Bowsite.com

Take-a-ways- The WI DNR is now in the business of suing/using the courts to stop hunting.

Lessons- Hounds are very effective tool in Wolf management.

Take-A-Ways- The harvest quota should include all participants.

Lesson - The Season does not always have to start on November 1.

Take-A-Ways - The Season does not have to always start on November 1.

Forget it, it just now showed all zones closing on the 24th. Guess either there system or my computer took the long way around. Still strange!!!!

The only reason hounds have been so successful is they have had absolutely perfect conditions to run in with the fresh wet snow. Come November if we have another season you will see the trappers shine with the conditions more favorable to them than this time of year.

The previous seasons the quotas were adjusted/closed when other zones exceeded quota to try and ensure the overall quota wasn't exceeded. This year five and possibly all six zones will be exceeded.

Zone 1 31 28 Closing at 3 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 24

Zone 2 18 39 Closed

Zone 3 20 26 Closing at 3 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 24

Zone 4 6 6 Closing at 3 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 24

Zone 5 27 26 Closed

Zone 6 17 37 Closed

400 females could produce 1600-2400 pups

Hard to see how this hunt can stabilize the population unless the mortality rate of pups is very very low

I always hear about the guys who take advantage of the phone in registration for deer, and how many unreported deer are likely taken. Wouldn't this apply for wolf as well, or is the wolf very similar to the coyote, where we all know their numbers are ridiculously high, but there's not enough people doing anything about it? The distrust I read about the DNR would lead me to believe that some people would eventually cut ties with them, go rogue, and do as they see fit? I'll be honest with you. I live in the southern part of the state. Our coyote population is way over what it should be, yet I don't actively hunt or trap them. Is there really that many people who know the wolf is overpopulated, who have the same mindset? Is it happening? Are people really worried about getting caught with a fine so low? Are they only hunting when it's legal to get the trophy?

I'm being facetious to a degree, and I'm also being serious. If you know there is a problem, and you're not getting the support. When is it time to take the law into your own hands? I realized that private land owners were far better at managing deer (well at least growing them), when they stopped listening to the CWD scare tactics that were supported by the DNR. Land owners said enough, and whether it's right or wrong, they decided to stop the eradication of deer. Perhaps the opposite needs to happen in the north against the Wolf, to bring back the deer?

Please don't blast me. I'm just making conversation. I'm telling no one to do something they shouldn't. Perhaps I'm suggesting they do something they should? LOL!

Very glad to see that Zone 1 came through with more numbers. As of this morning, Zone 1 was at 50

Very glad to see that Zone 1 came through with more numbers. As of this morning, Zone 1 was at 50

I asked him if he found that arrow ? He said no that's my Wolf arrow & laughed.

My take aways: 1) It is correct as already stated that conditions were VERY good for hound hunting - nearly ideal. 2) The best weapon for hound hunting them is 12ga with buckshot. 3) Next time (*fingers crossed that there IS a "next time") I will have my trapper certification and also put out traps. One of the groups in the area caught at least 3 with traps. It is also a very effective strategy. 4) If there is snow next time, bring a snowmobile and snowshoes! 5) There are WAY more wolves than what the DNR is reporting. The harvest number is at 213 as I write this - Someone would have to explain how a 2 or 2.5 day, slap dash hunt could kill more than 20% of any animal herd - I don't care how ideal the conditions were. The Federal Warden in the area was thrilled about the hunt and supported it 100% stating he knew there were too many wolves. The State Warden, on the other hand, claimed that the population estimates were "TOO HIGH" and stated there won't be a hunt now for several years because this hunt was too successful. BRAINWASHED!!!

Fact of the matter, TOO MANY DNR EMPLOYEES ARE NON-HUNTERS. How can ONE state agency be tasked with such varied duties from drinking water and wastewater treatment plant regulation to forestry to game management??? The answer - IT CANNOT. It is over due that we create a Game and Fish Dept that is split off the DNR. It is time that the "Party of Science" follow the f#*king science (last time I checked, Biology was 'science') and get the state wolf pack at 350 or 400 wolves as was originally planned.

I do not live in that area and have never deer hunted north of Baraboo so I don't have a horse in that race. I am just speaking based on my experiences this week knowing the numbers of tracks we saw versus the number of wolves harvested. (Not to mention that no sane dog hunter would dump on a track with 4 or more wolves so larger packs were left to the trappers. They got their wolves, don't get me wrong, but like already mentioned this time around dog hunters definitely had the advantage.)

Yes, lots of wolves are dying every year.

I don't believe the pack size info either but even if 6 is correct, that's one breeding female per six wolves.

So provide data that shows otherwise. The largest pack I’ve come across is 4 by tracks in the snow. They followed me about 1/3rd of a mile when I was coyote hunting. Came across the tracks On mine on my way back out.

They were all single file for a ways and then spread out in a path about 60 yards wide while I was being investigated/hunted. They then grouped back up and left for parts unknown.

"Traps are set like landmines for unsuspecting animals and the hunters are deep into the woods and out of the range of communication, and they can easily claim they didn't get the 'stop the hunt' notice before they killed their wolf," he said.

MjF 17 wolves would be freaking scary to cross paths with!

I saw a trail cam a few years back where there were 28 coyotes in one 15 second video clip from a guy who hunt Oneida co.

The successes of the hound hunters tells me while the DNR’s pack estimate may be in the ball park so to speak. There are a far greater number of singles or lone pairs out there. No houndsman would turn his dogs into a pack of 3 or more wolves. He would only get his collars back doing so. To fill and surpass the quota that quickly tells me there is no shortage of like I said lone or paired up wolves making for easy opportunities.

Id imagine a few deer a week. Im no expert. Maybe more. I read a wolf consumes on average 49 deer a year? Anyone know? Is that correct?

During cat season I followed fresh tracks up winter road)old J that showed 8 distinct wolves.

I also have tons of pictures of singles and pairs. I would believe an average of 4-6 but that means some are much bigger.

I'm sure the average pack size was deemed to be less than 4 wolves by the same people who testified that the deer herd in northern WI is in great shape.

Does anyone really believe that hunters could have killed 69% of the wolves in that zone in 2 days? Must be some pretty darn efficient killers !!!!

From Luke Hilgeman CEO of Hunter Nation- The group that sued the WI DNR on behalf of WI Hunters

There are a plethora of stories circulating right now, reporting Wisconsin wolf hunters exceeded the Department of Natural Resources' harvest quota by more than 50%. This statistic however, is grossly misleading and has created a false narrative that deserves clarity.

The reality is Wisconsin's wolf hunt quota was 200 for the 2021 season and the number of officially harvested wolves was 216. That is less than 10% over the season quota — not 50%.

The confusion and misleading data stems from the fact that the DNR approved a statewide quota of 200 wolves and then Native American tribes declared their portion of the quota in the ceded territory, approximately the northern one-third of Wisconsin. These tribes did not harvest any wolves.

Confusing the public further, the DNR has been telling two very different stories about the exact same harvest quota overage of 10%. In announcing the October 2020 bear hunt results, the DNR positioned the hunt as a success going so far as to state, "What's not captured in harvest information are the countless memories made among families and friends and all the hours spent outside taking in Wisconsin's wonderful outdoors. The bear hunting tradition in Wisconsin is very strong, and interest in the activity continues to grow."

Yet, for the exact same harvest quota overage of 10% for wolves this February, Eric Lobner, DNR wildlife director said, "Should we, would we, could we have (closed the season) sooner? Yes. Did we go over? We did. Was that something we wanted to have happen? Absolutely not."

The simple fact is wolves are strong, smart and vicious predators. They are not endangered; the gray wolf population is alive and well and has been consistently increasing. Wolves are to be respected and revered, however, too many of any species — particularly predators — can wreck the entire ecosystem. Sound scientific wildlife management is critical to conservation and sustainability of a species. In a brief on wildlife sustainability, the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies explained, "When well-regulated, the use of abundant wildlife is sustainable and ecologically sound. Using wildlife sustainably not only ensures that future generations will continue to benefit from these resources, but also that wildlife populations will remain in balance with the environment."

In Wisconsin, the population became unmanaged and overpopulated, resulting in a population nearly four times the DNR's goal. Moreover, wolf attacks had increased by 70% since 2014. That isn't just a statistic, it is Wisconsinites cattle and livelihood being destroyed, family dogs being devoured on the front porch and in backyards, and worse. There was a clear need for swift and immediate action to manage the wolf population in Wisconsin, which is still significantly higher than what the DNR dictates it should be. The DNR estimated the current wolf population to be approximately 1,195 wolves and the state goal for the population is 350 wolves.

It's important to note as well that the population estimate of 1,195 wolves in Wisconsin is a minimum count. That's why the wolf hunt lasted just 39 hours, because we have significantly more wolves than the DNR thought we had.

At minimum, the wolf population still stands at just under 1,000 wolves, still close to three times the state goal.

Here is Adrian “The Wolf Whisper” Wydeven’s take about the Wolf Hunt

CABLE — Luke Hilgemann of Hunter Nation claimed in a column last Sunday that the February wolf hunt in Wisconsin did not go over its harvest quota by much, and that the hunt was based on sound science.

He's wrong on both counts.

The February wolf harvest quota set by the Department of Natural Resources was initially 200 wolves. But that was reduced to 119, when 81 wolves from the total quota were reserved by Ojibwe tribes within the Ceded Territories of northern Wisconsin, under treaty-reserved rights to utilize natural resources to protect tribal interests. The DNR issued wolf harvest permits and attempted to close the season soon enough to hold the wolf harvest to 119, but in less than three days, hunters registered 216 wolves -- exceeding the established quota by 82%. The number of wolves registered does not include illegal and unregistered kills, which always occur during hunting seasons. This is also much higher than the overharvest of 13% on bears that occurred in fall 2020. The idea that 200 wolves should actually have been harvested by licensed hunters ignores the validity of treaty rights held by the Ojibwe tribes. These rights are supposed to be the supreme law of the land.

Hilgemann writes that, “Sound scientific wildlife management is critical to conservation and sustainability of a species.” No reasonable person can disagree with that. But little science supported the rushed wolf hunt held in February.

Hilgemann writes that “too many of any species -- particularly predators -- can wreck the entire ecosystem.” While the overabundance of herbivores such as deer can certainly raise havoc on forests, the best available science show apex predators such as wolves are important for regulating ecosystems, and they typically control their own numbers through territoriality. No science shows apex predators wreck ecosystems. While wolves do cause depredations on a small number of Wisconsin farms, scientific studies in Montana and Wisconsin have demonstrated that the most effective way to reduce such depredations is by direct controls on the farms, not statewide wolf harvests. Based on preliminary evidence, most wolf removal during the February hunt occurred primarily by the use of packs of hounds hunting large blocks of public land, which is unlikely to reduce wolf activity around homes and farms where depredations almost always occur.

The Wisconsin wolf population is not four times above the DNR goal for wolves. Hilgemann compares the population management goal of 350 animals established in the 1999 wolf plan to the most recent population estimate of 1,195 wolves from winter 2020.

The 2020 estimate of 1,195 wolves is not a minimum count. It’s an estimate of the actual population of wolves in Wisconsin in late winter through occupancy modeling. The minimum statewide count in 2020 was 1,034 wolves. The management goal for 350 wolves established in the 1999 wolf plan was never intended to be a cap and is no longer an appropriate goal for the Wisconsin wolf population. The goal set in 1999 was based on the estimated carrying capacity of about 500 wolves in Wisconsin at a time when less than 200 wolves were estimated to be in the state. Recent scientific research demonstrates the carrying capacity for wolves may be about 1,250 wolves. The DNR does not manage bears or deer with 20-year-old goals, and it is inappropriate to do the same for wolves.

The rapid harvest of wolves was not because more wolves were in the state than detected through surveys. It was because of the high number of permits issued, and because most hunting occurred with the use of packs of hounds by large, coordinated groups of hunters, during a period when wolf packs were breeding and leaving scent and tracks as they patrolled their territories. Any of the usual sporting ethics of fair chase were absent from this event. This may have been the first hunt in Wisconsin’s history where the number of hunters was greater than the number of animals being hunted.

The Wisconsin wolf population may no longer be endangered. But forcing a rushed harvest during the breeding season without careful use of science may create impacts on the population that will take years to understand. This hunt represented poor use of science and was an insult to sound conservation of the state wolf population.

>

Adrian “The Wolf Whisper” Wydeven. Every time I hear his name, I throw up in my mouth a little. He is the poster boy of our Mid level DNR problems. What a Turd.

.

The DNR really is cheerleading the season this year. Why can't the DNR just shut up and not remind fishermen this is happening? If it would just be ignored, they probably would just get bored because of no uproar and stop.

I wonder if tossing the fish in dumpsters is included in their cultural heritage.

I better stop or the liberal Bowsite gestapo will hunt me down for hate crimes against the indigenous peoples of Wisconsin.

"White Guilt"

The Lakotas/Sioux and the Objibwe fought many times most notable is the Battle of the Brule.

The Chippewa and Sioux/Lakotas waged fierce fights against each others in the mid 1750's.

The Sioux/Lakota and the Pawnees battled in what was named Massacre Canyon in 1873.

Few probably know it was the white man who negotiated the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 between the Cheyenne, Sioux, Arapaho, Crow, Assiniboine, Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara as attempt to bring peace between the tribes.

Sadly history has become the tale only of the discretions of the evil white man.

HF43

The tribes can run casinos while non-tribes cannot. The tribes can shoot deer at night over bait while others cannot. Damn near every Native American can attend college for basically free but most choose to wallow in alcoholism. They have choices but are given special treatment still. Barbara Crabb will always suck in Wisconsin lore.

The casinos are on their own land so

When you say they own the land, do you mean the portion where the casino is or are you referring to their rights on the ceded territory? Potawatomi is in Milwaukee. There are casinos in Madison and Green Bay. Not all casinos are in the ceded territory. I agree with all the points Capt. Mike made in regard to owned land. That argument is pointless. Plenty of non-Indians could own land and put up casinos if allowed. Isn't this a form a racism?

How about some hypocrisy while were at it and in the wolf thread. Part of the tribes' anger and contention with the recent wolf hunt was that females were killed after they had been impregnated. Yet, they have no issue with killing deer during breeding season or putting a spear in the back of the 20+ year old Musky ready to spawn. Oh the hypocrisy.