Idaho Panhandle Man Bags First Wolf
February 24, 2010
The pictures below I received in my email. It is my understanding that these pictures are of the same wolf written about in the Coeur d’Alene Press and the same wolf IDFG biologist Jim Hayden nearly blew a gasket over. In the email I received it said the wolf weighed 175 pounds. The CDA Press article said that Brett Pitcher got what he “estimated” to be a 180-pound wolf. Hayden went half out of his mind to think the CDA Press would write that when the wolf was not “officially” weighed. Who cares? It’s a big wolf.
The photos show the wolf complete. When Pitcher took the wolf to IDFG headquarters, where Hayden inspected it, it was only the head and fur, as is only required for inspection.
Congratulations on a marvelous kill and I’ll say it again. I don’t care how much it weighs, it’s a big wolf.
Tom Remington
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
We feature the latest news, events and politics effecting the sports of hunting, fishing, and all outdoor activities in North America.
Good game management, Mr. Pitcher. Thank you very much. I know a guy who made a pair of mittens with either side of the scull-hide.
Come on now, according to the wolfies they never weigh more than 120 lbs at most. Riiiggghhhttt.
I’m a bit nervous about the size of the animal in the picture. Should i be nervous?
Just think what one or two or three or ten of those things could do to a couple hikers in some back country place, while day hiking. They could do what ever they wanted, right now their not doing it, but they have been scoping us out down here, I’ve been prey tested by them. Especially when the horse and mule are along, then they are really bold, following, standing, watching right out in the open, walking right into the camp and then darting out.. And at night, sitting outside the wall tent, keeping and eye on the horse and mules, those damn things are walking about out there, barking at us. Geist is right on, trouble with these things is brewing..
Elk ,deer and buffalo and cattle and sheep are sure good for the wolves as you can tell by the size of this one. at least it makes for a bigger target when your shooting at the wolves.
I’ve started keeping a collection of all these large wolf photos….This one is not much smaller than the last one killed in Alberta, which is currently running for a recorded 197 pounds…..And considering the power and agility of ANY animal that makes it’s living in the wild, much less, one this big, it is indeed capable of taking any man alive, and making a meal of him….Just think of how many deer and elk have been consumed in a single year….(It didn’t get that big on acorns….) After one night in the woods with this fellow, and I would start thinking of how to take back all the woods this fellow has claimed….(if I was still alive..)
At least there is one less…..now, lets get the rest!
jes
Where is your verification for a recorded 197 pound wolf in Alberta?
According to IDFG the largest wolf taken during the Idaho “harvest’” season weighed in at 130 pounds, in Boundary county, just south of the Canada – Idaho border. As usual the sizes of Idaho wolves keep increasing as time goes by. The average weight of wolves taken in Idaho during this hunting season is less then 110 pounds.
thanks, lee. those are large wolves.
Lee, you can read the story in the Feb/Mar 2010 issue of North American Hunter…as a new world record, it is pending verification….The truth be told, Lee, is that you are asking for records which are not kept or verified by anyone. If you are looking online, you will get nothing but the Pope and Young, and Boone and Crockett, and that is only for world record game animals, not including wolves, but bears and cats. The same is true for most record keeping….most animals are left in the lurch, when it comes to any credible record keeping, except for the two mentioned. Can’t you believe anything but what you read in a government sponsored article? Evidently not. You’d make a good Nazi….just believe what they tell you….
You might check out the photo, but it has been on here before….and the responses are ludicrous, since many of them don’t believe anything but “photo shopped” these days….Maybe when some “verifiable” organization starts to record wolves, they will believe they can get that large…view at:
http://www.mikehanback.com/blog/index.cfm/2009/9/25/Photo-Biggest-Wolf-Ever
Averages don’t mean shit.
[...] Idaho Panhandle Man Bags First Wolf : Black Bear Blog [...]
From the Spokesman Review “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.”
He also said “This wolf was NOT weighed by anyone, and was presented for check-in as stated – only a head and hide. It “felt” like 180 lbs to the hunter – that doesn’t make it 180 lbs. You can probably tell, chasing down these kinds of rumors ticks me off a bit, but it’s important for us all to deal with facts, not guesses.” Jim Hayden, regional wildlife manager, Idaho F&G department.
http://www.allbusiness.com/environment-natural-resources/ecology-environmental/13962363-1.html
And just why, Lee, do you want to believe a Fish and Game biologist? Do they represent the final word for you? Or is it because they wear a uniform, that you are more inclined to believe? Maybe the Nazi comparison wasn’t inapt after all….
jes
My 55 pound collie would look similar to that if I held her up in a like manner. She is very furry, has a huge neck ruff, bushy tail, but comparitively short legs which would stll reach the ground.
It has nothing to do with a uniform; they do not represent the final word; examining data from many sources has led me to have a knowledge of wolf weights in various parts of the northern hemisphere.
I would believe a biologist over some young male that has killed his first wolf, hoisted it up at the kill site, not using any scale and saying it feels like180 pounds. He looks like a very pleased man. Though not what I would aspire to, I congratulate him on his personal success.
And just why, jes, to you not want to believe a F&G biologist?
And I’ve seen Border Collies from 25 to 65 pounds.
They screwed up and estimated the weight, it looks like 115-130 range to me. Still and elk killing machine.. Idaho still has to many of them, Idaho’s elk are still in dire straights..
Of course Biologists estimations of elk herd counts are the gospel truth.
But then of course I would take the word of many Idahoans on the ground looking at, for elk, also with the knowledge of correct cow to calf ratios, and familiarity with several established elk herds and few decades expertise watching those herds, over a biologists elk herd count estimations .
I live not to far from where he shot this wolf and have hunted some of this country. I’m with Greg on this one about it’s weight. I’m thinking 120-130 tops but still a big dog. Been out shed and wolf hunting the last couple of weekends and sure not seeing the elk sign that we usualy do this time of year. Hopefully it’s because of the mild winter and the elk are in a different area than most winters. Did find a couple dead yearling elk but they were to ar gone to see what might of happened. Seems to be quite a lot of wolf sign around but I think most of them are out hunting at night, not seeing or hearing them until after dark. We still have 4 more weeks to hunt so maybe we can score, hard to say though, it was 54 deg. today and the fishing rod is starting to look like it might need some bonding time.
Greg, you like history ? Try this one and let me know what you think – i hope you read it. This was written even before I was born!
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/fauna2/fauna2b.htm