More deer killed by wolves than hunters in some Wisconsin counties

[Ben Lamb]

What WI needs is a good ol (D) Senator like Tester and a commie wildlife advocate like Lamb to get their wolves delisted. Worked in MT and ID. Maybe we should loan them out.

That Max Baucus gets no credit here is a shame. He helped pave that path with Harry Reid too. There were a ton of folks who did heavy lifting here, yourself & RCFWA especially, Tony.

 

[Fsmith]

What WI needs is a good ol (D) Senator like Tester and a commie wildlife advocate like Lamb to get their wolves delisted. Worked in MT and ID. Maybe we should loan them out.

Funny thing if I remember correctly the wolf hunt in the Great Lakes states of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan was euthanized by a Judge in Chicago. Decision was based on political gains and not science. Back to the OP I grew up in Florence and Forest counties. It was once excellent whitetail hunting on my family’s farm. It’s all come to a screeching halt. Numerous reasons for that. Piss poor management at the state level via “CWD prevention”’ on 100 acre corn crop each fall the USDA would trap and transport anywhere from 25-40 black bears and it will take 10-12 years to draw a tag there. A few tough winters. Last but not least the wolf. A friend harvested a wolf during the inaugural season. I left the state in 2014. Prior to that I’d released wolves from footholds, this was in the early stages of there presence. Since another friend that logs in forest county frequently sees wolf tracks along with other sign. He has video of them on numerous occasions and comes along the kill sites regularly. So the wolf isn’t the only problem, without a doubt a large contributor.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Funny thing if I remember correctly the wolf hunt in the Great Lakes states of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan was euthanized by a Judge in Chicago. Decision was based on political gains and not science.

Not really. The ruling was based on the new interpretation of delisting Distinct Population Segments rather than entire populations within historic range. It's a bad reading of the ESA delisting criteria, in my opinion, but it's not a political calculation, it's a ruling based on precedent set in the west on delisting portions of the DPS (leaving Wyoming out the delisting rule in 2009). If it gets to the Supreme Court, I'm not sure how they'd rule, but it upends the promises made to states & their citizens on delisting.

I bet releasing those woofs was an adventure!

 

[Fsmith]

I bet releasing those woofs was an adventure!
[/QUOTE]
Occasions I’ll never forget. A person doesn’t really realize how much tooth they have until the only thing separating you from them is a half sheet of plywood.

 

[huronmtns]

And you have to be the dominant creature on both sides of the plywood for the release to go smoothly.

 

[Twolftg]

Wolves need to be managed. Like I've said how many times. Read the first line of the post you quoted. Not sure if I can be any more clear. I don't recall calling for extermination of the species.
Read what I wrote, not what you want to hear. There's room for them, just not a lot of room.

Yeah you said they need to be managed and then followed it up with this. "That being said, is there a place for them in the midwest? In my opinion, no". That is what you wrote. How am I hearing what I want?

 

[Sytes]

Many hunters in areas where wolf populations are a factor would prefer wolves to have the smallest presence possible.

Many understand wolves are here to stay whether liked or not. It's been a long fight to get where we are thus the heavy and constant push for management of their #'s and frustrations shared at fwp meetings regarding wolves... Come to MT FWP R1 meetings if you want a taste of this topic.

 

[rjthehunter]

Yeah you said they need to be managed and then followed it up with this. "That being said, is there a place for them in the midwest? In my opinion, no". That is what you wrote. How am I hearing what I want?

You heard my opinion. After I stated a fact, being that they need to be managed. Not sure how you're not connecting the dots here... Obviously they are here, that won't change now. But their numbers need to be managed.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at, do you want wolves to continue to be unmanaged?

 

[BuzzH]

Many hunters in areas where wolf populations are a factor would prefer wolves to have the smallest presence possible.

Many understand wolves are here to stay whether liked or not. It's been a long fight to get where we are thus the heavy and constant push for management of their #'s and frustrations shared at fwp meetings regarding wolves... Come to MT FWP R1 meetings if you want a taste of this topic.

The funny part about those region 1 meetings is the same guys that want every wolf dead, wont say a word about the colossal mistakes made by the FWP or the impact their hunting and poaching has on region 1. Lets get one thing straight, that country is full of the strangest people that live in Montana. White nationalists, freemen, you name it...they don't care about legal hunting. I worked in that country for a number of years for the FS...cant tell you how any times I found white supremacy propaganda between the windshield and windshield wipers. Not saying that there weren't good folks up that way, but there's a pretty big sub-culture of people up there that are kooks.

Remember when they opened up youth hunts for cow elk in region one? Supposedly the toughest elk country in Montana according to people up that way...yet 687 youth hunters between 12-15 years old killed cows?

There was a damn reliable source that used to post on this board, that I haven't seen for a while, who was part of the citizens advisory council and he said killing cow elk on private in 132 was the final straw.

Lions are also typically ignored even though 2 reliable and recent studies (Bitterroot and Idaho) that clearly show lions are the #1 predator on calf elk.

There's also the fact that even as elk and deer herds circle the toilet in parts of MT, the FWP changes nothing.

So, I say let those radical locals that show up carry on all they want about wolves, guys that never see a wolf, never buy a tag, and never spend an ounce of effort trying to help themselves.. It show's their ignorance of all things game management. I have no sympathy toward people too stupid and lazy to help themselves.

I also wouldn't suffer their bullchit at meetings either...

 

[NR_Hunter]

You heard my opinion. After I stated a fact, being that they need to be managed. Not sure how you're not connecting the dots here... Obviously they are here, that won't change now. But their numbers need to be managed.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at, do you want wolves to continue to be unmanaged?

Saying wolves need to be managed isn’t a fact...

It could be a fact that certain management needs to be done to meet YOUR social desires, but that doesn’t make it a fact that it NEEDS to be done.

Also, I too am a bit perplexed as to what this statement means: "That being said, is there a place for them in the midwest? In my opinion, no"

 

[Sytes]

Buzz,
The "smoke a pack a day", type have been involved in the conversations about our mismanaged elk populations in every meeting HT'ers I've enjoyed meeting in R1 have attended. While their focus is very critical on wolves as a factor for our poor elk #'s - they do have reason to base their complaints/frustrations... Far too often, even for the majority of us who are not with the, "smoke a pack a day" few - we hear generic, typical State responses to the concerns shared.
Diane, IMO, has been a value added to our corner of MT though even she is restricted to the bureaucratic hog tied, spew generic responses and concludes comments such as, "we understand your concerns..." bs. I've enjoyed the random occasional conversations with her. Interesting enough, she was flat out opposed to the forced re-introduction of wolves into Idaho and Yellowstone... Who-da-thunk, eh?
Your thoughts on our bull crap management of elk in R1 is pretty spot on. I don't say that as a means to endorse your opinion, I merely say that in agreement. The gross mismanagement of open season vs limited tags, cow tag crud, etc in an area of challenged elk numbers has been rough for a hell of a long time.
This is the problem many became overly frustrated with - lions ARE and have been managed for hunting by MT. Black bears ARE and have been managed for hunting by MT. On the other hand, Wolves have been completely off limits from managed hunting / trapping since their return in the late '70's from State management (similar to WI) up until '11(?).
For the longest time wolf #'s continued to increase with State hands tied behind our back. Now? We deal with an excessive wolf population, State generic empathy about wolf activity in NW MT that also adds to the challenged elk issues R1 faces.

Just for thought - not directed at Buzz.
All the years of MT's unmanaged wolf population due to ESA restrictions in excess wolves continued to grow. Without a war and peace novel covering every aspect, MT has taken 150-250 wolves each year between trapping and hunting. These harvested wolf numbers were off limits up until '11(?)... yet, we follow "minimal count managed" (for ESA sake) an estimate we have 900 wolves total in MT??? That... is bullshit and a significant issue shared at our meetings.
The complaints about wiping them out by a few people, Toby types (Region 2) is a reaction to the past ESA off limits, then progressed into State mismanaged, and now continued uncontrolled wolf population is a pisser to compound the issue of the piss poor management of our elk.

I feel for Colorado... Boyd would be a good spokesperson for opposition to forced re-introduction into your state.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,
The "smoke a pack a day", type have been involved in the conversations about our mismanaged elk populations in every meeting HT'ers I've enjoyed meeting in R1 have attended. While their focus is very critical on wolves as a factor for our poor elk #'s - they do have reason to base their complaints/frustrations... Far too often, even for the majority of us who are not with the, "smoke a pack a day" few - we hear generic, typical State responses to the concerns shared.
Diane, IMO, has been a value added to our corner of MT though even she is restricted to the bureaucratic hog tied, spew generic responses and concludes comments such as, "we understand your concerns..." bs. I've enjoyed the random occasional conversations with her. Interesting enough, she was flat out opposed to the forced re-introduction of wolves into Idaho and Yellowstone... Who-da-thunk, eh?
Your thoughts on our bull crap management of elk in R1 is pretty spot on. I don't say that as a means to endorse your opinion, I merely say that in agreement. The gross mismanagement of open season vs limited tags, cow tag crud, etc in an area of challenged elk numbers has been rough for a hell of a long time.
This is the problem many became overly frustrated with - lions ARE and have been managed for hunting by MT. Black bears ARE and have been managed for hunting by MT. On the other hand, Wolves have been completely off limits from managed hunting / trapping since their return in the late '70's from State management (similar to WI) up until '11(?).
For the longest time wolf #'s continued to increase with State hands tied behind our back. Now? We deal with an excessive wolf population, State generic empathy about wolf activity in NW MT that also adds to the challenged elk issues R1 faces.

Just for thought - not directed at Buzz.
All the years of MT's unmanaged wolf population due to ESA restrictions in excess wolves continued to grow. Without a war and peace novel covering every aspect, MT has taken 150-250 wolves each year between trapping and hunting. These harvested wolf numbers were off limits up until '11(?)... yet, we follow "minimal count managed" (for ESA sake) an estimate we have 900 wolves total in MT??? That... is bullshit and a significant issue shared at our meetings.
The complaints about wiping them out by a few people, Toby types (Region 2) is a reaction to the past ESA off limits, then progressed into State mismanaged, and now continued uncontrolled wolf population is a pisser to compound the issue of the piss poor management of our elk.

I feel for Colorado... Boyd would be a good spokesperson for opposition to forced re-introduction into your state.

I agree with some of this, but not the premise that MT, ID, and WY had no way to control wolves prior to delisting, that wasn't true then, and its no more true today. Montana had options under 10(j) from the get-go nd its disingenuous for you or the MTFWP to claim their hands were tied. They chose to not even exercise the available tools they have/had in the exact same way they pretty well ignore page 55 of the Elk Management Plan.

The smoke a pack a day crowd wasn't even smart enough to read the plan, let alone apply pressure to the FWP to use the tools available to them.



Also, even though bear and lions have been hunted all along, lion quotas were reduced significantly in the late 90's at the constant high pitched whining from the houndsmen association.

 

[shoots-straight]

Sytes, I'm pulling this off memory, not a link so I could be off some here. BUT, had it not been for the "RELOCATION" effort rather than just the natural Migration of wolves into Montana, Wolves would have been mostly off limits to kill. As Buzz has stated the 10j rule was the one picked for the relocation effort and lead to the killing of over 1600 wolves prior to delisting. Had we not went to the 10j and a "RELOCATION" effort been put in place, there would most likely been far more wolves in Montana today than we do now. Thank the Government for that gift. The Smoke a Pack a day crowd are more in line with Bar Stool biologists in my minds eye.

 

[Sytes]

Thanks for the good conversation on this topic Buzz / S.S.

My understanding, relocation was specific to Yellowstone, WY. Several wolves were taken from Montana pack(s) and Jasper NP, Canada and relocated to Wyoming's portion of YNP. No wolves were re-introduced / relocated into Montana. They were a natural migration from Canada in MT and naturally routed from YNP into the southern part of MT (The first YNP wolf shot as it crossed into MT.). Wolves also relocated / re-introduced into ID. Those also naturally migrated into Western MT.

I need to read up further on 10j - Though I don't believe any wolves were relocated into Montana.

Chronological order reference: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=21&ved=2ahUKEwjJ26SPho7nAhWimOAKHck_BXgQFjAUegQIAxAB&url=http://fwp.mt.gov/fwpDoc.html?id=33062&usg=AOvVaw1qaudIJFi7jLbhuynHkSbu

Edit: I was having trouble opening up 10j from USFWS. I was able to open it via the IDGF website. I now understand what you're referencing with respect to 10j. While no wolves were relocated / re-introduced into Montana, due to the migration of wolves from those areas where they were relocated gave us (MT) the opportunity to handle "problem wolves" and at that... as we learned we had better dot your "i's" and cross your "t's" as it was a royal joke to dispatch a wolf by Federal requirements and then dealing with the harassment by anti-esa activists that targeted individuals involved. Glad we are where we are now and do not look forward to Colorado facing the same hoops, nor Wisconsin, etc.

 

[rjthehunter]

Saying wolves need to be managed isn’t a fact...

It could be a fact that certain management needs to be done to meet YOUR social desires, but that doesn’t make it a fact that it NEEDS to be done.

Also, I too am a bit perplexed as to what this statement means: "That being said, is there a place for them in the midwest? In my opinion, no"

I'm gonna have to get the crayons out pretty soon to explain this...

Wolves need to be managed. In their current state with their populations where they are at and the number of hunters, they need to be managed. Either wolves need to be managed or half the tags need to be issued. There isn't room for both wolves and humans to grow and continue to kill at the rate they are.

Now, say if there weren't wolves in the midwest, I would vote to keep from reintroducing them. Due to the fact that there are more than enough hunters to keep deer populations in check, there is no need for wolves. This is my opinion, hence the statement about there not being room for them in the midwest, in my opinion.

As far as "my" social desires, I'd say my desire is to continue to hunt deer in my home state of Minnesota (I feel like a few people might agree with that statement) . I would appreciate if wolves could be managed so herd populations stop falling. I get your social desire might be different being wolves won't affect bird numbers but as far as big game goes they have an impact. Also note that it looks as though you Coyote hunt? Well wolves will run out or kill Coyotes in their territory.

Now that wolves are here they obviously aren't going anywhere. But they need to be managed if we wish to continue having the good deer populations we've always had.

 

[NoWiser]

Minnesota’s deer herd is not falling because of wolves. You may believe it is, but it’s not. If you can’t kill a deer in MN these days, it’s because you are a lousy hunter or are spending too much time in the bar complaining about wolves and not enough time actually hunting. Not seeing deer where you hunt? Pick up and move. Minnesota has plenty of public land and more than enough deer to go around.

 

[JLS]

The 10j allows for lethal removal of an ESA species due to significant management concerns.

SS is right, the experimental population designation was pretty key in allowing for lethal removal of wolves through 10j during the recovery process.

 

[JLS]

I'm gonna have to get the crayons out pretty soon to explain this...

Wolves need to be managed. In their current state with their populations where they are at and the number of hunters, they need to be managed. Either wolves need to be managed or half the tags need to be issued. There isn't room for both wolves and humans to grow and continue to kill at the rate they are.

Now, say if there weren't wolves in the midwest, I would vote to keep from reintroducing them. Due to the fact that there are more than enough hunters to keep deer populations in check, there is no need for wolves. This is my opinion, hence the statement about there not being room for them in the midwest, in my opinion.

As far as "my" social desires, I'd say my desire is to continue to hunt deer in my home state of Minnesota (I feel like a few people might agree with that statement) . I would appreciate if wolves could be managed so herd populations stop falling. I get your social desire might be different being wolves won't affect bird numbers but as far as big game goes they have an impact. Also note that it looks as though you Coyote hunt? Well wolves will run out or kill Coyotes in their territory.

Now that wolves are here they obviously aren't going anywhere. But they need to be managed if we wish to continue having the good deer populations we've always had.

Maybe you need the crayons. You just stated wolves need to be managed in order to preserve your hunt opportunity. That is an opinion, not a fact. Not that I am advocating, but if we just left nature alone, it would self regulate. The notion it NEEDS us to intervene is simply not true.

 

[Sytes]

Maybe you need the crayons. You just stated wolves need to be managed in order to preserve your hunt opportunity. That is an opinion, not a fact. Not that I am advocating, but if we just left nature alone, it would self regulate. The notion it NEEDS us to intervene is simply not true.

I know Randy is not the truth of all truths however, he commented it's impractical to consider wolves will self regulate. He shared when the landscape was free of the population we have. I agree. Our space is limited. This is not the wild land of the past...

Also regarding 10j, I have tried to locate anything remote to 1600 wolves killed between 10j (2005) and delisting (2011). I see frequent content from NPS that states 1600 wolves existed between WY, MT, and ID. I know this was off the top of his thoughts so maybe misspoken or is there a practical reference to this comment?
That ratio would equal/exceed our current annual harvest.

 

[BrentD]

Maybe you need the crayons. You just stated wolves need to be managed in order to preserve your hunt opportunity. That is an opinion, not a fact. Not that I am advocating, but if we just left nature alone, it would self regulate. The notion it NEEDS us to intervene is simply not true.

Not only is it his opinion, it is also flat dead wrong.