You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
Hopefully the other committees will act more sensibly. It is the job of the Minnesota DNR to manage the wolf population, not a group of anti-hunting activists. Let the DNR determine if the hunt is accomplishing the management goal and if not, adjust the quotas or shut it down altogether. A legislative shutdown done without the data in hand is not a good practice.
Wild creatures, including wolves, should fear man. Fear creates a healthy distance. Wolf hunting is good for both species and should be continued. If you want to see cutsie, semi-tame animals, try the Como Zoo.
Bravo! Killing such a magnificent animal for "fun" is opposed by approximately 80% of Minnesotans. I hope the rest of our REPRESENTATIVES are listening.
I think they should only allow one class of people to shoot a wolf. Farmers who have live stock that have been harmed. Let THEM thin the wolves out because they have a sound reason to do so.
As a person who tries to get white pine growing on my property I appreciate that the wolf keeps the deer herd in check a little bit. I think the DNR has done a good job of managing the wolf population in MN. No need for the zealots who believe that the wolf is a spiritual being to take over or complicate the issue with mis-information. What is the carrying capacity in MN for a healthy wolf population? We all know what happens when that is exceeded and wolf packs live in too near proximity to each other ... that ain't pretty either. So, if the DNR has a hunting season for five hundred wolves (or whatever the number is) as part of their management plan I certainly do not see any problem.
I am not an advocate of hunting wolves but the reality is that hundreds may die every year by the hands of angry farmers and ranchers anyway but we will never know how just many because when someone poaches a wolf they don't tell the world about it.
Let us compromise and settle on a 1 year moratorium so that we can further study the impact that his past season had.
I certainly do not like having to watch my back while I'm out enjoying nature but I think we should take a step back and study the state of things now.
Would it be possible for the rest of us non-metro people to cede the entire metro area to Wisconsin? Self-righteous urban and suburbanites dictating wolf management to someone like myself who lives and works in wolf country. I get to pay for your ballparks and trains while you get to decide how many wolves should be roaming around my property.
any assertion that wolf hunting wasn't amply vetted because of the way it passed is blowing smoke out of his ...ears. We have been counting and talking, litigating, lobbying, and paying trappers and hunters to control wolves for 25 years. It's not like this hasn't been coming. We do know for a fact that we can bring back the wolf if the numbers fall too far, so if there are too few wolves after one more hunting season (and two whelping seasons), we can stop then without endangering the species. We don't know if we can save the moose in MN. It is an absolute fact that if there are less wolves, they will kill less moose. So lets show a little restraint, tell the Chicken Littles of the anti-hunting crowd to take a chill pill and talk about this in the 2015 legislative session. Bill G.
If you want real info on the plan for wolves, rather than this sensationalistic piece of grandstanding fluff by the greenie-weenies, read the "Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan for the Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment of the Gray Wolf" and other pages at the USFWS. I would point out that the goal for wolves in MN was supposed to be 1400 to 1600, and we are carrying 3000, so a harvest of 400 for two consecutive years should be easily sustainable. Bill G.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
Poll: Grade the Timberwolves season
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2014 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks