BigfootWeekend September Expedition

Friday, December 13, 2013

Joe Fitz Cryptid Watch: 100% Wild Grey Wolf Shot Killed In Missouri


Bigfoot Evidence reader Joe Fitz and Michael Brookreson are our official wildlife reporters. This week's news item is about a grey wolf seized by the MDOC from a Greenville, Missouri hunter after they got wind he had it tested and it came back pure with no domestic dog or hybrid mixing. They basically told him to enjoy his picture because that's all he could keep as their official position is still that there are no Grey Wolves in the Missouri Ozarks. Joe writes:

Genetically pure WOLF shot and killed by a hunter and then Seized by the MO Department of Conservation in Greenville MO.  This eastern Ozark wolf was NOT supposed to exist though locals had insisted they were there for years and no.  They didn't confuse them with a coyote or domestic dog.  So MDOC hears about this and tells the guy to enjoy his picture because he cannot have his trophy back as there are no wolves in Missouri.  After that they whispered to him that not only was it real. But tests revealed it to be a 100% pure grey wolf.  No domestic mix or hybrid/pet.   Pretty cool for those of us that that believe there's a tiny bit more than what they tell us.

My best friend Matt. My ex law partner!  Almost 100 Pounds. Get this Joe. They aren't supposed to be there. Or exist.  Yet MDOC found out this guy had it tested and seized it'.


Here is a screen capture of the MO state highway patrolman that helped seize the wolf and the last photo the guy will ever see of his kill. I obtained them from my old law partner who got the images from the circuit clerk of Wayne County MO where the wolf was seized. It does prove one thing I guess. When it comes to rare and exotic species and the state and local government's official positions on the matters of these animals existing or being taken in their jurisdictions, they certainly aren't above simply hauling something they want to remain hidden away. - Michael

150 comments:

  1. first again bigfoot still dead

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... The man cried all night whilst peering through the darkness of his chamber. "Please be the case for my sanity?!"

      Delete
  2. I would like a credible source for this story. Surly there must exist some.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just as I thought. The only source on google for this is this post. Why do I just know this is totally made up?

      Delete
    2. It was enough reading that Joe Fitz is a "wildlife reporter"... But if in Wales he has only cows and sheep!

      Delete
    3. I'll have you know we have badgers, foxes, otters adders, and the ocassional big cat too old boy.

      Delete
    4. The entire story was attained by Mike Brookreson from a close friend of his... there is nothing 'official' to be found in any other sources, except for here thanks to Shawn.

      Delete
    5. ^ And that makes this story nothing else than a joke

      Delete
    6. Wow Joe you live in a jungle of animals then!

      Delete
    7. 3:46... Why so defensive and paranoid bro???

      3:49... Ha ha ha! Yeah, Jumanji has nothing on us!!

      Delete
    8. Joe can you please comment on the big 200 lb wolves that are being shot in canada. Many believe that these big wolves are the extinct dire wolves. Any comment?

      Delete
    9. Yeah i've been hearing about those. The biggest was 285 lbs

      Delete
    10. Bro... I'll get looking it all up and let you know ASAP. Thanks for the head's up!

      Delete
    11. Lol!

      Shawn Taterhole's the Tards with a Joe and Mike B story.

      Merry Xmas Mr Randi!

      MMG

      Delete
  3. Sorry but I destroyed the so called cryptid conspiracy aspect of this yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/gray-wolf-timber-wolf

    Missouri never denied wolves occasionally wander in/through your state, Mike.

    They just deny a living and breeding population of them.

    http://mdc.mo.gov/newsroom/dna-shows-hunter-shot-canine-october-be-wandering-wolf

    The State of Missouri doesn't even deny recovering the bodies (which is done to animals that are killed either out of season or when they do not have an active season for said animal) nor do they deny genetic testing on the animals.

    Just another case of sensationalism and spouting off stories without doing proper research...

    Reminds me of the ignorance of the 'blonde bears in CA' line from yesterday. People believe what they want to believe regardless of fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wolves in Missouri are the hardest evidence of the existence of Bigfeets

      Delete
    2. And when you think that these two guys may have reached the bottom... they find the way to scrape it still more...
      How sad must be your life when you realize you're spending it being a ridicoulous clown?

      Delete
    3. Clown? What are you providing that state agencies may be seizing specimens taken by hunters ?

      Delete
    4. I saw John Jones get ripped many times for stating he was chasing wolves in the Adirondacks of NY State. Never doubted him. Secondly. You idiot. That's not a play uniform that MO state trooper is wearing. Third. The relevant point here is if they want your rare specimen. Even if you claim mistaken coyote kill. Which the guy allegedly did. They'll take it if they want to. It is agenda driven. Like your comment against Joe or myself. Two guys who don't know you and don't want to.

      Delete
    5. Daniel. You're off in your own little playroom as usual. What the state told this guy and its official position and quotes you can attribute to state officials are 3 topics. I'd venture to say of the three you have a vast knowledge of 0. That being said. Y'all have a nice day.

      Delete
    6. Well, that's what Wildlife commissions do to animals taken out of season and those animals that are not recognized/have active hunting/trapping seasons.

      Game Commission came and took a Fisher from my cousin while I was witness to it. It was not trapping season an it was struck by a vehicle. They took it for genetic testing just like the wolf and wouldn't return the pelt.

      Just because you hunt doesn't mean you can keep anything you shoot.

      This isn't 'Nam, Smokey, there are rules.

      Delete
    7. Oh and one more thing. The very fact that a trooper and DOC officials got involved and took the specimen goes a tremendous way towards invalidating virtually every point you gents tried to make. Agenda Driven. Start with conclusion then let your facts work their way back. Nice.

      Delete
    8. Yes you're a clown because you stated that Missouri denies the existence of wolves in the state and this is rubbish, as Daniel pointed out.

      I live in the St. Francoius Mts of Missouri from 30 years and I always knew that some wolves may be around in certain periods of the year.

      We all knew it yet.

      But you make up this story and take it as a sensational news to add to the "Government is bad" story to implicitly prove that Government covers Bigfoot too.

      And yes, we call people like you CLOWN.

      Oh, still waiting for your mighty HD video footage of Bigfoot, it's quite some time that you made the announcement.

      Delete
    9. Great stuff Mike B!! Keep up the good work brother!!

      Delete
    10. First, I never said John W. Jones spoke was NOT chasing a wolf, in fact in his geographic location, it's nothing for a random wolf to pass through...especially during bad nutritional winters.

      Secondly, he brings that taunting by himself.

      Third, since you want to be short and blunt, fuck you. How's that?

      Delete
    11. You know you make me smile. I can't help but laugh because you are funny and witty. Nevertheless. A wild grey wolf seized in Wayne Co in the Ozarks isn't some starved diseased Minnesota mongrel. It's something more i think. Look at elk reintroduced in the area very recently. It does correlate.

      Delete
    12. I have a whitetail buck tag, guess I can go shoot turkey, tag it with my buck tag and keep it...you know, just because I'm a hunter.

      Delete
    13. And Dan. Breaker 1-9. We got a 10-20 on a Big Bad Wolf headed to Grandmas house in the southern Ozarks come back.

      Delete
    14. No. But. If it was inadvertent and accidental and the species really has no history of bein there. Then why take it. He wasn't fined or arrested.

      Delete
    15. Because it's not a recognized native species. Same thing would happen if someone shot some escaped chimpanzee or tiger.

      Most of these cases have coyote hunters shooting what they believed was just a big coyote until closer inspection drew the questions into the open.

      You can tell where many animals are from just by genetic testing, especially in highly monitored predatory species. The reintroduction of Wolves years ago has these people on top of their population information.

      Delete
    16. It's called "Law" Mikey, great news eh? ^^

      - The guy from Missouri that you ignored

      Delete
    17. Man. I'm not ignoring you. I can only type so fast. If your point is to call me a clown repeatedly. Point taken. If you have a legit question. Ill try to answer it. M

      Delete
    18. 4:23. The only law you've implicitly cited Is your first amendment right to be an ass. What law was broken here specifically and what tenable defense is there. There's no season on coyotes and clearly this guy had his "ducks in a row".

      Delete
    19. And your cited state recognition is that you personally acknowledged there were a few around when you lived there?

      Delete
    20. Wow. Turns out there is a clown on this thread.

      Delete
    21. Umm...there's a season for Coyote in Missouri, da Fuq you talking about? In fact, it's in right now.....

      http://mdc.mo.gov/regulations/coyote-regulations

      Delete
    22. You can kill em as nuisance virtually at will. Unwritten law. There's a season on clowns on this thread too. So I gotta go. :)

      Delete
    23. In fact every poacher ever caught with a mag might and .22 is sworn to say nuisance coyote to the game officer despite the buck blood dripping from his truck bed.

      Delete
    24. I still live in Missouri and we have been knowing that sometimes some wolves may be around in the winter season. You cant kill them because they are not officially a missouri species, obviously

      Delete
    25. You still need a valid permit to kill them and there is in fact a season for their harvesting. There is also a clearly regulated off season for them in which you cannot validly harvest the animal.

      You said tere was no season and no law, both were dead wrong.

      Delete
    26. Look. I'm speaking from in the woods experience as a hunter. It is almost completely ignored. And if you are a hunter you know that. And I used it in the context of excuses for this hunter. You have gotten argumentative for its own sake and its weakening you. You were right. No vet exam. No controversy. Yes. There's technically a coyote season. But it's shoot on sight all night alright. If you can even loosely attribute it to nuisance Pets or livestock fire away. And if your a hunter Dan. Which you claim to be. You would freely admit this now.

      Delete
    27. As Anthony Kiedis opined. "Real Men Don't Shoot Coyotes". Now. Are you going to tell me that coyote regulations and seasoned are enforced or that it's not the 1 excuse for rifle and spotlight ??

      Delete
    28. C'mon Dan. I answered your questions. And ignored your fuck you. What's the 1st thing ole Darryl says he was a shooting at last night on any night??

      Delete
    29. Dan. We were discussing this coyote season you referenced and I asked you a question based in reality. Are you on break?

      Delete
    30. Hmmm. Appears we've reached a conundrum. If Dan admits coyote season goes largely unenforced and is therefore the most common phrase ever uttered by poachers we know he's outdoorsy but that his whole premise was predominately an argumentative ruse. If he tries to play it by the statute we know he couldn't handle a squirrel rifle. Nice place to leave off I think. Crickets.

      Delete
    31. I don't know how you boys in MO practice your game harvesting, but in PA we take our seasons and animals seriously. Only POS poach and shoot game out of season.

      Our laws are highly enforced (even red tag/farm tag/crop damage tag) and you will pay if you get caught breaking them.

      Delete
    32. Merry Xmas Dan. My advice. Don't offer to shoot the Xmas bird. :)

      Delete
    33. Well. Then you're full of shit as a Christmas goose. I thought you lived in Tennessee And furthermore ill let any real hunter or outdoorsmen tell you what happens to coyotes caught in a field or poachers caught in a truck. That answer was just plain wrong. Have a nice day

      Delete
    34. And I've only hunted whitetail at my home in TN, so I can't speak for their laws or enforcement. I know Fort Campbell area is highly regulated and seriously enforced.

      Delete
    35. The correct answer is this. Because they can be taken as nuisance animals they are the no 1 excuse for shooting any time of the year and a ready made excuse for a poacher in ANY state to possess a light and rifle at night. Anyone who truly hunts knows this fact. Good day. I repeat. Good day!

      Delete
    36. I was born and raised in PA, am a legal resident of TN, and split my time between the two states. January-September in TN, October-December in PA. Hell, I even spend some time in Southern California, what of it?

      Delete
    37. Seeing as I don't hang around poachers or pieces of shit, I wouldn't know their excuses. Every single person I know do not hunt out of season and only spotlight during proper hours. I was raised with honor and integrity for the wildlife, not to go drink and drive with loaded weapons. Sorry that I value those aspects of tradition.

      Delete
    38. Danny Downer,seems to me you just like to argue.Plain and simple.

      Delete
    39. Ha.Ball Boy,honor and integrity.Now that's unbelievable.Talk about Bigfoot being a hoax.Is there honor and integrity in the ball sack community?Just wondering.;-)

      Delete
    40. Only for an hour or so in the morning before I beat it while looking at myself in the mirror.

      Just depends on the first pile of lies I run into first.

      Delete
    41. And there's your sign people.

      Delete
    42. No piece of circumstantial evidence has ever made me step back and go, "maybe there is a Sasquatch."

      Not one.

      Add in 100 years, countless expeditions, huge technological advances and population expansion and it just makes BF that much more of a misidentification/hoax phenomena.

      Delete
    43. 'Countless expeditions'; referring to that long post yesterday I take it?

      None of us know the fruits of those research periods. Just because they didn't bag a Bigfoot doesn't mean they didn't come away with any fibres, tracks or valuable information, which I think you'll find the majority of which did.

      The accumulation of evidence over the whole monthly total of that research isn't even comparable to the accounts and duration this creature has had acknowledgement.

      What we know now about the species is off the back of many research groups' excursions to find that information. How else do you think research is started and accumilated? Such research over a long period of time is conducive, regardless of whether they found the Bigfoot you would surely no doubt deny anyway... I must remind you that it took them 60 years to find the panda, and they give up after 30.

      Delete
    44. You als keep ignoring the fact that there is a transition from 150 years worth of domumentation of both accounts and university studies that have been transitioned by footage, tracks... All the recent sources of evidence that promote total consistency in what one would expect from a legitimate creature.

      Delete
    45. There is nothing you know about these supposedly real creatures, otherwise every research group wouldn't have their own theories that are vastly different from the next set of researchers.

      John Jones is a quick and prime example of that.

      No one agrees on knocks, stick figures, nocturnal or daylight, friendly or foe, lineage, ape or human, nobody can agree on anything.

      That only happens with fake animals because with real animals there are certain facts that all groups or researchers must abide by.

      No amount of "fibers," hair, whoops, knocks, or footprint castings will ever validate a species or become hard evidence.

      So I stand by my previous assertion that I have not witnessed one piece of circumstantial evidence to lead me to believe Sasquatch exists.

      Delete
    46. Great! Good for you... I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence made you believe in Bigfoot in the first place?

      The fact is that we are dealing with hight intelligence, different tempraments and possibly different customs. This is something that for all my comments, people like you still can't grasp. This is why we are not dealing with a dumb animal and this is why people have different theories about behaviour, diet, etc. that is NOT validation of a fake animal unless you are too stupid to acknowledge that I am not arguing for an animal, but the long term self correcting research field of a wild human that no doubt has some level of culture.

      No about of whoops (primate behaviour), woodknocks (limb breaks post woodknock included) and fibres (even when tested as unknown primate) or casts will never validate a species for you, because you don't want a species to be real. You have invested so much time and effort into this that if it was confirmed a species, you wouldn't be able to handle it old boy.

      Oh, and I got my point across about the 'countless expeditions' you appeared to not think through properly yesterday, if seems.

      Delete
    47. What led me to bigfoot originally?

      Being a naive child that wanted to believe in a primitive man out living in the rustic wilds while the rest of us worked our lives away.

      Then I got into it more and more, I read all the theories, saw all the movies, documentaries, and YouTube clips. I read some literature, and more importantly I saw all the different characters and people in the world of bigfoot. I saw their action and inaction, I saw their flaws, I saw their errors, and I've certainly witnessed their lies.

      Spent the first 1/3 of my life in the woods.

      The more I am around the field and footers, the less likely it becomes for a 9ft 800lb undiscovered primate roaming the wilds of NA.

      Every week, every year it's always the same cycle of boring excuses as to why there is no monkey man and no legitimate biological trace of the creature.

      Top it off with a smug Brit whose never seen a lick o' American woods, whom regurgitates irrelevant data and pushes things he doesn't comprehend just to 'keep the word out there' (latest example see Dan Shirley/Blonde black bears) and there you go.

      No DNA evidence even from all these steamy Squatch turds, no body, no bones, no hard data.

      Even if these things were super intelligent supermen like you claim, in the last 50 years we would have found biological evidence of their existence.

      Delete
    48. You spent 1/3 of your life in the woods, I know people who have spent far more time in the woods than that and have seen a Sasquatch. It's as simple as that. If you haven't seen a Bigfoot, then maybe you don't venture too far from the road, maybe you're not as hot as you think you are?? You haven't seen a Sasquatch so it doesn't exist, yet you believe in Oran-Pendek and go by less 'circumstantial' evidence. No Daniel... My assessment of you and your bitterness is probably more accurate than you would ever admit. I think you got your hands burned, got ridiculed for believing in a bipedal ape. There's no shame in that, it's what got us all here... But your ego clearly rendered you in 'deserving' of something to help with the ridicule you couldn't handle. Your bipedal gorilla didn't show, so you turned on the group that 'owed you' for your time invested.

      The 'more you are around hoaxers' attitude you have is because of one of two aspects that you ignore. Bigfoot is now popular culture. It is now also an avenue for considerable income to have hits on a YouTube channel. That doesn't make this field BS because you can't get your head around that; it merely makes it evident of people's new found attention for the subject in the same way UFO's did in the 90's. No trace of Bigfoot? Would you admit if there was anyway? Have you even discussed the Brown's thermal for example, by any chance? No... You have avoided that very nicely haven't you??

      Smug? Yes... Of course I'm smug, I can sit here in Wales and find stuff out about your country that you are too stupid to. That makes me smug alright, and you know what's saddest? That you have this amazing history of your country that you are too bitter, too focused on imediate experiences to acknowledge. I bring you facts, I bring you data from libraries, universities... That is something you cannot contend with and it troubles you to the point that you don't even attempt it. In the same way that I need to brush up on bears, you need to learn a whole lot more about the history of your own country.

      Plenty of bodies in the Smithsonian old Danny boy, plenty of examples of the understanding of hominids changing all the time and in the last 50 years you have excellent footage, tracks and the accumulation of eyewitnesses that still rolls in regardless you of your so called 'hunting experience'.

      D'you know what I think? I think you like to keep the word out there you're a hunter, when I think you're full of crap, Danny Boy.

      Delete
    49. True dat.True dat.

      True dat stand in guy.

      Delete
    50. You can think what you want, PJ.

      I don't believe is the orang Pendek either, I give it a higher probability of existing when compared to bigfeet.

      Problem is you can't accept that not everyone accepts old stories and the words of people as fact.

      Look at your post above, can't even have a normal discussion without you goin off the rails.

      Bottom line is no biological evidence for a 9ft 800lb creature, whether human or not, means no bigfeet. Accept it.

      Delete
    51. Dan. I thought as you do. If I hadn't gotten rocks thrown in my area I would never have traversed this semi obsessive path. I have asked Joe to help me transfer mediums on the potting shed discs. Dan. Hypothetically. What if you plainly see something you can't explain. Will you and your new acolyte just sit back and call me names and call out a myriad of things it could be. What if it shows one subject being submissive to another. Playing peek a boo with it. Will you say they are 4 dogs playing poker? These people have had life changing experiences. Dan. I will take you out in the heart of it. I will give you access to audio and visual proof you have yet to experience. To what end? How jaded are you? That inner naive boy you used to be had more credibility and intelligence and sense of wonder than any bullshit snarky exchange you and I could ever muster. Is he gone forever? I see glimpses of him in your astounding sense of humor. Would that he would join me. He might just have the time of his life. M

      Delete
    52. Since you're here all the time Dan, it's clearly you with some inner conflict of denial were these beings not real you'd not waste so much time on it. The reason we can't find these hairy men is because, not only are they not apes but probably not even hominin and rather visitors from who knows where... You do the math, boy.

      Delete
  5. Correlation does not equal causation.

    You should have learned that in Junior High.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nor should they equal state sequestration. I went to Hank Jr High

      Delete
    2. Look. It's a nice bookend piece on the John Jones discussion and state action or inaction on recognized species in their area. But it's no lightening rod of controversy.

      Delete
    3. And all my rowdy friends have settled down. ....

      Delete
    4. It may be a gray area of the law, open to interpretation but most, if not all, wildlife agencies have rules set in place for instances just like this. Non-Native species and the unlawful or accidental taking of of a non-native species.

      Is this a case of man not knowing the law or the law not existing????

      Delete
    5. Now that's a good question. Word I got is he said "coyote" with a bit of a smirk. That also speaks to whether or not they thought he had some legitimate culpability. Bear in mind this guy tried to have his own veterinary exam done to rule out hybrid or pet. Which also speaks volumes of the rarity of this specimen in that area.

      Delete
    6. All actions were well within the letter of the law, regardless of nobility or honesty of the hunter, veterinary office, and Conservation Officers.

      His biggest mistake was ever taking it to the vet in the first place.

      Delete
    7. And that's why I like your posts. Ultimately we often come to the same conclusion by very different methods.

      Delete
    8. I'm not saying any laws were broken. Or it's a human rights issue. Again. For the sake of those who are playing ostrich. Every DOC has a species it knows has a small population or travel corridor through a state will often

      Delete
    9. Ignore them or claim they simply aren't there if for no other reason than to perhaps serve the public policy of protection of that species in its very limited presence.

      Delete
    10. I think dire wolves still exist. Google 200 lb wolves. They have been shot and photographed

      Delete
    11. Very interesting. The idea that inside the genome of some of the larger predators. Bear, Wolf, there seems to lurk an occasional "ancestral throwback " to a time of larger size. More archaic look.

      Delete
    12. Is it generational or species specific. Some people will tell you Giant Short Faced Bear still exists and that McFarlanes Bear was indeed one.

      Delete
    13. Mike the biggest was shot recently. It weighed 285. Joe is gonna look up on it. I truly believe that these big ones are dire wolves or an entirely new species of wolf

      Delete
    14. I really dig this whole line of thinking. The whole idea of archaic species knocking about line Karl Pilkington. :). Keep it up!

      Delete
  6. You up there. You say I'm a clown. But then you admit to waiting on footage I possess. Wow. Your residence in St Francois county and the very fact that you aren't freely admitting that Johnny Law is agenda driven on DOC issues In MO just fit you for a nice long pair of shoes and a rubber nose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm waiting anything because I know you have anything.
      It's called "Sarcasm", ya know

      Delete
    2. Let us all hope it can be used with greater effect than that. Look Whether you agree or not that state agencies to use agenda driven tactics and seizures of specimens for said agendas or not is of issue. Your opinion of me doesn't seem to be. Either way. I wish you well. No hard feelings.

      Delete
    3. So...are you saying there is a massive cover up of breeding populations of Wolves in Missouri or what?

      Delete
    4. Not anywhere in my life Dan. Don't start with the hyperbole. I've adequately stated above exactly what I'm saying.

      Delete
    5. Look Dan. The locals back home thought this was a big deal. This has happened with mountain lion footage where DOC in Van Buren MO took a guys camera footage of a mountain lion taking a buck. What's the public policy for that. This is the kind of stuff they do. And they do it quite simply because they can.

      Delete
    6. Dan, as the Missouri guy said, he's implicitly saying that government is bad to add fire to the Bigfoot government cover up story.

      Whoa, hard times for Footers

      Delete
    7. I like that. It's funny. Ass backward. But sorta accurate.

      Delete
    8. Wait...someone let a Wildlife officer take their camera/footage??

      I'm gonna call pure bullshit.

      Lick my sack and gtfo of my house should be the only phrases given when someone of no jurisdiction tries to commy something he has no warrant nor right to take.

      I have a hard time believing a Midwestern American gave up such film so easily.

      Film is not a biological specimen, therefore doesn't fall under their jurisdiction unless there is an active trial underway and it contains evidence of a criminal action.

      Delete
    9. I know for a fact it happened and the picture and the story were captioned in the local newspaper right down to the seizure of the footage. Good thing he had stills made before it "went missing".

      Delete
    10. Oh they asked very politely. Needed to study the footage and all. He just never got it back. Now Dan. I think we've all learned a valuable lesson today. While there may be no vast cryptid conspiracy. States gonna do or try to do what state wants to do. By whatever means it can achieve those ends. And we've learned you are grumpy and your sidekicks an ass. No hard feelings. Have a nice holiday.

      Delete
    11. If this was the wake up call to realize absolute power corrupts absolutely, I'm not sure we're on the same page.

      Damn right I get grumpy in the morning when people try to pass off half assed stories as fact, regardless of it's origins....especially when dealing with known wildlife and political action.

      It's not like bigfoot world where 8 different groups can freely speculate their own theories and shit on others groups.

      Like I quoted earlier,

      This is 'Nam, Smokey, there are rules.

      Delete
    12. Been cracking any nuts lately Ball Boy?

      Delete
    13. I crack many on a weekly basis.

      How about you?

      Delete
    14. How do your teeth hold up to all that BALL cracking Daniel?

      Delete
  7. How can be a wildlife reporter a guy that lives in Wales?

    ReplyDelete
  8. 2014 YEAR OF THE WOLVES

    THE YEAR OF THE SQUATCH HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO 2015

    ReplyDelete
  9. Apparently wolves occasionally enter Missouri.

    http://m.waynecojournalbanner.com/mobile/news/article_a4d87460-62ac-11e3-b33d-0019bb30f31a.html


    ReplyDelete
  10. Chris. Look at the picture above. It would seem so.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Now we are bicycling back to the established fact. Joe. They are all yours. Who woulda thunk a cool little tidbit could be so controversial. Unless someone has an agenda. The Ruth is out there. Laters. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only agenda I've seen is one trying to twist a remotely interesting story into something that it's not while seemingly glossing over published fact in search of some greater 'truth' and the agenda of those trying to correct the misinformation and present it from being spread.

      Delete
  12. Looks like the wolf in y'all's picture is the same wolf reported in the news story I linked above too. Cool. Also, after checking google news, looks like there was another gray wolf killed in Missouri back in November.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The whole front page of google search has pictures and articles going back 15 years. Seems one is taken every few years.

      Delete
  13. In my professional opinion that "grey wolf" is in fact a dogman/chupacabra hybrid.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Joe fitz joe fitz ! Hey it's the Canadian guy your friend who s writing the book was asking me how he could get some of these wolfs so I sent him a message on the Tim fasano page his name was John w jones so if u want tell him I wrote some info for him to help him out ! Thanks joe have a good Christmas !!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey TTL!!

      I will pass that message on to him at the first opportunity. I suspect he's hard at work with his new book!

      Merry Christmas to you bro!!

      Delete
  15. ...Cool story, thanks for sharing guys..Its does support the idea that wildlife officials are not completely above board when the topic is wildlife..
    It also shows that if there is a conspiracy to hide information, well, they suck at it: I am in fact looking at a picture of what they want to hide on the internet, on this very blog...lol..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely you are. And thank you for noticing!

      Delete
    2. Joe. I was out last night and didn't know Shawn posted this till early am. I look forward to your next featured cryptid. Congrats on a thought provoking thread. M

      Delete
    3. I mean it brother. I was out till the wee hours taking my son to hobbit 2 Premeire in SA. But carry on bro. It certainly was more than a little wolf story. Shoot me an email over the weekend. Let's transfer the mediums on this potting shed vid and see what's what. Till then. I'm off line till Sunday. M

      Delete
    4. Hey Mike and Joe. I appreciate you putting this out. I know where you are going with it and I concur. I would not call it a conspiracy, more a consensus, but the effect is the same.

      It only took me five minutes of research to find out land owners and hunters have been seeing and hearing wolves in Missouri for several years. They are getting thick as thieves up in Michigan ( opened a limited hunting season on them this year ) Wisconsin, and Minnesota and it only makes since they are spreading out for more uncontested territory. I am amused that the MDOC list them as Extirpated when they for sure know better. If they are moving through Missouri, then where are they moving too. Draw a line between St. Louis and Kansas City and anywhere south is nothing but small towns and mostly forest and farms. If I was a wolf moving through I would say to myself Missouri looks pretty good to me. This means they are also mating because a dog is going to do what a dog is going to do, and with in a few years you will be hearing about what a destructive force they will become again from the farmers and hunters.

      Because they are not hunted I really think they are becoming a little more tame. In middle of July 2012, I was traveling from Oh to the Upper Peninsula Cabin in Michigan on the I-127 between Mt. Pleasant and Clare, MI. It was around 5 am and just starting to get a little light. There was a misty fog due to high temps and muggy conditions and I was only going about 55. Something was on the interstate ahead of me. I slowed down fast and at first glance I thought two large dogs were feeding on a deer in the middle of the north lane. I had to come to a creep as they did not move. I had my window down and they finally shuffled away and were right outside my window. I looked in amazement as they were not dogs but two full grown 100 pound plus wolves and were in no hurry to get away. I thought it was neat as hell as I spent the first 27 years of my life in Michigan and hunted a lot and there were no wolves at that time. I thought it remarkable how they were now back thanks to the Mi. DNR and I finally got to see one up close, especially since I an a canine lover.

      Keep up the good work guys.
      Ilegitimi non carborundum

      Chuck

      Delete
    5. Oh. Though I never saw a wolf in those first 27 years, I was much more fortunate and saw a Bigfoot in the early 70's crossing a swamp in Roscommon county.

      Chuck

      Delete
    6. Good work gentlemen ! Better make sure that wasn't Grampa from the Munsters..Just saying.

      *<B-)

      Delete
    7. Ha ha ha ha!! Greats stuff Chuck! And how the devil are you Skunkey?!

      Peace both.

      Delete
    8. Pretty well joe. Just flushed those demons down the toilet !

      *<B-)

      Delete
    9. Chuck and Skunk. Thank you guys. I totally appreciate it and Joe deserves the credit. It is cool that they are turning up in different areas isn't it?

      Delete
  16. Shawn seems a bit dense...wolves aren't "cryptids".

    ReplyDelete
  17. First off, congrats to Joe & Mike for the article about a wolf getting killed in MO. Great post! But, I'm shocked by all the negative comments, on this! (Or should I be)? It's a great news story pure and simple.

    Second, I did not shoot a Wolf. I shot a very large coyote (75lbs) that a reporter, and a State biologist mistaken for a Wolf! A 20 year State Biologist mistaking a coyote for a Wolf! amazing!

    Anyway, we now have obtained a Federal 'Kill" permit from the Department of the Interior. If/When this pack of Wolves returns to our area (Apx every 2-3 weeks) They can be legally Trapped or shot, "But" only by a Native American, and supposedly only on reservation property! So you know what will happen! Got to go quick, my dinner's ready, wife calling me, Skunk stew tonight, and I don't even need my teeth to eat it!

    John W. Jones Spoke

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Canadian Guy! Thanks for the advice. Like I said in another post, these Wolves have a circuit radius of around 60 miles. We go by reports of live stock killings.

      It takes 2-3 weeks to return to our area. Earlier, they killed a horse, been coming back feeding on it. We're waiting for their return. We have 10 leg hold traps out (#4 and now #5 offsets) The #3's they destroyed.

      This weekend we will get snow, then game over. We need 4 inches or more. We will use calls, when we think they are close. Our Terrain, is all Mountains (Pretty steep) Farms and orchards, in the valleys, then heavy inclines after 1/2 mile. Lots of rocky cliffs and caves. Mines to, mostly old copper mines. The Terrain funnels their approach into our kill zone, about 1 mile radius. 20 of us, waiting to kill them! plus the traps. It's all timing now.

      At least the "Native Americans", can legally kill them. i'm not involved (he, he!) We suspect there are 6 of them. But. . . they could just abandon the area competely and go somewhere else. Who knows?

      John W. Jones Spoke

      Delete
    2. John. Just a little piece I thought you'd like that Joe felt should be published. Take care my friend. M. Oh the negative response came primarily from two posters whom I think have more negative interest in the co authors than the subject material. M

      Delete
  18. Mike why is Joe 'aligned' to the stuff you release?

    Never got this.

    Joe why do you allow this to happen?

    Guys you know I don't interact offline hence the question here.

    MMG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MMG. Great question. A long time ago in a galaxy far far away a lazy and impatient man refused to download content properly. Learn to work basic computers. Or otherwise train to do anything of use with himself. That man asked for Joes help with all content. By day he us mild mannered Welsh cryptid reporter Joe Fitzgerald. But at night at the Honkey Tonks. He's known as the blonde bandit. In other words. We just kinda collaborate. M

      Delete
    2. By the way. MMG. I have never monatarized any image release or copyrighted anything nor have I made a buck off Joe. It's just for kicks.

      Delete
    3. Oh and one last thing. The only person I release material to is Joe. It's up to he and Shawn what winds up here. Have a great holiday.

      Delete
    4. Hey Mike, how's that virus?

      Delete
    5. So much better. It ended three weeks in just like you said. Amen!

      Delete
    6. Hey Bigdad. The biologist on my research team says that grey wolves are in Texas too? Any rumor to that or things you've heard?

      Delete
    7. I've heard that they're some up in E.Texas.I was hunting in Broaddus,Tx by the Louisiana border and had a bear with two cubs come up.The mother commenced to start climbing the tree I was in.I let out a couple of rounds in the air with my .44 and they ran off.Also seen a cougar in Weches, Tx off of Hwy.21 east of Crockett, Tx.We were playing poker at night outside the cabins and it walked across a large tree that had fallen the year before.Never seen any wolves but have heard that they're some in East Texas. Glad that you're feeling better.Got to go and meet the family at Pappasitos.Excellent margaritas and bacon wrapped shrimp.Y'all take care.

      Delete
  19. KEEN IES HAEVS AAN VAGINA GUD KOLLUM, EET GUD GUD

    ReplyDelete