Wolves

[JAR JAR]

"Wolves belong in wilderness areas. Most of Northern WI isn't really a wilderness area."

What kind of statement is this? You must not leave the bright lights of the city much because the last time I checked almost everything north of Eau Claire is "wilderness".

Not one person on this forum is going to win on this topic. I'm not a wolf lover by any means but there is absolutly nothing anyone can do about them and if you happen to shoot and kill one you had better hope that you get it off your property because if it has a implanted transmitter on it you are screwed.

Also we all talk about the big bad wolf but what about the coyote. There are probably more coyotes in this state than there are deer (Just a thought). The coyotes do more damage to livestock and domesticated animals and the deer than the wolfs but do you hear everyone going after the wiley coyote, no!,but you do hear of them going after the big bad wolf why is that?

Just my two cents

Jar Jar

[nolte]

Jim

I think you would be the only hound guy I know that actually likes wolves.

This is the thing that bothers me. In 1990 there were approximately 50 wolves in WI, now not even 15 years later there is an estimated 350. The number of actual wolves could be much higher. The DNR is in the process of delisting them to threatened. This has been going on since 2002. Also the DNR has no clue or number on how many live on Indian Reservation lands because they can't montior there. In there studies they have set a population goal of 350 wolves in the state. Ok we're over that now with no way to control the increase. This means that the habitat that is suitable for wolves to live in with minimal conflicts is used up and they will expand their range to areas with more conflicts. Also the DNR does not get rid of problem wolves. They only relocate them so they can cause problems elsewhere. The DNR sets aside 36,000 a year for depredation losses but last year they spent 75,000. So what does that tell you about their ability to judge wolves impact.

Windy, here is the problem with your reasoning. You are compairing Grizzlies or Brown Bear in AK to Wolves in WI. Grizzlies were never removed from AK. Wolves were removed from WI and the people got used to not having them around. Now they are back in the same area with more people. This is going to create conflicts no matter what way you look at it. So now you have the choice to promote an animal that brings in zero revenue to the state or focus your efforts on different animals. It is easy to see the economical choice. Many of the people that hunt in areas that are thick with wolves are going other areas because of better opportunities and not having to deal with wolf encounters.

I don't hate wolves, they are an incredible animal. But WI does not have the habitat to support a large number of them. I don't want every wolf shot but I do believe that the DNR better get a handle on them before more severe situations happen and be able to compensate individuals for the losses sustained by wolves. In the wolf's case their adaptability is what gets them in trouble, especially since their only predator is US and we can't do anything about it.

[nolte]

Jar Jar

"You must not leave the bright lights of the city much because the last time I checked almost everything north of Eau Claire is "wilderness"."

I have been called a lot of things before but never this one. Do you honestly believe your statement above. I bet there are very limited areas in WI where you can't stand in one spot and get to a house or multiple houses,lake cabins or hunting shack in 5 miles.

A wilderness area to me would have a lot less people in it. Highway 72 up to Baudette Mn and that area is a lot more wilderness than Superhighway 8 which cuts across WI north of Eau Claire.

About coyotes, yes the do damage and I hunt them whenever we have snow. But they don't have the ability to greatly reduce game in an area and do not pose a significant threat to people or dogs.

[windycity]

Anyone who has walked into Bear country in Alaska vs. walking into most back country areas in the lower 48 can tell you that there is a striking difference due entirely to the possibility of a bear encounter. Its nothing to be feared, but there is a definite heightened awareness and a need to prepare and operate differently. I would offer that the presence of bears actually makes the people entering bear country more informed, aware, and skillful sportsmen than people who don't have to consider these things when they go fishing or hunting. My previous post was a comment on value and not a comparison between bears in AK and wolves in WI. The risks and possibilities add alot of value to some people's experience. The presence of wolves should have the same effect if people are opened minded. I too am an advocate of management because while there are problems associated with wolves, there is also definite value. Management is necessary if you concede that nothing stays the same and adaptibility is a good thing (for humans and wolves). I too live in wolf country and I don't want the desires of the people who have the "Whack any wolf that I see" and the "its all about me and filling my freezer" attitudes taking precedence over my desires and the things I think are valuable.

[Xplorer]

If any of you believe that the only place there are going to be wolves is in "wilderness areas", you are a bit misguided. Do you consider the city of Duluth or Superior to be wilderness? Of course not, but each has wolves within the city limits and has for awhile(ive seen the Pokegama pair on the St Louis ice several times just up river from the Bong bridge) and the area west of Spirit Mtn over towards Gary/New duluth has wolves. They are there because of all the protected deer that live there, easy chow. A friends next door neighbor had his dog cornered twice in his backyard by wolves, about 300 yards from Interstate 35.

In MN there are 200-250 problem wolves terminated each year by authorities, or more than half as many as the entire state of WI has total. Why is it that those 400 or so (the DNR has a number count at the end of last winter for both on and off reservation populations on their HSOforum i believe. they can do airial surveys on res lands) cause so much more perceived trouble than their 2500 "brothers and sisters" do in MN??

Maybe if the state stopped compensating bear hunters at up to $2500 per dog they would meet budget estimates, again, if you play you pay. Its not like the DNR reintroduced the species like they did in Yellowstone, the wolves migrated to better hunting grounds from MN. And it is federal law that has kept them from some population control measures. Just seems that you are blaming the DNR for something that has an awful lot of different strings attached to it.

I just dont think that it is reasonable to think that there wont be wolves in the northern third of WI anymore. You may remove a wolf from an area via the SSS method, but if there is good habitat/prey, another will fill the void in a short time as disbursal takes place naturally.

And yes, anywhere in wolf county you go you will see the wolves run the trails, thats where the deer are too. If I wanted to show someone what wolf tracks look like, the first place i would take them is to the northshore snowmobile trail just outside of duluth first thing on a winter morning, it is usually loaded with tracks.

It will be very interesting to see what WI comes up with once the federal delisting process is completed.

If its any consolation, i think that WI's post-delisting plan is more aggressive (read lethal controls/public hunting) in controling wolves than MN's plan (at least that's what i got out of it from minimal comparison)

[upnorth]

The attitudes of some of the people here are the kind of thing that has kept the wolves from being delisted by the Feds. Keep it up and they will never come off the protected list. I hope that those of you that are threatening to shoot wolves are not that stupid to actually break the law, and if you are I hope you get caught.

For the most part wolves are like most creatures, they don't want to work too hard for their food. They go after the sick, the weak and the old. They are the ones that clean up the dead ones afer a hard winter, they are actually keeping the herd healthy. They sure as hell ain't gonna go after a healthy 8 point buck, the would probably die in the process and they just ain't that stupid.

[nolte]

Xplorer

You may have misunderstood what I said about wolves and wilderness. Wolves belong in s wilderness area, not in areas where they come in direct contact with numerous people and dwellings. There is no doubt that wolves have moved into a closer proximity to towns.

I don't agree with your pay to play statement. It is easy to say that when it probably won't effect you. I have a hard time not using an area for the hunting sports I enjoy just because wolves moved in. Especially since they weren't there before and I or the people that hunt the same area get no added value from the wolves being there. I'm sure that the views would be different if someones prized pointer or lab was backed and killed. But since it's only some smelly old hounds, who cares right?

[Surface Tension]

We in Northern Mn. have already gone though what you folks are experiencing. We're really not expecting anything to change till wolves show up in St Paul. I agree with Tom, we do live in the wolves back yard. I think we should do everything possible to coexist with them. My early sitings of wolves were just a glimpse as they fled at my site. This wasn't long after the bounties were taken off the wolves. Later the frequency of siting went up a bit as their numbers grew but I noticed something different. They've lost some of the fear. Instead of high tailing it when encountered they showed no urgency to leave but did so shyly. Its not increased numbers that concerns me, its that loss of fear for humans our wolves have developed. Wolves are smart, a controlled and limited hunt would bring back the natural balance of human and wolf. I don't fear wolves but I do know that they'd not have any qualms about snatching a dog out of my yard. My yard is my territory, in a properly balanced human - wolf relationship my yard should be the last place a wolf would feel save much less look for a meal.

Wolves kill wolves that enter their territory, so if a hound is in their territory they're only doing what they do to ensure their survival. How can you fault the wolf for that. Would it be any different if the bear that those hounds are mauling decided it had enough and started to swat a few hounds around? Like Xplorer said pay if you play.

I've heard the stories of wolves circling someone while out hunting too. I think a bit of fear and the human imagination is at play here.

I lived in the Alaskan bush for 3 summers smack dab in the middle of Griz country. At night before bed I'd read some from a book called "Bear Attacks" or something like that.

Sure my imagination got me going a bit, but I lived in a canvas wall tent.

Wolves hurting the deer population in WI, your going to need more then 250 to make a dent in that deer population. Sure they might run deer off a 40 for the day but the deer will come back.

[Browning83]

Nolte---you are right about this sounding like Chad....but I am wondering who you are...I have a good idea but a first name would be great. I totally agree with your views on the wolf issue. Give me a post back or maybe a call.

[nolte]

Chad, This is Nick, I drove you around on your Birthday. Sounds like you shot a real toad this weekend. Shoot me an email with the pic. [email protected]

[Xplorer]

Nolte,

I think that i get what your meaning, i just think that the notion of only finding wolves in wilderness areas isn't valid anymore. I almost lost a springer to 2 wolves that had her dead to rights while bird hunting. All i had was 3 loads of #6's in my shotgun and they were moving quickly to close the 20 yards between them and her. I screamed which made them freeze, then ran directly at them with my gun waving (prob not too smart) Luckily they retreated and ran out onto a frozen swamp, stopping about 75 yards out. My mutt didnt even know how close she came (she was looking backward at me being an [commercial-or-naughty-word] and never saw them) When i got up to her i carried her by the collar for probably 50 yards (adrenaline) up the trial before sprinting with her all the way back to my truck. All this occured about 4 miles from my home just outside Duluth 12 years ago. I would have never considered that i should have been compensated if they would have gotten her. And yes, i went back and hunted the area after that with her many times.

[Gustafson]

I guess they are here to stay. I don't agree that they actually help deer hunting, but I do understand they take out sick or weak animals. I ask what happens when they take all the weak or sick out? I have seen first hand that they don't just move on. They may have a little trouble getting healthy deer but they do. What happens when hunters harvest goes down and a lot of it is due to wolves taking there own chunk? While I don't agree they all need to be killed, the DNR or whoever, needs to pony up and get something set so they can control them. No matter what they say they don't have a close estimate to their population numbers. Another thing is hunting dogs. I think you should have every right to defend your dog. I know it is in the nature of the wolf to attack another dog, but its not just a dog its YOUR dog. You can legally defend yourself if attacked and it should be the same for your dog. On another note, my Dad was hunting in Canada a few years back and they seem to think that MN can have all their wolves. It doesn't help their hunting. Just my opinion but it isn't 1875 anymore and as we know things can't always be as they once were.

[MuskyBrian]

I hope every one of you who threatens to shoot a wolf gets caught, busted, and has fines running straight out of your backside. Listening to some of your "logic", it really is little wonder why fishing in Wisconsin has taken a complete nosedive.If you are going to tell me you can't find a deer in Wisconsin, you need to look in the mirror at your own hunting techniques. Just like in fishing, everything and everyone else is always to blame but one thing...YOURSELF. "I can't catch any walleyes now, it must be the growing musky population!" Now it's I can't find any deer because of Wolves. GIVE ME A BREAK!

I do NOT respect those who break laws, fishing or hunting.

Wolves are one of MANY animals who have encounters with pets on property. Maybe we should go and blast everything that lives that may pose a threat? We can have just have deer running around and go into the woods knowing we are safe!

Laws and regulations are in place for a reason. If the DNR and whoever else says don't do it, then maybe they have a good reason why. Listening to uneducated people give their logic for going against the law in fishing/hunting and anything else involving the outdoors makes me sick.

As for the guy who gives his story about being circled by wolves, I think there are many of us here who have had encounters with nature. I have been circled by bears on numerous encounters up in Canada. Guess what? I lived to tell about it and so did you. Maybe they were just checking you out? If they wanted to take you down, they would have.

------If i offended anyone, I am sorry

[nolte]

MuskeyBrian

Hold the sass please. So far in this thread I've been called a city slicker, ignorant, and now uneducated.

I think the real education about this issue comes from experience. I spend roughly every weekend from the end of June until the snow melts hunting in these areas,plus the vacation days I take. And I talk regularly to 30 to 40 other people that do the same thing and get laid off in the winter. Plus many loggers that spend more time out in the woods than that. These aren't your typical wannabee outdoorsman. They see a lot of the same things that I do and have similiar experiences. So I trust a lot of their opinions more than the wolf biologist that drives around with the telemetry antenna on their truck.

The wolves typical behavior is changing in WI. They can reduce a deer herd size in smaller areas. I don't want to give up an area I enjoy hunting because the wolves thinned em out. You need to remember the major deer population is in the southern part of the state, which is without very many wolves.

Someone also said something earlier about what if the bear starts to maul dogs. This happens occaisionally and it is part of it. Some dogs do die from it. I have no problem with this. But wolves that aren't being targetted or provoked will seek out and kill your dogs. I have some pics of this but feel they are to graphic to include in here. Here is a link in case you would like to see first hand what they can do.

http://www.exit201.com/shadetree/showthread.php?t=4804&page=2 scroll down to post "41

I don't know about you but If I saw a wolf doing this to my dog, I would have a really hard time saying "oh well I guess its just part of it" Dogs are no match for a wolf. A wolf will make make short order of any dog you put up against it. Even with bull mastifs, pits,los dogos, and irish wolfhounds, it is lights out for dog. Especially if there is a pack.

No one on here claims to be shooting every wolf they see. Most just want to establish some sort of a control measure in case they or their dogs are in danger. And possibly a season to thin down the number of wolves. We don't really have much else of a choice cause they are already here.

Also the reason fishing is in a downward spiral is more to do with the poor spawning habitat, increased overall pressure, zero slot, and poorer water quality. You can't catch them if you they can't grow.

[Browning83]

I just love how all these people are coming up with these "facts" on how wolves are not hurting anything. Are these "facts" coming from personal experiences or from what they hear. And most people in here don't want to completly wipe out all the wolves....but to maintain a healthy population. And when a hound is killed by a bear, the bear is in self-defense and is not hunting down the dog. I have never seen a bear stalk a hound down and kill it but I have seen wolves pursue a hound that is in a chase. Also I'd like to know the story behind the numerous times a pack of bears had circled "musky" in canada....just interested.

Also Nick did you get that pic of my buck?

[nolte]

Chad

I got your email but the pic didn't work. That ok though cause your cousin sent me one too. Hope you guys get a few more for the pole. Later.

[MuskyBrian]

"If I wasn't worried about going to jail or losing my hunting/fishing priveleges, I would whack everyone I see."

" I personally think all wolves should be shot"

Some of your points regarding maintaining the population due to human interference are valid and understandeable, and frankly I agree with some of it. The 2 examples I listed above are completely ridiculous, and if you call yourself a sportsman I think you need to look the definition up in a dictionary because YOU AREN'T.

I hunt, I fish, and I'm certainly not a member of PETA. But someday I want my grandchildren to be able to experience the wild like I have. "Sorry kids, there's no wolves left, they interfered with bear hound hunting."

Are you guys listening to what you are saying??????

[nolte]

The quotes said that they wanted them all gone, not that they were doing it. So I think to chastise them is a little hasty.

One thing I would like to point out. No one here has a clue what life was like in WI when there were actually wolves around. The numbers now are as high as they have been since the 1860s. So its not like they were here and wrongly exterminated, seen as such an immense value and then thoughtfully reintroduced by the WI DNR to enrich our outdoor experience. They migrated over on their own. In the times when wolves did well in WI there were many other animals for them to prey on. There were Caribou, Bison, Elk, and Moose. All of which are almost totally eliminated from our state. (Although I did see a bull moose this summer). So for wolves to survive they have to now focus their efforts on other animals. If we get a deep snow and the deer need to yard up it isn't going to be very pretty.

Also if you think your kids or grand kids are going to see the wild like you were able to you are sadly mistaken. I wish it wasn't true and will do everything I can to not make it worse, But it is going to change and I fear not for the better. I can look at many places where I used to be able to go and hunt, or fish and see cabins and posted signs all over. If you can't see this you aren't hunting and fishing in same WI that I have been able to enjoy.

One thing we need to do for all the people that enjoy our outdoor sports is to support each other. Because little by little the things we enjoy are being taken away. If you can't see or hear this you are definately turning a blind eye and a deaf ear. So instead of jumping on hound guys or deer huntes for not wanting wolves around, listen to them and their experiences. Then make your decisions, but please don't blindly say things like "Sorry kids, there's no wolves left, they interfered with bear hound hunting." cause it is obvious you have no idea about this group.

I guarantee MuskyBrian you would have a totally differenent attitude if something was attacking the population and your experience of chasing old Esox Masquinongy.

[Xplorer]

nolte,

I hope you wernt referring to my postings on here, debate is a good thing and this issue is tough to keep civil on any level, due to the extreme views it brings to the table (just look at some other WI board discussions, wow). Everything from never touch/interfere with a wolf anytime, to bring back the bounty on them.

I think these wolf issues are gonna be on the forefront sooner rather than later, and compromises will need to be found.

I have seen the photos of the bear dogs and wouldnt wish that on any animal, much less my own pet/hunting dog. The problem is that if the only requirement for individuals to take lethal measures against a wolf, are that they are threatening to harm a pet/dog, you know (and the DNR knows) that there will be wolfs killed unjustified because the person doesnt belive that any wolfs should be in their area. You'd see wolf's whacked all hunting season long under the guise of protection. I dont think that you will ever see WI with more than a rule stating that you may take lethal measures against a wolf that is attacking your pets/livestock on your own personal property . I think that any lethal measures on public land will end up being state managed.

The MNDNR just released their latest (03/04 winter) population estimate/study for MN last weekand it is at 3020, tho the 90% confidence level is anywhere from 2300 to 3700 wolves. The 97-98 estimate was 2450. The interesting thing is that they estimate the total wolf range didnt change much, there are just more wolves in the same area. The DNR answer is that there is alot more deer now than in 97-98, and pack territories got smaller since they dont need to travel as far for food. 485 wolf packs estimated in MN.

I think that ST is correct in saying there is has been a change in the wolfs "attitude" towards humans. They are adapting to humans, and i think have lost some of their inherent fear due in part to much more frequent human contact (and no consequences to that contact). They are habitating areas that they wernt "supposed" to occupy when recovery plans were developed years ago. I belive that MN's initial recovery plan said the state goal was about 1250 wolves, which has now been exceeded by about 240%. What will MN do to "control" the population?

Everyone here is entitled to their opinion on this (above are some of mine), i dont see any right or wrong answers. All our experiences/views shape what we think needs to be done. We can agree to disagree and still share information. The entire MN distribution report is on their HSOforum, released 11-18.

Where the balance between all interested parties ends up, will be on the table in the next couple of years. I dont envy either states DNR office in this one.

[nolte]

Xplorer

You said it very well. I agree with a lot of what you said. My biggest concern is exactly like you said, the poplulations for wolves is higher than targeted goals. With these higher numbers it creates situations where wolves will become more and more of a problem. The dnr in both states has been very poor in figuring out what to do with these increasing numbers. It started out as a success reintroducion story for them(which they really had nothing to do with) to a "Hey I guess theres a lot of them what do we do now" situation. I just hope it doesn't turn in to "Holy dump we've got a problem". I guess only time will tell.

[Nuclear Fishin]

I'd like to point out that many people do actually shoot wolves without hesitation. There is a large contingent of so called "sportsman" who are not shy about there intentions. There are some on this thread who seem to fit into that group as well.

My comments about "ignorance" and others who mentioned "undeducated" are not welcome here nuclear!!!, Nolte and the others who take a more moderate stance on this issue. I agree with much of what you guys have said about management.

As for the wolf-whackers out there, I'm not sure if you guys will listen to reason but I'd like to say that studies have shown that when wolves are eradicated from an area coyotes take over the void left by them. When coyotes are more numerous the result is that smaller game such as grouse, fur bearers, etc. are actually depleted. So for people who like to hunt grouse or like to trap, when you take the wolves out of an area, you are actually hurting those two activities.

[muskybuck]

I hunt deer up by Clam Lake, WI and the last couple of years I have noticed wolf tracks in the snow. This year was the worst year we have had up there. Three hunters, six days, no deer. I saw one deer, a doe crossed the road in front of me while I was walking back to the tralier. I hunted for many years (20) up by International Falls and know what it is like to hunt deer where there are wolves. Very few deer available to the hunters. Human hunters that is. I have hunted north of Duluth and noticed that the deer would dissapear for many days after the wolves would sweep through an area. You would see the wolf tracks in the snow where they worked a swamp over and every 20 feet or so of that swamp was crisscrossed with wolf tracks. You could always find the kill by listening to the Ravens and follow the noise and find the carcass. You guys that hunt the North land where the wolves are know that where there are wolves the human deer hunting goes down hill and I mean way downhill. Then to top it off the DNR had an earn a buck system going on in that (clam lake) area. I think the insurance companies are going to very happy with the results of the wolves and the DNR teaming up to drastically reduce the herd. I hope the DNR leaves it up to the wolves next year and does not help them out.