Well into Wisconsin’s waterfowl hunting season, WPR’s Larry Meiller sat down with the DNR's Taylor Finger to talk about waterfowl conservation.

The post Keeping up with Wisconsin’s waterfowl during this year’s hunting season appeared first on WPR.

A gray wolf (Getty Images).

Permanent rules to guide the conduct of wolf hunting in Wisconsin are set to take effect Saturday, capping off a yearslong process in which the state Department of Natural Resources worked to write policy about one of the most politically polarized issues facing the state. 

A state law enacted in 2012 requires that when the animal isn’t protected on the federal endangered species list, a hunt must be held. DNR staff say the permanent rules will prevent a potential future hunt from being stopped by a lawsuit while tightening some of the provisions that resulted in the highly controversial 2021 wolf hunt in which hunters exceeded their 200-wolf quota in just three days. 

The wolf has been back on the federal endangered species list since a ruling by a federal judge in California in 2022. 

The rules largely govern how a hunt must be held if and when the animal is no longer considered endangered. During previous hunts, the DNR was operating under emergency rules. DNR officials have warned that a future hunt without permanent rules in place could be halted by the court system. 

The new rules include shortening the window by which hunters must register wolf kills, update wolf harvest zone boundaries, issue zone-specific tags and provide protections for wolf dens. 

They were passed unanimously by the state Natural Resources Board in October 2023 at the same time it enacted the first full rewrite of Wisconsin’s wolf management plan since 1999. The management plan stirred debate because it doesn’t specifically declare a numerical population goal. Instead, the plan divides the state into sub-regions in which DNR staff will regularly determine if the local wolf population needs to be reduced, maintained or allowed to grow. 

Farm and hunting groups, who are often fiercely opposed to the growth of Wisconsin’s wolf population because of concerns about wolf attacks on livestock, hunting dogs and pets, as well as longstanding societal and cultural fears of the animals, were largely against the new wolf management plan. Those groups pushed for the plan to include a statewide population goal of 350 wolves — which is the number stated in the 1999 plan, written when the animal was beginning its slow comeback to the state’s landscape after being extirpated in the 20th century. 

Estimates put the current Wisconsin wolf population at about 1,200 wolves, with signs that number is stabilizing. 

Environmental groups and the state’s Native American tribes were in favor of the new management method, stating it matches the best available science for how to responsibly manage animal populations and fearing that the anti-wolf crowd would see a 350-wolf population goal as a ceiling. The wolf is especially important to the Ojibwe people, who have a deep spiritual connection with the animals. 

Some Republicans in the Legislature were also opposed to the new wolf management plan and for years the implementation of the new rules had been held up by a Republican-controlled committee. A recent state Supreme Court ruling found that the committee couldn’t indefinitely prevent the passage of administrative rules, allowing the DNR to move forward. 

Also this year, Senate sporting heritage committee chair Sen. Rob Stafsholt (R-New Richmond) wrote a letter to the DNR asking if it would make changes to the rule. Stafsholt’s requested changes included setting a statewide population goal or range, increasing the harvest registration window to 12 hours, allowing harvest tags to be used anywhere statewide and eliminating all subzones, including areas set aside as a measure to protect wolf packs on tribal reservations. 

Despite those objections, the DNR has continued to move forward without any changes. 

Amy Mueller, a member of the Sierra Club of Wisconsin’s executive committee, says she feels like the rules and the management plan are the best possible compromise on an issue as polarizing as wolves, in which one side is opposed to wolf hunting in general and the other would like to see the population reduced. 

“I think this is probably the best kind of compromise we can hope for coming out of an emergency rule that had been on the books for, you know, decades — a plan from 1999 that still had a population goal hoping that we could reach 350 wolves,” she says. “I feel like these are important steps, and probably good wins where we need them. And of course, I’d like to see more, but I think being realistic, this is still worth supporting.” 

Mueller adds that she believes the DNR gets an “unproportionate amount of flak that’s misdirected” about wolf hunting because it has to follow the law and the law requires wolf hunts. 

“Unfortunately, if we want to stop wolf hunting we need to look at the makeup of the Legislature, and we need to figure out how to amend Act 169. So I think the DNR is doing what it can with a very controversial issue and having their hands tied by this law,” she says. 

Tyler Wenzlaff, director of national affairs at the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, echoes Mueller, saying public opinion is at “two different extremes” but that the new rules and plan do seem to represent a good compromise that will help guide the state whenever a hunt happens again.

“We have two forces here that are — we’re trying to get the number as low as we can, and the tribes are at a zero quota. And so the DNR is in the middle, trying to navigate these two forces and bring us to some kind of compromise,” he says. 

“And looking at the rule,” he adds, “we support the rule and some of the changes that were made. We believe that it’s a strong compromise for both the agriculture and hunting community, but also those that want to see wolves remain on the landscape in strong numbers. And so moving forward, we believe this rule is in a good place. And really a permanent rule is necessary for Wisconsin to delist the wolves in the future and have a hunting season.” 

As the DNR works to implement the new rules, Mueller, who has a seat on the DNR’s Wolf Advisory Committee, says she’s looking forward to working on the plan’s provisions for education about wolves and their role in the ecosystem and efforts for non-lethal abatement of wolf conflicts with humans and livestock. 

Wenzlaff says the Farm Bureau is going to continue pushing for a numerical population goal to be set, even if it’s set to a level higher than the 350 wolves advocates have sought. 

“If the population were to be gradually reduced to a more socially acceptable range, it would restore balance between maintaining a healthy wolf population and protecting farmers’ livelihood, pets and livestock,” he says. Wenzlaff says farmers are willing to hash out the right number with the wolf management committee, “but unfortunately, the DNR didn’t want to have that conversation. So we’re left with broad guidelines that can be reinterpreted by the next administration, which we don’t really support.” 

For both sides of the wolf debate, the outcome of next year’s midterm elections are going to play an important role in their efforts. 

For tribes and environmental groups, the prospect of Democrats gaining control of the Legislature and holding the governor’s office presents an opportunity to repeal or change the wolf hunting law to block whatever actions the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress take. 

“There’s a lot at stake, because right or wrong, wolves are highly political,” Mueller says. “So I think [I’m] optimistic about the potential changeover in our state but cautiously optimistic. Understanding there’s a lot at stake, and it could really change things for wolves in Wisconsin, for the better or for the worse.” 

For the farm and hunting groups, the prospect of a Republican governor would mean the state government is pushing in the same direction as the Trump administration. U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is running for governor and seen as the frontrunner in the Republican primary, has authored legislation that would take the wolf off the federal endangered species list. 

Wenzlaff says the Farm Bureau is ready to work with either party and wants to focus on how to get wolves delisted by Congress. 

“It really comes down to the federal government and what their plans are,” he says. “What Wisconsin does really doesn’t matter until we have that delisting … There’s a lot of different ideas on what that could look like, but we’re willing to work with anybody, any stakeholders that are willing to talk about a reasonable wolf management goal.”