Pack of Wolves .

Pack of wolves moved in on us . Stepped outside and heard them howling for a good 10 minutes . 9 of them verified . I started packing my 45 Colt , i have seen a deer yet !

Location?

Don Meier wrote:

Pack of wolves moved in on us . Stepped outside and heard them howling for a good 10 minutes . 9 of them verified . I started packing my 45 Colt , i have seen a deer yet !

Have had wolves for ten years at our place. deer population is dismal. We quit shooting does 9 years ago in order to help the population. I’ve had the same 5 deer on my trail camera for the last three months.

The only way I see anything changing is if more people’s pets start getting killed down by the metro..As sad as that is to say..

The only way I see anything changing is if more people’s pets start getting killed down by the metro..As sad as that is to say..
[/quote]

Same as WI. The voices of Milwaukee, Madison, and other southern populated cities over ride the people of the northern part of the state. The WDNR sent out a survey about wolves. The results showed the people wanted more wolves.
The problem is they sent the majority of the surveys to southern cities where there are NO wolves. The people that have to live with the wolves get very little say in the decisions about the wolves. It’s BS politics at its finest.

MX1825 wrote:

The problem is they sent the majority of the surveys to southern cities where there are NO wolves. The people that have to live with the wolves get very little say in the decisions about the wolves. It’s BS politics at its finest.

All of that is just semantics until the feds remove them from the endangered species list in the Great Lakes Region and a judge does not reverse it. They’ve been removed twice, one under Obama and another time under Trump, only to have both decisions reversed in court.

It’s rumored that some people shoot first and worry later.

SSS….the quiet solution.

gom
I agree but wolves are delisted in Montana and Idaho and MN/WI has more wolves than those states. So again I say politics is the problem.

MX1825 wrote:

Same as WI. The voices of Milwaukee, Madison, and other southern populated cities over ride the people of the northern part of the state. The WDNR sent out a survey about wolves. The results showed the people wanted more wolves.
The problem is they sent the majority of the surveys to southern cities where there are NO wolves. The people that have to live with the wolves get very little say in the decisions about the wolves. It’s BS politics at its finest.

I have no dog (or deer, or livestock) in this fight, but those numbers are misleading. The 8,750 survey recipients were randomly selected Wisconsin households. Recipients skewing outside wolf territory would be pretty likely given the fact that there are many more households outside wolf territory than in it. What’s important to note is that of the survey results actually received and counted, fifty-five percent came from households within wolf range. And among all responses, which skewed to those living in range, 66% said keep the current levels or add more, vs only 19% that said decrease the wolves. (The other 16% was neutral).

So I would say the voice of people living in wolf territory was heard and honored, you just didn’t like what they had to say.

Oh no the wolves are attacking my pine trees. What will the deer eat?

Riverrat wrote:

Oh no the wolves are attacking my pine trees. What will the deer eat?

As someone who is involved with a family owned Christmas tree farm, I feel triggered…
DT

The governors of Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota need to tell the feds we are done with them. No more investigating illegal kills, or doing population studies or spending money on them what so ever, until they get them delisted permanently. Basically do what Idaho did. Unfortunately until the 3 current governors of those states are voted out of office, it isn’t going to happen. And to the people that think delisting will happen if a person gets attacked, look at what the grizzlies are doing out west. Killing and injuring people every year and still nothing happens with them.

I have no dog (or deer, or livestock) in this fight, but those numbers are misleading. The 8,750 survey recipients were randomly selected Wisconsin households. Recipients skewing outside wolf territory would be pretty likely given the fact that there are many more households outside wolf territory than in it. What’s important to note is that of the survey results actually received and counted, fifty-five percent came from households within wolf range. And among all responses, which skewed to those living in range, 66% said keep the current levels or add more, vs only 19% that said decrease the wolves. (The other 16% was neutral).

So I would say the voice of people living in wolf territory was heard and honored, you just didn’t like what they had to say.
[/quote]

Describe wolf range please?

Everything in white or light gray is what the DNR defines as wolf range.

Per the report, “Within sampling
strata, residents within Stratum 1 (i.e., rural wolf-range counties) had the highest response rate (44%) and those within Stratum 4 (i.e., metro wolf non-range counties) had the
lowest response rate (31%).

But yeah, the wolf-loving city folks dominated the responses, for sure…

Attachments:

1. 

   IMG_7054.jpeg
   

Well im in southern Ashland county and never received a survey ? Unless i was supposed to do it online ? Anyway the pack is a verified 11 and they are camped out the last 2 days . First time since i lived here (24 years) i can remember this many , they have over the years killed all kinds of livestock and family pets with in a mile radius of my home. To say the least its unnerving hearing the whole pack howling and sounding like they are all excited to make a kill . Especially when im climbing out of my ground blind . I will try to download the audio of tonight

Don Meier wrote:

Well im in southern Ashland county and never received a survey ? Unless i was supposed to do it online ? Anyway the pack is a verified 11 and they are camped out the last 2 days . First time since i lived here (24 years) i can remember this many , they have over the years killed all kinds of livestock and family pets with in a mile radius of my home. To say the least it’s unnerving hearing the whole pack howling and sounding like they are all excited to make a kill . Especially when im climbing out of my ground blind . I will try to download the audio of tonight

“The 8,750 survey recipients were randomly selected Wisconsin households.”

Obviously not everyone got a survey. And I don’t dispute any of the issues you’re having. they are real issues and like I said, I’m not pro-wolf or anti-wolf. I just disputed MX’s assertion that “they sent the majority of the surveys to southern cities where there are NO wolves” because that just isn’t the case. Nothing tanks an argument like unnecessary exaggeration or false claims.

I am pro wolf just not in my back yard

The WDNR has changed the wolf range over the last several years to meet their agenda for more wolves. Originally it was to be the northern third of the state where large tracts of timber were available to keep conflicts to a minimum. Counties that were majority ag land were not considered wolf range. Now over 2/3s of the state is considered wolf range. That is why the survey your statistics are from are skewed to be we want more wolves. Your survey also stated that 37% of the people from wolf range want less and 27% want no more than the state has right now. I have no dog in the fight either because I live in the southern part of the state but I know people up north that are afraid to go outside after dark.
I’m not against wolves but there needs to be a limit to how many.

MX 1825 yes , yes and yes . Its ridiculous there is no management plan . A biologist from Montana said its a matter of time before someone’s kid is attacked and killed . Anyone remember the engineering student killed by wolves at Wollaston Lake a few years ago ? Tribal police confirmed it was wolves , and the Ministry brought their expert in well after the fact and he said it was a black bear.

Is human safety really a concern or are people just using any justification for better deer hunting? Deer kill far more people, via collisions, then wolves ever will so I’m not sure why we’d advocating against their population control

Reef probably both. The economics is also a factor. Years ago in many small towns the deer season made many small business a lot of money. I don’t think wolves have a positive economic impact. If anything it is negative because of compensation payouts.

Reef W wrote:

Is human safety really a concern or are people just using any justification for better deer hunting?

The chances of being attacked or even killed by a wolf is extremely remote. You almost can’t even measure it. You have a much higher chance of winning the lottery, getting struck by lightning, or getting into a car accident on your way to the deer stand. Heck, you could live and hunt in wolf country for years on end and never even see one. I deer hunted for 25 years in wolf country in northern MN and never saw one.

Obviously deer hunters and livestock owners are going to complain. Wolves hunt deer, and in some cases they will prey on livestock when given a chance. Or domesticated pets.

I think most of us here would agree that there needs to be state management of wolves in MN, WI, and MI (which is considered the Great Lakes Region). And I have no doubt that there eventually will be with a lottery-drawn, quota based hunting and/or trapping season.

However, until they are removed from the Endangered Species List in the Great Lakes Region, all you can do is bark up a dead tree. Its not like the governor of Wisconsin can go to the president and a federal agency and just tell them to remove the animals from the list. Its federal law, which supercedes all state law. The US Fish & Wildlife has the authority to remove them, and they’ve tried twice, only to have it reversed in court. One of the primary reasons it has been reversed in court is that the judge has stated that the wolves “have not yet reclaimed their original territory that they had established prior to be placed on the ESL.” Well poop, of course they haven’t. They’re never going to re-establish all of that territory because its now been turned into urban environments and agriculture land. And their primary food source, buffalo, are not present in great numbers either anymore. So I don’t quite understand the logic behind that decision in court, but its how the system works in this country.

My suggestion is if you live in wolf country and you’re seriously worried about being attacked, stay inside. There is a far greater danger to a domestic dog than a person. BTW you can shoot a wolf if it poses an immediate threat to a person. Really no different than the cougar recently shot. If you feel a legitimate threat, shoot the animal, and call the authorities to report it. Explain what occurred. Based on the incident with the cougar, if you have grounds to stand on and are honest about it, they will accept it.

My two favorite bumper stickers. In Alaska, it’s “EAT MOOSE. 10,000 Wolves Can’t Be Wrong.” In Idaho, “Wolves…Smoke A Pack A Day.”

gim wrote:

I think most of us here would agree that there needs to be state management of wolves in MN, WI, and MI (which is considered the Great Lakes Region). And I have no doubt that there eventually will be with a lottery-drawn, quota based hunting and/or trapping season.

“One of the primary reasons it has been reversed in court is that the judge has stated that the wolves “have not yet reclaimed their original territory that they had established prior to be placed on the ESL.”

I think a better viewpoint is that yes, wolves are a viable part of our outdoors as long as they are managed as to where they are found and how many there are. A couple hundred wolves across northern portions of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan is plenty adequate. Regardless of where their original range was, we don’t need to be saturated with the animals. Its the green people that want to hear them howling or see them and those same green people are the ones who have shown that they have zero common sense around said animals.

Its going to come down to people getting fed up with the games the politicians and judges want play and they’ll start removing the excess animals on their own. At our cabin property it wasn’t anything to see 10 to 20 deer in the yard in an evening 10 years ago. Now we think its a big deal to see one a trip or two and we are not what is considered remote. There are too many wolves. Period.

I look at wolf control like I do one of those quaint little country intersection without any traffic control. Nothing will ever happen to it until someone with clout has a family member killed there, then there will be all manner of signage in place.

Agree with the above post Jimmy. They are an apex natural predator on the landscape but they’ve exceeded their stated population goals in the Great Lakes Region. Its time to cull a few on a regular basis. Hopefully we have the legal opportunity to do that sooner rather than later.

Reef W wrote:

Is human safety really a concern or are people just using any justification for better deer hunting?

I spend plenty of time in wolf territory and can agree it’s blatant fear mongering, but I think you know that. Irrational love from one side has bred irrational hate from the other.

I don’t fear wolves. We walked into a kill once on a day hike and every one of the 8 animals was out of there like a bullets. If I had livestock or pets at the cabin, I’d fear for them.

Jimmy Jones wrote:

If I had livestock or pets at the cabin, I’d fear for them.

There’s tons of wolves around my cabin. Don’t think I’ve ever put a camera out and not caught one. A few weeks ago was the first time I’ve ever seen one in person though, it walked right through the edge of the yard. The neighbor traps every year and gets 4 or 5 wolves in the traps each season.

I never let the dogs out without GPS ecollars to keep track of them and keep them in the yard. I also try to minimize them being out at night.

Not sure exactly where this was but it’s roughly 20 miles away: https://www.elyecho.com/eight-wolves-trapped-between-ely-and-babbitt-due-dogs-being-taken

tswoboda wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Reef Whooligan wrote:</div>
Is human safety really a concern or are people just using any justification for better deer hunting?

I spend plenty of time in wolf territory and can agree it’s blatant fear mongering, but I think you know that. Irrational love from one side has bred irrational hate from the other.

Do you actually live where the wolves are ? You say you spend time in wolf country ? Big difference ! Have you ever experienced an adult lone wolf 2 feet from an entrance door to your home ? I have ! The threat is real , there is a reason why my great grandfather who homesteaded at the turn of the century shot and trapped wolves until there were only a few left.

Agreed Gim and Jimmy. I think one of the main issues with wolves in MN, is the DNR’s estimates of wolf numbers and range don’t match people’s anecdotal experiences. According to the DNR there are fewer wolves now than in 2004 and 2008. Here’s the links, but basically in 2008 they estimated 503 wolf packs and 2,921 wolves, in 2021-2022 they estimated 498 packs and 2,691 wolves.

And their estimate of the range has stayed relatively stable, with the southern end being from Detroit Lakes area to Little Falls to Milaca.

If true, this would support a wolf season as it is a stable population.

Anecdotally these estimates would appear to be incorrect, as there are more wolves showing up, in more places that they haven’t been in previously. In the last 20 years seeing and hearing them have went from non-existent to common in the Paul Bunyan State Forest. And sightings of them south of the DNR estimated range has changed drastically as well, numerous sightings in Rice/Sartell/St Stephen and many places south of the estimated range. Add in the uptick of game camera usage, and wolf appearances on game cameras outside the historical range and in significant numbers. Plus, St. Louis County has gone from one of the premier (was once #2 on the Boone and Crockett county list) deer hunting counties, to a severely decimated deer herd with primarily bucks only zone(s). Which leads anyone applying common sense to say, both the population and range are expanding at a rate the DNR can’t or won’t acknowledge, and it is severely impacting deer hunting in the state.