Wisconsin judge dismisses lawsuit challenging state’s new wolf management plan
MADISON, Wis. — A lawsuit filed by animal welfare activists seeking to invalidate Wisconsin’s new wolf management plan was dismissed by a judge on Monday.
Dane County Circuit Judge Stephen Ehlke threw out the case accusing Wisconsin wildlife officials of violating the state’s open meetings law and ignoring comments from wolf researchers and supporters, reflecting just how controversial the debate over wolf management in the state has become.
Ehlke ruled from the bench, granting a motion to dismiss filed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and its board. The lawsuit was filed by the Great Lakes Wildlife Alliance, also known as Friends of the Wisconsin Wolf & Wild animals.
The lawsuit alleged that members of the Department of Natural Resources policy board collected comments on the wolf management plan from interest groups they favored even after the public comment period had ended.
The lawsuit focused on three private conversations attended by members of the board, hosted by the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, the Wisconsin Association of Sporting Dogs and Wisconsin Wolf Facts.
The lawsuit alleged that although a quorum of board members did not attend any of the meetings, enough of them participated to influence changes to the plan, in violation of the state’s open meetings law.
The judge ruled that the law on open meetings did not apply to the meetings in question because there were not enough board members present to form a meeting.
Ehlke also rejected allegations of violations of due process and administrative procedures. The judge also rejected arguments that comments from the Great Lakes Wildlife Alliance were ignored during the development of the wolf plan.
The group has not presented a single case to support its claims of discrimination, Ehlke said. Allowing them to claim they have been discriminated against would mean that anyone could make that argument if a government body does something he or she doesn’t like, the judge said.
“This makes no sense to me and would result in government operations coming to a standstill,” the judge said.
Susann Bradford, an attorney for the Great Lakes Wildlife Alliance, asked the judge to reconsider the ruling. The judge rejected that request. Bradford said after the hearing that the group was considering whether to appeal.
Farmers in northern Wisconsin have complained for years that the wolf population is multiplying too quickly and preying on their livestock. Hunters say wolves are devastating the deer population in the northern part of the state. Conservationists argue that wolves have not yet become firmly established in Wisconsin and need protection.
The DNR board adopted the wolf management plan in October. It recommends keeping the statewide population at about 1,000 wolves but does not set a hard limit. The plan instead recommends allowing the population to grow or decrease at certain numerical thresholds.
State wildlife officials have said the lack of a hard limit gives the DNR more flexibility to manage the species, allows local wolf packs to fluctuate and gives the population a better chance of maintaining wolf stocks for years to come.
Hunting advocates favor setting a population limit, saying the lack of a target leaves both wolves and humans unprotected. Conservation groups opposed a provision related to how the DNR would respond to certain populations in different parts of the state.
Last year, a federal judge placed gray wolves in the lower 48 states back on the endangered species list, making hunting illegal and limiting ranchers to nonlethal control methods such as fencing livestock or using guard dogs. The DNR has updated its wolf management plan in case wolves are delisted and hunting can resume.
The U.S. House of Representatives last week passed a bill to remove wolves from the endangered species list, but it is likely doomed to failure amid opposition from the Biden administration. Republicans in the Wisconsin Legislature passed a bill that would require setting a specific population goal, but Democratic Gov. Tony Evers vetoed it.