The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old January 23, 2012, 09:07 PM   #51
Sure Shot Mc Gee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2012
Posts: 1,989
Wolves size? Don't let size fool you. They are the toughest and most respected wild thing in the woods. They look somewhat like a Siberian Husky with a straight tail. But exhibit more intelligence than most any other domestic dog species. Only the toughest and smartest of a pack are allowed to mate which helps the breed immensely. The earlier pix of those really BIG dogs being held up by their hunters are bogus. The photos of the gal knelt down petting a big penned up black male are real. The medium size gray dog crossing the road is a real good photo of one too. If by accident A Gray gets shot back in the woods? If the animal wasn't shot on private property? it's left for the ravens. Coyote hides on the other hand are not against the law to keep. Being caught by a DNR warden with a Gray wolfs fur/hide in private hands can get someone in Minnesota a 90 day stay in jail up to a $10,000.00 Federal fine and He may also be facing State charges with a good possibility or loss of hunting privileges for a year or two added on. Most hunters in MN would prefer Gray wolves to have been introduced else-where's in the USA to save the species from extinction.
Sure Shot Mc Gee is online now  
Old January 23, 2012, 10:39 PM   #52
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
Quote:
Most hunters in MN would prefer Gray wolves to have been introduced else-where's in the USA to save the species from extinction.
Yeah. Like Wisconsin.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 23, 2012, 11:02 PM   #53
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
LOL, everyone is accepting the pictures in post #46. Simply take that for verbatim truth, no reason to doubt that post and the fact that the female wolf is stated to be about 75 pounds.

Let's now take that wolf whose hind legs are almost as long as the mans and the front paws which are longer his arms and extrapolate to a wolf in the 140-150 pound range which is what many of these alpha males weigh with them as large as 175 officially and unofficial accounts of wolves as much as 210 pounds and imagine the wolf in the picture standing on her hind legs as double her weight.

I would venture such a wolf would be exactly what we see in the opening post. Once again, that 75 pound wolf is essentially as tall as the man if she would have had her head up instead of snuggling in on him. That is a SMALL wolf. Wait till you see one that is twice that size which is within the reported range for these critters. Post 46 says it all. These are huge, fast, and ferocious beasts that come in packs up to 20 or more. That is a real game changer in these woods.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 23, 2012, 11:36 PM   #54
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Scroll down a little more than half way on the right to see Stryker, a 140 pound malamute. Admittedly, NOT a wolf, but it is a 140 wolf-like dog for sure. It is a HUGE mut to say the least and validates what a 140 pound wolf would look like in a picture.

http://www.hudsonshuskies.com/

Now if you folks say that wolves don't get to 140 pounds, then not much I can say. I believe the photos in the OP are real and why not. They are in the same size range as the 140 pound Malamute in the link above. Maybe that is a fake picture as well!!
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 04:11 AM   #55
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
As I've said before I've got a hunting magazine laying around here that I can't find that has a whole big article on those wolves, who shot them, all the details with those same pics. It would seem kind of irresponsible to put that in a well respected magazine if it were not fact. I've got a couple more places to search but I'm now determined to find it. If that is in fact a fake, the publisher of this magazine will be put up into this forum for you all to tear him apart.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 09:55 AM   #56
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,362
I forget the "why", but on a Sunday back some fifty years ago I walked past the Silverwolf gun store in Detroit. There was a full-body mount of a wolf in the window. What really caught my attention was the size of the forelegs; as big as my arms, and that was back when I was young and healthy. At the time, I guesstimated a weight of somewhere around 150 pounds.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 03:10 PM   #57
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
Quote:
LOL the first few are fakes. If you've ever seen a 450 lb, 9 ft long lion "hug" its trainer, it looks about as big as the wolves in those pics.

North American wolves typically don't get much bigger than 170 lbs. Look at the proportions of the wolf heads to the men-----bogus.
WRONG!!!

I FOUND it!!

Magazine was "Big Buck" fall edition Vol. 23 No. 2 2009

Article "Potential World Record Wolf" by Jeff Grimolfson

Weight claimed 197 lbs.

Location Glenevis, Alberta

The pictures at the start of this post are from his article.

He's got it on vidocamera and it aired on "The Hunting Chronicles" on "Wild TV"

www.grimsmonstermix.com website

Last edited by warbirdlover; January 24, 2012 at 04:59 PM.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 04:44 PM   #58
Wyoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,243
To all of the doubters: Do a google search for Wyoming Wolf Kill pictures and take a look. Just because you have not seen one of the huge beasts, doesn't mean they aren't out there.
__________________
Go Pokes!
Go Rams!
Wyoredman is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 05:47 PM   #59
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
No they must be photoshopped fakes. They couldn't be real and be that big. Don't you know that wolves are just friendly little dogs that people are so mean to and persecute them without any cause. LOL
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 07:22 PM   #60
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,347
Quote:
WRONG!!!

I FOUND it!!

Magazine was "Big Buck" fall edition Vol. 23 No. 2 2009

Article "Potential World Record Wolf" by Jeff Grimolfson

Weight claimed 197 lbs.

Location Glenevis, Alberta
Very good! Glad you found it. The title of the article is apt. It has been over 2 years since this wolf was shot and yet there apparently are no official records verifying its weight, or not that I can find. There are no news accounts and no mention through various Canadian and US wildlife/environmental agencies, wildlife organizations, or confirmations by hunting organizations. At 197 lbs., a new world record for the gray wolf, you would think that "The Hunting Chronicles" would be playing up the hunt episode. It isn't often that such a program actually catches the hunter in action killing a world record sized animal. "The Hunting Chronicles" isn't doing anything with such historical footage and the event isn't even mentioned on their website. Why do you think that the only claims of this wolf being so heavy come from hunting rags, blogs, and forum postings? Why don't you think there is any sort of official record for it. I know I haven't found any and nobody else has reported any sort of official record listing either.

This really reminds me of the previous supposed world record Bulgarian wolf that was killed in 2007. It was reported to be 80 kg. (176.4 lbs), eclipsing the 175 lb. Alaskan record for gray wolves. Reports of its record status were noted wildly on the internet, but when attempts were made to verify the claim, it fell well short of the record weight.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/175...ot-dead-report
http://www.strangeark.com/blog/2007/...ot-record.html

So now this Canadian Gray Wolf is supposed to be the new record, and not just North American either, but would be the new world record for gray wolves.

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof and that doesn't seem to exist with the wolf shown in the OP.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 07:43 PM   #61
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
They don't go by weight for the world record but by the skull size. Last known the skull was waiting a drying period and then was to be measured. Go in the link to the website of the guy who shot it (in my last post). It gives should give some info in there (but doesn't).

I've also found these pictures and stories blown all out of proportion and where it was shot. It now weighs 235 lbs. and is growing!! And it was shot in 2011 instead of 2009.

http://www.grimsmonstermix.com/

And since the timing is right...

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/thegrey/

Last edited by warbirdlover; January 24, 2012 at 08:09 PM.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 07:59 PM   #62
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,347
You keep posting a link for an animal attractant product. If you go to the wolf picture, you don't get any information. The link is broken.

http://www.grimsmonstermix.com/images/gallery/p9.jpg

Quote:
Go in the link to the website of the guy who shot it (in my last post).
Okay, here is your last post. The only link you provide is to the attractant.

Quote:
WRONG!!!

I FOUND it!!

Magazine was "Big Buck" fall edition Vol. 23 No. 2 2009

Article "Potential World Record Wolf" by Jeff Grimolfson

Weight claimed 197 lbs.

Location Glenevis, Alberta

The pictures at the start of this post are from his article.

He's got it on vidocamera and it aired on "The Hunting Chronicles" on "Wild TV"

www.grimsmonstermix.com website
I don't see where in any of your posts that there is a link to the guy who shot the supposed record weight wolf.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:09 PM   #63
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
There is a gallery with the guy's pic with the wolf but the large pic is not there. But it IS the guy who shot it and it DOES mention the fact. The outfit ALSO sells an attractant and also offers guide services.

Write the guy bitching about it. Don't tell me!

http://www.grimsmonstermix.com/gallery.htm

Quote:
Have a question? Tell us what you think about Grim's Monster Mix and Bear Bait In A Bucket. White Claw Outfitters want to hear from you!

White Claw Outfitters
21-540-30 Range Road 274
T7X 3S9
Spruce Grove, Alberta

Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 339
Glenevis, Alberta
T0E 0X0

tel. (780) 983 8224
sales@grimsmonstermix.com

Jeff Grimolfson Owner/Operator
(Jim Johnston is the guy who shot the wolf)

Last edited by warbirdlover; January 24, 2012 at 08:23 PM.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:19 PM   #64
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
And I guess I need to put this in here.....

No, you don't need to put them in here. Those images are copyrighted materials.

Please review TFL's copyrighted materials policy, found on the rules page.

Last edited by Mike Irwin; January 24, 2012 at 08:58 PM. Reason: redacted copyrighted images
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:20 PM   #65
Irish B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 359
Thank you for assuring everyone that my pictures are real. I am 6'. That little female can look me face to face when she stands up tall. The big 90 lbs black male stands 7' tall. He can and does put his paws on my shoulders and look over the top of my head. I can give my professional opinion on wolf size for what it's worth. I did a thesis on wolf reintroduction in the us but more specifically the genetic mutations.and human interactions causing larger wolves. Let me be clear the largest wolf ever recorded in the us was around 175 lbs. This is the largest confirmed report. I am inclined to believe that there are larger wolves out there due to a constant genetic mutations causing larger wolves but that has never been confirmed. This is based on the fact that I've worked with males in captivity pushing upwards of 160 lbs. The thing is these old males were more well fed than physically massive like the wolves in question from the op. This leads me to believe that a lot of those pictures are either photoshoped or perspective picture, you know the ones where the African lion looks 900lbs. All the wolves pushing upwards of 160 lbs and more were big slow wolves. They would be inefficient as hunters in the wild. Although we do know that the alpha males and females don't always lead the hunt but pick the most athletic wolves to hunt though this is uncommon. Like I said before people don't really understand wolf size vs weight. That black was only 90 lbs but stands 7' tall. Although he doesn't look it in the picture, the 120 lbs male is massive. He's a huge male in his prime. Also having worked a bit with the local zoo I can tell you the average male wolf in his prime is considerably beefier than the average mountain lion, the exception being big male cats. The 165 lbs Arctic timber hundred was MASSIVE. I have no pictures with him because cameras weren't allowed in his enclosure due to his tendency to turn anything on your belt or in your hands into a wolf treat! As for the wolf hunting issue I can't say I'd ever hunt a wolf but I'm not against it. Capstick himself as well as studies have proven when you allow responsible hunting it prevents over poaching. When a predator is completely protected it has no value to the people of the land. Farmers either kill the animal itself or hire poachers to kill the animal. When hunting is allowed it not only brings money and tourism into an area it controls the population, keeping farmers from killing ever predator they see. Besides in this day and age the us government would never allow an animal to be hunted to endangered status.
__________________
If a man hasn't found something worth dying for, he isn't fit to live
Irish B is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:21 PM   #66
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
And the final page....

Last edited by warbirdlover; January 24, 2012 at 10:39 PM.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:24 PM   #67
Irish B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 359
Birdlover the wolf on the left in picture 2 looks perfectly real and not really unusually large. I would guess him to be around 140 lbs. The picture on the right just looks like a camera angle. . .but if there was a wolf that weighed in at a confirmed 190 lbs they probably would have heard about it in the scientific community and since all the biologists, wolf experts, wolf rehabilitators, wildlife veterinarians I've consulted with in doing my little report and all the biological journals I could dig up that had to do with wolf size, size progression, and genetic mutation in the past 50 years only spoke of a confirmed 175 lbs wolf I'm going to go with that. In the zoological community it isn't fact unless it's published in a scientific journal and every serious factual zoological discovery that is backed by conclusive evidence is published in a scientific journal
__________________
If a man hasn't found something worth dying for, he isn't fit to live

Last edited by Irish B; January 24, 2012 at 08:35 PM.
Irish B is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:30 PM   #68
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
Quote:
Birdlover the wolf on the left in picture 2 looks perfectly real and not really unusually large. I would guess him to be around 140 lbs. The picture on the right just looks like a camera angle.

Irish B
I cannot comment on the weight, and I know nothing about photomanipulation etc. I only put this article in to show it WAS a real wolf in the pics and shot in Canada. They say the weight was 197 lbs. And I think you are correct that they are making the animal "look" bigger by the angles etc they are taking the pics at.... like we all do when we get a huge buck!

We should elect someone to contact the guys at the website and see what they say and what details they might provide. You would be the perfect guy to do it with your experience! Seriously!!
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:31 PM   #69
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,347
Quote:
There is a gallery with the guy's pic with the wolf but the large pic is not there. But it IS the guy who shot it and it DOES mention the fact. The outfit ALSO sells an attractant and also offers guide services.

Write the guy bitching about it. Don't tell me!
Despite your language, what you are telling me is that all the information you are saying is true/accurate is from this website which does not have the information, just a thumbnail picture we have already seen countless times and to not blame you, but blame the guy at the website because you could not otherwise come up with the information?

It seems that just about everything about this story has been changed or misrepresented and salient informaiton on the story is quite dubious. Now, even the links to the information don't exist.

So much for the extraordinary proof.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:35 PM   #70
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
Quote:
Despite your language, what you are telling me is that all the information you are saying is true/accurate is from this website which does not have the information, just a thumbnail picture we have already seen countless times and to not blame you, but blame the guy at the website because you could not otherwise come up with the information?

So much for the extraordinary proof.
What I SAID was there was an article in a legitimate hunting magazine about this wolf. And here it is. I said nothing about whether it was accurate or not. How the heck would I know? Geesh.

Make your own conclusions. I'm all done with this thread.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:36 PM   #71
Buzzcook
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 5,604
Quote:
Now if you folks say that wolves don't get to 140 pounds, then not much I can say.
So who in this thread has denied that wolves grow to 140 or more pounds?

If you'll read the thread title it says,
Quote:
Is this normal size for a wolf?
, that is where the controversy lays.

What you've done is create a strawman or you're just not very good at snark.
Buzzcook is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:40 PM   #72
Irish B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 359
Edited my post up there and added some stuff. No one is blaming you just can't always believe the stuff on the internet. Like how it's floating around that wolves have a bite force of over 1500 psi when in actuality the only real study done confirmed them at 421 psi (compared to a German Shepard which has a bite force of 230)
__________________
If a man hasn't found something worth dying for, he isn't fit to live
Irish B is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:43 PM   #73
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,347
Quote:
What I SAID was there was an article in a legitimate hunting magazine about this wolf. And here it is. I said nothing about whether it was accurate or not. How the heck would I know? Geesh.
Yeah, and it was written by the guide (not the hunter as you claimed) with no outside confirmation.

By the way, great violation of copyright laws on posting the article illegally.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 08:50 PM   #74
Irish B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 359
Actually I contacted several sources that claimed they had shot or killed a world record wolf. Not one could provide me with actual proof. I either got no response or bogus responses. I know if I shot a world record wolf the first thing I'd do is have it officially weighed. I know most of you would do the exact same thing.
__________________
If a man hasn't found something worth dying for, he isn't fit to live
Irish B is offline  
Old January 24, 2012, 10:14 PM   #75
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
That isn't the question either. If it is or isn't a world record is not the issue. Whether that is a real picture and how big wolves CAN get is the real issue. I believe we have enough to say it is a real picture, a real wolf and yes, those suckers get BIG. Irish B noted a 95 pound wolf that could put its legs on his shoulders and stood at 7 feet on hind legs. No one dismisses the facts of a 140 pound wolf which we would all agree is a BIG wolf. I found a picture of a 140 pound Malamute, admittedly a bit different than a wolf, but it gives a fair comparison a few threads back.

We are also not talking about the AVERAGE sized wolf which may be in the 100-120 pound range. Even there, Irish B stated how BIG the 120 pound wolf was. These are not small critters.

Secondly, they don't belong here in Idaho and it is a fraud that the FEDs have sold us that they are the same critter. Yes, Great Danes and those little yapping creatures are the same species, but they are as different as night and day. Same thing with the Mackenzie Valley Canadian wolf and the native Idaho wolf. Same species but still distinctly different.
Alaska444 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13621 seconds with 8 queries