Wolf hunt, trap legislation introduced
Wisconsin
As expected ... it's a start, anyway. Way too loosely written though, IMO; allowing DNR to limit tags will result in way too few wolves being legally taken. Should be written to the effect of figuring out an annual quota to get the numbers down as quickly as possible to goal, and the goal to be no higher than the current 350 (and preferably closer to the original goal of 100-150).
Wouldn't use of dogs be considered baiting ;-)
Seriously though, why use this system? Why not set a quota and sell unlimited licenses and require day of kill registration? When quota is reached notice goes out for end of hunt. With todays wired world I am sure word will be out fast announcing end of season.
Exactly Smokey, in their haste to set it up, allowing the loophole of letting DNR set permit numbers was not thought through, apparently, by said long list of hunting orgs. Unlimited is the way to go. DNR earns more $ for depredation payments/wolf management while still controlling the number shot with a quota (300 might be a good first-year quota).
And RC, you're most certainly welcome. Yes, who would have guessed it? ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
Smokey, you know.... Guys out west are actually doing that. Mostly just letting the dogs out to mark territory when the animal is concerned. Or using the urine as a scent post for trapping. Otherwise they are using the recordings of hounds treeing to call them in.
Anything going through is at least a start!!!!
It will be interesting to see what the success rate is after the first season with a limited number of tags. My money is on very low.
Why do they have to re-invent the wheel? Idaho seems to have removed it's head from the other end. Their regulations seem pretty simple with respect to wolf hunting.
By my calculations the SSS rules in place for 2011 eliminated 105 wolves. That sets the bar pretty high but we will see if the new rules can do better.
On the same topic from a neighboring state with a lot more wolves than WI.
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/138236849.html
Hound hunters will pile them up along with trappers.
Droptine, Dont wolves eat hounds?
Retro;
Wolf packs will attack and kill hounds. A wolf alone will not. They will turn tail and line out for parts unknown. So I have been told.
Finally! Legislation allowing the WDNR to control the wolf population! ;-)
.... with hunter/trapper participation!
Droptine, Thats what Ive been told also. I guess I wouldnt understand why a hound hunter would turn his dog loose on a wolf even if its a single track. How long before the single wolf the dogs are chasing turns into several wolves? Im not a hound hunter, so just askin.....
Aren't there very large dogs that are trained specifically to find and kill wolves? You would think a large enough group of these critters could be sent out to do the work for you. Just follow them up with a broom and dustpan picking up the pieces. Sounds like fun.
Today on the radio news, a legislator said about wolf season.... Landowner permits Yes..... A sport season NO WAY....... Well the politicians will fight this one away, hope the majority is for it.....
Droptine/Retro - I am curious about the hound hunting also. I can see the treeing of bear or mountain lion. How does it work with wolves?
A wolf chase is like a really big snowshoe chase. Might circle a bit, might take a one way ticket to parts unknown.
Mostly hunting them with dogs would be like a hog hunt. Dogs would catch and hold them until you got there to dispatch. On occasion a pack might kill it as well. Otherwise you might get a shot during the chase. Either way due to above reason would not want to hunt them with dogs. Enough trouble with game that runs shorter distances as it is.
Yes, they kill dogs. Yes, there are dogs once intended to hunt them. A few still are hunted on them. Kicking myself now, but I recently turned down a Russian hound female that was bred. Both parents used to hunt moose,lynx, and WOLF! Packs are normally used to hunt singles. Pack on pack I will leave that alone! Yes, one wolf can turn into several wolves. A hunting tactic they are even supposed to employ.
I saw in the paper today it will be 10.00 for application non refundable, and if you draw, 100.00 for the tag, or preference point..... alot of money
$100 for a resident wolf tag fee? That's ridiculous. I think Idaho is $30...maybe.
The higher fees also discourage non-hunting wolf lovers from purchasing tags. They also encourge only serious wolf hunters/trappers apply for permits. Same fees would also be used for a potential future elk season.
One of the bills also mentioned not allowing transfer of preference points.
$100 will be the equivalent of a dime in today's money...by the time WI has an elk season.
Will residents have preference over non-residents? It really grates on me when a non-resident gets a bear tag ahead of a Wisconsin resident who has waited years. Tomb
Tomb - how about people who own some land in WI and yet live in a lower state. They buy resident tags because they say they are "entitled" because they pay taxes. I sooo want to call the DNR but they are my wife's family and because I have pitched a fit about it already with them they would know it was me.
It goes on more than we know
I thought the goal of the "new" DNR was to try to simplify things. They are talking split type seasons as far as technique, applications, draws and zones.
Keep it simple, set a quota, purchase a permit OTC, require a 24 hour call-in and when the quota is met the season is over for the year. The wolf lovers can buy all the tags they want and it won't matter. You can keep the tag prices lower, say around $20 and you have yourself a money maker for the DNR. Currently you have about 600,000 deer hunters in Wisconsin, most would be willing to buy a permit......just for fun we'll say 450,000. That would bring in $9 million/year. If they feel the need to create zones, call Wisconsin Zone 1, Michigan Zone 2 and Minnesota Zone 3.
Sagittauris - Wouldn't that be nice then if it was that way with the BEAR tags......
FiveRs, I'm in your camp with unlimited tags, lower fee and same-day call-in with a quota cap, but I don't think you'd sell anywhere near what you mentioned. The way some folks complain about deer license costs (often over a $4 cocktail and a $5 pack of cigs), can't imagine that many buying one. Plus, the majority of deer hunters hunt outside of wolf country. I'd say you'd be very fortunate to get even 50,000 to buy a $20 tag, but that'd still be a million bucks for depredation payments and management (like state/federal trapping and shooting of problem wolves). My guess is, knowing how very difficult it would be to even see a wolf for most hunters, is that you wouldn't sell even a small percent of that number. Perhaps limiting tags and selling them high will get only the guys serious enough to hunt/trap hard enough in areas they know they can see/trap a wolf. Not saying I agree with it though.
YZF, believe it or not, Wisconsin is likely only a couple years away from being able to offer a small number of elk tags. The assisted dispersal to other areas is better than having the eggs all in one basket. Yes, wolves are eating some calves, but we're not far from the 200 number needed to trigger a limited 10-elk hunt.
11$ in Idaho has a Res
31.75 for a NR...
WI has messed up twice on this new program... There should be a quota, everyone should be able to buy a tag and they should be REASONABLY PRICED!!!
WI never ceases to amaze me... which is why I'd rather never hunt my home state again...
$100.00 resident tag. must be a missprint $500.00 non resident tag. fibs have a lot of money $10.00 non refundable app. fee. Hey, we've got to make some money here. We're not going to sell many tags at these prices.
4.5 month season. why??? 4 wolf hunting zones. Who's going to tell the wolf?
This is so screwed up, it's almost laughable. Does the DNR really want to manage the wolf population? It doesn't look like it to me.
This is almost certainly not the DNR's proposal ... and one has to wonder which community organizers helped draft it?
Naz, The numbers came from the link you provided.
Yes, but that's a legislative proposal, not a DNR proposal. The sponsors and co-sponsors are listed.
"Always ask for more than you want and look reasonable by giving up something and negotiating. I wonder if that’s whats happening here."
If that was the case they'd ask for something decent. There's little to nothing to give up there! Using your example, if they were going to ask for more than they'd settle for, you'd start by saying unlimited free tags, a year-round hunt and a quota of whatever number off of this year's estimate wouldn't put 'em in jeopardy of getting below goal. Then you'd eventually amend to a shorter season, low-cost tags and a conservative quota the first year (200-300 for example) that even with illegal kills, depredation euthanization, roadkills, disease and wolves killing wolves wouldn't likely put you in jeopardy of having the feds step in.
"Fifteen groups or individuals testified or registered in support of the bill, including the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, National Rifle Association, Wisconsin Cranberry Growers Association, Wisconsin Cattlemen’s Association, United Sportsmen of Wisconsin and Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association."
"Dick Thiel, one of the state's foremost wolf authorities and recently retired from the DNR, recommended the number of wolf management zones be increased to allow more flexibility. He also advised against night hunting."
"Thiel advocated for a season that ran in December and January and ended before the annual late winter wolf population survey.
He also recommended that hunters or trappers be required to bring harvested wolves to registration stations."
Suder and Rivard said amendments will be drafted in coming days. They hope to have the bill passed by the Assembly and Senate and signed into law by Gov. Scott Walker by April.
"Randy Jurewicz, also a recent DNR retiree, worked on wolf management for 31 years and is intimately familiar with damage claims.
He recommended the bill be redrafted to make sure money from the Endangered Resources fund is not used for wolf damage compensation now that the species has been delisted.
“If you don’t change that, it will devastate the Endangered Resources fund,” Jurewicz said." ( could be why they are proposing the fee structure??)
Unless you are actually trapping them, have a farm where they are after your livestock, running dogs after them, or living in NW Wis, most guys who spend alot of time in the woods, are never going to see a wolf........
If they believe there are 800 wolves in the state, than I think a quota of 700 would be what they should shoot for.............
I think the season should be year round, just like yotes, and also open during the gun season......
The Wolf tag should be free with your deer license.
Whitetailer
You hit it right on the head. I spend more time in the woods than most and very few times if at all would I have had an oppertunity to shoot a wolf. There like ghosts, heard but not seen. Open it up during the rifle season for wolves & coyotes.
Anything new on the legislative front?
Has the DNR weighed in with a proposal?
Lots of good responses from the people who took the time to post. I thought there would be many more.
To those that are not sure wolves are, or are going to be a problem in the future if their #'s are not drastically reduced, take a look at the big game #'s in Idaho, Montana, and yellowstone Nat'l park. Look at Idaho's aggressive attempt at reducing the wolf population through hunting and trapping. They are now taking to the skies with helicopters in areas where hunting and trapping are not having enough of an impact.
Rancid, Out of curiosity, What group were they giving this presentation to?
I liked the movie. Two packs. One alpha male in each pack. Both packs trying to survive. One pack dominates in the end. Intriguing. My wife jumped out of her seat three times. That was worth the price of the ticket right there.
I'll "half and half" agree and disagree on that. Some things are common sense and have been for many years and some others are pulled out of thin air and wanted by a minority. Then there are those that are "in between." No matter what, it is what it is and if any bill is so controversial that a majority disagree with it, there may be a backlash appropriate to snuff it out.
2011 Wisconsin Trapping Regulations, Page 9, You may not: set, place, or operate any steel-jawed trap with a spread width of more than 8 inches.
Sag , I have several Wolf traps , 1 is 8 inches and the other is 12 inches . I'll check but I think their both Canadian .
Here is an interesting testimony by a fella who knows a bit about wolves:
I talked to a Warden on Wednesday. He heard $50 for rez and yes $500 for NR.
I dug out one of my traps last night . 28 inches long , 9 inch jaws . The jaws are 3/4 x 1/4 flat steel with teeth every 3/4 's of an inch . The teeth are 1 inch long with a round point and are rivited to the Jaws .
The teeth interlock tightly when the jaws are closed . Wt , about 18 lbs with 3 feet of chain . Nasty looking trap . No markings on it but I bought it in Jordan MT at Hells bar . At 7 pm the owner said no to a $ 20 offer . At 1 am and 20 war stories later I bought it for $ 10 .
Well that sure is a ya know wouldn't ya know told ya so kinda deal.
LOL ... the Republican Legislaters authoring these bills set the $10 application and $100/$500 license fees! Remember, you wanted the Legislature telling the DNR what to do, you voted for this!!!! ROTFLMAO Whose names are on these bills?!?!?!
Sags maybe your mom jeans are on a little tight this morning but surely your not insinuating, that the Dems would be in support of this with all of there sierra club dollars at stake? This is flawed and needs to be fixed but I'd rather have a chance to fix it and a hunt, then no hunt and no chance at doing anything about the wolves.
Why not 24/7/365 with no fee?
Very simple.....
It would be back to Walker v.s. the runners again.
You'll have durky, naz & sag piss & moan, but if it were left to their party, the only weapon allowed would be a butterfly net.
Hey, we all want the wolf population reduced alot. Perhaps one of these Republican Legislaters with their name on these bills will admend them to lower the application and license cost ... at least to Wisconsin Residents? If they don't, you can always vote them out next election cycle. ;-)
"we're not far from the 200 number needed to trigger a limited 10-elk hunt."
Funny, we only need 200 elk to trigger a 10 permit hunt. Yet, we cannot seem to pull the trigger on any kind of a wolf hunt with likely over 1000 animals on the ground. Sad state of affairs.
It's time to give management of all things to the people that live in the affected areas. If you do not live there - you do not have any say in what goes on there! More elitists dictating how to live others' lives from a few thousand miles away.
Independent, no party needed. As for Naz opposing a much more liberal wolf hunt than they came up with, you've got to be kidding. Did you read this thread? If not, here's yesterday's column, "Wolf, crane hunt proposals could be better."
Good work Naz, That is what is needed
I still do not believe we will have a wolf season, and we will still be talking about this next winter....
Naz its almost as if you hijacked my e-mails to all the legislators, I sent them an e-mail urging them to not try to re-invent the wheel and just adopt the Idaho plan.
If their serious about killing wolves, for the most part, its going to be with the use of dogs, and trapping................
I was out shed hunting yesterday and run across this(the track not the money) actually there were several different tracks, this was the largest
Assembly amendment offered yesterday would drop the harvest tag fee in half, still way too high at $50/$250 resident/non-resident, in my opinion. Click on the first link at start of thread, then click on the bill history and can watch from there. Senate amendments could be coming today or soon. I hope they're just getting started on the amendments. Both bills are still a far cry from what is needed to get the numbers down toward goal faster than simply USDA Wildlife Services killing depredating wolves will do.
