The tribes don't get part of the quota because of "politics", it's because of one judges interpretation of the treaty in the 1980's that was essentially made federal law. DNR has no flexibility on the tribal issue or WI would have decent walleye fishing today.
In my opinion, the lawsuits to worry about are not coming from the usual pro wolfers, they may come from the tribes that feel they should have had a seat at the table when the quota was set per treaty, and now have ample ammunition that WDNR did a bad job of managing the quota. Why is this a big deal? Because the tribes don'ta abide by the DNR season and can still hunt wolves today if they want....but will play the card that they have now lost the opportunity to exercise their hunting gathering rights without fallout from the public and pro wolf crowd because the DNR screwed up. (I believe this is why DNR wanted to appeal the decision, to honor the federal treaty interpretation) This should be of concern because the Great Lakes indian fish and wildlife commission has their own biologists, their own DNR essentially within wolf territory...and I could see given the current political climate the gov deciding to let the tribes manage wolves.
Also, with population estimates, the number has always been a minimum count for as long as I can remember.....not anything either side of the argument should be putting much stock in. It's like saying there are at least 1100 citizens living in Chicago. Worthless number. You could kill 1000 wolves and still find them out there, we all know that.
Both sides of this issue need to find middle ground if wolves ever can be managed, but as long as the pro wolf side thinks killing one wolf is too many, and the anti wolf side thinks having one wolf in the state is too much....we will be on this back and forth can we or can't we hunt BS for years and the hunters and farmers will be the side that suffers the effects.
In my opinion, the lawsuits to worry about are not coming from the usual pro wolfers, they may come from the tribes that feel they should have had a seat at the table when the quota was set per treaty, and now have ample ammunition that WDNR did a bad job of managing the quota. Why is this a big deal? Because the tribes don'ta abide by the DNR season and can still hunt wolves today if they want....but will play the card that they have now lost the opportunity to exercise their hunting gathering rights without fallout from the public and pro wolf crowd because the DNR screwed up. (I believe this is why DNR wanted to appeal the decision, to honor the federal treaty interpretation) This should be of concern because the Great Lakes indian fish and wildlife commission has their own biologists, their own DNR essentially within wolf territory...and I could see given the current political climate the gov deciding to let the tribes manage wolves.
Also, with population estimates, the number has always been a minimum count for as long as I can remember.....not anything either side of the argument should be putting much stock in. It's like saying there are at least 1100 citizens living in Chicago. Worthless number. You could kill 1000 wolves and still find them out there, we all know that.
Both sides of this issue need to find middle ground if wolves ever can be managed, but as long as the pro wolf side thinks killing one wolf is too many, and the anti wolf side thinks having one wolf in the state is too much....we will be on this back and forth can we or can't we hunt BS for years and the hunters and farmers will be the side that suffers the effects.
