Patti Nickerson attacks Hybrids again! in Michigan
save...@nospam.com
>
> Biting dog may be destroyed
>
> Tuesday, September 5, 2000
>
> From local reports
>
>
> A dog that attacked a 2-year-old Laketon Township boy who wandered onto a
> neighbor's property should be destroyed, the Muskegon County Prosecutor's
> office believes.
>
> Brett Gardner, chief assistant Muskegon County prosecutor, said his office is
> awaiting receipt of official police reports about the weekend incident. So far,
> prosecutors have seen only The Chronicle's report published Monday.
>
> Nonetheless, Gardner said, officials will seek to have the black Labrador
> retriever destroyed.
>
> "We'll certainly be taking steps to assure the public safety by bringing action
> in district court to see if we can have the dog destroyed, which is what is
> required by law," Gardner said.
>
> Daniel McDonald, 2, of 688 Simot, received hundreds of stitches in his face
> after he wandered into the neighboring yard where the animal was running loose.
>
> The dog's owner, Gary Wishman of 686 Simot, declined to comment.
>
> Wishman told Muskegon County Animal Control that he did not want the animal
> destroyed, said animal control Director Alvin D. Pearson.
>
> Pearson, who described the dog as passive, said he believes there should be a
> court hearing into the matter so that officials can hear "the other side of the
> story."
>
> The dog, which is being held at animal control, essentially was minding its own
> business in its own yard before the boy ventured in and was attacked, Pearson
> said.
>
> The attack was one of two that occurred Saturday. The other attack, involving a
> dog described as a wolf-dog mix, left a 5-year-old boy with 100 stitches in his
> head and ear. That dog was destroyed immediately after the attack in the
> Manistee National Forest in Oceana County's Greenwood Township.
>
> The animal is being checked for rabies, although the boy was expected to start
> rabies immunization shots as a precaution.
>
> According to the Michigan State Police Grand Haven Post, David Miel was camping
> with his parents and the dog's owner, who is their neighbor, when the attack
> occurred about 7 p.m. Saturday.
>
> State Police Trooper Matt McCaul said the dog, described as a quarter wolf and
> three-quarters husky, was not leashed at the campsite.
>
> "The boy had been petting the dog and was in the process of turning to walk
> away when he was suddenly attacked," he said. "The dog latched onto the boy's
> left ear."
>
> According to McCaul, the bite tore through the ear's cartilage. The boy was
> taken to Hackley Hospital, where a plastic surgeon was summoned. The boy
> required more than 100 stitches, he said.
>
> After the attack, the dog's owner, Tim Matheny, of 4530 Orshal, allowed the
> victim's grandfather to shoot the dog to death.
>
> "As I understand it, the owner turned to the grandfather and asked, 'Would you
> like to shoot my dog?' and the grandfather took him up on the offer," McCaul
> said.
>
> Because the 2-year-old dog was not current on its rabies shots, McCaul said the
> boy most likely will be started on the first of a series of rabies shots.
> McCaul said there were no overt signs of rabies prior to the attack.
>
> He said state law requires wolf-hybrid dogs that attack humans to be destroyed.
> Because the dog already has been "put down," there is little more the state
> police will do. He said state laws allow victims of such attacks to recover
> medical expenses from the owners.
>
> A state law designed to protect people from wolf-dogs, which requires the
> animals be penned at all times, goes into effect Oct. 29.
>
> The law bans the breed, but allows for existing wolf-dogs to be kept under very
> stringent rules. Owners have to erect fencing that the animals cannot jump over
> or dig under and warning placards must be placed in yards of homes where the
> wolf-dogs live.
>
> The animals must be neutered, and if they are taken off their property, must be
> transported in pens.
>
> Contributing to this story were Chronicle staff writers Lynn Moore, Terry Judd,
> Michael G. Walsh and Jeff Alexander.
>
> Copyright 2000 Michigan Live Inc.
>
> Patti Nickerson
Is Patti Nickerson the mother who got drunk and allowed her child to
wonder into a dangerous dog's yard? Please clarify.
SaveWolf
UCOMMIT4
>wonder into a dangerous dog's yard? Please clarify.
>
OH PLEEZZZZZZ
Get a grip on reality instead of making up your own
Patti Nickerson
Ken M.
>
> >Is Patti Nickerson the mother who got drunk and allowed her child to
> >wonder into a dangerous dog's yard? Please clarify.
> >
> >SaveWolf
> >
> >
>
> Or should I say Propaganda?
> Patti Nickerson
Did they slander you? I recall some of the controversy over this
but can't remember the whole story. Did you allow your child to
wonder into a yard with a dangerous dog, unsupervised?
--
(ken)
See ten photos of Sweetie, my new Chihuahua girl born 4-16-00:
http://www.zyworld.com/maryland/test.htm
To respond to this place (-) between x and d.
Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.
NADAdog
save...@nospam.com wrote in message <39B55102...@nospam.com>...
UCOMMIT4
>but can't remember the whole story. Did you allow your child to
>wonder into a yard with a dangerous dog, unsupervised?
NO I DID NOT.
NO I WAS NOT DRUNK.
Patti Nickerson
dw
very cold weather and get attacked by their own family dogs.
It wasn't a wolf-dog. The police report is posted on the
web.
Janine Heimerich
-- J
A.James Gambrini
Come on! You were drunk with your boyfriend. Gettin laid eh?
Tony
A.James Gambrini
That's right. You have the bitch nailed to the wall.
Tony
WlfDogRSQ
No, her daughter did not wander into the neighbors yard. She LIVED with the
dogs that killed her. And several strays that were routinely accepted in the
area.
Need info? Contact me and I can provide police and autopsy reports.
gloria :)
www.wolfdogs.org
WlfDogRSQ
YOU WERE IN THE BAR. YOU ALWAYS LEFT YOUR YOUNG CHILD ALONE.
It's in the police report. Dogs, many dogs,killed your child.
Now you make money of her death. How the hell do you sleep at night?
UCOMMIT4
Total slander and you know it....
Patti Nickerson
Bryan Foust
Bryan
"UCOMMIT4" <ucom...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000906184806...@ng-cl1.aol.com...
Ken M.
Is this for real?
Ken M.
Good lord!
Peggy
sleep!!! ;)
WlfDogRSQ <wlfd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000906184156...@ng-fi1.aol.com...
Peggy
reports or more information.
Ken M. <pob...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:39B6D9C3...@ix.netcom.com...
Lynn Kosmakos
"Ken M." wrote:
> Is this for real?
I don't care if it is or isn't. I don't want to hear it.
Lynn K. (done with this thread)
Ken M.
Don't want to hear about Wolf-Hybrids or the fact that she got drunk
and neglected the child? Which part?
Greg Largent
years is slanderous or false and you can prove it, why then haven't you
brought charges against her?? It would seem the thing to do IF what is
said about you were false, Patti. As you like suing others for things
and collecting 50-60 thousand dollars for it, why not start again??
Most likely because you know that the Police Report contradicts what YOU
say about the events of that day and of that time period, Patti. It is
NOT slander and WE know it because WE have read the police reports, I
invite ALL to read the Police reports and form their own conclusion as
to WHO is not telling the truth or has changed the and their story.
Any takers?????? Be the first to step up to the plate, Patti. :)
Greg.
--
"If you always insist on saying what you think,
don't expect to hear only what you like"
Your help is needed to fight the Shambala Bill, HSUS, PETA
and others who would deny RESPONSIBLE ownership.
http://network54.com/Hide/Forum/17027
Star...@Rockford.com
ICQ# 19866917
A.James Gambrini
Tony
UCOMMIT4
Patti Nickerson
UCOMMIT4
Patti Nickerson
Nicodemus Telrenner
TERRITORY. as long as you are not on his territory, he most likely wont
attack (always exceptions) The kid wanders into a fenced back yard. The
dogs territory. So the lab defended it
--
"...in the end,
it is not to die,
it is to die well..."
"Ken M." <pob...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:39B57121...@ix.netcom.com...
NADAdog
UCOMMIT4 wrote in message <20000906184806...@ng-cl1.aol.com>...
UCOMMIT4
Any lawyer will tell you not to talk to the other side. THINK ABOUT IT
BITCH......
Patti Nickerson
UCOMMIT4
Patti Nickerson
Ken M.
>
> Ken,
>
> I have both reports. Rather a 23 page police report and a one page autopsy
> report. Both show Patti Nickerson lied to police at the time of her daughters
> death or lied to all legislative committees. She needs to pick which one.
>
> It boils down to who or what Patti actually lied to: she can't have it both
> ways.
>
> She told police that neither of her children were scared of the dogs (DOGS,
> folks...no wolf dog) but she told Senate and House committees that she KNEW one
> dog had wolf in it, was stalking her child and was owned by neighbors across
> the street. I have that on tape. The dogs were owned by her family, she lived
> in a trailer across the driveway. So where did she lie? And to whom? And
> WHY????
>
> And if, she decides that what she told the Senate is the truth, that she
> thought this animal was stalking her daughter, how can she explain the fact
> that she always left her alone? That IS in the police report.
>
> If I thought someone or something was stalking my daughter (or son), you can
> damn well believe that I would NOT be in the bar, having my hair done or
> shopping.....whatever excuse Patti gives to whoever wants to listen. I would
> be waiting for my child, or, more likely, doing what I do, and picking them up
> at school.
>
> Patti should have been charged with child abuse and neglect. In that she is
> correct; the police did a poor job.
>
> gloria
OK, I assume you read the report right, so this incident really has
nothing to do with hybrids, wolves, or wolf dogs.
Amazing.
John
"Ken M." <pob...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:39B8237D...@ix.netcom.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
NADAdog
Ken M. wrote in message <39B8237D...@ix.netcom.com>...
Gwragedd Annwn
"Ken M." wrote:
> I suppose I'll have to review the police reports. Who has them?
> --
> (ken)
>
Police Report Follows
__________________________________
DOG ATTACK (HUMAN DEATH)
TIME / LOCATION
This incident occurred at approximately 1l:40 A.M. on 3-2-89. The incident
was called in at 1:10 P.M. Officer arrived at 1:30 P.M. to the driveway area
of Box 1087, Rte. 3 just off County Road PB in Tilden Township, National Mine
Location.
SCENE
Officer arrived and was contacted by subjects who advised they had found the
body of a child in the shoulder ditch-area of the listed driveway. The body
was approximately 40 feet off the driveway in the snow. Two witnesses and two
ambulance attendants were at the scene. Officer was advised the victim had no
vital signs. The victim was checked by officer and he also found none. It
was apparent to officer the victim had been deceased for some time.
There were blood stains sprayed in the snow and on the snow banks in the
area. There were indications that there had been a struggle of some type in
the driveway and in the snowy area near the driveway. This area covered about
200 feet from the start to where the body was located. There were clothing
and personal items strewn around the driveway.
CONTACT WITH MOTHER OF VICTIM
PATTI JEAN NICKERSON,- W/F, DOB 9-9-60 of same address, TX 486-6909. Arrived
at the scene about 20 minutes after officer did. She was advised of the
situation and gave officer the following information -
She advised she went to town to have her hair done and was accompanied by her
boy friend DON MANNING. She has made arrangements with her parents to watch
her daughter if she is not home. Sometimes her daughter did not go over to
their home but would stay home and watch TV. She advised they have never had
any trouble with the dogs before and she was not aware of her daughter being
afraid of any of the animals.
INTERVIEW WITH DON MANNING
DON MANNING, boyfriend of the victim’s mother lives at Box 44, M-3S, Palmer
TX- 475-5195. He advised he picked up PATTI after the kids went to school and
they went shopping and when they returned they saw police. He did not know
anything in particular about the incident until arriving and being briefed by
undersigned officer. He stated that the dogs have been around and that he has
not seen any vicious actions by either of the dogs since he has been in the
area, although the one dog has been at the house for just a short time.
CONTACT WITH FRED ALDERTON
FRED ALDERTON, grandfather of the victim, is also co-owner of the Number 2
dog. He advised officers during their first contact with him that he did not
know who the Number 1 dog belonged to. Both dogs were in his yard at this
time in the driveway. ALDERTON gave officers permission to kill his dog when
he was told what had happened.
ALDERTON advised he baby sits the victim when her mother is not home but did
not know she was missing. He stated sometimes when she gets off the bus she
goes home and watches TV and sometimes she comes over to his house.
Later, ALDERTON told officer that dog Number 1 belonged to his other daughter
TAMI’S boyfriend. He told officer that neither of the dogs were mean and had
never bit anybody. He said they have only had Number 2 dog for 8 or 10
months. About 6 weeks ago she had pups. None of the pups were outside at the
time of the attack. He stated that Number 1 dog had been at the house for
only one week. He said that he and TAMI and her boyfriend were in the house
at the time of the attack and had hot heard anything.
DOGS INVOLVED
NUMBER 1 DOG: An eleven month old Husky, brown/ black/white,-weight 110 lbs.;
known by the name "IVAN". The owner has only had this dog for two weeks and
purchased it from the HOUGHTON HUMANE SOCIETY. The dog had all of its shots
and was not sick. It did not appear to be malnourished or abused.
NUMBER 2 DOG: A 1 1/2 year old Husky/ shepherd mix. brown/black in color,
known by the name "BRANDY". This dog was previously owned by TIM HANSEN of
Ishpeming.
NUNBER 3 DOG: Not found. An off-white mutt type dog with long hair weighing
about 50 lbs. It is felt that this dog was not involved in the attack but
happened to be in the area at the time.
Number 1 dog was shot and killed by TPR. SWEARENGIN in the driveway of the
ALDERTON residence. The dog was shot 2 times with a 223 rifle and died on
the spot. An autopsy on this dog showed it to be the main subject of
the attack and the most involved in the victim's death.
Number 2 dog was shot by TPR. SWEARENGIN on County Road PB. It was shot a
second time and died in the yard of ROY DELARYE about 100 feet from where it
had been shot the first time. An autopsy on this dog showed it to also be
involved in the death but to a lesser degree.
CONTACT WITH ELLA ALDERTON
ELLA ALDERTON, wife of FRED, advised she was gone during the attack but her
husband, daughter (TAMI) and her boy-friend were home. She advised the
victim comes over to her house after school sometimes if she feels like it.
Other times she stays home and watches TV if her mother is not home. She did
not have anything more to add than what FRED had told the officer.
RECONTACT FROM ANONYMOUS SOURCE:
The undersigned had been contacted by an anonymous source and advised that the
items of clothing from the child that were missing could be located at DIANE
JOHNSON'S residence located right next to the ALDERTON'S.
CONTACT DIANE JOHNSON:
In the early evening hours of 3/8/89 the undersigned and TROOPER KRUGIELKI had
contact with DIANE JOHNSON of National Mine. Her house is located directly
above the scene of where the body was located. Her driveway is located in
about the area where the dog attack took place. She stated that she did pick
up a hat in her driveway which was pink in color. She did pick up a sleeve in
the middle of the driveway. Also a boot and a sock on the left side of the
road. These items were picked up by herself. placed in a bag and then placed
in the entryway to her house and then sent to the dump the next day. She had
done this due to the fact that she had asked the grandfather FRED what she
should do. FRED told her to pick the items up and she stated she did. Upon
picking them up, she said "what shall I do with them?" and the grandfather
told her to throw them away.
CONTACT MADE WITH FRED ALDERTON:
The undersigned went to the FRED ALDERTON residence and asked MR. ALDERTON to
return to the rear seat of Car #6120 and at that point asked MR. ALDERTON if
what his neighbor, DIANE JOHNSON, had stated was true. He stated "Yes". He
was advised that we had been looking for these items, however, now that they
were destroyed there was no sense in looking any further. As far as any
questions about the incident at this point in time FRED ALDERTON advised that
he had none. As far as his daughter to the best of his knowledge, his daughter
has none.
Undersigned attempted to contact PATTI NICKERSON every day and each day, upon
calling. was told that she was sleeping. However, upon her returning the calls
the undersigned was not in the office.
INTERVIEW WITH ROY & GAIL DELARYE
ROY DELARYE of County Road PBD, Rt. 1, Ishpeming, advised officer that
approximately 11:40 A.M. he looked out the kitchen window and observed the 2
dogs that were later killed, ripping and tearing what he thought was a bag of
trash or a deer hide. This was in the area where the body was found. He
advised that it is not uncommon for dogs in the National Mine area to be
roaming around getting into people’s trash, etc. He advised that there is
also a trapper in the area and sometimes he has animal carcasses taken from
his property by animals in the area. He advised that when he observed all the
commotion with the police, etc. he went down to the scene and then realized
that it was a small child that the dogs had been at and not anything else. It
was in his yard the second animal died. The animal ran into his breezeway
area and was later removed and destroyed.
GAIL is the wife of ROY and lives at the same address. She advised at 11:30
A.M. she saw the victim get off the bus and walk up her driveway. She said
the victim was fine at the time and no dogs were around. She stopped looking
out the window and went back about her business. She said a few minutes
later her husband called her to the window to show her the dogs and she
related the same story as he did about them.
INTERVIEW WITH MICHAEL DAILY
MICHAEL JAY DAILY, W/M DOB 9/3/66, 105 E. Montezuma, Houghton, MI is the owner
of dog Number 1. When he is not going to college at Houghton, resides at the
ALDERTON residence. He advised that Number 1 dog is his having purchased it
from the Houghton Humane Society 2 weeks ago. The Aldertons had been keeping
the animal for him for approximately one week. The dog was current on his
shots, and he had no idea as to why it would have attacked the victim. He
stated that the dog has not shown any aggression towards anybody since he has
owned it.
INTERVIEW MICHAEL JAY DAILY:
On 3/7/89 at approximately 1:15 P.M. MICHAEL JAY DAILY was interviewed at his
place of residence on Montezuma Avenue in the village of Houghton. Interview
took place in the front seat of Car U8120. MR. DAILY was advised why the
undersigned and the prosecutor were there and that we needed a verification of
the information he had originally provided to the trooper involved. MR. DAILY
advised that he picked up the dog approximately one week ago on a Thursday
from a person in Ahmeek. MI. This person is the person who keeps the dogs for
the Humane Society. MR. DAILY advised that he had gone to this location four
or five times before he took the dog. Upon first taking the dog, he brought
the dog to the Frat House in Houghton where the dog was kept until he left to
take it to the ALDERTON residence. He clarified the day that he picked the
dog up as stating "it was a couple of days before he got out of school on
break" which he believes to be 2/23/89. He stated that during the time he had
the dog in Houghton the dog did break loose and he did have trouble enticing
the dog back to be rechained. He stated that. upon getting out on the break
for spring. he went to the National Mine area and took the dog with him. The
dog was chained at that residence until 3/1/89. He believes about 3/1/89 the
dog was unchained. He has no idea who released the dog. however. he advised
that ELLA ANDERTON said that if the dog stayed around he could stay off of the
chain. As to the party he picked the dog up from at Ahmeek. he stated he
believes the woman's name was ROBERTA NIEMI. As far as obtaining any paperwork
from the Humane Society, he said no paperwork was exchanged between himself
and ROBERTA NIEMI.
Upon arriving in the National Mine area and attempting to license the dog, he
had taken it to DR. ALTO in Negaunee to obtain his shots. He advised that
when he picked the dog up he had been told by ROBERTA NIEMI that the dog had
been beaten and was afraid of men. This is the reason he went to the location
where the dog was kept four or five times in an attempt to gain the dog's
confidence. As far as being mean, MICHAEL advised he didn't think the dog was
mean. As far as the day in question. he advised that his girlfriend TAMMY and
himself had fallen asleep in ELLA ALDERTON'S house. They were responsible for
watching for the child to come home from school but they knew nothing of the
incident until ELLA ALDERTON came home and told them what had happened. To
the best of their knowledge they had been asked by PATTI NICKERSON, mother of
the victim to watch for the child as PATTI was going into town with her
boyfriend to have her hair fixed. MICHAEL stated the child was supposed to
come up to Grandma's house after school
AUTOPSY HELD
On 3/3/89 DR. RANDY SMITH performed an autopsy upon the victim at Marquette
General Hospital. A large amount of polaroid photos were taken by the
undersigned of the victim along with polaroid shots of the dogs involved.
Approximately one hundred and twenty-five (l25) 35 mm photographs were also
taken by the undersigned reference this complaint.
It appears that the child was attacked and partially eaten by one or more of
the animals involved in her death. Most of the skin and muscle area on the
buttocks had been stripped. The muscle and skin area of the legs was
stripped. A large area was open between the chest and the hip in the right
back area and a large amount of intestines had been removed.
AUTOPSY DOG #1
Dog #1. which is the large male. was autopsied by DR. RANDY SMITH. Found in
the stomach content of this animal was what appears to be the material that
was stripped from the victim. This dog’s head was severed from its’ body and
then skinned revealing the skeletal portion of the head. The teeth part of
the dog were fitted into several wounds on the child and it appeared to be
this animal that caused most of the damage to the child.
AUTOPSY DOG #2
This is the smaller female dog that was seen tugging on the child’s clothing.
There was nothing found in this dog’s stomach other than bile and blood. Its’
head was also skinned and the teeth did not match up with the wounds on the
child.
DR. RANDY JOHNSON, Marquette County Health Doctor, came into the room during
the autopsy. Due to the type of death involved and the fact that there were 2
dogs involved, both of their brains are being shipped to the Health Dept. in
Lansing to determine if they were rabid or not. Both of these brains were
packaged separately and given to DR. RANDY JOHNSON who said he would transport
these items to the Health Lab in Lansing.
On 3/8/89the undersigned was contacted by DR. RANDY SMITH and advised that he
had been advised by DR. RANDY JOHNSON of the Marquette Co. Health Dept. that
neither one of the dogs were rabid.
--
The Wolfdog
http://www.fiu.edu/~milesk
"It's a great pity the right to free speech isn't based on the obligation to
say something sensible."
--Unknown
Gwragedd Annwn
yard. I don't think it was a defensive action so much as it was a prey action.
It's just better for a lawsuit when the dog becomes a wd, as Patti's parents
found out when she sued them and was awarded $90,000. Or did Ivan become a wd
after the lawsuit, Gloria? I can't remember which came first. I know he became
a wd about two years after the attack, but can't recall if the case settled
before or after the "wd" label.
Kim
Nicodemus Telrenner wrote:
--
dw
WlfDogRSQ wrote:
>
>
> And her lawsuit against her own mother was for $90,000, not 50 or 60, just to
> clarify.
John
posters are confusing the newest attack with Patti's.
"Gwragedd Annwn" <gwra...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:39B85A68...@bellsouth.net...
A.James Gambrini
Tony
A.James Gambrini
Tony
A.James Gambrini
can't be ruined. lol
Tony
WlfDogRSQ wrote:
>
> Greg, me trying to be good, really <very evil grin>
>
> You are correct. If I have slandered Patti, or anyone else, charges could have
> been brought against me. The trouble with slander is that what is said has to
> be false.
>
> I have never slandered Patti as what I have stated is the truth. She and I
> both now it. And she is trying hard to make sure no one else knows it.
>
> And her lawsuit against her own mother was for $90,000, not 50 or 60, just to
> clarify.
>
> You are quite right (about a lot of things, you blankety, blank, blank, blank
> <g>) The full police report and he autopsy report state clearly that Patti has
> lied and continued to do so. Why?
>
> The full police report is 23 pages long. It is too long and Nickerson is not
> worth it to scan in and post. Will be happy to send copies to anyone that
> wants it. If anyone prefers, you can request a copy from Michigan State
> Police....but they do charge $25
>
> gloria :)
A.James Gambrini
>
> where does it say I was in the bar?
>
> Patti Nickerson
For God's sake!!! You were drunk!!!
Tony
Bryan Foust
then come out about her criminal acts of perjury AND fraud - clear on up to
the point where it would prove that the new Michigan wolfdog laws were
passed based on her criminal acts. Actually, I wish that she would attempt
to sue Gloria. I would take time off of work to come up there and watch
Patti get burned and carted off in handcuffs with felony charges to fight
from the attempt. Then the Michigan law would have to be repealed as well.
Bryan
"NADAdog" <nad...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:8p95v7$7nb$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Ken M.
>
> "Ken M." wrote:
>
> > I suppose I'll have to review the police reports. Who has them?
> > --
> > (ken)
> >
>
> Police Report Follows
This is tragic. That's all I can say.
dw
no felony changes would result - sorry it would stop the
waste of time. You couldn't fine an attorney to take it on
shares.
dw
dw
Gwragedd Annwn
loss of her child (no matter who the mother is) in such a brutal fashion
is a tragedy that I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy--and regardless of
where Patti was, or who she was with, or what she was doing, I empathize
with her on her loss. However, what Patty subsequently did is also tragic
as she has conducted a two-woman (she and Beth) campaign to ban an animal
that *might or might not* have had anything to do with Angie's death.
There is not one single positive thing that has come out of this whole
tragic mess....unless it is that Beth Duman has now become the resident
wd-phenotyping expert in MI--the ONLY scientist (cough) who can pheno
down to 5% wolf in a dog. Great Scot! I can see her going
international--NOT! The sad thing with this is that most scientists
realize that phenotyping a wd is subjective and is NOT always accurate.
But Duman seems to have become more than just a mere scientist taking
part in the subjectivity of wd phenotyping; she is now the omniscient
phenotypist. What a crock!! And what conceit!! Truly unbelievable....
Kim
dw wrote:
--
UCOMMIT4
>tragic mess....unless it is that Beth Duman has now become the resident
>wd-phenotyping expert in MI--the ONLY scientist (cough) who can pheno
>down to 5% wolf in a dog.
In response to recent events, Wolf Park is restating its position in regard to
wolves and hybrids as pets.
by Dr. Erich Klinghammer, Director, Wolf Park
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Contrary to erroneous views held by some wolf hybrid organizations as well
as hybrid owners, our foundation does not oppose ownership of these animals. As
our policy posted on our web site (http://www.wolfpark.org) shows, we are for
the responsible ownership of these animals. In a nutshell, this means that we
believe wolves should be kept with other wolves in large, secure enclosures to
protect the animals as well as people - especially children - and fed
appropriate food, and that suitable provisions for the future of the animals
should be made in case of the owner's death or illness.
Many people think that if you raise wolves or wolf x dog hybrids as dogs,
they will behave like dogs. Much is made of the so-called percentage of wolf
vs. dog genes in an individual animal. The more an animal looks like a wolf,
they say, the more it will behave like a wolf - whatever that means.
From the point of view of safety for the general public, as well as the
owners, social aggression in hybrids tends to be less of a problem than one
would think. An animal may challenge and even bite an owner or familiar person,
but the consequences are rarely serious. Predatory behavior is another matter.
A socially friendly animal - and pet wolves and wolf x dog hybrids are
generally friendly if properly socialized to humans - may nevertheless launch a
predatory attack under certain circumstances. If a person runs away, trips or
falls, struggles, cries or screams, such behavior is similar to that of prey,
and is very likely to result in a predatory attack. Since children are small,
they are less intimidating to a wolf or hybrid, and the chance of an attack is
increased. Couple this with the propensity - primarily of small boys - to tease
such animals if they are behind a fence or on a chain, and the stage is set for
disaster. Many children have been attacked. The lucky ones escaped with
injuries. Many have died. All these deaths were avoidable. While it is true
that the same comments apply to many dogs - who are considered to be the same
species - the probability that a pet wolf or hybrid will attack a child is much
greater.
Whenever such an attack occurs, it is often national news. A concerned
public cries out for laws to outlaw such animals, while the hybrid owners rise
up to defend the keeping of these animals - pointing out how friendly they are.
Parents are accused of poor supervision - not of the animals, but of the
children who are the victims of such attacks. In many instances the owners have
been warned beforehand, but such warnings are usually dismissed or ignored.
When a child is dead or disfigured for life, one hears: "Gee, I am sorry; I did
not know; the animal has never done that before; it is so friendly; it loves
children; it is afraid of people; etc." The list of excuses is endless.
There are many responsible hybrid owners who have secure enclosures, have
people to help care for the animals, and who inform themselves of the dangers.
Unfortunately, we never hear much from them. When legislation to control
hybrids is introduced, it is responsible owners who would suffer if the
legislation were to become law. There is no mechanism in place by which the
hybrid-owning community can police itself - even if it were willing.
Legislation across the country varies - and there are places where there is no
control, like Indiana. Furthermore, many people are still preoccupied with the
percentage of wolf vs dog in an individual animal. No hard data is available,
but people who have seen many wolves, hybrids and dogs generally agree that the
physical appearance of an animal is not linked necessarily with readiness to
attack a potential prey. In other words, a very dog-like hybrid might attack as
readily as a pet wolf.
Years ago we at Wolf Park decided to do something about this problem. We
decided that education was the best way to go. We hope that the information we
have disseminated in our seminars and publications has saved some lives. We
will never know.
Monty Sloan, our staff photographer, can be considered a hybrid "expert".
He knows wolves well, and has probably seen and photographed more wolves and
hybrids than anyone in the world. He has talked to countless owners, seen their
facilities, and lectured across the country on wolf x dog hybrids. Monty's
style of lecturing is very low key and no one gets upset with Monty.
In Michigan, Beth Duman, a biology teacher, who lectures on wolves and the
need to preserve them in the wild, has represented Wolf Park for many years.
Beth has been a strong advocate for legislation to control these animals, as
are all of us at Wolf Park. We are for responsible ownership of these animals,
taking their unique characteristics into account.
In her endeavor to warn people of the potential danger which these animals
pose, and to safeguard the animals as well, Beth made some unfortunate remarks
some years ago at the AVMA meeting in Los Angeles. These remarks were in jest
but were misunderstood by those who were not present but merely read the
transcripts. This what the hybrid owners and some of their associations seize
upon to discredit her. Beth has since apologized for her remarks on numerous
occasions, yet the virulent attacks, misrepresentations of her position, and
outright distortions continue to surface from time to time. We have received
phone calls, letters and e-mails demanding that Wolf Park fire her.
Instead of attacking Beth, her critics should care about the safety of
the children that are endangered by hybrids kept "as if they were dogs". Beth
Duman is passionate about the protection of wolves in the wild. Beth learned
the hard way about the danger a pet wolf can pose: she had one herself, but
gave it to Wolf Park when the animal bit her husband. Beth has our full support
for her educational work in Michigan. We receive many letters and calls
praising her efforts. She deserves the support of everyone who cares about
wolves, hybrids and the safety of children. Sooner or later an animal gets out
and does damage. Guess who pays the price? The animal who should not have been
in a position to chase or attack a child.
Just a few weeks ago, I testified in a case involving a hybrid attack on a
small boy in Texas. After my testimony, the case was settled out of court. The
animal got out of a wooden enclosure from which it had escaped once before. The
owner was told by the breeder - whom I know personally, and who has since given
up raising hybrids because people would not listen to him - how to care for the
hybrid. The owner pleaded ignorance of the danger this animal posed. In his
opinion, it "loved children". He knew better.
So, guess what? A third child - a four year old boy - was killed on August
21 by a hybrid in Michigan. It was the hybrid owner's child. The child was
unattended for just a few minutes. The animal was in the backyard on a chain.
The boy had apparently been choked to death and bitten through the trachea. It
was identified as a hybrid by the owner. I saw a photo of it, and while I could
see some "wolf characteristics" it looked mostly like a dog to me. Beth Duman
also had that impression.
Who paid the price for human ignorance? The innocent boy who is dead, and
the animal who couldn't help his nature and had no business being where he was
in the first place - and who was killed for his deed. Yet hybrid lovers choose
to attack Beth Duman as if she were responsible for the animal getting killed.
In fact, it was the father who had it killed. Hybrid breeders and owners should
take care of the own, not attack those who have warned for years of the
dangers.
Since legislation is spotty across the nation, I think insurance companies
should exclude coverage for hybrids in their homeowner's policies - UNLESS they
are kept properly. We would be happy to provide them with standards which were
worked out some years ago at a seminar held at Wolf Park. Participants included
hybrid breeders, owners, wolf researchers, a veterinarian and our Regional USDA
inspector. We forwarded these recommendations to the State of Michigan when
they were considering a law controlling hybrids. To this day no such law exists
in Michigan. Why not? That is another story. How many more children have to die
in Michigan? Is three not more than enough?
Wolf Park staff, visiting students, and scholars do behavior research at
the Park. We share our information with the general public through lectures at
the park and elsewhere. We also hold wolf and wolf x dog behavior seminars,
offer internships, ethology practica and volunteer opportunities. Our aim is to
inform people - especially school children - about wolves, wolf x dog hybrids,
and wildlife conservation. Although we have no objective measure of the success
of our educational efforts, the fact that former visiting students, who are now
teachers and parents, bring their own children and students to the park shows
that their early experiences had a lasting effect on them. We like to think
that as voters, when wildlife issues are up for a vote, they will support
candidates and policies of benefit to the environment in general, and wolves in
particular.
Beth Duman's response to the current situation
regarding the death of a child in Michigan.
---------------------------------------------------------
Beth Duman's response to the current situation
regarding the death of a child in Michigan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Last Saturday evening, September 21, 1999, Cody Tyler Fairfield was killed by
his family's pet wolf/dog cross, Tanner. Since that time, some of the people on
this bulletin board have chosen to change facts, insinuate information or
otherwise cloud this reality.
Some of the facts of this case are as follows:
The animal did kill the child. There were no chain marks on the child's body.
The child was not killed when a confused animal struggled to get away from a
tangled child. The father did not murder his child and then attempt to frame
his pet. The animal asphyxiated the child as it held the child's throat. The
child had a puncture wound through his trachea made by the canine tooth of the
animal. He also had a large number of bites all over his body.
The animal was killed at the owner's request. I had nothing to do with that
decision. The head of the animal was sent to the state health laboratory for
routine rabies testing.
The animal was a wolf mix. Both the breeder and the owner attested to this
information. When I was called by the director of Muskegon County Animal
Control to look at the animal, I did not say the animal was 5% wolf, I stated
only that I agreed with the animal control officers' assessments that the
animal was not as much wolf as some information had purported.
Some of the people on this bulletin board have knowingly & purposely changed
the facts in this case. Their motivation seems to be to both cloud the fact
that another child has been killed and to personally vilify me. Those who know
me personally know that I have spent many years working on behalf of wild
wolves and the humane and safekeeping of hybrids.
I would suggest that those of you who doubt the facts which I have presented
here contact Muskegon County Animal Control, the Muskegon County Medical
Examiner and the Michigan State Police to verify the facts themselves rather
than relying on hearsay as reported on this bulletin board.
The bottom line is that these "accidents" should never happen. If you really
love your animals and don't want them legislated out of existence, then you are
the folks who need to take action to keep accidents from happening. The real
villains in this scenario are not the animals or me, but the breeders who
produce and sell these animals without giving honest information about how to
successfully care for a semi-domesticated animal. The reason so many hybrids
end up on chains in backyards is that their owners had no idea what they were
getting into when they adopted their animals in the first place. If they had
been told that the animal might be overly destructive in their home, possibly
untrainable, an escape artist, predatory toward small children and other
animals, etc, they may have chosen to get a domestic dog instead. Instead, the
owners probably started with a cute puppy with the best of intentions and the
animal ended up chained up "out back" when it could not be kept like a common
dog.
If you really love your animals, you need to be working to give realistic
information about the keeping of hybrids. Potential owners need to know how to
build safe and humane confinement for their animals. They need to know that it
is not unusual at all for captive wolves and many hybrids to see small children
as prey. They need to be given the chance to choose ahead of time whether they
want to deal with all the problems of wolf/dog ownership.
Next, you need to police the hybrid community to become aware of those people
keeping animals in unsafe or inhumane situations and encourage them to make the
necessary changes to keep their animals responsibly. You need to challenge the
breeders who are placing animals in situations where they can never have a safe
and humane life. A number of years ago, the Coalition for Responsible Ownership
worked hard to produce a document that could be used as a guideline for model
hybrid regulation. This could be used proactively when dealing with bodies that
seek to ban hybrids. Wolf Park has similar hybrid keeping guidelines on its WEB
site.
Saying that hybrids are "just like any other domestic dogs" serves no useful
purpose. Vilifying those who challenge your misleading information or changing
information to suit your whims also does no good for your animals. The tragedy
of little Chad's death could have been averted. Now is your chance to keep the
next tragedy from happening.
In response to recent events, Wolf Park is restating its
position in regard to wolves and hybrids as pets.
Patti Nickerson
UCOMMIT4
>subjective and is NOT always accurate and for any scientist to portray
>to the public that s/he can pheno within 5% is bullshit.
>
>Kim
Maybe you should reread the post:
"The animal was a wolf mix. Both the breeder and the owner attested to this
information. When I was called by the director of Muskegon County Animal
Control to look at the animal, I did not say the animal was 5% wolf, I stated
only that I agreed with the animal control officers' assessments that the
animal was not as much wolf as some information had purported"
Only wolfdog people said that Beth Duman stated the animal was 5% wolf.
This is exactly how words are twisted into others agenda.
Patti Nickerson
WlfDogRSQ
support her, don't want that.
Would end a lot of internet speculation.
Fact is, even though I have been stating facts for many years, both online and
off, Patti Nickerson has not sued. Why?
Answer is obvious.
I have never lied. What I have accused Patti of being is true. She knows it,
I know it, and so do many of her 'friends' and neighbors. Her supporters even
know it.
Let's face it; Patti Nickerson is not the best poster adult they could have
wished for. But her pictures are worth putting up with her, and so they do.
She also knows that in a court of law, her lies would be exposed. That is the
last thing she wants. Take that back: That is the last thing her autopsy
picture pushers want.
Sadly, whether Patti and her new pals like it or not, she is quickly heading
into court. There, she will not be allowed to but on the sickening show she
routinely does to committee members. I hope someone cues her in on this, and
quickly. Then again, maybe not.
gloria
www.wolfdogs.org
WlfDogRSQ
brain in her head and can only do what she accuses others of doing:
Cut and paste.
The noose is tightening Patti. Might I suggest you start looking for a good
attorney now, rahter than later?
WlfDogRSQ
Didn't you see Beth on the news? Looks like she doesn't totally agree with
you. Maybe she is trying to salvage what will be left of her career.......
PS: animal control doesn't agree with you either....go figure
Gwragedd Annwn
yards, I don't recognize that wolves and wds have cornered the market on prey
drive. I have no problems addressing the prey drive found in wds, but I do have a
problem when people twist it, trying to infer that it's only found in wolves and
wds. Such is ludicrous and the promotion of such can be dangerous as it ignores the
prey drive found in DOGS. In their haste to denounce wds, people frequently forget
that DOGS ARE CANINES and are therefore predators, also. (Hint: read "The Culture
Clash" by Jean Donaldson, "The Behavior of Wolves, Dogs, and Related Canids" by
Michael Fox, and "The Dog's Mind" by Bruce Fogle.)
One key difference does separate a wolf from a dog, however. Wolves are not
domestic. Dogs are. Dogs are DOMESTIC WOLVES and, like wolves, are also prey
driven. It may be diminished or channeled into another area (e.g., the
fetching/finding of prey for hunters, the herding of sheep, the chasing of a ball
or child running from them, etc.) because of domestication and selective breeding,
but that does NOT mean that dogs no longer have prey drive. NOT AT ALL! Why do you
think that children (usually informed by somewhat dog-savvy parents, or their vets,
or the AVMA, etc.) are warned NEVER to run from a dog?
Now a curious question is, where does the domestication in a wd take place? How
many generations must a wd be removed from pure before he is considered
domesticated? According to testimony from Dr. Ray Pierotti in a Texas court case,
domestication can occur within five generations. So if a pure wolf is at least five
generations back, what do you have? It's possible that you have a domesticated
animal. But does that only address a pure wild-caught wolf? Or does that refer to a
captive wolf?
Let's look at wolves in captivity for a minute. When does domestication take place
there--or does it? Belayaev and Trut's *fox* (i.e., not domesticated) expirement
began in 1956. In 1962, changes were found in the offspring consistent with
domestication. In 1969, "after only seven years of selective breeding" even greater
changes were found indicating that a domestication process was occurring. What I'm
getting at is that very FEW people have wds that are (1) the product of a pure wolf
and pure dog cross, or (2) have a recent ancestor that was wild caught. MOST wds
are products of other wds and when wolf is in the line, it's a wolf that usually
has great great ancestors that were also raised in captivity. So when would
domestication occur in those who have no wild-caught wolves in their recent
history--say within 8 generations? Is it possible that domestication is already
occurring? Possibly. (What do ya say, Nick, DW?) But I digress....
You seem to think that wds corner the market on killing children. (Of course, if
you're looking at Primrose's rather ridiculous homespun stat, I could understand
where you might be deluded. But let's focus on reality and peer-reviewed
information and let's leave Primrose and her delusional stats out of this. Are you
forgetting the other DOGS that were involved in mauling your daughter? Are you
forgetting the numbers of children that are killed and/or bitten by the family DOG
each year? Over 4.7 million people are attacked each year by man's best friend: the
dog. Of that number, around 60% are kids. An average of 10-20 (closer to 20 in
recent years) are killed due to dog attacks and most of those occur on the dog
owner's property.
The CDC references Sacks et al's. study on fatal dog bites: "In the 6-year study
published in the medical journal PEDIATRICS (Vol.97 No. 6, 891-5), Jeffrey J.
Sacks, M.D. and associates reported the finding of 109 bite-related fatalities.
They found that 57% of the deaths were in children under 10 years of age. 22% of
the deaths involved an unrestrained dog OFF the owner's property. 18% of the deaths
involved a restrained dog ON the owner's property, and 59% of the deaths involved
an unrestrained dog ON the owner's property." A whopping 77% of the animals were ON
the owner's property!! Strays make up a VERY small percentage of the dogs that are
involved in fatal attacks.
I agree 110% with Klinghammer when he states that he is "for the responsible
ownership of these animals." IMO, anyone with a wd *should* have secure fencing to
protect both the animals from the public and the public from the animals.
Containment does NOT include the chaining of an animal. All fo this is no different
from what a Dobie, Rottie, gsd, Malamute, Husky, etc. rescuer would claim when
screening someone for a home for one of these animals. In addition, it is no more
than what the AVMA, CDC, and other dog-related orgs would have to say about any
large canine. Wd owners, though, need to be even more cautious about proper
containment because of the publicity surrounding, the attraction of an ignorant
public to, and the intelligence of a wd--with more stringent precautions being in
place for those that show the wolfier tendencies/traits.
It's my opinion that half of the people who have large canines probably shouldn't
have them--regardless of whether it's a rottie, gsd, wd, etc. And it doesn't center
around the behavior of the animal as much as it centers around the abominable
ignorance of those who have these animals as pets. "Dog attacks are the No. 1
public health problem of children, with over half of children bitten by age 12,"
said Dr. John I. Freeman, president of the American Veterinary Medical Association
(AVMA). "Surprisingly, most victims are bitten by dogs owned by their family and
friends, but there are steps dog owners can take to reduce the likelihood of their
dogs biting people."
So what do you propose, Patti? That we should just ban people from owning all large
canines? That would solve the problems. Ignorant owners would no longer have these
animals. Then again, neither would all the responsible ones out there who love
their animals and haven't done a damn thing other than to protect their animals and
the public (especially children) from becoming another of the numerous statistics
abounding in our society. Is that your answer? Or are you going to ignore the other
canines involved in mauling your daughter and focus on one kind of canine that
MIGHT or MIGHT NOT have had a damn thing to do with Angie's death?
Yes, Patti, I empathize with your loss, but I also find your subsequent actions
abominable as they seem to indicate nothing more than a redirection of
responsiblity onto a type of animal that may be totally innocent.
Kim
UCOMMIT4 wrote:
--
WlfDogRSQ
Uh Patti, may I suggest AGAIN, you lay off the bottle?
Your potty mouthed post doesn't do a great deal to back the angelic picture you
try to post of yourself and your equally foul mouthed ten year old daughter.
No wonder you latest husband left you.
Remember, it's all on tape.......... LOL!
gloria :)
Gwragedd Annwn
Unlike many who wish to focus on wds as being the big bad predators of
the back yards, I don't recognize that wolves and wds have cornered the
market on prey drive. I have no problems addressing the prey drive found
in wds, but I do have a problem when people twist it, trying to infer
that it's only found in wolves and wds. Such is ludicrous and the
promotion of such can be dangerous as it ignores the prey drive found in
DOGS. In their haste to denounce wds, people frequently forget that DOGS
ARE CANINES and are therefore predators, also. (Hint: read "The Culture
Clash" by Jean Donaldson, "The Behavior of Wolves, Dogs, and Related
Canids" by Michael Fox, and "The Dog's Mind" by Bruce Fogle.)
One key difference does separate a wolf from a dog, however. Wolves are
not domestic. Dogs are. Dogs are DOMESTIC WOLVES and, like wolves, are
also prey driven. It may be diminished or channeled into another area
(e.g., the fetching/finding of prey for hunters, the herding of sheep,
the chasing of a ball or child running from them, etc.) because of
domestication and selective breeding, but that does NOT mean that dogs
no longer have prey drive. NOT AT ALL! Why do you think that children
(usually informed by somewhat dog-savvy parents, or their vets, or the
AVMA, etc.) are warned NEVER to run from a dog?
Now a curious question is, where does the domestication in a wd take
place? How many generations must a wd be removed from pure before he is
considered domesticated? According to testimony from Dr. Ray Pierotti in
a Texas court case, domestication can occur within five generations. So
if a pure wolf is at least five generations back, what do you have? Is
it possible that you have a domesticated animal? Does it matter if it's
a pure "wild-caught" wolf or pure "captive" wolf? Well, let's look at
I agree 110% with Klinghammer when he states that he is "for the
responsible ownership of these animals." IMO, anyone with a wd *should*
ignore the other canines involved in mauling your daughter and focus on
one kind of canine that MIGHT or MIGHT NOT have had a damn thing to do
with Angie's death?
Yes, Patti, I empathize with your loss, but I also find your subsequent
actions abominable as they seem to indicate nothing more than a
redirection of responsiblity onto a type of animal that may be totally
innocent.
Kim
_______________________
UCOMMIT4 wrote:
<snipped for brevity>
>
> In response to recent events, Wolf Park is restating its position in regard to wolves and hybrids as pets. by Dr. Erich Klinghammer, Director, Wolf Park
>
> Contrary to erroneous views held by some wolf hybrid organizations as well
> as hybrid owners, our foundation does not oppose ownership of these animals. As
> our policy posted on our web site (http://www.wolfpark.org) shows, we are for
> the responsible ownership of these animals.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Beth Duman's response to the current situation regarding the death of a child in Michigan.
>
A.James Gambrini
Tony
A.James Gambrini
Malamutes supposedly have 10 percent in their lineage. It does not mean
they are wolves. It still comes down to "substance abuse".
Tony
A.James Gambrini
Tony
A.James Gambrini
Tony
Bryan Foust
the witness stand, they will be charged with the felony act. We aren't
talking of a burglar or other such criminal trying to get out of going to
jail. Her acts have vicitimized - directly or indirectly - hundreds, if not
thousands of individuals. In this particular case, Patti would most
definitely face criminal charges for her acts of perjury, and the new laws
would have to be investigated due to the wrongdoings that were committed to
get them passed. The legal technicalities based on Patti's actions would
make this law very easy to repeal.
Bryan
"dw" <wes...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:39B8D00F...@pacbell.net...
UCOMMIT4
Patti Nickerson
UCOMMIT4
Patti Nickerson
dw
Bryan Foust wrote:
>
> Actually, this is not accurate. If a person commits the act of perjury on
> the witness stand, they will be charged with the felony act. We aren't
They can be charged. Rarely under these cir's. However it
would make any future civil/crim cases open to great cross.
> talking of a burglar or other such criminal trying to get out of going to
> jail. Her acts have vicitimized - directly or indirectly - hundreds, if not
> thousands of individuals. In this particular case, Patti would most
> definitely face criminal charges for her acts of perjury, and the new laws
> would have to be investigated due to the wrongdoings that were committed to
> get them passed. The legal technicalities based on Patti's actions would
> make this law very easy to repeal.
>
> Bryan
>
A review of the law would not be automatic nor certain even
with a perjury conviction.
Repeal is a legislative action.
There are science tech's that make this law hollow. It will
only take the case the money and the effort to gut it.
dw
Bryan Foust
expose you for the lying crook that you are. However, you are in Michigan,
and I live in Texas. The demographics in themselves prevent me from doing
this. I *will* do everything in my power to expose you for what you are
here in this newsgroup.
Bryan
"UCOMMIT4" <ucom...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000909083410...@ng-bg1.aol.com...
A.James Gambrini
Tony
wolfa.123
Dogs sometime known as the family pet
Rottweiller probaly spelled it wrong.
and a whole lot of other words but the truth is the truth .More DOGS have
killed mamed or injured Humans then any other animal Wolf /dog or wolf.
You need to check the facts .
Wolves are affraid of Humans and stay away from them .
99% of all so called wolf/dogs Hybrids have no dam wolf in them at all .
They are so far removed from the wolf they might as well be a Toad or a Horse.
You know what you get when you cross a horse and a buro .
Someone who thinks they have a WOLF DOG as a pet
wolfa.123
It cannot happen % LOL
What a bunch of ^%$^()^$%$@$@#,s
you people would belive anything
A.James Gambrini
Tony