This is a known risk, as wolves are territorial, and the state extends payments to hunters whose dogs are killed just as the state reimburses livestock owners whose animals die in this manner, too:
The state paid $37,000 for 15 dogs killed last year, for instance.My question is: as traumatic an event this no doubt is for the owner's dog, is a state payment to a hunter whose dog is killed by wolves during hunting - - the very issue that led a judge to bar hunters from using dogs in the wolf hunt set to begin in October - - a fair action by the state, or an entitlement payment?
