Wisconsin proposes a 300 quota on wolf tags
- Thread starter cheeser
- Start date
Nick87
Well-known member
Wow, they must figure that the population estimate isnt quite accurate.
Jorgy
Well-known member
Our wolf hunt sure is a fun topic with absolute polar opposites depending who you talk to. (general statement alert) - talk to people down south (Madison/Milwakee urban) and there are only 100 wolves left in the state and they are going to be wiped out. Talk to someone who lives above hwy 8, you should be unlimited tags and it still wouldn't be enough to help the deer herd.
It's as sad as politics and vaccines.
It's as sad as politics and vaccines.
maxracx
Well-known member
I can speak as someone who lives smack dab in the middle part of the state and our DNR folks down in Madison down have a clue on the current predator population in this state. Wolves, bear and bobcats populations are far higher than anyone knows. I travel to all corners of the state and from my travels I can tell you these overpopulated species are expanding and moving south at an alarming rate. Wolves have been seen as far south as Madison. Bears and bobcat populations are currently extending south down along the WI river drainage to and along the Mississippi River. The DNR is not interest in listening to local reports. 10s of thousands of wildlife cameras all across the landscape have provided plenty of proof.
one ate E grain
Active member
I read once that to maintain a stable wolf population below the maximum one would need to cull as high as 30% and to reduce populations would require removing 30% to 50% per year. I doubt Wisconsin will ever achieve near those numbers.
For good scientific reading on wolves I highly recommend the papers of David Mech archived at the International Wolf Center. https://wolf.org/wolf-info/basic-wolf-info/in-depth-resources/scientific-publications/ Mech is a lifelong mink trapper. I went looking for the paper I'd read but every time I opened an article they were such good reading I forgot what I was looking for and got sidetracked.
Mech like Geist and Leopold is a good writer, and his scientific papers are very readable.
For good scientific reading on wolves I highly recommend the papers of David Mech archived at the International Wolf Center. https://wolf.org/wolf-info/basic-wolf-info/in-depth-resources/scientific-publications/ Mech is a lifelong mink trapper. I went looking for the paper I'd read but every time I opened an article they were such good reading I forgot what I was looking for and got sidetracked.
Mech like Geist and Leopold is a good writer, and his scientific papers are very readable.
I don't really understand why these species repopulating their native range would be considered alarming. Pretty cool, actually, if you ask me.
Unless you hunt deer, run livestock, or have dogs outside. It's not the presence, it's the quantity.
I agree, I love having wolves, bobcats and bears in Wisconsin!
Unfortunately though, it seems as if the wolf population is a bit out of control at the moment and could use reduction (quite a bit IMO). Doesn’t mean they don’t belong here, just maybe not so many- population is way over the initial objective of 350.
Last edited:
Where I live it’s not the repopulating people dislike it’s the over population of wolves. I like having them but they need to be aggressively controlled or they get out of hand quickly. They are pretty amazing predators which also makes them difficult to control. Most people not living around wolves have no idea what it takes to just keep their numbers even. If you like deer and elk you should support liberal seasons in my opinion
How can I say they get out of hand quickly when it’s taken them like 45 years to go from 0 to 1000?
There’s a clear increase but it’s hardly exponential and it starts in 1980. I’m failing to see how things can quickly get “out of control”, especially when, well… getting them “under control” doesn’t seem to be especially difficult. Maybe politically it is.
I hear what you’re saying. What gives me a bit of pause is the way the 2020 season went down- 218 killed in just four days.
To me, that means one of two things are true: either Wisconson wolf hunters are incredibly efficient killers, or the WDNR 2020 population of just over 1000 was probably undershot by quite a bit.
As I said, I am NOT a “kill all the wolves!” guy at all- I’m happy they are here. Also happy we have a hunting season for them.
To me, that means one of two things are true: either Wisconson wolf hunters are incredibly efficient killers, or the WDNR 2020 population of just over 1000 was probably undershot by quite a bit.
As I said, I am NOT a “kill all the wolves!” guy at all- I’m happy they are here. Also happy we have a hunting season for them.
And yes to your last point- it has proven to be very difficult to manage politically (especially as it relates to tribal involvement).
I was talking about Idaho- I don’t know about Wisconsin except they are way over what I understand their objective to be . In Idaho we have taken 300-400 each year trapping and hunting with looong seasons. even year around wolf hunting on private. With that the population was still growing most years and were somewhat stable last 2 years according to idfg. It didn’t take long to go from a few planted in Idaho in 1995 to way above the “goal” that was set originally. Have you hunted or trapped wolves? Do that a couple times and after you are successful report back how easy they are to control. Regardless of how long it took Wisconsin wolves to get here shouldn’t matter if they are way overpopulated. It’s like compound interest
30 percent of 300 wolves is 90 new wolves. 30 percent of 1500 wolves is 450 new wolves yearly. That is how they get out of hand quickly. Go hunt some wolves so you can understand how easy they are to control. There are multiple otc tags you can buy and they are CHEAP and plentiful. Quit wasting your money trying to draw a mediocre elk tag and buy cheap wolf tags and actually help the elk out.
Nick87
Well-known member
What he said^^^ and if anyone thinks that the reported 218 is all that was taken you've really got your head in the sand.
This to me rings true. Wolves are not easy to hunt, the counts have to be low. I like having wolves also. Anywhere you have recovered wolf populations you need pretty aggressive seasons. I have successfully taken wolves but in my experience one of the hardest animals to consistently kill. These wolf threads are exhausting. Wolf lovers should be happy we have wolves way above the agreed on recovery numbers in many western states and obviously Wisconsin. Hunters who appreciate elk and deer should be happy because we are getting longer seasons, quotas, tags and methods to take more wolves. Yet we argue because every time additional methods of take or limits are announced somebody freaks out and says the fish and game is screwing up. The sky is falling! Idaho is going to get sued! Having wolves is good, controlling their numbers is better and actually getting them close to original recovery numbers is great!! No matter what they do with seasons ,short of poison , wolves aren’t ever going away. Nrhunter Are you scared for the Wisconsin wolf population? I mean what’s the point?
shines@times
Well-known member
I'm not actually weighing in on the wolf in WI issue itself, as I have not been followying the topic. However, I really do want to point out what should be a patently obvious truth that must be considered when managing any wildlife species, especially interacting populations of predators and prey, in our modern world. And that is "native range" does not equate with native habitat.
Randy had a popular comment from his Sportsman Channel days. I believe he was quoted here once and maybe, if I have enough care, I'll see about digging it up.
The basics revolved around the open range of wolves pre civilization and since the civilization boom / encroached upon both ungulate and wolves, wolves are not capable of self management as during the pre civilization boom.
Edit: sheesh enough search words and let the search engine do its magic. First try;
"Some dream that wolves and prey will find some perfect balance. That may have been possible 400 years ago over large uninterrupted landscapes. With a half billion people living on this continent, fracturing elk and deer habitat, changing landscapes with our presence, such balance is a nice thought, but impractical. Until all 500 million of us agree to pack our bags and leave this continent, restoring it back to its original condition, the days of self-balancing within some socially acceptable population ranges will not happen."
Last edited:
Similar threads
