Great News For Wolves! For Now

Decision on wolf protections in Lower 48 delayed
May 20, 2013 22:00 GMT

http://ktvl.com/template/inews_wire/wires.national/20f04fe9-www.ktvl.com.shtml

Wildlife advocates and some members of Congress argue that the wolf’s recovery is incomplete because the animal occupies just a fraction of its historical range….

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Federal wildlife officials are postponing a much-anticipated decision on whether to lift protections for gray wolves across the Lower 48 states.

In a court filing Monday, government attorneys say “a recent unexpected delay” is indefinitely holding up action on the predators. No further explanation was offered.

Gray wolves are under protection as an endangered species and have recovered dramatically from widespread extermination in recent decades.

More than 6,000 of the animals now roam the continental U.S. Most live in the Northern Rockies and western Great Lakes, where protections already have been lifted.

A draft proposal to lift protections elsewhere drew strong objections when it was revealed last month.

Wildlife advocates and some members of Congress argue that the wolf’s recovery is incomplete because the animal occupies just a fraction of its historical range.

Dead Bison Found North of Yellowstone

This article includes a good overview of the kind of anthropogenic threats that the wildlife face outside of Yellowstone National Park…

 

Worry over dead bison found north of Yellowstone Park

By Ralph Maughan On May 19, 2013

Montana is said to be investigating-

Gardiner, MT. Given the frequent stories of wildlife killing and hate that emanate from the Gardiner, Montana area, the latest find of 2 to 4 bison carcasses north of Yellowstone Park is raising worry about more illegal and legal wildlife killing in the area and/or the spread of domestic or wildlife disease.

The bison were found in areas frequented by people, not in any remote backcountry.

The area recently had an unpleasant incident of wolf killing following the placement of domestic sheep almost next to the Park that wildlife supporters said was deliberately done to cause controversy or provoke a wolf attack. Non-park wolves were soon credited with attacking the sheep.

For years the area has been scene of Yellowstone Park wildlife poaching, bison slaughters, heated controversy over elk numbers (too high or too low), Yellowstone Park wildlife migration routes, and what some see as excessive wolf hunting so as to decimate the population of Park wolves.

The winter just past also saw the first evidence of controversy over a growing Native American bison hunt that left a large number of bison entrails (8000 pounds) that would attract grizzly bears. They were cleaned up by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

The complete story on the recent find of bison carcasses is by Eve Byron of the Independent Record (here reproduced in the Missoulian).

Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved

Comment info Montana Wolf Hunt Proposal, 2013-14

From Wolfwatcher.org:

NWC Official Statement: Montana Wolf Hunt Proposal, 2013-14

May 13th, 2013

Montana officials estimated that at least 625 wolves, in 147 verified packs, and 37 breeding pairs inhabited the state at the end of 2012. During Montana’s 2012/2013 wolf season, hunters and trappers killed 128 wolves and trappers took 97 wolves for a total of 225. The actual numbers of wolves killed in the state, however, estimates more than 300 when factoring in wolves that were killed by depredation control (USDA’s Wildlife Services killed 108 wolves), vehicular accidents, disease and other natural causes.

Montana FWP Commission proposed its 2013-14 wolf hunting and trapping season. Comment period begins on Mon., May 13th and ends on June 24th at 5PM. Final decision will be made at a Commission meeting on July 10th in Helena.
•Submit via online submission – or – email: fwpcomm@mt.gov
•Submit via USPS mail at FWP – Wildlife Bureau, Attn: Public Comment, P.O. Box200701, Helena, MT 59620-0701

PROBLEMS:
1.Archery-only hunting would run from Sept. 7 through Sept. 14.
2.The hunting season is extended – the general hunting season (Sept. 15 and ending March 31, 2014); trapping season (Dec. 15 through Feb. 28, 2014)
3.The overall bag limit is 5 wolves per person in any combination of wolves taken by hunting or trapping, – an increase from 1 per person last year.
4.Wolf quotas would be maintained in areas near Montana’s two national parks, with a quota of 7 wolves in an expanded Wolf Management Unit 316 near Yellowstone National Park and a quota of 2 wolves in WMU 110 near Glacier National Park.
5.A new regulation would allow hunters to take a wolf over bait placed for trapping

BACKGROUND:
• As of Jan. 2013, Montana has 2.6 million head of cattle and 225,000 sheep. FWP Director Jeff Hagener said in a press release, “Confirmed livestock depredations due to wolves included 67 cattle, 37 sheep, one dog, two horses and one llama in 2012. Cattle losses in 2012 were the lowest recorded in the past six years.”
•In April 2012, MtFWP’s former Commissioner Ream stated, “The arrival of wolves in the West Fork added to the predatory pressure on the elk herds, but does not come close to the impact that mountain lions have. Statistics show that the elk population statewide is doing well with numbers at an all-time high of 112,000. He said the state management objective calls for 90,000 which means the state is about 22,000 elk over objective.” Ream suggests, considering a number of factors, that it was “a perfect storm“ that led to elk population reductions in Hunting district 250. Those factors include hunting, predation and weather and have all have tipped the balance in that area against the elk. He said the drop in the calf/cow ratio had hit a critical low, but did show some sign of recent recovery.
•In a May 1st article in the Independent Record, FWP Recommends Expanded Wolf Hunt Season and Bad Limit , George Pauley, FWP Wildlife Management Chief, said the reasons for the proposed changes in Montana’s 2013-14 wolf hunting season are twofold. “We’re just looking for opportunities to hunt wolves … and it’s an attempt to reduce the population,” Pauley said. “We’ve always had a philosophy of incrementally increasing harvest rates and opportunities.”

The National Wolfwatcher Coalition submitted its

NWC Official Public Comment re: Montana’s wolf hunting proposal for 2013-14.

We have already reached out to the Commission so that we can ensure the voices of all stakeholders are represented in its policy objectives. You are invited to review our statement and use it as a resource to guide the drafting of your own public comment via the directions above.

Questions or Comments? Contact us via email at : info@wolfwatcher.org

Michigan Lunatics Are Running the Asylum

Apparently, the average law-abiding citizen officially has no say any more in the state of Michigan. Anyone with a modicum of compassion for non-human animals is being ignored, written off and treated like a child in a power coup led by anti-wolf fanatics in their game department, state legislature and governor’s office.

After all the information that’s come out about the benefits of wolves to an ecosystem, or the intrinsic rights of animals, wolves are still being treated as vermin, trapped, snared and bounty-hunted as blindly as they were in the ignorant 1800’s. Indeed, all hell is breaking loose across the West.

Here’s what the mainstream media wants us to know about the situation there [my comments in brackets]:
Governor signs bill that may open door for wolf hunt
by Anne Cook

LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder signed legislation today that may open the door for a wolf hunt in Michigan.

Senate Bill 288 gives the Natural Resources Commission the responsibility to establish managed open season hunts for wild game. It exempts the taking of mourning doves, pets and livestock.

The Legislature will maintain its ability to both add and remove species on the list.

“This action helps ensure sound scientific and biological principles guide decisions about management of game in Michigan.” Snyder said. “Scientifically managed hunts are essential to successful wildlife management and bolstering abundant, healthy and thriving populations.”
[Explain how killing healthy wolves is supposed to bolster thriving animal populations.]

The legislation met plenty of opposition, however, from groups like the Keep Michigan Wolves Protected coalition. The KMWP said the legislation was an attempt to run around a proposed referendum on wolf hunting.

“The legislature wants to silence the voice of Michigan voters, circumvent the democratic process and nullify the more than 255,000 signatures submitted to the Secretary of State’s Office,” said Jill Fritz, director of the KMWP coalition.

Michigan Farm Bureau, the state’s largest farm group, however, applauded the signing of the legislation [no surprise there] calling it a “triumph of science and reason over emotion stirred by out-of-state interests.”

“Michigan voters’ strong support for Proposal G in 1996 made it clear residents want oversight of wildlife management in the hands of experts,” said Rebecca Park, legislative counsel for Michigan Farm Bureau. “Despite what opponents to this legislation would have you believe, these bills are very much about respecting and reinforcing the people’s will, not denying it.”

[No doubt Michigan residents never knowingly intended to give up their right to the voter initiative process in regards to wildlife.]

“We welcome visitors from out-of-state to come enjoy the bounty of our woods and waters, but have to remain vigilant and draw a line when deep-pocketed activist groups try to tell us how to manage those resources,” Park said.

[Deep pocketed? Surely “out of state” wolf proponents’ pockets are not as deep as the ones on the OshKosh B’Gosh coveralls worn by members of the Michigan Farm Bureau or the suits of their lobbyists.]

Meanwhile, here’s the press release from Keep Wolves Protected:
Governor signs bill allowing NRC to designate animals as game species without legislative or voter oversight

LANSING, Mich. – The Keep Michigan Wolves Protected (KMWP) coalition expressed its deep disappointment in Gov. Rick Snyder, who today signed legislation (SB 288) that circumvents voter rights by allowing the Natural Resources Commission (NRC) to establish a wolf hunting and trapping season before Michigan voters can decide the issue in the November 2014 election.

“Governor Snyder has betrayed the trust of Michigan voters by signing legislation that takes away their referendum right to challenge laws on animal issues. And Governor Snyder failed to defend Michigan’s Constitution by allowing the democratic process and referendum vote in Nov. 2014 to be circumvented. The governor’s action validates the perception that state government is broken and does not reflect the best interests of the people it is supposed to serve. This is a dark day in the history of Michigan and for people who believe in fundamental democratic principles and the humane treatment of animals. We will not give up the fight to stop wolf hunting and trapping in Michigan,” said Jill Fritz, director of KMWP.

SB 288 has resulted in Michigan’s 7.4 million registered voters losing their right to decide whether to protect Michigan’s declining population of 658 wolves in the November 2014 election. KMWP submitted more than 255,000 petition signatures on March 27 to suspend Public Act 520 – a law that was rushed through last December’s lame duck legislative session and classifies wolves as a game species, until a referendum vote in November 2014.

SB 288 was fast-tracked through the legislative process before the Board of State Canvassers has certified signatures from registered voters from every corner of the state. SB 288, which empowers the NRC, a politically-appointed panel of seven persons, to designate animals as game species without legislative or voter oversight, is an an end run around the referendum and an attempt to silence the voice of over quarter of a million Michiganders who signed petitions to stop wolf hunting and trapping . Michigan voters would be unable to reverse decisions of the NRC because it is a regulatory body and not the Legislature.

Facts
• Michigan’s wolf population has decreased from 687 to 658 according the latest census by the Department of Natural Resources.
• More than 2,000 Michigan residents from the Upper and Lower Peninsulas volunteered for Keep Michigan Wolves Protected, a coalition of animal welfare groups, conservationists, veterinarians, Native American tribes and faith leaders, to gather signatures during sub-freezing temperatures in just 67 days.
• Despite the wolf population’s fragile status and over the objections of renowned Michigan-based wolf scientists, the Michigan legislature rushed a bill through in December 2012, opening the door to the same practices that virtually eradicated the wolf population in the first place.
• Wolves are extremely shy and have a natural fear of humans. In the past 100 years, there has never been a verified attack by a wolf on a human in the lower 48 states.
• Current state law already allows farmers and dog owners to remove or shoot wolves that are attacking their animals, and farmers may obtain a permit from the DNR to remove additional wolves following a depredation incident. Fewer than 8 percent of the Upper Peninsula’s farms have reported any wolf depredations in the past 17 years.

Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson

HCN: Trappers catch a lot more than wolves

From High Country News – From the April 29, 2013 issue by Jodi Peterson

As the feds handed management of gray wolves to Idaho, Montana and Wyoming over the last few years, reactions were mixed. Conservationists worried that wolf numbers would plummet, while hunters and trappers were thrilled they’d get to legally pursue the predators. All three states have hunting seasons now. Idaho started allowing wolf trapping last year; this year, Montana had its first season.

Despite mandatory state-run education classes, though, trappers have been catching a lot more than wolves — mountain lions, coyotes, bobcats, eagles, fishers, deer, moose, even family pets. Hikers and skiers have encountered wolf traps on public lands close to trails. In January, a National Park Service employee accidentally stepped into one, just outside Glacier National Park; the next month, a dog got three of its legs caught in two different traps at once south of Livingston, Mont. Below are some figures from Idaho’s 2011-2012 wolf trapping season. (Complete data from the current season aren’t yet available for either state.)

123 Total wolves trapped

143 Number of people who reported setting traps for wolves *

557; 111 Greatest number of wolf snares set in one night in one game-management unit; foothold traps set *

45; 33 White-tailed deer caught; released alive *

45; 1 Coyotes caught; released alive *

9; 3 Mountain lions caught; released alive *

9; 7 Domestic pets caught; released alive *

39; 22 Other non-target animals caught, including bobcats, geese, skunks, raccoons, golden eagles and ravens; released alive *

$37,115 to $1,256,966 Estimated monetary value of one Northern Rockies wolf **

$38.25; $333.50 Cost for license and tag to trap one wolf for Idaho residents; for nonresidents

* Based on responses to a survey sent to 460 people who took Idaho’s wolf trapper education class and purchased a 2011-2012 trapping license.

** according to 2011 Duke University study

Sources: Idaho Fish and Game Department, Duke University.

Ecological Benefits of Wolves

Here’s an overview from the Wyoming Sierra Club on some of the good things wolves do for their environment, for those who need reminding…

BENFITS OF WOLVES

Wolves play a vital role in maintaining the health and sustainability of the landscape in the greater Yellowstone region and our western lands. They are a keystone species, one that has a disproportionate impact on its environment relative to its abundance. Since their return in 1995, wolves have benefitted this ecosystem by regulating prey numbers and movements—allowing streambank habitats to recover, reducing densities of coyotes, and providing food for scavengers.

The most recognized and well-documented ecological benefit of wolves is that they have resumed the important role of maintaining healthy wildlife herds in the northern Rockies by selecting young, old, physically impaired, or diseased animals. (5) By reducing prey numbers, dispersing these animals on the landscape, and removing sick animals, wolves also may reduce the transmission and prevalence of wildlife diseases such as chronic wasting disease and brucellosis. (7)

In addition to improving the overall fitness of wildlife herds, wolves have also altered the behavior of their prey, leading to a cascade of beneficial effects on the landscape. In the absence of wolves, elk tended to browse heavily in the open flats along rivers and wetlands, since they did not need to evade predators by seeking thicker cover. Without fear of wolves, elk over-browsed the vegetation inhibiting the growth of new trees. Since the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone, elk spend more time in the safety of thick cover or on the move.(6) As a result, riparian areas and aspen groves that had been suppressed by decades of over-browsing are regenerating, improving habitat for species like beavers and songbirds.(3) Beavers, which create wetland habitats with their dams, have improved water quality in streams by trapping sediment, replenishing groundwater, and cooling water.

Species that rely on healthy riparian habitats and benefit from the presence of wolves in Yellowstone National Park include:

g Yellowstone cutthroat trout and other native fish

g Moose

g Waterfowl (ducks, geese, trumpeter swans)

g Songbirds (such as warblers, wrens, and thrushes)

g Small mammals (such as beavers, muskrats,

and other rodents)

g Insects, amphibians, and countless other species (3, 6)

wolves and coyotes

In the absence of wolves, coyotes became a top predator in the ecosystem, but they are not large enough to regulate elk, deer, and moose populations.(2) The return of the wolf restored a natural complement of predators to northwest Wyoming and returned the coyote to its role as a mid-level predator.

wolves and scavengers

Scavengers, such as ravens, eagles, and bears, also benefit heavily from the return of wolves. Wolf kills provide scavengers with an important source of protein, particularly in winter. Twelve species of scavengers are known to visit wolf kills in Yellowstone National Park. (10) Ravens are especially attuned to wolves and may fly over wolf packs as they pursue prey, allowing them quick access to wolf kills. In turn, wolves may benefit from ravens by following them to carcasses that can feed both species. (8)

Prior to the reintroduction of wolves, scavengers were more dependent on animals that died due to harsh winters. Since snow is thawing earlier as a result of a warming climate, there are fewer winter kills available for scavengers. Wolf kills may help buffer the impacts of climate change for scavengers by providing them with a food source in the

The return of the wolf to Wyoming has had significant ecological benefits in a relatively short period of time. Ecological concerns contributed to the decision to return wolves and should play a role in how states manage this keystone species. Although it is easy to focus on the perceived negative impacts of wolves, it is important to recognize the actual benefits they provide to our ecosystem. By regulating wildlife herds and reducing the prevalence of diseases, revitalizing riparian areas, reducing coyote densities, providing food for scavengers, and indirectly improving conditions for a host of other species, wolves play an essential role in maintaining the ecological health and integrity of the landscape.

The Perverse Logic of Wolf Hunts

I’d been wondering how many cows died from other causes, versus the fewer than 100 (or 0.0003%) killed by wolves. This article includes some of those figures…

The Perverse Logic of Wolf Hunts

by GEORGE WUERTHNER

The hysteria that surrounds wolf management in the Rockies has clouded rational discussion. Wolves are hardly a threat to either hunting opportunity or the livestock industry.

ELK NUMBERS ABOVE OBJECTIVES

For instance, the Wyoming Fish and Game reports: “The Department continues to manage to reduce Wyoming’s elk numbers. The total population of the herds with estimates increased by 16 percent in 2009 and is now 29 percent above the statewide objective of 83,640 animals.”

Things are similar in Montana. Populations have grown from an estimated 89,000 animals in 1992 prior to wolf recovery to 140,000-150,000 animals in recent years.

In Idaho we find a similar trend. According to the IDFG 23 out of 29 elk units are at and/or above objective. Hunter success in 2011 was 20%: one in five hunters killed an elk.

Wolves are clearly not a threat to the future of hunting in any of these states.

LIVESTOCK LOSSES EXAGGERATED

Ranchers are equally irrational. In 2010 Wyoming livestock producers lost 41,000 cattle and calves due to weather, predators, digestive problems, respiratory issues, calving and other problems. But total livestock losses attributed to wolves was 26 cattle and 33 sheep!

Last year Montana livestock producers lost more than 140,000 cattle and sheep to all causes. But total livestock losses attributed to wolves was less than a hundred animals.

In 2010 Idaho cattle producers lost 93,000 animals to all causes. Respiratory problems were the largest cause accounting for 25.6 percent of the cattle lost. Next came digestive problems, accounting for 13.4 percent of the cattle deaths. Total cattle losses attributed to wolves was 75 animals.

To suggest that wolves are a threat to the livestock industry borders on absurdity.

WOLF CONTROL INCREASES CONFLICTS

Worse yet, the persecution of predators does not work to reduce even these minimum conflicts as most proponents of wolf control suggest.

The reason indiscriminate killing does not work is because it ignores the social ecology of predators. Wolves, cougars, and other predators are social animals. As such, any attempt to control them that does not consider their “social ecology” is likely to fail. Look at the century old war on coyotes—we kill them by the hundreds of thousands, yet ranchers continue to complain about how these predators are destroying their industry. And the usual response assumes that if we only kill a few more we’ll finally get the coyote population “under control.”

The problem with indiscriminate killing of predators whether coyotes, wolves, cougars or bears is that it creates social chaos. Wolves, in particular, learn how and where to hunt, and what to hunt from their elders. The older pack members help to raise the young. In heavily hunted (or trapped) wolf populations (or other predators), the average age is skewed towards younger age animals . Young wolves are like teenagers—bold, brash, and inexperienced. Wolf populations with a high percentage of young animals are much more likely to attack easy prey—like livestock and/or venture into places that an older, more experience animal might avoid—like the fringes of a town or someone’s backyard.

Furthermore, wolf packs that are continuously fragmented by human-caused mortality are less stable. They are less able to hold on to established territories which means they are often hunting in unfamiliar haunts and thus less able to find natural prey. Result : they are more likely to kill livestock.

Wolf packs that are hunted also tend to have fewer members. With fewer adults to hunt, and fewer adults to guard a recent kill against other scavengers, a small pack must actually kill more prey than a larger pack. Thus hunting wolves actually contributes to a higher net loss of elk and deer than if packs were left alone and more stable.

Finally hunting is just a lousy way to actually deal with individual problematic animals. Most hunting takes place on the large blocks of public land, not on the fringes of towns and/or on private ranches where the majority of conflicts occur. In fact, hunting often removes the very animals that have learned to avoid human conflicts and pose no threat to livestock producers or human safety. By indiscriminately removing such animals which would otherwise maintain the territory, hunting creates a void that, often as not, may be filled by a pack of younger, inexperienced animals that could and do cause conflicts.

INSANITY IS DOING SAME WRONG THING OVER AND OVER

We need a different paradigm for predator management than brute force. As Albert Einstein noted, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Unfortunately, insanity has replaced rational thought when it comes to wolf management.

Montana Mulls Upping Hunter “Harverst” Limit to FIVE Wolves

HELENA — Montana wildlife commissioners may extend the hunting season for wolves and the number of predators that can be killed by a hunter or trapper.

“We’ve always had a philosophy of incrementally increasing harvest rates and opportunities,” FWP Wildlife Management Chief George Pauley said in an article in today’s Great Falls Tribune entitled, “FWP proposes extending wolf hunt, kill limit.” The changes would allow hunters more opportunities and reduce the wolf population,
he said.

Well that’s just fucking great; more hunter “harvest” opportunities, fewer wolves–what a philosophy!!

The agency also is proposing allowing hunters and trappers to take up to five wolves each, the Independent Record reported Wednesday.

Last year, hunters and trappers could take only one wolf. The state Legislature this year passed a bill that allows the agency to increase that limit.

The commission takes up the proposal at its May 9 meeting in Helena….

Top 10 Retorts to Hunter Fallacies

Hunters’ arguments and rationalizations for their sport are so repetitive and predictable that, to save valuable time and precious mental energy, it might help to have your responses printed out ahead of time like flash cards, and kept at the ready in your back pocket. Here, then, are the Top 10 Retorts to Hunter Fallacies you’re most likely to hear the next time you debate a sportsman. (I would apologize to David Letterman, but this isn’t meant to be a joke.)

10) Hunting is sustainable.”                                              
In today’s world of 7 billion people? Never mind, that’s a joke if I’ve ever heard one.
Do we really want to encourage 7 billion hungry humans to go out and kill wildlife for food as if wild animal flesh is an unlimited resource? The only way hunting could be sustainable for humans these days is if we drastically reduced our population and killed off all the natural predators…Overhunting has proven time and again to be the direct cause of extinctions, from the passenger pigeon to the Eastern and the Miriams Elk. Now wolves in the Rockies and Great Lakes are being hunted and trapped to oblivion—for the second time.

9) Animals kill other animals, so we can too.
That’s an example of what’s known as the naturalistic fallacy—the notion that any behavior that can be found in nature is morally justifiable. But wolves and other natural predators need to hunt to survive, humans don’t—for them it’s nothing more than a thrill kill. Human beings have moved beyond countless other behaviors such as cannibalism or infanticide, so why can’t some people tear themselves away from hunting?

8) Humans are carnivores, look at our canine teeth.                                          Human teeth are designed primarily for chewing plant-based foods, like our primate cousins do. Humans’ “fangs” are teensy compared to those of gorillas, who are strict vegetarians and only show them to appear fierce. Also, our intestinal tract is long to allow for the slow digestion of high-fiber foods, while true carnivores have short intestines as needed to process meat and dispose of the resulting toxic wastes quickly.

7) Wild game meat is health food.
All animal flesh is rife with cholesterol throughout, and the protein in animal flesh is acidic, causing bone calcium losses as it is metabolized. According to the American Dietetic Association, a diet high in animal products has been linked to obesity, diabetes, colon and other cancers, osteoporosis, kidney stones, gallstones, diverticular disease, hypertension and coronary artery disease. New studies have found that another culprit in causing heart disease may be a little-studied chemical that is burped out by bacteria in the intestines after people eat meat.

6) Hunting is needed to control animal populations.
You’d really have to have no understanding of or faith in Mother Nature to make such a claim—she was doing a fine job of taking care of her own before Man came along and appointed himself “manager” and “game” keeper. No niche goes unfilled for long before some natural predator finds it and fixes a “problem”…if we allow them to. Besides, hunting animals like deer makes them breed more, resulting in more deer, not fewer.

5) If we don’t kill deer they’ll become a traffic hazard.
Two words: Slow Down.
More animals are hit by cars during hunting season than any other time of year, usually when fleeing from bloodthirsty sportsmen with guns.

4) Hunting teaches respect for wildlife and an appreciation for nature.
Ha! That’s like a serial killer claiming his crimes foster a respect for women. Tracking down and shooting something does not equal respect. Try using a camera or binoculars if you really want to respect them.

3) Hunting is a “manly” sport.
First of all, hunting isn’t even a sport—Sport is generally recognized as an activity based in physical athleticism or physical dexterity. Sports are usually governed by rules to ensure fair competition. A sport is played by two equally matched, or at least equally willing, sides. According to SportAccord, the second criteria determining if something is a sport: it be in no way harmful to any living creature. And anyway, real men respect animals (see above).

2) Hunting licenses pay for wildlife refuges.
In truth, hunting licenses pay for hunter playgrounds, not true wildlife refuges. Take a look at how many “refuges” have been opened up to hunting; or just try to close an area to hunting for the sake of wildlife and hear the nimrods wail. If hunters hadn’t hijacked all the refuges, more bird watchers, hikers and others who truly appreciate nature would gladly pay for a pass to frequent those places. Furthermore, non-consumptive wildlife watchers contribute far more to local economies than do hunters.

1) Hunting keeps kids out of trouble.
Sticking a gun in a child’s hand and telling him or her to shoot Bambi is likely to leave lasting psychological scars, whether it’s PTSD or a heart calloused for killing.

Bonus fallacy) God put Animals here for us to use.
Don’t flatter yourself.

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved

Intolerance is Sometimes the Only Humane Stance

There’s been a lot of talk about tolerance these days, but sometimes it seems only the Left side really takes the concept of peaceful acceptance to heart. Fair-minded folk are encouraged to politely tolerate each other’s differences in order to get along. But lately the anti-wolf faction has hijacked the word to justify the killing of wolves.

For example, ten Washington state legislators recently urged their Fish and Wildlife Commission to enact a policy of allowing the unpermitted killing of wolves, “to maintain social tolerance for gray wolves in northeast Washington.” And a wolf-hunter/wildlife snuff film producer told NPR News, “Having these [wolf] hunting seasons has provided a level of tolerance again.” Sorry, but I guess I just don’t see how killing wolves promotes tolerance for them; sounds more like enmity than tolerance.

But I guess I can kind of see their point though—from a converse perspective.

Still, tolerance should not be just a catchall catchword to be bandied about whenever the mood strikes—some things don’t deserve to be tolerated. No caring person should be expected to tolerate the mistreatment of others. Anyone with a sense of right and wrong should eventually come to the conclusion that intolerance is sometimes the only humane stance to take.

Intolerant is what Japanese whalers label anti-whaling groups or non-whaling nations when they question the “right” to harpoon and butcher whales or trap and slaughter dolphins. South Koreans, who literally torture dogs to death and boil cats alive in the belief that doing so makes them taste better or improves their medicinal value, call humane activists intolerant when they oppose those barbarous customs. And European and American producers of foie gras scream cultural intolerance when animal advocates work to end the bizarre practice of shoving a pipe down the throats of geese and force feeding them until their livers swell or their stomachs burst, whichever comes first.

Meanwhile hunters and trappers expect us to tolerate the torment they unleash on wolves and other wildlife. Members of a civilized society should not hesitate to take a stand against cruelty to other sentient beings—who are fully capable of suffering—in the same way they oppose cruelty to human victims.

This post includes an excerpt for the book, Exposing the Big Game; Living Targets of a Dying Sport.

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved