5 good Wis wolves

19 October 2012, 19:03

p dog shooter

5 good Wis wolves

Five wolves killed in Wisconsin as controversial hunt begins
MSNBC ^ | 10-19-12

MILWAUKEE (Reuters) - Wisconsin officials said on Wednesday that hunters killed five wolves during the first two days of the state's inaugural wolf harvest, which began this week despite opposition from animal rights groups.

The state's Department of Natural Resources said a gray wolf was trapped and killed on Tuesday in Oneida County and hunters elsewhere across the state reported four kills on Monday as the state-sanctioned effort to reduce the population began.

So far, the state has issued 638 of the 1,160 wolf-harvesting licenses it authorized for the season, which runs through February 28 or until hunters reach the quota of 201 wolves. The licenses cost $100 for state residents and $500 for hunters from outside Wisconsin.

The move to allow the hunting and trapping of the state's wolves has been opposed by some humane societies, which have filed suit challenging the use of dogs in the hunts.

20 October 2012, 05:15

Heym 450/400

Too bad there are any to hunt at all. I grew up in central WI and never heard of anyone seeing a wolf. Now I see at least 2 or 3 every year.

20 October 2012, 08:09

Navaluk

Idaho Fish and Game shows 55 dead wolves so far as of 10/19, but this is a Red State, so we take this serious.

22 October 2012, 02:21

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
Too bad there are any to hunt at all. I grew up in central WI and never heard of anyone seeing a wolf. Now I see at least 2 or 3 every year.

You don't like diversity?

22 October 2012, 03:14

Heym 450/400

When it comes to wolves no! IMO the state was doing just fine without them and now our deer herd in the central and northern counties are suffering because of them.

Some people like having them in WI, most don't.

22 October 2012, 04:57

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
When it comes to wolves no! IMO the state was doing just fine without them and now our deer herd in the central and northern counties are suffering because of them.

Some people like having them in WI, most don't.

Do you think the sky rocketing bear population, 33,000+, has anything to do with it or do you just like to blame 1000 wolves?

22 October 2012, 05:31

Heym 450/400

I just like to blame the 1000 wolves.

Listen It's obvious you like having wolves around and I don't. We could argue for the next page and a half but either way we're probably not going to change eachothers minds.

As far as bears go we obviously need more or I wouldn't have to wait 8 years to draw a tag

22 October 2012, 05:58

buckeyeshooter

22 October 2012, 06:17

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
I just like to blame the 1000 wolves.

Listen It's obvious you like having wolves around and I don't. We could argue for the next page and a half but either way we're probably not going to change eachothers minds.

As far as bears go we obviously need more or I wouldn't have to wait 8 years to draw a tag

You don't actually think the bear pop. has anything to do with waiting 8 years do you? I hope I'm reading that wrong.

I don't want to change your mind just have a conversation. Just makes no sense to me to blame the lack of deer on a population of predators that is 1/33 the size of the black bear population. Why not put any blame on the coyote population that boomed when the wolves were taken out of the picture? How about people shooting a huge number of deer every season for many years? The deer pop. hasn't dropped so quickly just because of a few wolves. There are many other factors that people choose not to think about.

22 October 2012, 06:29

MileHighShooter

bears MIGHT eat some deer, wolves DO eat deer. remember they are pack animals, pure predators, and kill/feed frequently. Bears might be predators, but they are also scroungers, scavengers and consume berries and such. Big varied diet. Wolves eat ungulates, thats it...maybe the occasional coyote or bear, but mostly deer, elk, moose, and farm animals.

22 October 2012, 06:35

Heym 450/400

No I don't think the 8 year wait has anything to do with the population. Some things are said
"tongue in cheek" that just don't translate well on the net.

I agree with some of your points, the coyote population has alot to do with it. Fortunatly coyote season is set up in such a way that "we" really should be doing a better job controlling them. As far as liberal bag limits of deer over the past 10 to 15 years, in hindsight they probably have been too high. I can remember years were my family consisting of about 6 guys shot at least 5 or 6 deer a year each. Those days are gone and its easy to blame wolves. I just don't see the need for em thats all

23 October 2012, 01:07

sdirks

The bears eat a lot of fawns right after they've been dropped in the spring. I know that bear predation accounts for as much as a third of the calves born in our little elk herd each year.
And I would agree that high bag limits state-wide have had their intended purpose: cutting down on the growth of the state's deer herd. Certainly wolves do account for a few thousand deer each year, but they alone are not the reason deer harvest numbers in the north are down as compared with ten or fifteen years ago.

I am glad wolves are back, but we do need to manage their numbers down below what they are now. The original population target of 350 statewide makes sense to me. And we need to keep our bear population way below what it is now as well.

24 October 2012, 05:31

Navaluk

As of today: 65 in Idaho, 18 in Montana. Anyone interested can follow along on their web sites, Idaho Fish and Game and Montana Parks and Wildlife.

24 October 2012, 19:55

p dog shooter

The number is up around 20 now.

24 October 2012, 20:14

OLBIKER

Fuggin Wolves kill for Sport.My neighbor had 6 calves killed last spring.The DNR blamed it on Coyotes.Yeah right ,if its a coyote kill they do not have to pay for damages.Gut shoot the bastards.

24 October 2012, 22:48

OLBIKER

quote:
Originally posted by thirdbite:
quote:
Fuggin Wolves kill for Sport

That's funny on a sport hunting forum. Maybe people shouldn't attribute human motives to wild animals.

What would you call it when they kill and eat part of one and then kill 5 more and let them lay???

26 October 2012, 21:30

don444

Wolves Suck!!!!

27 October 2012, 06:42

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by OLBIKER:
Fuggin Wolves kill for Sport.My neighbor had 6 calves killed last spring.The DNR blamed it on Coyotes.Yeah right ,if its a coyote kill they do not have to pay for damages.Gut shoot the bastards.

Maybe your neighbor should protect his livestock like people have done for thousands of years. It's too easy to let your livestock live in a field, do a piss poor job of protecting them and then get mad when something kills them.

Whose fault is it really?

27 October 2012, 06:44

AXEL19

I believe the number is up to 29.

27 October 2012, 06:47

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by MileHighShooter:
bears MIGHT eat some deer, wolves DO eat deer. remember they are pack animals, pure predators, and kill/feed frequently. Bears might be predators, but they are also scroungers, scavengers and consume berries and such. Big varied diet. Wolves eat ungulates, thats it...maybe the occasional coyote or bear, but mostly deer, elk, moose, and farm animals.

33,000 bears is alot of noses to sniff out fawns in the spring. Imagine if each of those bears eats just 2 or 3 fawns.

27 October 2012, 16:52

p dog shooter

Axle are bear population is booming in Wis along with the wolves.

The problem is that are DNR is baseing the hunting numbers on the Minimun number that the state could have.

The popultion studies show that we have between 20 and 40 thousand bears. ou would think they would avg, it and say we have 30000.

No they say we go with 20000 just to make sure we don't make a mistake. At that rate are bear population is just booming.

Every body I know that baits have several bears coming in. It is common to see sow with mulitable cubs.

Same with wolves if one does a simple 10 percent increase each year we most likely have right around 2000 wolves in wis. DNR say the Min we have is 880 so we base are hunting off that number. What a joke.

No one would complain much if they were manage to the 350 goal levels.

Would make sense if the goal is 350 you would kill 530. But no they want a kill just over hundred plus. Not even keeping up with the pups born and surviving in one year.

The problem is lack of reasonable population level, lack of control, and over protection then the wolf itself.

.

.

27 October 2012, 16:53

p dog shooter

quote:
Maybe your neighbor should protect his livestock like people have done for thousands of years. It's too easy to let your livestock live in a field, do a piss poor job of protecting them and then get mad when something kills them.

Whose fault is it

That would be by killing evey wolf in the area and the state that is how farmers and ranchers protected there live stock for thousands of years

28 October 2012, 00:16

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Axle are bear population is booming in Wis along with the wolves.

I agree. I've heard that a healthy wolf pop. increases by 20% every year.

The problem is that are DNR is baseing the hunting numbers on the Minimun number that the state could have.

The popultion studies show that we have between 20 and 40 thousand bears. ou would think they would avg, it and say we have 30000.

No they say we go with 20000 just to make sure we don't make a mistake. At that rate are bear population is just booming.

Every body I know that baits have several bears coming in. It is common to see sow with mulitable cubs.

I agree with all of the above. I have also seen plenty of pics of a sow with 4-6 cubs. I believe our paper had a trail cam pic with something like 7-8. Wow!

Same with wolves if one does a simple 10 percent increase each year we most likely have right around 2000 wolves in wis. DNR say the Min we have is 880 so we base are hunting off that number. What a joke.

No one would complain much if they were manage to the 350 goal levels.

Would make sense if the goal is 350 you would kill 530. But no they want a kill just over hundred plus. Not even keeping up with the pups born and surviving in one year.

The problem is lack of reasonable population level, lack of control, and over protection of the wolf and black bear .

So what your saying is the WI dnr and law makers are idiots. I agree

I also agree with this. When I heard the harvest goal I had to hear it again to make sure I wasn't having hearing problems. The harvest goals are going to do nothing more than maybe manage the current population. When I heard the latest pop. numbers of 880 I instantly said to myself the number is probably more like 1500 at least especially with the mild winters we've had. The warm winters lead to more carnivore food as well.

.

28 October 2012, 00:29

AXEL19

quote:
Originally posted by p dog shooter:
quote:
Maybe your neighbor should protect his livestock like people have done for thousands of years. It's too easy to let your livestock live in a field, do a piss poor job of protecting them and then get mad when something kills them.

Whose fault is it

That would be by killing evey wolf in the area and the state that is how farmers and ranchers protected there live stock for thousands of years

They've killed off wolves and other predators in masses for thousands of years? Like in as big of an area as the contiguous 48? Really? What happened over the last 100 years to the wolf is unprecedented. Do you support the killing of the buffalo herds? That was just done by hard working ranchers to feed America.

Ever heard of livestock guarding dogs?

When some animal rights nut spouts off about hunters being blood thirsty killers and not wanting to practice conservation I sit back and think about how right they are in alot of instances. It's hypocricy at its best.

Like I said, it's easy to put some animals out in a field, go sit in your cozy house then come out in the morning to find dead animals and start bitching. People who are starting to use LGD's are finding great success in protecting their animals.

28 October 2012, 01:52

ravenr

Unless the Wi wolves live solitary lives
There isn't a breed of guard dog made that
Could fend off a pack of wolves.
Nice fantasy blather by the bunny huggers.

28 October 2012, 06:04

p dog shooter

quote:
People who are starting to use LGD's are finding great success in protecting their animals.

Unless the Wi wolves live solitary lives
There isn't a breed of guard dog made that
Could fend off a pack of wolves.
Nice fantasy blather by the bunny huggers

LGDs are just another attemp by the antis to protect their wolves.

28 October 2012, 06:06

p dog shooter

quote:
Do you support the killing of the buffalo herds? That was just done by hard working ranchers to feed America.

I guess to need to read some history.

The buffalo herds where killed of by hide hunters very few were used for meat.

29 October 2012, 01:50

raamw

When the tree huggers pushed for the protection of wolves they did not contact the biologists. A predator no matter which one will continue to grow its population until the prey that they eat start to diminish Then one of several things happen, they find another food source(livestock, pets people)they move to another area that doesn't have their kind (that is why you have them in states that where void of them) or they die off allowing the prey animals to repopulate. Now when this occurs the cycle could easily be 10 years or more before the cycle starts again, simply put will people allow that to happen. Wolves need to be controled at a tolerable level, just wait till some young child gets mauled or killed and lets see what they have to say then. The other thing people don't understand wolves polar bears coyotes fox are meat eaters, they kill or they scavenge , brown and black bears are omnivores, they will eat both plant and animal