I believe in 1985 the DNR closed the season on bear due to low numbers.

Not all female wolves have a litter every year. The pack model determines that with the alpha males and females. However there could be increased repro as they sense lower numbers or very good habitat to support more animals. We just need to find ways to minimize the wolves into our southern farmland and more populated areas. There is way more biological carrying capacity in southern WI then northern WI and we have enough marshes and protected areas that would make control difficult at best.
With roughly 50-70K of deer hit and or killed by autos how many wolves could exist on road kill alone? In WI we used to pay crews to clean up the road kill but we decided to save the money and I don't know about you but the vulture numbers in our area have tripled or more since that time, let alone the other species. Some times we make political decisions that can really change the biological components.
Bryce

I wonder who was asking the department to limit harvest? Any idea on if we were we under or over goal? Any thing we can learn from this example?

Bryce, I tend to agree so let's look back at the last conservative harvest and how it impacted the number of wolves in southern farmland. Folks are probably sick of this example, but here it is again.

After a significant harvest in 2013(257), the department decided to go conservative with their wolf harvest in 2014-5 season. With a off reservation midpoint winter count of 648, the state recommended a quota of 156. 150 of that quota was given to state license holders. The state also decided to pressure zone 6 and put a quota of 35 which was over 100% of the midpoint winter count (28). So what happened?

Well we harvested 36 wolves or nearly 129% of midpoint winter count, yet the population grew from 7 packs to 11. The very opposite of what we wanted to have happen.

So since we had population growth in zone 6, we didn't harvest 20% of actual population since science says 20-29% give us stable, but we had growth. Since we harvested 36 wolves, I can divide by .2 to get a more realistic population estimate. 36/.2=180. Published science says I need 40% to start to decrease population. So if I take 180X.4=72. Assuming no growth in zone 6 since 2014, we would need to harvest 72 wolves to start to see the population go down.

Now here is a fun little tidbit about this zone. What is the last actual population estimate for zone 6? 56. If we harvest 129% of this number like we did in 2014, that also gives us a quota of 72.

If we started with 156 like they did in 2014 and only swap out my increase for zone 6, that gets us to 192. So unless we go higher in quota for the other zones, we will continue to see population growth in zone 6.

It's not for the WCC to "ask" for a number of tags to be issued. They recommend a quota based off the information they bring to the table. No one should adjust their calculations because they are afraid to rock the boat. The animal lovers are already fighting for 0. The DNR is twisting their formulas and likely dealing with political pressure to recommend a number that doesn't p... off either side too much. And the WCC is recommending if the carrying population is the goal then they recommend a full force season like in the prior full seasons because the population is still not under control.

If you would like to see the NRB discussion on wolf quota today, you find at link below.

https://youtu.be/PiNrFT4Dfzw

Board passed a quota of 300 after failing to pass a couple motions for much more liberal quota.

Just saw that they increased the quota this year back up to 300.

Good news. Sure hoping I draw a tag.

The DNR game managers wanted only 130. I don't think they realized how overpopulated we are with wolves.

I hope you draw a tag too, AJE!

I was most disappointed in the DNR Secretary throwing a temper tantrum when he and the administration were called out for their deceptive tricks and playing politics with the issue. It only grew worse as it became clear he wouldn't get his way. I am glad I took the time to testify as you can no longer claim they don't know.

Any doubt this administration would do everything in their power to keep from harvesting more wolves was eliminated when Josh Kaul decided he would try to remove a board member. Looks like the legislature is going to use funds to defend Prehn.

https://www.weau.com/2021/08/21/law...suit-over-chair-natural-resources-board/

HSUS wants to pick his replacement. What a sham.

I bet the odds are better than 50% that the leftist prevail.

Chris

Ugly times.

On a brighter note, Biden administration finally got something right....


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-wolf-hunting-protections-criticism-activists/

On another note, I’m enjoying Missouri.

Enjoy the fall convention, I’ll miss those.

Lots of nonresidents still come to the convention. Don't be a stranger.

But I cant talk. I live pretty close and I cant make it work this year.

Looks like HunterNation is stepping back up to the plate again....


https://www.jsonline.com/story/news...gainst-dnr-board-chair-prehn/8242172002/

The lady trying to replace him would be a disaster.

She held a leadership position on the Bayfield CDAC. They ignored very strong public input against their recommendation and refused to adjust their original recommendation for antlerless permits on public land to account for the feedback. Thankfully the current board adjusted the permit levels when it came before them.

https://www.fws.gov/news/ShowNews.c...ay-wolf-in-the-western-us-&_ID=36998

Not wi, but I bet it makes into the arguments for the cases dealing with WI.