Hunting Forum

Possible Wolf Season
Last Post 17 May 2012 11:14 PM by niemz. 42 Replies.
AddThis - Bookmarking and Sharing Button Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Sort:
PrevPrev
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 3123 > >>
Author Messages
Mark_DUser is Offline

Mark_D Send Private Message Posts:244
--
30 Dec 2011 08:28 PM

Hey LunkerDog,  You may like this.

-MD



Gray wolf hunting season could happen fall of 2012

On January 27, the gray wolf will officially leave the endangered species list. As early as fall of 2012, there could be a new wolf hunting season in Minnesota.

According to Dan Stark, Department of Natural Resources Wolf Management Specialist, a wolf hunt was not in the state’s management plan this soon, but the 2011 Legislature changed all that.

“That specific language was passed by the legislature in 2000 when they passed a wolf management bill, and it stated at that time that the DNR would have the authority to develop a season five years after the delisting of the wolf, but would have to allow for an opportunity for the public to provide input on any proposals that the DNR would develop. The last legislative session, that five year waiting period was eliminated, so it basically now states the DNR can develop a wolf season once wolves are delisted, but still needs to allow a public input process.”

Stark said the DNR is already looking at proposal options for a wolf season.

“So right now we’re going through an internal staff process developing some season options. It’ll likely be something that’s discussed at the legislature this year. There’ll be an opportunity later in the year for the public to review our proposal.”

Minnesota did allow wolf hunting a number of years ago, but the population grew in spite of hunting.

“It was legal to hunt wolves, but it wasn’t a regulated season. So up until the early 1970’s wolves could be killed, primarily through trapping, was the method people used to catch wolves. Some of the information would indicate that from about 1950 to the early 1970’s that about 200 wolves were killed annually by trappers. During that time we have limited information on population estimate, but there was one estimate done in the mid-50’s that the population was somewhere between 300 and 600 wolves. Then by the early 1970’s we had bout 750 wolves. Even though they were being hunted at that time, the population did start to recover because bounties and aerial gunning had been eliminated and those were probably the two methods that really helped reduce wolf numbers.”

Stark said wolves are not easy to hunt and season would likely be classified as a furbearer hunt.

“In a lot of places they’re managed as furbearers and in some areas where they’re trying to reduce populations they have an extended hunting season. But wolves are really difficult to hunt. They occur at pretty low densities, so that in order to go out into an area that has a wolf pack and be able to figure out where that is over 40 or 100 square miles that they might cover is pretty tough. Then to be able to actually see one…it’s not going to be an easy thing for people to do, so it’s going to require some specialized knowledge of their behavior and biology and some experience doing it. Likely a season would center around them as a furbearer because that’s how we manage many similar species like bobcats and otter, things that do have a good pelt to be sold. I think about the average wolf pelt can be $100 to $300.”
If there is to be a wolf season in the fall, a public comment period would need to be held next summer.

Attached file
View more news from WTIP


Government is responsible to the citizens; Citizens are responsible to keep elected officials accountable; Companies are responsible to produce safe products; Consumers are responsible to use products as intended; Employers are responsible to give just compensation to employees; Employees are responsible to work diligently; Citizens and Businesses are responsible to use natural resources wisely: All are Responsible to God.
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
31 Dec 2011 10:02 AM
We can only hope!
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
01 Jan 2012 07:26 PM
Mark, TGJ understated it, this has been a long ordeal, I'll believe it when I see it!!!

I don't care if it's hunting, or trapping, I'll find my way in. In lieu of this years events many of you know my opinion of the wolf has changed as of late.

They came in after my dogs twice I know of in 2011, killing my old dog Clarence Maki on August 18th

When the wolves are killing my dogs in August it's telling me that their population has exceeded the point that their natural game can sustain them.

I saw two of the three wolves that were taken buy the federal trapper in in my area, and in fact shot one of them myself, they were underweight, and malnourished. That's why they chose my old dog as a food source.

It will be interesting to see how this moves forward. I hope the MNDNR studies the models of the Western states. Personally I like the 2009 Idaho model, but that's just me

Our input is going to be important on this issue, I've got the pics to support my input, but we need to add our opinions in an intelligent, and concise manner.

Ya I know, I'm screwed in that department!!! I'll need the pics to back up my input
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
07 Jan 2012 09:26 AM
Looks good so far, now to wait for the law suites.

I would like the set a quota and sell the tag. Season could be from Oct. 1st to March 1st. or all year as long as the # has not been met.
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
07 Jan 2012 06:13 PM
TGJ, that's pretty much how Idaho did it. IMHO that seems like the smartest way to do it.

Of course the MNDNR would never do things the smartest way now would they???

Listening to MPR last week it sounds like the MNDNR is leaning towards a lottery draw for tags which IMHO would be stupid. With a lottery draw you have set # of license sales, with a set revenue. With a quota system the revenue isn't limited. I may be wrong, but I believe that a quota system would bring in more money for the state, and would give more people an opportunity to hunt.

But what do I know???

I guess all I can do is voice my opinion when they hold the public feedback, and see what happens
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
08 Jan 2012 05:58 PM
Why would they go for a lottery???

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/ev...her_ID/36/
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
09 Jan 2012 08:09 AM
I think they are caving to the wolf lovers.

Get talking to you reps in the legislature, they will make the rules and put the pressure on the DNR.

A trophy season after the deer season is just plain stupid.....
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
22 Jan 2012 11:28 AM
TGJ, I figured that I would bring this conversation back to this thread rather than hijack Thrillseekers thread with it.

I could live with a wolf season starting in conjunction with the deer hunting, though personally I would like to see it start latter. My reasoning is that at this point in time, for the most part, deer hunters leave the wolves alone. Wolves are smart animals, once we start killing them the game is going to change, and I believe that it will change fast.

I'm thinking that if they go with the lottery system that they're proposing giving the wolves their own season after the deer season will at least initially give hunters a slight edge. Though I don't believe that edge will last long.

On the other hand, if they decide to sell an unlimited #  of licenses, opening the season along with the deer season will be a huge money maker for the state. Only the truly dedicated wolf hunters would continue after the deer season ends.

In the story I linked above it stated that the legislature would allow for "public testimony". Does anyone know how or when that is to take place? Is our only recourse to contact our local legislators? Or is there going to be some larger public forum?
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
22 Jan 2012 04:44 PM
I have been looking for a place to comment but have not found any yet. I will be talking to my reps this week just to get them thinking along the right lines.

I want a wolf season to start with deer so I can hunt wolves after I get my deer but I will come back afterif thats the way it is.
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
26 Jan 2012 12:43 AM
On MPR tonight I heard that the DNR is proposing a 400 wolf quota with 6000 licenses sold in a lottery drawing The season would run from November  until the quota is met (though I'm sure they will have to set an end date, as the quota may not be met. Wolves are going to prove to be a tough hunt). Hunters would have to register their wolf on the day they killed it. I should add that it will be 6000 hunting/trapping licenses. Depending on how the rules apply, I may go for the latter.

TGJ, they also said that the season would not run in conjunction with the deer season because it would create too many complications
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
26 Jan 2012 08:48 AM
I read that in this mornings paper. I said some unkind things about the DNR and the wife looked at me and said "I see you found the wolf article". That plan is just a** kissing the anti hunters. I hope or polies get some big brass ones and give us a decent season and access to licenses. This issue is turning me into a f the dnr person. I think I will take a break before I get banned.
Mark_DUser is Offline

Mark_D Send Private Message Posts:244
--
26 Jan 2012 04:02 PM
TGJ,



After counting to ten.



-MD












Government is responsible to the citizens; Citizens are responsible to keep elected officials accountable; Companies are responsible to produce safe products; Consumers are responsible to use products as intended; Employers are responsible to give just compensation to employees; Employees are responsible to work diligently; Citizens and Businesses are responsible to use natural resources wisely: All are Responsible to God.
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
27 Jan 2012 12:13 AM
TGJ, I think were both feeling about the same.

I can live with the 400 wolf quota for now, but only 6000 licenses being sold has me reeling at the DNR

The DNR is missing out on a huge revenue making opportunity here, yet they want to raise license fees on other seasons.

What the hell difference does it make how many licenses they sell, and how many hunters they give an opportunity too, as long as the 400 wolf quota is in place???
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
27 Jan 2012 08:48 AM
I to have no problem with a quota of 400. But 6000 licenses is just plane crazy. I did the e-mail to both the House and Senate yesterday telling them how I feel.
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
27 Jan 2012 08:51 AM
And the DNR wants 50 bucks for resident license.   Again I will take a break before I say things that will get me banned.
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
27 Jan 2012 02:45 PM
Lets do some math.

6000 licenses sold @ $50.00 = $300,000.

100,000 licenses sold @ $25.00 = $2,500,00.

Yup, a bunch of geniuses we've got running our DNR

Oh, and lets not forget... They need to raise the hunting and fishing license fees so they don't go broke
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
Mark_DUser is Offline

Mark_D Send Private Message Posts:244
--
27 Jan 2012 04:14 PM
Ok guys since were talking numbers.  In 2009 there were 800,000 deer licenses sold.  Total deer harvest 190,000. That ratio says 4 licenses = 1 deer.

That said:
Wolves are not as plentiful.  (They have a lower population density)
They are move secretive than deer.

Question then is, "How many licenses does it take to kill 400 wolves?"

The DNR seems to think 6000.  Which would mean 15 licenses = 1 wolf.

Raising the deer license fees 3 dollars is a gain of 2.4 million.   Charging $400.00 for a wolf license would also get that 2.4 million.

The question remains what value are we getting for our license fees?

-Mark

Government is responsible to the citizens; Citizens are responsible to keep elected officials accountable; Companies are responsible to produce safe products; Consumers are responsible to use products as intended; Employers are responsible to give just compensation to employees; Employees are responsible to work diligently; Citizens and Businesses are responsible to use natural resources wisely: All are Responsible to God.
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:917
--
27 Jan 2012 06:35 PM
Mark, I would say that we get a great value for our license fees. For me that's not the issue here.

Your math isn't flawed, but I feel that your hypothetical reasoning is.

That being said, I'll go ahead and do some hypothesis of my own, and see how it resonates with the rest of the members.

Our first disagreement comes with the $400.00 wolf license. That only holds true if they only allow 6000 licenses to be sold. My Pryor math paints a different result.

Lets look at some more of your math, and theorize a bit. You say some 800,000 hunters for deer. If that many hunters were to want to hunt wolves. At 6000 licenses available in a lottery, that's less than 1% of wannabe hunters being able to participate. If only 1/2 of those hunters want to participate, it's less than 2% being able to participate. If only 1/4 of those hunters want to participate, less than 4% would be able too at a 6000 licenses sold limit.

I agree with TGJ, the DNR seems to be bending over backwards to appease the anti's. It almost seems as if they're trying to squelch the wolf season before it ever gets traction.

I'm sorry, but I find the DNR's proposal to be total BS.

They want to raise license fees for deer hunting, and fishing, yet seem to be turning their back on what I believe would be a great source of revenue. Not to mention that they seem to want to cut a possible huge percentage of possible hunters entirely out of the game.

Needless to say, what the DNR is proposing in regards to the wolf hunt has me pissed off!!!

I'll add one more note, then walk away for now before I too get banned.

TGJ said that they want a $50.00 license fee to hunt wolves. It's high, but I would pay it for the privilege to hunt wolves. If they sold 100,000 licenses it would amount to 5 million dollars into the DNR's coffers (Net).

No, wait, I've got a better idea... Lets just raise the fees for deer hunting, and fishing licenses on the vast majority of sportsman, and deny most of them the right to hunt wolves, that's a much better idea
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
Mark_DUser is Offline

Mark_D Send Private Message Posts:244
--
27 Jan 2012 08:02 PM
-LD

You fulfilled the intent of my post,  which was to help move the conversation along. 

I know that there are a lot of emotions out there,  

Logical points to pass along to lawmakers and the bureaucrats.

     1.  The Wolf Hunt has a very large revenue potential for the DNR
     2.  Trapping is the most effective way to kill wolves.
     3.  Hunting would allow more people to participate.
     4.  A a long hunting season followed by a short trapping season would maximize participation and revenue.


-MD


Government is responsible to the citizens; Citizens are responsible to keep elected officials accountable; Companies are responsible to produce safe products; Consumers are responsible to use products as intended; Employers are responsible to give just compensation to employees; Employees are responsible to work diligently; Citizens and Businesses are responsible to use natural resources wisely: All are Responsible to God.
TGJUser is Offline

TGJ Send Private Message Posts:187
--
28 Jan 2012 09:34 AM
It all comes down to if you have a quota and required registration there is no need to limit licenses. If they charge a lot for a license, more than deer or bear, they will be depriving themselves of revenue.

My deer camp in the heart of wolf country has only seen one wolf in ten years. That is with thousands of hours in the woods.
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 3123 > >>