Michigan is debating having a wolf hunt but with biologist like this it doesn't look to promising.
Wildlife biologist Rolf Peterson has studied wolf behavior on Isle Royale for more than 40 years. He says a public hunt could split the animals into smaller packs and actually increase reproduction.

"It’s sort of if you kill one wolf, two come to the funeral. I mean that’s just a common sense way of expressing the ability of wolves to respond to any sort of increase in mortality," says Peterson.

Peterson says a hunt designed to reduce conflicts with humans could work, depending on which wolves were killed and how many. But he thinks it would have to be in a very small area.

But Peterson says over the last decade, trained professionals have shown that they can move in quickly and get rid of problem animals.

"Wolf hunting by the public is not about solving problems, for the most part. It’s about people’s desire to kill wolves for whatever reason that might be," he says.

WI season closed last weekend. We reached the non-tribal 1/2 of the quota. --> 116 wolves.

Well, I didn't think it would get done, mogwai, but I'm glad it got done.

137 YTD in Idaho, 15 of those from trapping.

__________________
NRA Endowment Member
SCI Member

Now, it remains to be seen if those numbers are sufficient to lower wolf numbers and allow big game to recover in parts of ID, while keeping deer populations healthy in WI.

__________________
Ask me about QDMA.

According to the Michigan biologist you didn't so well.If you kill one and two show up to the funeral,that means you have to kill 50% of the population just to break even.

Funny axioms aside, you don't have to kill anywhere near 50% of the population to break even.

In cervids, which are considerably more fecund than canines or any predator species, you need to harvest 25-30% of the total population, with a focus on females, to maintain herd numbers. Since male wolves don't have horns, it's not as easy to know the sex of the animal you're shooting, but if you were to actually kill 50% of the wolves in an area each year, it would only take 2-3 seasons before they were just so scarce that you had a hard time finding one to hunt or trap.

Fundamentally, shooting at least SOME wolves will ensure there are not as many the following year as there likely would have been. If the point is to keep their numbers in check, while not eliminating them entirely, we all know that regulated sport hunting is the only effective means of achieving both of those goals. Let's just hope the respective game agencies figure out what type of harvest is required to make that happen.

__________________
Ask me about QDMA.

Lets just treat wolf like coyotes OPEN ALL SEASON! instead of treating them "WITH KID GLOVES"!

I've seen the tally of other recorded mortalities (depredation kills by ranchers & federal trappers, recorded roadkills, kills by folks fearing for pets or children, etc.) and it was slightly greater than the season total, so I think that recorded wolf mortality was over 250 by all human means. That should make a difference in populations next year.

Broom in,
As the apex predators of this land with our God given right of dominion over the animals with in it we have the right to keep a balance . Should we totally eliminate a species ..I think not. Should we manage and control species that over take and damage other species..answer Yes. We need to, and must control herds of deer to keep down on crop damage ,vehicular collisions ,etc.. In the same token we need to control packs of wolves who feed every few days and decimate herds of deer ,elk and other non -predatory species .
I know this thread is last years but, it struck a cord with me . As a responsible hunter, sportman ...I do bear the responsibility of co trolling the wildlife species under my control . Just as many deer hunters who own land and impose rules of the kill such as 4 yr. Old and older or 8-point and above to increase buck deer growth . We must place rules and regulations on wolves so that they are controlled and managed like any other wildlife . . Thanks Stan

__________________
If looks could kill we wouldn't need Handguns!!!

I couldn't agree more, Stan. Hunters have been taking pride in restoring deer herds to healthy populations, but controlling them so they don't wipe out ag crops or take out too many cars. In some areas, maybe having a few wolves around will mean fewer deer and elk to be killed each fall, but the key with both species is to keep their numbers in check.

__________________
Ask me about QDMA.

I'm finally catching up on my reading, and just read the August 2012 Petersen's Hunting magazine. They had a revealing article about the wolf issue and the incentives for filing lawsuits to prevent delisting of wolves. It is rooted in the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).

Equal Access to Justice Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In brief, this act allows '...citizens with a net worth of less than $2 million and business entities worth less than $7 million to recoup legal fees from successful litigation.'

Non-profit orgs have no net worth (PETA, HSUS, etc). So, they can sue at-will. State game agencies with limited budgets cannot effectively fight these lawsuits.

'A dozen such groups (non-profits) have filed more than 3,300 lawsuits in the last 10 years and recovered over $37 million in litigation costs. The awards come directly from agency budgets.'

They really don't care about the wolves, they just want to suck the life out of State game agencies and enrich their lawyers.

__________________
NRA Endowment Member
SCI Member

I like wolves so much ...Not... I think we should share some with the east cost.

Michigan is going to sell 1200 tags over the counter for 43 wolves for a wolf hunt in the U.P. Mostly for the counties in the western end.Season Nov.15-Dec 31.$100 res tag--$500 non res.

I agree here. I have heard of hounds being massacred when they crossed trails with a wolf pack while the hounds were out trailing cougar.