De-Listing of the Wolf

[brian6715]

nofishfisherman wrote:

Your argument also fall flat the second you don’t eliminate deer hunting as well. You can’t sit back and let mother nature handle one species but not another, especially considering how interconnected the deer and wolf are.

I would argue that IF the deer population can’t sustain itself in wolf territory, than we shouldn’t hunt them there. Again, I am sure it’s an unpopular opinion on an outdoors site, but I would bet I am not the minority in the state with this thought. Nature before hunting is the way I look at it.

[ashtrailguy]

I would bet your in the minority in the Deer hunting group in the state. Without control you can say goodby to the Moose in NE Mn. If there is no food there is no wolf. So to be able to have Deer and Moose and wolf there has to be control of the wolf numbers.

[HeviShot]

“According to the Wisconsin DNR, “Each wolf kills about 20 deer per year.” If there number of 5,000 (which I honestly think is low) kills 20 deer a year, that’s 100,000 deer killed. In just 1/3 of the state. How is that not seen as a future problem that is only multiplying?

2016 LSF Walleye Opener Champion-Mille Lacs

[Bigfatber]

There are so many factors to talk about with our Mn deer populations ups and downs , and our moose .From our DNR’s mismanagement, harsh winters , road kills , and wolves… Harsh winters can and do wipeout extreme amts of deer as seen back in the winters of 95-96 & 96-97 , those two consecutive winters killed from 1/2 – 3/4 of our deer in the whole state , 2014 also comes to mind for massive die offs . Well like it or not we can’t control Mother Nature and the winters she gives us , self explanatory as I see it … Our DNR’s mismanagement of our herd downstream of these years doesn’t help the rebound , with the bucks only approach, over allotment of doe permits , and so called management tags , over harvesting of available natural browsing, are all things that can and should be approached in a better way , but isn’t.. I personally know one of the top whitetail experts in the world , a retired wildlife biologist, professor of Emeritus in this field who says our states management is ridiculous, and has personally tried to give advice to our states wildlife biologists to better manage our herd , only to be fallen on deaf ears . Oh but you say the DNR holds their informational meetings open to the public to discuss just such , but when real talk is presented ,they don’t listen , there answers are “ we will take this info into consideration, but absolutely nothing becomes of his input . REALLY I say .this guy knows what he’s talking about and is willing to help out , free of charge .. search Dr Harry Jacobson deer and you will see for your self his expertise in this field … definitely something that can and should be done to help our states whitetails and the harvesting of such . . . As for the wolves ,they need to be managed differently also , another something that we can and most definitely should do. It comes down to accept the things you cannot change , but change the things you can , sound advice for much I will say .. what you say wolf huggers , I bet these wolves will bite the hand of those who try to help them , imagine that !

[ashtrailguy]

I think Is. Royal has shown that excessive wolf population is doom for the wolf in the long run. Now the Moose numbers have gone way up now that the wolf population has starved and died from inbreeding, mange and other things.

[Bigfatber]

Yes the isle royal debacle is a farce in it’s own way .They bring back the wolf to control the population of the moose there . Ah duh , our DNR says wolves are not the reason our moose are in the hurt bag . Well excuse me , the moose range here in Mn just so happens to be where the wolf have a big footprint, and oh did I mention there are no deer there anymore either.. Oh ya , I jus recalled that our DNR says there are no deer there because of their aggressive deer management in that part of the state , ya right . So there you have it, no deer , no moose , just wolves . So now with no deer or wolves left in this area the wolves are forced to move on to better pastures where there is food for them to survive . The DNR says that the wolf range is expanding throughout the state , imagine that . It’s so sad because back in 70s and 80s moose were all over the north , our moose population was at all time highs then , but guess what our wolf population was a lot lower back then . Lots of nonsense, lots of bologna, lots of huggers , lots of studies , lots of wasted money too . Nothing new , sad but true .

[bottlebass]

brian6715 wrote:

To me the answer is simple, they are ranching in wolf territory and that is a risk they have to be willing to take (and it’s an extremely miniscule risk). Same as ranchers in the south dealing with extreme heat and drought, ranchers in the west dealing with grizzlies/coyotes/snow, ranchers up-north dealing with extreme cold, etc. It’s mother nature, the wolf has more right to the territory than we do, whether some want to admit it or not. A very small amount of livestock predation doesn’t justify hunting them. Numbers are not out of control now, and if they do over populate, the prey cycle will naturally reduce the population. It’s mother nature, we need to stay out of it, even if our precious deer hunting is diminished.

The problem is there were 0 wolves in the area when he built and started his ranch. I understand what you are saying but the prey cycle will not naturally reduce their population if they have easy prey like livestock available to them. If you fully take humans out of the equation you would be right, but you are missing that part of the equation.

[JohnnyJigum]

the wolf needs no one to take care of it. It is the top predator. they are smart and can take care of themselves. they should have a controlled hunting and trapping season so they learn to be afraid of humans and human contact that way they lean to stay away from people pets cattle etc. they are smart. thats why it took over 200 yrs. to push them into Canada with clearing of the land, bounty hunted year round,poison meat,cyanide traps,federal trappers,dens decimated killed and shot on site etc I am sure I forgot a few. my point is they are a canine like a fox, coyote, or wolf are a renewable resource there are too many. Too keep a healthy population they need to be controlled like all other wild life. They are being controlled by federal trappers now but will not once they are (Finally)removed from the endangered spices list they should have never been on,they have never been endangered. Look up the grey wolf,once they are removed the cost of controlling them will go to the state thousands of dollars. With a limited hunting and trapping season they can be controlled at a limited cost and maybe generate some revenue for the dnr. They are top predator are very smart and will learn again to avoid people pets farms roads etc. help the moose population,deer population,wolf genetics,health of the population. With a limited hunting trapping season we will be able to have a healthy resource for many years. Wolfs need to relearn how to be afraid of people so they are not having contact with pets people cattle etc. Again they are smart. they are a renewable resource just another fur barer nothing mythical just another canine that could use controll

[Doberfishman]

bottlebass wrote:

brian6715 wrote:

To me the answer is simple, they are ranching in wolf territory and that is a risk they have to be willing to take (and it’s an extremely miniscule risk). Same as ranchers in the south dealing with extreme heat and drought, ranchers in the west dealing with grizzlies/coyotes/snow, ranchers up-north dealing with extreme cold, etc. It’s mother nature, the wolf has more right to the territory than we do, whether some want to admit it or not. A very small amount of livestock predation doesn’t justify hunting them. Numbers are not out of control now, and if they do over populate, the prey cycle will naturally reduce the population. It’s mother nature, we need to stay out of it, even if our precious deer hunting is diminished.

The problem is there were 0 wolves in the area when he built and started his ranch. I understand what you are saying but the prey cycle will not naturally reduce their population if they have easy prey like livestock available to them. If you fully take humans out of the equation you would be right, but you are missing that part of the equation.

Not only were there no wolves, there were few to no deer in the lower portion of MN before the Wolves were exterminated so there was no need for them to move south for a food source so they stayed in northern MN.
As the food supply falls below the carrying capacity of the wolf packs, they will start eating domesticated animals in higher numbers and/or they will move south to follow more plentiful food supplies. i.e. deer herds. The wolf needs to be managed just like the deer, geese, ducks, fish, etc.

Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something - Ron Swanson

[Joehere]

Article in Duluth News Tribune today says 2/3 of moose calf ,1/3rd of adult mortality rates due to wolves in Minnesota. Annually.

[tkleven]

Right, a lot of people would appreciate a Moose for the family, how many eat Wolves.

[Author]

Posts