Wolf Hunt Halted
Thoughts from a wolf expert
The upcoming scheduled November wolf hunt was halted in late October by Dane County Judge Jacob Frost in a lawsuit brought by plaintiffs Animal Wellness Action, Center for Human Economy, Friends of Wisconsin Wolf and Wildlife, Project Coyote and Wisconsin resident Pat Clark. Following the ruling, On Wisconsin Outdoors received the following note from Wolf Advisory committee member Laurie Groskopf, a wolf expert and trusted source for OWO.
“With the state (DNR) defending the hunt and their proven long-time record of minimizing hunts or avoiding harvests, it (judicial verdict) is no surprise. I feel the level of incompetence within the DNR is unprecedented. The DNR's wolf expansionist goals were obvious over the past three decades, and hunts from 2012 - 2014, which reduced the wolf count by only 69 animals in three years, while lethal wildlife controls were also in effect, proves that no matter what party is in control, higher wolf numbers drives the DNR's decisions. We have had 7 years to plan for wolf management and this fall's harvest, and there is really no excuse for wolf management missteps except that the DNR does not want to control wolf numbers.”
On Wisconsin Outdoors then asked Laurie to expand on her thoughts regarding Wisconsin wolf management. Her thoughts follow, as referenced in the November-December issue of OWO in the Ellis column on page 22, November Wolf Hunt Halted-Skyrocketing numbers now left unmanaged:
Perspectives on Wisconsin Wolf Management
By Laurie Groskopf
Wolf management in Wisconsin began in earnest in the late 1980’s. In those days, the federal government had already determined that wolves would be delisted when their numbers reached 80 for three years in WI, or 100 for three years in WI and the Upper Peninsula of MI. That number has never changed on paper, but the reality has been far from the plan.
Over the past 30+ years, the DNR has always focused on the number of wolves. The numbers have surpassed anyone's imagination, the latest being 1136 before February's wolf season. Impressive wolf numbers remain the main bragging point of the wolf program, and the basis for DNR management strategies. Like most American standards, more is better in their minds.
But the reality is that many folks in wolf country measure the wolf program much differently. To date this year, 95 wolf conflicts on the DNR list (attacks, harassments, threats) are probable or verified. There were 102 in 2020. Each of these conflicts is a very distressing, devastating, and memorable family tragedy. Many involve financial losses. All involve long lasting psychological distress. Many conflicts go unreported for a number of reasons; including that some don't recognize a wolf attack and many do not know how to report these incidents.
For those of us who live around wolves, the distressing reality has been that when government fails to address wildlife conflicts, people feel so threatened that they sometimes take matters into their own hands, legal or not. Most wildlife managers around the world know that humans regulate wolf numbers in human dominated areas. Wisconsin has the highest human population density in wolf recovered areas of any place in North America. The DNR managers realized that human agreement with the wolf program is important, and thus they selected the social carrying capacity as determined by research in the late 1990's - 350 wolves was the goal in the 1995 Wolf Management Plan reapproved in 2007. The 350 was the social carrying capacity.
Fast forward to the present, and the huge increase in wolf numbers (and conflicts) became normal to DNR management staff, and they made the decision once the last relisting occurred in 2014 to not fight it in court and to not allow the experts and stakeholders to meet on the DNR wolf advisory committee since October, 2014 until this spring.
Is it any wonder that the lack of leadership, transparency, public input, and planning is catching up with DNR staff? They did not support delisting, did not plan for a management strategy that used the public's views of quality in wolf areas to gain approval of the program, and they are not using the science to determine wolf season quotas.
In fact, only two old studies were used to determine wolf quotas in 2012 - 2014, which resulted in a reduction of only 69 wolves in three years of harvest (815 in 2012 - 746 in 2015). In February, and again in planning for this fall's hunt, the DNR used only one of those studies, Layne Adams, et al, "Population Dynamics and Harvest Characteristics of Wolves in the Central Brooks Range, Alaska" published in 2008. Is this science? The study was done prior to any harvests in the lower 48. The Department ignores 11 years of harvest data in Idaho and Montana, and 7 years of data from Wyoming. Two of these states have had very liberal wolf seasons and have been unable to control the wolf numbers and achieve a low level of agricultural conflicts. Wyoming has maintained a wolf population above their federal relisting level for 17 years and has held 7 years of harvests to maintain a wolf population under 350 (336 last year). Lead wolf biologist in Wyoming, Ken Mills stated "seeing success with hunting as a tool to stabilize Wyoming's wolf population is notable."
Why does the WI DNR ignore all this more current data? Because they cherish their concept of success - over 1,000 wolves. As far as any concerns for quality of life for the wolves where they live, or quality for the humans where wolves live, they seem unaware and unconcerned.
Measuring Wisconsin wolf management just by the numbers is a mistake. Quality needs to be the goal. Eliminating the public and outside experts for 7 years was a mistake, and Wisconsin is paying the price for the DNR's inept wolf.
Laurie has been actively involved in wolf management since the mid- 1990's in a number of different capacities and in a number of organizations. This winter will be her 9th as a volunteer wolf tracker for WI DNR.