Legislation On Wolves

Discussion in 'Himalayan Imports' started by ibear, Feb 15, 2005.

  1. ibear


    Apr 15, 2002
    An Anchorage judge on Wednesday upheld the state's controversial aerial wolf-kill programs, paving the way for private pilots to shoot more than 600 wolves this winter in rural Alaska.

    In her decision, Superior Court Judge Sharon Gleason refused to grant an injunction sought by the Connecticut-based group Friends of Animals and six Alaska residents to halt predator-control efforts until their lawsuit against the state goes to trial in May.

    The same group of plaintiffs sued the state in 2003, saying the Alaska Board of Game and Alaska Department of Fish and Game hadn't justified the predator-program under guidelines in state law. Gleason denied that request.

    The plaintiffs pitched a similar argument last week, saying the Game Board had not determined the necessary harvest and population figures required by state law before predator control can begin.

    Gleason found that the plaintiffs had not proven that the figures were invalid and that they would suffer only minor harm if this winter's programs go forward. On the other hand, she wrote, the state demonstrated it would suffer economic harm by stopping the multiyear programs mid-stream and that subsistence users would also be harmed by interrupting the efforts.

    She also noted the plaintiffs were challenging figures established as early as 2001, and that the long delay before taking the state to court undercut their request for immediate action.

    Representing Friends of Animals, attorney Jim Reeves said he was heartbroken by the ruling.

    But Game Board chairman Mike Fleagle said it showed, for the second time in 13 months, "that the state is acting appropriately and within the law."

    The ruling isn't likely to affect Game Board decisions on future predator control programs, Fleagle said.

    "We view each new proposal on their merits," he said. "I don't know if (the ruling) makes us more cautious, but it will keep us on our toes when we approve these things that we dot all our i's and cross all our t's."

    At its next meeting, March 4-13 in Anchorage, the board will consider requests for new wolf-control efforts in several additional areas, including the Kenai Peninsula.

    So far this winter, pilots have killed 115 wolves in five programs stretching from the Kuskokwim River to the Canada border near Tok.

  2. Josh Feltman

    Josh Feltman

    Feb 12, 2001
    What's so great about killing wolves?
  3. Green Ice

    Green Ice

    Dec 27, 2004
    I love wolves but if they are dangerous to humans or threaten to seriously diminish the game animal population then they must be dealt with.

    Svashtar likes this.
  4. Jebadiah_Smith


    Jul 28, 2004
    Gotta kill something.
  5. Josh Feltman

    Josh Feltman

    Feb 12, 2001
    You know, I'm in a foul mood today. I think I'm just going to leave this thread alone.
  6. kukrikebab


    Feb 14, 2005

    What's so great about killing wolves?


    Gotta kill something.

    So How about that man in the mirror?

    Do the human race a favour.

  7. BruiseLeee


    Sep 7, 2001
    What about them hockey players eh?
    Svashtar likes this.
  8. Rusty

    Rusty Moderator Moderator

    Mar 8, 1999
    Hey, everyone, lighten up here.

    It's been bad weather and we've hardly had a day's worth of sun where I live in the whole last 3 weeks put together and it's raining outside right now.

    Play nice if you want to play here. Cut others some slack.
    raghorn likes this.
  9. munk


    Mar 22, 2002
    Yes, let's stop this face in the mirror stuff.

    We control predation for a variety of reasons, both financial and enviromental.

    Ask Nevada Ranchers what they think of their livestock kill numbers due to Protected Calif Cougars trotting over the State Line.

    We could ask the Abalone what that small unloved shellfish thought of all the Seals (?) and Sea Lions devouring them to extinction because it was not popular to control those large mammal's populations. Actually, we can't ask the shell fish along the Ca coast because they're nearly gone. So the Sea Lions swim to Portland and raise hell there. Everything is interlinked. This is not the North America of the 1300's, which we can't bring it back, nor should want to.

    There is a better way to approach environmental husbandry than the far left NO NO NO and what is characteriszed as the Far Right's 'who cares?"

    We gotta be able to find common sense.

    That said, I think it would be fun to shoot a wolf from a plane in Alaska. I heard they used to use M1 Garands. Actually, I wouldn't mind pulling the switch myself on some waiting in Death Row in Ca. I like the wolves a whole lot better. They don't 'deserve' to die.

    munk the menace
  10. Svashtar

    Svashtar Gold Member Gold Member

    Dec 28, 2003
    What Munk said! It's "predator control", not anihilation. The Alaskan folks know their territory and what needs to be done to keep all animals healthy and under control.

    Unfortunately, some animal rights groups would much rather all humans be killed before a single animal is harmed in any way. "Irrational" is about as kind a word as you can use to describe them IMO.

    Same outfit that would rather every tree and forest in California burn down in a super-heated deadfall driven wood conflagration than to allow a single hated lumber company to clear out the tons of dead and fallen trees per acre that do nothing but provide fuel for out of control super-fires.


    munk likes this.
  11. Jebadiah_Smith


    Jul 28, 2004
    I'm not even going to get angry at your stupidity. My post was a joke. You've already made yourself more of a fool then I possibly could by flaming you.
  12. munk


    Mar 22, 2002
    Jeb, let's leave it. I want us to have an after dinner conversation. I want peace. He shouldn't have said that and Rusty weighed in with his basic human goodness once more.

    to tell you the truth- your post was so out of character, (does he really mean it?) I didn't know what to think.
    And I even had my dear friend Josh getting irritated with my position.

    You've established enough friendship coin here, Jeb, so that not only should you shock and anger us some day it will be OK, but also is Ok to let things go.

    Anyway, we're back on the right track, poking our way towards a discussion of reality, not either extreme.

  13. Jebadiah_Smith


    Jul 28, 2004
    Munk, the post really was supposed to be a joke. I believe you know that I dont think that way. Perhaps I should have used a smiley face :rolleyes: :) .

    My real opinion on the matter is that I support the idea of predator control. Even on cute and cuddly wolves. But I dont think that they, or any animal should be hunted to nonexistence. I love nature, and I am a responsible hunter. Its all a balance, and sometimes the balance means killing. There are people in Alaska trying to scrape out a living who can be seriously damaged by overpopulated wolves. And yes, if I could shoot a wolf from a plane, I would. And no, I wont be killing myself over it any time soon. If that makes someone angry enough to want me dead, I dont care. Whatever floats their warped little boat.

    The fact is you cant really tell my position from that post. I might be a murderous barbarian, or I might have be a sarcastic treehugger. Three words isnt enough for a reasonable person to decide that a person should kill themselves.

    Kukikrebab, If you cant take something like that without going off of the deep end, I really dont think you'll find the Cantina to your liking.
  14. Esav Benyamin

    Esav Benyamin MidniteSuperMod

    Apr 6, 2000
    New Jersey Animal Control

    Wolves are sleek, swift,
    delirious with hunger;
    bear, fat gluttons.

    Wolves howl,
    heads pointing to heaven;
    bears roll around, with eyes like black buttons.

    Myths abound, but the beasts are rare,
    I look for them daily, but they're never there.

    I heard a report about one down the block;
    by the time I arrived, the bear was in shock.

    Attacked by the mallards, and teased by the kids,
    he's back in his hills, like a bum on the skids.

    Whatever he needs here, he'll have to forego,
    when even the wolves are too worried to show.
  15. JR42

    JR42 Gold Member Gold Member

    Feb 1, 2004
    This thread reminds me of two of my favorite Ed Abbey quotes (and yes, I know he was indirectly responsible for the formation of one of the most extreme environmental groups):

    For munk: I would rather kill a man than a snake.

    And: The essence of true wilderness is big mammals that can eat you.

    I agree with what munk said in the quote above about the answer lying in the middle ground. I don't want to live in a West devoid of large predators, but I don't want to live in an economic wasteland, either. Proper management of wildlife populations and our other natural resources is the only way to ensure their survival without causing harm to those who've perpetuated environmentally destructive practices. In short, you have to get the ranchers to reduce grazing pressure and not shoot every predator they see, but you also have to ensure their livelihood isn't threatened by the predator population.

  16. munk


    Mar 22, 2002
    The Monkey Wrench Gang became what he was known for, but he never intended that. He not only wrote much better books, but would have little in common with Peta or Alf.

    I'm willing to accept carnivores in the woods- just don't arrest me if I shoot one right before I became dinner.

  17. Jebadiah_Smith


    Jul 28, 2004
    Munk, didn't Montana just legalize a limited harvest on wolves? I recall seeing it in a news blurb in the new Bugle.
  18. Semper Fi

    Semper Fi

    Feb 23, 2002
    I don't like the thought of killing wolves.

    If I ever come back as an animal, a wolf is what I want to be. My avatar was not a random pick.

  19. munk


    Mar 22, 2002
    I don't know, if they aren't now, they will eventually. (when it's off the endangered species list- and we get through the politics of that)

    But I know Buffalo are back on the hunting menu. Look for next season to be high theatre with animal rights groups attempting to block and destroy the hunt in front of cameras. They had a real party during the last hunt before it stopped. Now it's begun again, the fiasco will too.

    I don't know all the wherefore about brucculosis, but the Buff have it, and if too many leave Yellowstone (because it's too small for them now, and Buff don't care about fences) and give it to our beef cattle, as ranchers fear, the State will lose its Fed Beef certification.
    And unfortunately, the urban areas of Montana don't care if there's work. They voted against reopening mining. Wyoming is full of industry and Methane wells. None here; we have Bozeman, Kalispell, Mossula, and all their money poured into legislative coffers. I figure it's a combo of political clout, money, and lack of education to many in the cities. The papers are liberal.

    It's the same darn story wherever you go. I wouldn't mind losing issues so much if all the truth was out and everybody could vote on facts.

    There is a liberal media in this Country and I hope it's time is setting.

  20. munk


    Mar 22, 2002
    Semper, many people pick animals as atavars and more than atavars. I always felt it was important to you. The good news is when Alaska is controlling wolves, there are wolves to go around. You're covered.

    It is strange to think of killing an animal not for food.


Share This Page