch rebar. Long
chains with effective swiveling are important to holding these tough
predators.
Best Baits
Wolves love fresh, warm meat, of course, but they will not hesitate
to return to a kill or accept a free meal when it is available. This can
be their downfall. Any wild game or beef will work well for bait, but
wolves love beaver meat. It’s like crack cocaine to a wolf. “Wolves
would live on beaver meat 100 percent of the time if they could,”
Klassen states.
When you’re establishing bait stations, a local trapper who can
supply you with beaver carcasses can be an important part of your
wolf-trapping success. Beaver meat is dark red and rich with a strong
smell. Wolves are attracted to the smell of the meat and the associated
beaver castor, which calls in all canines with its powerful scent.
Wolf trapping has become accessible to many people for the first
time. It’s no secret that wolf hunting and trapping is controversial and
inflammatory in many circles. It pays to learn the specifics and do it
right each time. Each time a trapper makes a mistake it has the
potential to flame up into a very tough situation for trappers, hunters
and game departments to deal with. I trust this article will put you on
your way to trapping your first wolf effectively and humanely.
Klassen’s Wolf-Trapping School
Gordy Klassen does about 25 workshops per year travelling around
Canada to help trappers catch wolves more effectively and humanely. He
also does a 35-hour course over four days at his camp near DeBolt,
Alberta. A third option is a wilderness trapline experience, where you
spend time with Gordy on what he calls his Wilderness College. For more
information about these options, call (780) 957-3731 or email
info@trappergord.com. You can visit his website at
www.trappergord.com.
Source:
http://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/predator-hunting/tips-for-trapping-wolves-from-a-veteran-trapper/
http://archive.freep.com/article/20140830/OPINION01/308300023/Michigan-legsilators-roads-funding-taxes
Oh, and that article is kinda old: They are now actually are asking voters to up the sales tax to 7%, and are considering lowering the income tax – their idea of helping out the low to middle income folks is to extend one finger. PS: we have flat income taxes in MI. Hi Ho!
I’m amazed how fast Ralph picked this story up.
They’re adopting the same strategy here (reduce income tax, raise other taxes). The problem is, the sales tax is regressive–it hits people harder the less money they earn. So essentially you have yet another example of republicans structuring tax policy so that wealth moves upward. Ugh.
–
Are wolves somehow implicated in the deterioration of our state’s vital thoroughfares? Have marauding packs been impeding construction crews struggling to repair Michigan’s battered roads before another winter unleashes its fury?
Most Lower Peninsula residents have never actually seen a wolf. Yet there are apparently numerous legislative districts where the animals’ nocturnal howls are so deafening that lawmakers can no longer hear what their constituents are saying about Lansing’s continuing neglect of Michigan’s roads.
Hee!
Also interesting comment from Adrian W.
Listen to the audio version:
http://wuwm.com/post/endangered-wisconsin-gray-wolf-management-taken-congress
And, once again you can thank HSUS and their friends for sending this matter the way it is heading.
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/01/13/wolf-legislation
Some education is needed here so Congress knows that the Endangered Species Act already allows direct lethal protection of persons and their livestock under attack and also that indiscriminate hunting and trapping breaks up wolf families and leads to more livestock predation. The last thing we need is another “rider” getting attached to a “must pass” bill.
++Some education is needed here so Congress knows that the Endangered Species Act already allows direct lethal protection of persons and their livestock under attack …++
Not true. Once again you have just enough information to be a danger to yourself and others.
There is no provision to kill an ESA protected species to protect attacks on livestock – only humans- and then it is only a “defense” in court, the event the accused violator is prosecuted. Of course, defending one’s self in federal court, including all preliminaries to trial is not an inexpensive outlay. Of course the physical evidence needs to support your defense, so you better have scratches/bites or lots of footprints or torn up ground around where you took your self-defense action. And, do not destroy evidence in your favor. Of course there are also the costs of federal LEO investigations too.
The Endangered Species Act, Section 11 [16 U.S.C. 1540]:
(a) Civil Penalties-
(3)Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no civil penalty shall be imposed if it can be shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant committed an act based on a good faith belief that he was acting to protect himself or herself, a member of his or her family, or any other individual from bodily harm, from any endangered or threatened species.
(b)Criminal Violations –
(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, it shall be a defense to prosecution under this subsection if the defendant committed the offense based on a good faith belief that he was acting to protect himself or herself, a member of his or her family, or any other individual, from bodily harm from any endangered or threatened species.
“Of course the physical evidence needs to support your defense, so you better have scratches/bites or lots of footprints or torn up ground around where you took your self-defense action. And, do not destroy evidence in your favor. Of course there are also the costs of federal LEO investigations too.”
I say hogwash. All they have to do is say, “I thought it was a coyote”. Ba da bing. They walk.
I usually back up what I say with some authority. So, I must be reading something? You don’t have to agree with me, but at least you know how I reached a position. Sorry you don’t like the cut and paste, but it seems to be better than just pulling something out of my ass, like some folks do here with considerable regularity, yourself included.
I’m not a wolf hater, I just don’t want as many as some.
Now you are talking about prosecutorial discretion. Apparently some legal decision-makers are finding their federal tax Justice Department dollars might actually be spent in other higher priority areas.
By the way, I have no idea how many violators have been prosecuted for killing ESA protected wolves, but not many, after the McKittrick policy. http://www.wildearthguardians.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8579&news_iv_ctrl=1194#.VNp9D8J0xD8
Nice diversion, but it simply shows my comment was correct. You know your first comment implied anyone that killed an endangered wolf would be pounced with the same fervor that Homeland Security would pounce on an an animal rights advocate. Nah, it doesn’t work that way for wolf killers.
“I thought I saw a coyote”
The laws that apply to one should apply to all, but it never works that way. Never has. How is that cattle round up on the Cliven Bundy federal land going? Did the Dann sisters ever get their livestock returned and the use of the Shoshone treaty land? Nah, you see, WM, the law just isn’t applied in the same way to all people.
Wolf killers typically walk free.
MN wolves have been in the “threatened” category, a lesser ESA classification than “endangered,” since their initial listing a very long time ago. They have sought delisting for the last 13 years or so, and HSUS has sued because they NEVER want them delisted (a formal written HSUS policy). Now that it appears the winds are changing, HSUS is seeking what THEY SAY is middle ground they have never sought before, and for MN there is nothing gained. So, expect MN to follow thru with a vengeance. WI and MI it appears are also fed up.
Do you agree that the legalized hunting and trapping of wolves is questionable and likely is no longer scientifically justified??
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/12/141203-wolves-hunting-livestock-ranchers-endangered-species-environment/
Alternatively, if hunting/trapping is in the end all about numbers of wolves and where they are, maybe this research is of little use. Probably should keep that in mind, too, Ed. So if wolves are eating too many elk or deer in the wrong place, I’d say all options for hunting/trapping are in play.
http://www.minnesotafarmguide.com/news/regional/mfbf-and-mfu-ask-for-gray-wolves-to-be-delisted/article_220160e4-b173-11e4-b081-a76104ba6c24.html?comment_form=true
To be fair, MN was just as intransigent (as HSUS) when wolves were being listed (they fought listing tooth and nail). So nothing’s really changed here except the political winds.
—
Ed: Weilgus’ data doesn’t suggest wolf hunting isn’t scientifically justified. Rather, it suggests killing wolves increases depredations–to a point. Kill enough wolves and depredations actually fall (that’s the flipside of his findings that pro-wolf folks don’t like to talk about). Nevertheless, since we apparently need to maintain wolves (probably near current levels), states should use regulated public hunts cautiously, and in most places, they shouldn’t be talking about decreased depredations as a goal of such “management”.
Yes, I agree with you that if a wolf state allows enough wolves to be killed by hunting and trapping, eventually depredations on livestock and/or other animals will go down. In fact, if you carry this scenario forward the way many politicians want, wolf states can just eliminate wolves all together so there will be no wolf depredations on anything, anywhere. This is where politics over-rules science and unfortunately, it seems to be being promoted more and more.
I think what most people who like wolves do not want is wolf hunting and trapping, and they probably agree that the rest of the legal protection from endangered status is less than critical. Therefore, they will support a downloading.
Your mistake here is is the same one made by those who take every chance to dig at hunters — both focus on people/groups rather than issues. Who cares what HSUS or RMEF or SCI or CBD has done in the past. It doesn’t matter. What matters is whether the policy that is currently being advocated is a viable alternative. The rest doesn’t matter, it amounts to ad hominem attacks. Tribalism has become the biggest barrier to agreement on wolf management policy.
—
Tribalism – ‘the behavior and attitudes that stem from strong loyalty to one’s own tribe or social group.’
I can’t speak for MN and WI, but in MI citizens did vote down both ballot proposals that would have led to another wolf season. The fact that the outcome is now moot thanks to MNRC initiative doesn’t tell me the state is fed up.
Once again, it’s just politics.
I think its tragic that the courts have been consistently remanding protections of wolves back to the federal government, whether for lack of adequate state protections or because the USFWS acted arbitrarily and capriciously, only to have protections thwarted by sleazy politicians that will do anything to advance their archaic and superstitious witch hunt like positions about predators .
HSUS v. Jewell is the perfect example of how our system is supposed to work. When legal questions about a rule or law and the way its implemented or interpreted, arise, if there is legal standing or merit then the courts consider the issue and deliberate carefully before reaching a decision.
For politicians to lie, cheat and pander to Congress to override judicial decisions and prevent judicial review is damned undemocratic.
The HSUS did its job, they are advocates and watchdogs. If they and others like them did not exist, animals and wildlife would live even more miserable lives because the world is full of some pretty despicable people.
I don’t appreciate the continuous assaults on wildlife, public lands, and protective environmental legislation by extremists that make litigation unavoidable.
“[R]idiculous” you say.
You might want to look at this Congressional report – especially beginning at page 6. There is reference to CBD and WildEarthGuardians. HSUS is in the same tier of “irritation and loathing” by this Republican change agent group, but HSUS litigation to my knowledge not been as focused as much on the West.
http://valadao.house.gov/uploadedfiles/esaworkinggroupreportandrecommendations.pdf
The R’s in the House have 4 bills in the hopper already and that was before tide began to turn with the Senate going R controlled, and they haven’t even considered the Western Governor’s agenda yet.
Hopefully, at some point soon, we can get many more politicians elected who are in tune with the public regarding nature and wildlife. In the meantime, these strong conservation organizations have to be the first line of defense, and I thank them for that.
Except for this: if congress delists great lakes wolves in some way, it will seem to be the result of the recent court “victory”.
Translation: I think he’s essentially correct. That does make it hard to have a coherent comeback.
Same for timz trolling when WM was correct about what the facts of the law now are.
And again, HSUS’ win in court may indeed result in wolves being delisted, but they were already delisted. If Congress delists wolves without amending the ESA, then HSUS still wins (because of precedent). If they don’t act when they believe the law demands more, then they admit defeat without putting up a fight.
I’m sorry, but the whole argument seems like sour grapes to me? Personally, I dislike a lot of the goals of a whole variety of interest groups, but I can’t fault them for pursuing their members’ interests in court.
“If they don’t act when they believe the law demands more, then they admit defeat without putting up a fight.
I’m sorry, but the whole argument seems like sour grapes to me? ”
sour grapes indeed
The HSUS win is like gasoline on a fire. Now the Western states have new and motivated allies in the Midwestern states, to affect change to the ESA in whatever form that might take. And it is already obvious that whatever fix(es) this R Congress may have in store for MN, MI and WI will include at least WY.
So, “sour grapes” or not, and notwithstanding your advices above, I submit still, that the issue is and remains HSUS and the decisions it makes to litigate certain issues which continues to add fuel for those who would drastically change the ESA because of their actions – even in name only. It is the balancing of lost opportunities and consequences of winning too well on principal that create the dilemma. And, for MN continuing in “threatened” status will downlisint MI and WI to “threatened” from “endangered” is no compromise whatsoever. MN gets nothing from this.
I bet Senator Franken (D-MN) has gotten an earful in recent weeks from the MN Farm Bureau which has wolf delisting as one of its 4 current top issues. They represent something like 75,000 farms in the state.
Momentum for ESA changes could go well beyond wolf recovery issues if opened up, and adversely affect hundreds/thousands of other species, because of the focus on what some have termed the “protracted silliness” of wolf recovery litigation.
and therein lies the real issue, it doesn’t matter what the courts, the general public or anyone wants for that matter long as the livestock and trophy industries are pissed off. Its not Congress that is angered about wolves its the lobbyists.
Come now, the Democrats in the Senate are not going to let the Republicans gut the ESA — they have absolutely nothing to gain from it–and much to lose! They may pass legislation to delist wolves in WY and the Great Lakes, or perhaps nationwide (though this outcome is doubtful), but the Dems might not even let that through (they fear their base as much as the Republicans, and btw, there are not many Ds left in the DFL for Franken to fear). The most likely case is that Republicans (with the help of a few Dems) use another legislative rider to delist wolves in the GLs and WY, in which case the precedent stands.
The irony here is that conservation groups are going to end up getting a huge boost in funding when/if Congress acts, which will only encourage and embolden them (just as it has groups like SFW and RMEF). And so we go ’round and ’round…
—
Louise,
A ‘reasonable compromise’ probably includes a “recreational” harvest of wolves, whether it is ethically justified or not. The fools who want blood wield too much political power, and they are not going to accept protected status.
Compromise, of course, entails giving up something you want, which many folks on either side of the issue cannot seem to grasp; then again, keeping wolves in the spotlight appears to be a good strategy to fundraise.
“…you may be thinking: Huh—70 animals lost in a year (or 107, take your pick), and this is a big honking problem?
Precisely that point was highlighted by Howard Goldman, senior state director in Minnesota for the Animal Humane Society of the U.S. He pointed out that there are 165,000 calves in Minnesota’s wolf range…I find that if Goldman’s calf count is correct, the casualties reported by Stark represent a loss rate of .00039 percent.”
—
Can you say “symbolic” issue?
http://www.minnpost.com/earth-journal/2014/01/does-wolf-hunt-reduce-livestock-losses-maybe-not-lawmakers-are-told
I do hope you YOUR assessment of the D’s in the Senate are right. I have my doubts especially in the next round of 1/3 Senatorial elections, and that is the cause for concern.
“Few poaching cases
Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, was curious about how much effort has been required of the DNR to address wolf poaching — which I suppose could be considered a form of reverse depredation by humans.
His question brought the DNR’s enforcement chief, Maj. Phil Meier, to the microphone, who said there were six cases in 2012, zero in 2013. Titters from the audience ensued.”
Absolute BS, as I have had written and oral communication with two MN DNR officials, one who participates in this hearing, who both said on average 10% of MN wolves illegally killed each year.
A lot can happen between now and the 2016 Senatorial election. Sadly pundits seem to be pretty much in agreement that of the 16 Senatorial seats that are up (9-R, 7-D), they are leaning toward another 2-4 current D’s going R, while the R’s hold on to the seats they already have. In play seem to be IL, NH, PA and WI.
This is pretty scary for a lot of reasons, unless something changes. And, who knows what either party will roll out on the Presidential ticket.
Maybe Ralph can tell us the last time the House, Senate, White House, and the Supreme Court were all R leaning, and what happens if the stars align for what could begin an even worse nightmare 2 years hence.
Did you ever have a chance to work with Richard Thiel? I was lucky enough to have a phone conversation with him back in the mid 80’s when wolves were starting to make a strong comeback in WI. Seemed like a decent guy from what I remember.
Is this natural fluctuation not accounted for or allowed to play out in wildlife management today? Does it have something to do with the way wilderness areas are cut off from each-other by modern cities and development? And why not relocate the excess wolves to all the places currently lacking them that are spending money trying to get rid of their excess deer/elk? I’m also wondering who determines when there are too many predators vs too many herbivores, and if it’s based exclusively on ecosystem health or partially on making sure hunters can catch enough deer/elk as well.
Why anyone even gives this any sort of serious consideration is beyond me.
Lest we forget the events of last year, there are numerous articles in the media. Other articles are in the link below:
How Half-Truths, Falsehoods and One Farmer Distorted Reasons for Wolf Hunt