Stop Wisconsin Wolf Hunt

Target: Governor of Wisconsin Scott Walker

Goal: To prevent the planned wolf hunt in Wisconsin and provide protections for wolves.

The gray wolf is perhaps the most iconic species within the wolf family. Living throughout North America and Eurasia, these animals are the largest species of wolf as well as the most immediately recognizable. Sadly, through history they have often been persecuted for being a threat to livestock, which in turn severely depleted wolf populations over the years.

Despite this, Congress has officially eliminated federal protection for gray wolves. This puts them at great risk as many take the removal as an open invitation for hunting these majestic animals. There is a tremendous threat that this newfound vulnerability to hunting will allow these animals to fall prey to large-scale culling. This is disheartening as hunting of these animals should be severely limited and conducted in a highly regulated fashion as is proper with such an important species.

Wisconsin’s upcoming October 15, 2012 wolf hunt highlights the issues present with removing protection from gray wolves. It is Wisconsin’s intent to not only allow wolves to be hunted indiscriminately, but also to allow the use of dogs by those hunting gray wolves. This is cruel to both wolves and the dogs used to hunt them. Even what would be termed a successful hunt could result in dogs being maimed or killed by wolves that are simply trying to protect themselves.

The decision to allow both dogs and the nighttime hunting of wolves takes an unacceptable concept (the hunting of a species that should be protected) and renders it detestable. If Congress will no longer protect these animals then it falls to the people themselves. Take the first step towards protecting these animals by stopping Wisconsin from conducting its October 15th wolf hunt.


Dear Governor Walker,

Gray wolves have historically been unfairly persecuted for the threat they can pose to livestock. This persecution reached such extreme levels that eventually many countries including the United States adopted laws protecting these animals to prevent them from being completely decimated.

Unfortunately, Congress has now voted to eliminate federal protection for these majestic animals, leaving them once more vulnerable. There is a tremendous threat that this new-found vulnerability to hunting will allow these animals to be killed at an unprecedented rate. If they are to be hunted at all these animals should be at the very least be protected by laws requiring wolf hunting be conducted in the severely limited, highly regulated fashion that should be associated with such an important species.

Wisconsin’s decision to allow not only the nighttime hunting of these animals, but also the use of dogs reflects this unfortunate lack of regulatory protection. This decision is cruel to both the wolves being hunted and the dogs being used during those hunts. This decision means that wolves will not only be tracked and killed, but harassed needlessly by dogs chasing them during the hunt. Even if the hunter is successful, it still could result in the death or maiming of his own dogs by a wolf merely attempting to protect itself.

Wisconsin must stop this from happening. Removing federal protection from a species does not make it an open target to be hunted back into threatened status once more. Gray wolves are far too important to be hunted down recklessly.

Stop the planned October 15th wolf hunt to protect these animals. If that cannot be achieved, at the very least ban the use of dogs when hunting these animals. Protect our wolf population before it is destroyed.


[Your Name Here]

Sign the Petition

  • Only your name will be displayed. By signing, you accept our terms and may receive updates on this and related causes.
FacebookCare2 NewsTwitterEmailShare


  1. It seems that every state wants a witch, rather wolf hunt. Aren’t they aware of the ecology and justice towards our wildlife?

  2. Daniela Bress says:

    Don’t fool your voters and the rest of the world!
    You kill more of your alleged important ecologically animals during one single oversea transport than a wolfmother in twenty years!!!!

    Tell your ranchers to build fences, keep their cattles away from public land and protect them from dying on ships and in trucks in the name of globalization and tell your so-called hunters they are nothing else but cowardly little examples for Americans with either too much inferiority complexes or pathological pleasure in killing. The first-mentioned should be sent to the therapist and the others to jail.

    And hey, the world doesn’t need more than half of the producted meat, because it ends up in the dustbins and on the streets of our modern „civilized“ human society, anyway!

  3. Sylvia Schmidt says:

    Ecological development is a good thing. Move your cattle to another location. Wolves are good for the environment, it is man that is the danger to wild life.

  4. German Shepherd Lore says:

    @Daniel Feehan

    First, I would like to say that it is refreshing to have an intelligent conversation about this topic. I know a lot of hunters, and the ones that I choose to associate with actually do have respect for wildlife.

    The wolf hunting pages that I have visited, however, all convey the impression that wolf hunters are blood-thirsty savages who could give a rat’s @$$ over respect for wildlife conservation and the need to protect a healthy presence of wolves to better the ecosystem.

    That being said, I would like to clarify some of your points:

    ‘Much of that taxpayers expenses came from permits sold to hunters’
    Much of the taxpayers expense also came from tourists who enjoy seeing wolves in the wild.

    ‘We put many of these species on the brink of extinction…’
    To my understanding, wolves were completely extinct in the US in the late 1930’s until they were reintroduced. No wolf hunting permits were issued as they were federally protected.

    ‘safely trapping and neutering is not cost effectively, if that was the only solution, wolves would never have been re-introduced’
    So, eventually hunting them was the only inevitable conclusion to the reintroduction effort? That seems back-@$$ward.

    Hunters and cattle ranchers are certainly not the only users of public lands, and they should not be the only ones who control what happens on public lands. A majority of Americans want to see wolves returned to at least some of their former range, namely the Yellowstone area. Public land is for everybody and wildlife are included.

    For too long western ranchers have grazed on Federal land at the expense of the tax payers and wildlife of this Country… Since we taxpayers are subsidizing the livestock industry, we should have the right to demand that wolves be part of the natural landscape.

    To use YNP as an example, “According to the survey, only 3.5 percent of the Yellowstone National Park area economy is due to livestock. Whereas 39.5 percent is due to services, much stemming from tourism. Just considering the number of people who benefit from this ecologically whole proposal… wolf reintroduction is clearly a superior act.”

    ‘History holds many documented accounts of wolves preying on humans’
    Please show me the data. Attacks from healthy wolves on humans are extremely rare, however, a report by The Wolf Trust documented 80 encounters, some of which were provoked (like wolves caught in traps, wolves shot by darts for research, etc.), and only 16 of them resulted in human injuries. Even this number of cases means your chances of getting attacked (not killed, but just attacked) by a wolf are about the same as being struck by lightning.

    Humans are destroying the ecosystem. We are not responsible predators. And we bend to pressures from special interests, i.e. ranchers and hunters.

    Wyoming is now proposing shoot-on-sight for 80% of the state. Is that to ‘keep wolves at a population level that best suits all wildlife’?

    I call BS.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Facebook Comments


1079 Signatures

  • Ana Maria Mainhardt Carpes
  • Darlene Roepke
  • Lynn Juozilaitis
1 of 108123...108
Skip to toolbar