Wisconsin Wolf kill reaches 50% of statewide quota after first day of season; DNR to close three zones

[NEWHunter]

@NEWHunter The (now) 22 yr old plan was formulated at a time much of the suitable habitat in the state was not yet occupied, so the authors of Act 169's (Reps. Suder and Revard, 2012) insistence of holding to that number (midway between delisting-250 and 500, the perceived biological capacity at that time) while ignoring then over 13 years of cited research and best science.
DNR management plans generally are 10 years and in the 1999 document, it's even addressed: Pg 4: public review every 5 years (last paragraph on the left hand column)

Pg 8: the plan provides guidelines for the next 10-15 years.
Pg 28: 5 yr intervals of the population status including public review... Obviously a new wolf plan has not been written so this February's hunt was already on weak ground whether one was for or against it. Usually when you hunt a species, one would want to have a current management plan..........

I am not glass half full/empty.........I just want our wildlife managed in a scientific way. When you ram something through by courts and a barstool biologist on the NRB, this is what you get.

Finally, I agree, hopefully the season is done better the next time (unless we want to dig our own graves in terms of state management) that provides opportunity for trappers, allows the fur to be taken at a time when it is prime, and has reasonable safeguards (like our sturgeon seasons) to make sure we don't get over the quota

Yes, I’ve previously acknowledged that the plan is being updated and the numbers are likely to change. You can’t provide the citation I did from 16 pages in with out having an idea of what’s in the document. You left out the 2006/2007 addendum at the end of the document that reaffirms the 500 number.

Careful with the sturgeon guys - the science may be good but the optics of the biologists and the enforcement doesn’t look so good from what I’ve read.

 

[RobertD]

I'll stick with Mike Mitchell. He has the data. And I doubt MT is spending much if anything on it. Feds mostly, I would guess. But in any event, the data do not support the assumption that busting wolf packs has the same effect as busting coyote packs.

I'm very late on this thread, but have you read Dan Flores's Coyote America? He gets into the details of how wolves and coyotes respond to pressure/killing. His research backs up Mike Mitchell's argument. Wolves don't fare nearly as well as coyotes when their social structure breaks down.

 

[OverlordBear]

70% died or 70% of those that died, died of predation.

Starvation, trucks, and many others make for a lot of compensatory mortality.

Do you hate bears as more than wolves. You should. They kill way more fawns. This is true just about anywhere there are black bears and ungulate offspring. Why do they get a pass from everyone?

Because bears are delicious and wolves are mangy dogs. I want grizzlies and black bears in all of their historical habitat. Bears should be cruising all over the lower 48. Wolves take them or leave them.

 

[BrentD]

I'm very late on this thread, but have you read Dan Flores's Coyote America? He gets into the details of how wolves and coyotes respond to pressure/killing. His research backs up Mike Mitchell's argument. Wolves don't fare nearly as well as coyotes when their social structure breaks down.

Dan is a historian.. Dan backs up Mile, not the other way around. In this day and age, where the facts come from matter a great deal. I guess I'm a stickler for that.

 

[hcenvinc]

Wolf kill reaches 69% of the statewide quota in less than two days, prompting the DNR to close the season Wednesday

Hunters and trappers registered 82 wolves, 69% of the statewide harvest quota, in the first 39 hours of the hunting season.

www.jsonline.com

Wiped out entire herd where I use to hunt. Went there in November a couple years back and only found one set of deer tracks. Place use to to be sweet.

 

[hcenvinc]

Much higher wolf density in WI and given no hunting seasons they have gotten quit bold.

Exactly, they're not endangered in northern Wisconsin national forests

 

[mariano742]

The issue is that we took quota reserved for the tribes, it is a bad look and something that will end poorly for hunters.

Lots of barstool biology studies

barstool? no. lots of people who spend a LOT of time in the woods and understand things from a hands on basis after observing things for years and years and decades know that this is good for the deer. Wisconsin hunters get a bravo from me.