March 15, 1999

Dear Concerned Citizen:

Here is the second draft of the proposed Wolf Management Plan for Wisconsin. The first draft of this plan was introduced in May 1998. It was revised after a 90-day public review from May to August 1998. Many people provided their comments and expressed their concerns both during a series of forums across the state and by sending in letters and email. Members of the Wolf Advisory Committee looked at those concerns and modified the original plan.

This proposal is based on sound biology and science, and incorporates social, political, cultural and fiscal concerns. Wolves are a controversial species, people have differing views about them. This management plan addresses the concerns we have heard from people in public meetings, sessions with specific groups, as well as one-on-one meetings with many individuals. This plan achieves an appropriate balance between wolf restoration and protection, and minimizes and mitigates any social/economic effects. An environmental impact statement is not needed since no significant adverse effects are anticipated.

Although the enclosed plan describes proposed state management of wolves, federal downlisting to threatened status will be required before some of the management activities can take place. Total federal delisting as neither endangered or threatened will be necessary, before full state implementation of the wolf plan is possible. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will propose federal reclassification later this year, and will determine a year later if wolves will be downlisted to threatened or totally delisted. If wolves are federally listed as threatened, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to have some control on wolves in the state. Once wolves are federally delisted (no longer endangered or threatened) full control will return to the State of Wisconsin.

Changes that have been made in the current plan compared to the first draft plan are listed below:

1. The state’s delisting goal for Wisconsin was reduced from 300 for 3 years to 250 for 1 year.

The reduction was made because of concerns that current rates of growth could allow a major increase in the wolf population before any landowner control on depredating wolves could take place. No landowner control can occur while wolves are listed as threatened or endangered by the State of Wisconsin. Under delisting, limited control could be allowed by landowners on depredating wolves. Reduction of the delisting goal from 300 to 250 does not reduce viability of wolves in Wisconsin.

2. The population goal was modified from a maximum population of 500, to a minimum population goal of 350 when more liberal control activities could go into effect.

Because of concerns by many that 500 wolves were too many before control activities would go into effect, the goal was lowered to allow greater control earlier. The intent is to allow maximum control activities at a lower number, if needed, because of social intolerance or problems with wolves.

3. Landowner authority to kill wolves on private land was expanded to include authority to kill wolves in the act of attacking pets or livestock on private land, and landowners outside of wolf core areas could be granted permits to destroy wolves on private land in ongoing cases of wolf depredation.

The wolf committee felt it is important to allow landowners the opportunity to protect their pets and livestock.

4. Six wolf core areas were developed in Zone 1. Zone 1 consists of the Northern Forest deer management areas. The Core Areas (3,227 square miles) provide places where wolves would be given near complete protection. Wolves would only be controlled if they were captive raised animals released into the wild, or if they were diseased wolves. These Core Areas are in locations where depredation is least likely to occur and where habitat favors wolves.

The first draft of the wolf plan listed all public land in Zone 1 (northern and central Wisconsin), providing complete protection (an area of 7,600 square miles). Many people were concerned that control activity may sometimes be needed on public lands. Therefore, the areas of complete protection were reduced to areas of highest quality wolf habitat. Areas of complete protection will be important for maintaining a viable population, while allowing more flexible control outside these areas.

5. The zones have been modified to 4 zones. The Northern Forest Zone (Zone 1) has been expanded to include the Menominee Indian Reservation.

The Menominee tribe has asked to be incorporated into Zone 1 because the reservation contained extensive areas of suitable wolf habitat. Total zones increased from 3 to 4 zones because the Central Forest was separated from the Northern Forest and called Zone 2. Although major differences did not exist in regulations between Zones 3 and 4, the wolf committee recommended maintaining separation to emphasize the need to protect and encourage dispersing wolves in Zone 3. Wolves causing depredation could be relocated from Zone 3 but would be destroyed in Zone 4 under threatened status and until the statewide population reached a minimum of 350.

6. The Central Forest (4,521 square miles) is designated as a distinct zone (Zone 2). This zone would not contain any wolf core areas. Coyote hunting would not be closed in this zone during the firearm deer season.

Many people are very concerned about the establishment of wolves in central Wisconsin. The need to close coyote hunting during the firearm deer season has not been demonstrated in this area as it has in northern Wisconsin. The wolf committee felt the Central Forest should be treated differently from northern Wisconsin, allowing for more flexible control activities.

7. Authority for controlling nuisance wolves was expanded for USDA – Wildlife Service, DNR wardens, and local law enforcement authorities. These agencies would be allowed to kill wolves that pose threats to health and human safety, and wolves that have become habituated to people and act very tame.

Law enforcement officers normally are allowed to destroy animals that pose threats to human safety, and this authority should be expanded to wolves when the population becomes secure. Some wolves may occasionally become habituated to humans, and captive wolves or wolf-dog hybrids will present special concerns that should be controlled, based on unusual behavior. Healthy wild wolves would rarely, if ever, be destroyed under these circumstances.

8. Reimbursement for pets would be continued once wolves are delisted.

Many people commented on concerns for potential wolf depredation on pets. The Wolf Advisory Committee decided it is important to maintain payments to reimburse pet owners.

9. Population monitoring on wolves would continue at current levels into the foreseeable future.

The first draft of the wolf plan had recommended eventual reduction of wolf population monitoring efforts, but many people expressed concerns about reducing monitoring. Persons interested in keeping the wolf population low wanted high levels of monitoring to justify control activities. Persons concerned about maintaining a higher wolf population wanted intense monitoring to readily detect any declines.

10. Language on reference to Indian reservations, and recognition of tribal concerns was expanded.

Several tribes felt that the wolf plan did not adequately discuss Native American concerns and the unique status of tribal lands.

11. Areas closed to coyote hunting during the firearm deer season are only recommended for Zone 1 (Northern Wisconsin) and would represent 33% of the state, compared to 44% currently.

As stated above, benefits of the coyote closed zone have mainly been demonstrated in northern Wisconsin. The wolf committee was cautious about eliminating the coyote closed zone in northern Wisconsin because it may introduce additional mortality to that population.

12. A public harvest will be considered in 5 years if the population management goal (350 wolves) and social tolerance are exceeded.

The wolf committee felt that currently the majority of Wisconsin citizens would not be supportive of a public harvest on wolves. At current rates of increase, the wolf population is not likely to reach 350 in less than 5 years. If the population exceeds this level more quickly, pro-active trapping by USDA – Wildlife Service could be used to reduce wolf numbers in problem areas. A 5-year moratorium on any public wolf harvest has also been proposed in Minnesota.

13. Alternatives originally listed in the plan are now listed in Appendix I.

Several people were confused by alternatives considered in the first draft. It was not clear to some people that these were ideas considered, but rejected. Therefore, they have been moved to an appendix to reduce confusion.

14. An additional appendix, Appendix H, has been added to reveal recent attitudes of Wisconsin Citizens toward wolves.

15. Minor editing and modifications were made throughout the report to clarify the Department’s intent or incorporate concerns expressed by the public.

The Department will conduct a 45-day public review of this drafted plan from March 19 to May 5, 1999.

Following completion of the 45-day review period for the Wolf Management Plan and Environmental Analysis DNR staff will analyze comments and information received and modify this document and the management concepts accordingly, if warranted. Various DNR administrators will review the final Wolf Management Plan / EA and refer it to Department Secretary George Meyer for Natural Resources Board approval. The Wolf Management Plan, once approved by the Natural Resources Board, will guide Wisconsin Wolf Management for the next 10 to 15 years. The Wolf Advisory Committee will review this plan every 5 years.

The public hearing about this Wolf Management Plan/EA will be announced in a separate mailing and noticed in local and statewide media.

People are encouraged to send in comments and concerns on the wolf plan. Written comments can be sent to:

Wolf Plan
P.O. Box 4001
Eau Claire, WI 54702

Or you may send comments to our e-mail address: wolfplan@dnr.state.wi.us

If you are interested in reviewing detailed county maps of wolf core areas, contact:

If you are interested in the Environmental Analysis process you may contact:

Wolf recovery is a real wildlife success story in Wisconsin. Long-term management will need to maintain the health of the wolf population, while adequately dealing with any problems caused by an expanding wolf population. I believe the enclosed plan takes a major step in accomplishing this wildlife conservation goal.

The Department and I sincerely appreciate your participation and interest in developing this management plan.

Sincerely yours,
Steven W. Miller
Administrator, Division of Land