Commentary
What's the appeal in hunting or trapping a wolf?
by Karin WinegarKarin Winegar is a St. Paul journalist and author.
On a deserted logging road sometime before midnight about 30 years ago, I pointed my nose at the night sky and howled. Beside me, the wolf scientist David Mech howled, too; then we waited, our naked little ears straining through the miles of rock, pine and birch to catch the high, far thread of answering sound.
A photographer and I were covering the issues around this endangered species and its reintroduction to Yellowstone Park. We interviewed staff at the Wolf Project in Jackson Hole, Wyo., and met with ranchers in Montana and biologists in Minnesota.
Since then, wolves have often been on my mind and in my life. In 1993 I covered the opening of the International Wolf Center in Ely, where wolf pups licked my ears and nose. Dogsledding on Ely's frozen lakes, I glided in the tracks of wolves. And, camped one October evening outside Nerstrand, Minn., I thrilled to the song of a captive pack.
Then as now, wolves evoked an emotion far disproportionate to their actual numbers or threat. In a controversial move in 2011, Idaho and Montana removed wolves from federal protection under the 1973 Endangered Species Act, Minnesota did so in January 2012. No species has previously been removed from the act's protection.
Now there's a huge public howl about Minnesota's first season on wolves. Minnesota trappers and hunters will be allowed to kill 400 of our estimated 3,000 wolves starting in September. Why de-list now, I'm wondering, and who stands to gain?
The new season is not about biological need or controlling specific problem wolves; it is a sport and trophy hunt. And the noise involves at minimum a certain sense of entitlement, a volatile and intractable mix of passion, political meddling in science, masculinity in search of itself, a residue of country-city enmity, political point-scoring with extremists, juvenile anti-authoritarianism and some ancient scapegoating. And possibly worse.
When Idaho promptly kills half of its wolves (379 kills recorded in the 2011-12 season), when Wisconsin receives more than 10,000 applications to kill 201 of its estimated 780 wolves, when Wyoming proposes a hunt without limits or season on all of its 343 wolves, when Minnesota rolls out the welcome mat for a controversial group of international trophy hunters (Safari Club International) and overrides the 80 percent of respondents to a survey who denounce the hunt, there is something up in the collective psyche.
The something is not a surge in the number of Minnesota wolves (a stable population since 1998) or a shortage of Minnesota deer (stable at 900,000 to a million).
What is the appeal in killing a shy creature with no detectable DNA differences from your golden retriever? How is it fair to run wolves over with snowmobiles or — as in Alaska — run them to exhaustion with airplanes and then shoot them?
Biologist Peggy Callahan is founder and director of the Wildlife Science Center in Forest Lake, Minn., which uses captive wolves in education programs. Her perspective is that the Minnesota DNR does solid field work and has a "good handle on the lethal management of wolves." She says the wolf population in Minnesota "can withstand a hunt, and the numbers the DNR uses are conservative," which is not the case in other states. Like me, Callahan scents something wrong.
Minnesota created a wolf management plan in 1998-99 that achieved consensus from "all stakeholders," she explained. It was signed into law in 2000. Then, in a closed-door session in summer 2010, legislators axed the plan's requirement for a five-year waiting period after de-listing before a hunting season would be declared.
"This has stopped being about science a long time ago. This time, Congress walked over the plan and changed it, and that is terrifying," said Callahan. "Unfortunately, what has happened is a perception that protection of wolves is a 'left wing' issue and delisting is 'right wing' issue.
"It is fear or hatred or both. I don't know, but it is really out of proportion."
What's the rush, I wonder? How much of this is misdirecting our free-floating and amped-up cultural anxiety toward an innocent species? And is it incidental that removing the wolf from endangered-species protection could help mining companies get easier access to its habitat?
Whatever the reasons, wolves, and those who care about them, could now pay a horrible and unjust price.
Comments (51)
The fact that grey wolves have been removed from the endangered species list is a good thing. It means the listing did what it was meant to do--that is, to restore wolves to viable numbers. In Minnesota our wolves went from being just about the last population in the Lower 48 in the late 1960s, with total numbers being around 300, to a healthy population of 3000 today--the largest concentration of these animals south of Canada.
While I'm an avid hunter I have no interest in hunting wolves, although I support the hunt in parts of the state where there is a conflict with livestock operations. The state and federal governments already kill about 200 wolves each year from those locations anyway. Why not let the public do it in a controlled manner?
I live in NE Minnesota and hear wolves howling on a weekly basis from my home. I occasionally see these secretive animals. They are a great and vital part of the northern forest ecosystem.
Still, while I have no interest in killing wolves myself, I have no objection with the state offering a controlled hunt in those parts of the state where wolves and people don't mix well.
Gordon,
I whole heartedly agree with all you have written. Hearing wolves and less frequently seeing them is part of the soul of the North.
As a rather non-consumptive user of wildlife (not an avid hunter or fisherman), I have found the SSS, gut shooting hyperbole both disgusting and counterproductive. Wolves are not the evil incarnate, nor the lovable cuddly creatures some would have us believe. They are animals making an honest living in a tough environment.
I take heart that with articles such as this, and comments such as Gordon's, that sound common ground can be found with our wolves, and we can move on to tackle issues much more important to our daily lives.
Unfortunately, several errors mar this article. The most serious follow:
1. the federal govt (not the states) delisted the wolves.
2. several other species such as the alligator, bald eagle, peregrine falcon have been removed from the ES List.
3. ID killed 1/3 or less of its wolves , a number that does not compensate for the number produced each yr.
4. The proposed WY hunt does certainly have bag limits, seasons, and other regulations.
5. It is illegal for aircraft to run wolves to exhaustion in Alaska.
See www.wolf.org for objective, factual info re wolves.
Dave Mech
I was an avid meat hunter for decades, but do not approve of folks who keep finding excuses to kill wolves, to include blaming them for lack of game rather than their lack of hunting skills.I have no problem with our predators having their share and i am convinced we need them in the natural order to maintain balance.
Please stop the hunt and especially trapping.Trapping is inhumane,barbaric and torture. We don't even know for sure how many wolves we have in Minnesota they have not been counted since 2006.
WHY do the wolves have to "withstand a hunt"?
Can't we just leave them alone?!
Can you eat wolves? If not, I see no reason for hunting them.
Karen, thank you for this article. Farmers, ranchers, other property owners, (anyone!) already have the right to protect their livestock, property, and families from wolves that threaten them. Trapping is especially cruel and could have far more damaging effects than a quantity of 400 on Minnesota's wolf population. Trapping is indiscriminate and could take mothers who are still caring for pups. It could take the alpha wolves, not those that are weak. It could actually lead to more threats to livestock as the health of the wolf packs is threatened and they become more desperate for food. If traps in Minnesota only have to be checked once every 24 hours, wolves could endure physical and mental torture for long periods of time. If more than 400 traps are set, we could lose a lot more than 400 wolves before the traps are even checked and the number of wolves killed is reported. Many things are wrong with this situation because it was set up for "Safari" hunters to bag wolf "trophies". This is so sad and could undo 40 years of bringing the wolves back. The wolf hunting/trapping season needs to be stopped before November 3rd, when it may be too late for the health of our wolf population. Many deer hunters are against the wolf hunt. They don't see the morality in killing something you don't eat, and they think trapping is cruel. They have also seen a decline in chronic wasting disease in the deer population as the wolf population got healthier and took out the weak and sick deer.
As a long ago student in ecology and ecosystems, wolves are a critically important part of any healthy and diverse system. They are not responsible for decreases in populations of game, but rather man. It's time we quit giving in to those who wish to kill something "for fun" and rely on science and the facts to keep wolves in our natural environment in order to maintain a healthy system.
Glaring and obvious purpose of the Hunts, going on all over the Country, is for a small group of people. It is not to protect the "livestock" because the methods chosen create will nilly shooting. The "hunters" also know nothing about the way wolves pack, mate or make families and NO consideration has been given to this either. Government and those who are supposed to make healthy decisions, have ignored the majority of the Country that oppose the hunts. So plain and simple, it is because of a small group of people that have given large contributions and put pressure upon politicians in order to attain funds for elections. This is a pox upon the human behavior and upon a species that will be destroyed or harmed in the chain of our planet. I have many many years living in areas with wolves in MN. and the whole hunt was built upon a lie. It is almost as if the idea of killing a "wolf" is akin to "killing the devil or evil". Very stupid, ignorant and sinful all the way around.
Interesting that the same famous wolf biologist mentioned in the article also made comments to this section correcting inaccuracies.
The most obvious answer to why people hunt wolves is somehow missed. FOR CONSERVATION. Conservation includes wildlife management as in the North American Model of wildlife conservation. Animals should only be taken for good reason, and in this instance it is to control overpopulation.
To anyone who disagrees with the idea of hunting and trapping I'd like to hear you offer any other solution to reduce wolf populations. Any. Birth control? Good luck. Trapping and moving to a different state? Don't forget you need to relocate 30% just to maintain current levels. Ariel gunning? Gassing in dens? Poison? Bounties?
Who will pay? Current cost is about $1500 per wolf via Wildlife Services. CBD going to pony up the money? NPR?
Hunting and trapping is about the best thing you will hear for wolves, other options no one will like as much.
I c'ant find any appeal to trapping or hunting the wolves
Have you ever seen a wild animal die of rabies? Distemper? Mange?
Have any of you self-appointed saviours of the animal world ever been out there in the animal world long enough to see true natural suffering and death?
I have. Many times. You see, I lived for 35 years in the wild places, out there where the animals live out their real lives in real time with real disease and real death.
When I had to put a coyote, fox, even wolf, out of its misery, that was suffering from a disease, killing it so slowly and painfully, I looked around. But you weren't there.
I had met you many times, in the summer, sometimes in the spring and fall, out there procliming to all about your love for the wild animals, your hand firmly patting your own back just as rapidly as possible.
But when it was 30 below, and a poor wild canid, bare skin his only covering while he died agonizingly in the bitter cold and snow, and the mercy killing was my only path of compassion, I looked around for you, but you were gone. Back to your nice, cozy, warm home or apartment in the Cities, where you could dream of the lonesome call of the wild you heard on the wind once or twice, wine glass in your hand, relaxing, thinking up a new attack on the folks out in the woods doing what needs to be done.
The mercy killing needed to happen. You were not there. So, as usual, I did it myself.
Most of them never were lucky enough to run into me. So they died without any mercy. In abject agony.
I can assure you of this:
Every one of those animals would have begged for a hunter or trapper to come along with a nice, clean bullet, if they could.
And that would have been by far the best outcome for them.
You kids seem to think life for wild animals is some kind of version of a Hollywood movie, and if you can just keep the evil hunters-trappers away, the critters will live out an idylic existence in the heavenly woody land you envision.
Get a grip. Grow up. That world exists only in your mind.
In real life, hunters and trappers are the good guys.
Ever see an eagle (or owl) swoop down on a mink, then rip its guts out while it is still alive?
I have. The screaming is almost unbearable. That mink would have loved a trappers trap.
I could go on, but the lilies are not strong enough to hear any more real nature stories.
The MN DNR should be following a plan based in wildlife science to manage our natural resources. That is their JOB. It is NOT serving the wolves or the citizens of this state to cave in to ignorance, hysteria, or the wishes of people who feel they should be entitled to kill animals that others have worked so long and hard to protect. I am disgusted that our public servants are not serving the majority of our citizens, nor are they serving the wildlife it is their ostensible duty to protect.
please don't allow the trapping .... no torture
Why does it seem that Dr. Mech is pushing for the hunting of wolves constantly? Science has proven that creating the wolf as a game animal does nothing to improve it's status or preservation amoung wolf hunter. I don't really understand him at all. How can you devote your life to an apex predator like the wolf and then be pro-hunting of it. Was that the intention all along to bring up the population enough so that it can be killed for sport and fur. I guess Dr. Mech, a hunter and trapper would think so. I disagree
Excellent article, I did not feel the "errors marred" it at all. Even with the corrected statistics, the question remains, "why delist now...and who stands to gain?" This is not 1995, we know wolves have stable populations, but does this fact warrant the liberal hunting and trapping that several states now condone? If the question were put to public vote, the answer would be no. Wildlife is still being managed by the old school mentality of removing anything (at least predators) above the carrying capacity. Sure, you can shoot 1/3 or 1/2 of the wolves in a state and they will survive as a species, but why allow it when a) it is not necessary and b) the majority oppose the needless killing? Must our wildlife be "managed" solely by those who see it as an expendable commodity, like clay pigeons? Which reminds me of the passenger pigeon, shot from the sky by gleeful hunters until none remained. If someone has kept count and said, "Hey, stop shooting now, there's 150 left!" would that have made the hunting more respectable? There were conservationists in the 1850's trying to stop the wanton slaughter of the passenger pigeons but they were silenced. I know, wolves won't become extinct, but I also know the hunting of them is only to serve the desires of a few, and do they honestly gain from this? Perhaps. In a society that promotes machismo and violence, these individuals will find their reward.
For a summary of the history of the why's and wherefores of the human mentality behind the attitude towards our resources here on Earth, and yes, wolves are resources, we could do no better than read the lectures, now a short book, that Barry Lopez wrote 20 years ago called 'The re-discovery of North America", which shows just how much our history can define us, for good and bad, and how hard it is to turn away from the sins of the fathers and take a new path. In the end we have to turn to each other. As for controlling wolves, its interesting how some hunters proclaim their good deeds by dispatching animals for whatever reason and attack those that have reservations about them. Life is what it is, for animals it is tough, uncompromising and often desperately painful and full of suffering, but folks, these are human feelings that we project onto them. Thoreau said, 'In 'wildness' lies the preservation of the world'. note 'wildness', it is not part of our brief to homogenize all life, if we do, we will suffer ourselves. There is, I believe not a single 'wild bee' in the USA and this lack of wildness is not doing the collapse of the bee's any good. We should, like the work of Michael Soule and others, be pushing for re Wilding zones the length and breadth of our countries where nature can live and exist on its own terms, not ours. As RD Lawrence said, 'Nature is careless about the individual, but careful about the species'. We must simply provide a home and let them live.
Hunting for sport is a money making venture for state government. Don't think for one minute there is any other reason. Look around at our planet which is in serious trouble....do you really think for one minute that the wolves, or any other creature, is safe from human poor judgement and extinction. Only one animal has upset the natural balance of our world, and that's the human. I fear to see what will be left for the children in years to come at this rate. Look at the honeybee which is responsible for the majority of our food source....and yet still, people continue to use pesticides freely without a second thought. Wolves are nearby our farm, and we respect and value their presence; a treasure and reminder of the core connection to our natural world. Thanks for the article.
Has anyone else observed the Cattlemen's Ass. and their cronies in Washington tearing down the house not only for wolves but mustangs as well?.
The public lands and laws designated to provide humane and appropriate habitat for these animals has been undercut and subverted either by changing the laws themselves in the case of the wolves or taking advantage of laws and tax payer funded lands in the case of the mustangs.
The public does not want the majestic and historic national wildlife of this country and the public lands allotted to them destroyed.
If our leadership cannot employ tactics that go beyond serving a vocal and powerful minority i.e. the cattle industry, hunting lobby and those lobbyists interested in mineral and gas exploration we must convince them otherwise or effort to remove them from office.
As habitat for wildlife and humanity's needs continue to conflict, the attention given to green technology and sustainable living in cooperation with nature will become crucial.
Lastly, as a species intimately connected to all of life including our predators, we will not be able to live lives of quality with the web of life fractured into tiny pieces.
Thank you Karin Winegar and Peggy Callahan for speaking of the irrational rush to hunt and trap wolves. It is apparent that this aggressive, short-sighted and reckless wolf trapping and hunting season is based on limited information, old theories and outdated anti-wolf hysteria. WhThe DNR has data on a yearly basis about our deer herd but they know very little on the eve of an inaugural wolf hunting season about our much rarer and more fragile wolf population. We have no current baseline comprehensive population survey. The most basic research principle is to have baseline data. Charging ahead with a hunt is clearly irrational but driven by an aggressive force. We do not know if this force will result in many more wolf deaths than those planned for, now that wolves are not federally protected. The inexorable push to kill wolves is quite alive even though it comes from a small segment of people. By acting on the irrational rush to hunt, our leaders and public agencies place us at risk of economic suicide. They are endangering a lucrative and growing tourism business and a wilderness economy. Consider also the cost-effective assistance our Minnesota wolves provide to limit the spread of diseases in our deer herd. Imagine a deer population with a Chronic Wasting Disease ( CWD) scare? This too needs to be consider at risk along with a risk to our wolves. Those who understand the wolf's true value, both the tangible and intangible; speak up. The is our better Minnesota.
Great article. At the Committee meetings at the Minnesota State Capitol where the wolf hunt was being discussed, the lobbyists were lining up for their chance to publicly thank the politicians for providing the "opportunity" for Minnesota hunters to take part in the wolf hunt. For sure, that's the reason for the upcoming hunting and trapping seasons.
Reply to Gordon Hommes: the public wolf hunting and trapping seasons are only "controlled" in one way: there's a limit on the number of wolves taken, statewide, no matter whether where there's a conflict with livestock operations (or any other operations) where they're taken.
Reply to Dave Mech: certain Minnesota legislators in the U.S. Congress worked agressively for the delisting, with the support of certain Minnesota legislators and constituents.
Reply to Dave Mech: are you trying to tell us that killing 1/3 of a wolf population every year is a good wildlife-management practice?
Reply to Dave Mech: the planned residual wolf populations in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming following the 2012/2013 recreational hunting and trapping seasons are very low.
Reply to Steve Austin: the recreational wolf hunting and trapping seasons aren't targeted at diseased animals. Certainly, there's no need for a recreational season to kill diseased wolves--they can legally be killed now at any time they are considered threats that could spread disease.
Although I no longer hunt anything, I do not oppose hunting philosophically. I also support the guaranteed rights of our Native brothers and sisters to hunt and fish (and who totally oppose the wolf hunt.) But what needs to be "managed" is hunters, not wolves!
I hike with my 3 dogs in the deep woods north of Duluth 4 to 5 times a week, 52 weeks a year. Most of the trails I walk are never used except during the firearm deer hunting season when I am out after dark with a headlight. Later in the season, I'm on snowshoes. The wolf pack in the area watch us, but we don't bother them and they behave likewise.
What I see is the disgusting behavior of hunters and trappers: deer carcasses thrown aside in every parking area, ATVs tearing up posted non-motorized trails (today's hunters don't walk,) gunshots well after dark, traps not labeled or checked regularly, garbage and worse in the woods. Intoxicated hunters ignoring the rules and killing for fun.
What I've never seen once in the past 15 years is a Game Warden! Now we are going to allow these yahoos to kill an animal that has no value as meat, is not growing in numbers, is helping control the deer population, and is a symbol as important as the Bald Eagle? Furthermore, because of the wolf's social group, if they kill the "wrong" wolf, the whole pack will suffer from the loss.
I'll be out there even if the DNR is not, and I'll be watching, recording, and reporting. No more Mr. Nice Guy.
I made a cause on facebook causes to oppose the wolf hunts in MN, WI, MI, to boycott all tourism and products, so the money they thought they would gain is not going to happen, here is the link, join my cause....we arent backing down!!
http://www.causes.com/causes/785917-saving-the-great-lakes-wolves-of-minnesota-wisconsin-and-michigan-boycott?utm_campaign=home
more than five thousand have taken the pledge....and lots more actions on here check it out.....now, is it really worth it to continue with this sadistic hunt amy klobuchar and her war against wolves is really backfiring on her and everyone in the world has seen this cause...all over the internet!
Some of the responses to Dr. Mech are considered, in that within the short texts, we don't find the several identified other causes of population pressures: such issues as inbreeding depression in small populations have not been well addressed in once again suddenly adding human persecution (I'll get to that term in a moment) to the mix:
We know that MN wolves contain some DNA from interbreeding with coyotes, likely occurring during the period of extremely low population in some area. Such interbreeding is highly likely to change behaviors to some extent. various pressures and constraints on species survival such as the inbreeding, relatively unnatural outbreeding, and persecution mentioned, operate over lengths of time insufficiently studied or sufficiently considered within the 40 or so years of protection.
There are many more pressures taking small or overexploited populations toward extinction (yes, Dr. Mech, I know that the species is strongly what we call r-selected. 4 lifespans it would seem, is far too short a time to pass judgment, as population biologists know) left unmentioned here.
The pretension by those who kill, that they are somehow humane, rather distorts the word. To dispute only a bit within ecological spheres, that a functioning diverse biota tends to prevent rabies as a significant factor, is a study which is recommended to those who draw the red herrings of fear, loathing, and management across discussion.
Comments are limited to this # of words.
The appeal is obvious. They make really nice hats and coats. The meat makes really good bait.
I Myself coming originally from the UK have no political agenda in this matter but I do see the same happening to this country as happened in the UK & Europe (Most of our indigenous wildlife becoming extinct).. this type of Practice of putting "A CULL" on an animal just because it threatens Farming (remember folks we are encroaching on this animals Land not the other way around) yes by all means give the farmers the power to rid the "Pests" from their land but a STATE WIDE Cull ...are you having a laugh... as someone said earlier "These Animals were on the protected list ".....why oh why then as soon as they come off that list are they allowed to be hunted back to to the threatened list.... I cannot see the fascination with the Hunting fraternity for hunting something just for the sake of it.....is EVERY Hunter going to use the pelt ...NO! is EVERY Hunter going to use the meat NO! It is just because they can hunt and kill these Shy animals that are doing what is natural to them.... unless you are hunting to survive (to Eat or to Keep Warm)HUNTING IS NOT NATURAL.....Being a Photographer myself I would rather have an image of one of these Beautiful Creatures on my wall rather than a trophy from a unnecessary kill...
As chief of all wolves, I am disgusted to see the negligence in most of these comments. You all think hunters are destroying my population, this is a horrible mistake! If I were to take hunting away from my people they'd all be dead. The problem lies with these places you suburban slobs call cities. This continued development leave my people with less and less hunting area. On top of it, I've received reports from my messengers of big city slobs threatening to kill us if we are ever spotted in the city. I find this ironic. With your continued disgusting development, we are going to be left with no choice but to hunt the city. With this I have ordered my people to kill any city slob seen on our land. Until next time, leave all hunters alone. As it is a way of life and they are far less destructive to my people than you slobs...
If there is going to be a cull because of too much population of a certain species, I think we should focus on our OWN species. How about we go around and have a State-wide cull of people. We have too many useless people around, not contributing to society, polluting our natural resources, over-using our facilities. I think we'd have a great success if we got rid of a few million people! Then the wolf population wouldn't seem so bad. I'd be happy to start a petition on this!
As For Mr Chief Alpha Male.... HOW MANY CONTRADICTIONS IN YOUR STATEMENT....Are you for hunting or not.. are you for The preservation of the wolf population or not... if you are for the preservation ... why make the statement that people should be killed because they are on YOUR land.. that is as bad as humans saying wolves should be killed because they are on Humans land.... Make sense before you commit to any statement and try not to muddy the cause.....In Fact I would hazard a guess that you are in fact a Hunter that has no clue of what impact (Nor cares) this type of cull would actually has on the indigenous species in this country and is more interested in the fascination with blood lust like so many weekend hunters have. Also I would guess that your "NAME" is made up as some kind of thin Joke at the Proud Native American Population Who in my view would never write such a lame and uneducated statement like that.
Dear Ian Bineham, I find no contradictions in my post. Perhaps you should rethink schooling. First, it should of been very clear the post was written from a wolves perspective and not native American as the alpha male is the leader or chief of a pack, or you can simple look at my first 5 words. Second, if it's not clear I'm pro hunting, again you may wanna rethink schooling. Third, as for your comment "this is as bad as humans saying wolves should be killed because they are on Humans land", that is exactly the point I'm getting at, as that is exactly what city folks do. Again rethink schooling. Fourth, I can only laugh at the fact you seriously think having a controlled wolf season will kill the population. Deer hunting has been on a controlled season for years and the population seems to have no problem thriving. Finally, as for your blood lust comment. If you think the killing of wild animals is inhuman I sure hope your vegetarian and I urge you to go to your local cattle yard, as the means of killing domestic animals puts hunting to shame. Means: domestic animals have no clue you're going to shoot them as evidence they love human interaction. Wild animals know they are hunted as evidence they run at first site of a human being. Think about it, would you rather know your hunted and given a chance or have someone as a best friend one minute and he shoots you the next?
In Response.Yes I do See your point.Yes I do see why wolves are encroaching on the populus BUT that is a Human Problem not a nature problem . As for the problem in hand As I said before in my first comment... this is about wolves doing what comes natural to them (after all they are one of the top predators in this country yes not including Bears and Bobcats etc) but this "problem" is mainly local to Farms and not Cities... Why have a STATE WIDE CULL why not deal with the "problem" at it's source.... This is just an excuse for the trophy hunters to get their blood lust kick. Please look up Blood sport in the dictionary and also as I have said before look at the history of overkill hunting in UK and Europe and see what this type of "cull" "Bloodlust" "Thrill seeking can do to an animal speices.
but to be honest I think you went about commenting in a very peculiar way.1 You are NOT a wolf and how do you know what they are thinking. 2.Wolves are natural predators and know no different. 3.The wolf population has only just got back to a suitable level for it to be taken off the endangered list (so with this STATE wide cull it will probally slip down to the endangered list within 2 years "speculation I know but do the math") 4. With not letting the wolf population to breed (The average litter size for the wolf is 4 to 7 pups. Less wolf population than deer.Deer Litter Size: 1 in first year; 2 and sometimes 3 in later years etc etc)and mass it's numbers the or same will happen as in #3 4.the deer population is high and has always been high and is used for meat (by some hunters.. for example my Father in law and his brother were hunters but now chose not to as they do not hunt for meat anymore and do not care for the Trophy style of hunting) and 5. my schooling is just fine thank you and may be you should think about returning to school yourself because your punctuation is something to behold......
and BTW I am a Meat-eater and I have no worries about where my meat comes from.The livestock you spoke about are bred for human consumption and have no clue what they are there for and that is the point of domesticating animals. On the other hand the reason wildlife runs away is because any sound or smell that is out of the ordinary in the wild is a potential predator so hence they run away and also wolves are an extensively shy creature and keep to the shadows unless they are on the hunt themselves Nothing to do with they know they will be hunted by humans they NOT a natural prey of anything. They hunt because they are hungry:not for sport or trophy or a rug....show me a Wolf den with a Deer head on it's wall or a human skin as a rug or photo's of them posing next to a deer or human carcass. Then I'll agree with you on all points. Other than that I'll stand my Ground on the fact hunting for other than survival is morally wrong.
You're right, my sport is just wrong. I'm morally messed up for killing animals. I really shouldn't do that. I find it also funny that with all the coyotes/beaver/muskrat I've killed over the years, nobody cares about that. Just wolves. Are they not the same type of hunt as wolves? A skin hunt...also you're right again(dang it), my English does suck. But I'd have to say, my math is pretty good and your numbers just don't add up. According to my calculations the population will not have any trouble increasing with the kill limit set at 400. i'd like to see your formula on this, as I hope as a licensed engineer my math isn't that bad...
Chief Alpha Male~ First speaking as a wolf, now throwing out your (supposed) occupation as a licensed engineer to make your opinion more impressive. Oh, and is that sarcasm you're conveying? Wow. Impressive. I've never come across such sharp wit like that before! Let me guess, next you'll be announcing you are part spear and give us a long diatribe about how using you is more humane in the killing of animals. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for your next installment. Oh! And please make sure to throw an insult in there too to bring home the fact that you are, indeed, THE alpha male! (I know it's sometimes hard for some people to have a respectable conversation without resulting in belittling and name calling. You're a perfect example.) Thanks for the contribution to this discussion.
I'd like to note I didn't start the belittling. Maybe if you looked at "Ian Beneham's" response to my initial post you'd rethink your statement Alpha Female, who I believe to be Ian for obvious reasons...
Dear CHEF APPLE MOLE ......alpha female=NOT ME..... and yes you did make a belittling comment.... try reading your responses.... Something about schooling.... DO YOU REMEMBER NOW!!! and by the way ... why go on about Coyote, Beaver Etc.. when the Article is about WOLF... Try staying on subject.... or is that TOO Hard for you... and Also when responding PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE try and get the persons name right you are TRYING to respond to. If you have nothing constructive to say (as a person and not some figment of your imagination)then try and read the remainder of the posts in the discussion as well as the main article too. Thanks
Wow. All of a sudden I've been credited as being involved in quite an entertaining and very skewed discussion. I hate to disappoint either you, Alpha Male, or you, Ian Bineham, but I am obviously neither of you. Don't credit someone for something they didn't say or someone they are NOT. It's quite obvious that Ian can hold his own regarding his feelings on this -wolf- discussion (which is a very good point by the way...this is an article about wolves: not muskrats, deer, UFOs, motorcycles, thesauruses and all the rest of the other subjects that are getting brought up). But now taking other comments on this page as deeming it belonging to someone you don't agree with is just being childish. I hold my own comment. You and Ian duke it out yourself. I simply decided on my pseudonym the same reason YOU did, Alpha Male; I wanted to remain anonymous. At least Ian is not afraid to stand up and voice his views under his real name (if it IS in fact his real name). Alpha Male, that is definitely something you aren't. You are a whiny, persnickety anonymous nothing in cyberspace that wants to act big but hides behind a phony name and shouts out his pro-hunting actions. Give it a rest already. I think the only one who actually is paying attention is Ian, and I'm guessing he's getting quite sick of you as the rest of us are who have bothered to read this article. *sigh* Try online dating or something instead.
How are coyote, beaver and muskrat not related to this conversation? If I remember correctly, one of your arguments Ian is that wolf hunters do it for the blood lust or something to tat nature. Well then, if this is the case, what is the difference between wolf hunting and coyote/beaver/muskrat? My point is, all these animals including wolves are hunted for their skin (hence the term skin hunt) which has great value. Well with this being said, i'd like to know why everyone is all wound up about wolf hunting but could care less about any of they other 3 animals. Seems racist to me...also, I never denied I "belittled" you Ian, I just simply noted that you started the "belittling" with your initial reply to me and I am not ashamed to have dished you a taste of your own medicine. Pretty hard to deny the fact you started it all when it's in writing isn't it?
Obviously you really didn't read the Article did you.... TITLE "What's the appeal in hunting or trapping a wolf?" There is no mention in said article to The Animals you named. as I said before try and stay on subject. As for my first reply to you. That was not Belittling you that was pointing out that you were muddling the point you was trying to make by pretending to be a wolf .Which still doesn't make any sense as you (as I have said before)don't actually know what a wolf is thinking. As for your belittling ,you tried to use inept schooling against me (Don't make me laugh) and boasting about how educated you are and also wrongly speculating that I was a Non Meat eater...Sorry but you don't have to be a vegetarian to care about animals and wildlife. My views on Hunting are negative and I stand by my previous statement that Hunting is morally wrong in my eyes. It is pretty sad that you are clutching at straws by questioning other peoples posts thinking that it is me. Not everyone agrees with you or hunting as you can see by the majority of posts for this article. Thank you again for your valuable input.
howwooooooooooo
The simple answer to your question about coyote, beaver and muskrat Chief Alpha Male, is that two wrongs don't make a right.
(however, 3 lefts do)
Karin Winegar - thank you! YOU ROCK!
Some how I think DNR's Math department needs a good shake up (Preferably by the throat ) Here are the WI application results.
http://www.wdio.com/article/stories/S2766125.shtml?cat=0
THAT'S MORE LIKE IT!!!!
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/243612/
THIS IS MORE LIKE IT......
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/243612/
This illustrates a serious flaw in federal-state regulation of rare resources. State politics, caught up in local emotion and local economic interests, can threaten the federal land reserves that are supposed to preserve America's heritage for all time. While the feds do not do a great job of protection either, there should be a firm federal heritage plan that states can tighten but not override. Not every human impulse should be indulged. I am sure that many Americans would love to carve their names into Mount Rushmore. We don't let them, for good reason. Those individuals who lack the talent to create anything lasting and beautiful seem to have a particular tendency to want to destroy, as a perverse way to make their mark. That is not an impulse that we should treat as being appropriate. Let's grow up, think about future generations, and protect our wild heritage.
Thank you for this thoughtful article! You ask some provocative (in a good way) questions that have been on the minds of many lovers of wild life, especially regarding what part mining interests play in the rush to hunt these magnificent creatures. In my opinion, the original 5 year moratorium should be reinstated and during that time the true numbers of wolves and the health of the packs should be thoroughly studied. What's the rush? is a very good question!
Also, trapping is a barbaric, tortuous method of killing that is indiscriminate and has no place in this world. Why are we still using this inhumane method of killing? We know it hurts and kills unintended victims and leads to slow painful death. How can so called , self described wildlife "managers" delude themselves into thinking this is acceptable in any way? I am so disappointed in our leadership in Minnesota for allowing this to go through and I will vote accordingly.
I've never understood the joy that some people get in destroying the creation. You see, when you "hunt" an animal, you are destroying it. You are killing it. You are slaughtering it. When you "trap" an animal, you are torturing it. So we should really call a spade a spade and call these "sportsmen" exactly what they are -- animal killers. Look, man, I understand people who don't have the money to buy high protein vegetarian food and HAVE to eat meat and they don't have the money to buy meat that the supermarket so they hunt for their food. That's fine. But guess what? That only makes up a small fraction of those "sportsmen" out there. The overwhelming majority is a bunch of men who enjoy destroying animals in any way possible because it makes their pee - pees feel bigger. So they come out with all kinds of excuses for this disgusting, sadistic, sociopathic behavior. Sure...nature is cruel. Would you rather live out your life or have a huge metal machine tear into your lower leg one day until some alien swoops down and "takes you out of your misery" by zapping you so he can put your skin up on the wall of his space ship? Oh, I'm sure you would just "beg" for that. Right. Grow up. These animals were put on Earth for a reason -- to weed out the weak among the herds -- which is the OPPOSITE of what those "sportsmen" do, because they're always looking to slaughter the best looking and most powerful animal. ASSHOLES. Please screw up and trap yourselves and die.
Post a comment
Please be civil, brief and relevant.
E-mail addresses are never displayed but they are required to confirm your comments. All comments are moderated. MPR reserves the right to edit any comments on this site and to read them on the air with attribution. Please read the Terms and Conditions before posting.
You must be 13 or over to submit information to Minnesota Public Radio. The information entered into this form will not be used to send unsolicited e-mail and will not be sold to a third party. For more information see Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
