Wolves De-listed
 

Not sure if everyone has heard yet, but today the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service de-listed wolves (again) from the Endangered species list. I believe it takes
30 days before they are officially removed, but this is probably the best thing that can
happen for Wisconsin's deer herd in the Northern part of the state. Last year they we're de-listed, but someone decided they knew better and sued to re-list them and some U.S. Judge agreed. Now that they are again off the list, its up to the individual states to manage them. I would imagine they will
have livestock damage tags to issuefarmers to kill some, and then I guess we'll see from there.

Looks like at least one step in the right direction!!!!! This is Good!!!!!!

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I heard the same thing this morning, but the animal rights activists will be on this like flies on s**t.

They were the reason I believe the wolves were put back on the endangered list. I guess we will see!

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Well the wolves are a lot thicker up north then the DNR will ever admit to. But I do not think you will see a season on them for some time. The locals I talked to this year saw as many or more wolves then they did deer.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

IHAVE A FRIEND WHO LOST TWO BEAR DOGS TO WOLVES AND I REALLY THINK ANY WOLF WILL BE A DEAD WOLF FROM NOW ON.

If something isn't done real soon the farmers and bear hunters will take care of it for them. Just let the DNR handle it and they will be gone like our deer herd is. Between the wolves and the DNR our deer won't have a chance.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

You godda remember, these wolves are vital to the natural cycle of life. Its ok to kill one in self defense or in defense of livestock, but if we go out and kill all we see, we won't be any better than they are. That reckless killing is why I have to pay 1 or 2 grand to hunt buffalo, and why the great Native American culture is now almost gone. I'm not a hippy, I just love Earth how it is.

Respect the Wildlife, whether Savage or Savaged


NextGenHunter

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I'm sure if you asked farmers and houndsmen , they would also say they liked the earth like it was before the wolf was re-established in WI. There is a place for wolves and that is mounted and on display. Wolves kill dogs, cats, deer, cattle and so on and so on. I can see them being in the mountains or un populated areas just not here.If wolves do damage to livestock, who do you think pays for the farmers loss??? The answer is------------------- We Do!!!!!

The great native culture you talk about was ruined by market hunters - Wolf on the other hand was exterminated because they prey on anything that is alive!

I AM AN OLD HIPPY AND I DISLIKE WOLVES[:@][:@][:@]

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Alright ,alright.I didnt mean to make youangry... I just mean ifyou dislike something, the answer is never to kill it. Its quick and easy, but it comes back to haunt you. I dont know much, being young and all,so I dont know.Man also kills cats dogs deer and cattle, and I have no mounted humans on display. Its the way things are, and its sadly a fact of life that things kill things. I dont like arguing, so Ill just backoff this one...

:) Happy um...livestock defending. (Not savage wolf hunt-down)

NextGenHunter

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I heard more wolf complaints this year in MN, statewide pretty much then I have heard in a long time. I know that there were plenty of occassions where the next day or something I would walk in somewhere I had been the day before and there were wolf tracks in boot tracks. I think it would be a good thing to manage wolves and keep them in check populatin wise and in check pecking order wise.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

As sportsman we are supposed to be stewards of our natural systems. De-listing the wolves should not be seen as a victory for sportsman. I can only hope that protection can continue at the state level...which it most likely will. It never ceases to amaze me how the anti-wolf propaganda from the 1950's continues today; wolves are a vital part of the northern midwests ecosystem, not the ruthless savage killers they've been made out to be. Livestock damage tags and problem wolf tags are not necessarily a bad idea in "high" density areas, but if hunters continue to spread this fear mongering among our ranks we're going to see the extinction of wolves in our lifetime...which despite what some of you seem to think, would be a tragedy.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

In addition to what mr.mc54 said, wolves have destroyed the northern Wisconsindeer populations. Where I was hunting, registrations were down 50% from 2007 and 20% for the whole state. Do you think bears, coyotes and the previous winter did this? Absolutely not. Ever since the DNR re-introduced wolves into the WI ecosystem, deer numbers have been dropping and dropping. Wolves are not a native species anymore, so the deer don't recognize the danger, and as a result, get killed.

I hear so many people say "Wolves are great, they should stay." Why? How are they so great? What are they doing to improve anything? The best thing to do is to completely eradicate them again.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I think there is a place for wolves in the ecosystem, A VERY SMALL PLACE, once the numbers climb as high as they are here in Wi., Mi., Mn. and Yellowstone, there needs to be a management program in place........There is a very interesting editorial in the most recent Bowhunter Mag. that I think bemidji needs to read........What most hunters are saying about wolves comes from frustration NOT propaganda, it is proven through studies that wolves are the largest natural predator of deer and other game species here in the midwest, coyotes (because of thier higher numbers) come in second. Why is it that state agencies propose getting wolf numbers to a certain goal and then promise there will be controlled hunts thereafter, but IT NEVER HAPPENS..........Too many tree hugging, wolves are cute and cuddly, voters that shoot down all proposed legislation to put a sensible managemnet program in place, this is where the propaganda stems from, not hunters..............

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

The wolf is no more a important part to our eco-system, reason being Wisconsin has evolved and our natural system has forever been changed. Any one who thinks they can make it the way it used to be is grasping at stars. There was a time that the wolf was an important part, but all has been changed. Deer can adapt to change but a wolf will always be a savage killer and needs lots of space to roam. This is a problem for the wolf as their range is getting smaller as more people move out to the country. Our state can manage the deer herd with out the wolf.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

2007 was the second largest harvest in state history. Did you expect record harvests would continue each year forever. :D

The DNR did not re-introduce wolves into the WI ecosystem ... god did. ;) Wolves have been around in numbers for over 20 years, yet from 2004 through 2007 WI deer hunters somehow managed to harvest over 2,008,000 deer.:)

HA, that explains alot about you. :D

The only thing that needs eradicating is ignorance.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Bemidjihunter, I agree with you that wolves have a place and need to be managed, but that doesn't mean that they don't need to be kept in balance, via hunting or some other method. Wolves have been a part of the woods for centuries and should continue to be, and it would be a shame to see them disappear. However, the can't go unchecked. Minnesota's wolf population is quite large and I feel that there are more then the DNR has estimated. Do they need to be cut back? Perhaps...but left unchecked they will grow to unsafe levels.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

\

What?!?

Eradicate them completely? I really hope your kidding. Do a google scholar search on wolf-cervid predator prey relations. Some folks here really need to start basing anti-wolf arguments on facts rather than hearsay and outright fear.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Ok, maybe I'm not backing off.

In Texas, some 12-20% of the deer population is taken by hunting. It is the biggest cause of death here for deer. Should we manage humans now, too? Of course the population of deer drops quite a bit because of wolves, but, nature being so wonderful, it climbs right back up again. Before youcall the wolf a savage killer, think of yourself. If you believe wolves should be hunted down, that makes you the savage killer. And I KNOW that humans take up WAY more room that wolves, and we do much more harm to different species, yet we call them the savage killers. That makes me sick.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Crazy talk dude- crazy- crazy- crazy :):):):)

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I don't neccesarily disagree with you.

I interned for the minnesota dnr this summer...I do not believe wolf numbers to be underestimated. Wolves are INCREDIBLY mobile animals with huge home ranges, which makes the population estimates seem low to the casual observer.

Wolf populations will not get out of control...they can't. They don't have enough room. Wolves are very territorial and have huge ranges. And what do you mean by unsafe level? The population is now less than 15% of what it was prior to 1950. Obviously part of that has to growth and development, but I don't think we have to worry about a little red riding hood scenario just yet. As far as maintaining a healthy carrying capacity...there isn't a mammal better than wolves out there, besides the coyote (which is the only real threat to the deer herd, if you can even call them a threat).

Hoping to exterminate or restrict wolf populations in order to keep setting deer harvest records year after year is not only incredibly irresibosible of us as outdoorsmen...it just simply won't work. Wolves play such an incredibly small role in controlling the whitetail populations.

As for wolves no longer having a place in the ecosytem...thats not for us to decide. It never was. All species have whats called an "intrinsic value," which basically means it our responsibility to protect them just because they exist. Will the natural system of north america collapse if we do lose them? Most likely not, but it doesn't matter.

I'm sorry for the rant but I'm passioate about this issue. I'm a semester away from a degree in wildlife biology, and my thesis is on wolf-deer relations. Trust me folk...I've done my homework on this one. like someone mentioned above the only thing we need to eradicate is ingnorance.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Incorrect...Wolves ranked right next to black bear and domestic dogs in fawn mortality in a recent study in northern mn, and WAY behind coyotes. I should know...I was the field intern in the study. Anti-wolf propaganda comes from frustrated hunters...frustrated hunters come from low harvest numbers...low harvest numbers come from a combination of hundreds of factors, wolves being a small portion of that.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Bemidji, tell me how many deer 1 wolf will kill in one years time, then tell me is it not true that the wolf is the only other predator besides humans that kill purely for sport and will leave the meat to rot?
If you are doing your thesis on the wolf you should know these facts, if you don'tfeel they are fact then i think your thesis is biased...... What's really funny to me is the fact that most people on this thread that are pro-wolf no matter what the circumstance have either worked for or with the DNR in one capacity or another, I would bet these same people believe CWD can be eradicated as well:eek:

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

DNR estimates ~3000 wolves in Minnesota...

Estimates say each wolf kills on average 20 deer per year...

60000 less deer... (DNR estimates say 43K deer)...

Humans take around 200K per year...

So wolves are not an insignificant impact on deer populationsbut I can't see how we can completely blame them...

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

double post-sorry[&:]

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

chigacotrs-your numbers are pretty close. Although 20 deer a year per wolf is slightly on the high end. It's more in the area of 10-15, but does vary greatly. In a tough winter such as this one, I would expect that to probably reach up to 20 for some wolves because of the ease of hunting. I never meent to say this is an insignificant figure...just very very small. In north central and north eastern MN, wolves account for the deaths of somewhere around 5% of deer in the same range, and about 2-3% of the entire states herd. To be honest with I'm not positive on numbers for wisconsin or michigan but I do know MN has 5-6x as many wolves as both those states...so I imagine they would be significantly less.

Lungbuster...not sure where you get your information from. I'd definetily like to see it...becasue despite your blatant insults to my research, I do try and stay as unbiased as possible. As far as wolves killing for pure sport...this is another example of perpetuating the image of wolves as savage killers. In biology is called the "conservation of energy." It takes a ton of energy to take down a deer(usually), and wolves won't waste that energy for "sport." The only time a situation like that may come up is when they are teaching pups to hunt, which isn't often. If they make a kill, it's because they need to eat, and they will eat it.

lungbuster...I'm not trying to insult you. I'm trying to help you see the issue from a conservationalists pov. I hope we can both agree that we don't want to see wolves go extinct. I can agree with you that limited control isn't neccessarily a bad idea either. Anti-wolf fear mongering is not a means of control though...it will only lead to extinction. As far as your comments on the DNR...you think a "pro-wolf agenda" among the people who are most educated and experienced on the issue is a coinsidence? Or some huge DNR conspiracy to ruin whitetail hunting? Most of them are sportmen just like ourselves. And you'd be hard put to find a biologist worth his salt that thinks Cronic Wasting Disease can be eradicated entirely.;)

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I don't believe it has anything to do with whitetails..........the DNR's agenda is driven by politics and the biggest proponents for keeping the wolf on the endangered list arerepresentatives that are tree-huggers.....The last time wolves were de-listed a bleeding heart group convinced a judge to over turn the ruling and put them back on the list. The wildlife biologist know they cannot eradicate CWD, it's the WiDNR that has thier head up thier arse and can't see the forest for the trees........I respect the biologist , I have no respect for a politcally driven dept of Natural resources that will not listen to hunters...............As for most DNR officials being sportsmen, I just have to laugh, because most are just weekend warriors that might spend a total of 1 week a year "hunting" whitetails.......To me that does not make a sportsman, at least not in the regard that they should know better than the hunter that spends months out of every year in the woods scouting and hunting.

I mean no disrespect to your studies and I applaud the fact that you are majoring in wildlife biology in school..........however I don't agree with how Wi. DNR counts our wildlife populations, especially wolves or deer.....this has nothing to do with your studies as you have said you are doing it in Mn. So I appologize for coming down on you, but I respectfully disagree with some of your views on wolves.........As I stated in my first post on this thread, I believe there is a place for wolves in our ecosystem.........but it is a very small one and I for the life of me can't figure out why the original goals once met cannot create cause for management, but it seems that those goals where just a ploy to protect the wolves and never was there intent to let management practices be employed.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I for one have seen deer wasted and rotting because of the wolf. Would it be safe to say, as a (biologist) that pups are born each year? So if that is true, Then every litter needs to learn how to practice ( as you say )thekill! So there will be hundreds of wasted deer to teach the pups from the litters each year. What you saymay be true in minnesota.Maybe the wolves here have not evolved as fast as Minnesota wolves. The wolves here kill anything that they come in contact with and have stalked humans as well. Many houndsmen have wittnessed the wolves going out of their way to kill bear dogs. Many of residents have wittnessed their dog or cattle come up missing. They can practice killing in Minnesota just keep them there.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Mr.mc-some of the things your saying or simply absurd. Wolves in no way kill everything they come across, and there has been no documented case of a wild gray wolf attacking a human in the united states...EVER. I have no doubt you've seen a wolf leave a fresh kill or discovered an animal killed by a wolf that to you looked rotted...but remember, wolves cache large prey (deer and moose) and what looks rotted and inedible to us is perfectly fine for wolves to come back and eat later, which they do for almost every large kill. As far as dogs go...yes wolves will kill dogs, but they won't hunt them down or go out of their way to attack them as you've stated. They will avoid a conflict if they can becasue of their solitary nature, but they are very territorial and will fight dogs on occasion if they feel they're a threat to their territory...thats just mother nature, not some inquenchable blood lust.

lungbuster-As far as the department with it's head up it's ass I couldn't agree with you more...thats definetily the case in mn and I'm sure it's as you said in wisconsin. But it's not their fault, they are trying to do good things, but as you mentioned there is simply to much political sway to accomplish much. the original plan was to delist wolves from federal protection once conservation goals were met. The goals were met..and they were not delisted, so I understand where a lot of conflict comes from. And you right-it was left wing "tree huggers" without much knowledge on the situation that casued them to be re-listed in a sense. The recent federal delisting is not neccessarily a bad thing. It will help the western states control populations while still allowing the midwest to practice conservation. i did happen to catch that article in BOWHUNTER that you mentioned...it said something about wisconsin allowing 40-some wolves to be eliminated, which in my eyes may be slightly on the higher end but definetily very reasonable. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO WOLF CONTROL. What I am opposed to is wild acusations of wolves as blood thirsty monsters who are going to kill all our deer, slaughter our cattle, rape our women, and blow our houses away. That will only lead to unjustified killing and stronger opposition to healthy population control.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

bemidjihunter,
You are right on with all of your statements (letting deer rot?Ever watch an episode of Wild America? they chew on the carcass for weeks). Controlling wolf population is ok, elimination is not. I'm sure bears and yotes take as many deer, especially fawn, as wolvesif for no other reasonthan the sheer number of bears and yotes,but there isn't the fear or hatered of those species, probably too many bad horror movies and bedtime stories are stuck in the minds of the uninformed.
Our human population at almost 8 billion, is poised to double by 2050. Wisconsin is poised to go from it's current 5 to almost10 million people. Wolves changing our hunting should be one of the least worries. Birth control should be.

One thing to note, that perhaps by having a season on them, and making wolves a game animal, may help some mouth-breathers see them as a worthy quarry, and therefore something they would like to keep around.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

No-Wolf Attacks on Humans ? I am not a biology student but here goes- I have done a little research on this subject and I found there have been many attacks on humans . Try reading some research by T.R.Mader Research on the gray Wolf. He has documentation on many attacks in Minnesota imagine that,Alaska,North Dakota,and many other places in the continental US.You could Google (gray wolf attacks on humans) but that is to easy. I found other sites where a women and her little girl were attacked and they have pictures to show the mauling they recieved for just going for a walk. I have had wolves stalking me when walking in the forest in Bayfield county. Now Tell us again that (there hasn't been a single wolf attack on humans) You know what, You aught to do a little more research before trying to discredit a person. I think you would fit right in with the DNR. Make up a bunch of mumble jumble and pass it on as fact! This guy believes when I see. Just curious- is that what they taught you in DNR school????????????

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

mr.mc-I misspoke...I was in a hurry to get to class and didn't proofread, I apologize. There has not been one documented case of a wolf KILLING a human in north america. Attacks, although incredibly incredibly rare, have occured. You are literaly more likely to win the lottery than be attacked by a wolf. Every incident I've ever read about has included a rabid wolf too. I can't say a healthy wolf has never attacked someone, but I've read a lot on the issue, and I've never heard of it. As you know rabies makes animals act aggressivly, a trait wolves normally do not possess. I too have been followed by wolves on numerous occasions while doing feild work this summer...not "stalked." I know comparing wolves to dogs isn't real scientificly sound, but it's not a real big streach either. If you own a dog, whats the first thing they do when a new person walks into the room onto your lawn? It's the same for wolves, they're just checking out the visitor. If your ever attacked by wolves, I'll pay your dang medical bills for misleading you. Hows that?

I've never heard of DNR school. Just where would I find that....?:eek:

Edit-I just remembered a case I read about in Alaska of a wolf attacking a hiker several years ago. The wolf had no disease but was provoked when the hiker beat him with a stick I believe. Thought I may as well cover my bases here.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Bemidjihunter;
Now that I got you side steppin I'm gonna take advantage of it. Did you read the articals on the web? If not read it and then get back to me. In the articals I read- they had documented wolf attacks on HUMANS.

Now what wildlife biologists say, is what you tried to pull over on me, that there has been very few DOCUMENTED attacks on humans. The artical says that the reason biologists say that, is for it to be documented attack, the wolf has to be killed and tested for rabies. Everyone of the attacks thatI wrote about, the wolves were tested and found to be healthy. All of the attacks that I wrote about were unprovoked. Now-about the person who provoked the wolf you mentioned, I think any person would use anything you could find to defend yourself against a wild animal that was trying to kill you. I won't need your paying my medical bills cause I never go into the wooods without my insurance policy with (my S&W 44). If they even look at me they will be tested for rabies!:D:D You miss spoke, huh -Read the Articals!

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I read an interesting article on hunting and wolves and wolves beginning to lose their fear of humans in Sports Illustrated of all places and the opening part of the article was about 2 wolves hunting down to hikers in Canada and though they were able to fend them off and slowly walk backwards to camp using a stick,the wolves followed most of the way...hunting them. I believe that wolves for the most part will leave a human alone, but as less people hunt them, and more wolves and more people butt heads and territory these numbers will rise. Also, read a lot about hounds getting attacked in wisconsin...that was in several outdoor magazines this past year.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

mnprohunter;
Read the articals that Iwrote in my post to bemidji. There are many documented- unprovoked attacks by wolves on humans. I read the same artical as you mentioned and they said that wolves tend to not fear humans as some animals do.

Just GOOGLE (gray wolf attacks on humans) and there will be alot of reading on this subject. I'm not trying to cause mass hysteria, but what some would want us to know about the wolf just isn't true. The cases mentioned went back to the 1800's up to the present. If you ever have a wolf case you out, the look in their eyes, will chill you to the bone and you will never forget it. :eek:

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I have been lucky enough to see wolves in the wild on several occassions, and though at a safe distance and in no harm it is a chilling experience as they are a cunning predator. I also know a guy down by Emily, MN who has a wolf for a pet...wow...they are huge. It is a big timber and makes my 85 pound black lab look like a pup. I would definately not want to have one after me. Wolves are a predator and do have a place, but humans in the woods need to be aware of them and the possibilites and protect as needed. As for delisting, this is a good thing b/c wolves should be managed on a state by state basis not be gov't in washington. Good discussions guys, and sure is a huge variety of opinion on the subject. But in the end, lets remember we are all on this site b/c we are hunters...and hunters need to stick together!

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

Ethologist call it habituation I think...and it's our fault, not the wild animals. I have "looked into the eyes" of wild wolves more times than I can count...awe inspiring-yes; spine chilling-not in the least.

Yes...documented cases. Science is funny like that...things need to be able to be proven. I did take a look at some articles from google (non of which would be accepted in the world of wildlife management thankfully) and the ones that "appeared" to be somewhat credible put the number of attacks anywhere from the low 20's to about 80 in the higher ones (most of these "attacks" being wolves shot while looking at the "victim") in north america since the 1800's. Lets crunch the numbers shall we.

For your sake-I'll use conservative estimates. pop. of wolves in alaska and canada=about 60,000. pop in lower 48=about 7000. current total=67000. life span is about 10 years on average. So lets assume that population level for the last 150 years (it was obviously much higher during this time). That means 1,005,000 wolves in North America in the last 150 years. Even your most radical articles put the number of attacks at 80 in that time frame.

Not a very accurate model, but it should give you an idea. 1 wolf attack for every 12,500 wolves...1 attack every 2 years throughout NORTH AMERICA. Deer cause more DEATHS a year than there are wolf attacks in a 100 years. More people have been trampled by bison than attacked by wolves. More people have died from west nile virus than wolf attacks. And keep in mind that those wolf attack numbers are coming from people that may have less knowledge on the situation than even you do.

I don't really expect any of this to change your opinion...I guess the only positive I can take from this is that future legeslation will be based on research by my peers and I...not articles you find on google.

I really don't want to get into a pissing match with you...and it seems like it's headed that way. I'm going to go back to thinking about bowhunting and not about changing your mind on these awesome creatures. Best of luck in the 09 season-that is why we're all here anyway.

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I think we can all agree to disagree and yet be civil to eachother, that's the cool thing about living in America, we are free to state our opinions, right or wrong. One thing I think we all agree on is that wolf numbers need to be kept in check, the exact numbers are what is really at debate..........I want to say that if I was harsh with anyone on this thread or any others, I appologize it is not my intent to make enemies on any of the forums I visit, but to simply state my opinions and ideas, right or wrong, I am willing to bet that anyone I were to meet in person from any of these forums I would get along with, because after all we are all brothers and sisters of the blood!

Shoot straight!

Chris

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I learned more from you and Bemidji on wolves in this discussion than I ever knew. Bemidji you really put me to the test and made me dig in and do some research. I don't want you to think I am looking for a pissing match. If that is your impression..(i'm sorry). I had a pre-concieved idea about the wolf and I really did learn something, imagine that.

I get kinda carried away some-times but We really are on the same side.:):)

GOOD DISCUSSION GUY'S!

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

well put lungbuster...happy hunting to both of you:D

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

I think one thing that frustrates many of us is the lack of creditability that the Department of Natural Resources have. Many of us simply do not believe anything they tell us anymore. As my Dad told me when I was young... "Never lie to a man. For once he knows your a liar, he had no reason to ever believe or trustyou again." I guess that does not apply to government agencies??? :eek:

We know the DNR does not lie. They count the wolves and estimate their numbers and tell us there are not many of them in our area. Probably just like they count the deer herd. But wait, that deer herd thing... was a simple mistake, the wrong formula was used. So all forgiven for the mistake.. right?? :D. Mistake to them means caught in a lie. They claimed mountain lions were not in Northern Wisconsin even thoughthere have been sightings all over the place. Nope.. no lions in Wisconsin. That is until one was caught on a game camera a little south of Superior and the picture was on the news. Opps!! Well then they admitted, that there might be one... why can't they just tell the truth.

A woman I know swears she saw a wolf watching her grandchildren while they wereall outside in the yard. She livesin the country and had no reason to lie. She even started the conversation with me. All the wolf was doing was sitting on a hill side watching her grand babies laying on a blanket in the yard getting some sun and fresh air. She was outside watching the babies. She observed the wolf and took the kids inside. She called the DNR and reported it and was told to keep her kids in the house for a while. I would have told her something very different to do to solve her problem. When she took them out after that, she took a shotgun. But as any warden will tell you.. if you shoot a bear (I never asked about a wolf) there better be gun powder burns on the fur. Meaning it better be attacking you. What if it is attacking something or someoneelse?

But an interesting point.. what if her grand kids were say four years oldand playing by themselves semi supervised (Mom used to watch us out the window when we were kids, while she did her house work...as we all have done with kids).Do you think that wolf would have just sat on that hill and watched? Of course he'd pass on a easy meal. Unless he was old or sick. And then that does not count... right?

Another person who has free ranging ducks and geese in their yard watched a wolf take a goose out of the yard. They called the DNR and was told by the person on the phone, they were sure,it was a coyote not a wolf. So they said, fine, we will shoot the coyote. And their reply was.. "You better not shoot a wolf !!!" Now who was not so sure of the species?

I had a friend that was bow hunting. On his way walking out, he saw two wolves shadowing him. He had a bow. He swears the wolves watched him pack up. And he was chased by the wolves, whileon his four wheeler as he was driving out. They ran along side him and a little behind him. Was he lying? Were the wolves just curious? Playing? Or did he run his wheeler off the road into the mud taking a curve too fast, and climb a tree and call us from his cell phone because he was acting like a squirrel? I hate to tell you what I might have done in that case.

The DNR claims they never brought the wolves to Wisconsin. Again, I do not believe that statement. The DNR told me they were not letting problem bears loose near my house. They assurred me that the bear are released deep in the nationalforest and musthave worked their way to my yard. Then I find them turning a bear loose with an ear tag not a mile from my house. Honesty!!

I can not prove wolves just wandered into Wisconsin. I think this line the DNR tells is untrue. I do not believe them. Creditability issues again. The wolves just all of a sudden showed up in different areas and in pack numbers. We were told to keep our dogs out of certain areas as the wolves would kill them. Harmless wolves we were told. Maybe dogs don't count??

And I went to the meetings where the DNR biologists tried to sell the wolves in our areato the locals. The wolves are harmless, more scared of you then you are of them (why do they say that? I am not scared of them. I am armed). No danger. Again, I knew they were not telling the truth because their lips were moving. And yet when someone is attacked by a bear, wolf, or any wild animal...the first thing out of the DNR's mouth is.. the animal was old, or diseased, or some other excuse. HELLO... animals get old, they get sick. So doesthat gives them an excuse thento attack humans? And the number of wolf attacks on humans is basically non existent. Well in my world then.. how many attacks then are allow? What if a child was attacked?By an old sick wolf. So that's OK??.. tell the parent ofthat child that it only happens once in a great while. See what they tell you.

And wolves donot kill indiscriminately? I talked to loggers who were cutting back in the national. The deer that winter turned their site into a deer yard because it was packed down and each night the deer moved in and cleaned up all the browse from their logging. Then the men come to work and find eight dead deer. Most of the deer, mauled with parts tore open and parts eaten.Deer parts all over the place as it was described to me.The DNRcame out and confirmed, yes wolves did this. But the wolves did not return for the rest of theslaughtered deer carcasses. And the DNR's reason... your (meaning the loggers) activities must have scared them off. But this was not indiscriminate killing because it was the humans fault? The Wolves killed and ate their fill, them moved off. They left a lot of meat in the woods at that site. But suddenly because being scared of the loggers, that's why they never came back.

I am not advocating the killing of wolves. Believe me I am not. In fact one book I read on the subject by Farley Mowatt "Never Cry Wolf" was very interesting and awakening (and an excellent read)to the plight of the wolves. And while the number of deer they kill might not impact the over all population of the deer herd, I can tell you when the wolves move into an area, the deer move out of that area.I can also tell you if I am in the woods and I feel threatened by wolves, I will deal with it, and then the DNR will have to prove it was me that did it.

Was the northern woods all that bad before the wolves showed up? What's next? We have elk, wolves, timber rattlesnakes (you better pray I never see one of them), an occassional moose, turkey, and NO DEER. :D

RE: Wolves De-listed
 

cayugad;

I couldn't agree with you more! I did learn alot by reading the web sites I listed in the above posts. If anyone reads the articals I mentioned they will understand what you are talking about the miss-trust of the DNR's Wildlife biologists. If they would just tell people the truth and not treat every-one like they just fell off the pumpkin truck. People will make their own decision on the wolf, so just tell them the trueth from the get go. In the articals I read , one of the reasons for wolf attacks humans,is they don't fear humans any more. People are shrinking the wolfs territory and more contact means less fear. As I said above in a post if anyone comes in contact witha wolf as I did, you will see why I don't trust them. They will case you out and their eye's just go right through you. Is it their fault? No, but the DNR biologists could help the situation by informing people and not down playing the situation. Let the people make their own decision! We as sportsmen need to stick together even if we disagree on some things. We have the right to "AGREE TO DISAGREE" as lungbuster said.