DEPT. DF NATURAL RESOURCES Wisconsin Wolf Management Plan October 27, 1999 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 7921 Madison, WI., 53707 PUBL-ER-099 99 WISCONSIN DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES Wisconsin Wolf Management Plan Compiled by the Wisconsin Wolf Advisory Committee for the Division of Land of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources This plan outlines the long term management of wolves in Wisconsin. The plan was presented to the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board for its approval at Hayward, WI., on August 24, 1999 and revised at the Board's direction for its meeting in Madison on October 27, 1999. oward S. r kenmiller, Director ~~re:joftLL Steven W. Miller, Administrator Bate ' Division of Land /a 77 Date WISCONSIN WOLF MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY by the WISCONSIN WOLF ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Wisconsin Wolf Advisory Committee reports to the Bureau of Endan­ gered Resources Director and Division of Lands, Land Leadership Team of the Department of Natural Resources. Plans prepared by the Wolf Advi­ sory Committee are subject to approval of the Natural Resources Board The gray wolf returned to Wisconsin in the mid-1970's 8. encouraging interagency cooperation; and was listed as a state endangered species in 1975. 9. establishing a system for program guidance; A state recovery plan, initiated in 1989, set a goal for 10. encouraging programs for volunteer assistance on wolf reclassifying the wolf from state endangered to threat­ conservation; ened once the population remained at 80 or more 11. recommending future research needs; wolves for 3 consecutive years. By 1999, the popula­ 12. regulating wolf-dog hybrids and captive wolves tion had increased to 197 wolves, and had been at 80 or more since 1995. Therefore the Wisconsin DNR, 13. establish a protocol for handling wolf specimens; has reclassified wolves from endangered to threat­ 14. encouraging reasonable ecotourism of wolves and their ened, and developed this plan to manage wolves as a habitats. threatened and eventually as a delisted species. Ef­ forts have also begun to federally reclassify or delist Four zones will be used to manage wolves (Figure 8). Man­ the gray wolf by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. agement actions will vary according to wolf population status (Table 1). This plan will delist the wolf from state threatened to a nonlisted, nongame species when the wolf population Zone 1 consists of Northern Forest deer management units reaches 250 animals based on late winter count and Menominee County. Limited lethal control would be al­ across the state in areas outside Indian reservations. lowed on problem wolves, but generally lethal control would A management goal of 350 is recommended. not be exercised on wolves inhabiting large blocks of public land in areas of suitable wolf habitat. Fourteen strategies were developed for managing wolves. These include: Zone 2 includes Central Forest deer management units. Lim­ 1. managing wolves in 4 different management ited control would be allowed for handling nuisance wolves, zones; but lethal control would normally not be conducted on large 2. intensely monitoring wolf populations through blocks of public land. threatened status and delisted status; Zone 3 consists of areas south of Zone 1 and surrounding 3. monitoring wolf health; Zone 2. Protection would be provided for dispersing wolves, 4. cooperatively managing wolf habitat; but more liberal control would be allowed for handling nui­ 5. controlling nuisance wolves and reimbursing land­ sance wolves. owners for losses caused by wolves; 6. promoting public education about wolves; Zone 4 represents areas with little or no wolf habitat where 7. establishing regulations for adequate legal protec­ liberal control would be allowed on problem wolves. tion of threatened and delisted wolves; 3 Wolf population and health monitoring would remain Volunteer programs will be used to provide education on intense for the foreseeable future and will include radio­ wolves and assist with wolf population surveys. telemetry tracking, wolf howl surveys, and track surveys. Management activities for Wisconsin's wolf population Research will continue to be used to address manage­ shall! be based on a late winter count. ment concerns as wolf populations increase and empha­ sis will be on developing accurate and economical sur­ Cooperative management of wolf habitat will continue to vey techniques, as well as continued evaluation of future be recommended for a threatened and delisted wolf impacts on wolf populations and their habitats. population in suitable habitat. Habitat management would include access management, vegetation man­ Legislative authorization will be sought to restrict owner­ agement, protecting corridor habitat, and protecting den ship of hybrids and to obtain authority to control free­ and rendezvous sites. Management of wolf packs living roaming wolf-dog hybrids. within Native American reservation boundaries will be coordinated with tribal governments. Wolf Management costs will increase from a base level of $130,000 yearly at approximately 10% per year from a Depredation control activity will focus on preventive base year of 1997-98, for the next five years; this does methods, while also providing adequate control of nui­ not include depredation costs. License fees from hunting, sance wolves. Once wolves are reclassified as feder­ fishing or trapping will be used for wolf management only ally threatened, wolves that are verified habitual killers if the species is open for public harvest. Full reimburse­ of livestock, may be euthanised. Lethal wolf control ment should be made to owners who have lost pets or activity will not be carried out generally in large blocks livestock to wolves; normal costs are estimated at of public land in areas of suitable wolf habitat. Once $20,000 to $40,000 per year when wolves have reached wolves are state and federally delisted, euthanization of management goals. The cost of removing depredating depredating wolves may be permitted by landowners or wolves and either translocating them to suitable habitat occupants on their private land. Proactive depredation or euthanizing them is estimated at $15,000 to $30,000 control may be used by government trappers in areas per year. Therefore the total cost of wolf management with historical wolf problems after the population level activities is estimated at from $165,000 to $200,000 per of 350 has been exceeded. year. Public education about wolves will continue to be an By its nature, the gray wolf interests not only traditional important strategy of wolf conservation in Wisconsin. hunters, but many persons who are interested in nature Education will involve preparation of special education viewing, photography, hiking and nature study. As an material, work with cooperating organizations to pro­ apex species, the management of wolves impacts other mote education on wolves, provide special training on forest species. It is appropriate for funding for wolf man­ wolf management to agency personnel, and continue agement to come from alternative funding sources, in­ agency presentations on wolves. The efforts will em­ stead of traditional license fees, or strictly from endan­ phasize the positive aspects of wolves to Wisconsin's gered resources funding. forest ecosystems. New funding sources need to be identified to provide the Specific regulations will need to be developed for Department of Natural Resources the resources to con­ wolves listed as threatened or delisted. Regulations will tinue reimbursement at fair market value for losses and focus on maintaining a high level of protection, even for to maintain a sufficient depredation response program, a delisted wolf population. as well as maintaining sufficient monitoring of the wolf population. Cooperation among various federal, state, county, local and tribal governments will be an important aspect of future wolf conservation in Wisconsin. A Wisconsin DNR Wolf Advisory Committee will continue to incorpo­ rate a diverse group of individuals to address policy and management concerns. The Wolf Advisory Committee will annually review wolf management in Wisconsin with a citizen stakeholder group. Policy or management changes will be recom­ mended to the Department of Natural Resources Land Leadership Team for Natural Resource Board approval. A public review of the plan and management goals will be conducted every five years by the Department of Natural Resources. 4 Table 1. Management actions as prescribed by the DNR wolf plan for specific zones (See details in text) STATE LISTING AND ALLOWED MANAGEMENT OPTIONS Endangered Nongame Protected Status Nongame or Furbearer Status <80 wolves <{ao.25o wolves) (250-350 wolves) MANAGEMENT ACTION iot.ie zo'Ne· .•.. zO~e. ZONE ZONE ZONE ZONE STATEWIDE ·3··· 2 3 4 Depredation: USDA live trap yes yes yes no and translocate Confirmed depredation: USDA no yes yes yes live trap and euthanize • Depredation: government trapper no no no yes proactive control**• USDA/DNR/Law Enforcement no yes yes yes euthanize nuisance wolves• Depredation:Private Citizen: no yes yes yes Lethal control by permit*** Depredation: Landowner may kill wolf no yes yes yes attacking stock or pets on private land*** Public Harvest••• no no no no Coyote hunting closure during yes in part no no no firearm deer season * Federal down listing to threatened status must first occur before these actions can take place. **Lethal Controls would rarely be authorized on large blocks of public land in areas of primary wolf habitat