Wolf Advocates…Play Offense not Defense

October  28,2014

I’ve been going through my archives looking for timely pieces to repost.

This is just as relevant today as it was in 2010, maybe more, considering the challenges wolves and wolf advocates face are so much greater!

===

Feb 16, 2010

When gray wolves are discussed the inevitable dialog commences concerning their effect on ungulates or livestock, which puts wolf advocates perpetually on defense. We feel compelled to defend the wolf.  Many of the posts on this blog are in defensive mode. Wolves are continually portrayed in a bad light, so I feel obligated to defend them, it’s a natural reaction.

I’m an avid football fan and I know a great defense is the backbone of any team but the best defense is a good offense.  If we’re constantly talking about deer, elk and livestock then we’re not talking about wolves.  I believe this is the strategy of the anti wolf-crowd, to take the focus off wolf issues. It’s a tactic as old as time and it works.  If you want to deflect attention from an issue, change the subject.

I challenge wolf advocates to stop playing defense.  The motives that drive wolf persecution are political and cultural.  It’s not about livestock depredation, elk numbers or “wolf management.”

From Wolves A Cosmopolitan World View:

“Wolves (have) persisted quite well alongside humanity for over a hundred thousand years, all without the “benefit” of wildlife management. It should be clear, then, that humanity’s troubled relationship with wolves has little to do with sound science in the sense of empirical data, quantitative models, or management techniques. Instead, our trouble with wolves is a deeply rooted ethical conflict over whether to coexist with wolves and other large predators. Resolving this conflict is a question of values, not facts and wolf recovery depends on a culture of tolerance for other life forms and their ways-of-life, not a science of wildlife management.”

As for elk and deer, wolves have been coexisting with their prey for thousands of years without the need to be managed.  The elk owes it’s fleetness of foot to the wolf.  It wasn’t until Europeans set foot on this continent that the wolf suddenly became the enemy.  Europe had purged itself of most large carnivores. European farmers and ranchers transplanted that idea to America and the war against the wolf began, almost four hundred years ago. The last hundred years included an aggressive poisoning, trapping and shooting campaign led by the federal government.  Not only were wolves mercilessly killed but other predators and animals were targeted. It’s believed more than two million wolves were eradicated from the lower forty-eight, that’s a grim figure.

To learn more about the extermination of wolves in the West and to understand the mindset that believed any wildlife that couldn’t be controlled should be eliminated, I recommend reading Predatory Bureaucracy: The Extermination of Wolves and The Transformation of the West, by Michael Robinson.

In a Nova Online interview, given ten years ago, Ed Bangs (Wolf Recovery Coordinator, US Fish and Wildlife Service) put it this way:

“Well, we deliberately got rid of them, as a society. A hundred years ago, our society placed very low value on all wildlife. We got rid of all the deer, the elk, the bison, the turkeys, you know, everything, in deference to other social objectives, primarily agriculture and settlement. And you can imagine being a grizzly bear or a black bear or a wolf or a coyote—when there was nothing else to eat but livestock, that’s what you ate.  As a consequence settlers really hated wolves, grizzly bears and other predatory animals and they deliberately tried to get rid of them all. The federal government actually sent out trappers who spent years hunting down the last wolf and killing it. The last wolves were actually killed by the U.S. Biological Survey, which is the agency that transformed itself into the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that is now responsible for wolf restoration!” 

He goes on to describe how wolves were killed:

Poison, and a lot of them were shot. The dens were found, the pups were hit over the head. And then the adults were shot around the den. But poison is probably what did away with most of the wolves. The old stories go that there wasn’t a cowboy in the west worth his salt that wouldn’t see a carcass and lace it with strychnine in the attempt to kill everything, I mean the foxes, the coyotes, the eagles, the wolves, the bears, everything. And this poisoning campaign, surprisingly, went on until the ’70s. There were poison baits placed throughout the western United States—even on public lands by federal agencies.”

This mindset is still prevalent today, especially in the West.  Many people holding these views occupy political office, populate state game agencies and have the power to make life and death decisions concerning wolves and other predators.  Even though wildlife belongs to all Americans, elected officials and bureaucrats who are grounded in outdated, arcane thinking,  exert tremendous control over wildlife “management”.  Think of  Wildlife Services and the damage they do every year. Yet they continue to operate with abandon.

Did you ever wonder if wolves are blamed for livestock kills committed by another predator, their very close cousins, the dog?  There was a recent study done in Basque that addressed this issue:

“Two researchers of the Euskadi Wolf Group at the Doñana Biological Station” examined the feces of wild wolves and dogs, which were identified by their DNA and examined the contents of their scat.  Their findings:

When compared the remains of prey identified in both wolf and dog feces, they saw each feces contained only a single prey item. Among the prey items identified in 30 wolf feces (the remains in one wolf fecal sample were unknown), 22 contained wild prey (17 roe deer, three wild boar, one Eurasian badger and one European hare) and eight contained domestic animals (four horses, three cattle and one sheep). Wild species represented 73% of all prey identified in wolf feces and sheep only 3%.

Of the 39 prey items they be able to identify in dog feces, 14 (36%) contained remains of sheep and seven (18%) contained remains of either horses or cattle. Domestic animals represented 54% of all prey identified in dog feces.

When suspected wolf livestock kills are reported, do you believe after reading the Basque study, that “wildlife managers”  sometimes get it wrong? That wolves may be blamed for more than they actually kill?  Or wolves may show up after a kill is made by another predator and be blamed for it?  This happened to the Mexican gray wolves that were under death warrants if they killed more than three livestock per year, even though cattle made up just 4% of their diet.  The three strikes rule was rescinded last year but before SOP 13 (Standard Operating procedure) was rejected, endangered Mexican gray wolves were eliminated for feeding on dead cows even if the cows died of natural causes.  The ranchers were not removing dead carcasses, even though it’s their responsiblity to do so as tenants on public land. The outrageous fact is the Mexican gray wolves Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area is all public land. The wolves should have dominion here, not ranchers, who are leasing the land.  That land belongs to the American people, yet we have zero input on what happens to the animals that inhabit it.

The Mexican wolves now number just 42 animals, down from 52 wolves counted at the end of 2008. Two Mexican wolves were conclusively shot and the remainder of the deaths are being investigated but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the dead wolves, including four pups, were probably killed by poachers.

The reason I bring up the Basque study and Mexican wolves is they provide two examples of wolves blamed for livestock deaths they may not have committed.  It’s akin to the half-truths and outright lies that are repeated about wolves decimating elk.  The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation declared elk numbers not only stable but rising in 23 states, in their 2009 Spring press release. The elk population grew 44% from 1984 to 2009 yet  I’ve actually had hunters write to me asking where I get my numbers on elk, when it’s their own RMEF stats.  Unbelievable but it shows what happens when people want to believe myths about wolves.  Which brings me back to taking the offense when it comes to wolves. Don’t be sucked into endless discussions about ranching and elk.  Wolves need our help. If we waste our time engaging in counter productive arguments defending wolves against rumor and myth,  then the anti wolf crowd has won.  They want to change the subject.  They want to talk about anything but wolves.

Our goal,  as I see it, is to emphasize the positives. Wolves and all apex predators improve the health of our ecosystems.  We can point out the admirable qualities wolves possess,  that we can all aspire to.  To quote Ed Bangs once more:

“A wolf’s territory represents the place where their family lives and where they’re safe. If you’re in your pack’s territory, you have a family to help defend you, to care for you, to share food with you. Wolves are the parents, the mothers, the fathers, the brothers and sisters that we always hoped we could be. I mean there’s extreme loyalty among family members, it’s everything to them.”

This is what the world needs to know about wolves.

You won’t see negative comments or arguments about wolves on this blog. I’m not going to perpetuate the same tired dogma that’s been ingrained in the thinking of so many people who should know better. If we can stand against the rumors, myths and prejudice that haunt wolves to this day, we can truly make a difference for them and other top line predators.

Let’s stop playing defense by allowing wolf haters to control the tone and content of the conversation. It  doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work to dispel rumors but more of our time could be wisely spent devoted to helping wolves achieve the peace they deserve by spreading the word about the good qualities they possess.

It’s a tough job battling hundreds of years of persecution.  Even our language is rife with “bad wolf karma”  that we may not be aware of.  Phrases such as “Thrown to the wolves”,  “Wolves at the door” or “The Big, Bad Wolf”, imparts the idea that wolves are menacing and bad.  Or the way in which wolves are portrayed  in movies and literature.  Werewolves are almost always evil,  the idea of a human (usually a man) transformed into a wolf,  that kills humans with abandon, conveys the belief wolves are inherently evil, which is so far from the truth.

Wolf advocates it’s time for us to play offense and keep the conversation centered on wolf issues and their welfare. Education is the key, especially for young people,  so they don’t grow up believing the same lies and half-truths many seem to hold so dearly.  Maybe it’s time to write new fairy tales about wolves, instead of the “The Big Bad Wolf” eating grandma.  How about wolves saved aspen and willow trees?  Or having wolves on the landscape helps the Pronghorn antelope fawns?

We are their voice, wolves can’t speak for themselves, so it’s our job to speak for them.   Speak out for wolves and you control the conversation.

Remember:

“Perhaps it was the eyes of the wolf, measured, calm, knowing.
Perhaps it was the intense sense of family.
After all, wolves mate for life, are loyal partners, create hunting communities
and demonstrate affectionate patience in pup rearing.
Perhaps it was the rigid hierarchy of the packs.
Each wolf had a place in the whole and yet retained his individual personality.
Perhaps it was their great, romping, ridiculous sense of fun.
Perhaps it was some celestial link with the winter night skies
that prompted the wolf to lay his song on the icy air.
For the native people who lived with the wolves,
and the wolves once ranged from the Arctic to the sub-tropics,
there was much to learn from them.
Is it any wonder that the myths of many tribes characterise the wolves
not as killers but as teachers?”
~ Unknown

===

 Wolf Photo: Courtesy SigmaEye Flickr

Posted in: gray wolf/canis lupus, biodiversity,  Howling For Justice

Tags:  canis lupus, play offense not defense, wolf research, Mexican gray wolves, wolves or livestock

Advertisements

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://howlingforjustice.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/wolf-advocates-play-offense-not-defense-3/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

19 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Encroachment Never Ending: On Their Turf
    Get cattle and sheep out of the wilderness, encroaching on wildlife. Stop wildlife agencies and hunters from farming elk and deer in the wilderness. A sheep rancher turned 1800 sheep loose on rugged hillside land in eastern WA on an allotment, a lease, then complained about wolf predation and wanted the wildlife agency to do something about the wolves. Ranchers in the Tetons (Wyoming) placed cattle in prime predator country (wolves and grizzlies) then complain about predation and want “balanced” treatment of the predators. Hunters in the wolf jihad states want a war on wolves and sometimes lions and bears; and want to basically farm sport targets in the wilderness. Idaho sent a professional hunter into the Frank Church, River of No Return Wilderness to kill a pack of wolves (2013), so there would be more elk for them to kill. Ranchers should not be allowed leases in the wilderness or prime predator country. Ranching is taking up more and more public land, 23,000 grazing permits in 16 western states. Ranchers are on public land, complaining about predators, bison, and some even resent sharing with grazing wildlife. Turning cattle or sheep loose in back country is predator baiting. Ranchers are not seeking balance with wildlife they are seeking power and control of public land and the killing of predators on that land. We, as a society, need to start retiring public land leases not expanding them; allow no more encroachment Stop the hunter-rancher war on wildlife, albeit a tradition.

    http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/wyoming-livestock-producers-seeking-balance-in-predator-management/article

    http://exposingthebiggame.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/as-wolves-return-so-do-tensions-with-ranchers/

    http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyles/recreation/ranchers-urge-relocation-of-washington-wolf-packs/article_

    http://thoughtsfromthewildside.blogspot.com/2014/03/killing-wolves-hunter-led-war-against wildlife

    http://www.boiseweekly.com/…/ap-lawsuit-aims-to-halt-idfgs-pro.

    magicvalley.com/…/idaho…hunter-to-kill-wolves/article

    Like

    • Thanks Rog,

      It is certainly tie for those who want the wolf protected to engage in coalition with the larger groups of people who recognise that cattle and sheep devastate public lands, in order to remove these heavily subsidised parasites damaging the last remaining wild ecosystems, and ecosystems that COULD be restored, should the agencies involved reprioritise properly.
      I understand that the Animal Unit per Month charge for a single sheep is $.27 – twenty seven cents! Imagine any person or other animal able to eat to heart’s content for only 27c a month.

      Just now I found that BLM charges $1.35 per AUM for cattle. This price is the same as last year, and up from the 1966 evaluation of land forage value as $1.23. Yes, you read that right. Back when minimum wage was around 1/8 to 1/10 it is now, and large houses could be bought for $20,000, Now, food is about 10x (1000%) what it was then, houses are 20 to 30x ( 2000% to 3000%) what they were, and the AUM fee is 10% different.

      Any proper republican would demand that ranchers get the hell off public lands, as that is the most astonishing welfare payment , especially in light of the giant trucks and free time to kill everything in sight afforded to these welfare queens.

      The BLM defends grazing on its site as an historical use, but I happened to know a man born some twenty-five years BEFORE the west was populated by immigrant ranchers and British cattle barons. So much for “tradition” and “history” when within the lifetime of two people they were NOT there. Get ’em off!

      Another group ripe for coalition are the scientists and advocates recognising that the vast extinction now occurring requires “rewilding”, the establishment of large sections of wildland, with sufficient wild corridors between, all unaffected by human exploitation (read: killing, logging, mining, roadbuilding, etc).
      Conservation biologists , ecologists, and lay rewilding advocates have the same goals in mind as do those who wish to preserve wolves and other native wildlife (imagine stepping down the Gila or San Diego riverbeds, and knowing there were 300lb jaguars at home. What a rush! I hike and have otherwise played where giant predators live, and lived where mountain lions stepped across the front yard for 15 years, and even now, can go but a couple miles from this spot to find their traces. I have both had to chase big bears (at night!) and withdraw from their concerned huffing and teeth clacking here and there. I LOVE the experience, and honor these great beings who communicate so clearly ))

      Anyway, wolf advocates MUST recognise that their goals are the same as the above. It has been repeatedly shown for decades now, that roads, dirt roads, any provision of vehicle access for humans leads to a habitat becoming unsuitable for the wolf, at about 3/4 km of roading per square km, or 3/4 mile per square mile. It’s in ALL the compendiums gathered about habitat allowing a viable wolf population (Any more human access and it becomes population sink, as more wolves are killed than can survive. This is due to white man , fat, lazy, murderous white man, killing wolves, coyotes, practically anything he can under cover of absence of his kind.
      Thus the anti-roading advocates are in this with us.

      The Yellowstone Wolf Project begun by Rod Coronado, is only one of the several state hunter observation projects of his wider vision.
      Join them, if you seek to document and prevent too much torture by hunters in wolf-killing states.
      Better yet, google the wolf defense and ecodefense manuals available online, and download the latest versions of things you can do to prevent the problem, which is mighty white hunter shooting and trapping. I do not post the URLs here, as Nabeki may not want her site to be associated directly.
      But I, on the other hand, have experienced wolf behavior and communication close up, and I believe that this intelligent species, alien only because it is carnivorous with a free will, has more value and more to tech humans than the destructive human species has to give to any other on this planet.

      Until we reduce our population (another important coalition member!) and reframe our interaction with other species entirely, especially with the wolf , we ourselves (rather, I mean anyone with guns and intolerant attitude)are unsuitable to inhabit this magnificent Earth.

      THe above are important coalitions to make, as, although a large majority of the humans living in North America claim to be pro-wolf, only a tiny percentage are active in protecting them in any way.

      Finally, since the hunting, and urban-dependent meat-selling ranching, lobbies have INCREASED their intolerance to wolves and wolf advocates, while wolf advocates have been trying tolerance and practicing reparation and tolerance for them, it has become painfully clear that they are not, NOT going to get better, and may indeed require significant economic loss to remove them from this, the land, the continent of the wolf.

      Like

      • That fourth word, tie, was typed as TIME. -sloppy keyboard – the commment may contain other typos, but I’m movin’ on right now, and hope y’all can translate them . . .

        Like

      • Continuing my thoughts in this column concerning the need for wolf advocates to become more effective in the face of the canicidal whitemen who have come to the North Wmerican west in order to profit as completely as possible, I offer you this

        talk on understanding the new social tools for empowering yourself in your moral and ethical quest.
        Jeremy outlines grassroots social power structure. I hope you will find it instructive enough to give you ideas to help popularise and save the wolf from the violent cruel torturous persecution of “management” for human resource arrogation and control.

        Wild, in itself, means unmanaged, except by oneself. The wolf lived in harmony with huge, healthy populations of elk, moose, bison, deer, beaver, caribou, for at least ten thousand years since the great ice cover down into Wisconsin.
        No wolf diminished these pronghorn, or other ungulates, but lived in populous health.
        Only when Euro people came with guns, domestics attendant diseases, hate for life and self-willed others, more virulent than the cruel poisons they distributed for centuries to kill this other intelligent social species., was that balance lost – as immense quantities of birds, hooved animals carnivores, herbivores, all died under their cruel traps and guns.

        Those who understand the wrongness of this slaughter as you do, will hopefully use your collective power to ed it.

        Thank you for your work!

        Like

  2. Hi Nabeki,

    We need a repost of the names of those who voted to delist wolves if you can?

    Like

    • ida, that is my next post, I’ll have it up tonight or tomorrow!!

      For the wolves, For the wild ones,
      Nabeki

      Like

  3. The wolf is viewed in different ways. To some a noble spirit, to others a vicious killer. But to the wolf itself he/she is neither, he/she is just a creature desiring the good fortune to survive another day.

    On one hand there are those that see wolves as snarling, vicious and plucky, when they actually have a normally pleasant nature and know how to pick their battles. Any needless injury can easily lead to death, a lost member of a pack can be disasterous for the survivors as it leaves them bereft of a family member and an extra capable body. On the other hand, there are those who seem to have this idea that wolves have an easy pleasant existence frolicking in the wilderness. Life is extremely hard and dangerous for them, one wrong move and it is all over. That being said, a human’s worst wilderness survival nightmare is their every day and yet they are content.

    Like

    • The wolf is not as he is viewed, but as he experiences.

      If you wish to imagine, then imagine fleet, powerful females, and strong powerful males, all individuals, working extremely hard, using their evolved attributes joyously, powerfully, carefully, to sense, assess, choose, play, strategise, communicate, create harmonious family, explore, live.
      Imagine a kind whose members ALL care for every young, sharing, not judging one another, prizing above all their relationships.

      Imagine that you, a feeble two-legged, without a weapon that kills all at great distance, imagine living without resentment, but open to the moment. Imagine living without quivering fear of anything with teeth, sufficiently wise to allow others to live, only having the imperatives of eating, comfortable in a world where every other thing has an intrinsic right to life, only taking what you need for your own participation with all these beautiful others, in life.

      Nothing threatens you, although you are not the most powerful being on earth.

      Like

  4. As always, awesome article. Thank you. Will share.

    Like

  5. That was a great post from the past. I do remember it. I just sent a letter and an article i read called “A wolf called Romeo” by Nick Jans to a friend of mine in Stevensville, Montana. Years back i lived in the Bitterroot in Hamilton. She had an encounter with a wolfat night in her driveway! I asked her what happened? She basically said they looked at one another for awhile and the wolf turned around and walked away. She and her husband are not wolf lovers and she was really frightened that night by the black wolf with haunting eyes because that was all she noticed at first staring at her in the darkness! I would have been overjoyed to be that close to a wild wolf! I told her it was probably a young wolf that was curious about the human who came so close to it. It should have been a life altering event for her, a wake up call to the wonder of the wolf! What did Chief Joseph once say a long time ago, “You only fear what you do not understand”!

    Like

    • And more importantly the words of the Heiltsuk medicine man are appropriate to any encounter:

      “The wolf only shows himself when he has something to tell you.”

      What the wolf showed her was first, her own unreasonable terror of anything not under her control. Until and unless she learns THAT lesson, she will not be able to go on to the other things that wolf was saying, which are many.

      Like

  6. Here are some relevant thoughts that I have on wolf protection strategy: How to Protect Wolves Ravaged by State Game Agencies…Dick Thiel, retired wildlife biologist with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, states the core problem: “We are not really a bureau of wildlife management, we’re a bureau of game management…the nonconsumptive user group has deluded themselves into thinking that they actually have a voice. They don’t have a voice…Now, incidentally I am a hunter and I’m not terribly proud of what’s going in the state of Wisconsin right now [re: wolf hunting]. We’re being hijacked by special interest groups that are hunters, and that’s just it.” In short, game agencies can do whatever the hell they please to wolves, and be as tyrannical and indifferent to broader societal values and ecological science as they wish. So, what’s the solution? We can fight to keep wolves in some places on the list of nationally endangered [protected] species, as a temporary measure. But sooner or later, wolves will be “delisted” since the U.S. Endangered Species Act does not mandate that wolves be managed fairly and for the American public as a whole, only that they be kept at minimal numbers to prevent their extinction. So…here are my [strategic] suggestions:
    1. Fight so that certain national lands are closed to wolf hunting and trapping in the national interest. The strongest cases can be made for federal lands near national parks and for national wilderness areas.
    2. Insist that state governments give the broader public a genuine voice in wolf management. This strategy may work in some states, such as Washington and Michigan, but not in others (e.g. Idaho, Wyoming). In some cases, wolf management may have to be politically yanked from state game authorities, perhaps in states like California.
    3. Build and demonstrate massive public support for wolves! The above strategies depend upon it! In my view, this necessity requires a heck of a lot more collaboration between pro-wolf organizations than we are currently seeing! Dr. Tony Povilitis, wildlife biologist with Campaign for Yellowstone’s Wolves (on Facebook)

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dr. Povilitis,

      RE: Strategic suggestions

      Historically scientists reintroducing wolves understood that social carrying capacity needed increase (Dr. Thiel mentions it in his work on reintroduction in WI. Perhaps in: Thiel, Richard P.
      Keepers of the wolves : the early years of wolf recovery in Wisconsin . 2001). Beyond wolves : the politics of wolf recovery and management / Martin A. Nie. 2003.
      Others.

      Little actual work was done on strategies for increasing this human tolerance issue. As you mentioned, most discussion was of conflict reduction.

      Since political attitudes seem to have hardened, , with the perception that public lands, wilderness, endangered species advocates being associated with greater federal imposition of restrictions, there are some difficulties in getting to your suggestion 1.
      Specific strategies;
      1. a.Since at present, democrats are using wolf delisting and other abandonment of protection, wolf advocates will need to demand that this issue is integral to their vote – as Nabeki has done on this site.
      b. Wolf protection needs to be joined and coordinated with rewilding, ecosystem preservation, wildlife corridor building.
      c. Relatively few trappers can do much devastation, and this occupation needs concerted attack – to a greater extent than now occurs. However, states understand the high possible takes, and so continue to support trappers, as “management” tools, either present or available.

      2. Because wolves are managed toward the genetically and demographically dangerous goals determined by developers of the original reintroduction, a far larger modern scientific analysis of the problems inherent in these goals must be developed and put in place, assuring the Gray Wolf of sufficient gene flow (habitat connectivity), an ecologically effective populations size (reflecting habitat carrying capacity, rather than any other parameter), and the large core areas you have implied as necessary. What has been called wolf social structure or culture, is a major issue through which to approach any hunting bans.

      3. Pro-wolf constituencies can be divided into:
      a. large conservation orgs, national and international; Canada and the USA need to get together as shown by the past death and difficulties wolves undergo when crossing the borders.
      b. state organisations and advocates
      c. indigenous groups – particularly the Ojibwe, and wolf Clans, among others (tribal biologists and traditional attitudes can marshal much support), which give more priority to wolf conservation.
      d. Bloggers and subgroups on social websites.
      e. members of these large websites such as care2 and facebook, who voice support for wolves, but merely post short comments; many of these are generalist animals advocates and domestic animal advocates.
      f. The as-yet unconnected population which has responded pro-wolf to numerous polls.
      g.Wolf biologists and other scientists recognising the necessity of predators in ecosystems. Thank you for interfacing g with d, here! I note that several field biologists are passionate activists, within the scientific and policy spheres. Others like L. David Mech, have a view that wolf advocates can cause extreme political reaction (and his prognostications have too often seemed valid); he has been somewhat active in attacking wolf advocacy (See his 2012 Author’s personal copy “Is science in danger of sanctifying the wolf?” L. David Mech in http://www.scribd.com/doc/104750776/333-is-Science-in-Danger-of-Sanctifying?secret_password=35hwawnibboc5yb6gjm
      This essay unfortunately, reflects the early wolf biologist assessment of the threat of social carrying capacity loss or failure.

      Marco Musiani, Luigi Boitani, and Paul C. Paquet, Eds: “New era for wolves and people : wolf recovery, human attitudes and policy” compile more work internationally on human social progress toward acceptance of wolves.

      All these groups need to be introduced to one another and to begin the strategisation of development of large areas where the wolf is not hunted.

      Like

  7. Dr. Thiel worked to understand and reintroduce wolves to WI for about 30 years.
    Unfortunately, public lands ranchers, other ranchers and sheepmen (most of which owners essentially do this as hobby, while making their money in large business ventures, such as did JR Simplot in ID. There are many others)both retain the Euro attitude of kill everything which disturbs you in any way, and especially anything that reduces your profit margin – they cannot do anything about the far higher number of domestic dogs killing their profits, and the dwarfingly higher rates of weather, injury, and illness killing their $ flow, but wnat to vilify and freely kill the entire species of wolf, as scapegoat upon which their frustration and hate for any who disagree in any way can be focused without repercussion.

    THIS is why they support their pet candidates – humans who are under their control, just as are the steer and sheep, theirs to rule and slaughter.

    You have the hunting lobby, who have aligned themselves with the gun crazies, who want to use automatic weapons to kill for sport (and you thought ISIS was bad) , and the quavering wusses who feel that they NEED guns. These people are all so terrified that they feel they cannot live without these things – and when someone feels that way, they become homicidal in a flash. This is not to mention their need to kill with impunity, to feel safe (it doesn’t work), and to feel less powerless.

    If you imagine how they would feel without these lethal instruments to protect them (and they constantly reiterate this, their faintheartedness every day in every medium), you will further understand that they WILL NEVER CEASE to kill those defenseless whom they judge as deleterious to their acquisition or possession.

    It is thus the most violently adamant who constitute the other side of this wolf killing matter.
    Since all of the above have cognitively linked the death of all wolves to their own inadequacy in life, whether they claim impoverishment or direct raw fear, you will find that this particular chimpanzee, us, becomes most dangerous when most fearful.

    They do not question their own timidity, these supreme weaklings who need to kill to prove that they are not what they KNOW themselves to be. Again, every quote, every expression they make on the subject is explicit in their admission of this craven fear. I have wondered why for decades, no one else has even spoken of this, as evident and admitted as it has been by these groups. Open carry – what did any of you think was the source of reasoning?

    The wolf is scapegoat, easily sacrificed without repercussion. His image to them is of ferocity because he is a carnivore. Otherwise the NRA, and the “sport” hunters would be eyeing bunny rabbits for the safest thing to kill.

    Like

  8. Great post, and absolutely relevant. Thanks for sharing it again!

    Like

  9. Reblogged this on Exposing the Big Game.

    Like

  10. Excellent post. Something I have been saying for some time: Until we get serious about saving native wild animals on western lands, quit compromising with ranchers/hunters, with the core goal of Getting All Livestock Off Public Lands, no native animals will every have a chance.

    To hell with ranchers. If they can’t make it on private lands–too bad. Are any of us guaranteed a livelihood, or subsidies for our work or business? The livestock industry is inherently cruel, environmentally destructive, and frankly, evil. My new slogan is: “The only good rancher/hunter/trapper is an ‘ex’ one.” Feel free to change a word or two anytime. Most ranchers hunt, and many hunters ranch–and trap.

    Like

  11. Sorry for the typo at the end of the first paragraph–it should be “will ever have a chance.”

    Like

  12. So true! I can not tell you how many times i’ve had wolf haters trying to take me off subject and/or provoke me. Some even resort to childish name calling when they get no result. My message to wolf haters is, try all you want. You can threaten, you can cuss, you can try to tear me down, and you can give me all the “facts” you want. I will NEVER stop fighting for wolves! No amount of name calling and distracting will stop that. Thank you Nabeki for your work.

    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: