Timber wolf lottery permits?

[lungslicer]

It seems that more and more Minnesota outdoor men and women are seeing more and more wolves in certain areas of the state. I am suggesting that the Minnesota DNR considers opening some of these areas to a Timber wolf lottery drawing. The season could begin and end with the firearms deer season. The lottery could be much the same as the antlerless deer drawings that we used to have. Of course, their would have to be supplements to the rules (no baiting, etc.). This would give offer a oppurtunity for certain people to legally harvest a preset number of wolves from selected zones. What do you guys think?

[tealitup]

Quote:

---

It seems that more and more Minnesota outdoor men and women are seeing more and more wolves in certain areas of the state. I am suggesting that the Minnesota DNR considers opening some of these areas to a Timber wolf lottery drawing. The season could begin and end with the firearms deer season. The lottery could be much the same as the antlerless deer drawings that we used to have. Of course, their would have to be supplements to the rules (no baiting, etc.). This would give offer a oppurtunity for certain people to legally harvest a preset number of wolves from selected zones. What do you guys think?

---

I think the state can do this after 5 years of the species being taken off the endangered or threatened species list. Therefore, I believe the state has to wait another 4 years.

[picksbigwagon]

If this comes to be, I would really love to see the DNR put the permit prices for non-resident tags in line with other states and their big game (elk tags out west, moose tags out west, etc) It cost me $253 to hunt, doe hunt mind you, in Iowa the last two years, my brother could deer hunt in MN with me for 130 and take a buck or a doe, in fact he could take 3 deer (intensive harvest area) for only 7 bucks more than I spent in IA....

[fishermann222]

When the time is up and MN gets a season (if they do have a season instead of trying to manage it on their own) I hope it is for residents only. (feel free to attack me now)

[sm54]

I totally agree that it should be kept to legal residents only, and under a very watchfull eye of the CO's. But, this season should not coincide with any other deer seasons in the state. For the simple reason that if you want to hunt/trap a wolf do it for just that, and not by accident. I would love the chance to actively pursue a timber puppy with traps myself as this would be the catch of a life time.

[brassman]

Yes I feel that it should be legal residents only too. But I think there would be a lot of negative press on it if a season would be integrated. Howevre I heard that people want a season in the rockies somewhere. It is hard to tell if there is a sustainable herd that is able to take hunting though. My reasoning on this is that one person could see a pack on monday and on wednesday this person could talk to another person that lives 5 miles down the road and say, "Yeah I saw a bunch of wolves too man theres a lot around!" in reality it could be the same pack covering their normal territory. I feel that the wolf population will not get much higher due to packs hitting eachother fighting for food and there are only so much resources. The wolves will not become like the deer herd has (look at Isle Royal). But I agree that the wolf population needs to be in check. I believe that wolves are still afraid of us though considering my dad shot two deer on the second saturday in deer season about .25 miles apart and one gutpile was gone completely and the other where my dad forgot to pick up his gutting gloves has not been touched at all 2 weeks later. As for now the wolf population is at the mercy of the DNR and the biologist thats know a lot more about the wolves in Minnesota than you or I know. ( they keep a lot of info hidden from us) This thread could get out of hand so I'll leave this as is.

[tealitup]

Resident only hunt with a landowner preference - or amount of lottery permits given to residents.

[Bandit]

They could do it like ND does with Mountain Lion and have a season that ends after a quota was made. I understand the people that want a special season or trapping only, but since I don't trap and live to far away to run a trap line for them if I did, I would like to be able to harvest one even if it was by chance while deer hunting. I have no idea how one would attempt to harvest one besides trapping them except for dump luck. Unless they would come to bait like a bear.

[Steve Foss]

Wolves will come to roadkill in all seasons, and especially during cold spells in winter are not especially wary of human smell on the carcasses. Baiting for bear hunting is unpopular with many in the United States, but that controversy has more or less leveled off, at least in Minnesota, with animal rights groups and bear hunters only taking occasional shots at each other.

If a wolf hunting season was established, there'll be pretty fair amount of protest among Minnesotans. If baiting is allowed, I'd expect that debate to get ugly in a hurry and stay that way for a long time.

I would never apply for a tag to shoot a wolf. At least I can't see myself doing that. But hunting/trapping is one viable form of population control, and I expect if there's a lotto system put into place there will be a ton of responsible hunters looking to harvest an animal that's been a big part of the romance of the North Country.

Considering how many people sitting in their deer stands see wolves, that might actually be an appropriate time for a season. I doubt we're talking very many wolf tags here in the first place, nor would it surprise me to see a hunting/trapping season, if one is even put into effect, that is three-zoned. In other words, all wolves in a northeastern core zone are protected with transition zone wolves and farmland wolves being open.

[Ufatz]

Brassman: The last sentence of your post " they keep a lot of information from us (DNR) is interesting." Why would they do that? Any suggestions on what type of information that might be?

[Muthagoose]

Quote:

---

they keep a lot of information from us

---

Unlike the non profit ORGS the state DNR has been very informative when asked..

Most detailed food source and year condition intell on bears has come out of Grand rapids.Unlike hearing a line of rehearsed bull on a buss ride or tour.

If you ask for last years intell the public information act provides you with that right so apply it..

Actually one of the worst trouble spots is in the NE sector..

Just ask what was paid out "last year for removal" and you will see. Dont forget "THEY WORK FOR YOU".

[brassman]

When I say they keep info from us is that I have asked if they have planted turkeys in pine or carlton counties yet they deny it. I have numerous reporting of turkeys all over around my cabin in northern carlton county but I cannot believe they made it this far north on their own. also when asked about Mountain lions, they will kind of skirt the question of where exactly the mountain lion has been seen more than once, especially dens ( I can see the protection of the den site but the nearest town wouldn't hurt) I'm not saying most of the info they gather is kept from us just some things that they feel we don't need to know. things are kept hush hush.

[Scott K]

Quote:

---

I'm not saying most of the info they gather is kept from us just some things that they feel we don't need to know. things are kept hush hush

---

Well you are talking about govenment here, and thats what they do best!

[Craig_S]

I'll go out on a limb.

If the DNR said they didn't release turkeys in Pine or Carlton Counties I bet they didn't. Just like other areas of the state, I'll bet some yeahoo bought some wild turkey chicks and did the job himself. And the DNR isn't very happy about it either. Bad genes, disease, stupid idea. What makes you think the DNR did?

And if they can't tell you about multiple cougar sightings, maybe there haven't been any/many? I certainly hope they won't point anybody to a den sight. But doubt they know about any.

Craig

[Steve Foss]

brass, just because you think the DNR planted turkeys doesn't mean they did it. It sounds like you'd already decided it must have been them before you asked them.

And in their position I wouldn't start chatting with any Tom, Dick and Harry over the phone about where the largest concentration of mountain lion sightings have been. How could they know who Tom, Dick or Harry is, or why T,D and H wanted the info?

I've dealt with the DNR for quite a few years as a reporter and have known some of those folks pretty well. I doubt very much there are black helicopters circling here.

[Muthagoose]

Well this is a very interesting thread...

STF Its not their postion to choose just who they give it to or why they are being asked ..

Hummmmmm being a reporter 1 would have thought you of all people would be the first to encourage and assist the public in gaining the truth..

Brass I would ask the wild turkey federation what their relocation numbers are and where.. You "might find" they work with the state and record #'s.

Govt is Govt you either get lead/intimidated or you "politely" continue. Dont ask for answers get statistics 1 year is the limitation on information...

Considering that Idaho already posted proposed license prices and included outastaters in that i wouldnt think our state would be much different .. After all isnt the commercialization of a areas wildlife a economical interest? seems to me thats what we did to the bears with the pay per view zoos..

[Steve Foss]

Quote:

---

Well this is a very interesting thread...

STF Its not their postion to choose just who they give it to or why they are being asked ..

Hummmmmm being a X reporter would have thought you of all people would be the first to encourage and assist the public ..

---

Muthagoose:

I do encourage public access to public info. Always have. You're reading things into my post I did not intend to convey, and I sincerely hope you're not just trying to score points.

If the DNR conducts and produces a study on cougar sightings, that is indeed information, and in fact public information. And if they have stocked wild turkeys, that's also public information.

But, some questions. What legally constitutes information? If the DNR gets reports from a few citizens of cougar sightings, is that really "information?" I don't know. Could simply be heresay from people uneducated in the ID of bigger cats. Is the DNR legally (or ethically) compelled to pass on what it might simply consider rumors from sources that are not known to be reliable? MIght it not actually be irresponsible to pass on such stories to the public, being unsure of their accuracy?

When does what the DNR hears become information and not just what they hear? I'm not splitting hairs. When you're talking public information and the legal system or FOIA, distinctions like this become important. The DNR, like any public agency subject to FOIA and open meetings/records laws, must constantly make decisions about what they should or should not talk about to Tom, Dick or Harry.

The question brassman raised about the DNR keeping back information is a very broad one open to a host of different interpretations.

[Muthagoose]

I dont need to "score points"

Quote:

---

And in their position I wouldn't start chatting with any Tom,

Dick

and Harry over the phone about where the largest concentration of mountain lion sightings have been. How could they know who Tom,

Dick

or Harry is, or why T,D and H wanted the info?

---

Well that is exactly why...ITS not up to the employee of the state to decides who should get information only that that proved accurate information..If a reporting was investigated then its a statistic.. This means We as a state have paid money to find out and should be provided such information...

I guess your response kind got me a little.. Hummmmm

As for Brass. yes but like I posted no Org can bring new into the state without clearing prior and so the state would have record...

[Steve Foss]

Yes, I do see where you're going.

But, still working off brassman's post, which started this tangent, if a DNR predator specialist takes calls from a couple citizens reporting mountain lion sightings, at what point do those "reports" become public info? The person has spent taxpayer dollars just answering the phone and taking the reports. At what point is it "investigating?"

So where I'm going is that there are fine lines, and that those lines need to be evaluated by the people who may or may not cross them. Their decisions are, because those folks are public employees, ours to judge. But in judging them, shouldn't we consider these things carefully? I think so.

[Muthagoose]

Only in national security,crimes being investigated and personal/civil issue....

I dont think this is a matter involving of any of them....

If you feel that way well your entitled..

However we are talking about a animal statistic that "our" DNR should provide as public knowledge after no more than one year....

I agree we as a public should judge them and keep them ""Honest"", Seems to me the GOVTs PR damage control/ sensorship is how we are lead to believe what is good for us??

[Steve Foss]

Well, I'm not making my point clearly enough. Sorry about that.

I understand the exceptions to the FOIA that you mentioned. I've been trying to make it clear that there must be some point at which things go from simple phone calls reporting things to actual information.

Once it's reached the point of being information, it should be shared with the public, no questions asked, unless one of those exceptions you mentioned apply.

The point at which things turn from rumor or phone calls into actual information most often is when a written report or study is produced. Not always, but mostly. Those reports/studies are public info unless the aforementioned exceptions apply. But while those reports are being investigated, are details of the investigation itself public?

I don't think so.

Anyway, sorry everyone for helping keep this thread off its original topic.

[Muthagoose]

I guess I wasnt either..

No more banter with a "reporter"..

Sorry all.

[livintofish]

Couple of ?s/thoughts the first will remain slightly off topic and the second back on.

Goose - I am just curious as to why you feel that the DNR is trying to withhold info and otherwise somehow deny the public their "right to know" every little thing that they deal with day to day. The biologists working in offices all over this state are not politicians, and they are not trying to hide any information for any reason, why would they? They are intellegent biologists working to better conserve the resources we all enjoy. Really go talk to some of them without being confrontational and see how helpful and knowledgable they are, keeping in mind that pr is not there #1 job qualifacation and shouldn't have to be. They implement managment strategies based on sound research, errors are sometimes made, but management strategies are promptly altered to protect these populations. I remember my grandpa talking about how the DNR was against us, and how they didn't know what they were doing...but I though people understood this agency of hard working professionals better now! Of course the only reason he was mad was that he couldn't keep 125 Northern Pike, like when he was a kid.

My other question is one of curiosity of why people are interested in hunting timber wolves, which were only recently taken off the endangered list? Is this mainly an issue of people wanting to control what they view as a problem predator? Or just the thought of hunting something rare and once endangered? That is the reason they were endangered in the first place, hunting due to thought of threat. I'm just curious as to reasoning, I would guess that nobody will be eating them, so just wondering why you want to kill them.

[Scott K]

For the question why people want to kill them, I will take a stab at that one.

The wolves are entering the civilized areas, killing farm animals, many cows, dogs, chickens. Coming into farm yards, not being afraid of humans. In some areas the populations are getting out of control. When there are a large amount of wolves in one area, they can sure put a hurt on deer really quick! Then when the deer #s drop they move on, or torment farmers, killing their livestock. I dont think the dnr will allow an all out killing like there was in the early 1900's, but they will allow the herd to be thinned some, in certain areas.

I for one would love to have a nice wolf hide on my wall, and if there ever is a lottery, I will apply, I have an aunt that gets nuisance wolves in her yard several times a year, she looses alot of cattle every year from them. Mostly fresh calves, but have taken down full sized cows also! I for one have an empty spot on my wall for a hide!

[Muthagoose]

I totally understand their position yet I wont allow anyone to buffalo me or sluff off on their obligations to the public. Just because they may speak latin does not make them right always, many College educated people work at McDonalds..

IE look at our states unablity to raise waterfowl funny how the experts have so many reason why yet when you compare the statistics of poor nest % to the fur harvest stats they coincide yet you will never get any state or feds to admit Delta Waterfowls predator control program is whats needed. Only because of political influences they dont implicate this..

I enjoy and respect discussions with others its how we discover. Its common knowledge we have big cats in the state and wolves doing damage.....

Confrontational hum I get all the information I request from the state and have a excellent relationship with many officials all because of mutual respect....

Do you accept a citations even tho you know your right and just pay the fine because its simpler than going to court??.Not me.