PRICE COUNTY, Wis. (WMTV) – The killing of nine federally protected gray wolves in northern Wisconsin is drawing criticism from tribal wildlife leaders and animal advocates.<\/p>\n
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) says the wolves posed a threat to human safety after repeated encounters with people in Price County. But tribal wildlife leaders say they were excluded from the decision-making process, while animal advocates question whether the removals were necessary.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is huge. This is a huge mistake,\u201d Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC) Executive Administrator Jason Schlender told WMTV. \u201cYou can\u2019t just say, \u2018oops, I\u2019m sorry.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
The wolves were trapped and euthanized by USDA Wildlife Services in late August and early September at the direction of the DNR.<\/p>\n
Why the DNR says the wolves were killed<\/p>\n
The DNR says the removals followed more than a year of reported wolf encounters, beginning in July 2025. The agency documented six verified human-safety conflicts and said members of the pack had become increasingly comfortable around people.<\/p>\n
According to the DNR, residents tried several nonlethal measures, including hazing, increased lighting, removing potential attractants and modifying fencing. The agency says those efforts failed to stop the concerning behavior.<\/p>\n
Although gray wolves remain federally protected, limited exceptions allow lethal removal under certain circumstances involving threats to human safety.<\/p>\n
The DNR says it consulted with federal wildlife officials and determined relocation was not feasible because of limited suitable habitat, the size of the pack and potential risks to other wolves.<\/p>\n
Animal Wellness Action President Wayne Pacelle disputes the state\u2019s justification.<\/p>\n
\u201cI question the idea that the Wisconsin DNR and the US Department of Agriculture killed nine wolves for human safety reasons because it\u2019s completely unprecedented,\u201d Pacelle told WMTV.<\/p>\n
Pacelle argued that wolves generally avoid people and questioned whether the six documented conflicts warranted killing the animals.<\/p>\n
He also pointed to wolves\u2019 ecological benefits, including their influence on deer populations and road safety.<\/p>\n
A 2021 study examining Wisconsin counties found that the return of wolves was associated with a 24% reduction in deer-vehicle collisions, largely because deer changed their behavior around predators.<\/p>\n
Tribal wildlife leaders say they were excluded<\/p>\n
Schlender said he was shocked to learn the wolves had been killed after state and federal wildlife officials spent more than a year addressing concerns without directly consulting tribal wildlife partners.<\/p>\n
For Schlender, the issue goes beyond wildlife management.<\/p>\n
\u201cFor us as Ojibwe people, I mean, for the Lake Superior Ojibwe people, there is a spiritual and cultural connection that we have with Maingan,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Maingan is the Ojibwe word for wolf.<\/p>\n
\u201cSeeing how they structure their packs, their families, and how they raise their young and how they function as a group provides a lot of examples and models a lot of things for us as Lake Superior Ojibwe,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
GLIFWC works with tribal nations to protect treaty rights and help manage natural resources throughout ceded territories, including areas outside reservation boundaries.<\/p>\n
Schlender said that responsibility makes tribal involvement in major wildlife-management decisions especially important.<\/p>\n
DNR secretary apologizes for lack of consultation<\/p>\n
DNR Secretary Karen Hyun has acknowledged shortcomings in communication with tribal nations and GLIFWC.<\/p>\n
\u201cI am deeply sorry for the DNR\u2019s lack of communication with Tribal Nations and GLIFWC in this process … I am committed to improving our collaboration and communication with the tribes around wolf conflicts going forward.\u201d<\/p>\n
The DNR says it sent electronic notices about the wolf conflicts to GLIFWC and tribal biologists but received no requests for additional information.<\/p>\n
The agency also said its existing policy did not require further consultation in this case, noting the incidents occurred 20 to 40 miles from the nearest reservation.<\/p>\n
Schlender disputed that explanation, noting that GLIFWC\u2019s responsibilities extend throughout ceded territories, not just reservation boundaries.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re not your common citizen, you know, we are partners in this whole thing,\u201d Schlender said.<\/p>\n
While DNR Secretary Karen Hyun has apologized and pledged to improve collaboration with tribal nations, the agency has not outlined specific changes to its consultation policy.<\/p>\n
Schlender said an apology cannot undo what happened.<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd then even issuing apologies and condolences, that\u2019s already too late,\u201d he said. \u201cThose things have already happened. Those actions have already been taken.\u201d<\/p>\n
Still, Schlender said GLIFWC intends to keep pushing for a greater role in wildlife-management decisions to prevent similar situations in the future.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ll continue to be vocal and visible in those spaces,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n