“Defenders” of Wildlife Supports Wolf Hunting!

Photo by US Fish and Wildlife Services

“Defenders of Wildlife is not opposed to hunting of wolves. We represent hunters as well as other conservationists and animal rights people. We have a very wide spectrum of people that are our members, but we’ve never been opposed to hunting ….Suzanne Stone

WHAT?????

Well you know, the cat is now out of the bag, this is something we’ve all known but to see it in black and white is pretty stunning, considering the persecution wolves are suffering at the hands of hunters and state fish and game agencies. Way to go DOW, way to go! 

Exposing the Big Game

Yet another sell-out group, sleeping with the enemy. Is this what they’re doing with all the donations they keep begging for? Unbelievable!

http://www.kued.org/suzanne-stone

Interviewer
Should wolves be hunted?

Suzanne Stone
Defenders of Wildlife is not opposed to hunting of wolves. We represent hunters as well as other conservationists and animal rights people. We have a very wide spectrum of people that are our members, but we’ve never been opposed to hunting. As long as it’s hunting done in a manner that other species are hunted, so that it’s not to exterminate the species, but actually to only take surplus from that population. And right now the wolf population in the Northern Rockies is still pretty small. For example, in Idaho we have somewhere around five or six hundred adult wolves, and if you compare that with things like mountain lions, we have over 3,000 mountain lions. We have 20,000 black bears…

View original post 47 more words

Advertisements
Published in: on August 27, 2014 at 11:15 pm  Comments (99)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2014/08/27/defenders-of-wildlife-supports-wolf-hunting/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

99 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. That’s very worrying, I have made several donations to them…I thought they were fighting to stop wolf persecution! I am completely anti-hunting, period. If so many prey animals were not hunted for “sport” by humans the wolves would likely not be attacking livestock.

    Like

    • Agreed, when our government wrongly delisted wolves, DOW was one of the major groups going to bring a lawsuit against the govt. to fight the delisting. Then they pulled out. I have not supported them since that time as far as I am concerned they are two faced and just collect money. I am not convinced NWF is much better as they “represent a wide diverstiy of people also” this included hunters. Who really stands for wolves in all the conservation groups who say they do, I don’t know.

      Like

  2. Most wolf advocates were aware of
    this AND their refusal to back Footloose Montana’s anti-trapping initiative 4 years ago, but it’s nice to actually see it in writing….Hopefully their donors will think twice about donating to an organization that asks for money to protect wolves and turns around and condones hunting them. Unbelievable hypocrisy!!

    Like

  3. Pathetic traitors.
    Another fox who apparently never wanted those grapes.

    Like

  4. Very sad we need to get groups together to do the work to protect Wolves as most people and voters want Wolves protected. I hope it
    is not true but it looks like they are using the wolf to get money but not
    use the money to protect the wolves but full their pockets with lots of
    green. Their are not enough wolves to hunt and with so many tools
    to kill them we need to do all we can to save every one as we can not
    lose any more.

    Like

  5. Am I glad I stopped my contributions to Defenders of Wildlife. I too am not opposed to hunting, but hunting for food, not for trophies or fur. Removing top predators goes against the science of sound ecosystems. Shame on Defenders of Wildlife. They don’t deserve the name. Pat O’Brien

    Like

  6. “Defenders” of Wildlife got their last damn dime out of me!

    Like

  7. Do you know how much monies we have donated to DofW for the purpose only, of protecting America’s wolves?

    We’re elderly and were going to leave some big monies to DofW in our will.

    Thank heavens, we now know the truth. Whom should we donate our will to help America’s wolves?

    Please, please help us with monies to help America’s wolves before we die. Please….

    Like

    • Please check out Wildearthguardians.org
      they are a great organizations. Wish i could be on their big donar list and be invited to their outings.
      They are a thorn in the side of Dept of Interior offices. Legally fighting for spices survival. Also Center for Biological Diversity is another good organization.

      Like

    • Alaska Wildlife Alliance has been doing great work against long odds and could use the help.

      Like

    • Howling for Wolves in Minn. is an awesome defender of wolves as is Adopt a wolf Pack in Idaho. Out there working very hard for wolves

      Like

      • HFW in minn is another compromiser.

        Like

      • Pete,

        Why do you say that? I believe Howling For Wolves is doing great work in Minnesota?

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

      • We Basically got that info about HFW from Xotzin O and Jrey Crow, from Northwoods wolf alliance, They told me and everyone that was on their Page NWA, that law she was trying to pass, allowed for wolf hunting, and didnt bring in The Tribes to the discussions, Which is not good. When we went over the Law ouselves, it was written in a very confusing manner, but they seemed to be correct, so please check with Jrey or Xotzin if you want further info. Fortunately, The Wolves are Protected in 4 states now. Thanks to the Lawsuit in Mich, a great Protest in Mich, and a Great Judge

        Like

      • Meant to add, and Thanks to everyones hard works coming together finally. All Actions for Wolves is needed.

        Like

    • You may want to think about American’s Wild Horses…they are becoming extinct in the wild. More are held in captivity then there are in the wild. Laura Leigh, has been fighting for them, for many years. Ironic that they are becoming extinct, when they are a National symbol of the U.S.

      Like

  8. Don’t forget to write DOW and tell them why you will never give them another dime and that they are fronting a lie!

    Like

    • So far, I believe WildEarth Guardians is doing the most legally that can be done to save wolves. Glad I donate to them.

      Like

  9. The policy of DOW is hypocrisy at its BEST! Dear Nabeki, as you have stated, we all knew it, but with these words of Suzanne Stone, the truth is now confirmed. Shame on her and everyone else who is contributing to the killing of America’s beautiful wolves!

    Like

    • Nothing hurts wolves more than wolf supporters fighting or undermining each other. This backlash is based on partial quotes from one interview. Did any of you stop to ask for an explanation or clarification? What did you do to confirm the truth or ask for the official policy? When do you spare some benefit of the doubt to an organization that has not only helped restore wolves but have stuck by them for decades since?

      Like

      • Suzanne, you can’t expect wolf advocates to gloss over what you said and I quote:

        Interviewer
        Should wolves be hunted?


        Suzanne Stone
        “Defenders of Wildlife is not opposed to hunting of wolves. We represent hunters as well as other conservationists and animal rights people. We have a very wide spectrum of people that are our members, but we’ve never been opposed to hunting. As long as it’s hunting done in a manner that other species are hunted, so that it’s not to exterminate the species, but actually to only take surplus from that population. And right now the wolf population in the Northern Rockies is still pretty small. For example, in Idaho we have somewhere around five or six hundred adult wolves, and if you compare that with things like mountain lions, we have over 3,000 mountain lions. We have 20,000 black bears, and more than 100,000 elk. And so if you’re putting a lot of pressure on a wolf population when they’re at such a low number, you’re managing them very differently than you’re managing these other species, which are managed to be in greater populations and more abundant.”
        http://www.kued.org/suzanne-stone

        So how many wolves are enough before DOW thinks it’s OK to hunt SURPLUS wolves? The answer: there is no magic number. Wolves don’t need to be hunted, period. Wildlife Services kills hundreds of wolves every year in the name of agribusiness. Now on top of poaching and Wildlife Services killings, wolves have to withstand formal hunts, where they are trapped, shot, snared, gut shot, you name it. This is a species that was wiped out in the lower forty eight in the 1900s, except for a few pockets of wolves in Minnesota. The only reason they were able to recover is because Richard Nixon signed the ESA into law in 1973, allowing them protection. There was a decades long battle to bring them back, as you know and now they’re experiencing the same discrimination and hate campaign as their ancestors. Idaho wants to take wolf numbers down to minimal levels. Wyoming has a predator zone where wolves can be killed by any means 24/7, 365 days of the year. Can you even imagine what is happening to wolves in the “predator zone”? Wisconsin has green-lit hunting wolves with dogs, basically the state has signed onto legalized dog fighting.

        For an organization, like DOW, who has the wolf in their logo, to state they aren’t opposed to wolf hunting is stunning and upsetting, no matter how you try to defend your original statement!

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

      • @ Suzanne: Thank you for taking the time to reply to my comment. I agree with you that wolf supporters fighting or undermining each other are damaging wolves. I am against any actions dividing such individuals and organisations, always working towards the creation of unity and harmony. However, when you state that you are NOT opposed to wolf hunting, I fail to see you as a wolf supporter any more. How can you support the salvation of these vital predators, while promoting hunting them at the same time?

        In the light of my above remarks, I therefore stand by the original comment that I posted. Pretending to save wolves, while not opposing the hunting of these magnificent animals, is hypocrisy at its best.

        @ Nabeki: Thank you so much for replying. I agree with everything you say and I could not have said it better.

        Like

      • Louise,

        There just isn’t anyway for DOW to spin this that makes any sense, as you pointed out. Thank you for caring and commenting and always standing up for what is right for the voiceless.

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

      • IT CAME OUT OF YOUR OWN MOUTH….I’VE KNOW THIS FOR YEARS…THAT’S WHT I STOPPED DONATING A LONG TIME AGO..WATCH WHAT YOU SAY…IT JUST MIGHT COME BACK TO BITE YOU.

        Like

  10. Unliked page.

    Like

  11. Guess i won’t be donating to them!!! I’ll look for a wolf rehabilitation center or ligit wolf sanctuary to donate to. Ladyhawk.

    Like

    • I have been donated to the Defenders for some 3-4 years now but after reading this ,,,I am reevaluating my situation with them

      Like

  12. Letter sent to DofW to notify them that I will no longer make donations until they stop supporting wolf hunting

    Like

  13. I hope none of you support Defenders Of Wildlife.

    Like

  14. I gave to them for years and they are always sending me letters ,this a shame they will go down the drain now thank you for the article

    Like

  15. Has anyone asked her to explain her comment? Does she address it further elsewhere? Defenders has done great work in so many arenas that I hate to denigrate them for this single comment without an explanation.

    Like

  16. They have always supported hunting, so does the “Nature” Conservancy, Audobon Society and WWF

    Like

    • I discontinued my membership last year when I spoke to some office people in Idaho Nature Conservancy.. they all hunt. And he justified why some people hunt wolves.

      I am now on a bandwagon for organizations to dart, spay or neuter, then release the wolves if they have attacked sheep. Then haze them away. Wolf population should be controlled now, and no more hunts.

      Like

  17. Yes, what a shame that ALDF has stepped away from their usual helping of the wolves.

    Like

  18. A few hunters may be true conservationists in the sense that they support and see the value of a balanced ecology and are happy to support predator conservation. I have met a few who say they would not shoot a wolf. But most hunters are very anti-wolf, anti-predator, and support “conservation” of only game animals (sports killing opportunities). Most replay the hunter myth of our forebears of eliminating wolves so there will be more ungulate killing opportunities. Most are profoundly ignorant about wolves. I listened to an outfitter and a young hunter talk about wolves for 1/2 hour one day and it was pure myth, folklore, lies and extremely anti-wolf.

    Trappers and hunters are good with rationalizations, both rationalizing themselves as “conservationists” which is absurd, when what they really do is game farming for sports and profit killing, marginalizing predators. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. reasons for game decline is almost always man and his activities: Loss of habitat to farming and grazing, as it is with sage grouse, forage loss due to man or weather or fire, over-hunting. Hunting is additive killing falling outside the wilderness ecology. Man is no longer few and dependent on subsistence hunting; now it is just sports killing. In any case, it is not predators’ depredations that are primary factors to be “managed” in a knee jerk way way of thinking, often spurring wildlife agencies to join in the “management” of predators rationale.; predators-prey have established millenniums of balance, and predators should never be scapegoated as the sportsmen do with bird, ungulate and fish number fluctuations. Climate change may be resulting in flora and fauna changes and even movement to other climes and loss of forage, fire damage, and disease. It is man that needs management in terms of controlling hunting levels, habitat loss and recovery, corridors of travel for wildlife kept or regained (available), learning to live with wildlife instead of against it in the march of civilization in ranching and farming, extraction industries, development. The rationalizations of trappers and hunters for managing the predators is an old, invalid mantra belonging in the categories of myth, folklore, lies, and with us from the dawn of civilization and sports hunting.

    Like

    • Agree with you Roger..
      thankyou for a clear picture.

      Like

      • Excellent & right on the money too, Roger thank you very much for this very detailed paragraph of the way it really is & yes I have believed in a change for some 20 years now & hunting in America does need to change. America does not depend on wild game for it’s existence any more. Nor does the American Indian. America has KFC on every corner now and yes it is sport hunting in my opinion, Man just wants to shoot his gun ….The Creator did not make the wolf, bear & coyote for target practice ..

        Like

    • Very well said….all truth!

      Like

  19. I have heard this. A woman who is an advocate for wolves out of WI, had informed me of a number of organizations to be careful on donating to. While they claim they admire and help wolves, but the same token they support groups who hunt and kill them. Do your research very carefully and thoroughly picking apart ANY group claiming to save lives before you support them and evne then keep your eyes and ears open for changes to the group in case of contradictions.

    Like

  20. Defenders does not support the hunting of any imperiled species. We are against any measures – including hunting – that undermine the recovery of imperiled species, including wolves.

    Those familiar with our work can clearly see evidence of this in several of our efforts over just the past year:
    – We are adamantly opposed to the predator derby proposed by a “hunters’ rights group” in Idaho. We are reaching out to officials to deny permission for this event to take place, and encourage anyone with similar concerns to do the same http://dfnd.us/1nzqpgx
    – We fought against the killing of wolves in the Frank Church/River of No Return wilderness, when the state sent a trapper in to kill eradicate two wolf packs in this protected area. Not only did we rally our membership against this effort, we also took the Forest Service to court for it. The state recently settled the law suit and stated it would back down from any similar actions during the next year.
    – We fought hard for no-wolf-hunting zones to be put in place around Yellowstone National Park
    – Our experts have spoken out against the state of Washington’s proposal to add wolves to their game management plan
    – We continue to fight against Idaho’s reckless management of wolves, rallying advocates on the ground, reaching out to officials, and educating the public with a large-scale advertising campaign to bring attention to the state’s plans to drive their wolf population down.
    And these are just a handful of examples.

    Across the board, we believe that wolves in the Northern Rockies, Southwest and Pacific Northwest have not fully recovered, and belong under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. No animal, wolf or otherwise, that is in need of that protection should ever be hunted. With the goal of keeping imperiled wolves protected, we have also led a massive effort against the proposed delisting of gray wolves across most of the country: http://dfnd.us/YYx1Ao

    Like

    • Too little, too late.

      Like

    • DOW: You say you “do not support the hunting of any imperiled species.” Is that how you justify hunting wolves in the Northern Rockies and the Great Lakes, then? Because you believe they aren’t imperiled? Nice try with your word games, but we can see right through them.

      Science shows that wolves and other predators are self-regulating. Therefore, they do not need to be indiscriminately hunted or trapped. Also, Stone talks about DOW’s support of taking “surplus” animals from a population. “Surplus?” Wolf packs rely on all their members to survive. Credible bioloigsts know that wolves cannot be treated like other species, as Stone claims in her interview. When it comes to the social structure of wolves and how that structure maintains the integrity of the pack, there is no “surplus.”

      DOW needs to stop pandering to special interests and find the courage to speak the truth about wolves and other predators.
      The indiscriminate hunting and trapping of wolves is not necessary!
      The fact that DOW supports the indiscriminate killing of wolves, then has the nerve to send e-mails out to the public begging for money to save wolves is utterly disgraceful.

      Like

  21. Why are hunters considered to be “conservationists”???

    Like

  22. Few years ago, I quit to pay DOW because they keep ask for donations everyday! Greedy, nothing help at all.. Heard they quit to help with the ranch, let states do job… Forget it. Goodbye DOW !

    Like

  23. Well what a big disappointment this is. I have donated to them in the past but i won’t anymore. I’m stopping my donations to the HSUS, ASPCA as well. Thanks for this important info.

    Like

  24. Years I have spent on the ground,on the phone I pad computer rally’s meetings can any one please be faithful to these poor persecuted creatures?

    Like

  25. I’ve donated to them for many years but no more. Phone calls and emails asking for their immediate need for money for use in going to court to stop the slaughter of our beloved wolves makes me literally nauseated. I helped restore wolf packs back in the mid-90’s and now they want to eliminate what we worked so hard to replace. I hope someone from there calls me again as they’ll get their ears burned when I tell them what I think after reading this newsletter. Thank you for enlightening those of us who may have been under the assumption that DOW was doing right by the wolf community.

    Like

  26. Suzanne Stone:
    “Defenders of Wildlife is not opposed to hunting of wolves. We represent hunters as well as other conservationists and animal rights people. We have a very wide spectrum of people that are our members, but we’ve never been opposed to hunting. As long as it’s hunting done in a manner that other species are hunted, so that it’s not to exterminate the species, but actually to only take surplus from that population.”

    “Surplus?” Wolf packs rely on all their members to survive. Credible bioloigsts know that wolves cannot be treated like other species, as Stone claims above. When it comes to the social structure of wolves and how that structure maintains the integrity of the pack, there is no “surplus.”

    DOW needs to stop pandering to special interests and find the courage to speak the truth about wolves and other predators.
    The indiscriminate hunting and trapping of wolves is not necessary!

    Like

    • Well said Joanne!

      For the wolves, For the wild ones,
      Nabeki

      Like

  27. This came as a bit of a shock.
    Lately I’ve been studying the “management” literature, statistical analysis of populations (of wolves, and of ungulates, their major prey species: elk, moose, whitetail deer in the Superior region, mule deer out west – there are more, but these bear most on 48 state management), and the rationale of wolf biologists who agree with either lethal management or “sport” hunting, or both.

    We know that wolf populations appear more to follow a sigmoid curve style from reoccupation of their territory to carrying capacity than for instance, does our own unregenerate overpopulating species. THey are self-regulating, and do not need human management. Because of this, it has become clear that
    1) initial fast repopulation by wolves leading to relatively saturated occupation normally slows down, and does not (well, it really cannot!) exceed carrying capacity. This trend was not and IS NOT sufficiently recognized, nor planned for in states’ “management.
    In short, it’s not management but manipulation of the rather unscientific original wolf reintroduction goals.
    2) Those goal numbers were not arrived at through understanding wolf population ecology, and as you guys know, were extremely tiny numbers, due to:
    3) The human social perceptions which are in the literature called “social carrying capacity.” This parameter is composed of the sensitivity of wildlife managers to the antiwolf lobbies and their political power.

    We know that STILL, more people in Michigan’s UP prefer that wolves not be hunted, although that number is the slimmest majority of all state areas. Generally we find that >2/3 of people anywhere want wolves protected and not disturbed except in extreme cases.
    Wisconsin and Michigan have huge numbers of hunters, and their state governments tend to slavishly follow the expressed political wills of these groups (MI also has a small number of farmers in the UP who are highly vocal about their miniscule losses.

    All the numbers are too much to go into in a comment here.

    Wildlife managers compute carrying capacity largely as wolf take of an area’s ungulate prey numbers,
    It is true that management is intended to keep wolves below to far below carrying capacity.

    We have consistently found that wolves themselves take far, far less than hunters.
    In the case of the Great Lakes wolf states, all three have so many whitetail, that they have doe seasons, and sometimes unlimited buck seasons. The killing of wolves, once again in short, is a lethal response to the massive human overpopulation’s desire to have as many of the deer for themselves as is possible.

    DoW, thus, by assenting to wolf hunting, is part of the problem of encouraging this massive human population (and it is insane back there) to eliminate any ecologically effective predator balance in favor of management not unlike a ranch or chicken farm. Nobody gets to eat a noticeable amount of anything except, you guessed it, those who pay into managing.

    Before management, it was, true, far worse.

    I am right now working on the research-supported notion of wolf-haters experiencing greater fear of wolves than others.
    There is some work being done on this and again, that is the finding.
    I am sure that, just as certain recent US executives placate the angry, that managing agencies are directed to skew their policies, even those that are both unscientific and unethical in the face of what’s now know about wolf culture/wolf society, toward killing of the outgroup to placate the highly vocal, fearful, and frustrated (feeling low on the human pecking order- the bullet to SOMEONE’s head is satisfying(unfortunate, but this is your species) group members.

    For a group called Defenders of Wildlife, this particular compromise is, indeed, a complete abdication and abandonment of their constituency.

    My best to you who will not compromise.

    Like

  28. Tried posting yesterday, but for some reason I couldn’t. Anyhow, I emailed Defenders of Wildlife. Basically told them that they appeared to be frauds. They can’t sit on both sides of the fence; one side, save the wolves..other side; condone killing the wolf. Killing a wolf is not negotiable.
    Just now I tried posting on Defender’s website; Re: Suzanne Stones interview. It would not let me.

    Like

  29. Center for Biology Diversity:

    http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/

    A nice thing about this group is if you donate you can specify what you want your donation to go towards. If you eamil them, I find they will email you back.

    Like

  30. Here’s the response I got when I emailed DOW on 8/28. Take it for what it’s worth.

    Dear Lois,
    Thank you for contacting Defenders of Wildlife. To clarify our position: We are against any measures – including hunting – that undermine the recovery of imperiled species, including wolves.

    Those familiar with our work can clearly see evidence of this in several of our efforts over just the past year:
    • We are adamantly opposed to the predator derby proposed by a “hunters’ rights group” in Idaho. We are reaching out to officials to deny permission for this event to take place, and encourage anyone with similar concerns to do the same [link]
    • We fought against the killing of wolves in the Frank Church/River of No Return wilderness; when the state sent a trapper in to kill eradicate two wolf packs in this protected area. Not only did we rally our membership against this effort, we also took the Forest Service to court for it. The state recently settled the law suit and stated it would back down from any similar actions during the next year.
    • We fought hard for no-wolf-hunting zones to be put in place around Yellowstone National Park
    • Our experts have spoken out against the state of Washington’s proposal to add wolves to their game management plan
    • We continue to fight against Idaho’s reckless management of wolves, rallying advocates on the ground, reaching out to officials, and educating the public with a large-scale advertising campaign to bring attention to the state’s plans to drive their wolf population down.

    Across the board, we believe that wolves in the Northern Rockies, Southwest and Pacific Northwest have not fully recovered, and belong under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. No animal, wolf or otherwise, that is in need of that protection should ever be hunted. We have led a massive effort against the proposed delisting of gray wolves across most of the country – more information at http://www.defenders.org/the-war-on-wolves/delisting-disaster

    If you need further assistance, please contact Member Services by phone at 1-800-385-9712 or by e-mail at memberservices@defenders.org. We are available to assist you between 9 am and 6 pm EST Monday through Friday.
    Defenders of Wildlife
    1-800-385-9712

    Like

    • Key point: “We are against any measures – including hunting – that undermine the recovery of IMPERILED species, including wolves.” “Imperiled” is the line drawn in the sand. DOW stated that it has no problem with the hunting of what it determines to be “surplus” wolves which damages the integrity of the pack.

      Wolves are a self-determining species, and the hunting of even one is one too many. In spite of the good work DOW has done, this is its dark underbelly.

      Wolves are not trophies under any circumstances.

      Like

      • Sabienne,

        Words like “surplus wolves” are fish and game speak, just like “harvesting wolves”, as if someone is digging up onions.

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

  31. Gray Wolf and Sportsmen Conservationists
    The wildlife agencies, state and federal, do what they want and call it science and conservation. Sporting groups do the same, such as the Safari Club and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Montana FWP had sporting groups compete for bids on big game tickets, an auction. FWP calls them conservationists. They call themselves conservationists. The emphasis of these sporting groups which FWP goes along with and USDA Wildlife Services facilitate and USFWS supports is game farming which is bad news for predators because these groups and wildlife agencies buy into the folklore that in order to have plenty of game to kill, such as elk, then the predators have to be managed and minimized. I listened to an outfitter talk one day about wolves to a young Elmer Fudd Nimrod for about a half hour and it was pure folklore and villainization. The sporting groups will call for predator management in an area because they believe some localized elk population is down and in come the cavalry of management services to cull the predators. Usually, waxing and waning of say an elk population is over hunting, forage, weather, normal movement, but it is evident what is running the show of wildlife management (mismanagement) is hunter-trapper-rancher folklore, lies, myth, parochial ignorance and self-centered power and control. This wildlife agency-hunter-rancher unholy alliance is what the gray wolf is up against and what the real conservationists are up against. The wildlife agencies and sporting “conservationists” really do not understand the wolf and wildlife ecology.

    Like

  32. Hunters and ranchers have been displacing wildlife and wilderness for thousands of years, since the dawn and march of civilization. They do not see themselves as such, but ranchers, farmers, hunters have led a war on wildlife. They see themselves as stewards of the land and conservationists because they allow some animals on the land, even if the the land is public leased land. But they are not tolerant of predators. wild horses, bison. Hunters often see themselves as conservationists because they work to expand and protect the game species for their blood sport traditions, but they create a huge distortion in wilderness ecology by marginalizing predators and farming ungulates and game birds. These groups are hugely into entitlement thinking. Ranchers, particularly in the West, see all public land as “their land” and they are against wild horses, bison, predators. Hunters and fishermen see their sports targets as theirs and resent sharing with raptors, storks, apex predators. They are wrong about it all, not seeing the benefits of balanced ecology and the healthy roles of predators. But their thinking errors get in the way of any change: Entitlement, power and control, victim stance, use of delusional righteous anger to control others, dehumanization of opponents to their views, self centered thinking. Major obstacles to change are society’s own ignorance and indifference to the unsustainable animal farming and game farming effects, most oblivious to inevitable extinction of land and sea wildlife and maybe our own existence (too abstract a concept for most).

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/idaho-wolf-hunting-derby-seeks-5-year-permit/

    https://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/idaho-wants-to-make-wildlife-killing-contests-an-annual-event/

    Like

  33. I emailed Caitlin Balch Burnett, the CO Defenders of Wildlife rep and she said Defenders does not support hunting wolves. They support returning wolves to the Endangered Species List and are opposed to the USF&W Service plan to delist all the wolves. They are fighting for wolves, not advocating for hunting them. I have spoken to Caitlin many times and she is very credible.

    Like

    • There is an obvious conflict between what Suzanne Stone said in the interview and what Caitlin Burnett told you. Someone is not telling the truth. Credibility is relative and subjective. We all need to keep DOW in our sights. We all need to hold them to the fire as they attempt to backpedal their way out of this.

      Like

  34. To answer the question how many wolves frequently asked? 150, 30 breeding pairs? 600-700: Wolves will manage their own populations relative to available niches, wolf pack elbow room, and available prey. They do not need to be generally hunted to “drive down the numbers” and hunting and trapping them probably does more harm than good. Anywhere that they are not hunted and trapped, their numbers have stabilized at some point; like maybe it apparently has in Montana coming in around 600 the past few years. To answer the question: Leave them alone you idiots! They will stabilize their own populations in a healthy for the ecology balance. Hunting should only be for true surplus sporting game not justified as controlling the populations. That is BS that evidently DOW has fallen for and a hunter mantra, which is really a rationalization for their blood sports.

    Like

    • Very well said…keep the heat on em!

      Like

  35. “Hunter Led War on Wildlife”: I would add ranchers and wildlife agencies: Hunters and trappers have been calling themselves conservationists lately a lot it seems. They cite early conservationists and early efforts to save game species (birds and ungulate herds) and fishes and on-going efforts to save game animals (killing targets for sportsmen). Some early “hunter-trapper conservationists” of considerable note were early pioneers in conservation: Teddy Roosevelt was one but he also founded numerous national parks and wildlife refuges to protect wildlife from hunter-trapper sportsmen. Aldo Leopold was one, hunter and naturalist, who became more enlightened about protecting the wolf and other predators and their place in the ecology. George Grinnell was one and also founded national parks including Glacier. I have met and know some hunters that like a balanced ecology of predators and prey, a true wilderness in which to hunt, and who disagree with trophy hunting and are even disgusted by it– and one who compares killing wolves to shooting his neighbor’s German Shepherd. But such hunter-sportsmen are far from often on the landscape; most have a very irrational, uniformed, visceral hate of wolves in particular and predators in general and want to minimize, marginalize, or exterminate them and essentially farm ungulates and game birds. Some even hate raptors who take “their” birds and their fish, as they view ungulates as “their” elk or deer. Most sportsmen and state wildlife agencies, it seems, want to marginalize the main predators (wolf, lion, grizzly). Nebraska only has about 70 cougars yet is embarking on a vigorous “management” campaign, as is SD with only 170 cougars. Alaska is killing wolves just outside national parks; Denali National Park has loss 2/3 of it’s’ wolves negatively affecting wolf watching opportunities. Since wolves have been turned over to state “management” 2700 wolves have been killed plus another 3435 by the rogue USDA Wildlife Services which kills 4 million animals a year in the name of control. Organizations of sportsmen such as the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has given money for anti-wolf programs, recently $25,000 to MT FWP for wolf “management”, and has offered bounties and cooperative agreements with agencies for wolf killing and the Montana Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife recently donated $15,000 to Wildlife Services USDA, a renegade killing wildlife agency that kills (shoots, traps, poisons) over 4 million animals annually. Sportsmen organizations are silent on predators if not unashamedly hostile but loud on protecting and farming game species. There are wildlife killing contests going on all over the USA and in some places, like TX, weekly. Hunters even call these killing contests conservation, killing coyotes for instance to save deer. States like ID-MT-WY-WI-MI have vigorous unscientific, political drive-down-the-wolf-population policies, trapping, extended seasons, and liberal kill policies year around. Much of this wildlife killing is done by trapping, a barbaric, horrendous way to kill and mostly unjustified. Trapping on public land is mostly done for “recreational” sports killing, the fur trade, trophies, with little regard for ecology and the interests of the general public, wildlife viewing, safety of the general public, and it takes a large toll in collateral damage to non-targeted animals, and is overly touted as need to control. There is some need for handling “nuisance animals” but the notion is abused by too little hesitation to evaluate the need, too little scientific management, too little nonlethal means used; basically trapping is a quick draw response and such a barbaric, inherently cruel means of “management” it should be under tight scrutiny with a public panel oversight and used only by wildlife agencies sparingly. There are around 7000 trappers in Montana alone doing it mostly for the fur trade and recreation.

    References:
    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/response-to-massive-cormorant-kill/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/08/16/peace-for-geese/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/idaho-wolf-hunting-derby-seeks-5-year-permit/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/idaho-wolf-hunting-derby-seeks-5-year-permit/

    https://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/idaho-wants-to-make-wildlife-killing-contests-an-annual-event/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/patricia-randolphs-madravenspeak-killing-wildlife-should-be-understood-as-an-addiction/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/?tag=sportsmen

    http://thoughtsfromthewildside.blogspot.com/2014/03/killing-wolves-hunter-led-war-against.html?m=1

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/wildlife-denali-wolf-packs-hammered-by-hunting/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/03/06/whither-the-hunterconservationist/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/03/05/sportsmen-donate-15000-to-wildlife-services

    http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2014/05/30/rocky-mountain-elk-foundation-donates-25000-to-fwp-for-wolf-management/9768067/

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/rmef-opposes-congressmans-call-for-yellowstone-wolf-buffer-zone/

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nrdc.org%2Fwildlife%2Fanimals%2Fwolves%2Fpredatorcontrol.asp&ei=Vm8cU8mrB43koATLsIGwAg&usg=AFQjCNFMOpGmVCcBkLO7uo7inKHveszrlA&bvm=bv.62578216,d.cGU

    “To look into the eyes of a wolf is to see your own soul.” Aldo Leopold

    “Whenever and wherever men have engaged in the mindless slaughter of animals (including other men), they have often attempted to justify their acts by attributing the most vicious or revolting qualities to those they would destroy; and the less reason there is for the slaughter, the greater the campaign for vilification.”

    ― Farley Mowat, naturalist, conservationist and author of Never Cry Wolf

    Like

  36. The Pittman-Robertson Act, often cited by sportsmen claiming themselves as “conservationists” creates a distortion in wildlife management because it does involve federal fees and taxes on guns and ammunition and fishing gear which is distributed back to the states. So, hunters and fishermen have this entitlement idea of their wildlife of killing wildlife since they think they are mostly paying for it and all conservation. The bed tax in Montana also pays for it, with a portion sent to FWP. Tourism and wildlife viewing are much bigger revenue builders than hunting, according to one source I read, it is 12 times more. Just wolf viewing alone in Yellowstone brings in $35 million to the surrounding states, with about 4% of 28 million Yellowstone visitors per year coming just to see wolves: Just one aspect of wildlife viewing brings in more revenue than fishing and hunting, bird watching in the USA. The Pittman-Robertson results in an emphasis on elk and other sport killing target animals and wildlife agencies essentially farming those animals and marginalizing the predators. Wildlife agencies stock steams, rivers, lakes for fish for fishermen to catch. Wildlife would be better served if more tourism dollars were funneled into wildlife protection and wildlife habitat acquisition and protection. We need the recognition of the impact of wildlife and wilderness viewing dollars that provide employment and lodging and retail purchases and dining and gas, and from employment income and taxes. Americans and Montanans also pay federal and state taxes with an understanding that significant money from those sources goes to Parks and National Forests and wilderness protection. So, the entitled sense that hunters and fishermen have about their contribution is inflated and distorted. But we should find ways to more clearly “show me the money”, to get more wildlife viewing dollars going back directly to wildlife protection and habitat protection, conservation and balanced ecology(s) instead of just the sportsmen emphasis on elk and other hunter targeted wildlife and targeted sports hunting and fishing.

    Wolves do not purchase hunting licenses, and most state wildlife managers draw their pay from revenue derived from sale of hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses. That, in brief, is what is wrong with wildlife management in America….Ted Williams, 1986

    “To look into the eyes of a wolf is to see your own soul.” Aldo Leopold

    “Whenever and wherever men have engaged in the mindless slaughter of animals (including other men), they have often attempted to justify their acts by attributing the most vicious or revolting qualities to those they would destroy; and the less reason there is for the slaughter, the greater the campaign for vilification.”

    ― Farley Mowat,

    http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/secretary-jewell-announces-1-1-billion-to-state-wildlife-agencies-from-excise-taxes-on-anglers-hunters-and-boaters.cfm#

    Like

  37. I received a reply from the Defenders of Wildlife regarding the email I sent them. This was their reply. It’s not what they are saying…it’w what they are NOT saying that caught my eye:

    Dear Anne,

    Thank you for contacting Defenders of Wildlife. To clarify our position: We are against any measures – including hunting – that undermine the recovery of imperiled species, including wolves.

    Those familiar with our work can clearly see evidence of this in several of our efforts over just the past year:

    • We are adamantly opposed to the predator derby proposed by a “hunters’ rights group” in Idaho. We are reaching out to officials to deny permission for this event to take place, and encourage anyone with similar concerns to do the same [link]

    • We fought against the killing of wolves in the Frank Church/River of No Return wilderness; when the state sent a trapper in to kill eradicate two wolf packs in this protected area. Not only did we rally our membership against this effort, we also took the Forest Service to court for it. The state recently settled the law suit and stated it would back down from any similar actions during the next year.

    • We fought hard for no-wolf-hunting zones to be put in place around Yellowstone National Park

    • Our experts have spoken out against the state of Washington’s proposal to add wolves to their game management plan

    • We continue to fight against Idaho’s reckless management of wolves, rallying advocates on the ground, reaching out to officials, and educating the public with a large-scale advertising campaign to bring attention to the state’s plans to drive their wolf population down.

    Across the board, we believe that wolves in the Northern Rockies, Southwest and Pacific Northwest have not fully recovered, and belong under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. No animal, wolf or otherwise, that is in need of that protection should ever be hunted. We have led a massive effort against the proposed delisting of gray wolves across most of the country – more information at http://www.defenders.org/the-war-on-wolves/delisting-disaster

    If you need further assistance, please contact Member Services by phone at 1-800-385-9712 or by e-mail at memberservices@defenders.org. We are available to assist you between 9 am and 6 pm EST Monday through Friday.

    Defenders of Wildlife

    1-800-385-9712

    Like

  38. Another one bites the dust, this time Defenders of Wildlife. Good God, wildlife and environmental organizations are dropping like flies so far as any substantive credibility goes. Just last week the NRDC and Earthjustice both began furiously lobbying the public to get behind the so-called Wolf “Management” Stamp to fund Montana Dept. of Fish, Wildlife & Parks (yeah, that MFW&P!) in putatively “non-lethal” efforts to “manage” wolves, while the NRDC freely acknowledges of state agencies such as the MFWP: “Whether we agree with them or not, lethal aspects of wolf management, such as hunting, will continue.” And now, we get Suzanne Stone saying, “Defenders of Wildlife is not opposed to hunting of wolves. … We have a very wide spectrum of people that are our members, but we’ve never been opposed to hunting.” “Whether we agree with them or not”? “[W]e’ve never been opposed to hunting”? With friends like this, do wolves have any friends? Well, actually they do. Indeed, I’m thankful, and anyone who wishes to see wolves thrive and benefit biodiversity and eco-balance and play a key apex role in a return to vigorous, robust ecosystems, rather than being “managed” or “harvested” to suit the bottom line of the ranching industry or the kills-for-thrills hunting lobby, should be thankful that Brooks Fahy at Predator Defense as well as George Wuerthner spoke out against Montana’s Wolf “Management” Stamp. Oh, and how perchance did Defenders of Wildlife weigh in on this Trojan Horse, aka the Wolf “Management” Stamp? Hmmm, let’s just see: “Under the current plan, the stamp will be available for public purchase later this year, and proceeds will fund Montana’s FWP’s wolf conservation efforts. We will keep you posted on the comment period. In the interim, a big thank you to the FWP Commission is in order for providing an opportunity for wildlife enthusiasts from across the country to help support and contribute to wolf conservation in Montana!” Note the careful use of the donator-friendly word, conservation, in lieu of that nasty old MANAGEMENT! Ugh! Yes, indeedy, “a big thank you.” I will paste the link to Brooks’ article in The Wildlife News, titled “Why the NRDC’s Montana “Wolf Stamp” Must Be Stopped,” which more and more is seeming almost a cautionary tale, a heads-up, to organizations such as the DOW, the NRDC, and Earthjustice ever more moving toward working with “them,” whether they “agree with them or not,” or reiterating that peculiarly insistent straddling of an unstraddleable fence, as in: We are “…neither an anti-hunting nor a pro-hunting organization,” — The DOW Because, as Bruce Hornsby once sang, “that’s just the way it is.” http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2014/08/14/why-the-nrdcs-montana-wolf-stamp-must-be-stopped/

    Like

    • Isn’t it always about the money? Root of all evil!

      Like

  39. I will not be donating to them anymore! I have read and re-read and just keep shaking me head.

    Like

  40. If I DEFEND Wildlife I can t not at the same time support HUNTERS. SPECIES of WILDLIFE ARE ENDANGERED!!!! HAD THE WHITE MAN NOT HUNT ENOUGH AND LEFT WASTE BEHIND HIS SIGHT???

    Like

  41. traitors!

    Like

  42. Please, everyone slow down a minute and think about what Stone actually said: that it’s not appropriate at this time to hunt wolves in the U.S. where their population numbers haven’t yet recovered. The question of whether or not to hunt wolves is not a yes/no question. It’s a question of where and when, for what reason, in what numbers, with what methods, etc. Defenders of Wildlife works in the practical world where all of these factors are critical. If Defenders of Wildlife wanted to fool people with false fundraising, they would just say “save the wolves” and leave it at that. Instead, they do the difficult work that needs to be done to actually save the wolves in the real world.

    Like

  43. With a perspective toward wolves that looks only at numbers of wolves negates the fact that each individual wolf is a unique, precious individual, a valuable member of a complex society. There can never be a “surplus.” Names and concepts like “game management” enable one to distant oneself from acknowledging the value of each individual wolf.
    Shame on Defenders of Wildlife for supporting the murder of even one wolf. I have stopped sending them my rather large donations for so many years. How can their past and ongoing smokescreen not have any legal consequences? The truth has sickened me. They are complicit greedy frauds with blood on their hands.

    Like

    • Although it’s true that most game management ignores the value of individuals and instead focuses on populations; where there’s such a thing as “integrated wildlife management” there’s still a need to consider populations (while also considering individuals). For example, populations matter when we consider the fact that viable wolf populations haven’t yet been restored in many parts of their historic range in the U.S. Population sizes also matter if they rise to unsustainably-high levels–biologically or socially. Yes, we need to develop our society’s tolerance for wildlife, but we also need to manage wildlife within current levels of tolerance; otherwise, we’re just left on the sidelines without any wildlife in our care. Defenders of Wildlife won’t be left on the sidelines; it will keep wildlife in its care. Good.

      Like

      • Are you a hunter?

        Like

      • If it helps to qualify what I’ve written here in support of Defenders of Wildlife, I’ll answer that question “am I a hunter?”

        I’m not a hunter nor fisherman nor trapper. I’m an old hiker who loves wildlife. Unfortunately, I have a couple of years of experience trying to approach sportsmen and policy makers with proposals to improve the management and treatment of wildlife. I’ve written about some of the issues and some of my experiences on my blog at http://www.SS-Slocum.info. In other words,

        I support Defenders of Wildlife because I know what they’re up against, and I believe that their approach is effective.

        Like

      • Considering that when wolves are hunted tolerance for them actually goes down because bad behaviour and false ideology are rewarded instead of eliminated. Wolves are self-regluating apex predators. This idea of ‘surplus wolves’ does not coincide with current knowledge in wolf ecology and has the stench of a political move to appease special interests for leverage.
        In addition:
        DOW (understandably) has issues with aerial gunning of wolves and WS but has no problem with thousands of wolves being killed by state sanctioned trapping and hunting? There lies the hypocrisy.

        Like

      • Well said John!

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

      • Yes, our society needs to develop a healthier, more ecologically-conscious tolerance for wildlife.

        Yes, surplus reproduction and its consequent mortality is part of the natural “self-regulation” system of wildlife populations.

        Yes, Defenders of Wildlife is concerned for the unnecessary killing of wildlife. The word “unnecessary” is the key.

        Wildlife Services is an awful agency, but at least some of the actions it takes are considered by unbiased third parties to be “necessary.” Aerial gunning is generally considered to be “unsportsmanlike,” but if its goal is to kill wolves that would otherwise be killed by other, less humane methods, it’s sometimes chosen over those methods. The state-sanctioned killing of wolves that have harassed or killed livestock, even though proper non-lethal precautions have been taken, is also generally considered “necessary.”

        In the natural world, with or without human presence, some unpleasant things are necessary.

        Like

      • Scott,
        OMG, the two paragraphs I highlighted are the reason we must part company. There are no surplus wolves, that is fish and game speak. Your views on wolves are really not compatible with the views of wolf advocates on this blog. You’re not doing yourself any favors by continuing to spout this rhetoric.

        “Yes, surplus reproduction and its consequent mortality is part of the natural “self-regulation” system of wildlife populations.”

        “Wildlife Services is an awful agency, but at least some of the actions it takes are considered by unbiased third parties to be “necessary.” Aerial gunning is generally considered to be “unsportsmanlike,” but if its goal is to kill wolves that would otherwise be killed by other, less humane methods, it’s sometimes chosen over those methods. The state-sanctioned killing of wolves that have harassed or killed livestock, even though proper non-lethal precautions have been taken, is also generally considered “necessary.”

        Like

  44. Mr. Slocum, you didn’t answer my first question, so I will ask you another. Have you ever hunted and/or killed wolves?

    Like

    • I did. I’m not a hunter of any kind, never have been, and hope to never be. If I were a hunter, I don’t believe I would be a predator hunter. I know that in some circles, that disqualifies me from having a seat at the table, and puts anything I might say in doubt. Why do you ask, Sabienne?

      Like

      • You wrote, “I did.” You did what? The reason I ask is that you come off as a shill for DOW.

        Like

      • I did answer your first question and your second. Scroll up and take a look.

        I am not now, nor have I ever been, an employee or contractor or anything other than a member of Defenders of Wildlife. I was a long-time employee of the University of MN, working with information technology. I am not now, nor have I ever been, an employee or contractor or board member or anything other than a member of any wildlife-advocacy organization, or sportsmen’s organization, or ranching organization, or agricultural organization, or the NRA, or the communist party. Or any organization that advocates or has ever advocated any illegal action of any kind except for orderly civil disobedience in protest of an unjust law.

        I have always, am now, and hope to always use only my own name when I write or speak out on an issue. The name my parents gave me and I have retained all my life, and am pretty sure I will retain for the rest of my life.

        So who are you, Sabienne?

        Like

      • Who am I, Mr. Slocum? I, along with Nabeki, am a tenacious supporter of wolves who is asking you to permanently remove yourself from this forum.

        Like

      • Not even a member of most of those types of organizations. Only a member of highly legal and ethical wildlife-advocacy, animal advocacy, human-rights advocacy, civil-rights advocacy, and probably some other philanthropic-advocacy organizations.

        Like

    • And no, I’ve never been in a situation in which there was cause to kill a wolf, and I’ve never have killed a wolf. I imagine if I’d been a farmer, I would have been one of those geek farmers with all sorts of electrified fencing, farm architecture, sealed food storage, etc. The animals, if any, would have been under the careful watch of collies.

      Like

    • Am I qualified, then, to speak?

      Like

      • That is to be determined by Nabeki and the others who have posted comments relative to the article. As for me, let’s just say you have not rocked my world.

        Like

      • Sabienne,

        Thank you for standing up for wolves and questioning Mr. Slocum’s rhetoric, which sounded like it was written by a fish and game agency, IMO. I would have addressed it sooner but was out most of the day and just read the comments.

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

      • Nabeki, I don’t have to tell you that you can spot them a mile away. Mr. Slocum’s doublespeak rhetoric is not consistent with those who truly love and support wolves. And I agree with you that he will have to look elsewhere for people who will endure his drivel.

        Like

      • You nailed it Sabienne!

        For the wolves, For the wild ones,
        Nabeki

        Like

      • I’ve made no attempt to rock anybody’s world.

        Like

      • I try to help people with different backgrounds, points of view, and knowledge sets to communicate with each other, and to solve problems by collaborating with each other. I tend to write for the benefit of readers other than those I’m directly addressing, since those I’m directly addressing tend to be far too sure of themselves to consider the information that I’m presenting.

        Like

  45. These perspectives go in all directions. Most opinions on wolf welfare, livestock conflict and ensuring numerous elk exist for hunters, with disrespect for wolves, leave out a most important fact that is “the elephant in the room.” It is this: excellent human health can be improved and maintained by consuming a vegan diet. Humans do NOT need to eat meat. This fact is always skirted and avoided for it challenges old, deeply socialized habits that are highly emotionally charged. Yet the fact remains: a meat centered diet is unhealthy, harms animals and that is a major inconvenient truth. Many intelligent people deliberately choose to ignore this fact. We don’t need meat. We don’t need livestock. This fact is so annoying for it means changing what we eat. Plus, there is so much money and greed permeating the livestock industry, an unnecessary, sickly business that is inhumane, murders wolves, pollutes the earth and is famously energy inefficient. This is WHY wolves are so horribly treated and killed, to protect the meat that we do not need. Additionally, people don’t know enough about so many endearing wolf qualities. So people do not love whom they do not know. The answer is education, promoting/advocating for wolves, better care of ourselves and the earth via vegan choices. We are better people by being compassionate and merciful, this according to all major religions. It was Gandhi who said that non-violence begins with the fork.

    Like

  46. Get rid of the livestock industry, especially those parasitic, wolf killing ranchers abusing public land, for which we all pay taxes and thus support. If livestock ranchers weren’t there wolves would be safer. Honest to God, we do not need to eat meat to be healthy.
    Educate blood thirsty hunters to find less savage, less primitive ways to get their jollies. Educate youth on the beauty, value and preciousness of wolves and their importance in nature. Change out the good ol boys in the DFW who regard wildlife as a resource, devoid of sentience, and replace with kind, compassionate stewards.

    Like

  47. I am glad I read this before donating. I was going to adopt a wolf for a friend as a gift, but it looks like it would be a waste of money. I feel horrible for these wolves.

    Like

  48. Nabeki, upon reading this article again, I am as sickened by it as I was the first time. I would like to suggest that you keep the link to this article on the home page so that every new person who visits Howling for Justice gets a heads up on DOW.

    Happy New Year, and thank you for your tireless efforts and dedication on behalf of the wolves.

    Like

  49. I gave donations to Defenders of Wildlife that automatically came out of my account every month for years…I stopped giving to them a few months ago. I think they have become so big and so money hungry that they are selling out to any group that will give to them. They are obviously not the people I first thought they were…they are going to fall when everyone finds out what hypocrites they are.

    Like

  50. I STOPPED DONATING TO THIS GROUP.

    Like


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: