http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/mammals/wolves/mgmt.html Looks like they're back on the list. I don't know what's more silly, MN wolves being "endangered" or the reaction I've been seeing from hunters pissing and moaning and talking about poaching. I swear those with level heads must have moved to Canada.... I can't seem to find them anywhere.
Saying you are going to poach wolves is ridiculous but so are the people that are spending a crap load of money to get wolves back on the endangered list. Look if the politicians want to take their money and put an end to hunting wolves then just have the balls to say we don't want you to hunt them. Don't hide behind putting them on the endangered list when they clearly are not. This is clearly a bunch of crying whinny ***** bleeding heart liberals getting what they want and it is F N SAD!!!
I like wolves and think they have a certain mystique about them, but I also think harvest in MN can be sustained and should continue.
I don't understand the Federal Governments need for stepping in. Do they think MN can't handle their own populations? Obviously everyone is entitled to their own opinions on the wolf situation but I think each state can handle their own wildlife. I believe the wolf population is high enough if wolves are traveling into areas like southern MN. If MN can host an elk hunt with a elk herd less than 200 animals, why can't we have a wolf hunt when populations are in the thousands? In my opinion an elk is far more "majestic" or rare in Mn. Elk reproduce on average 1 calf per cow where wolves can reproduce 4-6 pups per female. Clearly the wolf population can bounce back far easier than Elk. Looking at the ariel surveys, the estimated pre calving elk population was 157 and they gave out 9 licenses so 5.7% of the standing population. To me, logically we should be able to shoot ATLEAST 5.7% of the wolf population since they can reproduce faster and there are far more wolves.
I don't hate wolves, but if I want to see one I'd be happy to go to Canada or Alaska to enjoy them. Feel the great lakes and western states were fine before they were brought back in large numbers. I hope they're gone once again in my lifetime.
I get pissed about lies about the population there are way more than the 3000 on the high end of the "official" population estimates I watched a story this morning on KSTP about a wolf sighting in the suburbs of the Twin Cities, what does that tell you? Population is much higher that they lead us to believe.
Funny how you mention Canada...the more I look at the direction of this country .............The better Canada looks..lol
they just don't know the can of worms they have opened by reintroducing an alpha predator back into the lower 48..
But who are we to decide which animals are allowed to exist and which are not? Wolves were here long before we we were and they have a place and function in a healthy ecosystem. BUT...if we choose to manage every other species (especially those that interact so directly with wolves), I don't understand how we cannot then also manage wolves. The most unfortunate thing about this is that the animal rights folks spoke louder and were heard more than we were.
Considering they are seen from the Canadian boarder to the Twin Cities there has to be more than 3000.
Wolf lovers can have their "mystic" creatures up north in the woods, in areas with livestock keep them out. Wolves in the southern 2/3rds of Minnesota are an invasive specie and should be kept out. Evidently Wolves have higher priority than Moose in Minnesota.
Why? They cover way more ground than most mammals. Basic and generalized numbers: -Average pack size is 2-15, so we'll take 10 (On the high size and bigger than I've ever seen here) -average pack territory is 100-300 square miles. We'll take something on the low side, say 120 square miles -Minnesota, just under 87,000 square miles. We'll take your estimate of wolves being in the top half, so 43,500 square miles. 43,500 / 120 = 358.3333 packs (assuming high pack density). 358.3333 * 10 = 3584 wolves. Even taking 100 square miles for a territory and 15 wolves in every pack using the top 1/2 of MN gets us to 6,525 wolves. I just don't see it...
They also have a great dispersal distance, 50-100 miles (*recorded up to 500 miles). They also cover their whole territory in a short time. people will see the same wolves miles apart on the same day. Suddenly a pack of 5 wolves makes people think that there are 50 around.
Do you agree with the stats posted in the story online where the wolf population estimate for MN WI and MI is a total of 3,700 wolves? How are moose not considered endangered in Minnesota?
I see a appeal coming on this ruling. It really pisses me off when one judge can make a decision that affects us all. I strong believe that it should take more than one Judge. Political finest at its finest wonder what bribing he took. Beefie
Hard to say I guess. I could see it being more, maybe in the 4K-4,500 range But I doubt it being that high. One thing to consider is how they pick these numbers. Take the moos survey for instance. The last survey states 4,350 moose. People see that number. What they don't see is that the research actually says 3,220-6,210 moose. So, if there are 4,500 wolves, it's probably within their estimated range. Taking the same basic stats as before and adding the top 1/3 of WI (21,852 mi^2) and the entire U.P. (16,452 mi^2), be could add another 3192 wolves. Now thats again assuming full pack density ( I'll kiss your you know what if thats the case in WI & MI ) That puts us at an uber liberal 6,776 wolves. 4,000 seems pretty reasonable to me.
Don't get me wrong. They're expanding for sure and I think they should be managed. People just need to take much more even keeled approach. Both sides of the issue are championed by folks that are flooded with emotion, which often clouds any sort of reason.
Well, the feds haven't done it, but we stopped hunting moose and are in process of trying to help build their numbers. Would you like the Feds to step in in this case, but not in the wolf's? People endlessly ***** at the DNR. It kills me. They want to hunt wolves, protect the moose all the while researching to find all factors leading to their demise. A federal judge puts the wolf back on the list and somehow it's still the DNR's fault.
