Yes, Virginia Google Searcher, it is true.
The gray wolf has been trying to reclaim its place as alpha predator in parts of Idaho and the Greater Yellowstone Region ever since 65 members of this endangered species were reintroduced in the 1990s. The wolves are doing too good a job, perhaps.
Under pressure from another alpha predator, human hunters (along with state officials eager to keep hunters happy), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has changed a rule in a way that has wildlife campaigners howling.
The complaints are not about the section allowing someone to kill a wolf attacking, say, a dog or livestock. It’s the part about states and tribal governments having the right to allow greatly expanded killing of wolves in “non-essential” populations where local officials determine that wolf packs are taking too big a share of deer and elk herds also coveted by hunters.
In a news release, the Fish and Wildlife Service said the states needed more flexibility to allow them to “manage” and “remove” wolves (euphemisms for shooting them) where their predatory skills are too effective.
“The states have done an excellent job managing wolves, and this revision will provide the extra flexibility they may need to manage wolves for some time in the future,” said Jay Slack, acting regional director for the service’s Mountain-Prairie Region, in the release.
The Sierra Club complained bitterly today in its own release, estimating that the action could result in the killing of all but 600 of the approximately 1,500 wolves in the region.
“If we call open season on wolves now, we could soon find ourselves back at the starting line. It’s a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars,” said Sierra Club representative Melanie Stein. “Deer and elk populations are thriving in this region. There’s absolutely no reason to begin slaughtering wolves, other than to please a handful of special interests. This is another example of politics trumping science in the Bush administration. Federal and state agencies are tripping over each other, and our wildlife are suffering as a result.”
Local governments have been pressing for the change for awhile, and in the rural West, the right of humans to dominate nature is as deep-rooted as the laws of physics. Kirk Johnson of The Times filed a fine piece on wolves and the changing West earlier this month. [UPDATE 1/25: The above sentence was written in haste. There’s no geographic constraint to the human tendency to try to dominate the wild. The East did it long ago. Humans in the Amazon are still at it.]
As human populations expand, there’ll be ever more such clashes between human interests and those of wide-ranging wildlife, whether in the Serengeti or Wyoming.
Under pressure from another alpha predator, human hunters (along with state officials eager to keep hunters happy), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has changed a rule in a way that has wildlife campaigners howling.
The complaints are not about the section allowing someone to kill a wolf attacking, say, a dog or livestock. It’s the part about states and tribal governments having the right to allow greatly expanded killing of wolves in “non-essential” populations where local officials determine that wolf packs are taking too big a share of deer and elk herds also coveted by hunters.
In a news release, the Fish and Wildlife Service said the states needed more flexibility to allow them to “manage” and “remove” wolves (euphemisms for shooting them) where their predatory skills are too effective.
“The states have done an excellent job managing wolves, and this revision will provide the extra flexibility they may need to manage wolves for some time in the future,” said Jay Slack, acting regional director for the service’s Mountain-Prairie Region, in the release.
The Sierra Club complained bitterly today in its own release, estimating that the action could result in the killing of all but 600 of the approximately 1,500 wolves in the region.
“If we call open season on wolves now, we could soon find ourselves back at the starting line. It’s a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars,” said Sierra Club representative Melanie Stein. “Deer and elk populations are thriving in this region. There’s absolutely no reason to begin slaughtering wolves, other than to please a handful of special interests. This is another example of politics trumping science in the Bush administration. Federal and state agencies are tripping over each other, and our wildlife are suffering as a result.”
Local governments have been pressing for the change for awhile, and in the rural West, the right of humans to dominate nature is as deep-rooted as the laws of physics. Kirk Johnson of The Times filed a fine piece on wolves and the changing West earlier this month. [UPDATE 1/25: The above sentence was written in haste. There’s no geographic constraint to the human tendency to try to dominate the wild. The East did it long ago. Humans in the Amazon are still at it.]
As human populations expand, there’ll be ever more such clashes between human interests and those of wide-ranging wildlife, whether in the Serengeti or Wyoming.
Howling Over Federal Plan to Expand Wolf Killing - Check out the video while you're there.
Thankfully there's at least one sweet, sane person in Wyoming.
8 comments:
It's not nice of Dick Cheney to butt fuck animals in Wyoming.
It's so strange the way the same people who love their hunting dogs will happily shoot wolves and coyotes when they are so similar as you can see with Charlie on the Daily Coyote. In fact Charlie seems to get along better with cats than your typical dog.
Speaking of dogs I'm feeling a bit guilty about leaving mine at the groomers today. Since the groomers is in the same direction as one of our regular walks I feel a bit as though I'm tricking them. They were so happy to go for a walk after all of the rain and then we made a detour into the groomers and Akubi started whining while Tanuki tried to act cool but he was panicking too (he believes he's a very big dog) and I had to walk away with these two forlorn faces staring back at me from the window looking so abandoned.
BTW maybe we could ship the deer around here to Wyoming. We have far too many of them and I'm tired of having them eat my roses.
Poor dogs. They'll be ok though. Give them a special treat when they get out and they'll think itsallgood.
I suspect that Dick Cheney has neither penis, nor soul. That said, he is certainly guilty of rape by instrumentation.
@Ogg,
Yes, I think I'll pick up some chewies at the pet store before I pick them up.
@Buzz saw,
Well in either case, Baab has solidified it's position as the #1 Google search result for "is it true dick cheney butt fucks animals in wyoming".
Apparently this is also the #1 search result for "casey lynch naked". I have no idea who Casey Lynch is though.
The United States of Fat
Did I miss something, or is that map missing the key that explains what the colors mean?
Post a Comment