Wisconsin wolf plan sets target of around 1,000

[cheeser]

Wisconsin wolf plan sets target of around 1,000

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin wildlife officials released a revised draft wolf management plan Tuesday that recommends holding the statewide population at around 1,000 animals, a concession to conservatives looking for a hard limit. The Department of Natural Resources adopted a wolf management...

www.ironmountaindailynews.com

 

[seeth07]

Thanks for sharing. From a goal of having 350 wolves in WI to 1200. Love that moving goalpost

 

[Mallardsx2]

Man what a raw deal.

That the govt for you though. Not only do they say how wide the goalposts are they move them at their convenience.

 

[R.K.]

So hang on… The wolf population was capped at 350, but hunters were able to kill 218 in 4 days? It sounds like a lot more than 350 were on the landscape, and the state either failed to manage to that level, or failed miserably in its count. And now they want to triple the “goal” before allowing reductions?

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Animal rights advocates counter that the wolf population isn’t strong enough to support hunting.

Talk about an argument without merit (preposterous statement nominee for MN KFAN listeners)..

The whole hounds and baiting thing, while amazingly effective at getting wolves killed, doesn't do them a lot of good in the court of public opinion.

 

[rjthehunter]

MN won't even set a population goal. They just want as many of them as they can get. Something has to give pretty soon at this rate...

 

[seeth07]

So hang on… The wolf population was capped at 350, but hunters were able to kill 218 in 4 days? It sounds like a lot more than 350 were on the landscape, and the state either failed to manage to that level, or failed miserably in its count. And now they want to triple the “goal” before allowing reductions?

I'd bet my life on there being way more than 1200 right now even. The 218 killed in those 4 days were from tag holders, i.e. you had to apply and draw the tag. I don't remember the total tags issued but from that hunt, the DNR just didn't realize and expect how easy it was going to be for the tag holders to fill their tags due to the shear over abundance of them out there. They were expecting harvest success to be that near what is was in the past few seasons WI had before it was shut down and what happened is the harvest success was significantly higher than that.

 

[seeth07]

The whole hounds and baiting thing, while amazingly effective at getting wolves killed, doesn't do them a lot of good in the court of public opinion.

That article tossing in hounds and baiting is a joke by the author. Using hounds for bear hunting is fairly effective because after a group of hounds chases a bear for a few miles, they get tired and then run up a tree. That doesn't happen with a wolf. I have multiple family members and friends that run bear hounds. I've never heard of one of them treeing or "cornering" a wolf.

And baiting? WI rules really limit what can be used for baiting bears. Has to be enclosed in something so basically only a bear can access the bait and its typical sweet sugary things which bears have a soft spot for. How would you bait a wolf? Scent lures I suppose of either salmon oil or glands but isn't that used for all trapping we do here in this state? My fox and coyote sets surely are set with scents. Why would wolf be any different? Fine, call that baiting.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I'd bet my life on there being way more than 1200 right now even. The 218 killed in those 4 days were from tag holders, i.e. you had to apply and draw the tag. I don't remember the total tags issued but from that hunt, the DNR just didn't realize and expect how easy it was going to be for the tag holders to fill their tags due to the shear over abundance of them out there. They were expecting harvest success to be that near what is was in the past few seasons WI had before it was shut down and what happened is the harvest success was significantly higher than that.

My understanding of the circumstances: In 2012-2014 the seasons opened to trapping and hunting in mid Oct and hounds and snares were not allowed until firearm deer season ended (Dec 1st ish?). In 2014, the first zone hit quota/closure 3 days after opening in Oct, the other 2 closed on Dec 5th 4 days after hounds were allowed. The 2021 season started in February well after whitetail season and dogs were allowed from the get go so they killed a bunch of wolves right away. 86% of harvest was with hounds.

Going off that, the quick harvest of wolves in 2021 seems much more likely due to the fact that hounds could be used immediately in february (when people aren't wanting to deer/waterfowl/bird hunt than drastic changes in wolf abundance. That's not to say there isn't a shit ton of wolves though.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

That article tossing in hounds and baiting is a joke by the author. Using hounds for bear hunting is fairly effective because after a group of hounds chases a bear for a few miles, they get tired and then run up a tree. That doesn't happen with a wolf. I have multiple family members and friends that run bear hounds. I've never heard of one of them treeing or "cornering" a wolf.

And baiting? WI rules really limit what can be used for baiting bears. Has to be enclosed in something so basically only a bear can access the bait and its typical sweet sugary things which bears have a soft spot for. How would you bait a wolf? Scent lures I suppose of either salmon oil or glands but isn't that used for all trapping we do here in this state? My fox and coyote sets surely are set with scents. Why would wolf be any different? Fine, call that baiting.

Look at the stats from wolf seasons. They paint a very clear picture just how effective hounds can be for wolves.

 

[Treeshark]

Yep, hounds are very effective and the tracking conditions for them in the last season were absolutely perfect.

Couple those factors with way more wolves than the DNR estimated, and you get what we got.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

MN won't even set a population goal. They just want as many of them as they can get. Something has to give pretty soon at this rate...

MN has a similar concept just softer. Doesn't have any # high enough where they acknowledge the population should be reduced. They'd probably have to extirpate moose to get to there at the rate we're going. From the recent MN wolf Plan:

 

[Steelsearchin]

Could you cancel things out and bait them with beagles???

....not funny given the UP guys who used to hunt snowshoes and lost their whole packs, but might be a creative solution.

 

[seeth07]

My understanding of the circumstances: In 2012-2014 the seasons opened to trapping and hunting in mid Oct and hounds and snares were not allowed until firearm deer season ended (Dec 1st ish?). In 2014, the first zone hit quota/closure 3 days after opening in Oct, the other 2 closed on Dec 5th 4 days after hounds were allowed. The 2021 season started in February well after whitetail season and dogs were allowed from the get go so they killed a bunch of wolves right away. 86% of harvest was with hounds.

Going off that, the quick harvest of wolves in 2021 seems much more likely due to the fact that hounds could be used immediately in february (when people aren't wanting to deer/waterfowl/bird hunt than drastic changes in wolf abundance. That's not to say there isn't a shit ton of wolves though.

I will admit that I was wrong and stand corrected. I called my uncle and also reached out to a good family friend that runs hounds for bears.

Yes, a lot of the wolf hunting does happen with the use of hounds but it is drastically different than running bears or cats. When running bears/cats (around here its bobcats) the hounds are running them to a point at which exhaustion or simply convenance of running up a tree occurs. On rare occasions the hunter will be along the road and they catch the bear/cat running across and it gives them a shot. However, most shots occur by walking up on the hounds howling at a tree and they shoot it out of the tree.

When running specifically for wolves, they use the hounds typically as "drivers" and will send them into a section where the hunter waits for them to run out the other side. Very similar to hound deer hunting down south (not sure if that is something still legal or not?). It is also done pretty commonly here in WI for hunting coyotes.

From both of the people I reached out to this morning, they both have had their dogs get on wolves before. Neither of them has ever had their dogs tree or corner a wolf where they could walk up on it and shoot it.

I feel like when people think of hunting with hounds they think of the poor critter getting ran up a tree and shot at close range and not the latter situation which is much more difficult. Even when you are hunting where the end typically results in an animal being up a tree, the general population is just uneducated about the amount of effort, training, time and skill that is actually required to make that happen. It by no means is a walk in the park.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I will admit that I was wrong and stand corrected. I called my uncle and also reached out to a good family friend that runs hounds for bears.

Yes, a lot of the wolf hunting does happen with the use of hounds but it is drastically different than running bears or cats. When running bears/cats (around here its bobcats) the hounds are running them to a point at which exhaustion or simply convenance of running up a tree occurs. On rare occasions the hunter will be along the road and they catch the bear/cat running across and it gives them a shot. However, most shots occur by walking up on the hounds howling at a tree and they shoot it out of the tree.

When running specifically for wolves, they use the hounds typically as "drivers" and will send them into a section where the hunter waits for them to run out the other side. Very similar to hound deer hunting down south (not sure if that is something still legal or not?). It is also done pretty commonly here in WI for hunting coyotes.

From both of the people I reached out to this morning, they both have had their dogs get on wolves before. Neither of them has ever had their dogs tree or corner a wolf where they could walk up on it and shoot it.

I feel like when people think of hunting with hounds they think of the poor critter getting ran up a tree and shot at close range and not the latter situation which is much more difficult. Even when you are hunting where the end typically results in an animal being up a tree, the general population is just uneducated about the amount of effort, training, time and skill that is actually required to make that happen. It by no means is a walk in the park.

My main point was that I don't think the quickness in which 200+ wolves got shot is a clear cut indicator in how the wolf population has changed over the last decade even though that might support my argument for having wolf seasons. I'm not versed in the tactics involved with using dogs but didn't assume they bayed or "treed" wolves in most cases. Regardless, it's a hurdle in public perception. I've seen reports of wolves killing something like 29 bear hounds in a season, i imagine there were some hound casualties in the 4 days of open wolf season as well. People sending their dogs into that kind of danger to kill wolves just isn't something that will be viewed favorably to most non-hunters in regards to both the hounds and wolves.

I don't have any ethical reservations about people hunting wolves with hounds but my preference from a PR standpoint and a hunter opportunity standpoint would be no hounds, baiting, or night hunting and more tags issued.

 

[seeth07]

I don't have any ethical reservations about people hunting wolves with hounds but my preference from a PR standpoint and a hunter opportunity standpoint would be no hounds, baiting, or night hunting and more tags issued.

If using scents were considered "baiting" while setting traps, and using hounds to drive wolves out of areas wasn't allowed, I would imagine that we could have a 365 day season with no limit just like we do coyotes and the population isn't going to significantly change from the impacts of hunters/trappers.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

If using scents were considered "baiting" while setting traps, and using hounds to drive wolves out of areas wasn't allowed, I would imagine that we could have a 365 day season with no limit just like we do coyotes and the population isn't going to significantly change from the impacts of hunters/trappers.

I meant baiting for hunting but not with traps. Might get kind of tough on that one.

I think even without trapping, if there were OTC wolf tags for Sept-Jan and no hounds allowed it would have an impact on the population. They wouldn't wipe em out but a difference would be made. I'm not as familiar with N. WI deer herds but I am positive that level of wolf hunting would improve the health of the deer and moose herds in N. MN and wouldn't wipe out the wolves.

 

[seeth07]

I meant baiting for hunting but not with traps. Might get kind of tough on that one.

I think even without trapping, if there were OTC wolf tags for Sept-Jan and no hounds allowed it would have an impact on the population. They wouldn't wipe em out but a difference would be made. I'm not as familiar with N. WI deer herds but I am positive that level of wolf hunting would improve the health of the deer and moose herds in N. MN and wouldn't wipe out the wolves.

It would largely depend on whether or not the wolf season would be open during the 9 day gun deer hunt. Coyote used to be closed during that hunt but now it remains open even during the time when there is a very large force in the woods with rifles.

 

[SCliving Outdoors]

sss

 

[tzone]

They moved the goal the wrong direction. 50 would be better.