MENU
Lake-Link Home
LOGIN
Lake-Link
LOG IN

Wolf Hunt!

2/15/21 @ 11:43 AM
ORIGINAL POST
Bugeye1
USER SINCE 9/25/14

Wolf tags go on sale @ 12:01am 2/16/21! Clear your calendars for next week!

DISPLAYING 1 TO 10 OF 127 POSTS
FILTER OPTIONS

TODAY @ 3:43 PM
trouter
trouter
USER SINCE 7/3/01

Books can be penned on  why people hunt.  I cannot do that subject justice.

The wolf hearing from Jan 13  was hyper partisan.  Only elected officials from one party were present.  Other committee members from the other party were in attendance over the phone, but were not permitted by the chair to ask questions of those who testified.

One political party finds value in giving the DNR a black eye whenever they can.  I am not sure why this is.  

Most of those in attendance wanted a wolf hunt to begin immediately.  

The idea of litigation was floated at the meeting.

Not long afterwards,  the threat of litigation became a reality.

That is my summary.





TODAY @ 3:24 PM
airborne1986
USER SINCE 8/16/14

Did you read the DOI reasoning behind taking the wolves off the list? There is about a 100 page justification for the rule change. You should read it... it is very interesting. Yes given your numbers there are more reported wolves in WI than in those years... but that is also assuming that the target population control is 350 individuals which is way too low. You cannot sustain a population off 350 animals. That number which DOI sited as a reason the wolves have done better than expected was as  an agreed management number for years ago. 

Maybe someone can explain why the huge pressure to hunt these? I heard in previous posts it was tradition but obviously that can't be the case when the previous hunts are sporadic at best. The anticipation thig... I get it. But really why is there such push to hunt them? I am curious what the passion is behind all of this?

TODAY @ 3:18 PM
PimplySwede
USER SINCE 1/6/09

How can you possibly say the hunt happened too soon?  

The previous hunts were approved when the wolf population was not nearly as great as it is right now.  2012 - minimum of 774 wolves off reservation.  2013 - 792.  2014 - 648.

What more data do they need?

TODAY @ 2:59 PM
trouter
trouter
USER SINCE 7/3/01

Moderation and diplomacy are always in order.

When the wolf management plan was written, we knew very little about wolves in Wisconsin.  The wolf population at the time  (200) was a fragment of what it is today.  22 years later, we have a much better understanding of wolves in our state.

The wolf management plan was slightly updated in 2007.  


It would be my suggestion the 350 number be removed and replaced with "sustainable population".


TODAY @ 2:55 PM
airborne1986
USER SINCE 8/16/14

And what trouter said is exactly what my original issue was that was ultimately deleted... it’s not that I am saying don’t have a hunt. But this hunt was too soon. The only reason it happened is because of a function of law. Not based on science or supported by logic.

I for one would like to have the opportunity to see a wolf in the wild and not have to drive to North East MN or ON to do it. I don’t see what the harm is in that. 

TODAY @ 2:49 PM
airborne1986
USER SINCE 8/16/14

Who set up the management plans? I mean I don’t get it... half of the posts on this forum say the Wolf Patrol was reporting kills trying to get the season to close soon... now the numbers reported are right but that is because there are too many? Which one is it? Or are we saying wood patrol reported kills that didn’t happen and there are too many wolves and we held off on reporting kills to extend the seasons? 

Oh and on top of it all the people that went to school, study, and use imperial evidence to try and come up with a target number to meet and manage also have an underlying agenda... where does all of this stop? 

Oh another greater approach... well if we try to meet in the middle the liberal activists will just take everything and all hunting will cease so we need to be just as extreme... I mean that’s what creates this really big conflict. I am a moderate and would be open to having a season... when empirical data supports such. But watching this thread for the last week or so is putting that open mindedness to question and tactics like SSS are making me question of there can be a legal and ethical hunt. 

The impact having a season during mating season is also really problematic. Breeding pairs and females are going to be disrupted and the pup numbers of past are going to go down. In return the likelihood of a fall hunt is going down too. And when the current administration sees this mark my words DOI is going to step back in and anyone who wanted to hunt wolves are going to be SOL. 

I am not trying to be argumentative but some people need to be open to the idea this free for all is going to have a larger negative impact than trying to be moderate. I am not sure where this post will go but invisibly almost 2x the amount of quota is going to be used to try and fight for a fall season closure and a bar argument to how the quota doesn’t work. 


Not reporting a wolf kill within 24 hours is against the law... plan or not... it is an illegal activity and again shows this isn't about sportsmanship rather some vendetta against Wolves and peoples personal view points about who is best suited to manage them... I guess we should also say, well opening morning is when I can see a deer with a spot light on Saturday morning, a small walleye is a perch so I can keep it and no one will know the difference, and a the rules are just applicable to everyone but myself. Goes back to being an ethical outdoors person! 


TODAY @ 2:43 PM
trouter
trouter
USER SINCE 7/3/01

The 350 number is hopelessly outdated.   Reducing the population from the current level to 350 would mean a 70% reduction of the population.

Eliminating 70% of a species population that just came off the endangered list is species specific genocide.  

Consider the public backlash over a population reduction of that size.


TODAY @ 2:27 PM
JC-Wisconsin
USER SINCE 4/1/05

"Again, don’t be surprised when the Feds step back in and take control of this as we can see the states quota was either way over shot or way under numbered."

Wisconsin could kill no wolves, and the "Feds" want to put wolves back on the endangered species list.  First activist judge with a lawsuit with standing will likely end it.

Overharvest?  Feds putting wolves back on the endangered species list?  WI is tasked with managing wolves.  The published wolf management plan calls for a population of 350 wolves.  If anything, WI DNR is not properly managing the wolf population in accordance with management plans.  Maybe the "Feds" should step in and reduce wolves to the population targeted by our biologists and game managers.  

Sure a good "plan" to wait 24 hours to register a wolf as you allude to.  Extended the season a whole few extra hours.    

There is a wolf population problem in WI.  THERE IS NO WAY 2-3000 HUNTERS CAN WIPE OUT 20% OF THE POPULATION IN TWO DAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TODAY @ 2:20 PM
JC-Wisconsin
USER SINCE 4/1/05

"Mr. Smith only reported in one of last paragraphs on the back pages that the actual DNR goal for the state was 200 wolves and the Native Americans decided to not participate."

Mr. Smith is awful.  I won't even paste a link to the article because I don't want to see his articles read.  See the "Paul Smith Drivel" thread on Lake Link.  Horrible.

TODAY @ 1:31 PM
yahay
USER SINCE 11/28/07

Pie in the sky, sell license over the counter/online, ie making it fair to everybody, across the board, no excuses, no woe is me.   I understand the reason of holding a lottery, & for the record I did not apply for either a preference point or license.  Let the DNR set the fee similar to what sportsman currently pay for a license, perhaps average the fees out.  Again, fair.

To those who oppose the hunt your still free to purchase a license & to do whatever you chose to do with it.  This effectively eliminates an agenda & may help eliminate any conflicts in the field, which none of us want.

To those who may chose not fill the allotted tags, that's fine & I respect that decision.  Other hunter/trappers will fill tags until quotas are met & the DNR shuts down the season as we just saw. 

It would also eliminate the narrative that hunters/trappers, "exceeded the limits like during 2012, 2013 & 2014 seasons".   Hearin a lot of that & I don't know if this an attempt to make those hunters/trappers look bad or what.  Their should be an explanation as to why this occurs.  

Keep it peaceful & respectful & let's hope for a fall season. 


DISPLAYING 1 TO 10 OF 127 POSTS
Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.