Wolves!! Why??

[snafu1359]

I was wondering why wolves were reinterduced to michigan? So far from the research I have done wolves do no good at all. So why did we reinterduce them to michigan? Please someone give me some info!!!!!!

[Steve]

I don't think there was an organized effort to re-introduce them. They introduced themselves, spreading from Minnesota and (or) Wisconsin.

[yoda]

Nope, If I'm not mistaken the MDNR did it with the help of the feds.. Bunny Huggers had a bit to do with it also.. Don't ask me why they did it.. and I don't care what they say, The deer population has taken it in the head from them the last 2 winters :mad:

[David G Duncan]

I believe that both the above replies maybe correct. Wolves no doubt have made their way through naturally movement into the U. P., but I also recall that there was a DNR sponsored program to reintroduce wolves to the U. P. The wolves were trapped in Minnesota and then transported to the U. P.

These relocated wolves were radio collared to track their acitivites. Periodically I have heard reports about these radio collared wolves dying from both natural and unnatural causes. But if my memory serves me correctly, the majority of the deaths were from unnatural causes like gun shot or being hit by a vehicle on the highway.

It may be that the U. P. no longer has sufficiently large enough wilderness tracts of land to accomodate wolf packs on an ongoing basis.

Just a little wolf history, back in about 1925 my father witness a wolf chasing a deer. This wolf sighting occured in Manistee county in the lower pennisular, when my dad (who was an electric lineman) was working on the top of an electric transmission line steel tower. The deer and wolf crossed near the tower and my dad banged his wrench on the steel tower. This noise distracted the wolf and it stopped the chase. A strange but true story from the past, when a very few wolves since roamed the woods of the lower pennisular.

I for one would not support reintroducing wolves to the lower pennisular. It just would be a bad idea, since the habitat has long ago changed beyond the point where wolves could be expected to make a natrual and honest living in the lower pennisular. I also image that the U. P. habitat has or is fast approaching the same status that made supporting a wolf population in the lower pennisular unviable. Only time will tell.

[yoda]

Is there any place left in the lower United States that will support a Wolf Population ?? Why "Did" or "Do" some people think that the Reintraduction of the Wolf to Michigan was a Good thing. Is it going to take the migration of these animals to the Lower pennisula in search of food to wake these people up( There are unconfirmed reports of sightings already) Let them get a foot hold like they have up here and your going to have a problem. I wait for the day thay the headlines in the Detroit New read "Poodle Snatched off back porch in Detroit Suburb, Wolf appears to be the culprit" :D

[Robert W. McCoy Jr]

I have heard hundreds of stories about coyotes taking dog's and killing them.

I have also had coyotes yipping and following my pack before.

WOLVES!!:mad:
Can you imagine what a wolf would do to a hunting dog if it cought it. Let alone the deer heard and possible human attack's.

No way.

I know what the locals are doing in the UP. I also know they are the one's that have to live with the distruction these animals cause

[FixedBlade]

Far as I can remember the DNR released 15 wolves into the U.P. All of them were killed or died off. The wolves we have now are all transiants from Wi. or Can. Due to press coverage and public education by the first attempt at re-introduction there seemed to be a better aceptance of the new wolves. They eventually were able to establish packs and move into new territory's. Yes several wolves are killed each year. I think there is 6 unsolved cases right know. The wolves have been delisted (from endangered to threatened) and permits for killing of nuisance animals are now given by the DNR to farmers with lagitimate damage issues.

[yoda]

"Far as I can remember the DNR released 15 wolves into the U.P. All of them were killed or died off."
I'm sure this is what they would just LOVE people to believe

"The wolves we have now are all transiants from Wi. or Can. Due to press coverage and public education by the first attempt at re-introduction there seemed to be a better aceptance of the new wolves."
Where you getting your information from, The DNR Web site ?
The only acceptance that I have seen up here is from people Living in the Lower, It wasn't the People living in the U.P that wanted this program ..
I hate to be so negative on this issue, and really would like to know just where your getting you information from. I just don't see it :confused:

[Steely-Head]

There was a very organized effort to re-introduce wolves in MI by the feds and the MDNR. There have however been several groups of animals that have come over themselves from Minnesota/Wisconsin as well.

[yoda]

Very True Steely- head, and let not forget the ones that came accross the ice from Ont..and these animals where delt with when needed.

[snafu1359]

In my own opinion i believe that reinterducing wolves was a terrible idea. I have not found one thing that they are good for besides killing dogs and other pets or cattle ,ect...:confused:

[Jackone]

I think they were introduced and tolerated to help control the deer population. They kill the sick and slow deer which is a good thing. They also keep the rodent population down a bit. It's too bad that mankind hates the wolf so much. They are very beneficial to a well balanced wildlife population. Problem is, are just too many people for wolves these days.

[ggb6]

Before you all jump on me, I'll admit that living down state, I don't have to deal with them on a regular basis. But I would love to see one while out and about. I don't believe the wolf population is large enough to decimate the deer herd and if it does approach that size, it seems that it would give us something else to hunt. I don't know how much damage they do to livestock though and I certainly have sympathy for farmers who lose money through depredation. Does the state reimburse farmers for any losses?

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that sportsmen, of all people would be against the reintroduction of wolves. I've always defended hunters as being in the vanguard of conservation and as being the first to step up and protect a species. I hope I'm not wrong about this.

[Luv2hunteup]

Just ask anyone who hunts or has a camp between the Pine River campground and East Lake in Mack county what they think. The wolf in this yarding area are making a big dent in the deer herd.

People that I know and respect say there are two packs working this area, I have not seen either pack. Stop by the Rudyard Feed Co-Op and ask for an opinion regarding these killing machines.

I have seen on the DNR web site and other publications, over the last few years that several have died of lead poisoning east of this area. I'm sure that triple S has also come into play.

ggb6 if you really want to see one stop by the Mack bridge welcome center. You can get a real close look at one 24 hours a day. It's a real nice full body mount of one.

I share my camp with them but only because the law says they are protected. I do not advocate the illegal killing of wolf, but I'm not sure if I would turn some one in for killing one.

[predatordave]

i personally would love to see a wolf in the wilderness...........then be able to shoot it.:D i dont like the idea of wolves being out there in the woods with me while i am hunting. especially since i am getting into running hounds. there goes me going to the u.p. for bobcat. :mad: i dont think it is about protecting this species it is about controlling them. i think it is weird one side of lake superior you can shoot them all day all year. on the other side they are listed as threatened.

later, dave

[David G Duncan]

Just got my copy of the Amierca Hunter magazine and guess what there is an article (Part 1) on how predator mismanagement is jeopardizing America's wildlife resources.

"Alaska sportsmen have long been advocates of using biology and science to manage game, leaving politics out of it. The liberal governor Knowles administration, together with its allies in the animal-rights and anti-development camps, advocated the use of a dangerous mix of some biology and politics in determining what to do."

"They've made the wolf a poster child, a coffee-table cover boy, and shielded him from control measures that worked so well for so long. And with the packs sharply increasing, game populations in America's greatest hunting grounds are in alarming decline."

".... you have to remember that there are plenty of data in the scientific literature that indicate that to suppress a wolf poulation, you have to reduce it by at least 60 percent, several years in a row .... ."

There are apparently two programs that Alaska trappers are involved in related to controling the wolf population. One program involves a non-lethal method of pays trappers $200 per wolf to allow the state use a sterilization and relocation solution.

The other method sponsored by the Alaska Trappers Assoc., simply paid trappers the difference between $400 and the current price of the wolf pelt ( current fur price is $190). The trappers have to register in advance and record GPS data on where the wolfs are taken. They harvested 228 wolfs in the management area by use of the ATA option.

Now there is debate as to which program is really responsible for the increase in the caribou herd in the area being managed.

Interesing article, but I hope we never get so many wolfs in the U. P. that we need would programs like these.

[ggb6]

I certainly understand the concern and no, I do not advocate having wolves run rampant. Like anything else, they need to be controlled. But, and this is strictly a personal opinion, I would hate to think that the only way to handle it is to wipe them out completely. Someone made the comment that it's strange how north of the border they are fair game but here in the UP they are protected. I don't see why we couldn't have a regulated season to keep them from getting out of hand. But, maybe I just have too much yet to learn about them. I would still love to see one in the wild...and would have no problem having one sharing my living room, either as a mount or a wall hanging. I just wouldn't want to be the guy who shot the last one in MI.

[yoda]

I read that article just last night David G Duncan, I'm glade you posted on it. And there is going to be a article in a up and comming American Hunter where they will be exaiming the troubling return of the wolves to the northern rockies.
It amazes me that here you have these Predators in a truly wilderness area and have problem with them., and someone gets a brain fart to introduce them in a area with People, Live stock, and whitetail deer. The way things are going just maybe us Yoopers will get to flood the lower peninsula to hunt the whitetail deer, at least for a short time until the Lovely Wolf get a foothold down there..

[yoda]

I think I'd rather pick up November Fishing than cross the Mighty Mac. to enter the woods with the untold number of Trolls running around :D

[snafu1359]

A wise man once said that when you put a bully in a group of people there will be problems. I am refering the bully as the wolf and everything else is the people.

[FixedBlade]

Yoda. Your right I did read it. Thought I would try to help the origional poster with some info that was requested. At least I tried to answer a question. As a moderator you should know better than to post a sarcastic responce. Instead os being an ass twards me why don't you try to answer the question or just don't post.

[yoda]

Well I guess to begin this Fixedblade the sarcastic responce was not directed at you and I'm sorry you took it as it was.
And to answer the orignal question of snafu1359 I don't think anyone would or can stand up and say "It was me" . I was not the People from the U.P that voted this project in, and I sure it wasn't the sportsman of Michigan.. And I guess the down fall of this "Project" was the way the people in the DNR that are involved with it, handled complaints from land owners and farmers. They get a complaint, wait a week minimum, show up at the kill site, and tell the land owner it was Coyotes that did it.. This wolve thing is going to turn into something nobody wants

[kingfisher 11]

I went to a SCI dinner for the Flint chapter back a few years ago. I recall some guest speakers telling us why we should all grasp this idea.

If I recall they were young speakers. I was not impressed and I felt like why are they trying so hard, to convince us? I feel that this was definately pushed by a naturalist group, not a biologist.

I have hunted in Saskatchawen where there is a healthy population of wolves. First off, not the human hunting pressure on the deer herd. Second, the locals shoot them on site. They know what they can do if not controlled. I have seen areas where a pack lived. No sign of life, no rabbits, deer or other small game. And yet we would move about 20 miles in a different direction and the woods were alive. Same terrain and browse. Those guides insisted not to gut a deer in the hunting area and to shoot any wolf on site.

Should we wipe the wolves out? No, but we should not have someone in Washington telling us when we can start controlling them. By the time they get around to signing anything the deer will be down to numbers that will take years to bring back.

There are numbers available that tell you how many deer a adult wolf consumes in a month. If the facts I have read before are true then I feel for the hunters in the UP.

I think the sound of a howling wolf would be great. I just think you should not hear it very often.

[snafu1359]

I agree with you. I could understand if they were controlled a little better.

[FixedBlade]

Yoda. Apology accepted. If you thought that the coyote and wolves were bad just wait and see what happens if the mountain lion gets a foot hold in Michigan.

[MIBIGHNTR]

We were in Ontario bear hunting a few years back when the idea of reintroducing wolves into MI was becoming a reality. Most of the hunters in camp were from MI. When the subject came up at camp, the owner/guide said, "The MI DNR does not know what they are starting. Those *&%$#'ing wolves will eat everything in sight. They will kill every deer they can." Ther were many more four-letter words and other colorful expletives, but that was the just of what he said.

I certainly hope this isn't the case, but coming from someone with 25+ years of living with wolves in the Canadian bush, he didn't have anything good to say. Needless to say, if we saw any while bear hunting, we were incouraged to shoot them on site.

Mark

[bunnyhugger]

First of all, it suprises me how so many so-called sportsman, can be so clueless about the natural world they claim to know so well. To say that wolves will "wipe-out" and "eat everything in sight" is perhaps the most ignorant statement I have ever heard (which was repeated many times on this forum). If deer are a native species of MI, and wolves are a native species of MI, then that means they have consistently coexisted for thousands of years (before a bunch of jackasses showed up to mess up the natural balance). If a natural density (much higher than present) of wolves didn't wipe out deer over thousands of years, than why would it happen now? There are more deer now than there was when wolves were here before. Wolve will only make the population healthier, and stronger (which means less small deer, and more healthy large ones). Do some research before you start spewing ignorance. One more thing, wolves have naturally recolonized MI from MN and WI, not through reintroduction.

-Bunnyhugger

[Shoeman]

Hey BH

We're all entitled to our opinion, but calling our membership "Jackasses and ignorant" is borderline on our ground rules.


Maybe you should read through them before you make another post.

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=14283

[ESOX]

Get facts straight? HMMM Lets do a little thinking here...... I do believe Elk were predominant in this State before the clearcutting of the late 19th century, not Whitetail. There are more deer now because the habitat was changed drastically, the lack of Wolves had very little to do with it. For a biologist you sure have got your facts and subsequent conclusions all wrong.

[Jackone]

It sure surprises me that some 'sportsmen' are so against wolves. Like Bunnyhugger said, the deer and wolves have co-existed for thousand of years. Neither one has decimated the other.

It's just that some "sportsmen" are afraid that a wolf (which by the way, preys on the sick and slow) will kill their prized buck. All this poppycock of wolves killing off the deer herd is just that, poppycock. Nothing like that will ever happen. The laws of nature will see to that. BUT.....enter "man" and the laws of nature get unbalanced. "Man" screws up the most deleciate balance of nature. "Man" is afraid of wolves. "Man" wants to get rid of these animals.

Frankly, I'm appalled at the onsidedness of this list. The hatred of wolves is showing thru. Or is that, the FEAR of wolves. I don't think I have broken any of the 'rules' of this list by going aginst the popular concensus. I am a hunter that is on the side of the wolf. I'm sure there are enough deer for man and wolf. If the wolf get too plentyful, have a season on them. But let's not extinguish the wolf from our land. They are a part of our heritage. I for one, am glad that the wolf is getting a foothold again. I'm not afraid of hunting in the same area that wolves live. I have done it before and hope to be able to do it again.

Thank you, I will now get off of my soapbox. :)

[Shoeman]

Jackone,
What makes you think that a different opinion is a violation of the 'rules'?

It was BH's approach, language and "grand entrance" that made me post a link to our rules.

As for the wolves, I don't care one way or the other. I wonder what they taste like? Chicken, with a hint of mutton? :D

[walleyeman]

I for one do not hate wolves, but I am truly disapointed at the way the MDNR has went about this matter. For one thing I think we have always had a few wolves come through the up at one point or another. The fact that they didn't get a foothold tells me that conditions are not right for them in the UP.
Second, if you read about wolves at all they are very social animals. Most of the time living in packs for hunting and breeding. In these packs only one female will have pups. The rest of the pack helps with the care and hunting for the litter. I have not seen or herd of any "pack" in the UP. they seem to be "lone wolves".This is probably because a entire pack was not moved togeather. Just a bunch of wolves let go to make there own way. This is where the DNR messed up!!!

[ESOX]

I am up in the air on the Wolf issue, but my tendency is to say leave them alone, untill they decide my dog, or worse yet an unattended toddler looks like a snack. Fear? No, am I aware that wolf attacks on humans are rare. Realist? Yes. With Wolves moving into more populated areas they will grow acclimated to humans, and POSSIBLY become a threat to the young and infirm of our species too. This is what they do, and they are damn good at it.

As far as Bunnyhugger goes, voicing ones opinion is what we are all about, name calling isn't. Coming in here and calling the membership names is not an action I would expect coming from a "professional".

I have just taken the Shoeman refresher course on website etiquette, all I can say is when some newbie self professed "wolf biologist" comes in here and starts ripping at the membership with name calling and tenuous arguments at best, I will take one for the home team, regardless of my position on the subject.
I think I should go back to my first post and say what I REALLY wanted to say........ I haven't gotten any strikes YET........

:p :eek:

[Dawg]

I found this text interesting when I came across it a couple of years ago. I will let you draw your own conclusions about relevancy and scope. I guarantee if you read it with an open mind it will cause you to think regardless of your stance.

The only background that I will provide is that this study is near wholly isolated by water, and human predation is non-existent on a land mass of about 133,781acres (roughly 209 sq.mi.).

Isle Royal Wolves and Moose (http://www.isle.royale.national-park.com/info.htm#moose)

[CMUflyman]

I am going to jump right into the middle of this one. First off wolf reintroduction was attempted in the 1970's (6 wolves). All of these animals died. Since that time period they have dispersed into the region from Minesota and Wisconsin. The wolves in the UP are not lone wolves and they have formed many packs. Currently there is estimated about 300 wolves in the UP and enough habitat to support an estimated number of 800 wolves (Mladenoff et. al. 1995). A model has been used to look at the available wolf habitat in the lower *****ula as they will eventually make it here. It shows at least a area of 800km^2 that could support up to 40-50 wolves in about 5 packs (not counting the other non-contiguous areas that are high habitat probability). As others have said earlier wolves will not have a detrimental effect on the deer herd, it can only help (reasons have been previously stated). Wolf attacks are so rare that there has never been a single fatality of a human attacked by wolves. If you are attacked by wolves it is probably your own fault. Yes, it is true they will kill dogs out of territorial agression, but again probably your fault if your dog gets killed. I believe we can easily co-exist wolves.

Look this paper up if you really want to know the available habitat in the UP and find books by Mech and read them before you post.

Mladenoff, D.J., Sickley, T.A., Haight, R.G., and A.P. Wydeven.
1995. A Regional Landscape Analysis and Prediction of
Favorable Gray Wolf Habitat in the Northern Great Lakes
Region. Conservaton Biology 9(2):279-294

[yoda]

Ok Folks where getting a bit off line from the original post, I'll let this thread run a short time longer(barring any REAL mud slinging) then I'll lock it.
You folks out there that feel that where giving the wolves a bad rap, feel free to start another thread on the issue.. It's a FREE world last time I checked, just remember to keep it clean or Off it go's and you can find another place to post.. :D

[Jackone]

I went back and read the first posting. It seems to me that we are still on the subject. Matter of fact, we are just getting to the gist of it, via the fine post by CMUflyman and others. Let's not be too hasty Mr. Yoda, it's getting interesting. :) :eek:

[yoda]

Nope, in my eye's, it's getting WAY off base, and thats what counts, this is going no where. Feel free to start another thread, this one will be closed by 6:00pm. If you and BunnyHugger feel that strong about your opinion, then start another thread about it and we'll see how it pans out, and remember the rules :D
I thought March was the month for " In like a Lion OUT like a Lam"

[Shoeman]

According to the Isle Royal study, it seems to me that the wolf has a real problem surviving in lower climes. Why even bother introducing them in Michigan when they can't even thrive in an enclosed system? Would deer be a prime food source? Almost seems like it. What an experiment. I say, let them go on Belle Isle or Kensington. No caged hunts or PETA to contend with.

Perfect.

[Jackone]

Whatever!!! You're the moderator.

You do need a calendar and spelling lessons. This is APRIL and LAMB is spelled with a B. Have a nice day, yoda, sir. :p

[Dawg]

I guess where I hoped this would go will have to be expedited.

The population of wolves in the study fluctuated and maintained itself in accordance with the available food source(s). Also the primary food source (moose herd) was kept in healthy balance with it's environment and didn't overconsume the browse. Through 43 years of research, populations of both species remained relatively constant at an estimated population of 4.3 moose/sq.mi. (900 moose/19 wolves)

I feel this information gives credence to the effort of establishing a wolf population in the upper peninsula. Regardless of the resulting individual opinions it was asked "why?" Just one reason.

[1fish2fish]

Dawg,

Great article. I read this thread for the first time today and as I was reading every post I kept thinking "What about Isle Royale?" I'll be the first to admit I'm igonorant when it comes to wolves and I don't have an opinion one way or the other if they should be in Michigan or not but the Isle Royale study is fascinating.

I have visited Isle Royale twice (8 days and 12 days) and done a lot of reading on the wolve/moose balance that has now existed for decades.

Shoeman with all respect you need to reread the posted article. The wolf population is doing very well on Isle Royale. It has decreased and increased over the years for various reasons but it doing just fine and as long as there are moose they should remain.

Again, I'm only speaking on my own opinions (not science) but I can tell you what I saw with my own eyes. Those wolves didn't eat everything on that Island. Wildlife is more than plentyful. And in forty six years the wolves still have been unable to wipe out the moose population and let me tell they sure are trying but nature won't let them. I think the deer in Michigan are safe, hell they made it before and man wasn't even here to help them.

Finally, I just want to say I'm not for or against new controls on the wolves in Michigan. I'll let the experts decide that. But we sure do have a nice live study just to north of us to see how it works.

It's a shame this thread is being closed, one of the most interesting threads I've read in awhile (a few rude posts but those could be removed). But your the moderator and obviously the moderators do an excellent job because this is one fantastic site.

1fish

[kingfisher 11]

I think the key word in that study was the fact that the super preditor(SP?) human, was not envolved.

I believe if we did not hunt there would be a need for wolves just to help control the population.

If in fact the wolves do drop the deer herd in combination with human hunting pressure. I want to know what will be done? Will these groups that are promoting the introduction of wolves back off enough for us to reduce numbers of wolves? I think not, that is what my only concern is. I bet you could have the deer numbers so low that the success rates would be horrible and yet these groups would say its nature balance. They could care less we hunt, maybe a good plan for them.

First time we try to establish a permit system to harvest wolves you would see lawsuits. This has happend now out west. The DNR in hand with the naturalist introduced the wolves. Now the DNR wants a controlled hunt and the group who helped introduce the wolves are threatening law suits.

If only things could be simple, allow the wolves but, control the numbers as our DNR see fit.

To answer the original question. I think someone was setting in a office feeling they needed to get in touch with nature again. Thought How nice it would be to have wolves and grizzly bears wondering the woods the way it use to be. Thought.... hey I can get a grant for big $$$ for a study. Once the study is done I will get a job monitoring the success.

[Shoeman]

1 Fish,
You're right. I should have re-phrased that. What I originally meant was that the wolves didn't thrive. Therefore there was a balance. Would the same happen with deer? I doubt it. Deer would be a prime food source, regardless of age.

[Luv2hunteup]

Here's the the government thinks:





http://midwest.fws.gov/wolf/wgl/miplnsum.htm[/URL]Existing deer habitat improvement and maintenance programs by the DNR and national forests will be adequate to maintain a sufficient deer population to support a viable wolf population. No additional deer habitat management, or habitat management to increase the population of any other prey species, is considered necessary specifically to benefit wolves.