Why don't states treat wolves like weed and say "screw you" to the feds and go on with a hunt anyway? If the feds want to pursue violations, let em, otherwise we're gonna do our thing and state resources won't be used for enforcement. Works for dispensaries.

Most aren’t looking to eliminate the wolves, just need common sense population management, which helps to make sure that wolves keep a healthy fear of man and his hunting dogs.
You get to manage the wolves in AK, right?

Good point Joe.
I'm thinking GrayWolfandPack might be an anti.

Federal judge said we can't have a season. It's not worth risking a violation tl.

Brilliant. Just eliminate the goal and the plan is always successful.

Or, do like MN and just keep adjusting the goal to whatever the current population estimate is.

Wolf management is easy.

That's funny. Didn't you just kill the fox that killed your cat? Pretty sure the fox had more of a right to be there than you and your cat. Guess your cat should have been able to outrun, avoid, or fight the fox. It didn't. I think WI should be able to manage their wolves as they see fit. If you set a single trap for wolves on your line in Alaska then you're a hypocrite telling them to just deal with it.

Notice any differences in the zones? Good/bad idea and why?

To me zone 4 became much larger and now there and there are multple smaller zones surrounding reservations and other areas of higher or more selective harvest. Even with Lake Michigan and the mississippi corridor the major expansion area for wolves has been down the Wisconsin River area and into the forest and crop areas of central WI. Maybe the zone changes are set up to address those expansion areas. Don't know yet what the smaller zones surrounding the reservations will be managed.
I am one who did not mind seeing the goal limit or 350 number dropped. To me at this time that number is quite useless and is a major sticking point in managing the wolves at all. The department recognizes that even with their estimates we are roughly 3 times that goal number. Anti wolf people many need to move away from the no wolves on the landscape as well. If we get 3-10 years of managed seasons we will have far more accuracy on how many wolves we actually do have and to me managing to have a species to satisfy social issues and conflict makes more sense then a hard number does. If we can get past the endangered species road blocks and manage the wolves like we do other game species we will be in a better place. There certainly is no real defense for saying we have a species that is in jeaprody of becoming extinct and especially if we derive a management system for population growth or control. The best way to have a species stay on the landscape is to put a season on the species as resources, research and funds come with that.

Bryce

Well my comment today I sent to them was pro wolves and pro management via trapping exclusively. Im gonna keep doing surveys....the real thing is that once they fully come back what the populations of the rest of the animals will be.

Yes, wolf's belong in the woods! >>> So keep them in the woods and out of my pastures. Why do I have to back down to an apex predator on my property when I am MEGAPREDATOR?

Anyone got a direct link to this new wolf plan?

This might be a good point. One arm of DNR is pushing for improving water quality. Here is a list of restoration waters that they are working on and have plans to do it.
https://dnr.wi.gov/water/wsSWIMSDocument.ashx?documentSeqNo=307141811

Guess what gets a lot of focus? Yup, AG.

So what types of things are they pushing for? Things like cover crops and more pasture. One of the 5 principles of soil health is animal integration.

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/conservat...a/soil-health-principle-5-of-5-livestock

They want to and are encouraging farmers to put more animals on the landscape and get them out of confinement. It benefits the farmer through improved soil health and benefits environment by keeping sediment and nutrients out of the water. Unfortunately, a lot of these areas are in the very areas they just transferred out of zone 6 and will be required to have a higher wolf population. Makes absolutely no sense to be setting up farmers for failure and heartbreak.

Simply put, very few want to eliminate wolves, Just lower the density to non-conflict levels. I feel that is a do able and fair approach.

Very true.

Email I got from WDNR:


DNR News Release Header Image
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Dec. 13, 2022
Contact: DNR Office of Communications
DNRPress@wisconsin.gov



Public Review And Comment Period For
Proposed Wolf Management Plan Extended
Comment Period Extended Through Feb. 28


MADISON, Wis. – The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) today announced an extension to the public review and comment period for the draft Wolf Management Plan.

The review period is extended until Feb. 28, 2023 at 11:59 p.m.

This extension is intended to allow more time for the public to review the details of the plan and share their feedback on this important item.

The public is encouraged to review the draft plan online and share their thoughts via the online comment tool. The DNR will also accept questions and comments via mail and email at:

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
C/O Wolf Management Plan Comments
101 S. Webster Street
PO Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707-7921
DNRWildlifeSwitchboard@wisconsin.gov

The public review and comment period is a key opportunity for the public to share their thoughts on the proposed wolf management plan. The DNR will review and consider all feedback submitted during the review period while preparing the final draft of the proposed wolf management plan.

The draft management plan lays out a holistic approach to ensuring the state’s wolf population remains healthy and secure while balancing the diverse interests of the public.

The proposed plan was developed in consideration of many factors, including public input, consultations with Wisconsin's tribal nations, scientific literature reviews, a study on current public attitudes towards wolves and potential outcomes of various management decisions.

The draft plan aims to effectively balance the tradeoffs between three main objectives:

Ensuring a healthy and sustainable wolf population to fulfill its ecological role.
Addressing and reducing wolf-related conflicts.
Providing multiple benefits associated with the wolf population, including hunting, trapping and sightseeing.
In addition, the draft plan details proposals to increase public understanding of wolves, identify important scientific research to be conducted and outline steps to ensure collaboration on science-based wolf management in Wisconsin.

More details about the plan’s objectives and metrics for evaluation are described in the implementation section of the management plan. The descriptions and metrics provided give a clearer understanding of the intent behind each objective, how the DNR plans to measure it and what conditions constitute satisfactory progress toward the objective.

What’s Staying The Same?

The draft plan provides that DNR staff will continue to monitor wolves each year and address wolf-related conflict (consistent with current law). The DNR will continue supporting and conducting scientific research and science-based decision-making. Collaboration with other agencies, tribal nations, stakeholder groups and the public on items of mutual importance remains a department priority.

What’s Changing?

The plan proposes several changes to align the DNR’s wolf management strategy with the current state of the wolf population, the available science and the perspectives of a diverse public, such as:

Moving away from a single numeric population goal and instead using an adaptive management process focused on balancing the three main objectives (above).
Reducing harvest registration times and issuing zone-specific wolf harvest permits to improve the department's ability to effectively meet harvest quotas.
Adding mechanisms to address localized concerns, including wolf harvest concerns near tribal reservation boundaries and focused wolf harvest in areas with a history of wolf-livestock conflict.
Revising wolf management zone boundaries to better reflect current wolf distribution and habitat.
The public is encouraged to review the updated plan in detail to learn more.

Anybody watch the hearing for the delisting bill that was introduced. They sure had a wealth of knowledgeable people speak. I noticed one of our members did a great job testifying. Glad to see Mr. Roberts is able to speak freely to the issue. He comes on about the 55 minute mark.

https://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=412934

You all are truly blessed to have Mr. Roberts speak. I looked at the list of speakers and indeed Nate Roberts.........fighting the good fight.

Any chance that there were any testimonials from MN biologists?

"like".