Image: US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
More In This Article
-
Overview
More Ask The Experts
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
The state of Alaska may no longer loom as large in the American consciousness as it did during the presidential election, but enviros won't let us forget failed GOP veep candidate Gov. Sarah Palin's support for aerial wolf hunting. Conservation watchdog Defenders of Wildlife this week launched the Eye on Palin Web site to spotlight the moose-hunting Alaska chief exec's "Anti-Wolf, Anti-Wildlife Agenda".
"I am outraged by Sarah Palin's promotion of this cruel, unscientific and senseless practice, which has no place in modern America," actress and animal activist Ashley Judd said in a press release. "Because she is apparently determined to continue and expand this horrific program, I am grateful that Defenders will aggressively fight to stop her. I am proud to be a part of that effort."
Palin took the attack as an affront to her state's livelihood.
"Alaskans depend on wildlife for food and cultural practices which can't be sustained when predators are allowed to decimate moose and caribou populations," she said in a statement, "Our predator-control programs are scientific and successful at protecting vulnerable wildlife.
According to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, predators kill more than 80 percent of the moose and caribou that die there in a given year. To keep predator populations in check, the state currently has five wolf-control programs covering about 9.4 percent of the state's land area. "Successful programs allow humans to take more moose," its Web site claims, "and healthy populations of wolves continue to thrive in Alaska."
The agency lumps bears and wolves together as "effective and efficient predators of caribou, moose, deer and other wildlife," but it fails to explain why only wolves are targeted—or exactly how the predators affect moose, the most sought after big game animal in Alaska.
To find out more, we asked Shawn Haskell, a wildlife biologist at the Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department in Saint Johnsbury, who has studied caribou and wolf populations in Alaska and now manages Vermont deer populations.
[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]
Why do we need to manage wildlife populations?
We are humans, and we have existed for hundreds of thousands of years as just a small part of nature—but in the past couple hundred years we've become a large part of nature. We influence nature simply by existing. That's the reason wildlife management is now necessary to conserve the wildlife populations we affect.
How do biologists determine if a population needs to be culled?
First, there's the biological carrying capacity. Animals, including humans—though we don't always recognize it—sometimes become too numerous for their own good. That's when they eat themselves out of house and home: Their body condition goes down, reproductive rates go down, and fawns and calves starve to death during their first week of life because their dams [mothers] have no milk.
Then, there's what we call cultural carrying capacity, when animal populations become too numerous or too few for human liking. Deer become too many when they are eating your gardens excessively, and you're hitting them with your cars excessively. They become too few when you can't find any to hunt. So, there's a happy medium somewhere from a cultural perspective.
See what we're tweeting about
97 Comments
Add CommentFrom The Article: "According to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, predators kill more than 80 percent of the moose and caribou that die there in a given year."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is total BS... if you take into account the hundreds of moose killed by the Alaska Railroad every year, not to mention the hundreds that are killed on our highways in a given year... I would say that 80% is a LIE...
I live in Alaska and I am tired of people like Sarah Palin trying to make the world believe that we all live off of subsistence hunting. Caribou and Moose populations out number wolves 20 to 1 in Alaska, so there is no logic in saying that killing wolves helps the moose and caribou populations. It is a ridiculous theory.. but it is aimed at protecting the Moose and Caribou so that the TROPHY HUNTERS who give our great state so much money every year, can hunt them down and shoot them for some kind of morbid wall display. It is ridiculous and there is no place for aerial wolf hunting in North America.
There is a lot of confusion about Sarah Palin and her support of aerial wolf hunting. We are former 20+ year Alaska residents, and my husband, a hunter, was appointed to the Alaska Board of Game by former Alaska Governor Tony Knowles in 2000. The 7 member Board makes wildlife management decisions for the state. The current Board has approved aerial wolf control. http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/gameinfo/index.php
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe made the 10 minute video, End Aerial Wolf Hunting, in Jan of 2008 using testimony from Alaska Department of Fish & Game staff, a master hunting guide, and Board of Game members. http://current.com/items/88811075/end_aerial_wolf_hunting.htm Although the video has not been updated since the ballot initiate vote in August of 2008, the testimony, documentation, and research has not changed. The video also references a study done by the National Research Council and the American Society of Mammalogists. http://www.alaskawolfkill.com/Palin_Letter.html
This video exposes the fallacy behind Governor Sarah Palin's claim that predator control is based on sound science. Declarations that the program is for the benefit of subsistence hunters are shattered with documentation showing that sport and trophy hunters take up to 73% of prey in areas where aerial wolf hunting has taken place.
A 4 1/2 minute version of the video can be seen here: http://current.com/items/88816799/end_aerial_wolf_hunting_short_version.htm
Five years in the making, this video exposes the truth about the stranglehold the hunting lobby has on wildlife management in Alaska.
As far as science and Governor Sarah Palin go, I believe we saw that the two do not mix during the campaign. Open the shade and look at Russia.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile I understand that human intervention may be necessary to control wildlife populations, I don't understand the methods we use.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFirst of all, we should all recognize that human intervention is only necessary because of the human interference with the natural population cycles. Maybe we should manage the human population in these areas as well?
Also, why are they killing the wolves? There are other areas of North America that have seen a tremendous reduction in the number of wolves. At the very least, they could be relocated.
Finally, I think that allowing hunters to cull the prey instead of the natural predators violates the laws of nature. Natural predators kill the weak, sick and young. This keeps herds of prey strong and healthy. Hunters, on the other hand, kill the biggest and strongest members of the herd. In the long run, this practice will destroy the gene pool.
Palin made a fool of herself -- and others -- during the election. She carries no credibility with me. Nonetheless, as an Idahoan with vast experience in the back country, I can tell you that the article above is patently speculative in its own right, and in many ways simply incorrect. (I'm not sure what a biologist in Vermont might possibly know about wolves, although I'll believe he might know something about black bears.) Wolves are prey-opportunists, and they are very, very good at killing whatever they have decided to set upon. I can take you personally to areas that once teemed with game of all varieties, not just elk and deer, that are now dominated by wolves. The breeding pair -- and ONLY the breeding pair -- throws two litters a year, and the packs travel extensively. Non-alphas spin off to form splinter packs, because it is the only way they will get to breed. They are fast and mobile, highly adaptive, and extremely effective at avoidance and/or confrontation, due to exceptional aural and olfactory senses. They have pretty good eyesight, too. Unlike bears, the wolves have not been subjected to hunting, and contrary to what DOW would have you believe, their numbers have exploded. The current (official) numbers in Idaho stand at 5x what the original proponents of reintroduction stated as necessary for a viable population. In point of fact, the numbers are grossly understated. The DOW would also have us believe that a sustainable meta-population is not yet viable, arguing that breeding pairs cannot yet interact between the Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming populations. Pure poppycock, and that argument has fortunately now been refuted. The original Selway wolves and their descendants have now spread as far as Washington, Oregon and Utah, and can most certainly reach any of the Northern Rocky states they deem to be suitable for them, subject to the same habitat constrictors (subdivisions, etc.) that affect the cervidae and other wildlife. Ultimately, the bottom line is that while folks from Vermont and Tennessee like to listen to themselves being self-righteous about matters they nothing about, those wolves are affecting things here every day. Even under the endangered species designation, shotgunning of wolves from helicopters by government "hunters" was occurring in those areas where non-lethal methods had failed to curtail substantial depredation of both wildlife and livestock, and has been grossly inadequate to mitigate the expansion of the wolves numbers and range. What the hell does Ashley Judd know?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJapanese proverb:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhether the knife falls on the mellon or the mellon on the knife, it's the mellon that suffers.
It doesn't matter who is killing the wolves--subsistence hunters, sport hunters, or shriners. The question is justification. (Which may be why a
suit against the state to stop this program was unsuccessful.)
I would imagine that if it comes to that facts such as the following would come to light:
1. "Gray wolves actually come in a variety of colors; they can have white, red, black or gray fur. Male wolves weigh on the average of 90 pounds but can range up to 130 pounds and females generally weigh less. They can run 35 miles per hour and jump about 12 feet. They live in packs ranging from eight to 35 members and like maned and red wolves, mate for life. Their life span is eight to 12 years. The wolf's jaw can exert 1,500 pounds of pressure per square inch, twice that of a German shepherd; wolves can crush large bones in just a few bites.
There were approximately 3,500 wolves in the lower 48 states and about 10,000 in Alaska. That was the estimate three years ago. In Yellowstone Park, 33 Canadian gray wolves were reintroduced in 1995 and 1996 amid bitter controversy. Ranchers and landowners living outside the park remain on edge. Today more than 300 wolves thrive in the park."
Source, Chinook Observer
2. "Each year there are less deer and more wolves... . I've noticed a change in those mountains over the past seven years, and I'm certain if the American people had any idea what was going on in Yellowstone and the surrounding area, they would be appalled and very angry. Prior to wolf introduction in 1995, there were 19,500 elk in the great northern Yellowstone elk herd, over 300 big horn sheep in the ten square miles around Gardiner, Montana, abundant moose, antelope and mule deer. Now we have fewer than 10,000 elk and 40 big horn sheep. Montana state moose biologist Kurt Alt tells us the moose are all but wiped out, the National Academy of Science in its' March 2002 report tells us that the antelope population is a small fraction of what it was."
Source: Survivalblog.com.
As an independent I wonder: what is being hunted: the wolf or Palin? Judd
herself has said it's time to stop Palin. These are not the words of one acting with purely altruisitc motives. There is an agenda here that is unsettling and which ultimately will compromise the movement's credibility.
Baloney. Palin wants the wolves shot for the elite trophy hunters, such as the Safari Club. They go on canned hunts where the animal has no chance. As the wolves have no chance. And there is big money in killing. The trophy hunters get a tax deduction if they donate the animal to a non-profit. Thousands of dollars...I am now wondering if Palin gets some $$$ too. Of course she must. So the IRS and we ole tax payers are funding much of this.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd now, this year it is ok to kill the wolf pups too!? The female wolves' birthing season is February and early March. Nice Gov. Palin.
Alaskans should be up in arms the way she duped them in the ballot initiative depriving them of the vote to NOT kill wolves and using over $400,000 state money to do so.
As for wolves munching up the "subsistence food," as well as taking the caribou away from the trophy hunters, well, wolves do kill. They need to survive. But they eat lots of left-overs from another animal's kill...say, the bear.
There is no valid reason to kill these wolves other than the pleasure of killing...and $$$. And Sarah in a humpf wanting to get her way. She is still at it with the polar bears and now the beluga whale.
You know, she debased the pit bull, but she sure does hold on.
yes, keep the wolves population alive so all the moose and caribou population will be gone then we could start drilling oil and gas! Wildlife animals are in the way for drilling you know.. Forget about those native villagers that rely on game meat just let the wolves eat their food since the begining of their existence. Wolves kills lots of caribou and moose more than the train,cars, hunters and bears. Wolves also killed a lot of pet dogs last year alone so many of them they even killed pet dogs while youre walking in the trail. They are taking over cities like Anchorage! All you find is your pet dog tags and head if youre lucky. The whole pack feast on peoples beloved pet dog you cant even help your pet dog while it was being eaten because the wolves might turned on you..
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPredators either need to be controlled or they will decimate their prey to the point that too few prey will be available to the skyrocketing predator population. At this point the predator specie will then decline from starvation and disease as a result of insufficient food.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI love animals as much as anyone and if I had to choose between wolves or caribou calves, I would choose the caribou. I think the conservationists go too far. They should leave a state's affairs to the people of the state. If the majority of Alaskans are happy with their state's wildlife management it is their affair not the place of Judd or a congressman from California to tell them how to manage their state. I wish some of these people would care as much about an unborn baby's right to live as they do about animals.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou make me sick. You worry about wolves...but support abortion. You can let Asley Judd know that there are a lot of people that will no longer support her in ANY way, due to her crazy beieves. She has NO problem standing up and encouraging women to abort their babies, but finds outrage in shooting a wolves that destroys all other wild life. Wake up man, you better find something worth standing up for, because some day you will stand before God, and may he have mercy on you for your liberal views. Good luck
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHi, an Alaskan here. I grew up here; I hunt, fish, farm and forage in an effort to return to the ways of old, you know, when people were part of the enviroment, not its masters.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFirst off I wish everyone to realize there is no such thing as innocent.
The bear kills the cutest, most unassuming moose calf he can find. F
urthermore, boars (male bears) also kill the cutest, most unassuming cubs (baby bears) they can find; to eliminate competition. The wolf doesn't make a clean, quick, humane kill when it takes a moose. It wounds the moose and waits for it to bleed to death so it can eat without getting injured.
Humans are predators.
We operate in a very similar way; taking advantage of easy food, eliminate the competition and lose as little as possible to gain the most.
But, we humans are not fully acceptant of our natural instincts.
We try to hold on to some moral thread and cant help being full of pride.
So, we DON'T kill the cutest, most unassuming moose calf he can find and we DON'T wound the moose and wait for it to bleed to death, but we DO eliminate the competition.
Then we go a step further and hunt down and kill the biggest, strongest trophies we can find.
Here in lies the problem. We do not act fully by the laws of nature nor do we fully act above the laws of nature (the moral high road).
This can be seen in fish management on the Kenai river (as well as throughout game management and our entire society). On the Kenai they impose hook size restrictions, catch and release rules, snag release rules, bait restrictions as well as other means and methods restrictions in an effort to make it harder to retain fish. On the other hand there are major enviromental impact issues on this river to do with people spending so much time on the river and fish dieing before they can spawn.
Why does this oxymoron of management exist?
Because the more difficult it is to get fish, the more MONEY is spent on it.
If sustainable food source with minimal impact was the goal, means and methods would reflect quick take with no release of fish that where to small, too big, snagged, or just not pretty enough (released fish die, not spawn).
The base of the problem here is not means of predator control, but rather trophy mentality.
As long as hunting and fishing are viewed as a sport, we will continue to mismanage.
Be apart of Nature; full subject and acceptant of its rules.
OR
Get out of Nature and let it govern it's self.
Hi, an Alaskan here. I grew up here; I hunt, fish, farm and forage in an effort to return to the ways of old, you know, when people were part of the enviroment, not its masters.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFirst off I wish everyone to realize there is no such thing as innocent.
The bear kills the cutest, most unassuming moose calf he can find. F
urthermore, boars (male bears) also kill the cutest, most unassuming cubs (baby bears) they can find; to eliminate competition. The wolf doesn't make a clean, quick, humane kill when it takes a moose. It wounds the moose and waits for it to bleed to death so it can eat without getting injured.
Humans are predators.
We operate in a very similar way; taking advantage of easy food, eliminate the competition and lose as little as possible to gain the most.
But, we humans are not fully acceptant of our natural instincts.
We try to hold on to some moral thread and cant help being full of pride.
So, we DON'T kill the cutest, most unassuming moose calf he can find and we DON'T wound the moose and wait for it to bleed to death, but we DO eliminate the competition.
Then we go a step further and hunt down and kill the biggest, strongest trophies we can find.
Here in lies the problem. We do not act fully by the laws of nature nor do we fully act above the laws of nature (the moral high road).
This can be seen in fish management on the Kenai river (as well as throughout game management and our entire society). On the Kenai they impose hook size restrictions, catch and release rules, snag release rules, bait restrictions as well as other means and methods restrictions in an effort to make it harder to retain fish. On the other hand there are major enviromental impact issues on this river to do with people spending so much time on the river and fish dieing before they can spawn.
Why does this oxymoron of management exist?
Because the more difficult it is to get fish, the more MONEY is spent on it.
If sustainable food source with minimal impact was the goal, means and methods would reflect quick take with no release of fish that where to small, too big, snagged, or just not pretty enough (released fish die, not spawn).
The base of the problem here is not means of predator control, but rather trophy mentality.
As long as hunting and fishing are viewed as a sport, we will continue to mismanage.
Be apart of Nature; full subject and acceptant of its rules.
OR
Get out of Nature and let it govern it's self.
sorry bout the double, first timer!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs far as the aerial hunting by non government employees; if you going to do it, do it efficently and not with tax payers dollars.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy in the world would Scientific American consult with a Vermont biologist instead of a biologist from Alaska? Wolves need to be managed like other big game animals. Unfortunately, allowing hunters to manage wolves just isn't getting the job done. No one is talking about eliminating wolves. A strategy to control wolf numbers from the air is appropriate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou said:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"First of all, we should all recognize that human intervention is only necessary because of the human interference with the natural population cycles. Maybe we should manage the human population in these areas as well?"
Your attitude is one of a god. That is, you are transcending being merely a human, while passing judgment on the little creatures.
We are not gods. We humans are ourselves part of nature. And frankly, we are simply a better predator than the poor little wolf. Heck, we could wipe them out if we wanted. They would do the same to us if they could. However we are also morally better than them, so we don't.
You said:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"First of all, we should all recognize that human intervention is only necessary because of the human interference with the natural population cycles. Maybe we should manage the human population in these areas as well?"
Your attitude is one of a god. That is, you are transcending being merely a human, while passing judgment on the little creatures.
We are not gods. We humans are ourselves part of nature. And frankly, we are simply a better predator than the poor little wolf. Heck, we could wipe them out if we wanted. They would do the same to us if they could. However we are also morally better than them, so we don't.
But Andy, are we morally better? we manipulate the game for better sport, not better food.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom Native Alaskan Woman of 56 years born and bred.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisClearly watching Walt Disney movies has not done some of the people living in the lower 48 any good. Ashley Judd is probably still looking for her Prince on the big white horse to come and rescue her and live happily ever after. I suppose that is why she is in the 'make believe business' of Hollywood.
She has no idea what Native Alaskans or Alaskan transplants lifestyles are all about. Just because her ancestors in the continental United States of America acted like savages and through acts of genocide reduced the population of Native Americans to less than 1% and greedily stole their land and livelihood and hunted out practically every wild animal in the lower 48 all in the name of 'Fame and Fortune' doesn't give her or her organization a reason to act like idiots and ignore serious game management in Alaska and force Alaskans to completely live our lives eating out at McDonalds!
The state of Alaska including Sarah Palin, who is our current governor, as well as previous governors; excluding perhaps former Gov. Tony Knowles were and are completely serious and compentant about game management which will insure that we don't end up like the lower 48 states! I'm confident that we here in Alaska will continue to have not only future Native Alaskan people but all the moose meat we and the magnificent wolves can eat! Our current governer 'Sarah Palin gets that! She has Alaskans bet interest at heart!
I suggest that Ashly Judd has never been to Alaska or seen the wolves in the wild on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta or in the Alaska Range or anywhere in our state. Come to Alaska Ms. Judd and face Sarah Palin and then perhaps your eyes won't be wide shut!
Anyone can pet a moose, but only a true Alaskan such as Palin can reduce it to a large pot of moose chili.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you paid attention! Sarah Palin wasn't the one who said you could Russia from her house, that was the bimbo from SNL. Sarah Palin stated that you could see Russia from Alaska.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAndy, I have no desire for us as a race to "play God". The problem is that we are no longer predators. The native Americans were predators and lived in relative harmony with nature. They ate what they killed and virtually nothing went to waste.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisModern society, however, has far surpassed any definition of predator. We're more of an infestation. We're not in harmony with nature. We destroy it to suit our purposes. We don't simply kill for food. We kill for sport and we kill by simply changing the environment so dramatically that nature's very balance is disrupted. We ARE the next mass extinction event.
So ... you're right. We could just let nature take its course and see what rises from the ashes. Or we could try to check ourselves and minimize the negative impact we have. It's not playing God. It's a matter of survival of our species (and others). When it comes to the mass extinction event that we're causing, cockroaches and a few other species will probably survive. Humans? Probably not.
Whatever number are killed by cars and trains is all the more reason to limit predators attrition on them. Furthermore, you don't offer any cited statistics on how many of anything are killed by trains or cars. You call someone else a liar with out substantiating your own claims that do not even support your own point. You are not rational or trustworthy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere are Indian populations in Alaska that depend on hunting for food as well as cultural reasons. Your disregard for the native population is disgusting. When native leaders say that they disprove I will listen. Right now this is nothing but a Hollywood smear job. Sara Palin is all the better for detractors like yourself.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe court weighed in on the matter as other courts have done in different jurisdictions and they have ruled in favor of the State of Alaska. End of story. There did not appear to be cause for appeal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs I suggested, Ashley Judd is doing some predation herself; she came right out and said it: she wants Palin gone and oddly this is how she beieves she can do it.
..
Ashley Judd, "get a life".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGov. Sarah Palin also supports killing unborn human babies that's not in her clan. Anyone who kills God's creatures without the purpose of survival has a really bad mental problem and should follow their own advise.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm not an expert at wildlife management, but I recognize animal cruelty when I see it. I am not disputing that wildlife sometimes needs to be controlled, but can we do it in a more humane way, rather than shooting defenseless creatures in the back from helicopters? What about birth control? Come on, experts! Put your thinking caps on and come up with something that is humane and just. There's got to be a better way.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSarah Palin could care less about these wolves. She only cares about making a name for hersel. It's so good, and such a blessing that she and her did not make it into the White House. What she needs to do is help her daughter stop making babies and stay in school.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow much does Sarah really know if she thinks she can see Russia from her kitchen window really? Who would take the time to listen to her after her disgrace on the campaign trail. I would be hiding my face after that long and horrible ordeal; and what is she doing still making a fool out of her self.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI live in North Dakota and own land in Alaska. I feel it is time if New York wants wolves and bears to be left alone then lets introduce them to central park. There is plenty of food walking around from what Ive heard. Same goes for Hollywood it would be fun to hear comments on how much they like em after six months. Most of them think food comes from grocery stores anyway. Life in this country would be better if the folks on the coasts kept their mouths shut anyway. If we had more Sarah Palins in this world we would have a better place to live. Pray that the midwest never has a crop failure or you will soon learn about what cannabalism is.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMany missguided people think that it is okay to kill human babies and old people because they may not live long enough to justify and expensive medical procedure, but think that forest and animal management to be bad practise. This is sick thinking.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMany misguided people think that killing human babies and old people because a medical procedure is to expensive to be justified at an advanced age think that management of forests and wild life is unwise. They would rather let forests burn which kills nearly all of the wild life. I believe this to be sick thinking.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRe:Anyone who kills God's creatures without the purpose of survival has a really bad mental problem and should follow their own advise.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm a devout Episcopalian and I don't think God has anything to do with the problem. Perhaps you should direct your anger--as Judd should--towards
the almighty. After all, in his infinite wisdom he has decreed the wolf to have powers that allow him to kill as frequently as it desires, satiated or not, and has made it such that the wolf has no predator but man. I'm not an environmentalist; it seems reasonable to me however, to suggest that if the wolf hunted as the cat, only to eat, there wouldn't be a problem--but then unlike yourself and others, I don't pretend to be able to discern the divine will. I suggest you and your ilk read Job for some humility.
Re: The problem is that we are no longer predators.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTake a tour through a rendering plant or ANY beef, lamb, or poultry processing plant and then make the claim that what you see, if not predatory,
is something equally, if not more disturbing to observe.
Re: Palin made a fool of herself -- and others -- during the election. She carries no credibility with me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm sure we all appreciate that you took the high road and forfeited the opportunity to approach the debate without any pretentiousness or the kind of self-righteousness exhibited by Tennesseans and residents of Vermont.
Would it be a reach to suggest your refusal to bequeath any credibility on Palin carries no credibility with some others?
Well said! Hunting is a vile, brutal "sport" and it's dying out in the lower 48, although not fast enough to suit me. (Every time some drunk or careless hunter nails one of his gun-toting fellows, I celebrate.) Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be true (yet?) in Alaska, but we can always hope things will change there too an that hunters become extinct before the wolves do.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHunting is a vile, brutal "sport" that's dying out in the lower 48, although not fast enough to suit me. Every time some drunk or careless hunter nails one of his gun-toting fellows, I celebrate. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be happening in Alaska, but we can always hope things will change there and that hunters will become extinct before the wolves do.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am so sick of the "ACTORS" getting involved with issues they really know nothing about!!!!!! These are the people that should be on the recieving end of the attacks. Why do they ,and the mainstream media feel the need to throw anyone or anything they dont agree with, under the bus. Why not do some research, as obviously some people did here, and realize , there is always more to the story. As for the moron suggesting that Gov. Palin is getting kickbacks , again I reccommend doing research. She has consistantly declined these types of policies, from early in her political career. Do yourselves a favor America... start reading and educating yourselves before opening your mouth.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAhh.. another mindless believer in the media metropolis. You are the one making a fool of yourself sweetheart. Start reading books and research info for yourself, instead of swallowing what the liberals are cramming down your throat. Take heed ,novice, we have not heard the last of the fabulous Sara Palin, and your lacking knowledge will be reveiled.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAS for Ms. Judd... why not transport the wolves to one of her residences??? I think she'd be singing a new tune quickly!!!
You don't know what you're talking about. Wolf packs are highly organized, disciplined groups in which only the alpha pair reproduce - why? Because this acts as an effective regulator of wolf population. Studies of numerous predator-prey pairings show that predator reproductive rates drop, when prey availability declines. They don't just continue breeding until they exceed the local carrying capacity and starve. (Humans do that!)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAhh ...another mindless follower of media metropolis!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTake heed mindless one ,we have not heard the last of the fabulous Sara. Until then quench your knowledge thirst on ReaL reading material. Not the "not- fit -for -lining- a- litterbox" crap you obviously have indulged in.
Off topic: I post on numerous websites and this is the only one where virtually every thread features one or more double posts. Does Scientific American's web manager not read the forums or is she just incapable of fixing the problem?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell Said!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAshley Judd will lose a lot of fans following her attack on Sarah Palin over this wolf thinning policy...She has become just another bleeding heart Hollywood liberal... She would be better off keeping out of issues that she does not truly understand.. It seems she wants to keep her face out there in the media... We use to take great pride in watching this Kentucky girl out there supporting her Kentucky Basketball Wildcats...But this personal attack on Sarah Palin is totally uncalled for...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is outrageous..humans have no right to interfere with nature and wildlife. we have already done enough damage to it..thousands of species are now extinct,gone beyond existence..what more do thoughtless and stupid people like her want? How about population control among humans..her own family for instance? Targetting innocent animals and giving them no escape route is cruel,inhuman..whoever made a person like her the Governor? God save Alaska and the world in general from dumb people like Sarah Palin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the Alaska Department of Fish and Game is lying about the number of moose and caribou killed by predators (80%), then an investigation should be undertaken and those responsible dismissed from their positions. In science, it is crucial to have reliable baseline data.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I'm sure we all appreciate that you took the high road and forfeited the opportunity to approach the debate without any pretentiousness or the kind of self-righteousness exhibited by Tennesseans and residents of Vermont.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWould it be a reach to suggest your refusal to bequeath any credibility on Palin carries no credibility with some others?"
The issue is wolves, not residency. If you decide to base your assessment of my argument on whether you support Palin, or Judd, then you are simply missing the point. And by that, putting yourself, in my view, in the same intellectual camp as either, or both.
The point you failed to apprehend is that until you live with wolves, as I do, and know them, as I do, then pronouncements as to the morality of killing them or not killing them raise the spectre of an uninformed and dangerous social surd. So inform yourself, have Judd inform herself, and then try to make some sense of an interaction that has far more facets then you will, or can, imagine. If you do in fact acquire that understanding, then come look me up, and I will -- as I suggested -- take you to see the wolves, and let you meet the people who actually deal with them regularly. Until then, I must merely hope that you can fathom that the political, idealogical, or emotional positions of people who are not actually living with the issue offer no true enlightenment. Palin and Judd should both shut their mouths.
And a note to ajhil: You sound ridiculous. Read your own post again. And grow up.
Clearly the Bambi mentality is strong and undying in this country. until you have a doctorate in Biology then your opinion on whats good for wildlife populations is null and void.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBowMtnSpirit is pretty smart and states the science well in layman's terms, but take it from a very well represented Alaskan, Palin is a very good conservative leader who has read the State's constitution and is supporting the management of our resources for abundance. If you don't agree with the legal premise that Alaska is based on, live elsewhere...perhaps in Hollywood with Ashley Judd.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAshley Judd would rather kill unborn babies than wolves. If you live in Vermont, you know nothing about Alaska. Actually, the point is not about wolves its about POLITICS and the liberal left are afraid of Palin and have done a smear campaign because they know she has more integrity, honesty, intelligence, morality than barrack hussein obama, and biden put together. She represents something liberals can't stand - religion, guns, patriotism, and American ideals. Liberals would like us calling each other comrade and spelling America with a "k". If you can't read between the lines I'll spell it out for you. This is liberal biased media at its best, there is no science to this. Boycott Ashley Judd and all liberal Manchurians.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLook at a map of Alaska. Look at the roads. Not a lot of roads and very scarce on fast food. Get a clue. This is not about wolves its a smear campaign against Palin. Its the 180 degree rule with liberals. The more they smear the greater the threat.A year ago CA Congressman George Miller (D, Vacaville) introduced a bill to ban wildlife management in Alaska. It was a publicity stunt, and Miller’s ill-conceived bill never went anywhere. But it did anger the citizens and Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGovernor Palin responded to Miller’s political posturing stunt with a well-written letter, dated Sept. 27, 2007 that explains the importance of wildlife management to Alaskans.
Some excerpts:
On behalf of the state of Alaska, I am writing to express my displeasure with your introduction of a bill that proposes to end what you refer to as “airborne hunting” of wolves and bears in Alaska. You have misconstrued the reality of life in Alaska and the importance of wild game management as food to the people of this state. You displayed a shocking lack of understanding of wildlife management in the North and the true structure and function of Alaska’s predator control programs. You have threatened the very foundations of federalism and the state’s abilities to manage their own affairs as they see fit.
I am dismayed that you did not attempt to contact the state your bill affects most directly before announcing your legislation. At the very least, we could have helped you correct the many inaccuracies and misstatements of fact in both the written and the oral portions of your media presentation yesterday. …
Federal powers to regulate wildlife are limited and seldom result in broad, area-wide effective management strategies, but Alaska’s fish and game management programs have been widely recognized for their excellence and effectiveness. Alaska, alone among the states, has managed its wildlife so that we still maintain abundant populations of all of our indigenous predators almost fifty years after statehood. Your proposal to limit this effective management… is an unworkable and unwarranted interference…
Alaska’s predator control program is mandated by the Alaska State Legislature, regulated by the independent Alaska Board of Game, and implemented by the world-renowned scientists at our Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Our state constitution requires wildlife to be managed on the sustained yield principle, subject to preferences among beneficial uses. (cont. on next blog)
"subject to preferences among beneficial uses. When game populations or harvest goals are not met, Alaska’s intensive management law mandates action, including habitat improvement and/or predator control.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur state biologists use radio tracking, visual surveys, and numerous other scientifically proven methods to assess the health of wildlife populations. Often, predators keep prey populations lower than the area habitat could support. In most states. wildlife populations are limited primarily by habitat; in many parts of Alaska, however, moose and caribou are prevented from reaching abundant levels by heavy predation. Wolves and bears are powerful and effective predators; these predators kill far more moose and caribou than do humans hunting for food.
Our science-based program is designed to reduce the effect of predators in given areas with the intent to allow a higher harvest of moose and caribou by humans for food. By thinning the numbers of predators in selected areas, we are enabling more Alaskans to hunt moose and caribou and put food in their freezers. Each program is specifically designed, carefully considered, and closely monitored. We do not undertake predator control lightly.
With due respect, Congressman Miller, you failed to do your homework. I urge you to learn more about the realities of Alaska’s predator control program, and not to swallow the rhetoric of special interest advocacy groups trying to raise money for their inaccurate campaigns. In addition, I invite you to come I invite you to come to Alaska and see for yourself how we manage our wildlife, and meet some of the hardworking Alaskans who rely on our predator management programs to give them access to the food they need.
Sincerely,
Sarah Palin, Governor"
Nature has its regulatory mechanisms, to which we are also subjected.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisas wolfs multiply, their food will become scarce and they will die from starvation or competition over food.
As the human population keeps growing, it will suffer from the same problem. we should worry about ourselves instead of worrying about wolves. Where is the world going? Will there be food and oxygen for everyone in 100 years? The population keeps expanding, but the earth does not grow bigger.
We humans would benefit from keeping in mind that we are also subjected to natures regulatory mechanisms in everything we do.
Shame on you, SCIAM! Your article is more about politics than science.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo reference some hollyweird bigmouth with too much time on her hands and too few facts is bad enough , but your 'expert' from Vermont is flat out disingenuous with his premise and out right LIES about the (edited) facts of Alaska's predator control program.
<b>The fact is, Alaska does allow the hunting of bears, but bears are not the main predator that needs control.</b> Wolves are, according to a five year study (2001 - 2006) from the Alaska Dept. of Fish & Game.
And the ADF&G ~does not~ lump bears and wolves into the same category: <a href="http://www.wc.adfg.state.ak.us/index.cfm?adfg=management.research_project_detail&research_overview_id=4">Wolves outkill bears for moose: 53% to 17%.</a>
http://www.wc.adfg.state.ak.us/index.cfm?adfg=management.research_project_detail&research_overview_id=4
Also, wolves reproduce at a higher rate than bears due to a faster gestation period and larger litter quantities. They hunt in packs and make for great targets on open tundra from planes. It's efficient use of the tax payer's money.
The real problem here is knee jerk celebrities with their pet causes (no pun) and manipulated conclusions from dubious experts.
I wonder how many of you left wing nut cases eat beef or chicker or any other meat. Have you seen what they do to cows at the slaughter house or what they are subjected to before that? Same thing goes for chickens. As ALWAYS...THE LIBERAL LEFT ARE A BUNCH OF HATE MONGERING, HYPOCRITES. Just try to have a civil, discussion about something instead of attacking anyone personally.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt amazes me that the same people that decry the hunting of wolves and the "evil hunting lobby and evil Sara Palin think nothing of murdering unborn humans through abortion. Talk about misplaced priorities. Maybe we should go after the evil abortion loddy... Planned Parenthood is a group that began by condoning sterilization of people THEY, with their superior minds, considered unsuitalbe to procreate. This organization is a group that disguises the desire to rid the human race of the "unfit". Sound familiar...Maybe that is what Obama has in mind for the concentration camps he is building under HB 645. Can the ovens be far behind?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have lived in Alaska since 1967, and so have listened to over forty years of incessant arguing on this subject. Mr. Haskell takes a reasoned and moderate approach to the subject. Here are two additional facts that everyone appears to have missed: First, the State Constitution requires fish and game resources be managed to guarantee subsistence users adequate resources, and beyond that, to maintain viable and healthy resource populations. So this isn't some pro-hunter agenda. Folks in the bush absolutely must supplement their diet from subsistence sources. And this is their cultural heritage, also. It is simply uneconomical to fly in every calorie consumed. Secondly, although studies have shown that brown bears are significant moose predators in some areas, it seems everyone forgets that bears hibernate, while wolves are on the chow line all winter. So let's be clear: no one in Alaska wants to make wolves extinct. Control programs are only designed to take a certain percentage of specific wolf populations, and remain in place only long enough to let depressed moose populations recover. (I might point out that the science shows these inverted predator/prey population ratios can exist perpetually, with the prey population well below the carrying capacity of the range.) As Mr. Haskell noted, only 9.5% of the state is currently under predator control programs. As to the methods of predator control, trapping is allowed, but rather ineffective. The best way is aerial hunting, which is quick, cost effective, and allows simultaneous determination of the prey population size. Emotional attacks against control programs place animal welfare above human. But that's what Defender's of Wildlife is all about.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisShe hasn't actually said this, but it is rumored that Palin actually likes wolves, it is just that she hates fruit flies, as evidenced by her frequent campaign speeches against scientific research, research on fruit flies in particular. It is her belief, based on the same science that is foundational to many of her other beliefs, that wolves live in symbiotic relationships with fruit flies, who survive Alaska's winters by hibernating deep inside wolves' fur coats. No wolves, no fruit flies, therefore no fruit fly research.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow ever did nature manage to control the predator prey populations without the intervention of such truly dim individuals as Palin? The intervention of humans into this situation is about as needed as a guppy needing a bicycle.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey have been shooting wolves in Alaska through Democrat and Republican gubenatorial administrations at least since the 1970's when I lived there. So why all the hubbub now? Where was all your outrage stored while this "inhumane" act was going on in the past? Could it be that you are so blinded by political psychosis that you can only condemn an act perpetrated by a political opponent? By the way, a "Vermont wildlife biologist" who thinks that bears kill as many moose in Alaska as wolves is not a wildlife biologist. At best, he is like any one of the current editorial staff at SciAm, a political hack.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBill McConnell
They have been shooting wolves in Alaska through Democrat and Republican gubenatorial administrations at least since the 1970's when I lived there. So why all the hubbub now? Where was all your outrage stored while this "inhumane" act was going on in the past? Could it be that you are so blinded by political psychosis that you can only condemn an act perpetrated by a political opponent? By the way, a "Vermont wildlife biologist" who thinks that bears kill as many moose in Alaska as wolves is not a wildlife biologist. At best, he is like any one of the current editorial staff at SciAm, a political hack.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBill McConnell
Hi There
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScience and Politics overlap on almost every issue. Humans manage wildlife populations is to say our governments manage wildlife. I would oppose shooting wolves if their population were in danger, or if the wolves were causing serious damage to something else we value. That is to say, we need to manage wildlife. Does this not seem obvious?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis does not address the lack of caribou lichen in overgrazed area once you've killed the wolves. The caribou lichen grows back very slow and once overgrazed takes years to recover. So what happens when you kill the wolves and the caribou remain. They starve of course. What makes us think that we know better than nature at work. It's ridiculous to think we can figure this out when the scientists and natives that work and live here can't.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow....if anyoen is going to be talking about abortion and 'left wing nut cases' then the best place for you is in a political forum. Yes, this article touched much on the politics, but the fact of the matter is (as is taught in ANY credible wildlife ecology class) humans have changed the global biota SO MUCH that letting wildlife populations just fend for themselves isn't feasible. I'm studying what would be considered by many a pretty liberal discipline in a VERY conservative state, yet in the environmental sciences, it is almost unanimously known that the only place predation can be left alone is in the few 'pristine' wildernesses the world has left. In a place like Alaska (and believe it or not, just because someone studied ecology in Vermont does NOT make them any less credible as a Taiga/Tundra ecologist...it's not like studying economics in one place makes one any less credible in applying their knowledge to other regions), which has been severely affected by the behaviors of people who have probably never even BEEN to Alaska. The concentrated affects of climate change (which, as any renound climatologist, geophysicist, ecologist & life scientists will tell you is WITHOUT A DOUBT a result of man's behavior in the last 100 years) in the Arctic resulted from wasteful & destructive practices of the not-so ecocentric populations of the lower 48. Without SOME SORT of wildlife management, both populations would go biserk & suffer worse than before.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis isn't about God, it's not about abortion. Those are two totally different, UNAFFILIATED arguments to this story, and from what it looks like, anyone who is bringing those two components up is probably just dying to bring up controversy & piss people off. This is an ECOLOGICAL issue. The consumption of beef & poultry, especially when raised either inhumanely or in artificial settings, is a whole other issue and cannot be compared to the consumption of moose meat (seeing as moose is not intensively harvested in Alaska).
Until the region can naturally support caribou, moose, wolf & bear populations independently of human intervention, then perhaps animal cruelty can come into the matter. That isn't likely to happen in Alaska anytime soon (or anywhere else, for that matter) and because wildlife management is incredibly complex & difficult, several solutions must be considered if a viable end to this catastrophe is to be seen.
sorry that wasn't a response to any particular comment, don't know why that happened!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissorry, that comment wasn't directed to any particular comment, don't know why it did that
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPalin is a joke, and she has proven over and over that she is in this world for herself only and the rest including her family can either play along or just be dragged along.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOn the wolf hunting, so if it is true that the wolves are truly upsetting the balance of the Moose and Caribou, and need to be kept down in numbers, then why would any "hunter", not kill them with one clean shot. I thought good responsible hunters were supposed to kill cleanly and never allow the animal to suffer. The aerial wolf hunting Palin approves of and promotes is unquestionably cruel and brutal. Killing the pups should also not be allowed. States that allow hunting and are culling overpopulation sell tags for x number of animals of each sex annually, so they can track, and also bring in revenue. They never give tags for baby animals or nursing mothers, simply is not done. Yes Palin seems to throw all morals and decency out the window on her wolf hunting fun, and seems to not just justify the way these animals are killed, but seems to enjoy it. Palin is a disgrace to humanity.
Ashley Judd is a moron.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen did Sciam become a political rag?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMMM wildlife is tastey.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSave a moose; shoot a Palin.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswell said!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientific American now becomes another left leaning political publication. What better place to get an "objective" scientific opinion about Alaska than Vermont, the most liberal state in the union. Shame on you!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEcologists understand the dynamics of balance. The policy of shooting wolves also represents the worst of short-term thinking. Nature's balance ensures the health of the moose and caribou herds. Weaker animals are culled. Prey do not overrun their habitat. In addition, shooting wolves is disrespectful to highly intelligent family-oriented survivors in the wild. Better to manage human hunters for sustainable populations.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for that post, Alaskan Lady.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMost of the postings here bring up good and accurate data, but they still do not consider the big over all picture of how nature always works in balances and cycles. This has been shown in research studies over and over. Only mankind really has the power to upset this eons old practice. If you really are concerned about wildlife then maybe you should look at how we are destroying the earth that supports all life. We are running out of time people!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhomsoever values the cow or the moose or the elk above the Wolf, shall like the now-damned S.Palin, be removed from present circumstances and cast into the midden and the pit and the compost pile along with all cud-chewers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHas time not brought us to this point in history where man no longer lives in the wild? -can sentient beings converse with liars or fools?
And I thought that the discussion on evolution and Darwin was contentious. Truly, science is the way to settle this dispute. If the wolves should be killed, then does it really matter what method is used? If a man broke into my home, should I decide whether to shoot him or stab him? The result is the same, although I'd feel safer using a gun. Alaskans are very independent and individualistic people. It does seem that the issue should be resolved by Alaskans. But science should be the manner of resolution, not emotion. However, the rest of the world got plenty of evidence that Palin is a complete idiot. Your pride for your state should not overwhelm your common sense.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI, and other Alaskans, have voted several times to ban the aerial hunting of wolves.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAkmk...Please don't try to humanize the wolves. They are simply another wild predator, just like the alligator, but cuter. You mention controlling the hunters for sustainable populations, which is based on science. But once the decision is made to kill them, there is no reasonable argument regarding the method. THEY ARE STILL DEAD. Aerial seems to be the most cost-effective. By the way, I also apply this thought to humans. I believe that "cruel and unusual punishment" is a fallacy in that those humans that commit the worst crimes should be experimented on until they die. At least we could gain a little knowledge in exchange for their crimes. And Sarah Palin is still a complete idiot. I have respect for Alaska, but she makes you guys look really bad.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHumans are just another wild predator--only uglier. I was suggesting controlling the moose hunters, if control is needed--not hunting wolves.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOnce one has spent time observing (or even reading about) wolf families, one can develop a high degree of respect for both the individuals and the family structures.
Who we gonna shoot? A lame uncle that babysits the pups? A first year pup out exploring and learning to hunt? The alpha mother? Who is left behind? For what purpose? Next year's moose hunt by trophy hunters? And then have to do it all over again, year after year, because nature finds its own balance whenever we stop?
Aerial wolf hunts are senseless slaughter.
akmk...I don't avocate wolf killing and I no longer hunt. My point relates to the method, and the scientific reality of sustainable populations of both predator and prey. I hope we agree that humans have already upset the natural balance in nature, and as a Native American, it is also a huge part of my people's history. So, yes...humans are the true ugly predator. But that doesn't stop me from enjoying a buffalo burger (and a beer) at the local dive, because I am a pragmatist. I can tell that you have genuine passion and I wish you luck in your quest to halt aerial killing of wolves. Maybe we could get the moose hunters to hunt the idiot Palin?? (yuk yuk)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks. And best to you. I'm not opposed to hunting--for food or for skins or whatever one needs. Nothing is healthier than food off the land.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPalin's support of aerial wolf hunting is purely to shore up her mindless political base. Villages in Alaska supported Obama by a long shot.
Interesting, akmk. I recently heard that a dozen eggs, in the most remote villages, costs over $20.00, and that a gallon of milk is more valuable than a barrel of oil. I guess that we have to remember how much revenue is created by the hunting industry, but also by the conservation industry (I don't even have to mention oil). My friend, we live in a strange world. No revenue is created by the natives, so maybe the strategy is to starve them out of existence through poverty and depletion of sustenance resources. I'm sure you know that my people worshiped the Wolf for his cunning, his tribal cohesion and his family manner, and we imitated his hunting methods. I'm not sure if native humans or native wildlife has been treated more poorly. I live and think in the 21st century, but my heart bleeds for the past. Respect.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour words are totally true and respected. I would add only that we are all natives of this planet and anyone's heart can bleed when "all our relations" are not respected.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I wonder how many of you left wing nut cases eat beef or chicker or any other meat. Have you seen what they do to cows at the slaughter house or what they are subjected to before that? Same thing goes for chickens."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's unfortunate the way cows and chickens are slaughtered. However, they are at least going to be consumed. It is not senseless killing. Wolves are NOT eaten, they are slaughtered because they eat.
"I wonder how many of you left wing nut cases eat beef or chicker or any other meat. Have you seen what they do to cows at the slaughter house or what they are subjected to before that? Same thing goes for chickens."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's unfortunate the way cows and chickens are slaughtered. However, they are at least going to be consumed. It is not senseless killing. Wolves are NOT eaten, they are slaughtered because they eat.
"I wonder how many of you left wing nut cases eat beef or chicker or any other meat. Have you seen what they do to cows at the slaughter house or what they are subjected to before that? Same thing goes for chickens."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's unfortunate the way cows and chickens are slaughtered. However, they are at least going to be consumed. It is not senseless killing. Wolves are NOT eaten, they are slaughtered because they eat.
"I wonder how many of you left wing nut cases eat beef or chicker or any other meat. Have you seen what they do to cows at the slaughter house or what they are subjected to before that? Same thing goes for chickens."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's unfortunate the way cows and chickens are slaughtered. However, they are at least going to be consumed. It is not senseless killing. Wolves are NOT eaten, they are slaughtered because they eat.
I have read many people say that wolves only kill the sick and the weak. If that were true nobody would mind having these wolves around. The truth is that they kill whatever they want and sometimes they don't even eat what they kill. Maybe Ashley Judd should go visit the areas where these wolves live and talk to the people directly affected by them. Why are we subjected to the opinions of these Hollywood types who have never even seen a wolf in the wild. Being famous does not make you an expert on anything. The world they live in is not real. Please stop telling the rest of us who live in the real world and struggle to make our mortgage payment what is right and wrong!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have read many people say that wolves only kill the sick and the weak. If that were true nobody would mind having these wolves around. The truth is that they kill whatever they want and sometimes they don't even eat what they kill. Maybe Ashley Judd should go visit the areas where these wolves live and talk to the people directly affected by them. Why are we subjected to the opinions of these Hollywood types who have never even seen a wolf in the wild. Being famous does not make you an expert on anything. The world they live in is not real. Please stop telling the rest of us who live in the real world and struggle to make our mortgage payment what is right and wrong!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSarah Palin gives the distinct impression of somebody who doesn't have a command of the facts but talks boldly anyway. This is common for politicians but given her minority status and run for VP it just shows more clearly for her. The idea of shooting things from a helicopter gives the impression of laziness. Thanks to Palin, Alaska looks like a state full of lazy people careless with guns, language, and sexual partners. She did a great job of killing any romance people might have once had about the place. I once thought I might like to visit but now, nevermind.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSomewhere along the line some authority figure has made you OCD about the abortion issue and has probably collected a lot of money from you in the process but we are talking about killing wolves and environmental balance here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPredators either need to be controlled or they will decimate their prey to the point that too few prey will be available to the skyrocketing predator population. At this point the predator specie will then decline from starvation and disease as a result of insufficient food.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this------
That predator species consists of Alaskans like Palin and trophy hunters from elsewhere. It certainly should be controlled.