Lois, if you believe the wolf population magically and mysteriously stagnated at 3,000 in the State of Minnesota more than 10 years ago then you have not had much contact with nature. Your hysterical fabrications should be defused, it will be beneficial to you. Continuing to believe the wild eyed lefter lies is not good for you or anyone else, except the lefter meddler sheep herders who are trying to profit from their dishonesty.

. . . if you believe that you have somehow cornered the market on any kind of truth (including wildlife #'s), . . . you might not be correct. Why in the world would we believe you . . . or your numbers? Please tell us, chapter and verse, why you believe you are correct? I'm liking MNpost's numbers and article and Lois, myself. Take care, Bordy and FnBunk, Bub

A hunting season on Mourning Doves , meat for the freezer.
Many permits issued , harvest quotas set pretty low.
As long as idiot hunters keep shooting collared wolves ,then trying to dispose of those radio collars in a different location.
Its at least refreshing to know a couple hunters may be looking over their shoulder to see if anybody it watching.
Based on Cass County jury duty stints , attorney questions asked of prospective jurors . . " Have you ever been cited by the DNR for a game violation " The over whelming answer was YES.
That speaks volumes !

Minnesota wolf hunt: Groups sue to try to block season start

Two groups filed a lawsuit Tuesday to try to block the opening of Minnesota's inaugural wolf hunting and trapping seasons this fall.

"The DNR recognizes there is a wide range of opinions toward wolf hunting and trapping, but all Minnesotans should know the DNR's primary wolf management goal is to ensure the long-term survival of the wolf," DNR Commissioner

Actually, the DNR's primary goal is to find a way to put every species on some form of hunting. Except man, we hope.

I have never been a "game violator" and very few hunters are. I am not sure what studies may be the basis of your fantasy but I do spend a lot of time in the woods and I also know, as do most outdoorsman, that the DNR has has a solid reputation as a notorious liar that has existed for many years. There are some good and honest people who work for the DNR but as a entity they have, and have had for many years, almost no credibility. It apparently does not bother them. In any event, as bad as their credibility is, it does not rival your flim flamism.

How many fish, grouse, geese, ducks, moose, deer and what ever else you can buy a license for kill all the animals you are worried about??
Captron you are over the edge on this one. Go from Motley to Nevis to Walker to Remer and ask anyone that has any livestock and you might understand. I lived there. Also-where is your backup on the jury thing? You are very mistaken. Prove it or don't say it.

The author and that Minnpost article in particular appear to have chosen to not seek out--or ignore--quite a few facts in forming their opinion on the wolf season.

The endangered species act requires a plan from each state and recovery goal to be set by the federal government for each species--this is critical in a number of ways with regard to wolves and the coming season in MN.

That plan and goal are designed to insure the future of the species declared endangered is assured, after the species has the protection of the federal law removed.

A plan for wolf recovery was written many years ago.

Before that plan was written, extensive public comment and involvement of a roundtable (including members from groups who oppose a wolf season) were used to help develop the plan. Then the legislature was involved in codifying the plan--and through them, the opportunity for public involvement and comment was again available.

The recovery goal set by the federal government was less than 2000 wolves--a number that MN's wolf population passed and has exceeded for many years. The population has been relatively stable around 3000 for quite a few years now. MN has far more wolves than any other state in the country--including those that have held wolf seasons in recent years.

The wolf plan stated that a limited controlled season could be held 5 years after the recovery goal was reached and the species was dropped from the endangered species act--another milestone that was achieved some time ago. The wolf season this fall will come more than 5 years after the wolf was first removed from the endangered species list and even more years after the wolf population in the state exceeded it's federally mandated recovery population number.

Remember, after the wolf was first dropped from endangered species protection in the state, a series of lawsuits from wolf hunt opponents derailed final de-listing. None of those lawsuits involved any doubt about the population of wolves in MN--all of them dealt with procedural issues that judges agreed with.

The maximum allowed harvest of wolves in the coming season--if reached--would still leave MN's wolf population many hundreds of wolves OVER the federally mandated recovery population goal. The season framework calls for immediate season closure if that number is reached. And there is a lot of speculation the hunt maximum number will not be reached.

The facts are clear: the wolf population in the state grew to a point that exceeded it's recovery goal number--has stayed there for over a decade--was never questioned by any court challenge after the federal government first removed the wolf from endangered species protection, and the worst case scenario from the hunt will still leave the wolf population well above it's recovery goal number.

Wolf hunt opponents appear to want to ignore these facts. The truth is that they themselves were allowed into public debate and involved in forming the plan still in place today, and by any measure the wolf population has recovered and will remain so, hunt or no hunt.