WOLF KILLING DOGS
On Monday (September 21st) a wolf killed a hunting dog in the town of Minocqua Wisconsin, and this happens more than people think or want to believe. Just last year alone there were 40 confirmed hunting dogs killed by wolves in Wisconsin and the wolf numbers are growing every year. AGAIN, something needs to be done and that would be delisting wolves and institute another hunting season.
I wrote before that I was glad, wolves were delisted January 4th, 2021, and another hunting/trapping season was implicated so the state could manage them again. The reason, there is only so much habitat for animals to survive and when wild animals run out of food they will die. Therefore, states have hunting/trapping seasons each year to control the number of different species.
So, how many wolves are in Wisconsin NOW? NOBODY KNOWS HOW MANY WOLVES WE HAVE.
I don’t understand why but the DNR always gives low or minimum counts when wolf numbers are concerned and those numbers change constantly. The DNR says the number of wolves last year was 1226 in 336 packs roaming Wisconsin and is estimated that each pack averages 3.6 wolves.
Again, I can’t understand how that is possible because as far as pack numbers, their own aerial photos show well over that number, and the research I have done shows wolf packs in Wisconsin AVERAGE 6 to10 wolves per pack. THERE IS 6 IN THE OPENING PICTURE, BUT TWO ARE NOT SHOWN.
In 2010 the DNR estimated there were 200 packs consisting of 825 wolves in Wisconsin with no change for 2011. That would be around 4 wolves per pack. This is confusing as numbers for wolves as there could be.
2010 – 200 wolf packs with 825 wolves.
2011 – no change (how is that possible)
2012 – 213 packs with 880 wolves.
2013 – 214 packs with 834 wolves. That’s 46 less wolves
2014 – 162 packs with 660 wolves. That’s 52 less packs and 174 less wolves
2015 – 222 packs with 897 wolves. That’s 60 more packs with 237 more wolves
2018 – 238 packs with 978 wolves. So, that would be 16 new packs and 81 more wolves.
2020 – 256 packs with 1057 wolves. That’s 18 new packs with 79 more wolves
2022 – 288 packs with 1193 wolves. That’s 32 new packs with 136 more wolves.
2025 – 336 packs with 1226 wolves. Add 48 new packs and only 33 more wolves.
See what I’m saying when it comes to the number of wolves we have? I understand these are only estimated numbers, but from 2013 to 2014 how do you lose 52 packs of wolves? Then, how can you have 32 new packs with 136 more wolves and three years later the state has 48 new wolf packs and only 33 more wolves?
Here is the MINIMUM estimated number of wolves I believe are In the Northwoods but remember, these are low numbers of this species roaming our woods. If it is true that there are 336 packs and each pack has 6 wolves that would make it 2,016 wolves in the Northwoods. And that is not counting the number of lone wolves and wolves on reservations that the DNR do not count. So, add at least another 300 wolves. TRUE NUMBER I’M THINKING IS CLOSER TO AND OVER 3,000.
The DNR drafted a management plan that stated Wisconsin could manage 350 wolves and has a habitat that could support up to 500 wolves. Most of the wolf population is in the northern part of Wisconsin (6000 square miles), but here is the problem. New packs form each year and will look for their own territory. That new territory is now pushing wolves south, and owners of cattle and sheep are having their stock killed. With wolves moving to mid-state how do you think that is working out? Well, last year alone Wisconsin paid 3.2 MILLION DOLLARS in compensation for wolf kills.
For those who believe hunting/trapping is not humane, think about this. If a lone wolf (about 60 in the state) or wolves from another pack cross into another pack’s territory, those wolves will be killed by the established pack. The Northwoods does not have enough habitat (food) for wolves.
Do I believe wolves belong in the Northwoods? 100% YES, THEY DO, but they need to be taken off the endangered species list again and managed, so they don’t kill each other or starve to death.




