Tuesday, October 21, 2014

WI DNR allowing wolf killing above published quotas

[updated 12:20 a.m., Tuesday] The Wisconsin Natural Resources Board set a final 2014 season kill quota of 150 trapped and shot wolves  - - I will not use the officlal jargon "harvest," as that conjures up picture-postcard images of hay baling and apple picking - - but note in the Department of Natural Resources chart currently online that a significant excess of wolves has already been killed in two of the six geographical zones now closed.

In Zone 2, the kill is nearly double the published quota of 15. Maybe the 24 hours  the DNR gives hunters and trappers to report their handwork is excessive, as it can delay a zone closing while the quota is broken.

Why 24 hours? How about 12? Everyone has a cellphone these days and can get within range in less than 24 hours.

Unless the DNR firmly closes the two remaining open zones early, and lowers those zones' quotas, the final tally would be 163, or nearly ten percent higher than the agreed-upon 150.
ZoneQuotaHarvestZone Status
The WI wolf kill totals in the two previous seasons also exceeded the established quotas by seven.

Is this a DNR back-door method of raising the kill to satisfy some hunters who might resort to poaching for their satisfaction?

Or is the agency just catering to a constituency?


Anonymous said...

Thanks for the wolf update. I live in Zone 3. Heard some howling the evening of Oct 15, but hadn't heard them since and was starting to (perhaps irrationally) connect the grim dots. From the table, odds are the particular wolves I heard are doing just fine so far.

Can't wrap my mind around how we got to this point, where we actually hunt wolves.

The Endangered Species Act defines "endangered" as "a species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range." Gray Wolves' historic range covers 40+ states, and now that there's an established population in parts of MN/WI/MI, it's OK to hunt that population?? Even though they're entirely extirpated from 80%+ of their historic range? How is that not a "significant portion?"

For what it's worth, the US FWS has a recent report tracking population since the de-listing, interesting read:

From the conclusion, it looks like the Feds at least have some appreciation of WI's wolf "management" policies being more regressive than our neighbors:

"Planned [WI] harvest in 2014 (150) represents about 23% of the minimum 2013-2014 winter population level of 660. For comparison, the targeted harvest of 250 wolves set for 2014 in Minnesota would represent about 13% of the 2013-2014 minimum population estimate…. [W]e expect a continued decline in the number of wolves in Wisconsin and will evaluate the status of wolves there in the next annual post-delisting monitoring report."

Anonymous said...

It's all about satisfying customers [not hunters] remember this is the new "Chamber Of Commerce we have in Wisconsin. Their job is to serve their customers who provide donor dollars to Walker not protect wildlife and our natural resources from exploitation!