It was Monday morning when the news of two more dead hunting dogs in Wisconsin was released by the state’s DNR. According to the release, one dog was killed by wolves in Eau Claire County on Saturday and another was picked off in Bayfield County on Sunday, as verified by USDA Wildlife Services. The news of dead hunting dogs, while nothing new to Wisconsin hunters, comes just days after officials advanced critical changes to the DNR’s wolf depredation payment program.
Just last week, the Natural Resources Board advanced an emergency rule that would let the DNR delay wolf depredation payments until the end of the fiscal year, or June 30, 2027. In addition to pushing off payments, the rule could also potentially prorate (reduce) those payments based on available funds in state coffers.
The reason for the seemingly desperate move is straightforward and structural. While gray wolves remain under federal Endangered Species Act protection, compensation for livestock, pets, and hunting dogs comes out of the Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation budget, as there is no dedicated legislative appropriation for these claims. The bureau’s overall budget is roughly $8.4 million for fiscal year 2027, two-thirds of which is made up from gifts and donations, with only about half a million dollars in general purpose revenue. Meanwhile the broader Fish and Wildlife Account continues to carry a multi-year structural deficit driven by stagnant license prices (not raised since 2005) and rising costs.
Last year the state paid a hair over $200,000 in wolf compensation, which ended up being a reduction from the previous year, but is still a dollar amount that competes with other conservation work.
"As we’ve closed the books on wolf compensation payments for Fiscal Year 2026, there is increased uncertainty going into Fiscal Year 2027 about the DNR’s ability to fully cover all (wolf) compensation claims in the year ahead," Randy Johnson, DNR large carnivore specialist said.
With narrowing options for the DNR when claims threaten to outrun the available dollars, officials are wrestling with whether they ought to pay on a first-come, first-served basis until the money runs out or hold and/or prorate payments so that later claimants are not left with empty pockets. This latest emergency rule opens the door to the second approach, while many of us are left wondering as to when the adults in the room will approach the situation with a bit of common sense.
There was a time when wolves were under state control in the Badger State, which allowed for regulated hunting and trapping seasons (although short-lived) that effectively fed the very same compensation fund via wolf license and application fees. According to the Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, sales of wolf hunting applications, preference points, and licenses for the February 2021 season generated over $99,000 — or about half of last year’s compensation bill.
Wisconsin DNR
When it comes to structural management solutions, there is none better than allowing hunters to participate and help underwrite the cost of living with the animal. Particularly when that animal is an apex predator.
Rather than aligned incentives, we have a system handcuffed by Federal protections that remove the ability to run a season, wipe-out all associated revenue and sticks the bill with a cash-strapped bureau that has a long list of other responsibilities.
With over 1,100 wolves in Wisconsin, the population is hovering near what agency scientists describe as biological carrying capacity. The Great Lakes population as a whole is healthy and well distributed across Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, with recovery goals that were set back in 1992 long since exceeded.
What has not been recovered is a durable, state-led management framework that can respond to local conflicts without waiting on federal court calendars or congressional riders.
And while the emergency rule may be seen as a necessary short-term fix, it’s better suited to serve as a reminder that the current arrangement is unsustainable. Coexistence requires management tools and funding mechanisms that match the biological reality of the current landscape.
A regulated, state-run season remains the clearest path to both.
