Wolf sighting should increase
Contributors to this thread:Wisconsin
From: Huntcell
18-Sep-20
Huntcell 's Link
DNR estimates wolf population up about 13%
The agency believes that based on modeling the actual wolf population is 1,195 wolves.
“Come on man”
Ya right more like 3-5 times that.
Time to get Season again.
From: smokey
18-Sep-20
Where's your data?
From: skookumjt
18-Sep-20
I'm certain that the article means the minimum overwinter number. The actual number could be much higher. That is the way they have always done their modeling.
From: Missouribreaks
18-Sep-20
If you believe in increased hunter recruitment, more efficient archery season weapons, and increased land access to meet population control objectives, seems like game managers are continuing to partially solve these issues with wolves. Human hunters decline in many areas, non human hunters increase.
Likely the wolf numbers are vastly understated. Having said that, there always seems to be enough deer for humans to justify their desire for more efficient weapons during archery seasons. May as well welcome more wolves too. Due to human hunter behavior and greed, I am softening my position on wolves a bit.
From: Jeff in MN
18-Sep-20
Keep in mind that wolf don't thin the herd in areas of the state where there are no wolfs.
From: Live2Hunt
18-Sep-20
Well, the guy on learntohunt.com would not agree with softening up on the wolves. He is in British Columbia and says the wolves have decimated areas of ungalids. Whole valleys that had Caribou, Moose, Blacktail deer are void. They are killing machine's that don't kill just what they need to eat. That has been proven by biologists that have spent winters tracking packs. They need control, they can and will wipe areas out of game animals.
From: Tweed
18-Sep-20
What is the typical winter mortality rate?
From: Trickle rut
18-Sep-20
Actually for Wolves winter is one of the healthier times of the year. Most mortality in winter is generally wolf on wolf or wolves on wolf. Most mortality occurs on average during the whelping and pup rearing time. I've been following the news on the wolf reintroduction of isle royale. Some new reports just out the last few days. Fascinating on the insights of how these guys roll. With modern technology and a island (26 miles long?) As a classroom watching these guys sort it out is good drama.
From: Hoot
18-Sep-20
Common theme on all our 20 bait sites in Northern Bayfield.
From: Tweed
18-Sep-20
Dogs?
From: Muskybuck
18-Sep-20
Yep Hoot. And a common theme come November will be very few deer on the buck poles in northern Bayfield.
From: MjF
18-Sep-20
MjF's Link
Hoot... Thats the female, same one I have one camera all summer long, she likes chasing the bears off bait stations when they open it up, then snacks on the goodies.
From: Missouribreaks
18-Sep-20
Great pictures, keep them coming please.
From: Missouribreaks
18-Sep-20
Great pictures, keep them coming please.
From: Hoot
19-Sep-20
More wolves on baits. 40% of wolves on camera were collared. Many are different wolves as pictures showed they were close to the same dates and times.
From: Hoot
19-Sep-20
From: MjF
19-Sep-20
As of this Spring there were only two collared wolves from the Echo Valley Pack, one is the female and another is a 8 year old male... now since then they could have captured and collared more. One of the wolves collar is not working.
From: Hoot
19-Sep-20
Mike - They have collared more since the 17 wolves in the largest pack is now down to 4. Probably wondering why they diminished.
From: BCD
20-Sep-20
Smokey, here is my data. The pack that inhabits the land I hunt is listed on the DNR's website. I have hunted this land before the pack moved in and I have been there every year since. The DNR has NEVER listed that pack as a "breeding pack". they have shown the number of wolves in the pack as 2 or 3 since the beginning of time. This pack has been breeding and having pups almost every year. Currently they show the pack as having 2 wolves. I have seen the pack this summer and there was 7, plus I'm sure others in the pack that were not visible. I have witnessed this many other years as have neighbors. Its not uncommon to see 4, 5 ,6 up to 8 at one time over the years. So based on my evidence compared to the DNR's estimate. `2 vs. 8, or 4 times the stated population. I would say huntcell is much closer to the ACTUAL wis wolf population than the DNR is. 1195 X 4 = 4780. Smokey, I know you know for a fact there are more wolves than the DNR states there is.
From the DNR website; "Deer herds in northern Wisconsin have increased significantly in recent years, even with an established wolf population, suggesting that wolves do not limit deer population growth." thats like saying wolves dont eat deer! 100% false statement
another: "Wolves are skilled at identifying vulnerable prey, and tend to target individuals that are old, young, sick or otherwise weakened. Hence, deer removed by wolves are less likely to survive and less likely to produce offspring than the deer that remain." another FALSE statement.
The best one; "The average age of white-tailed deer killed by wolves was 6.5 years in Minnesota, for example, whereas the average age of does taken by hunters was 2.5 years in this same area. This targeting of vulnerable animals serves to reduce the impact of wolves on long-term deer population dynamics. It has also been suggested that wolves might reduce CWD transmission rates and prevalence by removing sick individuals." First of all, There is absolutely no way in hell that 6.5 is the average age! thats just ridiculous. Most deer herds have a very small percentage of animals that old period, much less having that be the average age of wolf kills. And then they try and convince you that the wolves are actually helping the deer herd? Now thats funny shit right there. Nothing but bullshit propaganda written by some tree hugging wolf lover!
The DNR is like the mainstream media. Just tell it enough times and it will be true. Too many people willing to drink the kool aid.
From: Todd108
20-Sep-20
This pic might make me chuckle a little at someone's bad luck but unfortunately it's my property. Still a cool pic though.
From: Mnhunter1980
20-Sep-20
Jeez Todd! 7? What county?
From: BCD
20-Sep-20
Todd, thats 2 wolves to the DNR :)
From: Todd108
20-Sep-20
There are 11 in that pic. This is Douglas Co.
From: Tweed
20-Sep-20
Yes..... 12=2 in DNR wolf math.
From: happygolucky
21-Sep-20
Holy crap Todd. And to think the number the DNR was going to be happy with was 350. We need the hunts back. It is amazing how quickly the quotas were reached in those 2 hunts. No doubt the actual number far exceeds what the DNR tells us.
From: Drop Tine
21-Sep-20
Sadly the DNR doesn’t do the counting. They just compile the data received from bunny huggers that under report them when they do track counts each year.
From: Nocturnal II
21-Sep-20
I'll never forget the guy that use to report here as a wolf tracker? Does anyone here remember? He had his dog with him one time and was surrounded by a few in daylight. He defended his dog and luckily only wound up with a tooth hole in his camo.
Anyways, he reported often on here. Many here contributed on his threads but in the end, he was so upset when he compiled his data together and presented it to the dnr. His numbers he promised were absolute and the dnr or whoever he had to present them to said, they couldn't use it because the numbers didn't add up or fit the data they had from the past.
I remember him walking everyday. Him blown away by how many wolf packs were in the area and how many packs overlapped one another. Kinda explains why some parts of the state can't even rebound from the decimation?
From: Muskybuck
21-Sep-20
The inverse of the wolf formula works for DNR deer population estimates in my neck of woods: 2=12 Lol
From: BCD
21-Sep-20
I conversed frequently with one of those treehugging wolf counters a number of years back. Lots of heated arguments :) He took the class that taught them how to do it, and he showed me the parameters and conditions that needed to happen in order to count tracks. there had to be x number of inches of fresh snow, they had to use certain roads, etc. basically you could only count tracks when the comet was directly overhead and the wind was a certain speed, and from a certain direction....well you get the point. It was a total joke. Most wolves never even cross a road that a prius or subaru can drive down, much less right after the perfect storm when the wolf petters could go out.
From: Muskybuck
21-Sep-20
From: Muskybuck
21-Sep-20
Nocturnal-I think I remember him. Steve White?
From: MjF
21-Sep-20
I believe Steve White was also a bear guide
From: happygolucky
21-Sep-20
I believe you are right with Steve White. He was a bear guide in zone B around Eagle River. I believe he was a fishing guide too.
From: Nocturnal II
21-Sep-20
MuskyBuck YES!!! Good memory!
From: Muskybuck
27-Sep-20
Holy cow Hoot and MjF, 17 in a pack! That is a beautiful area and a shame. I have scouted that area extensively as a new area to hunt, but with that many wolves around it sounds like it will have an extremely low deer population and an out of whack food chain just like my area west of there.
From: MjF
27-Sep-20
MjF's Link
The 17 pack was counted back in 2017... They came threw the area that I hunt and decimated the deer herd in the area, they still venture in and out periodically, especially when bear baits are placed. I do not know how big the pack is at this time. Notice in the picture the one legged wolf.... seen her last year but have not this year. The female collared one is a regular along with a old collared male, hope now that there are no more bear bait stations they will move on. During the winter months the deer will yard up in this area, last spring I found on 80 acres 4 wolf kills. They also killed 3 horses across the road in 2018. It is super clear if we want our Whitetail population to get back to normal here in the Northwoods and surrounding counties wolves need to be managed, otherwise our deer population will continue to decrease until theres nothing left.
From: Milwroad
27-Sep-20
Amen to that MjF! It is a huge problem.
From: Muskybuck
27-Sep-20
It is a huge problem, but wildlife managers do not view it as a problem. Hence the frustration we feel concerning this area.
From: Missouribreaks
27-Sep-20
Wildlife managers love the wolves. Wolves go where the deer are, access sometimes prevents human hunters from doing so. Wolves also are not into horn porn, they simply manage the herd to the numbers, then they move on or starve.
From: Milwroad
29-Sep-20
A little off topic but related. The NRB/DNR has hearings on October 2 about deer unit boundaries. You can send letters/comments to Scott Karel of the DNR at [email protected] I sent him one about noted differences between conditions north of Highway 2 and south of it in our northern counties.
From: skookumjt
29-Sep-20
Way off topic but where are there counties that have major differences between north and south of US 2?
From: Milwroad
29-Sep-20
Really?
From: Tweed
29-Sep-20
I think its a legit question considering the only real part of WI that is north of 2 is the line between Ashland and Superior.
From: Milwroad
29-Sep-20
Yes, it is a fair question but one that should probably be addressed in a thread dedicated to a discussion of management unit sizes as opposed to a wolf thread. Depending on year winter severity differs between southern and Northern Bayfield County, for example. Also there is significantly more active agriculture in southern Bayfield as opposed to northern.
From: skookumjt
29-Sep-20
You brought it up......
From: Milwroad
29-Sep-20
Touche!
From: Tweed
29-Sep-20
I'm not familiar with Bayfield so I ask this for my own education.
It appears that the difference between north of 2 and south of 2 are minimal based on agriculture. If anything it looks like more ag in east central Bayfield.
From: Milwroad
29-Sep-20
Yes, probably correct. My post was primarily meant as a discussion of breaking down some of the management units as conditions can vary dramatically within a large county.
From: Hoot
29-Sep-20
The pack of 17 is down to 4 as of last Dec. and they don't know why.
From: WausauDug
30-Sep-20
when the old counts were listed on the DNR records pack by pack they were all 2-6 wolves in a pack except for the Rainbow flowage that may have been 7 or 8 if I remember right. That pic of 11 is incredible??
From: Tweed
30-Sep-20
At what point does a pack divide?
From: Missouribreaks
30-Sep-20
I doubt there is a number rule, lol.
From: MjF
30-Sep-20
MjF's Link
Hoot... I highly doudt the pack is down to 4 from 17, and theres more than one pack that are tracked up in the area. If so its weird how the two collared ones have survived. There are two separate departments that track the wolves up there (Red Cliff biologist & WI DNR). https://youtu.be/SpGToAWCaus
From: ground hunter
30-Sep-20
I found a wolf tracker lost one time. I walked him out to a logging road. He was in a panic, because he got no phone signal..... geesh
From: MjF
30-Sep-20
I still carry a handheld compass when Im in the northwoods when walking an area im not familiar with.
From: Nocturnal II
30-Sep-20
Compass is a necessity in the Bigwoods, but offline maps will settle no connection.
From: Hoot
30-Sep-20
Mike - All I know is what the biologists said. The pack was first close to hatchery then moved to the Sand River Basin. He showed me their travels around the hatchery. Then last December he was telling AH that he was trying figure out why the pack diminished so drastically.
From: MjF
30-Sep-20
Hoot those are two separate packs “Pikes Creek & Echo valley” they will inter-mix once in awhile and maybe they are now. There is another pack near Washburn called the 4 mile creek pack, I haven’t heard much about them lately and haven’t caught any on trail camera in two years, they would venture near washburns cemetery every 9 days. There is definitely more wolves up there and in general than what they are telling us.
From: Muskybuck
30-Sep-20
So if I understand this correctly above highway 2 from east to west we have the Washburn pack, Pike's Creek pack, Echo Valley pack, Sand River pack (or is this the same pack as the Echo pack?), Siskiwit pack and the Flag River pack where I hunt. I might have even missed another pack that hoot or MjF knows about and that's "just" the northern tip of Bayfield!
Hmmm.... Can't imagine where the deer went.
Then, throw in a lot of bear and even a roaming cougar or two and you have the anti-hunters nirvana.
From: MjF
30-Sep-20
Sand river pack and Siskiwit is the same as the Echo valley pack, which Red Cliff keeps track of.
From: MjF
30-Sep-20
Im shocked but not shocked, I asked an X wolf biologist up there this morning on how many wolf packs that he knows of in the area, here is what he wrote back. "Echo valley, red cliff, twin lakes, little sioux river, moreland lake, orienta falls, possibly a flag river pack, iron river, moquah. Those are the ones i know off the top of my head. Those packs arent necessarily there every year either, some form and break up and arent detected".
From: Muskybuck
30-Sep-20
2015 and 2016 they were reporting 6 packs from hwy 2 and north. Very problematic info you received. Perhaps the two big packs split. The barren’s pack was large and I saw incredible video of that pack and sounds like echo pack has split too.
From: Muskybuck
30-Sep-20
As far as the Flag River pack; they’re on my trail cameras this summer so they’re around.
From: Milwroad
30-Sep-20
Yes they are, in numbers from west of the west fork to east of the east fork.
From: Muskybuck
01-Oct-20
Hoot-I'm sure the biologist is aware of the "saturation point" concept where once wolves have fully filled an area and exceeded it's carrying capacity something has to give or natural and/or manmade mortality increases dramatically. I think maybe that is what is happening ---Too many wolves in the area. The competition amongst the packs must be intense. It would be interesting to hear what his theory is for how a pack can be as big as 17 wolves.
From: MjF
01-Oct-20
Words of the Biologist. "I think it was due to mange/disease with some human caused mortalities possibly in there as well. That big Echo Valley pack went from 17 down to 4 or 5 in one winter (2018-2019)."
From: Muskybuck
01-Oct-20
Thanks MjF. Yep, too many bring about seen and unforeseen problems.
From: Muskybuck
01-Oct-20
From the 1999 Wisconsin Wolf Management Plan:
-Delisting Level-250 wolves -Management Level-350 wolves -Perceived Carrying Capacity-500 wolves
I pulled up the 2020 Wolf Pack Monitoring Count on the WDNR site and I counted 19 packs in Bayfield County. If you do the math with the average pack 4-5 wolves in the winter and close to doubling in spring/summer. To use a biology term, they've reached "saturation point."
From: skookumjt
01-Oct-20
That's not a secret. Until the feds act there's nothing to do about it.
From: Muskybuck
01-Oct-20
Of course it’s not a secret, and I didn’t need you to tell me that. Anything policy/management related you come on here and act like you’re the gatekeeper of all knowledge with your snarky short comments-constantly. I’m sure a few people who hunt the area or like the area found the info interesting or useful. It gets old and I sure wish you could contribute to Hunting strategy type threads with some depth Instead of pointing out what is wrong with posts on policy and management.
From: HunterR
01-Oct-20
If only the feds could also force the wdnr to stop completely bs'ing the population estimates that way when and if a season ever rolls around maybe a reasonable amount of tags could be issued. I mean really, being the population is 1195 I imagine 16 or 17 tags would be issued, and the season closed 9 minutes after it starts?
From: Fivers
05-Oct-20
I doubt that the actual wolf population is even close to the 1,000 count, probably closer to 100. The odds of a pure wolf making it to WI is less than 5%, to many loose dogs and coyotes on the way from Canada or northern MI. Once one is bred with a dog or coyote, any breeding in any lineage after the one breeding, can never get back to pure. Wolves that are not pure, hybrids, are not protected under any regulations.
From: Tweed
06-Oct-20
^^^SSS crowd?
From: Fivers
06-Oct-20
Nope, just truth and common sense.
