8 thoughts on “What’s next for debate over wolf hunting?”

  1. Man has been part of the environment for 12000 years….. why now are eco-systems that exclude man deamed healthy!? Isn’t the predator pit that has been created places like Yellowstone…. where once 19000 elk and 1200 moose roamed now, only 3900 and almost no moose live… really out of “Balance” without man? Did the 10 million Native Americans that lived here when white man arrived eat tofu and wear polyester bonnets? During the freefall of the elk population biologist were boasting that when they hit the 9000 mark the herd was “healthy” and “sustainable” then 6000 more “healthy” Now at 3900 and cow to calf ratios that indicate more freefall we still hear “healthy” Makes one think that wolf science is just that wolf science!

  2. And now today’s count of wolves came out at 658, about 4% LESS than two years ago, when the curve was already flattening out. This is especially good news for people who want few fawns to be eaten in the spring, the larger packs and whole population having few pups to feed.

    So, Senator Casperson’s haste had a reason. The wolves, fully protected unless they misbehave, are already controlling their own numbers, just as an apex predator has to, wolf packs getting bigger removing smaller packs and reproducing slowly, 1 litter per bigger pack.

    There is a way to make more wolves, of course. Allow a sport hunt. This will reduce the size of the packs and let entire new packs – starting as breeding pairs, maximum breeding rate of 1 pack per two wolves – move into the opened territory the smaller packs free up.

    Of course, left alone the wolf packs might grow to even larger average size, reduce their and their pups’ impact on the prey supply even more, and who knows how low a wolf population the wolves might decide is natural and useful to them?

  4. Some of the anti-hunters say shoot a hunter to save a wolf …. that’s the type of insane mindset we’re dealing with! They don’t see the elk herds decimated out West (elk that are major economic drivers in those states), or the livestock, dogs and deer ripped to shreds in northern Wisconsin or the Upper Peninsula. Wolves need to be managed closer to the population goals set up when they first started making a comeback. They’re 3-6 times or more higher, depending on the state and whether you use the state or federal recovery goal. This isn’t an eradication program. Regulated hunts are the best way to garner public support to show “we’re doing something” to try to keep wolf numbers in line with the habitat and to reduce livestock, dog and deer/elk/moose killings, depending on the state. The hunts in Wisconsin, Minnesota and western states likely weren’t even enough to keep up with annual recruitment of new pups. Bottom line: manage the wolves, and if antis think wolves are so beautiful and sacred, ask them to take their precious pets that they saved from shelter for a walk, unleashed, in wolf country. When they hear the terrified yelps and find only a head and bones left, perhaps then they’ll understand.

  5. Wildlife Biologist and habitat scientist should be making ALL the wildlife managemant decisions in Michigan, not the average ignorant voter. Does the average voter have a college degree in wildlife biology or forestry or habitat management. Of course not, thats why we hire people with these degrees to make these decisions based on pure science, not based on misguided emotional anti-hunting ideology.
    If the DNR biologist decide that we have too many wolves which are killing too many deer and killing too many Moose, then we should have a LIMITED hunting season.
    I’m sure the Wolf hunt will be a lottery style permit system like we have for Elk.
    The DNR will decide exactly how many Wolves need to be harvested each year, from each specific area, and only issue a small amount of kill tags for that number of wolves.
    This will protect the deer and Moose populations for being decimated.
    Too many wolves will wipe out the Endangered Michigan Moose and it is already decimating the deer herd.
    We need Predator/Prey population balance.

  6. Interestingly this seems to cancel the voters 2006 decision to not allow mourning doves to be hunted as well as wolves.

    It could be useful in the response to this note to your legislators – and the Governor! – that if the bill is passed you will obviously also have to sign and distribute the petition for the Michigan “Fair Use of Ballot Referendum” Amendment that might appear on the November 4, 2014 statewide ballot as an initiated constitutional amendment, to allow bills containing appropriations to be the subject of referendums. A minimum of 322,609 valid signatures needed by early July 2014. For that matter, decide if you should press for the amendment in any case so that the veto resolution process is not completely destroyed by future ploys like this. See Voters for Fair Use of Ballot Referendum at http://www.votersfubr.org/

  7. There’s lots of us skeptical about wolf hunting seasons doing much good that are hunters ourselves, and no friends of the HSUS. Having pros (or ranchers) kill problems wolves sounds fine to me right now. Having a season may just give us (hunters) a black eye.

  8. Natural Resources, Environment and Great Lakes will meet on Thursday (4/11) at 8:30 am to take up SB 288. SB288 will remove the authority of the legislature to establish game species for hunting and transfer that authority to the Natural Resources Commission.
    The bill is in reaction to the recent legislation to establish a wolf hunting season in Michigan.In that case the legislature added wolf to the list of game species, and groups successful collected petition signatures which will place the issue of whether to establish a wolf hunting season before the people of Michigan on the 2014 ballot.This bill removes the ability of the people of Michigan to decide the issue and instead would transfer authority to an unelected body of unpaid appointees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *