PRESS RELEASE: Wildlife Alliance Sues Wisconsin Over Wolf Policies (Again)

Madison, WI — Today, the Great Lakes Wildlife Alliance (GLWA), dba Friends of the Wisconsin Wolf & Wildlife (FOWW) filed a lawsuit charging that the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Natural Resources Board (NRB) infringed on constitutional due process and equal protections along with violations of numerous statutes, regulations, and rules when it adopted the 2023 Wolf Plan and regulations last month. Following on its successful litigation in the Fall of 2021, GLWA hopes to push the agency in the direction of science-based decision making meant to ensure the long-term sustainability and survival of the Great Lake’s iconic gray wolf populations.

Some unlawful actions reflect secret meetings that violate Wisconsin’s Open Meetings law, viewpoint discrimination that violate the US and Wisconsin constitutions, and breaches of the Wisconsin public trust doctrine.

Breaches of public trust occurred through the use of outcome-driven “Lead Standard” science and by the biased catering to anti-wolf special interest groups.

“The next generation will look back with critical eyes on this state wildlife agency and its self-interested approach to science. Scientists have a duty to speak out for the highest research integrity and serve the broad public interest. Wolf policies must reflect the application of the best available science,” said Dr. Adrian Treves, whose research was largely ignored or disparaged by decision makers. “I am grateful for the support of my colleagues and the academic community. I’m confident that the pursuit of knowledge and research integrity will prevail. I look forward to continuing my work in understanding and protecting wolves for the betterment of our relationships with future generations of all life,” Dr. Treves added.

Among plaintiff’s multiple concerns, GLWA is concerned about the DNR’s decision to exclude gold standard research and any tribal biologist’s scrutiny in preference for the top-down politicized and questionable science that prioritizes lethal control and recreational hunting.  

“In our analysis of the wolf plan, we expressed serious concerns about the deliberate exclusion of a substantial body of high-quality scientific literature, seemingly aimed at avoiding conflicting findings with the agency’s favored ‘management’ approach involving ‘lethal control’. The plan and its approval process are both deficient in scientific integrity and ethical considerations, as biases prioritize the arbitrary killing of wolves, contrary to the coexistence promoted by the broad public and which science reports leads to better outcomes for wolves, people and nature,” said Francisco J. Santiago-Ávila. “Disregarding the numerous comments pointing out these imbalances without explanation raises doubts about the ethics and the scientific expertise within the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Natural Resources Board (NRB). More importantly, it highlights the promotion of harmful ethical perspectives influencing our relationship with wolves and the rest of nature.” Santiago-Ávila said.

In keeping with its pattern of elevating certain viewpoints over others in the wolf planning process, DNR and NRB held unlawful, secret meetings that clearly influenced changes to the final wolf management plan and permanent rules, rendering those plans and rules illegal. GLWA asked the court to strike down the entire set of new policies, rules and regulations, and deliver a stern rebuke to the DNR and NRB for violating state statutes and their own policies and regulations.

“We are staunch advocates for open meetings, democratic processes and transparency, particularly in the context of wolf and wildlife management. Our primary aim is simple accountability that all decisions pertaining to wolves and frankly all natural resources are made transparently, fairly, and with the best interests of the public and the wildlife in mind. Our advocates tirelessly generated the majority of comments within the established rules and timeline, believing and trusting that the system can work. However, it has become clear that the system has failed the will of the people, in favor of sport-hunting, agricultural and large extractive industry lobbyists. People should take notice this isn’t just about protecting wolves. The wolf plan happens to be the one of many policy decisions where these fundamental principles are so blatantly compromised, so it is our duty to take action, holding agencies accountable for their failures and addressing any potential corruption that undermines these principles,” said Melissa Smith of GLWA.

In this lawsuit, GLWA also addresses discriminatory practices which often exclude certain stakeholders and public comment if they do not hold the traditional sportsmen’s values. By design, the system holds onto a biased view in favor of recreational hunting, trapping and fishing with little regard for other legitimate uses such as camping, hiking and wildlife watching. Decisions and policy undertaken by DNR and NRB exclude diverse perspectives, values and shut out constitutional rights of the majority of citizens. 

“The 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution states that all citizens are to be provided “equal protection under the laws.” Those protections do not exist only in certain circumstances and when it is convenient for government agencies. The DNR and NRB made it abundantly clear through their actions that some stakeholders are more equal than others when it comes to life or death wildlife management decisions in Wisconsin. Once again, wildlife advocates are forced to have our concerns addressed through the courts rather than through the system that is supposed to work for all citizens of the state. One would think that the DNR and NRB would realize this. Unfortunately, their multiple  meetings with anti-wolf special interests and the subsequent changes to the wolf management plan following the closure of the public comment period in February 2023 demonstrate that this is not the case,” said Paul Collins, a legislative advisor for GLWA.

GLWA’s Board of Directors felt forced to gain legal recourse to challenge the failure of agencies to uphold democratic principles and transparency. “We believe in the principles of open meetings, democracy and transparency. Wildlife management must follow good governance and the best available science for future generations of all life, and most specifically for the beleaguered wolves that are killed for no good reason,” included in a GLWA organizational statement.

---

GLWA is represented by the attorneys at Wisconsin-based lawfirm Laffey, Leitner & Goode, LLC as well as Greenfire Law, PC, a public interest environmental law firm located in Berkeley, California.