Wolves

sconie hunter
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 4:49 pm

RE: Wolves

Postby sconie hunter » Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:02 pm

 
 
I think buckhunter21 hit the nail on the head with the predation/kill numbers.
 
Let's put wolf kill in perspective.  Assume a population of 1,000,000 deer and a population of 700 wolves.  The DNR estimate is under 600, but I am spotting them a few extra wolves.  One study I found showed that an average wolf eats the equivalent of 15-20 deer per year.  Assuming our 700 wolves eat 20 deer each (no road kills), that is still only a kill of 14,000 deer.  Put that in comparision with the 452,000 deer taken by hunters last year, or the 45,000 car/deer collisions, or the winter kill (could not find any numbers).
 
Yes wolves kill deer, but obviously not all of them.  If all the deer were gone, what would the wolves eat? 
 
Take a look at all the data available on the Isle Royale wolf/moose populations over the past 30 years.  The populations move in sine waves that are out of phase.  As the moose population goes up, the wolf population follows until the moose population decreases.  You then see a decrease in the wolf population.  Other factors include available food for the moose and tick densities.  Right now lymes disease is decimating the moose population. 
 
One final note: The moose on Isle Royale have some the smallest antlers found on moose anywhere in the world.  This is due to a high density of moose with a limited food source (it is an island).  Keep that in mind when you are looking for that next trophy buck.
 
I also hunt in Jackson County like others on this board.  In 2008 I saw more deer than I saw any other year in that area.  I have also seen both wolves and bear within a mile of my stand.

pschuh32
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:41 pm

RE: Wolves

Postby pschuh32 » Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:36 am

As upset as I was to hear wolves are now in the Tigerton area, what can we do about it? It's held up in the court system mainly due to the Humane Society, any hunter that gives even a dollar to the Humane Society should educate themselve as to what they really stand for. Even giving to your local Humane Society allows the organization to concentrate more and more money to push wolves and anti-hunting, they're not about homeless cats and dogs. As the wolves move farther and farther south, more and more people will be affected and will push for change. I don't think you're going to see much of an uproar until the deer population takes a huge hit, and it will if left unchecked. I put too much money into my property to watch wolves kill the deer, wolves I never voted for to have reintroduced in the first place.

wack
 
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:10 am

RE: Wolves

Postby wack » Thu Feb 10, 2011 9:35 pm

I just had a friend post a Defenders of Wildlife link on my FB page and I've had friends post HSUS links as well as a few others on the list fighting to keep the wolves in Wisconsin on the Endangered Species List. What we should do here is organize informative responses to these anti hunting groups to expose them for what they really are doing. Get the facts and then get on FB and flood these anti hunting walls with pro hunting facts that will get people to think.

 In Wisconsin the argument is pretty simple. First, no one wants to wipe out the wolves, Wisconsin DNR has a good wolf management program that Defenders of Wildlife, HSUS and others are preventing our DNR from being able to manage the wolves. You can't manage just some of the wildlife. These groups have done nothing to provide habitat for wolves, provide food for wolves, have not helped to move problem wolves, and they believe because there are no wolves in Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, and all other corners of Wisconsin that they should still be considered endangered. We have food and habitat for about 500 wolves, we've got over 1500 wolves and counting. What happens when we are all out of deer up north? What do 40,000+ black bears and 1500+ that could be 2500+ next year going to eat? Where are they going to go? City people and America's dairy land don't want 'em, if they can't make it up north, becoming public enemy number 1 down in southern and central Wisconsin isn't going to help the wolves future.

 Get them to think about it and ask them what did wolves eat in Wisconsin 300 years ago before man screwed the food chain up. The wolf's favorite food was the American bison. How many of those are roaming the north woods now days? Wolves also ate elk, deer, moose, caribou, possibly antelope...now they only have deer, and 160 elk left. If you want to save the wolves, the deer, and the bears and you also want to prepare for the cougars return, then wouldn't it make sense to join a group that's provided thousands of acres of restored habit and helped Wisconsin and many other states to restore elk populations for all to enjoy? Do you want to be on RMEF's side of the courtroom backed by science, sound and proven wildlife management practices, or on the side of DoW and HSUS with only high priced lawyers and double talk on there side.

 When the deer numbers in Wisconsin hit all time lows up north, who spoke up to protect them? Deer hunters. What big game animal provides the most conservation money for our state? Deer hunting. How can we ask our DNR to manage deer and bears without being able to manage wolves? What good are too many predators who are doomed to starve to death? Or doomed to war with hunters? History shows us how that scenario plays out. The best thing that could happen to the wolves in Wisconsin is a controlled hunt. With a DNR wolf hunt you make conservation money, you give a value to the wolves, you get wolves off the nuisance and threat list and add them to the big game list that's protected by hunters. If the arrival of wolves also brings the opportunity of adding elk and wolves to the big game list it will be a much easier pill to swallow.

  Hell, I even take it one step further in saying if we have to have wolves in Wisconsin, we also have to have elk and bison. The same study that got our elk program started also said bison would work too. What are our choices? Reduce the bear numbers and keep trying to make a food chain of deer, bear, wolf and humans work which means fewer deer tags, fewer bear tags as we let the economy and our hunting heritage go to crap? Or we invest in more natural renewable resources that this land was designed to provide to rebalanced the big game food chain in a way that will embrace and revive our hunting heritage and economy at the same time. They want to use the wolf as a biological weapon to destroy hunting in Wisconsin. Wolves kill the deer, move south, kill the rest of the deer and feed upon domestic animals until they too are wiped out. We need to use the wolf to strengthen hunting, strengthen our big game food chain and in return it will strengthen the deer herd, the bear population and provide a need for hunting for generations to come.

 I only mention bison because our DNR has a herd of Bison. In this time of cut backs, why would we keep a herd of bison behind fences and sell off the excess bison to domestic farmers as livestock? This nations greatest natural renewable resource, the American Bison, reduced to buffalo burgers! How can anyone want to save the wolves and not want to save this majestic beast? I'd much rather have a non hunter saving Elk and bison than giving money to Defenders of Wildlife and HSUS. We want jobs? We've got one of the best university systems in the world and they work well together with our DNR. Fit these beasts with GPS and find the best place possible for them to survive. Turn them loose as a test herd and let science and nature do their thing. If it doesn't work, it's easy enough to wipe them out again, and we don't have to pay to feed and fence them in anymore. Farmers have plenty. I'd look at Clam Lake first, as to what better place to see how the improved food chain works together while some of the road/traffic issues have already been dealt with.

 I can't imagine a hunter or wildlife lover of any kind that wouldn't love to see all of the big game animals return to Wisconsin. Why not? Car wrecks? Cars are safer than ever, we can gain jobs in making cars safer, fixing cars and making our highway system more wildlife friendly, not to mention restore habitat that's no longer needed for the paper industry and replace those lost jobs with jobs in the hunting industry, firearms industry, and tourism industry. As land owners up north start cashing in on natural renewable resources, land owners in central and southern Wisconsin then have choices to make. Keep beating the land into submission to produce milk and cheese or restore habitat and make a better, cleaner, more natural living off the land.   
American by birth, hunter by choice.

User avatar
gunther89
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:38 am

RE: Wolves

Postby gunther89 » Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:15 pm

There have been rumors of wolves near our area in Sauk County but so far no trail cam pictures or actual sightings by me or people I trust.  I know my hometown of Middleton which is a suburb of Madison had a wolf that got hit by a car in downtown Middleton about 7-8 years ago.  They did testing on that wolf and it was found to be a wild wolf.  It's a matter of time before more wander into big cities and cause trouble.
Scott

wack
 
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:10 am

RE: Wolves

Postby wack » Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:36 pm

No doubt there's been more than just a few bears and wolves spotted down there. They found one of Wisconsin's radio collared wolves as far south as Indiana. A few wolves in the CWD zone might be able to do what our DNR couldn't. They will go to where the deer and food is. 
American by birth, hunter by choice.

wisbooner3932
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 4:03 pm

RE: Wolves

Postby wisbooner3932 » Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:30 pm

I hunt and live in Sauk County as well and if I ever see one while hunting I'm going to remember my 3 S's...
You can take my gun, from my cold dead hands.

wack
 
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:10 am

RE: Wolves

Postby wack » Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:41 pm

ORIGINAL: wisbooner3932

I hunt and live in Sauk County as well and if I ever see one while hunting I'm going to remember my 3 S's...


 That would be an easy mistake with all of the coyotes in Sauk county, but beware that many wolves have GPS tracking devices on them. One wolf passing through isn't worth it. I personally would want that wolf to reek havoc until the city people beg hunters to hunt them. Our DNR doesn't want them down there but because of the lawsuits Defenders of Wildlife keep bringing our DNR can't do anything about where and how many wolves move south. When the wolves are delisted, then our DNR can organize a hunt and move or kill problem wolves which a wolf in Sauk county would qualify.

 My way of thinking is for up north, if we have to have wolves then we have to have more elk and we need to look into starting a test herd of bison. It's the only biologically sound plan for the north wood that can work and yet not loose deer hunting and bear hunting. Every person who contributes to any save the wolf organization should be challenged to provide the damn things with food. We can't leave it up to them to do it, we've got to speak up. Otherwise what deer are left up north are for the predators, forget deer hunting. With no deer up north, we'll have to all hunt the CWD zone. One way or another it will get hunted. My way hunting has a pretty bright future.
American by birth, hunter by choice.

Previous

Return to Wisconsin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests