More deer killed by wolves than hunters in some Wisconsin counties

[NoWiser]

Actually the fact that wolves evolved over tens of thousands of years with deer, elk, moose, etc proves that they do just fine at managing them. They have a hell of a lot better track record than humans, as a matter of fact. Humans managed to wipe out species from vast areas of this continent. Wolves, as scary and ferocious as they are, never managed to do that.

Wolves will never kill every last deer. They’ll starve long before they’ll ever accomplish that. I guarantee that where I deer hunt, the wolf population is way more dense than anywhere near Brainerd. Some years there are less deer, some years there are more. If I hunt hard I’ll always have an opportunity to kill a buck. But I’d rather hunt than complain about wolves, unlike most guys in that part of the state.

 

[rjthehunter]

Sorry, shallow water and shallow minds both freeze first...would be a waste of my time.

Good argument.
I'm curious what you disagree with or call BS on, most of what I said is common knowledge, not even an opinion... So do you think wolves should be introduced to Colorado also?

 

[rjthehunter]

Actually the fact that wolves evolved over tens of thousands of years with deer, elk, moose, etc proves that they do just fine at managing them. They have a hell of a lot better track record than humans, as a matter of fact. Humans managed to wipe out species from vast areas of this continent. Wolves, as scary and ferocious as they are, never managed to do that.

Wolves will never kill every last deer. They’ll starve long before they’ll ever accomplish that. I guarantee that where I deer hunt, the wolf population is way more dense than anywhere near Brainerd. Some years there are less deer, some years there are more. If I hunt hard I’ll always have an opportunity to kill a buck. But I’d rather hunt than complain about wolves, unlike most guys in that part of the state.

Some valid points, but in the past there hasn't been humans managing populations like there are now. We complain about elk and deer numbers, but then want to introduce wolves another apex predator into the ecosystem which will just reduce prey numbers further.

 

[BuzzH]

Good argument.
I'm curious what you disagree with or call BS on, most of what I said is common knowledge, not even an opinion... So do you think wolves should be introduced to Colorado also?

No argument made, just sticking to the facts that your post is BS and your mind is made up.

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

Now that buzz is frozen this thread will be boring.

 

[BuzzH]

Some valid points, but in the past there hasn't been humans managing populations like there are now. We complain about elk and deer numbers, but then want to introduce wolves another apex predator into the ecosystem which will just reduce prey numbers further.

Good god man, take a look at elk populations in Wyoming and Montana in 1994 and take a look at where they are now...

Try some facts for a change.

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

I like wolves their sweet! Especially when there is 250 of them like they said was a good threshold. I dont understand why sticking to the agreed management plan is such a bad thing?

 

[88man]

I like wolves their sweet! Especially when there is 250 of them like they said was a good threshold. I dont understand why sticking to the agreed management plan is such a bad thing?

If 250 is good 150 is better and 50 even better

 

[BuzzH]

I like wolves their sweet! Especially when there is 250 of them like they said was a good threshold. I dont understand why sticking to the agreed management plan is such a bad thing?

Do your part...season is open.

 

[BuzzH]

If 250 is good 150 is better and 50 even better

Seasons open for PA residents too...get after it.

 

[rjthehunter]

No argument made, just sticking to the facts that your post is BS and your mind is made up.

Good god man, take a look at elk populations in Wyoming and Montana in 1994 and take a look at where they are now...

Try some facts for a change.

So the 20 years after the introduction of a declining elk herd wasn't enough? A couple good years in a row and now the wolves are going to be considered helpful?

 

[rjthehunter]

So an adult wolf will eat up to 2.2 elk per 30 days. So if we let hunters do that, would there be an issue?

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

No desire to buzz. Fact is I dont care if there is a billion wolves or zero wolves in wisconsin. What I care about is how ridiculous it is that a bunch of anti's can go to court and some meat pounding jack off judge sides with people who dont know jack shit over a biologist that has studied wolves for 56 years. With this system taxpayer money for countless studies on wolves are worthless because of previously mentioned meat pounding jack off judge. Why are we doing studies when liberal hacks always just find the right judge?
I respect the work these biologists dedicate their lives to unlike the liberal hacks and their judge.

 

[rjthehunter]

I like wolves their sweet! Especially when there is 250 of them like they said was a good threshold. I dont understand why sticking to the agreed management plan is such a bad thing?

Wolves have a place, but it's not everywhere. If they could be managed in mn they wouldn't be so bad, but right now they're free to repopulate as much as they want. So the deer numbers take a hit from wolves year around and from September through December by deer hunters. They're getting hit by 2 of the top predators now. That's not good for a deer herd, wolves need to be managed just like deer.

Two words, liberal media

 

[BuzzH]

So the 20 years after the introduction of a declining elk herd wasn't enough? A couple good years in a row and now the wolves are going to be considered helpful?

Dense...doesn't even begin to describe that post.

If wolves have eaten all the elk, and there's been "20 years of declining elk herd" why is Montana is about to offer each hunter 3 elk tags, why Wyoming has been offering 3 tags per hunter for the last 7-8 years.

In 1994, it was 1 elk per hunter in both states...doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out what's wrong with your "picture".

 

[BuzzH]

Wolves have a place, but it's not everywhere. If they could be managed in mn they wouldn't be so bad, but right now they're free to repopulate as much as they want. So the deer numbers take a hit from wolves year around and from September through December by deer hunters. They're getting hit by 2 of the top predators now. That's not good for a deer herd, wolves need to be managed just like deer.

Two words, liberal media

Pro tip...whining on a hunting board isn't going to change wolf management in MN.

Get off your butt and do something about it...just like MT, ID, and WY had to do.

 

[tjones]

Deja vu all over again. This is all the same stuff from a decades ago when ID and MT were getting wolves delisted.

Folks didn’t get minimum population numbers versus total population back then and don’t get it today.

By posts from back then MT, WY, ID elk, deer, pets and kids were supposed to be extinct by now.

 

[BuzzH]

No desire to buzz.

They have a name for folks who aren't part of the solution...the problem.

 

[rjthehunter]

Dense...doesn't even begin to describe that post.

If wolves have eaten all the elk, and there's been "20 years of declining elk herd" why is Montana is about to offer each hunter 3 elk tags, why Wyoming has been offering 3 tags per hunter for the last 7-8 years.

In 1994, it was 1 elk per hunter in both states...doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out what's wrong with your "picture".

Number of tags doesn't alwaus dictate populations. We could shoot unlimited deer around here this year, doesn't mean there's a bunch of them. It means cwd is here and they want a larger sample. If memory serves, isn't Wyoming the state with the worst CWD in it?

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

They have a name for folks who aren't part of the solution...the problem.

If I'm not gonna eat it buzz I dont kill it