Sorry to jump in, but my statistics alarm went off on those comments. Wouldn’t that be the null hypothesis? No way he can prove a negative. So the negative is the baseline and he (or you) should have to reject it by proving the reverse, I.e that they do have an impact. To do that you would need to figure out when wolves showed up. Wisconsin has deer harvest stats by county to cross reference with known wolf areas. And don’t forget that WI had a wolf seasons a few years back, so that is a variable to control for. And probably should find EHD outbreaks too. Severe outbreak will kill hundreds of deer in a single county alone. But those may get eaten by wolves so not sure if you want to consider that compensatory.You have not provided a shred of evidence that wolves are not directly causing high additive mortality impacts on the deer population within areas occupied by wolves.
You have not provided a shred of evidence that deer predation by wolves has not reduced deer harvest by humans in areas occupied by wolves.
I’m sure wolves do reduce the population but it is a little more complex than we try to make it. That is why we have barstool biology.