SEARCH RESULTS

Photo credit: Jason Foesch via H4H Wolf Watch FB Group To fully understand the complexity of Gray Wolf protection we need to look at the worldwide population and management techniques used in different countries. The global gray wolf population is estimated to be 300,000 and growing. Once abundant over much of North America and Eurasia, the gray wolf inhibits a smaller portion of its former range because of widespread destruction of its habitat, human encroachment of its habitat, and the resulting human-wolf encounters that sparked broad extirpation. Considered as a whole, however, the gray wolf is regarded as being of "least concern" for extinction according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Today, wolves are protected in some areas, hunted in other areas, or may be subject to extermination as threats to people, livestock, and pets. Europe Europe, excluding Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, has 12,000 wolves in over 28 countries. Spain's wolf population is estimated at 2,000-3000 and growing. Wolves are considered a game species. Italy's wolves are a protected species with current estimates indicating that there are over 2,000 wolves living in the wild and increasing at a rate of 6% a year. Italy's leading wolf biologist, professor Luigi Boitani of the University of Rome, expressed concern that the Italian wolf recovery may have been too successful, due to a large portion of the public refusing to concede to the possibility of rising wolf populations requiring management. France's population as of 2018 is said to be more than 500 and growing rapidly. Germany's wolves were first spotted in 1998 and by 2019 had grown to about 1,300. Finland has a stable population and are legally hunted in areas with high reindeer densities. Poland has a population of approximately 2,500 wolves and increasing. Lithuania has a population of 300-400 which are increasing in numbers. The species is not protected. Belarus is home to a wolf population of 1,500-2,000 where they are largely unprotected, designated game species and have bounties. Ukraine has an unprotected, yet stable population of 2,000 wolves. Romania has an increasing population of 2,500 wolves. Bulgaria has a stable population of 1,000-1,200 wolves which are granted no legal protection and are considered a nuisance and have an active bounty on them. Greece has a population of 1,200 wolves, which are legally protected. Compensation is paid for livestock losses, with over 80% of it from insurance. North Macedonia has an increasing, yet unprotected population of 1,000 wolves. Russian wolves have no legal protection and number 25,000-30,000 and increasing. Asia Turkey has a population of about 7,000 and is a game species managed through hunting. Iran has a stable population of 1,500 wolves. Saudi Arabia has a stable population of 250-700 wolves which are given no legal protection. India has a population of roughly 1,000 wolves. China in 2003 estimated 12,500 wolves were living in China. Mongolia has a stable population of 10,000-20,000 wolves which are given no legal protection. Kazakhstan has a stable population of about 30,000. About 2,000 are killed yearly for a $40 bounty, though the numbers have risen sharply. Turkmenistan has a stable population of 1,000 wolves, which are unprotected. Uzbekistan has a stable population of 2,000 wolves, which are unprotected. Tajikistan has a population of 1,700 wolves in 2006, which are stable and unprotected. North America Canada has over 60,000 wolves, which are legally considered a big game species, though they are afforded protection in 3% of Canada's territory. The United States as a whole, has up to 18,000 wolves and they are increasing in numbers in all their ranges. Minnesota has a population of 4,100 wolves, which are legally protected, though they are culled for depredation control. Minnesota used to have control over its wolf population but this was revoked by a federal appellate court on August 1, 2017, making wolf management the charge of the federal government. The court decided to retain the state's minimum population of 1,600 animals. It has been argued by state officials that management should remain in the hands of the state, allowing for the wolf to be removed from protected status, since the population has exceeded recovery goals for more than 25 years. Both Wisconsin and Michigan have healthy populations of 750 each with numbers rising. Wyoming, Idaho and Montana have an approximate population of 1,657 wolves and growing. Contrary to the public perception that total protection of the Gray Wolf is required, the current status indicates that the Gray Wolves have recovered and are not close to being an endangered species. The vast majority of the global countries that are home to the Gray Wolf have populations that are stable or growing despite being mostly unprotected or managed as a big game status. Maybe it's time to stop crying wolf and start protecting its prey through proper management of the Gray Wolf. Dale Irish Vice President Hunters 4 Hunters References: Wolf Population by Country 2025 List of gray wolf populations by country - Wikipedia

Meeting Minutes – Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, USDA APHIS and Hunters for Hunters, (H4H), a Minnesota-based hunter advocacy group. Date:  March 21, 2025 Location:  Executive Boardroom, Timberlake Lodge, Grand Rapids, MN   Attendees: Dan Stark - Large Carnivore Specialist, Minnesota DNR Duane (Pete) Sahr - Wildlife Biologist - USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services Dakota Bird – USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) John Erb, Ph.D. - Research Scientist (Invited, did not attend) Dillan Porter – H4H President, Board Chair Dale Irish – H4H VP, Board Member Scott Olson – H4H Treasurer, Board Member Steve Porter – H4H Secretary, Board Member Tammy Tisland – H4H Board Member Jeff Riedemann - H4H Board Member Loren Lossing – H4H Member, Cattle Farming Interest This is to summarize a meeting between H4H and the Minnesota DNR staff and USDA APHIS staff to discuss issues related to Wolf Management in the state of Minnesota. The meeting was held on March 21, 2025, at the Timberlake Lodge in Grand Rapids. A list of questions (refer to Appendix I) was provided to attendees from the DNR and the USDA APHIS, before the meeting which included statistics from the Wolf Management Plan for which explanations were requested, questions pertaining to deer modeling and current wolf numbers, and additional Board Member questions.   An opportunity was provided to the DNR to review these minutes, and this was declined by the DNR on 4/1/25. Executive Summary  –The questions posed to the DNR related to the Wolf Management Plan and questions on pages 3 – 5 were not addressed. Dan Stark stated these questions were part of a citizen data request. It is unclear why the DNR refused to respond to the questions sent to them ahead of the meeting which were key to our discussion. Several of the questions from the Board were addressed.   H4H believes the current population of wolves in the state is having a devastating effect on cattle operations, deer hunting, and legacy hunting recreational property values. H4H is strongly opposed to the current Wolf Management Plan since it establishes the basis of the current level of wolf population at 3,000 and does not address the realities faced in the wolf range across the state. H4H believes DNR management is not doing its job in effectively managing the wolf in Minnesota, nor is it setting the stage for achieving levels of wolf populations which are balanced with the needs of farmers, ranchers, hunters and others who are negatively affected by wolves. Minutes  - The meeting opened with introductions of attendees. Steve Porter provided an overview of current challenges for deer farms in Minnesota, then stated that within the last year H4H met with more than 12,000 hunters in the state. The consensus of these hunters was that the numbers of wolves in Minnesota are higher than what the DNR states. It is generally felt that the USDA trappers do a good job; however, there are isolated cases where it is difficult to convince the USDA and the DNR that the depredation was caused by a wolf, and getting compensation for killed calves is extremely difficult.   Loren Lossing provided information about a cattle farmer who lost 90 calves in a ten-year period. Farmers in that area are devastated by wolves and are in desperate need of assistance.   Tammy Tisland – From the prospective of a real estate professional and auctioneer with a hunting background, who deals with agriculture- related and hunting properties. Many legacy hunting properties are being sold because hunter's no longer see deer. Clients looking for real estate are moving further south and west away from wolf populations in hopes that they will see a deer instead of just wolf tracks. Generations of hunters in families are affected. Value of land is greatly affected; it’s a continuing problem and we see no end to it. Dan Stark – In 2007, you could shoot wolves if they were killing livestock. We had arrangements in which private trappers could take the wolves. We strive for a consistency in how cattle depredation is handled: there must be a carcass and circumstantial evidence. The DNR wants to provide the tools and the resources to people on the ground instead of relying on the government. The DNR and USDA are in favor of a wolf harvest. however, the problem is that the harvest is likely going to take place when depredation is not occurring (during deer season) and so a season will likely not have an effect on depredation complaints.   Steve Porter – We have a real problem as there is 30 years of mistrust.   Tammy Tisland - Several farmers have had to completely sell out or modify their herds so that the calves they maintain are larger and therefore have a better chance against wolves.   Dale Irish - We have a concern that this management plan does not have an objective or a stated outcome.   Dan Stark - The process of a wolf season is in Appendix 2 of the Wolf Management Plan. It includes a framework of how to structure a season.   Dale Irish - It should be noted that this plan allows a maximum of 20% of the population to be taken (and this number would need to be adjusted downward if human caused wolf mortality is greater than 30% and the DNR states today that human caused mortality is 67%).    Dan Stark – The 20% number takes into account overall survival. The number one cause of mortality is human related. It depends on the management objective.   Dale Irish - A season taking 20% will do nothing to the population, based on a wolf life expectancy of 4 to 6 years.   Dan Stark - We do an approximation of the wolf population, it's not an exact count. Based on a survey every 5 years we estimate where wolves are in Minnesota. Wolf survey is a distribution. We determine what's occupied, document all the sign from natural resource staff, take in account observations based on depredation, and any additional wolves that are killed or shot. For areas without sign we estimate based on the research and human and road density. We are planning a pilot study with trail cameras. This year we're trying to do an update on wolf range. We currently do not entertain public sightings, only from federal and state agencies.   Tammy Tisland - Would it be beneficial to have members of the public provide information?   Dan Stark - Wolves can show up anywhere in the state. Wolves can disperse from Northern Minnesota to Saskatchewan. They have an incredible ability to traverse the land. Just because wolves are seen on trail cams throughout the state doesn't mean that packs exist there. The goal is to establish a system that will allow cameras to be registered for people to use to get an objective approach for spotting wolves that follows a process and a scientific method.   Dale Irish – We believe consideration related to how lone wolves disperse and impact on packs expansion is not being incorporated. Long-term declines in deer herds have been documented in DNR studies, most importantly DelGuidice reported 38% of adult does are killed by wolves and the mortality of bucks and fawns would be considerably higher. Could be approaching 50% lost by wolves. It is not feasible that wolves don't have an impact on deer declines. We do not understand how the DNR can claim that wolves have no impact on deer populations.   Dan Stark - You're talking about a statistical model. That excerpt from the wolf plan is not easy to digest. They are not having a long-term negative effect on the deer populations and that's always been acknowledged by the State. However, it's based on the collective information that we have on deer herds in the Northern part of the state.   Dale Irish – The DNR published a 45.5% deer mortality by wolves in a wide area of wolf range, from Elephant Lake down to Remer.   Dan Stark - Those numbers are not applicable for the state or across the wolf range. There are concerns about where the deer population is and how to get it turned around. We believe it's primarily due to habitat. Wolves are definitely a component. We could have an unlimited season tomorrow and deer numbers would not be affected, habitat is a bigger issue.   Dale Irish - We disagree that habitat is the main driver for mortality in wolf range. We propose a study in which wolves are removed from a certain area and evaluate the resultant deer population.   Dan Stark - That would be an interesting thing to look at as a researcher and scientist. Studies done in Superior National Forest showed bears and wolves each contribute 50% to fawn mortality. A study in Chippewa National Forest indicates bobcats, bears, and wolves play a role.   Dale Irish – We disagree with your conclusion that brainworm is the leading cause of moose mortality, based on Minnesota DNR research which states the mortality from brainworm is only 3%.   Dan Stark - As the primary author of the wolf plan, I wrote that as an expression of concern that we should be aware of this... I read it differently...   Dale Irish - Yes, but that doesn't state that 80% of moose calves are killed by wolves. We are very concerned about the lack of participation of hunters in the development of the wolf plan. Only one member on the committee represented deer hunters. You had groups like The Humane Society and native tribes.   Dan Stark - We tried to select members of broad representation, 5000 people applied. They all have different views of how wolves should be managed. We tried to consider all the different voices. That's why it's difficult to put these things together. Where there was disagreement, we had to make a decision.   Dale Irish - Only deer hunters are paying for depredation costs, why don't we have a larger voice?   Tammy Tisland - There's conservation and there is environmentalism. There was significant out of state and international participation with the Twin Cities a majority of the Minnesota response. This was an example of environmentalism, not science.   Dan Stark - They are organized and well-funded. 35 states and 14 countries.   Steve Porter - Can a bill be drawn up that does not rely on the wolf management plan?   Dan Stark – The plan is only intended to be a guidance document.   Steve Porter – Governor Walz has stated we will never have a whole season while he is governor.   Dan Stark - In my opinion I don't want to have legislation which requires us to, or prevents us from having a wolf season. Right now, the DNR has the authority to have a season, that's the way other species are managed as well. Because when the political structure changes and goes the other way, it will prevent us from having a season. The wolf population can sustain a season and it's another opportunity for outdoor recreation and we can do it in a sustainable way. I don't know if it will impact deer in the way people think.   Stark provided a history of government action since 1972, when the state did not think the wolves needed to be protected. Listing occurred in 1978, they were reclassified enabled harvest. In the early 2000s, we started proposing de-listing, 2003 to be reclassified in certain areas. That failed. 2007 was delisted. Supreme Court intervened. In 2010 we petitioned USFS, and they agreed, and the wolf came off the list in 2012. We have been a proponent of delisting. From a conservation standpoint it's been a mockery of the Endangered Species Act. I'd like to see it come off the list, to have long-term management by the state.   Steve Porter - We are concerned that we had undertaken a great deal of effort to arrange a congressional hearing in Sandstone in 2024 regarding wolf delisting and the DNR commissioner chose not to attend. A Data Request reported she had a meeting with Ron Shara.   Tammy Tisland - Our member's voices matter. Their land values matter. Our way of life matters and so we appreciate your time and your interest in what we have to present.   Dan Stark - A public attitude survey is required to have a wolf season, however. Tribal rights are important.   Dale Irish – A review of the Federal requirements indicates that a 5-year monitoring per the ESA is not required.   Dale Stark - A post delisting monitoring period of five years is required and allows the USFS to do an emergency relisting if they deem it's necessary. After the 5-year period then the entire process has to be completed in order to reinstate delisting. Wolves in Minnesota are considered a separate entity under the endangered species act. We have a management plan in place. We've met all the requirements.   Dale Irish - We believe this is a wolf protection plan not a wolf management plan. We may have to consider filing a lawsuit to prevent this plan from being executed.   Dan Stark - I will not object to wolves coming off the endangered species list. Any legislation would trump the wolf management plan. Wolves primarily eat deer. I estimate that Illegal wolf kills are 5 to 15% of the population or probably under 200 wolves per year.   Steve Porter - I believe 5,000 wolves are shot illegally each year.   Dan Stark - You are wrong from a population standpoint. If that were the case we would see different impact. The population numbers show a trend over time that has not changed much in the past 10 years. We probably won't have an updated range map until the end of the year.   Dale Irish - Would you consider a protected area in the Boundary Waters, but an open season elsewhere?   Dan Stark - I already talked to you about this. A wolf season might reduce the overall need for depredation control but there is still a need for wolf control. There is zero federal funding for that. We use funds from deer licenses, $0.50 from every license sold, which goes into the Wolf Management account. This amount every year (about $350,000) is not enough to cover wolf depredation, as we are spending about $400,000 a year. Upon delisting, this funding source goes away. The actual claim payments come from a separate source in the state General Fund.   H4H closed the meeting, thanking the DNR and USDA participants for their time and for sharing the information presented. Appendix 1 The following are specific questions from the H4H Board to the DNR and their response:   H4H Question: ln 2022, the DNR pulled more than $342,000 from deer hunter licenses for wolf management. For the period of 2020 -2024, please provide the budgets, plans and outcomes including all research reports from this work funded by deer hunters. DNR Answer: No response   H4H Question: Why does the DNR not include wolf predation in the Deer Population Model? DNR Answer: No response   H4H Question: Please provide the current information re packs, wolves, range, venison consumed. DNR Answer: Provided the changes in the table in yellow and comments below H4H Question: Why doesn't the DNR publish data and maps of packs, territories and movements of the approximately 30 radio -collared wolves? DNR Answer: We publish territory boundaries of all collared packs in our annual report, as well as a summary of how many locations we had for each collared pack that year. We do not publish the actual location points themselves, especially on active/alive collared wolves or packs for a minimum of 1 year after it was collected, because such location data is considered sensitive data (i.e., it could be used to facilitate unfair/illegal activity). Publishing that also is not needed to understand the results in our wolf survey report. Join H4H to support our work to get wolves delisted federally, and to have a meaningful wolf season in MN! You can get updates like this right to your inbox! Hunters for Hunters is dedicated to improving the hunt in Minnesota and beyond. Since our inception we have accomplished more on the wolf front than any hunting organization in MN has in the last 20 years! Joining us will ensure that we can continue to fight for hunting rights for future generations!

Photo Courtesy of Our Wolf Watch FB Group, credit Nolan Skuse Here are some of the highlights of this 67-page, 9-year plan, “word for word”. My personal comments are bolded . The plan can be viewed at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/wolves/wolf-plan.html “Today, wolves are distributed across half of the state in numbers of 2,700, well above the endangered species act recovery plan goals of 1.250-1400.” Twice the Recovery Goal! “Some readers might be surprised to find that this plan does not prescribe Minnesota’s approach to wolf hunting or trapping.” No need to hunt wolves with this plan? “Wolf management in Minnesota currently relies on revenue from deer and wolf license fees.” 12% of MN residents hunt, twice the national average with 475,000 deer hunters . “The highest population estimates of 3,020 wolves occurred in the winter of 2002-2004, which coincided with high deer population.” Since then, a declining deer population, with the wolf population staying steady . “Current occupied wolf range of packs is estimated to be 28,561 square miles, approximately 1/3 of the state.” Please check out our Wolf Watch page to see where wolves are being seen outside the range . “Research in Minnesota strongly suggest that wolves have not caused large-scale or long -term declines in deer.” 2017-2022 DNR study states we are loosing 32% of our breeding does to wolves. “In recent decades, deer population estimates in the wolf range have substantially declined following severe winter and intensive hunter harvest.” In the winter of 21-22 we lost 45.5% of our deer population due to wolves “In Minnesota the moose population exceeded 8,000, while today it's about 3,000-4,000. Moose appear to have declined primarily due to high mortality, fewer breeding age females and a reduced number of calves surviving to adulthood. Recent DNR research indicates health related causes account for about 2/3 of adult moose mortality, with brain worm being the leading cause. Wolf predation is the second leading direct cause of adult moose mortality, with predisposing health conditions identified in nearly half of the predation events. Wolf predation is the leading cause of death for the moose calves during their first 30-50 days of life.” “The conclusion from a 1995-2000 study, was that climate acting in tandem with pathogens and chronic malnutrition caused that decline.” Climate? Infection from bites on their back legs, malnutrition? With only 3% due to brain worm from DNR study. “In 2011 the legislation classified wolves as small game in statue.” (Page-19) “Verified wolf complaints have occurred at about 100 locations annually, in response approximately 180 wolfs are killed annually, in addition, over the last 10 years the MDA has paid between 80-140 claims each year at a cost of $100,000-$250,000 per year." “Beliefs about human relationship with wildlife can be described along a spectrum of “mutualism” (wildlife are deserving of rights similar to humans and part of a single community).” To “domination” (wildlife are resources that can be used to achieve specific human oriented goals).” Both mutualism and domination define Environmentalism and Conservationism . Individuals with strong “mutualism” beliefs often oppose killing wolves, while those with strong “domination” often support lethal control. “It is likely that mutualism beliefs will increase in Minnesota over time.” A public perception! “In 2012, the DNR collected public input regarding the establishment of a potential wolf season using an online questionnaire anyone could complete. There was significant out-of-state and even international participation, with twin cities metro residents comprising the majority of Minnesota respondents. Although not a representative survey, almost 80% of respondents to the online input opportunity said they did not support hunting and trapping of wolves in Minnesota.” F ew hunters were made aware of this survey. “While the state references wolf “management,” the term is inappropriate from an Ojibwe perspective, for one does not typically manage one’s brother.” “The DNR identified a minimum population level of 1,600 wolves in the 2001 plan. The wolf population has not been below 1,600 in Minnesota since the late 1980s.” The wolf should have been delisted then . “Objective 1B. Maintain a population comparable to recent estimates (2,200-3000, well above the federal recovery goals) and distributed across the majority of current wolf range.” The current population will be maintained for the next 9 years! “The Wolf Technical Committee, in coordination with tribal biologist, will recommend harvest levels to the DNR annually.” These are the same people that drafted this plan. Closing Comments Deer hunters in Minnesota are true conservationist protecting nature for humans. It is ethical to employ natural resources for the betterment of humankind, as long as they are properly cared for and managed with a concern for future generations. Humanity is seen as an integral part of the ecosystem rather than an intruder in the natural world. Special interest groups like Howling for Wolves, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, and the U.S. Humane Society are Environmentalists that try to protect nature from humans. The environment is to be saved, preserved, set aside, protected from human abuse. Nature is deified and worshipped while the welfare of humans is prioritized beneath the animal and plant kingdom. I heard that after reintroducing wolves into Yellowstone the special interest groups gathered at a nearby resort and had a champagne toast saying, “ this is the beginning to the end of hunting ” It is obvious that the DNR does not following the science in their decision making and because they have a political oversight, their priority lies in the majority of the popular vote. H4H has filed a DNR data request for cited research with a dated narrative of the claimed references of the quoted research and studies in the Wolf Plan. Members of the MDHA should contact their president and tell him to terminate ALL relationship with the DNR and end support for any wolf bill that includes the language in the MN Wolf Management Plan. Demand an explanation on how an over $100, 000/ year salary of an executive director and an over $30,000/year salary of a lobbyist allowed this to happen! The H4H corporate board is working diligently on removing language of this plan and replacing it with a more commonsense approach to managing wolves in our state. “It is clear that DNR departments are not concerned about the future of hunting deer as they are more concerned with public perception. This is a horrible thing for those of us that can see what is truly going on. It is for that reason that I encourage you and every hunter to become more vocal as the DNR departments are making bad decisions across the board.” (Kieth Warren) There are 475,000 deer hunters buying license in MN and retail sales are at 260 million with an overall economic impact of 458 million. The MN Wolf Management Plan needs to be challenged now! Thank You, Dale Irish, H4H Board Member