Federal Court-wolf hunting ends now

[maggie]

federal Judges today announced that the great lakes wolf hunting and traping in the western region,includes Wis,Mi,Minn must end immediately...

[badgerjohn]

federal Judges today announced that the great lakes wolf hunting and traping in the western region,includes Wis,Mi,Minn must end immediately...

..........  it's no longer legal to shoot those preying on livestock or pets. Wolves can be killed only if threatening human life........

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/286397951.html

[imnofish]

I spend a lot of time in a part of our state with a very strong wolf population, yet sightings, tracks, howling, etc., have been scarce.  I'm not a farmer, though.  Does anyone have any verifiable data regarding the rate of livestock and pet predation by wolves?   

[ramjet]

Idiot moron judge.

Hunting is an excellent management tool.

[maggie]

i must say, just because it was legal, didn't necessarily make it right, as with a lot of things in life, but i also believe every land owner should have the right to protect his OWN land, how crazy it's become, from almost extincted to being hunted, that has me puzzled, instead of simply killing and hunting them they should be looking at alternate ways to somehow coexist, as with any wild animal in the wild, bottom line is, if there is no food, they will simply move on or suffer losses by the mass, all tho i don't have to live in the area where they are predominant or have to fear them in any way "yet"  i don't believe an open season should have ever been granted Period...but that's just my opinion ...http://search.tb.ask.com/search/redirect.jhtml?action=pick&ct=GD&qs=&searchfor=The+True+Story+of+the+Three+Little+Pigs&cb=ZX&p2=%5EZX%5Exdm427%5ES11870%5Eus&qid=8bd829eab7ae4547aa0c7eae19d41ea2&n=780d0d57&ptb=5AD20935-9831-4619-AA37-96A9A7E70A0A&si=CMyt-_r2w8ICFREdaQodfJkACw&pg=GGmain&ots=1419251251293&pn=1&ss=sub&st=tab&tpr=jrel2&redirect=mPWsrdz9heamc8iHEhldEcgdjfjqpMajKYmz288FhTKdzvyRjUK5NoF8gqiKC9%2BeWopyT0jVBF%2FBXhCZtFK42g%3D%3D&ord=0&;

[wraslfan]

I spend a lot of time in a part of our state with a very strong wolf population, yet sightings, tracks, howling, etc., have been scarce.  I'm not a farmer, though.  Does anyone have any verifiable data regarding the rate of livestock and pet predation by wolves?   

My brother-in-law has a place near Tomahawk that we go to in the summer...he goes year round. has he never seen one (in person) but he has pictures of one in his yard (trail cam) and his neighbor lost 1 or 2 cattle? and their family dog (golden retriever) to wolves last year. Sitting around the camp fire last summer we could hear them howling...but never saw one. Being from Milwaukee, hearing wolves howl is very odd. There is a very clear difference between Coyote's and wolves howling! From the conversation had with his neighbor, there is no love for the re-introduction of wolves in the area.

[bigG]

I can see why they'd be protected in pockets (like Ft. McCoy by me), but if I'm a farmer and one tries taking out a young heifer , I'm goin' to get the 270, 30/30, whatever.

[ramjet]

First off the hunt is very controlled.

Secondly the judge made this decision a political one he legislated from the bench and did not listen OT the biologists he took aside with a animal,protection group driven by thier belief that NO animals should be hunted.

the impact on the deer herd can be minimized and Wolves can still be part of the Eco system but to comtrol numbers we nee a method that method is hunting.

What to see what happens to gMe animals when a wolf ovulation is held unchecked read up on the elk herd numbers in western Montana and eastern Utah.

my issue is not regulation but legislating from the bench.

[Handles II]

Like making EAB illegal for the DNR to use as a deer management tool now or in the future regardless of the circumstances? That kind of political legislation? 

Or actually starting a wolf hunt in the first place without actually paying attention to deer mortality rates from wolf predation in relation to mortality rates by other predators including humans and car accidents to see that wolf predation is minor in comparison to other methods of mortality. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/wolf/documents/committee/meeting0713.pdf  (take a look at Jerry Balant and Dan Storm's publications)

The reality is that we had some people that very much wanted to hunt/trap wolves. With wolf pelt prices being higher than just about any other fur out there, and the eagerness for some people to have a very rare trophy, along with unknowing hunters that thought wolves were killing "their" deer. These people appealed to those in power and got a hunting/trapping season for an animal that was just days before on the state and federal endangered species list.

I'm not against wolf hunting or trapping. Like you ramjet, I'm against political legislation. Wisconsin's wolf hunt was most certainly so. The numbers of wolves in this state, even if we tripled them over the estimates, are still lower than what MN carried for years and years, and even at triple the estimates, deer mortality would still be less than car-deer mortality rates every year. Bear, bobcat, and coyote predation would also still be above that of wolves. We haven't seen our bear hunting quota numbers rise even though they consume more deer than do wolves. Why not?

And, at least in WI, each of the two years that we have had wolf hunting, the quota was exceeded. That shows that the hunt isn't as well controlled as you would like people to believe it is.

[Handles II]

ex·ceed
ikˈsēd/Submit
verb
past tense: exceeded; past participle: exceeded
be greater in number or size than (a quantity, number, or other measurable thing).
"production costs have exceeded $60,000"
go beyond what is allowed or stipulated by (a set limit, especially of one's authority).
"the Tribunal's decision clearly exceeds its powers under the statute"
synonyms:   be more than, be greater than, be over, go beyond, overreach, top
"the cost will exceed $400"

And to correct myself, exceeded each of the past three years, not two. That would be every year we have had a wolf hunt. The number exceeded is not the issue.

[ramjet]

Like making EAB illegal for the DNR to use as a deer management tool now or in the future regardless of the circumstances? That kind of political legislation? 

Or actually starting a wolf hunt in the first place without actually paying attention to deer mortality rates from wolf predation in relation to mortality rates by other predators including humans and car accidents to see that wolf predation is minor in comparison to other methods of mortality. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/wolf/documents/committee/meeting0713.pdf  (take a look at Jerry Balant and Dan Storm's publications)

The reality is that we had some people that very much wanted to hunt/trap wolves. With wolf pelt prices being higher than just about any other fur out there, and the eagerness for some people to have a very rare trophy, along with unknowing hunters that thought wolves were killing "their" deer. These people appealed to those in power and got a hunting/trapping season for an animal that was just days before on the state and federal endangered species list.

I'm not against wolf hunting or trapping. Like you ramjet, I'm against political legislation. Wisconsin's wolf hunt was most certainly so. The numbers of wolves in this state, even if we tripled them over the estimates, are still lower than what MN carried for years and years, and even at triple the estimates, deer mortality would still be less than car-deer mortality rates every year. Bear, bobcat, and coyote predation would also still be above that of wolves. We haven't seen our bear hunting quota numbers rise even though they consume more deer than do wolves. Why not?

And, at least in WI, each of the two years that we have had wolf hunting, the quota was exceeded. That shows that the hunt isn't as well controlled as you would like people to believe it is.

You are ill informed the wolf hunt was endorsed and recomendedminimum by the Biologists that may know just alittle more than you about carring capacity and prededation.

I was absolutely positive you would react to this topic with emotion and misinformation as you do I also bet you have no wolves by you but if they were by you and wiped out your QDM area you would feel differently. But then it would be about you.

But soon Tom will pull this because it reeks of controversies and politics.......so get you're emotional rants in now HANDLESII ............🐾🐾🐾🐾🐾🐾😹

[Handles II]

Please post your biologist research. I did. The biologists in my posts were ones that reported their results to the DNR and State about this exact issue and used research in this state.
Where is your research from? Who did it? Please share.

[MHSfan]

Why did we re introduce them in the first place? Help control the deer population? The Beaver population? We the people spent tons of money to eradicate them, because the benefits of eradicating them out weighed the benefits of keeping them. Now that we have them and they have reached the populations the government biologists have set we need to hunt them down to that population set by the biologists. Even the antis admit the population exceeds the numbers set by biologists when the reintroduction was started. The wolf came back much quicker than expected. The fact that the quota has been filled all 3 years in less than 1/2 the season tells me we need to give more tags. You guys want them let them put them in Milton or your back yard Handles.

[imnofish]

First off the hunt is very controlled.

Secondly the judge made this decision a political one he legislated from the bench and did not listen OT the biologists he took aside with a animal,protection group driven by thier belief that NO animals should be hunted.

the impact on the deer herd can be minimized and Wolves can still be part of the Eco system but to comtrol numbers we nee a method that method is hunting.

What to see what happens to gMe animals when a wolf ovulation is held unchecked read up on the elk herd numbers in western Montana and eastern Utah.

my issue is not regulation but legislating from the bench.

So, are you advocating birth control for wolves?   

[Handles II]

Why did we re introduce them in the first place? Help control the deer population? The Beaver population? We the people spent tons of money to eradicate them, because the benefits of eradicating them out weighed the benefits of keeping them. Now that we have them and they have reached the populations the government biologists have set we need to hunt them down to that population set by the biologists. Even the antis admit the population exceeds the numbers set by biologists when the reintroduction was started. The wolf came back much quicker than expected. The fact that the quota has been filled all 3 years in less than 1/2 the season tells me we need to give more tags. You guys want them let them put them in Milton or your back yard Handles.

Wolves were not re-introduced they are part of nature, the natural world, and were in this state as long or longer than man. The few remaining wolves in WI/MN/MI were put on the endangered species list and the eradication stopped. In WI it took from the 1960's until now to get the population back to about 1000 wolves. I wouldn't say that is a fast population increase. We are now back below 600 total.

Interestingly man and wolves have lived together in harmony for 10's of thousands of years. It wasn't until European settlers came to this land less than 200 years ago, with very little understanding or care of nature,  and with fear and hatred in their minds of wolves from European fairy-tales, did the eradication begin take place.
It it was very typical of almost everything in this state and others, even globally. Elk and Caribou, bison, passenger pigeon, were all quickly eradicated from WI. Deer almost were, prairie chickens, moose, cougars, lynx, bobcat, fox, coyote, bear some species of ducks and geese all were very close to extinction in this state and others. Wolves were falsely blamed for the deaths of cattle and sheep caused by dogs that were let loose to fend for themselves. 

In no way should man eradicate anything in nature, we've already done that enough and there are no benefits. Unfortunately there are still people out there who's mentality has not progressed beyond that of their 1800's era ancestors. That wiping out something we currently fear or don't understand, or lust after like a trophy, is the best way to live life. 

Please educated yourself and others on the subject. A great place to start is by watching or reading Green Fire by Aldo Leopold, an avid hunter and self-proclaimed wolf-killer. A man who strongly believed that because he loved to hunt deer and elk, that the elimination of the wolf would mean a hunters paradise for him.

Here is a quote, that would fit with what you said in your post above. "The last word in ignorance is the man who says of an animal or plant, "What good is it?" If the land mechanism as a whole is good, then every part is good, whether we understand it or not. If the biota, in the course of eons, has built something we like but do not understand, then who but a fool would discard seemingly useless parts? To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering."

Have a good day, and good learning.