BWCABoard.com - The Social Network of the BWCA

I notice all the Pro-Ban pictures are of "cute" little wolves. Have you seen how they really behave in the wild? One lone wolf, is not to be feared. He knows it. But where there's one, there's bound to be more. And as a pack, the tables are turned.

The wolves see you as the next lunch. You can't run as fast a deer, you don't have claws like a bear, you can't climb a tree as fast as the small animals. They don't need to take out all of the party, just one, -- for now. They know they have safety in numbers. And their packs numbers are more than yours.

If you insist that wolf population be allow to grow unchecked you'd better plan for a different BWCA. Plan on the BWCA either being a ghost town OR allow people to carry weapons to protect themselves. Course one gun (even an AR-15 or AK-47) is no match for a pack of wolves coming at YOU. You have to kill them all. they only need to get one of you. They don't care which of YOU they get. They'll get the rest later, one, by one.

Just think how many people will visit the BWCA if even just ONE person is attached and killed by a wolf pack. The headlines will kill the tourist industry. Ely's history will read just like another Wilton.

OR

Just think of the new precautions for entering BWCA:
Mosquito Spray Check
Bear spray Check
Steel armor Check
Shotgun or semi-automatic rifle Check
Expendable party member Check
Enjoy the view!

[quote][size=150]A NEW WOLF MANAGEMENT IDEA-SANCTUARIES[/size]


[i]February 25, 2013

Contact: Tom Myrick, communications director

763-560-7374, ext. 225 (voice), 763-567-1907 (cell), tmyrick@wolf.org[/i]


Polarized parties on both sides of the wolf-management controversy continue to battle each other over strategy as the International Wolf Center searches for new ways to advance wolf survival-including the establishment of a wolf sanctuary.

"Extreme pro- and anti-wolf voices are the loudest in public debate, often disseminating inaccurate information and drowning out moderate and alternative views," explains Rob Schutlz, executive director of the International Wolf Center. "However, the role of the International Wolf Center is quite different from the agendas of these other groups. Our role is to be a voice of reason and calm, advocating for wolves by providing the public with science-based information that's without bias."

That is why the Center recently interviewed board member and wolf expert Dr. L. David Mech to explore a possible new compromise between lethal wolf control and total protection, Schultz explains. Mech is a senior research biologist with the U. S. Department of the Interior and has studied wolves and wolf management for the last 55 years.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] Some background will be very helpful here. Can you give us a short recap?

[b]Mech:[/b] Sure. Wolves have always been controversial. That's a given. Some people love them, and some hate them. The most recent controversy seems to have resulted from the wolf's removal from the federal endangered species list in December 2011 and then being publicly hunted and trapped. In Minnesota, the wolf population was biologically recovered in 1978, when there were 1,250 wolves. They were kept on the list until Wisconsin and Michigan populations recovered.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] I think the big question for many is why some people think the population needs to be hunted and trapped?

[b]Mech:[/b] Wolves kill livestock, deer and moose. Thus, some people think wolves compete with human interests, making it necessary to control wolf numbers.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] How valid is that view?

[b]Mech:[/b] Livestock owners do incur losses from wolf predation, and under some conditions wolves can reduce deer and moose numbers. However, public perception as to the degree of these problems is usually exaggerated.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] Okay, so let's look at the other side of the controversy. Why do some people think wolves should not be killed, especially by the public?

[b]Mech:[/b] Some people think no animal should be intentionally killed, while others can't fathom the wolf being listed as endangered and then suddenly being hunted like other big game animals. Some people are strongly opposed to killing wolves for sport. There, no doubt, are other reasons, too.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] I see, but are there any other ways to satisfy those who favor recreational wolf hunting as well as those who oppose it?

[b]Mech:[/b] That's a tough one. State management tries to compromise by limiting the number of wolves killed and by allowing them to be taken only during certain seasons.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] That was the case in Minnesota in 2012, but that still brought lawsuits and a call for a five-year moratorium on a wolf season. Are there no other options?

[b]Mech:[/b] Other than more-stringent regulations on taking, which will bring howls of protest from those in favor of hunting wolves, the only other compromise that has not yet been mentioned is to set aside a certain part of the state where wolves would be protected year-around.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] A wolf sanctuary? Interesting idea. Where could that be done without jeopardizing livestock?

[b]Mech:[/b] Minnesota is fortunate in having the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) many miles from livestock. There, wolves live on deer, moose and beavers. The area encompasses a million acres, or 6 percent of Minnesota's wolf range.

[b]International Wolf Center: [/b]Wouldn't hunters complain that wolves could hurt deer and moose populations there?

[b]Mech:[/b] I don't think so. The area is only lightly hunted because of its relative inaccessibility during the fall, and wolves have always lived there, even when extirpated from the rest of the 48 states.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] Are you saying that setting aside a year-around wolf sanctuary would satisfy folks who do not want wolves killed or don't like the idea of people killing them for sport?

[b]Mech:[/b] Certainly it wouldn't satisfy some of them, but it is the most reasonable and workable compromise I can think of that hasn't as of yet been tried.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] Do any other states have wolf sanctuaries?

[b]Mech:[/b] Only national parks such as Yellowstone, Glacier, and Isle Royale. Minnesota's Voyageurs National Park harbors wolves, but that park is too small for much of a population that lives only in the park.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] How many wolves inhabit the BWCAW?

[b]Mech: [/b]The numbers vary, but recently about 150 or roughly 20 to 30 packs.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] That's a substantial wilderness population!

[b]Mech:[/b] Yes. And it's one that has been studied several times since the late 1930s, starting with Sigurd Olson. In fact, Olson carried out the first scientific studies of wolves in the world there, and I have had studies going on there since 1966.

[b]International Wolf Center:[/b] Do you think the Minnesota Legislature would consider setting aside the BWCAW as a wolf sanctuary?

[b]Mech: [/b]Someone would have to introduce such a bill and let the democratic process play out. [/quote]

Wolves was here first and they have just as much right if not more to be here as we do!!! Humans fought wars to be free, Why can't Wolves live and run be free as we do!! They only kill what is needed to to survive for food and protecting their families, (Wolves DO NOT kill needlessly) humans do that and much worse! How can humans claim to have a heart when they can without remorse needlessly slaughter wolves and other animals for what sport, trophy, fun; there no honor in it!! I do understand there is a few good people who do hunt for food; but these wolf hunts are vile, cruel, wrong!

Because they took the wolves off the endangered list I have no desire to go to that state, it use be beautiful but now it has become a very ugly state. The killing and trappings of the wolves is unjustice, it shows lack in the human race (we don’t understand it so lets just kill it ). You should be ashamed of your reasons for harming these animals. How would you feel if the animals choose to treat all of you the same way. Next time give the permits to the wolves .You over there are a disgrace and should not have the power you have. You are really ignorant!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyone think they will change there mind if it is shown that the main reason for the declining moose population in northern Minnesota is due to the increase in wolf population?

Just wondering.

THERE ARE TOO MANY WOLVES.

The wolf season in the NE is being ended short on Saturday as the quota is 56 and 52 had been registered already Friday.

114 wolves have already been registered by hunters and trappers for the late season.

[attachment=2]248322_10151320302570050_1394601039_n.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=3]2007-Wolf_Hunt2.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=4]Wolf_hunt-085.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=1]pup1.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=0]pup2.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=0]newwolf4.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=1]alberta-wolf-hunting.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=2]wolf1.jpg[/attachment]

I don't think wolves should be hunted.

[attachment=0]Wolf-Hunting-2by6341.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=1]lrg-70-2006-wolf-hunt-053.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=2]predator-wolf-3-large.jpg[/attachment]

Minnesota's first early wolf season concluded on November 24th, 2012 with 147 wolves being killed. The late season began that day as well for both hunting and trapping. The late season will continue through January 31st, 2013. What is your opinion of wolf hunting in Minnesota?

DNR Wolf Hunt Survey Results

Here are the results regarding public opinion on wolf hunting and trapping.

Isn't it interesting that this bill was introduced, promoted, and pushed by the DNR. Legislators agreed despite opposition and Gov. Dayton allowed it to pass despite opposition. Now, with overwhelming poll opposition, the DNR said it will move forward as planned as it is the law -- a law they wanted and seem to be using as a shield now to protect their actions. My opinion, they will ride out the negative feedback and continue as planned. People have choices - animals don't. Trapping is cruel and barbaric - inhumane in every sense of the word. In addition, innocent untargeted animals will be caught and suffer. What do I plan to do: First of all, I will not vote for my legislators if they voted "yes" to this bill...regardless of political party affiliation. Gov. Dayton also will not get my vote if he should run for a second term. The legislators can amend this wolf hunting and trapping bill. I will write them each a courteous, respectful letter stating my position. What else will I do - This is a great State. There are numerous outdoor things to do without paying any fees, purchasing any licenses, or donating on my income tax filing. The DNR does not deserve my money. I'll spend it elsewhere. Spread the Word and Voice your Opinion - your vote is important to the people we send to St. Paul. Who should we send?

From Howling for Wolves: "Minnesotans have used their only opportunity provided for an official public comment to overwhelmingly oppose the planned wolf hunting and trapping season proposed by the DNR, with almost 80 percent of the more than 7,300 participants registering their opposition.

Despite overwhelming opposition, the DNR is moving forward with their plans undeterred. But we are also undeterred and we will continue making every effort to stop this upcoming "public take" of wolves in Minnesota.

We know the Minnesota Statute actually says "...the commissioner may prescribe open seasons...", so the decision to offer a wolf hunting and trapping season is legally at the discretion of the DNR and is not something mandated by law. We are making plans to inform the public about this.

For now, we need you to spread the word about this law and gather support for the next phase. "

My two cents,
Wolves are not an endangered species, according to Wikipedia ( I know they aren't the most reliable resource) Canada alone has over 52,000 wolves. The United States wolf population declined because people started moving into wolf habitat and people and wolves don't mix. Wolves kill livestock, pets and people, though attacks by wolves on people are rare. Wolves are a nuisance to humans living near them, this is why their population was driven away.
Wolves also have a huge impact on deer population. I know several hunters who've seen a dramatic decline in deer populations in areas where wolves have been "re-introduced." What many people don't understand is the economic impact this has on communities in Northern MN. Hunters who travel from the south for what was once excellent deer hunting pumped a lot of money into the economies of many small northern cities. When hunters become frustrated with declining deer populations they stop traveling up North. The DNR has also limited the number of deer that can be harvested from these areas because wolves have decimated the deer population.
I get angry when I think of this so forgive me but these stupid people who think its so important to have wolves in MN really have their heads up their asses. If you really want to see wolves the trip to Canada is very simple; but then, there isn't any activity such as wolf watching. There is hardly a person out there who spends money to visit areas of wolf habitat to try and get a glimpse of a wolf. There is no reason to increase the wolf population in MN, none. You can sit back on your couch and think how neat it is that MN is saving its wolf population but do you really care about such a useless animal? There was a grizzly population in MN at one time should we re-introduce them as well? The millions of dollars spent on the MN wolf population could have been much better spent on helping to preserve our lakes and wildlife areas and to keeping the costs of fishing and hunting licenses in check.
If we are to help with the declining northern MN economy, a hunting season for wolf would be a huge help. These nuisance animals need to be kept in check (if not driven back to Canada all together!). In the future, more effort should be spent on conversation that is viable for all people of MN not just a bunch of idiots in the Twin Cities who think pictures of wolf cubs are just too cute!

The wolves are finally back on my land in Chippewa National Forest and I'm excited. Wolves are not that dangerous to people. I can see the argument for the farmers. Since 2005, my family and I have been trying to replant a pine forest. 3 total trees have survived out of thousands due to the exploding deer population. I need those wolves on my lake!

hmmmmmmmmmmm..... sorry cant support the "NO" wolf hunt ... Just this morning we watched one walking on the bike path in front of the house ......we figured "at least something is using the billion dollar bike/walking path" ..... LOL ...... but ....... ummmmmm ...... NO! There must be some sort of control at some point! We live here too and they have no fear!

[size=150]DNR outlines wolf season details, seeks public comment[/size]

Minnesota's first regulated wolf hunting and trapping season will be conducted this fall and winter. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is seeking public comment on details of the proposed season.

Consistent with state law, the state's first regulated wolf season will start with the beginning of firearms deer hunting on Saturday, Nov. 3.
The DNR is proposing to split the season into two parts: an early wolf hunting season coinciding with firearms deer hunting; and a late wolf hunting and trapping season after the firearms deer season for those with a specific interest in wolf hunting and trapping.

A total of 6,000 licenses will be offered, with 3,600 available in the early season and 2,400 in the late season. Late season licenses will be further split between hunting and trapping, with a minimum of 600 reserved for trappers. The target harvest quota will be 400 wolves for both seasons combined, and will initially be allocated equally between the early and the late seasons.

The early hunting only season will be open only in the northern portions of Minnesota where rifles are allowed for deer hunting. It will start on Saturday, Nov. 3, the opening day of firearms deer hunting. It will close either at the end of the respective firearms seasons in the two northern deer zones (Nov. 18 in Zone 1 or Nov. 11 in Zone 2), or when a registered target harvest quota of 200 is reached, whichever comes sooner.

The late hunting and trapping season will begin Saturday, Nov. 24. It will close Jan. 6, 2013, or when a registered total target harvest quota of 400 in both seasons combined is reached, whichever comes sooner. The late season will be open statewide.

"The DNR is taking a very conservative approach to this first season," said Steve Merchant, DNR wildlife populations program manager.

Total proposed licenses and target harvest quotas are consistent with DNR testimony during the Legislative session, Merchant said. While Minnesota's wolf population of approximately 3,000 animals likely could sustain a much higher harvest rate, this first season is designed to provide information on wolf hunting and trapping interest and success rates that will help inform the design and implementation of future seasons, Merchant said. The proposed season is consistent with the goal of the state's wolf management plan to assure the long term survival of the wolf and address conflicts between wolves and humans.
The DNR is also continuing to consult with tribal governments and tribal resource agency staff on the proposed state wolf season.

Wolves were returned to state management in January 2012 when they were delisted from the federal Endangered Species Act. Prior to their complete protection under federal law in 1974, wolves were unprotected under state law and DNR had no wolf management authority. This proposal marks the first regulated harvest season for wolves in state history.

Wolf numbers and their distribution have remained relatively stable for the past 10 years and have been well above the federal wolf recovery population goal since the late 1990s.

Merchant said wildlife experts took into account wolf damage control mortality when setting the harvest number. Typically, about 80 farms have verified wolf depredation complaints each year. Over the past several years, an average of 170 wolves have been captured or killed each year by federal trappers in response to verified livestock depredation. About 70 wolves have been trapped and killed so far this spring following verified livestock damage complaints, primarily on calves.

Wolf hunting licenses will be $30 for residents and $250 for nonresidents. Nonresidents will be limited to 5 percent of total hunting licenses. Wolf trapping licenses will be $30 (limited to residents only). A lottery will be held to select license recipients. Proof of a current or previous hunting license will be required to apply for a wolf license. The application fee will be $4.

[u]The DNR is required by law to take public comment prior to implementing a wolf season.[/u] While decisions about whether to have a wolf season and when to start it have already been made through the lawmaking process, the DNR is seeking public comments on remaining details, many of which are outlined in this announcement. The complete proposal is available on the DNR website at [url]http://www.mndnr.gov/wolves[/url]. Given how soon the season must be put in place, the DNR will only take comments through an online survey, also at [url]http://www.mndnr.gov/wolves[/url] through June 20.

Specific details of the wolf season proposal include:

[b]Season Structure[/b]
• The early wolf hunting season (legal firearms or archery) will be concurrent with the deer season and open only in that portion of the state where rifles can be used to hunt deer.
• The early season dates are Nov. 3-18 in Zone 1 (Series 100 deer permit areas – northeastern and east-central Minnesota) and Nov. 3-11 in the rifle zone portion of Zone 2 (Series 200 deer permit areas – central and northwestern Minnesota). The early season will close before those dates if the target harvest quota of 200 is reached sooner.
• No trapping will be allowed in the early season.
• The late hunting and trapping season will open Nov. 24 statewide. It will close Jan. 6 or when the total target harvest quota of 400 is met, whichever is sooner.
• Licensed wolf hunters will be responsible for checking each day to assure that the season is still open.
• The bag limit is one wolf per licensee.

[b]Licensing[/b]
• A person cannot purchase both a hunting and a trapping license. A person with a hunting license may take a wolf only by firearms or archery; a person with a trapping license may take a wolf only by trap or snare.
• 3,600 licenses will be available for the early season and are only valid for the early season.
• 2,400 licenses will be available for the late season (at least 600 trapping) and are only valid for the late season.
• The number of hunting licenses offered to nonresidents will be capped at five percent for both the early and late seasons.

[b]Application process[/b]
• Application materials will be available online on or around Aug. 1
• A person must have proof of a current or previous hunting license to apply
• Trappers born after Dec. 31, 1989, need a trapper education certificate or proof of a previous trapping license to purchase a wolf trapping license.
• The application deadline will be Sept. 6; online winner notification will be no later than Oct. 14. Licenses will be available for purchase no later than Oct. 15.
• Groups of up to four individuals many apply as a single group and may assist another licensed wolf hunter but may not shoot or tag for each other.
• Applicants can apply for only one of three license types: early wolf hunting; late wolf hunting; or late wolf trapping.

[b]Registration[/b]
• All animals must be registered by the day following the day of harvest (can be done electronically at ELS agent or by phone).
• Harvest registration information/reporting will be available online and via a toll-free phone number.
• Carcasses must be surrendered for collection of biological data.

I see deer everywhere, including the Ely area and the BWCA. We have deer problems over most of the state... way too many deer, especially after this mild winter. What town are you near Tressie? I'd definitely take a drive up there if you are seeing wolves consistently.

6000 seams like a lot, but I only see wolves now... no deer... no moose... no rabbits... no fox...most other animals are hunted/trapped why not wolves too? Everything in moderation.

I saw a wolf crossing Minnehaha parkway last week, right by the falls. He stood there in the road an looked at me like I was crazy (or he was crazy; probably a little truth in both) I don't really believe in guns, but if he was in my yard, he would get slingshot with a bunch of agates!"

Poaching is poaching. Legal hunting is legal hunting. Legal hunting is legal. Poaching is illegal. I do not see a logical connection between the two. If one wishes to poach they will illegally kill an animal, regardless of whether or not there is a legal way for them to do it. Your reasoning connects law abiding citizens with criminals while I see no correlation what-so-ever. Your comment about the mountain lion has no relation to your comment about legal hunting bringing poaching. If there had been a hunting season for mountain lions in your area, and someone would have shot it licensed and in season, regardless if it was cleaning up your coyote problem or leaving your cats alone, the animal would have been shot legally, therefore it would not have been poached. Further, if someone would have wanted to poach your mountain lion, regardless of license or season mandates, they would have. Your just lucky no poacher wanted to kill her. There's no season on black rhinos in Africa, but poachers are killing them all the time. Making a wolf season allows law abiding citizens a chance to aid the state in managing a wildlife population as well as a ability to harvest a natural resource in a controlled manner. It also provides revenue for the state and puts citizens in a position to prevent poaching by showing an active interest in a wildlife population while also acting as eyes and ears for the DNR while they are legally hunting and scouting the areas where the animal lives. Connecting a legal activity to a criminal one is dangerous territory. It's the same reasoning we've seen in the gun control debate. It's attenuated and conclusory. I see no relation between the two.

Manage them like other species with a carefully managed hunting season. There's no biological reason to not allow a limited hunt. I'm not sure what you mean by "legal hunting also brings poaching". I would argue the opposite. Wolves are currently being illegally shot, which I don't support, but the main reason it's being done is because of the absense of a legalized hunt or way to manage the population."

While hunters do not waste the pelts I still think it is too soon. legal hunting also brings poaching, people that will use about any reason to shoot a wolf. I'm in southern mn for 6 yrs we lived on a property in a cougars home range. She left tracks across my deck, most everyone who lived there saw her. She once walked under my brothers deer stand and climbed a tree 10 ft from him and sat there. She never caused any problems, as hunters we say no real change in the deer population but the coyotes that were in my yard nightly, had eaten my cats, even ripping one apart on my front steps virtually disappeared. We lost 1 cat in that 6 yrs and that was to a trapper. My point Is if hunting were allowed or the restrictions lifted someone would have shot her within the 1st 3 mo. As long as the dnr I's capable of keeping any routes under control I see no reason for hunting to be allowed

Too low of a number of natural predators is the reason we have to manage deer populations. A healthy eco system manages itself.

To maintain a healthy wolf population it needs to be managed just the same as the deer and moose.

There never should have been a wolf hunting ban... Sorry, just being argumentative...

It seems the only people interested in hunting them are people that view them as pests. I fear we'll see wanton waste. With deer and moose we can at least be fairly sure that the hunters in general will not let the meat and pelt go to waste. Does anyone really eat wolf?

As long as it's controlled, well planned to keep them within healthy population levels, respectful, and doesn't endanger them again, then yes.

Absolutely, yes!

[attachment=0]wolf4.jpg[/attachment]