Nine gray wolves were trapped and euthanized in Price County in late August and early September after Wisconsin wildlife officials cited repeated encounters with people. The decision has drawn criticism from tribal wildlife leaders and animal advocates, who question both the lack of consultation and whether killing the pack was necessary. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources said it documented six verified human-safety conflicts over more than a year, beginning in July 2025. The agency said the wolves had grown increasingly comfortable around people and that residents tried hazing, brighter lighting, removing potential attractants and changes to fencing without stopping the behavior. The DNR said it consulted federal wildlife officials and concluded relocation was not feasible because of limited suitable habitat, the pack’s size and possible risks to other wolves. Although gray wolves remain federally protected, limited exceptions permit lethal removal in some circumstances involving threats to human safety. USDA Wildlife Services carried out the removals at the DNR’s direction. Animal Wellness Action President Wayne Pacelle challenged the state’s rationale, saying the decision was unprecedented and questioning whether the six documented conflicts warranted killing the animals. He also argued that wolf management should account for the animals’ role in ecosystems. Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission Executive Administrator Jason Schlender said tribal wildlife partners were left out of direct discussions despite officials addressing the conflicts for more than a year. He said the loss has cultural and spiritual significance for Ojibwe communities, for whom the wolf, or Maingan, holds an important place. GLIFWC works with tribal nations on treaty rights and natural-resource management across ceded territories, including places beyond reservation boundaries. Schlender said that role makes tribal participation important in major wildlife decisions. DNR Secretary Karen Hyun acknowledged shortcomings in communication and apologized. The department said it had sent electronic notices about the conflicts to GLIFWC and tribal biologists but received no requests for more information. It also said its policy did not require further consultation because the incidents occurred 20 to 40 miles from the nearest reservation. Schlender disputed that reasoning, saying tribal partners’ responsibilities extend across ceded territories. Hyun has pledged to improve collaboration, but the DNR has not announced specific changes to its consultation policy. Schlender said GLIFWC would continue pressing for a greater role in wildlife-management decisions.