Animal rights in the Trump Era: protecting Alaskan wildlife

With so much news coming from Washington DC these days, it’s hard to keep up with everything. One story that caught my eye and disgusts me to no end is a bill Trump recently signed into law.

What happens now? Predators, mostly bears and wolves, living on federal lands in Alaska will be slaughtered.

The law this bill repealed is an Obama-era regulation that prevented the hunting of bears and wolves on Alaskan federal lands unless it was deemed necessary to preserve the land’s refuge status. With the passage of this new law, bears and wolves can be shot from planes. They can be baited and shot. Cubs and pups can be killed in their dens, and mothers and their kids can be targeted and killed any time, any place.

As the former director of US Fish & Wildlife Services wrote in August of 2016, laws like this one are “purportedly aimed at increasing populations of caribou and moose but defies modern science of predator-prey relationships.” He was in favor of the Obama-era regulations that sought to protect predators on federal refuge lands. He stated that we should “ensure that predator and prey alike can thrive on our refuges.”

Why are bills like this, that so unfairly target predators–– going so far as to allow cubs and pups to be shot in their dens–– so popular among Republicans? The answer is the NRA, which backed this resolution. On the opposing side of the battle was the Humane Society, which urged Congress not to adopt the resolution.

One line in the NRA’s article about the law struck me as not only odd, but as an outright lie. They state that the ads the Humane Society aired in regards to the law are “falsely claiming that its repeal would allow for inhumane forms of taking bears and wolves.”

Is shooting hibernating bears in their dens not inhumane? Is chasing down bears from planes not inhumane? Is pulling the trigger on wolf puppies point-blank not inhumane?

The answer is obvious.

Now not only are the unethical and brutal murders of countless Alaskan bears and wolves legal, but the passage of this law suggests that we as a nation are okay with such inhumane actions. It also messes with the already fragile ecosystem, and will lead to the deaths of animals on refuge lands.

It is wrong, and I am deeply ashamed that it is now the law.

http://blog.timesunion.com/animalrights/animal-rights-in-the-trump-era-protecting-alaskan-wildlife/6512/

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Animal rights in the Trump Era: protecting Alaskan wildlife

  1. The new rules are outrageous. As for the NRA and its definition of what counts as humane/inhumane, that organization has no right to judge. Filling animals full of bullets or arrows, asleep or awake, is inhumane. Hunting animals, whether they are young or old, is inhumane. Trapping and poisoning them is inhumane. The NRA can’t absolve itself with more lies.

  2. We must try to change this. We must ask those running for office to promise to repeal this sadistic bloody law! We must do what the sadistic Republicans did as soon as they took power! I was contacted to vote for a democrat for a senate seat. I asked what he would do for animal welfare issues. I told him I am an independent and a single issue voter. My single issue is animal welfare and environmental issues.

  3. I wonder why this madness with regards to the shooting to kill of wild animals is so pronounced in the USA and amongst US citizens only, to the point of it becoming a State matter, and a world issue.

    • Good question. Why is this country always in bloodbath mode when it comes to wildlife and animals in general? As a “developed” country with all the attendant hi tech gadgets, generally comfortable living standards, decent educational opportunities, and nearly everything at our fingertips that we could possibly want,
      why is there this chronic need to make other species endlessly suffer?

    • I pondered this question as well. I think cruelty in various forms is present and strong in the entire continent of America. In North America, I think it is due to the culture and life style passed on through the European settlers. In south America most of the cruelty is a mixture of Spanish and the indigenous people’s believes.
      Hunting has always been big in Europe, the belief that animals were there for humans to take (a statement even used today by trophy hunters) was an integrated part of the life style and mentality. When European settlers arrived that belief was rewarded by the abundance of animals to kill. In South America it is as bloody and cruel but I think there is also an element of superstition. For example, recently I learned that cats are generally loathed and feared by people with Spanish background, and usually black cats are killed in the most brutal ways.

    • One a side note, it may seem that hunting is more European or American, but it also exists in Asia to a lesser degree and is done in a different way. In some parts of Asia there is not enough wild life left to kill in order to sustain a reliable diet. Hence most killing is done using domesticated animals, and in the most savage ways I might add. In south east Asia, the situation is even more diabolic and sadistic. Because of the humidity and heat, humans don’t kill animals before cooking and eating them. They trap and keep animals alive and either cook them alive or cut off parts of the animals’ limbs and body and cook them while the animal is still alive. Yes, that is the diabolical nature of humans who want to eat fresh meat at any cost! These subhuman creatures do not have souls.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s