NDR (Germany) https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/hamburg/wolf-der-in-altona-eine-frau-attackierte-ist-vermutlich-tot,wolf-628.html

Wolf, who attacked a woman in Altona, is presumed dead.

As of June 5, 2026, 9:18 PM

The Hamburg environmental authority believes it is likely that the wolf that ran through Altona at the end of March and injured a woman is now dead. Experts assume that the young wolf was shot and its tracking device destroyed.

The young wolf, after biting a woman in Hamburg in April, was initially taken to a wildlife rescue center in Lower Saxony. On Easter Sunday, it was fitted with a transmitter and released south of Hamburg, near the border with Lower Saxony. The environmental authorities had assured the public at the time that the wolf could be located at any time.

Both the wolf and the tracking device have disappeared.

The transmitter's data is available until the end of May – then contact is abruptly lost, the authority writes in response to an inquiry from NDR Hamburg. At the time of the last signal, the wolf was far away from Hamburg – in Damme, 160 kilometers away.

A defect is unlikely – as is the possibility that the wolf lost its collar. The transmitters are technically extremely reliable and well-tested, according to the authorities. A search operation failed to locate either the wolf or the collar. Therefore, the animal's death is considered probable.

Was the wolf shot?

Experts assume that the young wolf was shot and the transmitter destroyed. Since wolves are generally protected, a permit would have been required for the cull. However, authorities in Hamburg and Lower Saxony are still investigating whether this scenario is accurate.

The wolf sighted in Tötensen was a different animal.

According to the environmental authority, the wolf sightings in Tötensen and Neu Wulmsdorf involved a completely different wolf and not the one that attacked a woman in Altona in March. This could be ruled out based on the fur color and markings.

And here is the kicker: the wolf did NOT bite the woman which is why it was released. The following says it all.

Is It A Fox Mask Or......

 I have mentioned the fact that the Study has a huge photo data base and that includes of taxidermy since we are not funded we cannot afford to buy specimens that are of extreme interest.  If you read The Red Paper: Canids (very few have) you would have seen the masks (mounted heads of foxes) of supposed "foxes" released and killed by hunts that were anything other than foxes. Jackals, coyotes, wolves et al were all kept and released to hunt -newspapers of the 19th Century feature many news reports and features on jackal hunts.

Some taxidermies we traced but new owners refused to cooperate in a study. However, it was quite obvious that certain 'fox' masks were either mistakenly labelled by hunts which is not likely, or they were just called this by antique dealers -another group that constantly refuses to cooperate in any way. Many of the plaques/shields do NOT say "fox" but just give the duration of the hunt (the important part to them) and start-end locations.

I have noted before that experts in wolves and coyotes clearly identified masks as such but when they asked where the masks originated from and "England" was given most started spluttering and trying to back-track. Why? Who knows.

Take this one: "Vale of Clifttwr Hunt June 1963 "

The Vale of Clettwr (also spelled Cletwr) is a rural geographic area located in Mid Wales primarily within the county of Ceredigion.  It stretches across a lush, hilly region between the towns of Lampeter, Llandysul, and Tregaron, roughly following the path of the Afon Clettwr river.

Chunkiest 'fox' I have seen. What do you think?

(c)2026 British Fox and Wild Canid Study

Fox Attacks Cat or Cat Attacks Fox?

 

I must admit that I am gradually losing my patience with people claiming a fox keeps attacking their cat and they end up at the vets all the time spending more money.

Do they have video footage of these attacks? You get two answers:

1) No

2) I do but calling me a liar I am not going to share it

2 above after politely asking. I've had three people who apparently just stood and watched as "foxes tore my cat apart". I, for one, would not stand by and watch my pet being attacked. Basically, it's a lie.

WHY can these people not tell you which vet is continually treating their cats after fox attacks? As one insisted their cat was seen by a vet I checked with the only two vets in the area in question. Never had any cat in attacked by a fox. "Who said it was a vet locally?" screeched the group moderator (a friend of the complainer).

In 50 years I have NEVER seen a fox attack a cat. In a wildlife survey in London back in the 1960s it was noted that foxes "ran like hell" when a cat came at them. I cannot find any historical or genuine modern account of a fox attacking and killing a cat.

In the last 20 years I have had occasion to rescue 5 different adult foxes that were cornered outside (by different cats)).

"Bella" the semi feral black cat that lived next door was a regular for attacking foxes and even twice had to be stopped as she jumped on foxes backs and went for a neck bite to kill it. I have on video two different cats that were stalking foxes.

Foxes can bite but a cat has 4 sets of claws and very nasty sharp teeth. Cats have all the attack advantages.

Cats fighting other cats -a fox was seen so it is to blame. A neighbour's dog has a go at a cat -a fox is to blame., This country has truly no interest in facts just blame it on...the badger...the fox...deer....otter. The biggest threat to pet cats are the owners at times so present veterinary reports or video footage or just shut up.