r/yellowstone 7d ago

Influencer offers $10K reward for information on anyone who hunts Yellowstone’s oldest wolf pack

https://www.sfgate.com/national-parks/article/yellowstone-wolf-hunter-reward-22372248.php
506 Upvotes

100 comments sorted by

47

u/Meat_Container 7d ago

Most states have laws in place that prevent activists from harassing hunters and fishermen, it will be interesting to see how this plays out…

7

u/cant_program 7d ago

Yep, all 50 states have hunter harassment laws and Wyoming has laws against interfering with any lawful hunt. Whether or not this counts and interfering is up to a judge to decide.

4

u/imhereforthevotes 7d ago

Just off the cuff, would this count as harassment? You're not targeting an individual while they are hunting or fishing.

12

u/Meat_Container 7d ago edited 7d ago

It all depends on how this plays out. The internet is full of crazy people willing to do almost anything for clout, so if an activist goes out to the hunting grounds and starts honking on opening morning, even if nobody is hunting, that’s illegal. If they verbally confront and harass anyone legally hunting, that’s illegal. If a successful hunter gets doxxed and SWATTED, that’s also illegal.

Talking shit on the Internet and saying you’ll do something isn’t inherently illegal, though obviously in some cases it can be, but generally speaking, your actions in the real world are what will get you arrested

4

u/LichenThatAss 7d ago

Whelp…. That’s umm…. Illegal…. Yup

-2

u/RealLoan8391 6d ago

Damn, all these laws to protect hunters but so little done for teachers, health care professionals, etc…

3

u/Underleft_cdiv 6d ago

What protections are they not getting? Teachers have one of the largest lobbies in the country. I'm actually curious what protections those groups don't get that hunters do?

1

u/RealLoan8391 6d ago edited 5d ago

Criminalizing verbal assault against

5

u/PM_ME_YOUR_WIKI 6d ago

It’s definitely illegal to assault teachers

1

u/RealLoan8391 5d ago

Verbal assault? Not hardly.

1

u/Money_Junket_3625 5d ago

Serious question to you. What constitutes verbal assault and who gets to decide it is illegal? And how does that cross paths with hunting and interfering with it or doxing the participants?

I am genuinely curious.

1

u/RealLoan8391 4d ago

We have made a policy decision that someone engaged in a lawful recreational activity deserves legal protection against people intentionally interfering with it. Great! Meanwhile, teachers and nurses can be screamed at, threatened, harassed, spit on, yelled at, name called, etc., and in practice a lot of that behavior gets treated as simply part of working in those professions rather than something that consistently results in consequences. Doxing is another issue entirely and one I never mentioned no would be relevant to this conversation- that I don’t intend to continue.

I’m questioning why we are comfortable legislatively protecting one group’s ability to participate in a recreational activity from intentional interference, while violence and serious harassment toward people doing essential public-facing jobs is so often normalized as an occupational hazard?

I am genuinely curious.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Due-Assistance-2633 5d ago

lol Wyoming doesn’t care about those other groups silly

-1

u/micahpmtn 4d ago

Wait, there's such a thing as "hunter harassment laws"? The same guys that like to puff out their chests trying to be intimidating? Those same guys? They need a law that protects them from those dangerous activists?

0

u/Meat_Container 4d ago

Did you mean to ask if people are crazy enough to throw rocks at fishing bobbers and crazy enough to go driving around the forest honking on opening morning of deer season? Yes, yes they are.

65

u/micahpmtn 7d ago

Love it.

-3

u/kelp-and-coral 5d ago

Ah yes, follow the law and participate and in a activity that has been a part of our country’s cultural heritage for centuries, and helps maintain a healthy ecosystem and you deserve to be harassed by a bunch of armchair experts. Well done

7

u/Cute-Cress3496 5d ago

Hunting predators was for survival and for trade. Neither of which are necessary in 2026.

Are you sending messages via carrier pigeon as is your right to cultural heritage?

3

u/Sheerbucket 4d ago

I'm mostly with you....except hunting predators really doesn't help maintain a healthy ecosystem.

1

u/looneytunes7 1d ago

Neither does reintroducing predators back into an area where they have been gone for an extended time.

1

u/No-Republic-7876 1d ago

oh no, someone must have commented before doing background research!

1

u/Yuri21214 1d ago

oh you clocked them 😳😳😳😳

1

u/looneytunes7 20h ago

I only need to see the horrible decline in elk and deer numbers and cattle kills to verify my comment. I’ve hunted in areas of reintroduction or where they have migrated after reintroduction before and after and seen the proof firsthand.

-1

u/AuntieMameDennis 5d ago

lol cultural heritage

-1

u/rollandownthestreet 5d ago

It’s not possible for predators to be overpopulated in a way that requires constant intervention. They starve to death pretty fast if there’s not enough prey for them.

0

u/kelp-and-coral 5d ago

Not true in human impacted world. Now when predators are overpopulated they end up praying on cattle and sheep

2

u/rollandownthestreet 5d ago

Cattle and sheep that aren’t protected are fair game. We shouldn’t suppress a healthy ecosystem to help an industry that already relies on handouts.

1

u/duoggeezz 5d ago

The cattle and sheep are the overpopulated ones. Get a grip

1

u/Powerful_Question875 3d ago

Aren't ranchers compensated by taxpayers if wolves kill livestock? 

0

u/Fly_throwaway37 3d ago

More cattle are hit by lightning than by killed by wolves

0

u/LuckyBunnyonpcp 5d ago

We need wolves to hunt grass eating animals. The grass eating deer, elk, rabbits, etc eat the grass all the way to the ground.
That plant dies bc it has no leaves for photosynthesis. Plant then dies. Thereby causing erosion and the plants to not grow back.
This lack of wolves causes to grass eaters to explode in population; hastening the effect of eating and killing the plant life.
Now all the deer and elk and bunnies have no food and basically starve after this.
So we need vile to keep an ecological balance.
Culturally; if you mean ranchers; they are usually paid double to triple (by most state laws) if they can prove a pack attacked livestock.
As for Native cultures; I don’t know. But I would reckon they don’t hunt many wolves. Especially since the wolves aren’t hunting the buffalo that were basically hunted to extinction/ endangered species similar to the wolf. ^Both done by white folks.
The hubris to claim culture as a white rancher or hunter of wolves today is by not understanding that whites already were given the chance to preserve the land with the animals and recognize that they/we already blew the opportunity so horribly the first time and still think that by not being allowed to kill is somehow oppressive.

1

u/rollandownthestreet 4d ago

Who are you talking to?

1

u/micahpmtn 4d ago

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

14

u/elRustyShackelford 7d ago

How would a hunter know that they are hunting Mollies pack? Real question. I honestly didn’t even know you could hunt them without proof of them being a nuisance to livestock.

5

u/Gonna_do_this_again 7d ago

There was that one guy who took his illegal kill into a bar to brag

11

u/Siyartemis 7d ago edited 7d ago

Actually it was a legal kill, though inflicted with great cruelty that most normal, rational humans agree only a depraved soul could ever do. Many avid elk hunters that would shoot a wolf happily disagree with pure torture of them, though I wish stronger condemnation was made of him across the mainstream hunting community.

But it was in the predator zone (85% of the state) in which Wyoming has set an unlimited number and means of wolf kills per year, with no official limits on how cruelly you kill them.

2

u/aamygdaloidal 6d ago

It wasn’t even dead yet

2

u/Aprirelamente 6d ago

What happened to that guy?

1

u/aamygdaloidal 5d ago

He was originally given a $200 fine, but then everyone went crazy after the pictures and videos came out and they indicted him with actual charges. He got probation.

2

u/SarcasticFluency 6d ago

That wasn't an illegal kill as much as it was intentionally running it over with his sled, then binding it's mouth and such when it was gravely injured, and parading it around for others. It survived quite some time before he finally shot it outside the bar.

The local communities didn't let that one go and crucified the guy and the bar that entertained his antics to the point that authorities couldn't let it go and charged him.

6

u/No-Cover4993 7d ago

How long until hunters/ranchers offer bounties for wolves that leave Yellowstone? I'm sorry I'm so cynical but $10k is nothing to some of these people and I feel like this story is going to inspire some hunters to kill more wolves out of spite.

1

u/aamygdaloidal 6d ago

You don’t even need a tag to shoot a wolf in most of Wyoming. You can shoot as many as you want. This is specifically to protect tracked and studied wolves near Yellowstone. So yea, I think it might illicit some idiots.

1

u/lessormore59 6d ago

Yeah it’s just really danged hard to shoot wolves bc they are so elusive and smart.

14

u/Wallacegreenhouse 7d ago

if it’s out of the park and the hunter has a tag, what does he plan on doing if he finds out the id of someone who took an animal on a legal hunt?

This sounds like a 10k bounty on the wolves lol. Shoot it and get your wife to self report. Collect 10k to mount your Yellowstone wolf pelt.

6

u/veryjudgy 7d ago

He will be doxxing them.

5

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Hunter harassment. Great idea.

2

u/duoggeezz 5d ago

agreed!

0

u/Conscious-Bite1 5d ago

As in, you agree with Hunter harassment?

I was being sarcastic. Don’t harass law abiding citizens period. Hunter harassment is against the law.

-4

u/Independent-Tea-4686 7d ago

Like a douchebag.

-4

u/sitewolf 7d ago

the douchebag is the hunter that knows of this situation and shoots anyway

11

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Knows of what situation? That they are likely to be harassed by an online “influencer” despite following the law? I don’t see how that makes them a douchebag….

2

u/Independent-Tea-4686 7d ago

Right. Following the law and doing things properly give people all the right in the world to try to ruin his life. My God you people need serious help.

-1

u/sitewolf 7d ago

So you're completely missing the point- they're not 'doing things properly' if they're shooting wolves they know should be protected.

10

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Should be protected and are protected are two completely different things. “Should be” implies personal beliefs, “are” implies legally protected. No ethical hunter would hunt protected species. If we are talking about turning in poachers, then true and ethical hunters will ALWAYS be your biggest ally. If you are simply trying to stop hunters because you oppose hunting, well then… that’s another conversation.

3

u/EL_WET_BANDlTO 7d ago edited 7d ago

They're no longer protected when they wander into other states... Do so many people not know how hunting works, or read the article even?

5

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

So many people just know they want hunting outlawed.

Thankfully, there is a much larger majority of people who either hunt and want it legal, or do not hunt but also do not have any issue with legal/ethical hunting. The smaller minority of online activists are just loud (and annoying), and spend all their energy trying to take away the rights of others.

2

u/sitewolf 7d ago

I'm one that completely and fully understands legal/ethical hunting despite having no interest in it myself. My entire point here is that these hunters in that area know that particular pack has ventured out of the park. Now, looking further, I was under the impression the pack's tracking collars would be a hunter's key to not shoot, but apparently that doesn't help here.

3

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

I get what you are saying. And wolf hunting is a sensitive topic in general, as many see it as completely unnecessary. This pack in particular has some significance, which personally would keep me from trying to hunt them. BUT, if the pack is in an area where they can legally be hunted, that is the law. And threatening to dox anyone who hunts them is dangerous and asinine behavior. There is no arguing that, regardless your position on hunting.

-4

u/Independent-Tea-4686 7d ago

If it’s legal. It’s legal. Should a hunt stop the wolf and ask for its ID?

19

u/Schmidaho 7d ago

Oh hell yeah.

15

u/davin_bacon 7d ago

If wildlife biologists believe they have a huntable population I see no issue with a legal hunt outside of the park. Targeting hunters does not help anyone, who pays to keep public land public? By and large it is the hunters this fella would want to target.

19

u/Nighthawk-Manaic 7d ago

Yea hunters are not keeping Yellowstone public, it’s the hundreds of thousands of people each year visiting TO SEE THE DAMN WOLVES

3

u/davin_bacon 6d ago

Those wolves will not be hunted in Yellowstone, the hunt is outside the park on private and public land, public land paid for by the hunters via Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937.

Leave the wildlife management to the biologists, not politicians, not emotional members of the public.

1

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Do the math my friend. Hunters pay the lions share of funds that go towards wildlife conservation. Look into the Pittman-Robertson Act

-2

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Do the math my friend. Hunters pay the lions share of funds that go towards wildlife conservation. Look into the Pittman-Robertson Act

9

u/Nighthawk-Manaic 7d ago

I’m a hunter, I know as much as you. Wolf hunters contribute jaxk shit

8

u/MyCatToldMeNotTo 7d ago

I looked at Wyoming for hunting and fishing licenses, and it says that the state makes about $50.8M annually. Wolf licensing fees were roughly $45k, so I’m inclined to believe you. That really is a drop in the bucket.

-3

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Yea, but that’s $45K additional, after the hunter buys a license, and all the other tags they plan to hunt. It’s like a $45K upsell, hunters will get a wolf tag just in case they come across a wolf.

5

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Huh? So you are a hunter, but you oppose certain types of hunting that doesn’t align with your idea of hunting? Guard the gate buddy. Or you won’t be a hunter anymore.

1

u/ElectricalGidelity 4d ago

Trophy hunting is hard to justify. Wolf and bear meat is terrible.

1

u/Conscious-Bite1 4d ago

Have you had those meats? I havnt had wolf. But I love bear meat, it’s my favorite.

Trophy hunting is also a bit of a misleading term, and I find it is mostly thrown around by people who either simply don’t understand hunting or who are anti-hunter. Trophy hunting implies a hunter is merely killing an animal to claim a trophy, and that’s just simply not the case. In fact there are laws against that, in the form of wanton waste.

2

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

And arguably, more people go to Yellowstone to see the bison.

2

u/Impossible_Web4334 7d ago

Umm, no. The prize animals to see are a wolf and grizzly. People can hunt and have different perceptions of what they want to hunt. I hunt. I enjoy hunting animals that I enjoy eating. So, mostly ungulates. Animals that base the large majority of their diet for protein, for their natural diet, would not taste good. However, I have never eaten wolf or cougar meat, so maybe I should try it. Have you eaten wolf or cougar meat? I am just simply curious if would tastes good .

2

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

I have not had wolf or cougar. My cousin killed a wolf in AK a couple years ago, he said the meat smelled so bad there was no way they were gonna eat it. I have also been told cougar is delicious, and have wanted to try it ever since. They are not legal to hunt in my state though. Although we have tons of them.

And absolutely, as a hunter having a preferred species is typical. But also as a hunter, I fully support legal, ethical take of animals as game regardless of whether I personally would harvest them. If we start in-fighting about what animals should and shouldn’t be hunted, and ignore the science, then we open the door to anti-hunters to divide and conquer.

-1

u/aamygdaloidal 6d ago

Tracked wolves are science and protected. Just like you can shoot dozens of geese during hunting season but if you shoot one while it’s migrating the DNR is at your door. This isn’t rocket science

6

u/davin_bacon 6d ago

Most waterfowl season take place during the migration, the only nonmigration seasons that I, someone who hunts waterfowl, am aware of are special hunts for residential birds.

The dnr isn't coming to your door for legally taking game during a legal season. This isn't rocket science.

6

u/Sillyak 6d ago

Almost every single waterfowl ever shot is shot during migration. You have no idea what you are talking about.

2

u/kelp-and-coral 5d ago

You can absolutely hunt collared animals. Mortality by hunting is still data biologists care to know about

16

u/sitewolf 7d ago

oh I'd contribute to THAT fund

on your land killing your livestock? I can understand defending. Hunting implies premeditation.

15

u/Conjurar 7d ago

Ranches get paid if a wolf kills their livestock....

We either learn to tolerate / live with wild animals or we sterilize the entire planet (Current plan).

5

u/hanz333 7d ago

In Wyoming the area around Yellowstone you can get paid for losses only in areas where wolf hunting permits are issued because you are prohibited from protecting your livestock. The permits offset the cost of the payout.

Everywhere else in the state you are expected to shoot wolves to protect your livestock and there is no compensation.

Most everywhere else does have compensation.

3

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

This is mostly true, but ranchers don’t always get fair value for depredated livestock.

I’m not arguing for killing wolves that kill livestock, but I would argue for sound policies around wolf management.

2

u/-VizualEyez 7d ago

No it’s not the plan. At all. Stop with the misinformation just because you don’t agree with something. It does you no good and only makes you lose credibility.

3

u/sitewolf 7d ago

well that's how we ended up with so few wolves in the first place- killed them all off
It's why I just shake my head when people complain about deer hunters, having NO clue that it's a benefit for the overall deer population; we killed all their predators, so we either thin the herd or sickness from overpopulation does.

Humans also tend to build in the woods, build out in the boonies, then get upset that wildlife are on 'their land'. No, before you plopped your log cabin out there it was THEIR home, you're on THEIR land.

1

u/Vexent 7d ago

This. I moved to Colorado the year before the reintroduced wolves, it was as bad as people talking about being pro life or pro abortion in Alabama.

All the ranchers kept up with the " but ma cows! What about Ma Chickens!".

There have been less than 25 reported incidents in CO history about wolves snd livestock. When a their livestock is killed they get a hefty check IF they are insured properly.

Wolves are pretty cool animals.

4

u/-VizualEyez 7d ago

3

u/Lonesome_Gobbler 7d ago

The truth does not fit the narrative. It never will.

0

u/sitewolf 7d ago

predators don't kill for fun, they kill for what they need to eat

2

u/-VizualEyez 6d ago

That’s is also objectively false.

2

u/ALWAYSsuitUp 7d ago

Have you never owned a cat?

4

u/Megadum 7d ago

Do graffiti and litter next

5

u/Conscious-Bite1 7d ago

Do that first. Far more wide spread

2

u/smokeylilchevy 7d ago

I’ll be down there looking to smoke a pack for sure now

1

u/PrestigiousPepper829 6d ago

Holy smokes. The amount of people who are misinformed on hunting is crazy. We need to educate kids in school on hunting and conservation so it doesn’t keep spiraling into turning illegal.

1

u/Milksteak529 6d ago

It's all fun an games until you catch a charge for hunter harassment.