Other options exist as well, such as the first attack being by a polar bear.
Many elements of that story seem fishy to me.
No we are wolf shit if they figure out how inept we are:dubious:
That’s one determining factor in whether wolves will attack humans. Wolves will look upon dogs as something to mate with or competitors for their range. Humans who were accompanied by dogs were most likely to attract wolves, but even so, the wolves were out to drive the dog away or kill it, but not necessarily to attack the humans. If people get too close to a wolf den and cubs, the wolves are also more likely to attack in order to drive away what they perceive as a threat to their young. Wolves are generally more inclined to avoid humans under most circumstances, however, and don’t normally prey upon us as a source of food.
Oh come on.
It also wouldn’t be unimaginable that if we had video of wolves mauling her, some posters would suggest the video was faked.
See the second painting here: http://www.wrmgraphics.com/page40.html
Damn!
Well, we had a good run…
Of course, another big difference is that no one goes around training wolves to attack people. I read a book by Massad Ayoob many years ago and he expressed many reservations about owning an attack trained dog. He was much more positive about owning a watchdog, but even in that case proper training is important. You should also approach it with an attitude closer to adopting a child than getting a biological alarm system.
That is a completely meaningless and completely annoying use of statistics. You cannot compare likelihood of attack or dangerousness from incidence like that.
:dubious:
Surely comparing the incidence of occurrence within the population is the *only *way of determining likleihood.
There are no polar bears within 500 miles of Chignik Lake where the mauling took place.
I asked about it once, but I don’t remember if I got an answer.
See, Gobal Warming is causing them to migrate.
Saying dogs kill more people than wolves is fine. But saying people are more likely to be attacked by dogs than wolves is just noise. Shoe laces are also more likely to attack people than wolves, etc.
Not following, sorry.
I’m saying it’s not smart to access life or death risk posed by wolf-human contact based on average number of deaths per US population and comparing that to dogs. Just like the often quoted sound byte “planes are safer than cars”. Better?
Just in case it isn’t clear, I’m not arguing “for or against wolves”, whatever that means.
The wolves in Yellowstone were mostly imported from Canada in 1995. I’m not sure of the wisdom of that unless there is an over abundance of elk or buffalo. They were originally wiped out in the early part of the last century.
I personally wouldn’t wander around a park by myself without a gun if it has wolves/bears in it.
Why?
Or an episode of Bones…
What about brown bears (but they would probably be asleep at this time of the year, when I think of it)?
Y’all are overlooking the most obvious possibility: the woman was slain by government agents. The “wolf attack” was a staged cover-up.