Canis of Wormis
Wolves Shot, Boycotts Called, Fur Flies
As the wolf hunt in Idaho continues, taxidermists are in business, critics are howling, animal lovers want a spuds boycott -- and a judge's ruling is in the wings.By Amy Linn, 9-03-09
 |
|
 | |
| Flickr photo by Brian Scott | |
|
Game officials and wolf hunt fans often say the same thing when it comes to the wolf hunt in Idaho and the upcoming one in Montana. Don’t worry, they say. Wolves are fast, nocturnal and darn hard to draw a bead on.
The question of just how tough they are to shoot even came up in federal court, where U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy on Monday heard a plea by environmental groups for an injunction to stop the wolf hunt seasons.
“Isn’t there evidence ... that with fair-chase hunting, not many wolves will be killed?” Molloy asked.
Yes, that’s right, as Steven Strack, attorney for the Idaho Fish and Game Commission, explained during the hearing. “There are nine million acres of wilderness areas in Idaho,” Strack said. It’s hard to even spot a wolf without using a helicopter, traps, baits or motor vehicles like ATVs (which are not legally allowed in the hunts), he noted.
The news from Idaho this week seemed to, well, blow a hole in that theory.
On the very first day of the first wolf hunt ever in the Lower 48, two Idaho men shot and bagged wolves.
Robert Millage of Kamiah told longtime outdoor writer Rocky Barker of the Idaho Statesman that he was surrounded by a pack of wolves before dawn. He used a hand call that “sounded like a wounded coyote,” and when an 80-pound female came running, he shot her, Barker reports. (To see the story in full, click here.) “The whole area is lousy with them,” Millage told Barker.
Archery hunter Jay Mize of Emmet, Idaho saw a wolf spooking his horse at a lake near Stanley, Idaho. “He walked back into his tent, put his rifle together and shot the wolf,” Barker’s story continues.
Those and other tales are going viral this week as the sporting world—and beyond—waits to hear whether Judge Molloy will issue the injunction sought by the coalition of 13 environmental groups trying to halt the hunts (the coalition is ultimately seeking to put the gray wolf back on the endangered species list and restore its federal protections).
About 1,600 gray wolves live today in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, the northern Rocky Mountain region that was repopulated with canis lupus during a reintroduction effort launched in Yellowstone National Park in 1995. Douglas Honnold, the Earthjustice lawyer representing the coalition, says the wolf population needs to hit the 2,000-to-5,000 mark before the reintroduction is completely successful. The wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana could result in irreparable harm, killing more than 300 animals, advocates maintain.
And wolf hunt foes are vowing to fight—with a potato boycott, if necessary.
The L magazine, which wins “most eye-catching wolf headline” award this week—You Say Potato, I Say Fuck the Idaho Wolf Killers—likens the hunt to a national regression into idiocy and tyranny. ("This is 21st-century America, not 15th-century Romania,” it concludes).
On YouTube, if it’s visuals you like, you can catch Ashley Judd speaking for Defenders of Wildlife about the wolf hunts. Or “you can share your ire directly with potato officials at Abest@potato.idaho.gov, tcornelison@potato.idaho.gov,” as L Magazine adds.
Waiting in the wings, meanwhile, is one judge, Donald Molloy. His ruling about the injunction—which could come at any moment—could do a lot of things to this battle. But it’ll never put it to rest.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
The wolf hunt is a sure sign that the reintroduction has been successful. I remember being in Yellowstone Park in the fall of 1996 and finding areas of the Park closed to humans. Who would have thought back then that the experiment would be so successful that the wolf is now seen wild not only in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montanain, but in states like Washington and Oregon, and that many states won't take the overage, like tr mentioned.
And I'm not too concerned that three hunters had success hunting the very first day on an animal that hasn't been hunted in decades. Wolves aren't stupid, so you can expect most of the rest to wise up pretty quickly. I don't fear for the wolves, and this managed hunt is much better than the old "shoot, shovel, shutup" management we've had in the past.
But maybe we can all agree on one thing that IS silly...seriously, a potato boycott? Really? That'll save the wolves, won't it...
So why can't we manage the wolf just like every other wild animal? I'm waiting for a good answer.
Don't give them a single penny
Not one penny for hotels or motels
Not one penny for potatos
No vacations
No business at all
Maybe the reason that individuals don't describe such a means of population control through hunting as simply "killing" is because "manage" and "kill" are not exactly synonymous.
On the other hand, a person might prefer "kill" if they don't agree with the practice because it ignores the regulatory aspect of "management" and of course has a nice ring of brutality.
shame on you for violating new west comment policy. by printing the inflammatory headline from the L magazine you have broken the rules you request of readers. and may i say the L magazine is quite a reference for even new west.
but go ahead fan the flames.
As a native Montana now living in Idaho I have seen first hand the damage the wolves have done to the rest of our wildlife population. It is easy to want to defend them when their actions have no effect on you whatsoever.
In regards to "by me", you say you don't give any money to Idaho or Montana. Trust me we have enough people coming to "Californicate" these states w/o you, keep your money.
Call Van Helsing!
We have recent anecdotal evidence from both Europe and here in the America's that the problem has not gone away. What exactly do these people think Warren Zevon was singing about when in those lyrics he clearly stated that he saw one in Trader Vics. Those bars were every Hilton hotel before Paris showed up. And in describing this creature he spotted, Zevon argued that "his hair was perfect". Take note.
Perhaps I misunderstood the tone of Amy's writing here, but I detected a not so sublime sense of agreement from her with the position taken by the writers and editorial staff at "L" magazine. Ms. Linn argued that after two hunters shot wolves on the opening day of the season in Idaho, the argument that wolves were hard to spot presented before Judge Molloy by Steven Strack, attorney for the Idaho Fish and Game Commission, did "blow a hole in that theory". What if the first two of the 220 allotted for removal are the first two of only 75? Early success by two hunters is meaningless.
And then we end up in Romania.
Here in lies the problem. There's old Warren Zevon sitting in the bar at Trader Vic's and he spots a werewolf. Not just an ordinary werewolf, but this one has perfect hair. A Romanian, British, or American werewolf, Warren didn't know, nor could he tell. They all look alike, you know. For that matter, it could have been a transplanted werewolf, perhaps even an immigrant. But Warren was the only person in the bar who could see that the critter was a werewolf.
Now what's a werewolf doing in a bar, particularly an upscale joint like Trader Vics? Hell, he's in there trying to seduce someone, and statistically, the likelihood was that his prey of choice was a female. Sort of a real life "Women who Run With Werewolves" and the women don't even know it until it's way too late. The fangs are sunk in and that's that for that. And as Warren pointed out, "His hair was perfect". Makes one wonder what his voice sounded like and if he was "sympathetic" and all that.
On things for sure. Since he was hanging out at Trader Vic's, you can bet he was a successful predator.
Now if Warren was the only person in the bar who could see the werewolf, I think will agree with Idaho Fish and Game attorney Steven Strack on this one. Of all people, women should be far more on the alert for werewolves, but they can't seem to see them even when they saw them. The victims keep on piling up like cordwood even when those gals were warned about such things from back when they were just toddlers. One after another they fall, and it's always "I never thought he would (inset here)..."
And back to that Van Helsing thing. Once those critters knew he was after them, things got pretty tough, and that guy was flat-out "World Class". I don't think that people are giving the furry critters involved in this debate any credit at all. They're almost being treated like they are "mentally challenged" or something and need special ed. classes or something. Hell, they're no different that that werewolf Warren Zevon saw - smooth, slick, well-groomed, and above all, adaptable to changing circumstances.
And just like the one at Trader Vic's, they are on their home turf.
They'll be just fine...
The Left and the Right have done a very good job of demonizing each other over the last few decades in America. Its been going on as long as I can remember, but in recent years it has gotten down right vicious. Lefties, frustrated by years of being completely ignored by the Bush Administration, including with regards to not having their votes counted for anything during his first election, have grown cold and stand-offish to the right. Meanwhile the Right, fueled by quasi-racists and xenophobes on the AM and Fox, have been whooped into a frenzy of distrust and anger towards anyone that does not believe in their god or in their moral set of beliefs.
Here in Montana, the arguments encompass everything from national healthcare to local hunting rights, but the divisionary lines remain the same across the board. Lefties in Montana are flabbergasted that people would want to hunt wolves. So delusionary and inconsistent is their arguement that while they are eating farmed bison and cow, wearing toxically made, synthetic "eco-friendly" clothing, they stand on their high horse and scream about 70 wolves being culled from the population of several thousand that now roam healthy across the landscape. "How dare you kill those things!" they scream, apparently not realizing their own predatory instincts aimed at different creatures.
Meanwhile the folks on the right are fired up about "eco-nazis" claiming that anyone that is against their way of thinking, or who is interested in preserving the very small 4% US landmass that is still entirely intact and roadless is a crazy radical not worthy of breathing.
The conversation ended years ago. Now it is nothing more than a screaming match in which no one can even hear the other side over their own voice. Its ridiculous. Its childish. And it is being fueled by the New Media substitutes for "news." News has been vanishing for some time. We rarely hear the simple facts without the filter of an agenda. We rarely are given information without severe bias. As a result, people are taking these nationalistic agendas, and attempting (stupidly) to apply them to their local communtities, as if Glenn Beck has ANYTHING to say that is applicable to ones local community. All he actually manages to pass along is his his anger. All Keith Olberman manages to pass on is cynicism. And none of it is helping anyone get along better with their neighbors.
We all live on the same god-damned planet, for god's sake! We share our streets and sidewalks with other people... and all these people are striving to do the same thing.... Get home to see their families after work, spend time sweeping the garage out, and avoid going to lame parties with their spouses, even though the parties ussually end up being quite fun. Humans have more in common than we often remember. Even "those other people" ... the ones that look different, that eat different, that live in "third world conditions"... they all like the same things... they laugh, they cry, they play jokes on each other.
Americans can be so god-damned pretentious, assuming that our way is the only way, and we've gotten to the point where we even think that way in terms of politics. We run around like a bunch of castrated monkeys trying to impreginate the world with our agenda... not realizing our own sterility. And its tiring.
We need more civility. Not a little, but a lot. We need to be willing to agree to disagree. We need to quit judging people so much. We need to accept people that think different, and try to enjoy a beer with them from time to time even if we don't necessarily like the way they do everything.
I kill a wolf, you kill a cow, my dog kills a squirrel, your cat kills birds... Jesus, thing die, things get killed (just ask Jesus!) All this non-sence about needing to fight our own countrymen over stupid issues that ultimately we have little control over in the first place...
So I for one am going to go home and enjoy a nice wolf steak tonight, and envite my vegetarian neighbor over for some corn, and perhaps she'll have a glass of chardonnay while I drink a PBR, and maybe, just maybe, we'll have a fun night...
That was damn good!
that needed to be said and you said it well.
and mr barr,,, we have already determined that the eco wolf lovers money is,,, well not worth the trouble. they come to the state with a t shirt and a twenty dollar bill and dont change either one.
As for all the "outrage," I have to ask Lawson why even bother to be civil at all? Why should I have to waste time and effort over finding points of agreement with geniusettes like Amanda Park Taylor and Whatzername Judd? What right do they have, really, given they aren't bearing the consequences in any way, shape or form? No wolves in SoHo and or Malibu.
Regarding the injunction, the issue is irreparable harm. That's a tall order for the plaintiffs (even against their pet judge) given that the present population started with what, 48 wolves? We could gun them down to that level, then back off and they'd come back, sho nuff. But I'd rather have set seasons that maintain a socially-acceptable population, in socially-acceptable areas.
Bottom line is, I will be surprised if Molloy enjoins this time. Anyone want to lay odds?
I will tell you this. If he was a close relative and we were at a family get-together, we wouldn't be getting along very well.
Two wolves were taken on the first day, big deal. Humans were not considered predators to them until today. Lets see how many are taken by the end of the season.
Laffin' here. One could only imagine the civility.
Case in point, the wolf hunt. What did you environmentalist expect when the wolves were re-introduced? Did you expect them to never be hunted and live happily ever after? Are you truly that naive?
Next what inspired me to write about the wolf hunt, the call for a boycott. I would like to point out the futility of your so-called boycott of Idaho potatoes. Gawd, that’s knee slapping funny. I’ll call your bluff.
Ok stop buying McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy’s, Arby’s, you get the picture. Don’t buy Ore-Ida, Krogers, Albertsons or any other no name brand frozen potatoes, they may be Idaho potatoes. Don’t order a baked potato in any restaurant; you don’t know where it is from.
I looked at the L website and on the front page is restaurant called the Sheep Station in Brooklyn. I had to laugh what are you ritzy-tittzy Easterners going to do without your hoity-toity fancy restaurant cuisine, my lamb? Or my brothers beef?
While your boycotting Idaho do me a favor and tell the haughty European looking Jon Kerry and his sugar-momma wife not to come to Idaho to ski. Write the Kennedy Klan and ask them not to come to Idaho to re-live any Teddy moments in Sun Valley. Don’t forget to e-mail all your favorite Hollywood stars and producers and tell them to sell their McMansions in Sun Valley and Ketchum.
As far as Ashley Judd is concerned she’s just a…..I’d call her a MILF, but I have more class than Bob Wire, so I’ll call her another rich spoiled misguided celebutard.
Yep, Idahoans are shaking in their boots over your boycott.
I would lay odds that Mr. Lawson is kind of like myself "in-de-pen-dent" and sees big money politics for what it is, big money politics. If someone's got the money and they want to give it to you, well, you say what it takes to get it. Spend some time in the last 200 years of 'mericn politics reading the nitty-gritty details.
Another item Mr. horst, what do you know and understand (two very different items) about the biology of wolves? If you want to dwell in glib comments, I say, shoot a wolf, save an elk. Then maybe I'll get to eat the elk some day.
I would buy Mr Lawson a beer because he said what he felt and used reason based on experience instead of categorizing someone simply because he failed to ask that person a few more questions.
And no, I am not a right wing nut or other stereotype. Stereotypes don't fit most of us and the idea that wolves could be introduced without a management plan is a case in point. Seems them wolves don't always dine on wapiti,
"http://www.helenair.com/news/local/state-and-regional/article_f0b347aa-939b-11de-b126-001cc4c03286.html"
and no, nobody is providing a single shred of real information concerning how many wolves is enough.
The best path is to truly understand the 80-20 rule. 100% of the time we agree on 80% of the issues, those other 20% should be dealt with in another argument. Look for the 80% and make this country and your town a better place.
Good day,
Mr. C
Best and probable outcome is that there will be wolves and wolf hunts long after all of us writing here are all gone and forgotten. So those of you worried about the poor wolves better go find something else to get excited about....the wolves don't need your help, they have survived worst,these critters are well adapted killing machines.
No offense,but ya know I'm trying to find a nice way to say you don't know what you're talking about. You should do some research about conservation in general and in particular study the whole wolf recovery program from it's start in the lower 48.
For your information wolves were never nearly extinct as you put it. They were eliminated in the lower 48 years ago, for good reason I might add but the species here in America have always thrived and still do in Canada and Alaska. This hunt is not about extermination never was and never will be. It is about conservation and management of wildlife. There is alot you should research if you really love wildlife and wolves as you say you do. I think you do feel for them but you don't know what you don't know.
That is just the way it is, sadly. And I'm not arguing one way or another, just pointing out that the system is based on a basic premise of meat eating, and that is not going to be changed. You could walk through Washington DC with a firey potato on a stick all day and night, but it won't change it. So what is the wolf lover do? Lobby your states elected officials. Take up the cause of education. Actually do something, pick up the phone, and call and try to converse with the leaders of the opposition. Take a long drive to take the time to meet them. Converse. Don't assume you know exactly where they stand, but take the time to find out, from them, their specifics. Agree to disagree, but keep lines of communication open. Setting a bag of shit on their doorstep and running off into the night might be fun to tell your friends about, but does nothing but deepen division. Seriously. The same goes as advice for people on both sides. People need to take the time to get to know their leaders. Take the time to makes sure your leaders know you. If you don't influence them, someone else will. It is a big responsibility, more than most want, living in a democratic republic. Individuals have the power, but they are going to have to be rather driven to get it. The fewer people involved, the more homogenous the dialogue. We've fallen to a low in the media world, where only the extremes get a voice. This isn't the life most of us know. It is time for the Middle Class to rejuvinate their efforts as statesmen.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009 9:08 AM MDT
BILLINGS, Mont. -- A federal judge says gray wolf hunts in the Northern Rockies can go on, denying a request by environmentalists and animal welfare groups to stop the first organized wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana in decades.
U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy said Wednesday that plans to kill about 20 percent of the two states' estimated 1,350 wolves would not cause long-term harm to the population.
But he adds that by carving Wyoming out of the recent decision to remove wolves from federal protection, the government appeared to violate the Endangered Species Act by making its decision based on political boundaries. Molloy says that means environmentalists could ultimately prevail in their bid to restore endangered species protection for the animals.
You honestly think that with unknown hundreds of hunters out there, killing 2 wolves in a day "blows a hole in" the theory that not many will be killed? I disagree. That is an extremely low percentage. Even now, 9 days into the season, very few have been killed.
Boycotting potatoes won't do anything but make a few people feel lilke they are doing something. It won't hurt the state of Idaho, and it won't help the wolves. I'd suggest a better idea would be to buy a wolf tag yourself. At least then your money will go to actually studying and managing the wolves we all love.
People are afraid of wolves, a governor wants to be reelected so it is hard to sell but I am working with others, emailing the governor to work with Defenders to open preserves in CA. I want wildlife preserves for them so, they will not be near people. I think it will help tourism here in CA. I would love to see a wild wolf but of course, I would never go to Idaho knowing what I know now, about the way those people are.
I think it is silly to be afraid of wolves but then I grew up in Oakland Ca. where the homicide rate is around 100 each year and pit bulls maul 100's of people.
There are many people here in the CA who are not going to buy produces from Idaho. This only helps because it brings unity to people working to help wolves and brings awareness of this senseless killing. It shows people we care about wildlife and that we are not so cruel, as to kill an innocent animal.
It sounds to me like any wolf in Idaho is to many so, why bother telling anyone about the five times the goal that was set. If these people do not want wolves, that is the problem and we have to find an answer or they will kill all of them. It doesn't take man long to kill all the wolves, history teaches us that.
It is clear neither of you understand the life cycle of our ecosystem and the positive role hunters plan in environmental conservation... We are not savages, nor are we cruel cold and evil. You clearly know nothing of our heritage or the prudent management of game.
Where do you think the money goes that we pay for game tags? It is used to help sustain future game population. Wolves have no innocents nor are they evil... They are simply apart of the system that needs to be managed and balanced. You see the act of hunting as savage and evil but you pay no attention to the importance of keeping the right balance. Is it savage when one wolf pack slaughters another? It is nature at work and part of the system.
Let me propose that perhaps death is not a tragedy after all, but a blessing. Let me ask each of you to really LOOK at your conditioned responses to each side of the wolf arguement.
Those of you who are harmfully affected by your emotional attachment to life in general and the wolf in particular, we applaud your sensitive nature. For without you there would be less compassion. BUT HERE'S ONE AREA WHERE YOUR JUDGEMENT ERRS. To assume that the wolf hunting advocates are not compassionate is not based on fact. Yes, the expression of the opinion to control ANY populous is going to SOUND incompassionate and barbaric. But let us start our journey of discovery by recognizing that single idea.
And those of you who see the need to manage the numbers of wolfs in wilderness settings, we applaud your ability to callous yourself to the violent process of killing. It's not easy to be responsible for the death of as beautiful a creature as the wolf. Or any other animal for that matter. But in your stalwarth nature, I am confident that there lies the wisdom to understand why someone can be appalled by that process you've so closely witnessed and they have only imagined or seen on television.
Now let's try to find that shared meaning, so perhaps we can accomplish something with this dialogue.
Is it perhaps man, ALL OF US, that has contributed to this imbalance of nature that currently exists and is forcing us into the actions that have lead to the circumstance that has caused this conflict? Could we perhaps try to understand each other so that our energy and resources can be applied toward diminishing this imbalance and perhaps helping all the wild creatures out there in the western states, not just the wolf.
Let us start by recognizing that since we are all responsible for encroaching on the natural balance, we also hold a responsibility to manage nature to the best of our ability. I personally choose to let the individuals who have spent their careers studying the issues, make the decisions, WITHOUT the fear of uneducated scrutiny. Let's let them tell us what the best thing to do is. Let's leave our emotion out of it.
And just let me give comfort to the individuals who find themselves in pain for the beautifully graceful grey wolf and the most recent decision by the court system. I am an avid archery elk hunter who has killed many elk. I've sat feet from dying elk, victims of my own will, and watched the life slip from their eyes. I've shed tears on each occassion and shared the experience as a predator. Animals, other than humans, have no self-pity, so there pain is different. There seems to be no sufferring. Just life and death. And death is only a tragedy to those left behind. So let your life be enhanced by the silent mind that this insight leaves behind and let's begin a rewarding dialogue and quit paying the lawyers.
things differ from the east to the west. the wests 21 century reality is much different than new yorks. your check to the defenders will only line the pockets of many many lawyers. and in true reality do nothing for any wolves.