Clearly, based on the facts and quotes in this story the Sheriff got it 100% correct and acted as he should have.
The problem with wolves in general have been spun to death in the media and public debate and leave us with many questions -
Did they introduce the same species in these areas or did they introduce a super-predator that may not have been the one in these areas? I have read that the “wolves” in northwest Washington were closer in size to coyotes than those they introduced (these things are BIG).
Did the wolves in this region live on available game or did they mostly follow the buffalo herds around the northwest? In other words, were they native or were they just as nomadic as the prey they lived on that no longer exist?
How much is this program costing the taxpayers? It seems terribly expensive to me. How many government workers are there for each wolf and how often are they employing helicopters to shoot them after livestock incidents? How much are we the taxpayers paying for killed livestock?
If someone found a few T-Rex’s would the same people want to introduce those because they were here once? It seems like an absurd question, but follow the logic used to justify the reintroduction.
What has been the impact on local numbers of elk, moose, and deer. If those numbers have gone down as much as some suggest what is the impact on the local economy?
If there are more incidents such as this in areas frequented by tourists on public lands such as hikers, campers, and backpackers what would the economic impact be to those areas?
Do the people within the regions where there are now wolves support this or is this something being pushed by people who do not live in the rural affected communities. I bet I know the answer to this one....
Did they ( Ed Bangs ) introduce a super-predator ...
Yes.
Not native, exotic Huge Canadian ... wolves
If someone found a few T-Rex’s would the same people want to introduce those because they were here once?
= = =
Bring back SMALLPOX!!!!