Comments on: RELEASE: Anti-Hunting Group Cries Wolf Over Wolf Management Law

By: Kristi Lloyd

Kristi Lloyd — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 21:11:00 +0000

What out of state radical? Washington, DC is the reason there are ANY wolf hunts. What is your point with Isle Royale? Neighboring state’s wolf populations are going down as well due to hunting. What point are you trying to make?

By: Kristi Lloyd

Kristi Lloyd — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 21:10:00 +0000

Actually one was in AK and the other was in Canada. NO deaths by wolves in the lower 48 in that time frame.

By: Krys

Krys — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 01:02:00 +0000

In the last 60 years there have been only 2 deaths related to wolves in mainland US.

By: Tony Dawson

Tony Dawson — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:40:00 +0000

Tony Dawson
Put and Take, Thats whats going on here.
Let the NRC decide how to handle this.
They done killed all the deer.

By: Rork1

Rork1 — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 15:19:00 +0000

I’m mostly worried about what Tony is writing about.
And I’m in doubt: perhaps mechanisms to kill wolves without hunting are enough to adequately manage wolf/human conflicts.
If that happens to actually be true, do I trust DNR/NRC to hold off on wolf hunts for a few more years while we study it more – maybe not.

By: wolf supporter

wolf supporter — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:39:00 +0000

Well, Robert…if it is designed to keep wolves in accord with their habitat and available food, then the wolf population should be allowed to grow to 900-1200 animals.

By: Wolf Supporter

Wolf Supporter — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:37:00 +0000

This article fails to mention the non-lethal and lethal measures already permitted under the current wolf management plan, including landowner permits that allow producers who have had prior depredations, to kill wolves on sight. In adddition, wolves can be killed in the act of attacking pets or livestock.

By: Wolf Supporter

Wolf Supporter — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:30:00 +0000

A person living in “wolf country” has a greater chance of being killed by the neighbor’s dog than injured by a wolf. Livestock depredation is relatively low 38% of all depredation in 2012 was at one farm – although there have been a few pets killed by wolves, most could have been avoided had the owner been more vigilant.

By: Wolf Supporter

Wolf Supporter — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:25:00 +0000

I am very disappointed with MUCC. It is MUCC that has sadly become an extremist group. We have less than 700 wolves in the U.P. Can you imagine the outcry over a hunting season if we only had 700 bears instead of 10000 or deer instead of 270000? Every organization would be howling for protection. Yet, for wolves, lets kill em.

By: Tony

Tony — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:07:00 +0000

The best that you can say about the DNR/NRC is that they use selective science – which allows the outcome they want based on the science they select. The reports about the NRC indicate that the only info they have asked for is wolf census data and info and costs of wolf depredation. Interesting but selective. Why not include the value of wolves as a way to regulate beaver, deer or boar populations to improve natural resources?
What if they determined the appropriate deer population based upon the cost to society to maintain high deer populations. Agricultural and forest impacts/costs, car/deer accidents and associated human death, injury, property damage and insurance costs, etc.

The reason they don’t ask for this scientific info. is that they don’t want to base their decisions on full info. Just selective science.
Why are wolves “game” but not robins, loons, eagles, warblers, etc. Science? Get real!
And right now, Senator Casperson is pushing SB 78 which will direct the DNR and NRC not to use science when managing public lands. Damn, there goes your lie that you are using science to manage resources.