Help stop the aerial gunning of wolves - action link:

[InvisibleTouch]

From an e-mail I got back after signing a letter to my rep (who is useless slime, but I keep sending letters anyway) ... please follow the link at the bottom to help end this ongoing travesty:

**************

Simply put, Alaska's aerial hunting of wolves and other wildlife is brutal and unnecessary.

Fortunately, we can put an end to this brutal practice. I just urged my Representative to cosponsor the Protect America's Wildlife (PAW) Act -- legislation that will put an end to the slaughter from the skies. You can, too -- just follow this link:

http://action.defenders.org/paw_act

State-permitted hunters shoot wolves from the air -- or chase them down to exhaustion and shoot them point-blank when they land. Over the last few years, nearly 700 wolves have been killed this way.

And now, states in the Greater Yellowstone region want to use this savage practice to kill wolves in Wyoming and Idaho.

But we can stop the aerial gunning program in Alaska -- and prevent programs like it from spreading to the Lower 48.

Take action now:

http://action.defenders.org/paw_act

Thanks!

[truebrit71]

1. Thanks for putting this out there...I am a big fan of Defenders of Wildlife...

Kicked and recommended..

[sailor65]

2. The problem is

that other methods have been tried to control wolf populations, the growth of which are threatening other species. Sterilization enjoyed only limited success. Traps and poisons carry with them other complications and are certainly less "Humane" than shooting.

It's ok to be distressed about the picture of a wolf being shot from the air, but no one seems to have a better idea yet, and your animal compassion should include the prey populations (i.e. Caribou) at risk.

[truebrit71]

4. The Caribou aren't at risk though...besides which Wolves help control the prey population..

..as well as limit the population size of other predators..

Wolves will typically seek the old, the ill or the very young as kills. That, by nature helps keep the population in check.

Predator populations are kept in check by the size of the prey population.

[Kelly Rupert]

9. That's not actually true.

The very reason for this program is that caribou and moose populations have drastically declined. Left alone, predator-prey relationships do not reach a stable equilibrium; they fluctuate predictably strongly, as both predators and prey populations undergo alternating boom-bust cycles (as the predators overkill the prey, undergo mass starvation, and then allow the prey to flourish).

[truebrit71]

12. The reason the populations have declined is because of humans...

The reason for this programme is for men with big rifles and small penises to shoot an animal in order to feel masculine and superior...

[Kelly Rupert]

16. That's just not true.

Animal populations go in cycles. Say we start out with a few too many wolves. There simply isn't enough prey out there for them, so the population undergoes a mass starvation. Now, it's not like some wolves are well-fed and others get nothing; the entire population becomes malnourished, and far more die off than is necessary to achieve balance. With few wolves out there, the prey animals see a population explosion; after all, usually most prey animals die before adulthood. With so much food out there, the wolf population explodes again, and we're back to the beginning. It's not like all these animals won't die a rather brutal death anyway. That's the way nature goes.

And meanwhile, the Alaskan hunting economy suffers during the bust periods. Why not keep things balanced?

[Blue_In_AK]

39. This isn't necessarily true in Alaska

Although I am against aerial harvesting of wolves, the moose and caribou hunters here are not all "men with big rifles and small penises" who want to "shoot an animal in order to feel masculine and superior." Instead, these harvest areas are peopled by Native villagers who depend on the moose and caribou for their subsistence. It's not like if you live in Bush Alaska you can just hop in your car and run down to the supermarket. I can understand why these people would want to ensure that there is plenty of game for them to eat.

On the other hand, Native peoples lived up here for centuries with the wolves and moose reaching a natural equilibrium. However, we have no way of knowing how many years were very, very hungry ones.

I see both sides of this issue - the curse of being a Libra. :)

[roguevalley]

18. this is about hunting for humans, not wolves. the state voted twice

in referendum to end this and they IGNORE us. Fuck them. end it now. when you don't have accurate counts, its hard to argue one way or another. hunters and guides have packed the board. no one else matters.

[Blue_In_AK]

40. I do agree with that.

The Board is packed with hunters and guides. I've transcribed some of the hearings that they've held on this program, and while the "staff" have tried to make things sound all scientific, it is pretty obvious where the loyalties of many of the board members lie.

I personally think if it appears that the moose and caribou populations are declining too rapidly, hunting for these animals should be restricted to purely rural subsistence hunters -- excluding all the others around here who would just "like" to have some moose meat in their freezer.

In any event, aerial shooting of wolves is just wrong. I've voted against it twice, and it's very frustrating to be ignored.

[nam78_two]

21. I have only heard these statements from pro-hunting groups like the Alaska Outdoor Council

I don't think I have seen estimates from too many scientifically valid sources providing examples/citations for how wolf populations are causing a dramatic decline in Caribou or Moose populations. Competition with humans (hunters) appears to be what is causing the decline if anything.

[Kelly Rupert]

23. It's rather inevitable that they will.

It's simply the way predators and prey interact. I'm not saying that the decline is enough to threaten either population permanently, but declines do and must happen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka-Volterra_equation

In real life, it often doesn't look quite like this, of course; there are going to be pockets of predators that die off in greater numbers and pockets of prey that allow the prey population to more-quickly replenish. But the basic boom-bust phenomenon has been well studied for over a hundred years.

[nam78_two]

25. Right

However, in this instance y=no. of humans+ no. of wolves (loosely speaking); And it is really y=y1+y2, where one of the ys does not really
depend on x for survival, whereas the other does. Humans prey on the same prey, but do not rely on them for their survival. The wolves are not the only predators here and I think the stance many people take on this (and is reflected in many of the protections of Endangered Species) is based on the fact the humans do not necessarily need to hunt to survive. I realise that there are populations of people that need to hunt for subsistence, but I am not sure the Alaska Outdoor Group for instance fits that bill. And also if I am recollecting this bit of legislation right (passed by Murkowski if I am correct) you are not talking about your local, average Joe hunter who needs to hunt to eat. If I remember right this was implemented more as a form of entertainment for relatively wealthy people (don't most of them use their private planes to hunt here?) as a form of entertainment. To me from the get-go, this seemed like another Republican ploy to use fuzzy math to pretend that there was an actual explosion in predator population that needed checking. Kinda like Bush saying that farmed salmon are an indication of the health of an eco-system.

[InvisibleTouch]

6. What gave you the idea that wolf populations are "out of control"???

Quite the opposite is the case for wolves in the lower 48 states, and even in Alaska where populations are still healthy, a normal predator/prey balance puts neither species "at risk." It's only when humans start mucking around in the system that things get "out of control" - and invariably to the detriment of the large predator species.

Furthermore, none of this aerial gunning travesty has to do with "controlling" a population - it's bloody trophy hunting, nothing more - completely unneccessary by any stretch of the imagination.

You are clearly very uninformed on this matter. You might wish to do some reading.

[Kelly Rupert]

11. This policy was implemented for the benefit of hunters, but not for why you think.

It was implemented because the elk and deer populations had declined to the point where the state's hunting economy was being harmed. It isn't hunting, it's predator population control.

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/9332491p-9247563c.html

[truebrit71]

14. ..it was also implemented AGAINST the wishes of the electorate...

...makes you wonder who was writing those checks to the legislators to overturn the ban...twice

[Norrin Radd]

36. kick

[roguevalley]

17. this would matter if they had accurate counts of moose and wolf

populations. they don't. our board is as politicized as the Politiburo and they need to HEED the MULTIPLE VOTES BY OUR STATE'S PEOPLE TO END THIS PRACTICE. They could give a rip. I have no pity for any argument but the one to end this evil. They ignore us up here no matter how many times we say NO!

The most photographed pack in the world, the Denali pack, has been shot to death. Fuck the game board. end this practice now.

[truebrit71]

26. I just read about the Denali pack yesterday...what a crime...

...unreal...sometimes I really hate humans...

[roguevalley]

30. I know. its ghastly.

[G_j]

3. done, K&R

[Kelly Rupert]

5. How would you propose keeping predator/prey populations in check then?

Trapping? Ground hunting? Or would you prefer cyclical mass starvation?

[InvisibleTouch]

7. How about letting them regulate themselves...

...as they've done for hundreds of thousands of years? Wow, there's a concept.

[Kelly Rupert]

13. Because they don't, really.

Left to their own devices, animal populations overexpand and starve off cyclically. Left alone, the wolves would continue to overhunt the elk, and many of them (more than this plan is killing) would starve to death. Meanwhile, there's no trophies out there for human hunters.

[InvisibleTouch]

22. Isle Royale?

If this is your reference study, there are a few points to be made: both moose and wolves have only been on the island for a few decades. Yes, there were initially some population fluctions in both species. They've stabilized nicely over the years. The wilds of Alaska is a vastly greater area, which has been in ecological balance for a very long time. Prey species are in absolutely no danger of being driven extinct by their natural predators. It's only when humans start meddling about under the guise of "controlling" or "managing," that population disaster results. And please don't pretend that vicious trophy hunters are concerned about ecological balance. I don't have any problem with hunting for food if one eats what one kills, but I immensely object to killing for no reason, for a bloody trophy.


I appreciate the debate, though, because it has kept the thread kicked a bit! :)


Thanks to all who have Rec'd and taken action!

[roguevalley]

19. cyclical mass starvation? when?

let them control themselves. read up on it. up here, its hunters they promote, not reason or science.

rv, who comes from a family of hunters.

[Kelly Rupert]

20. Depends on the birthrates of the species, food availability,

rate at which the predators kill the prey. Plug 'em into the Lotka-Volterra equation, and find out. Works pretty well.

[roguevalley]

32. ah, theory. well, in practicality, there are plenty of everything but

not if you want to guide out-of-state fat cats in here to shoot moose. This is Frank Murkowski's bouquet to the Alaskan people, served up to satisfy refucks who come up here to blast animals.

[nam78_two]

8. K&R.nt

[Kajsa]

10. Thank you!

Thanks for getting the word out there.
I too, am a member of Defenders of Wildlife.

This is brutal, reminding me of the way Cheney "hunts".

I support PAW and oppose aerial hunts!

Thanks, again.

:hi:

[Kajsa]

15. Here's NRDC's action page with a link to their video

they are trying to get on the air.

https://secure.nrdconline.org/08/wildlife_tvad_campaign_donate_d#

I support all these fine organizations.
They work together towards a common goal.

Thanks.

[Reterr]

24. k&r.eom

[Greylyn58]

27. Kick for the wolves.

[Kajsa]

28. Another kick

to help them.

:kick:

[InvisibleTouch]

29. Thanks for all the K&Rs!

Just when I'm ready to despair, I'm reminded that there are good people in the world too. Thanks all!

[Blue_In_AK]

31. Alaskan voters have opposed aerial wolf hunting

twice at the polls, but our Game Board ignores us.

[Mend]

33. they don't mention that Rep. George Miller (CA) happens to be a Democrat.

I wonder why...I will sign the petition and I have donated to this group before but I am not totally happy that they left off his party affiliation...is it so hard to say Democrat?

[OneBlueSky]

34. typical American response . . . "Got a problem? Kill something! Or someone!" . . . n/t

[Judi Lynn]

35. Thank you, InvisibleTouch, for the link. Hope it will help.

I only hope one day the world will be free of those who imagine they'd better stick their large, ugly noses into the desperately serious business of other people, other creatures.

[and-justice-for-all]

37. Done.

[_dynamicdems]

38. This practice is barbaric.

Wasn't this stopped before Bush took office? Now it is expanded. The man hates everyone and everything. You name it: trees, rivers, horses, wolves, minorities, our troops, children...the earth...

What does he like? Oh yeah, God. Right.

(Edited because I wanted to!)