Skip to comments.Five wolves killed in Wisconsin as controversial hunt begins
Posted on 10/19/2012 5:43:48 AM PDT by SJackson
MILWAUKEE (Reuters) - Wisconsin officials said on Wednesday that hunters killed five wolves during the first two days of the state's inaugural wolf harvest, which began this week despite opposition from animal rights groups.
The state's Department of Natural Resources said a gray wolf was trapped and killed on Tuesday in Oneida County and hunters elsewhere across the state reported four kills on Monday as the state-sanctioned effort to reduce the population began.
So far, the state has issued 638 of the 1,160 wolf-harvesting licenses it authorized for the season, which runs through February 28 or until hunters reach the quota of 201 wolves. The licenses cost $100 for state residents and $500 for hunters from outside Wisconsin.
The move to allow the hunting and trapping of the state's wolves has been opposed by some humane societies, which have filed suit challenging the use of dogs in the hunts.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Really not all that controversial.
Shoot every last one of em, the activists and then take care of the wolves.
There is talk about a hunt in Michigan’s upper peninsula too. Naturally the idiots in Ann Arbor and K-Zoo are opposed.
In Russia you don’t need license to kill a wolf. In some states government pays hunters ~$230 for every wolf killed.
It’s sad that the animal activists don’t understand how ecology works. It is a good sign that we have enough wolves to hunt now, and historically it will take sound wildlife management — including hunting — to ensure that they aren’t taken to near extirpation again.
It is also sad that folk on the other side, the “kill ‘em all ones,” don’t realize that if we do just that we risk a major ecological disaster. Thank god for knowledgeable, responsible hunters!
“”””Shoot every last one of em, the activists and then take care of the wolves.””””””
Tell the wolves.... Save a sheep, eat an activist.
I love how these Libs call wolf hunting in rural areas “controversial.” If a wolf was running around some rich, Liberal New York City, Washington or Connecticut suburb, you can be damn sure the Libs living there would be screaming for it to be shot.
Every time I see this subject come up I think of this.
A few years ago, the Sierra Club and the United States
Forest Service (USFS) were presenting an alternative to
Wyoming ranchers for controlling the coyote population.
It seemed that, after years of the ranchers using the
tried and true methods of shooting and /or trapping the
predators, the tree-huggers had a “more humane” solution.
What they proposed was for the animals to be captured
alive, the males castrated, then let loose again ... and
the population would be controlled. This was ACTUALLY
proposed to the Wyoming Wool and Sheep Grower’s association
by Sierra Club and USFS.
Well, all the ranchers thought about this amazing idea for
a couple of minutes.
Finally, an old boy in the back stood up, kicked his hat
back and said, “Son, I don’t think you understand the problem. These coyotes
ain’t fxxxin’ our sheep - they’re eatin’ them!”
Killing wolves is a GOOD thing. If they’re going to allow wolves to roam around the country side, the wolves need to be scared poopless of human beings so that they will avoid peoople, dwellings, and, hopefully, pets and livestock.
They should do this for coyotes! Those things are everywhere! I had one run up onto my driveway while I was mowing. Filthy buggers!
It’s only controversial because the animal rights lackeys are up in arms about it.
Ballot proposal: Mandatory
concealed carry in the northern woods.
Please explain what “ major ecological disaster” would happen?
I am drawing a blank trying to think of anything that would be a negative if they were gone from my state of MI.
Would livestock overpopulate the UP?
Would there be so many deer that the 750,000 MI deer hunters couldn't control them?
Would there be too many hunting dogs that cost thousands of $$ in the state?
There is a open season on coyotes in Wis and most states.
The question should be why didn’t do your part by killing the one running up your drive way.
If those animal rights activists just looked at the national statistics on missing pets, and compared them to the growth and expansion of wolf and coyote populations/ranges, they would see a direct correlation.
So which animals gets protected?
Can’t we all just get along?
In WI, with the exception of gun deer season, coyotes can be hunted day and night year round. No license needed on your own land
Man took the place of large canivores many many years ago, the only reason they exist now is because we allow it. I disallow every coyote I see and would do the same with a wolf.
I am not sure that is correct in the case of wolves. In areas where they did become extinct coyotes seemed to take up their slack in the food chain. The thinking many years ago was that wolves were too aggressive with people and livestock and bounties were paid on them until they were extinct or near extinct in many areas- yet the eco-system did not collapse that I know of.
I agree, whack em and stack em!
A landowner can shoot one at any time without a license, but they must be doing/about to do damage to your property at the time you shoot them.
I shoot ever one I see on my property, ditto for raccoons.
There is open hunting of coyotes allowed in many areas, not even a season, just an ordinary general hunting license requirement. The federal government and many state governments had many programs over the years to control and or eradicate coyotes including paying bounties, hiring professional hunters, and poisoning programs. They don’t call coyotes “wily” without reason, even after years of eradication programs the coyotes are still with us.
Controversial hunt? The wolves are against it?
Where wolves have been extirpated, some species of ungulates have grown to unsustainable levels, decimating flora and also contributing to rapid spread of disease, like CWD and TB, which can and do infect domesticated livestock. Such diseases kill many orders of magnitude more domesticated herds than do carnivorous predators.
The North American Model of Conservation has as its cornerstone responsible hunting. It’s proven to have saved bison, raptors, ungulates, and many other species that are both critical for ecological balance and that hunters and wildlife viewers enjoy.
I think you’d find that most wildlife managers agree that domesticated herds need protection, but that exterminating entire species isn’t the smart way to do that.
In my area most ungulates are regulated by hunting to keep sustainable levels. No issues with related disease in livestock in my area. We also have plenty of coyotes to offset any lack of wolves. I agree about responsible hunting being key to conservation- and would like to add that responsible ranching is also key to wildlife management in that ranchers supply most of the water in the arid west (all of it where I live other than a few puddles in rainy season) Some people do not understand relationships between hunting, ranching, and management of wildlife but the relationship is critical.
In most if not all areas don’t coyote populations grow to fill the void when wolves are gone? In your opinion is there a real difference in wolves and coyotes as far as their place in the ecosystem?
“It is also sad that folk on the other side, the kill em all ones, dont realize that if we do just that we risk a major ecological disaster.”
There are no wolves in 99% of the country despite the fact wolves roamed and killed from border to border and sea to sea. What kind of ecological disaster now exists in those areas due to lack of wolves? I will grant you that a couple of packs would probably clean up Central Park pretty fast and those of us being dictated to by wolf huggers are more than willing to give you all you want.
There is a large body of scientific literature documenting the ecological ramifications of predator extirpation. Suffice to say that it’s proven that ungulate disease rates (and therefore domesticated herd disease rates) are higher when natural predators are removed, not to mention that flora (i.e., forest cover) and therefore avian species are substantially reduced, as well. Most responsible hunters will tell you that prey health is better when controlled numbers of natural predators are allowed to exist...long story short, it makes for nicer trophies on the wall. :)
These are all ecological ramifications. Let them continue into perpetuity, and we could see more widespread problems. Bottom line is that responsible hunters and wildlife managers agree that wolves can coexist with other species in North America. It’s the same mindset that saved bison (and a bunch of other species) from extinction.
Also, as far as I’m aware, wolves did not populate much of either coast and were essentially absent in the southeast. Not to say that they weren’t much more abundant in earlier times, but they simply did not populate 99% of North America.
Who said I didn't! :)
If control freak liberals are so keen on wolves, they should welcome their fair share to hang out in their back yard, around their kids and their pets!!
Actually yes there were wolves on the coast, one of Daniel Boone’s neighbors was killed by wolves. Body fluids, including blood is the way many diseases, including brucellosis. Pretty hard to insist that wolves prevent the spread of disease when the incidence in both wild and domestic animals has increased so dramatically. There are tons of fresh bloody tissue lying around in the Yellowstone area every day. The raven and crow populations have increased hugely, brucellosis has exploded in the area. CWD is spreading further and further from the Colorado research center where it was accidently released, and deeper into Wyoming. Neither increasing populations of lions nor wolves has stopped it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.