--- title: "Officials Lethally Remove 9 Gray Wolves from Wisconsin After Threats to Human Safety" description: "State and federal officials worked together to remove nine gray wolves from Prince County, Wisconsin, last month to protect human safety." date: "2026-10-07" modified: "2026-10-07" authors: - name: "David Zeug" job_title: "Contributor" link: "https://www.outdoorlife.com/authors/david-zeug.md" url: "https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/gray-wolves-removed-wisconsin/" categories: - "Conservation" - "Wildlife Management" tags: - "News" --- # Officials Lethally Remove 9 Gray Wolves from Wisconsin After Threats to Human Safety ![gray wolf]() *A wolf spotted on a National Wildlife Refuge in Wisconsin. \Photo by USFWS\* The USDA Wildlife Services branch removed nine wolves from Price County, Wisconsin, at the request of the state Department of Natural Resources in August and September, according to a recent DNR statement. The Wisconsin DNR documented a series of verified threats to human health and safety in the Township of Flambeau. The only time lethal removal of gray wolves is allowed in the state is in the event of a threat to human safety, given that wolves continue to earn protection provided by [the federal Endangered Species Act](). The wolves, likely all from the same pack, had demonstrated signs of threatening behavior from July 2025 through August 2026. On Aug. 12, a homeowner in Flambeau reported trail camera photos of wolves directly behind his house. In another incident, a gray wolf came within 20 yards of a man mowing brush on his tractor, according to [the Wisconsin Examiner](). This is unnatural behavior for wild wolves, who typically steer clear of both people and residential areas. The pack demonstrated a pattern of behavioral escalation with a heightened acclimation of human presence and a complete lack of response to non-lethal deterrents. Those non-lethal methods included noise harassment, increased lighting, and the removal of potential attractants. Residents in that area had complied with all DNR and Wildlife Services [suggestions to deter the unwanted wolf behavior](). They proved ineffective. The wolves began responding less and less to the hazing attempts and became more acclimated to human presence, according to an email from Randy Johnson, the DNR’s large carnivore specialist. There are [three classifications]() of wolf conflict investigations: Level 3 behavior is classified as normal non-threatening and non- habituated behavior, but there’s more frequent human contact than is ideal. That includes wild wolf behavior like hunting and killing wild prey near occupied dwellings during daylight. Level 2 threats reflect a non-aggressive habituation to people. Level 1 threats display aggressive behavior toward humans. By policy, neither the Wisconsin DNR nor Wildlife Services provided more detail involving the removal than the removal took place in the town of Flambeau. However, online reports show level 2 threats and level 3 behaviors were documented in mid-August. Laurie Groskopf, a Tomahawk resident who has followed wolf depredation in Wisconsin for years, says lethal removal has been used in the past. “A wolf was lethally removed from the train yards in Superior. Deer were drawn to spilled corn and the wolf felt this was easy pickings. There was also a dairy operation in the Price County town of Fifield where wolves were walking right into a barn where people were working,” says Groskopf, adding, “sometimes trapping was successful and sometimes not.” Groskopf also thought the DNR should be more transparent with this information. “I feel they’re not doing a good job of advising the public about these conflicts. It doesn’t help \[our\] ability to take precautions.” Groskopf added the lack of transparency creates serious negativity towards wolves and the agencies that manage them and, “that’s not a healthy approach to wildlife management.” Certified wildlife biologist Adrian Wydeven headed the DNR’s wolf recovery and management program from 1990 until 2013. Wydeven thought the USDA Wildlife Service and DNR’s decision for lethal removal was a reasonable approach. “I’m sure Wildlife Services and DNR wanted to avoid level one threats and acted before that happened. In this type of group learning \[situation\], the most effective management would be the removal of the entire pack,” says Wydeven. “Younger wolves having lost fear of people and being habituated to people are not likely to readily lose that behavior. Also leaving any young wolves behind after removing the adults would likely lead to more nuisance behavior or starvation of the young wolves. While predicting future behavior of a wildlife species is always somewhat tricky, there seems to be enough of a pattern developing here that the approach taken was a responsible and reasonable one.” The DNR, in recognition of the cultural and spiritual significance wolves hold for the Ojibwe and other tribes, worked with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to transfer the euthanized wolves to the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission so the wolves could be handled in a manner consistent with Native cultural beliefs. The GLIFWC received the remains and, on Oct. 5, [publicly opposed]() the lethal removals. “This action damages existing relationships and fractures trust,” GLIFWC Executive Administrator Jason Schlender said in a statement. “We remind the WDNR and USDA Wildlife Services to involve GLIFWC and its member tribes in the decision-making processes. Simply handing us the remains of our relatives after killing them does not constitute meaningful consultation.”