Appendix D
Citizen Involvement in Development of the Wolf Management Plan. By David Weitz and Adrian P. WydevenThe Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) began work in1996 to develop a new wolf management plan for the state. The initial effort by the Wisconsin Wolf Advisory Committee was directed at obtaining public opinion on ideas, issues, and concerns of wolf management in Wisconsin. From October 15, 1996 to October 17, 1996 ten public forums were conducted across the state to obtain public opinions. (Sites were at Florence, Superior, Milwaukee, Park Falls, Madison, Stevens Point, Black River Falls, Rice Lake, Rhinelander and Green Bay). A total of 228 people attended the forums. Verbal comments were made by 122 of those in attendance. In addition 98 written and email comments were received during later weeks. Notifications of the forums along with information on the DNR Wolf Management Planning effort were sent to 1,200 media outlets and individuals throughout Wisconsin. Additionally copies of a "White Paper" on wolf management was sent to a list of about 800 individuals and
groups who had expressed some interest in development of the original
Wolf Recovery Plan in Wisconsin.
|
 Figure D2.The map above shows the distribution of responses from within Wisconsin which included zip-coded addresses. Some responses were received by email both from within Wisconsin and elsewhere in the United States |
Not all people agreed that reclassification should occur and some stated they'd be opposed to any change in the status of the wolf. Others favored reclassification but after population numbers are larger than 80 wolves. At least one person who commented suggested simply getting out of wolf management entirely.
The strongest single recommendation was that education about wolves continue with strong funding. Those responding in the forums and in writing showed real concern for the possible lack of adequate funding for educational efforts and some suggested methods of raising dollars for wolf monitoring, education and management.
In general people indicated support for some type of wolf population control at a future time but disagreed on the number of wolves that should exist in Wisconsin. While some thought hunters should be allowed to take wolves, and one person suggested using volunteers to control depredating wolves, in general most who discussed the issue felt that only Department of Natural Resources professionals should control wolf numbers.
Figure D2.The map above shows the distribution of citizen involvement responses received from throughout the United States. Responses which did not contain a zip code are not included. |
Although there was some disagreement there was general support for payment of damage to livestock and pet owners who lose animals to wolves. Some individuals suggested funding mechanisms including a call for private organizations to shoulder the cost.
While they represent a clear minority some people did suggest that the state spend no further money on wolf management and indicated they felt there was no reason to nurture wolf populations.
The wolf evokes strong sentiments in many people resulting in strong opinions both in favor and opposed to wolf recovery. Examples are:
"Wolves are not an endangered species and never were...you make it appear that the only wolves in North America are those in MN, WI., MI., most people don't know there are over 65,000 wolves in Canada?"
"I feel the present wolf population is adequate for northern Wisconsin...as a stock raiser I am highly concerned...please don't take our livelihood away from us?"
"I was at a wolf forum in Stevens Point. Hardly anyone came to grips with the question of 'controlling' the wolf population - in plain English, killing a few if they become too numerous and cause problems?"
"...We see no rational reason to pursue endangered animals for sport or for trophy?"
"...I ask that your plan give careful consideration to the impacts it may have on wolf populations in the Great Lakes Region as a whole, especially neighboring States, so that conflicts can be avoided?"
"...Wisconsin can be justly proud of this positive conservation achievement?"
"...I feel zones are needed for future wolf management. Population control should be handled by trappers and hunters with special license fees and season?"
"I have a difficult time accepting hunting of a species that is probably not meant as a food source...for the purposes of ego satisfaction?"
"I do not want you to feel that we (Mid-States Wool Growers) are against protecting various species of animals. However, we would like to have some thought given in your plan to help the sheep producer...this could take many forms?"
It is apparent that there is no broad public concensus on a number of the issues which this draft management plan discusses.
This report will be sent to more than 1,000 persons and groups who have shown interest in the Wolf Management Plan for Wisconsin.
A 90-day review period will allow individuals or groups to comment on the Draft Wolf Management Plan. Department of Natural Resources News Releases also will describe the Draft Wolf Management Plan. The Wisconsin Wolf Advisory Committee then will revise the plan prior to initiating comments during a final 45-day review period before it is once more revised and sent to the Natural Resources Board.
Figure D3.Locations of forums for the discussion of the Draft Wolf Management Plan. Superior, Hayward, Rhinelander, Green Bay, Black River Falls, Stevens Point, Madison and Milwaukee. |
To facilitate feedback on the Draft Wolf Management Plan forums are being scheduled at: Public comments can also be sent in writing to Wolf Plan, Department of Natural Resources, P.O. Box 400l, Eau Claire, WI., 54702.