Wisconsin has a long tradition of hunting and a long tradition as well of political debate and dispute.

So when state hunters voted last month to urge the state Department of Natural Resources to approve a wolf hunt in the state as a wolf pack management tool, it didn't take a soothsayer to predict there were going to be a few howls of protest.

Wisconsin has had a history of donnybrooks over hunting issues that in recent years have included the establishment of a mourning dove hunt and the ill-fated proposal to shoot feral cats.

Timber wolves or gray wolves were absent from Wisconsin for about 15 years before they started reappearing in the mid 1970s. The DNR began monitoring them soon after and their reappearance was aided by their listing on the federal Endangered Species list.

The number of wolves in the state grew - as did their depredation on cattle, sheep and dogs - and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service took them off the endangered list five years ago. Court fights here and in the West have put the wolf on and off the list in the years since and those battle continue unabated, with new filings just last month over delisting of wolves in the Northern Rockies.

Those lawsuits no doubt will have an impact on Wisconsin's ultimate decision whether to hunt wolves but in the meantime we would hope state residents try to look at the wolf hunt proposal in the most dispassionate way possible.

There is no question that wolves are predators. Last year alone, according to the DNR, wolves killed 30 cattle, six sheep, one horse and 13 dogs on 30 farms in the state. Wolf-inflicted injuries were also reported to six cattle, four horses and nine dogs, the DNR says. That's not an insignificant amount of losses for farmers in the northern part of the state, although it probably pales in comparison to, say, the auto damage caused by the state's over-abundant deer herd. Under current law, since wolves were deslisted in Wisconsin last year, farmers can be given permits to shoot attacking wolves, but that does little to help against attacks in the night.

That probably has a lot to do with the reason state hunters voted 4,848 to 772 in favor of establishing a wolf hunt at the spring meetings of the Conservation Congress, the outdoors group that advises the DNR.

The point is, the state tries to manage the size of the deer herd. That practice is readily accepted by most state residents who recognize the need to keep the herd within reasonable ranges to reduce the amount of damage to crops (and autos), but also to ensure that they aren't subject to die-offs because of overpopulation and insufficient food in the winter.

According to the most recent DNR figures, the state's wolf population now stands at 550 animals. That's well above the minimum goal of a state wolf population of 350 animals. According to DNR studies the wolf population has now expanded into agricultural areas at the edge of the state's northern forests. That suggests the wolf population here in the state may well be right at the cusp where additional tools are needed to keep their numbers within reasonable ranges.

Our guess is that, depending on the outcome of the court battles over listing or delisting wolves as endangered species, the dispute over a wolf hunt would likely go to the state Legislature. That's a forum that often plays to emotions instead of hard facts. Our preference would be that the issue of a hunt be decided by the state Natural Resources Board after assessing the wolf population trends and hearing from their wildlife management experts. That's their job. Let them do it.