Bill Herzog Timberjay "Wolves Lose to Political Flatulance" Are we really leaving the future of Minnesota's wolves up to hunters/trappers and livestock producers? I was appalled after seeing one-fourth of Minnesota's wolf population killed in 2012, shortly after federal de-listing from Endangered Species status.
Nicole Hendrickson I have three primary concerns in regard to the wolf issue: Public input was not acknowledged.The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) failed to live up to its promise — as outlined in its Wolf Management Plan — to follow a 5-year wait after federal de-listing.We need to be more careful when considering the longevity of the wolf. In our democracy, prevailing public attitudes usually shape public policy. With the wolf hunt, it is small interest groups of trophy hunters and cattle raisers that are getting their way.
The International Wolf Center sponsored a study in 1999 by Stephen Kellert, Ph.D., of Yale University, to measure public attitudes toward wolves in Minnesota; and the DNR published a poll in 2012 to assess public attitudes on wolves. The DNR’s 2012 poll had similar findings: 'Primary clients, hunters and trappers' Minnesota wolf policy should include Ojibwe values. On Thursday, the Minnesota Senate Environment and Energy Committee could decide the fate of a bill (SF666) that would reinstate the five-year moratorium on wolf hunting that was disregarded last year. In the spirit of cooperation with Minnesota tribes, I urge our state senators to pass this bill. The heated debate surrounding the wolf hunt in the western Great Lakes region boils down to this: Are wolves relatives or resources? How one answers this question shapes one’s ultimate stance on the recent state-sanctioned hunts in Minnesota and Wisconsin.
One need not be American Indian to respect wolves as other-than-human persons.
Dr. Michael W. Fox. Ron Meador, Minn Post. Letters to Editor. State Agency Game Farming Is Not Compatible with Ecosystem Integrity. State Agency Game Farming Is Not Compatible with Ecosystem Integrity With the delisting of wolves from protection under the Endangered Species Act, management of wolves has been turned back to the individual states where wolves occur.
In most of these states, we see state agencies adopting policies that treat wolves as persona no grata, rather than a valued member of their wildlife heritage. Nowhere do I see any attempt by these state agencies to educate hunters and the general public about the ecological benefits of predators. Nor is there any attempt to consider the social ecology of wolves and/or other predators in management policies. Wolves, like all predators, are seen as a “problem” rather than as a valuable asset to these states. In recent years state agencies have increasingly adopted policies that are skewed towards preserving opportunities for recreational killing rather than preserving ecological integrity. Want proof? Wyoming is even more regressive. Wolf-killing by the numbers: Trappers outdo hunters — and stir public outrage.
Today may mark the midpoint of Minnesota’s new trapping and hunting seasons on wolves, which began Nov. 3 and will run through Jan. 31. Or maybe not. Policy calls for the Minnesota Department of Resources to end the wolf “harvest” as soon as its target of 400 wolf kills is reached, and with each passing day, that goal seems likelier to be reached early.
As of last week, two of DNR’s three wolf zones were closed for the duration and the overall tally, at this writing, is approaching 300 (updates and a map are available here). This means roughly three-quarters of the quota has been filled in the first half of a two-part schedule that began with hunting only, then moved into a combined trapping and hunting phase just after Thanksgiving. By the way, the same pattern is shaping up in Wisconsin, where the trapping/hunting season started two weeks earlier than Minnesota’s and is set to run a month longer. Trappers outdo hunters, 2 to 1 Rising tide against trapping? Wolf Killing Seasons in Wisconsin and Minnesota Finally Getting National Attention. Wisconsin plans to “gradually” kill hundreds of gray wolves starting this October.
In yesterday’s edition of the Wall Street Journal there was an article about the upcoming wolf killing seasons in Wisconsin and Minnesota and the controversy surrounding them. The article explained the insane use of dog packs and night hunting in Wisconsin along with the usual whining from hunters that there are “no deer.” From the article: For some, particularly farmers concerned about attacks on cattle and hunters who say wolves have reduced the number of deer, the hunt is long overdue. “A lot of people are just looking forward to getting the population down to a more reasonable level,” said Mark A.
There you have it. Hunter kills wolf to save dog, maybe. Opposition to wolf hunt seems purely emotional. I passed another wolf billboard today on the freeway.
Its message clearly opposed the wolf season in Minnesota. As executive director of the Wildlife Science Center, a wolf center near Forest Lake, I am well-versed in the emotional extremes that accompany any conversation about wolves. Yes, the wolf hunt stirs emotions. Counterpoint There's a big black dog who lives next door and wanders into my yard from time to time.
His is name is Sammy. He barks like a pack-a-day smoker, leaves kielbasa-shaped piles on my lawn, challenges my Scotty, intimidates my children, and the only way I can get him to step off is if I get up from my work and charge him with the full force of my 6-foot-2-inch frame, pointing my finger and yelling. Even then, he usually waits to back down until his owner begins calling from the other side of the hedge. She sounds like a guest on "The Jerry Springer Show. " As you can imagine, Sammy's existence is impinging upon the order of my property, my financial well-being and pursuit of happiness. As everyone knows, fortunately, the answer is no, no and no. We did that for emotional reasons. Wolf Hunting Seasons Wouldn’t Stand Up to a Public Vote.