September 18, 2020

Wisconsin Deer Hunter Fends off Wolves with Walther PK .380

The first wolf came in from the right, mouth open, fangs ready to rip into Nellesen’s leg. A swift kick from the man’s boot landed square on the wolf’s face and deflected the bite.

“That first wolf missed my leg by 8-10 inches,” he said.

The other two wolves weren’t far behind. As the next wolf leapt toward Nellessen, the man jumped back and was able to fire a single round into the animal.

Source: American Hunter | Worldwide Exclusive: Wisconsin Deer Hunter Fends off Wolves with Walther PK .380


Bear Hounds Killed In Douglas County, Wisconsin

Editors note: That brings the total number of known dogs killed by wolves this year to 11. As the season progresses we can most definitely expect more pets to be killed more as wolves expand their pack sizes.

Source: Bear Hounds Killed In Douglas County, Wisconsin – Graphic Image


News Analysis: Domestic dog doesn’t fit profile in Presque Isle predation

What happened after her death was even more unusual. Sometime after 8 p.m. on the evening of Jan. 1, or in the early morning of Jan. 2, Gerster was not only victimized by her heart but by an animal or animals. The depredation involved abrasions and lacerations of the head, torso, and extremities, and her right arm was amputated below the elbow.
The missing body part has never been found. In addition, her clothes were ripped from her body and strewn asunder, and a puncture wound in her upper torso was so deep and impressive – the size of a nickel, one witness described it – that those first on the scene thought it was a gunshot.

Source: News Analysis: Domestic dog doesn’t fit profile in Presque Isle predation – The Northwoods River News – Rhinelander, Wisconsin


Wisconsin May Legalize Blaze Pink to Encourage Women to Hunt

With the number of female hunters growing, Wisconsin legislators have decided that the next logical—if not somewhat misguided—step in the continued recruitment of women is to add blaze pink clothing. Sen. Terry Moulton, co-chairmen of the state legislature’s sportsmen’s caucus, is leading the charge. The sportsmen’s caucus, which was formed last January, is a bipartisan group of legislators who focus on outdoor issues and plan to unveil a new bill to legalize blaze pink for deer hunters this week, according to the Star Tribune.
Source: Wisconsin May Legalize Blaze Pink to Encourage Women to Hunt | Field & Stream


Wolf euthanized at Oshkosh zoo after it bites child

Officials say they are still investigating how the child was able to get into a non-public area of the zoo.
Source: Wolf euthanized at Oshkosh zoo after it bites child | FOX 11 Online | WLUK-TV


RMEF Grants to Assist Elk Restoration, Research, Habitat Enhancement in Wisconsin

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation awarded more than $440,000 in grants to fund 42 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects, including continuing elk restoration efforts, in the state of Wisconsin.

“We are both excited about and committed to returning more elk to their native range in Wisconsin,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “We also appreciate the hard work and dedication of our volunteers who worked hard to raise funding for a vast array of other projects all across the state.”

The grants, awarded in 2014, and will directly benefit Ashland, Bayfield, Bedford, Burnett, Chippewa, Columbia, Dunn, Eau Claire, Grant, Iron, Jackson, Kenosha, Lincoln, Marathon, Monroe, Oneida, Outagamie, Polk, Price, Racine, Richland, Sawyer, St. Croix, Vilas and Wood Counties. There are also five projects with statewide benefits.

Since 1990, RMEF and its partners have completed 322 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects in Wisconsin with a combined value of more than $6.9 million. These projects have protected or enhanced 2,648 acres of habitat and have opened or secured public access to 1,270 acres.

Here is a sampling of RMEF’s Wisconsin projects, many of which carry over into 2015, listed by county:

Ashland County—Enhance elk forage on 320 acres on the Chequamegon National Forest through maintenance of existing forage openings and accelerated restoration of aspen forage habitat via mowing, hand-clearing, prescribed fire and timber sale.

Jackson County—Provide $300,000 in funding over the next three years to help continue the ongoing restoration of Wisconsin’s elk herds and expand the herd into new areas (also affects Ashland and Sawyer Counties), and improve early successional habitat by treating, and then seeding, 30 acres adjacent to potential release sites for the Black River elk reintroduction, maintaining high quality habitat near the core of the Black River elk herd range.

Kenosha County—Provide funding to assist the Central Falcons shotgun team attend the Scholastic Clay Target Program National Championship in Illinois.

Sawyer County—Enhance 450 acres through a variety of treatments including prescribed fire, mowing, and planting on the Flambeau River State Forest and Kimberly Clark Wildlife Area.

Statewide—Provide funding to support the Wisconsin High School Rodeo Association’s involvement in its shooting sports activities.

For a complete list of Wisconsin’s projects, go here.

Partners for the Wisconsin projects include the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, and various sportsmen, wildlife, civic and government organizations.


Anecdotal Wolf Stories

Presented by James Beers:

I recently changed dentists and last week had my first appointment. The dentist asked me if I was the same person who writes about wolves in the Wisconsin Outdoor News. I said, yes, I am, and he proceeded to tell me how much he hates wolves and how frustrated he is with wolf-lovers. He said that he and friends had deer hunted in northern Wisconsin for years but they recently started hunting in central Wisconsin because the wolves have decimated the northern deer population (this confirms what I have heard and read from other sources). He said that the motel (Comfort Inn) where they stayed when deer hunting in the north was always full during deer season but now is down to 20% capacity due to the lack of hunters. He also said that another group of friends who traditionally hunted in a national forest in the north have not seen a single deer in the past five years.

The dentist told of an incident with a wolf when he was bird hunting with his dog. The wolf charged his dog and he shot the wolf at point-blank range. Fortunately for his dog, he was close enough to defend it from the wolf. This incident took place before wolves were put back on protected status.

Nothing like a real encounter to convince one of lethal wolf behavior.



Clearly, the N Wisconsin deer herd is seeking its “New Normal”, wherein global warming and climate change effects on plants; and those as yet unspecified diseases, fleas and ticks that Minnesota DNR “biologists” and University of Minnesota “perfessers” have yet to identify but are sure are causing the demise of N Minnesota deer and moose are spreading to our Eastern neighbors. All we can do in the meantime is give them more money and just hope they find the answers in time. Otherwise, soon the Central Wisconsin deer herd will similarly disappear as far as any hunting and what is left, Illinois???

Actually, a few more years of this lying and subterfuge from all these government experts and the possible political reaction from Wisconsin progressives that aren’t still hiding in Illinois and Indiana motels will give the Madison/Milwaukee/U of W wolf folks control of the State government (like Anthony Eden and Labour replaced Winston Churchill and the Conservatives in 1945 as soon as the War was over) and with Wisconsin deer hunters historical anomalies (like loggers and trappers); and rural Wisconsin dog owners filing out of the woods with their hands over their heads crying, “Comrade” like Italians surrendering in N Africa in 1942 or Germans surrendering at Stalingrad in 1943 – they can:

– Make the wolf the State Icon, State Mammal, State Predator, and place a 30’ high statue of a wolf in the Capitol Rotunda.

– Make dog ownership illegal since the opposition from remaining rural dog owners (those that actually derive other than emotional benefits from their dogs) will be about the size of the Hmong lobby.

– Revoke Concealed Carry and make the possession of rifles, shotguns and ammunition illegal without a permit issued by some young lady in Madison since deer hunters and rural residents that actually imagine hunting or defending themselves and their property from wolves and human predators will be moving to cities and leaving the rural precincts to federal and state realtors who will help the Local governments box up their records for the State Archivist and the State Historian since Local government revenue will dry up like speakeasies in 1933.

– Seize the fish and game agency revenues and authority for:

– “Protection” and “research” of all plant and animal species (not just the “hook and bullet” species).

– Extermination of all “NON-Native” plants and animals not documented as occurring in the State before 1492 AD.

– Restoration of all “Native” (as defined in Legislation) species of plants and animals throughout the state.

– When the old hunting and fishing revenue runs out quickly since there is no more hunting and fishing, the State Legislature and the US Congress will receive demands from the urban voters to spend tax dollars from all to make the State a Secular Nature Worship Cathedral as a model for other progressives elsewhere or else who will employ all those DNR worthies and “perfessers” that caused all this without a scintilla of responsibility or one qualm of a guilty conscience.

This sarcasm has more than a kernel of truth in it. I am saddened as I hear about your deer hunters as I hear about similar situations across this great country almost every day and, as they say, if you didn’t laugh you would have to cry once you understand what is happening.


Jim: There was a recent letter to the editor in WON written by a bird hunter/bird dog owner in NE WI. He complained to the DNR folks that he can’t/won’t bird hunt because the presence of wolves is too much of a threat to the safety of his dogs. So the ever-adaptive DNR told him to hunt in areas where there are fewer or no wolves (the DNR handily has a map of wolf territories on its website). The hunter pointed out two distinct and DNR-ignored facts: Wolves traverse a large territory and the packs are not always where the DNR says they should be, and, this DNR “advice” has effectively made areas of WI no-hunting zones. So here we go – exactly what the U.S. Humane Society wants – the death of hunting.



When I moved back to Minnesota 6 years ago, the St. Paul Pioneer Press was publishing unbelievable DNR/U of M drivel about wolves bi-weekly with front page stuff every few months about moose, and how ticks and global warming (I kid you not) were responsible for the disappearance of moose. Almost without fail, wolves were never mentioned and when mentioned they were just a throwaway reference to some people saying that predation was a factor. Those that were so noted were usually pictured as redneck, flat-earthers that were too dumb to accept global warming and were probably racists on top of it.

I wrote letter to the editor after letter to the editor trying in a few words and in measured tones (to get it accepted as a letter) to point out the lies in the articles but to no avail.

So I wrote the Outdoor Writer about it and tried to send him information but he dismissed me like a petulant child that didn’t like spinach.

My last e-mail to him concerned how in the short time (2 years?) since I returned I had met two Minnesota ruffed grouse hunters (one at Church and one while fishing in central Minnesota) that told me they no longer hunted grouse because they had had encounters with wolves that they drove off with their shotguns. Both said they hunted with the family dog and if they ever brought the dog home dead or all chewed up they didn’t think grouse were worth the reaction from their wives or kids. The outdoor writer said I was just making it up. He had lived in Minnesota all his life and never heard of such nonsense. He asked me to quit bothering him. About 6 months later he went to work as a Public Relations flak for the Minnesota DNR where so far as I know he labors away today.

His replacement was a young, urban enviro whose claim to fame, per himself, was he hadn’t hunted or fished before but he loved nature. He took up where his predecessor left off. I kept writing letters to the editor and when the outdoor guy wrote drivel about wolves I wrote him a measured e-mail which he quickly dismissed me with the words, we would just have to agree to disagree. He replied also that I was nuts for implying that I knew it was hard for him to be objective about such things and still maintain the DNR as a story source for articles or as a recommendation for keeping his job if he was too far off the wolf, et al, reservation. He clearly expected to hear from that old crank that had just moved to the state and was just a waste of time if you didn’t turn him off right away.

You are absolutely right about the perfidy of wolf “maps”: they are just like wolf depredation “compensation” that never materializes either fully or for an extended period. They are both placebos administered for temporary gain by neophytes that couldn’t even qualify as midwifes, and whose hidden agendas are despicable and responsible for much of the ongoing loss of rural American culture, communities, government and economies.

Jim Beers
28 March 2015

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:


Let’s See The Proposed Great Lakes Wolf Bill

THERE OUGHT TO BE A LAW! Not really but isn’t that usually the cry we hear when things don’t go the way we have been brainwashed to think they should?

We’ve been hearing about PROPOSED bills that would remove the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act in the Great Lakes region. I’m tired of hearing about all the promises that are going to be in this bill. I’m not that stupid. I’ve been down this lousy road before. Bill titles and false promises get people on all sides revved up and squawking like a gaggle of geese. The reality is all too often that the actual text of the bill is useless drivel, written so most can’t understand (not that it matters, they never read the bill anyway).

So, let’s see the text of the bill already! Why do these clowns get to spend weeks spreading what, more than likely, will turn out to be lies and more lies, when they can’t, don’t, won’t share their proposal until after a formal submission….if then? Are they hiding something? This is the same tactic President Obama is using in his plan to seize full control and censorship of the Internet. WHAT’S IN THE BILL?!?

It’s fun for some to get all worked up over this supposed wolf bill proposal that’s been talked about from Congressman Reid Ribble, and yet none of us knows what’s in it. If we pay attention to the tidbits of information being said about the bill, it might give us some hints.

For instance, in this news article, Mr. Ribble is quoted as saying, “My bill doesn’t have anything to do with the Endangered Species Act. It just says a court should not be making a determination. And, in fact, if the population [wolves] decreases the Fish and Wildlife Service can re-list the wolf at any time.”

What’s he saying here? Looks to me like he is suggesting that the Courts will longer be able to make any rulings on wolves in those states listed in this bill….whichever ones those are. What I find troubling is that he says that if the wolf population decreases, the Feds can relist anytime they want to.

So Ribble, if this is what’s in his bill, is tossing blindly all his support and ceding all power to the decisions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). Really? Those corrupt, agenda driven clowns? I see the USFWS as being really no different than the Humane Society of the United States, Midwest Environmental Advocates or any of the well-greased groups that steal their money from the taxpayers of this country. USFWS history shows their constant and consistent caving in to pressures from environmental groups.

If this bill doesn’t contain the right language, then what a waste of time. The idiot wolf lovers have pushed and demanded for so long, taking advantage of and bastardizing any semblance of law and order to get their way and more, when it comes to wolves. And now people have had enough. Screw em!

Not only would I make it so leeches can’t make their living filing lawsuits, I would permanently remove the wolf from Federal protection and disallow the USFWS any say in the future events that surround the wolf. We mustn’t forget that these criminals at the USFWS created this mess in the first place. They lied to the American people and foisted a plague upon the people and land.

It appears to me this secret proposed wolf bill does nothing but give USFWS dictator status. Way to go!


AZ and NM Want Their Wolves Included in Ribble Bill for Delisting

As I understand things, a bill that is planned to go before the U.S. House of Representatives that would effectively remove gray wolves in Wisconsin, Michigan, Wyoming and Minnesota from protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), is being crafted as I write. According to some sources, once that bill is ready it will be presented to the House.

There now appears to be a movement underway in Arizona and New Mexico where groups seeking control of wolves in the Southwest want their Congressional representatives to get in on the action and get Mexican wolves in those states included on this bill.

Below is a copy of a letter sent to Rep. Steve Pearce from the Catron County Commission seeking action.

RE: Addition of “Mexican Gray Wolf” to be included with the “Gray Wolf’s” removal from the Endangered Species List Congressman Pearce,

The Catron County Commission requests that you add the “Mexican Gray Wolf” (Canis Lupus Baileyi) into the legislation U.S. Representative Reed Ribble, R-Wis. is preparing to remove the “Gray Wolf” off the Endangered Species List in four States.

U.S. Representative Ribble is leading the effort and the co-sponsors include U.S. Representatives Collin Peterson, D-Minn., Dan Benishek, R-Mich., and Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.

There has already been severe collateral damage to the citizens of Catron County, County Government and the State of New Mexico in recovery of Mexican Gray Wolves on settled landscapes by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (See attachment A1 Dr. Geist)

Now, with the new 10j rule, Mexican Wolf Recovery will be expanded up to I-40 (eventually beyond) in New Mexico-Arizona and South to the Mexican border. This expansion will take in vast settled landscapes and will have major negative effects on the citizens, pets, businesses, livestock, and wildlife.

All the Mexican wolves that have been released into the Gila Wilderness have moved and gone into areas of human activity. The last wolf pack, the Coronado Pack was released last July, 2014 into the Gila Wilderness. The wolves left the Wilderness recently, entered private property attacking and injuring two dogs. The wolves were hazed back into the Gila Wilderness by the USFWS and the chance of them remaining is questionable.

Congressman Pearce, by taking the Mexican Wolf off the Endangered Species List it will save rural families from losing their homes, businesses and private property rights.

Attached are documents to show the negative effects and collateral damage to achieve Mexican Wolf Recovery on settled landscapes .

Respectfully Submitted,
Glyn Griffin,
Catron County Commission Chair

Attachment A1

Dr. Geist addresses the issue of wolf recovery on settled landscapes

Wolves cannot be kept in settled landscapes, because of the impossibility of keeping wolves and dogs apart, and the destruction of the wolf genome by creeping hybridization. While I whole-heatedly agree that there should be no keeping of wolves and wolf hybrids as pets, the sheer size of the “wolf-dog” industry as well as past releases of wolf hybrids will insure further erosion of the genome of free-ranging wolves. Secondly, how is officialdom to know of wolf hybrids unless wolf numbers are strictly and closely regulated so that plenty of specimens are available for testing. Thirdly, from my experience identifying wolves or dogs from photos sent my way I have serious doubts that European wolf specialists can currently distinguish wolf from dog. Unless limits are set early to wolf numbers – and I see no hint of that – wolf populations will expand to destroy the populations of deer and turn to livestock and humans.

Do the authors of this manifesto really think that they can significantly keep wolves and dogs apart by minimizing the number of free-ranging dogs? Even if they have some success in doing so, are they not aware that lone wolves themselves seek out dogs? Do they really think that lone wolf females in heat will desist from visiting suburbs and farms looking for a mate? Do they think that chained farm dogs will not copulate with a female wolf in heat at night? Has nobody had the experience of holding a young very large male dog in training while they come in contact with am estrus female canid? I had a Bouvier de Flandre on the leash while we came across a small wolf track in the snow – and the Bouvier went wild! He then weighed only about a hundred pounds. I had my hands full! An amorous male wolf threatened my wife when he approached an estrus hunting dog in an enclosure. No neighborhood male dog had been that bold! In short, given wolves with a desire to mate and they will intrude deep into human habitation. There is no way to effectively segregate wolves from dogs in settled landscapes. Moreover, as this is written, there is now way to protect wildlife from marauding packs of dogs either.

As I have said before, all efforts to make wolves compatible with settle landscapes are a waste of time and energy. All marauding canids in settle landscape need to be removed. This raises the question of how to conserve wolves as a species. What we know for certain is that they need to be kept away from people and dogs. In the first instance that means that wolves and other large predators need to be kept where the public has no entry. And such areas need to be large. The very first step is to negotiate internationally for keeping large predators on military and atomic reserves. I doubt that national parks are suitable because the tourist lobby will balk. Secondly, means and ways need to be found to control closely wolf populations in such reserves to insure that the predators do not run out of prey, and leave the reserves for settled landscapes. Well-fed wolves will cause the least problems. Severe trapping and predator control in 20th century North America kept wolves out of settled landscapes, eliminated agricultural losses and disease transmission, retained their genetic integrity, while attacks on humans were unheard of.

Wolf conservation as proposed here (i.e. Europe) is not serious.

Sincerely, Val Geist
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science


Finding Humor in Tragedy

The following is an editorial/Letter to the Editor sent to the Green Bay (Wisconsin) Press-Gazette in response to a “fawning” article about the recent decision by a lady, federal judge in Washington, DC to place all Great Lakes wolves back under federal jurisdiction, thereby precluding even a modest, “fig-leaf” illusion of states (i.e. those living with the wolves)managing wolves or having any say about how many, where, and to what extent wolf damage and destruction will be tolerated as enforced by draconian federal law enforcement. ..Jim

Finding Humor in Tragedy

The recent decision by an activist federal judge in far-off Washington, DC utilizing (not really enforcing) what is arguably the most recklessly un-Constitutional law in American history to abolish all State and Local authority over the presence of wolves in their midst is a Tragedy of a magnitude worthy of a Shakespearean Play. It would not be out of order to compare it to some individual cleric in W. Iraq issuing a Fatwa based on his interpretation of Sharia Law.

Your paper lauds how the lady judge has confronted “hostile state management” (i.e. of wolves). Hostile state management by State politicians and bureaucrats would have first and foremost been to follow state and federal law and forbid the expenditure of any state hunting license revenue or and Pittman-Robertson excise taxes derived from arms and ammunition sales on any wolves that were forced into the state by federal bureaucrats and that have caused great harm to rural life, livestock, game animals, and the “domestic Tranquility” of Wisconsin residents being forced to endure the harms spreading wherever wolves become established.

State government has become a handmaiden to federal overreach and Local government revenue, jurisdictions and authority have been severely restricted, for what?

What is “management” of any wild animal population other than achieving and maintaining numbers and distributions of the animals as desired by those that live with or utilize those animals?

How can anyone right-thinking person (the judge in question and your writer are as right-thinking as St. Louis demonstrators shown a Coroner/Police Report) describe a wolf season with stated number goals as “unregulated killing?

If Killing wolves is “barbaric”, what pray tell is wolves killing and eating an Alaskan schoolteacher or a Canadian college student?

What is “recovery”? As many wolves as can be shoehorned into 48 states (when there are millions worldwide)? What were all those early ESA “goals” for wolves other than lies?

Even the miniscule annual harvest quotas in our states are merely tiny efforts meant only to quiet critics. The 10-15% harvest quotas of the (asserted) wolf population (since wolves cannot be accurately counted we may be sure DNR numbers are as reliable as national jobless and inflation numbers) are even lower than annual harvest quotas of desirable game animals. These tiny harvest quotas do only 2 things, 1) they reduce winter competition for food guaranteeing more and healthier reproducing females next spring and 2) they encourage larger litters and therefore MORE wolves next fall. That nonsense about “pack structure” and “alpha males” is no more that romantic biological propaganda. To reduce however many wolves are out there, a harvest of 50-70% for at least 5 years and then a 35-50% reduction annually thereafter would be required.

If leghold traps (that by the way allow for release of non-target animals), snares, electronic calls and baiting are “cruel” and “unsportsman-like”; this latter term from organizations that would eradicate all “sporting” hunting, trapping and fishing activities tomorrow; are to be banished what is left? Evening classes for predators? A domestic Jane Goodall Corps?

Please spare us the use of the term “science”. Wolf/predator “science” over the past 30 years has become little more than propaganda purchased by government bureaucrats and radical environmental/animal rights organizations from University professors seeking funding, tenure, recognition and graduate students.

Wolves kill people, livestock, game animals, dogs and other predators like coyotes and foxes. Wolves spread, carry, and contract over thirty diseases and infections that kill and disable humans, domestic animals and other wild animals. Wolves cause great stress to rural families, rural communities and rural life. To call this “decision” a Tragedy is actually being kind. So what is so funny? Where is the “Humor” in this Tragedy?

The “Humor” lies in how your paper and all those wolf-lovers you serve in all those places distant from where the wolves and rural people are doing their “Danse Macabre”, (i.e. Dance of Death) can say with a straight face that it is “barbaric” to kill wolves with “packs of dogs – with hounding of wolves so out of the realm of responsible action that it’s drawn condemnation around the nation”.

Jim Beers

1 January 2015

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.