MENU
Lake-Link Home
LOGIN
Lake-Link
LOG IN

Wisconsin's Unmanaged Wolves

11/13/17 @ 10:35 AM
ORIGINAL POST
Farnorthbadger
User since 12/7/13

A very interesting possible end around of longtime federal inaction on the out of control  Wisconsin wolf packs.

DISPLAYING 51 TO 60 OF 384 POSTS
FILTER OPTIONS

2/1/18 @ 7:20 AM
Farnorthbadger
User since 12/7/13

Tammy Baldwin wants a wolf hunt about as badly as our current upper management in our WDNR. Not at all.  We can fix that quickly and easily next fall btw. And I don't mind a few wolves around either Ihookem.....everything in moderation though and well managed. Exactly opposite of how wolves have been managed in Wisconsin going on 20 years. I wonder If those wolves are STILL not eating the BRF elk calves though. I really would like to see an accurate count on wolf predation on that collared herd though.....if done honestly it should give some great info on wolf predation in the Midwest. If done dishonestly...........then more pro wolf WDNR/Humane Society drivel. 20 years later and our crack scientists at the WDNR  are still scratching their heads over  almost no growth in Wisconsin's elk herd. Only in Wisconsin. 

1/31/18 @ 7:44 PM
ihookem
ihookem
User since 11/29/01

Lets see a bunch of wolf pics . Frankly, I seldom get them on the trail cams up in Price co.  They are wild animals by the way. I like wolves. I think they're cool. Maybe cause I'm part Native American.  They don't bother me at all and honestly believe I am the Wolf Whisperer. I walk right up to them in the woods. We get along just fine.  I guess my point is , we can complain till hell freezes over and repost the same lines a thousand times. it isn't getting us anywhere. You want to change something? Maybe get on Tammy Baldwinn and see if she can push through something. I dont know neither. She sais she wants a wolf hunt so let he put her money dont and get a vote going. 

1/31/18 @ 11:53 AM
Farnorthbadger
User since 12/7/13

Interesting posts while I was gone on vacation for a bit. The Natives certainly did hunt harvest and eat wolves. To suggest otherwise is mentally challenged. And as for our WDNR they don't want to effectively estimate wolf populations in Wisconsin in any way shape or form. The people we employ to manage our states wildlife are in absolute lockstep with the Wisconsin Humane Society. CWD indeed and a lower deer population to boot! Had a cousin find a gorgeous 8 pointer last week that would have been a monster next year.......too bad a pack of real monsters got him before license buying state hunters. They don't eat the antlers though. The only part of a deer a  pack of wolves don't. Let's see if we have an increase in deer kill next year after a crappy winter( global warming lol) and moderate antlerless kill. I'll go out on a limb and guess a decrease.......a big one for 2018....... along with  another huge decrease in license sales to coincide with the pi$$ poor wildlife management we are currently getting in Wisconsin.  Exactly as this pro wolf agenda was planned. Still waiting to hear BRF elk predation rates for 2017...........they should be interesting indeed. 

1/30/18 @ 7:41 PM
Capt Quint2
User since 4/14/15

Thus is crazy. There is absolutely no need for any kind of wolf population in this state. I wish we could kill them all. The DNR should also open up more Bear tags since the Bear population is too large and take a lot of fawns in the spring.

The North Country is screwed now with the large number of all predators, harsh winters and the DNR still allowing doe shooting in most zones.  

Quint out.  Good hunting and stay safe!


1/30/18 @ 6:24 PM
Fishsqueezer
User since 5/19/06

The 2/3 rule has to do with harvest, or as a general rule of thumb, you can harvest 1/3 of the adults and still sustain the population. But all species are different depending upon reproductive rates and other factors. You probably couldn’t kill 1/3 of all adult sperm whales and sustain the population. You could probably kill half the adult coyotes and sustain. 

1/30/18 @ 6:17 PM
Brother of the brush
User since 1/22/12

That's some funny stuff there Trouter......I guess with head in sand people don't think clearly.

1/30/18 @ 5:02 PM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05
So, if the population climbs to 100,000, then we should manage for 60,000?  That doesn't make sense.

1/30/18 @ 4:45 PM
trouter
trouter
User since 7/3/01

The 350 number, in my opinion is obsolete.


Generally speaking, the sustainable population is two thirds or three fourths of the total population.  This is a common rule of thumb for species management.  


If we take 66% of 920 wolves, we have a sustainable population of 607.  



1/30/18 @ 8:44 AM
JC-Wisconsin
User since 4/1/05

Trouter, you do realize the State wolf management plan is broken into regional zones with population objectives for each unit don't you? Your comments suggest otherwise. Please take time to research to make informed posts as some people take what they read here as gospel.

Like what was posted, what "management" is taking place with wolves?  I mentioned this earlier with WDNR using the word "management" with CWD.  Neither are being managed, as actions implemented do not fit within the definition of management.  Both programs fall under the definition of "monitoring" which is a big difference.  Only wolf management is currently scientifically possible, but just not politically possible.   

When WDNR was "managing" wolves, the number of permits available in the northwoods were not effective.  Permits were filled within a matter of days (4 days for Zone 2), and anyone living in the northwoods quickly realized the number of permits issued did not make a serious impact on population levels, and should not have been considered a serious attempt at controlling the population.

For instance, the 2014 quota for Zone 2, which covers most of NE Wisconsin, was only 15!  By the 4th day when they closed the season, 29 wolves had been already killed.  They were killed so fast and hunters/trappers were so successful the WDNR could not react in time.  WDNR estimated this was over 20% of the entire Zone 2 population of wolves.  Obviously, this completely undermines their population estimate.  In fact, that same year, a friend of mine had one game camera picture with 7 wolves on it.  That amounted to over 5% of the wolves in an area covering most of NE Wisconsin (Zone 2) standing in front of his camera.  Anybody can surmise the population estimate was much too low.  I personally don't think WDNR has effective tools to properly estimate the wolf population, and that hinders effective management.  

In fact, restricting permits in the northwoods was stated by WDNR to be limited because "it is good wolf habitat."  Don't be surprised when/if wolf hunting and trapping is allowed again that WDNR will not make a serious attempt to reduce wolf numbers to the 350 population goal...ever.  The WDNR has basically stated they want relatively high populations of wolves in the northwoods.

1/30/18 @ 7:52 AM
Brother of the brush
User since 1/22/12

Trouter, you keep bringing up managing. Why?  They haven't been managed in many years.

DISPLAYING 51 TO 60 OF 384 POSTS
Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.