Your view on Sarah Palin and others' anti-wolf agenda?

[pln9fos]

Hi there everyone. I don't know if this topic ought to be in politics or not; I decided here because it has to do more with wildlife, although it is part of Palin and company's political agenda. I decided to post this because as someone who really cares about wolves, I wanted to see what others thought about what I view as a cruel practice that ought to be illegal. Please give me your views if you have the time.

 

[Miumaru]

I care more about her mistreatment of anyone who isnt a conservative.

 

[skitzo van]

I don't come close to watching the news, so could someone explain to me what Palin is doing now?

 

[King of the Sandbox]

I'm afraid I don't know what she's doing to them. Could you give us a link to an article or at least an idea of what she's doing?

Also, though I love wolves, I have been blasting my fair share of them in RDR. ^_^

 

[Grike]

"Anti-wolf agenda"? I'm sorry, but you make it sound like they have a personal grudge with them.

And while I absolutely love animals, I think hunting is okay *in moderation*. After all, that's what led to the endangerment of lots of animals.

 

[Biosophilogical]

I love wolves, and if I had a trained wolf (as in, it wouldn't eat me) I would be the happiest man alive. (I'm a dog person, and wolves are like really awesome dogs)

OT: What's she doing? Seriously, I feel uninformed and generally in the dark about the entire question you are asking, except the wolf thing, because they are awesome.

 

[Levitas1234]

Anti wolf agenda sounds like the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

 

[pln9fos]

I'm afraid I don't know what she's doing to them. Could you give us a link to an article or at least an idea of what she's doing?

Also, though I love wolves, I have been blasting my fair share of them in RDR. ^_^

Well, Palin champions the slaughter of wolf packs in Alaska with what she has deemed a "predator control program." I have yet to actually find an article or hear her acknowledge her reasoning behind this, but I doubt that it is logical. If it is simply population control that she's talking, I believe that it's completely unneeded, as wolves only just barely got off the endangered species list recently. If it's about taking care of livestock, there are more peaceful solutions than going out and killing off a threatened species.

 

[Pimppeter2]

Many Alaskans depend on hunting for hood and other purposes. Predators kill more than 80 percent of the moose and caribou that die there in a given year.

So we should let humans starve so that wolves aren't mistreated? Its not like its complete genocide of the entire wolven race. Give me a break.

All the humababloo is just becuase people like blaming Palin for stuff.

Case and point below me.

 

[ObsessiveSketch]

Sarah Palin is the political equivalent of Miley Cyrus. She's retarded, has no talent for what she does, will manipulate any media-form or person to get herself more attention, and has an inexplicably devoted fanbase. They only difference is that Miley Cyrus wasn't almost VP.

Whatever she's doing at the moment, I probably disapprove. If it involves shooting wolves because 'hunting is fun,' then yeah, that shit is whack.

EDIT: have there been environmental studies conducted as to whether the wolf packs actually endanger the resources of US citizens?

 

[pln9fos]

Many Alaskans depend on hunting for hood and other purposes. Predators kill more than 80 percent of the moose and caribou that die there in a given year.

So we should let humans starve so that wolves aren't mistreated?

While I will admit that I don't know the percentage of kills that wolves make up for deaths in the wild, I know from a National Geographic article about the dilemma with wolves that they only cause about 1% of livestock deaths annually. I don't think we should let humans starve, but I am particularly against the championing of anti-wolf practices because wolves are still a threatened species and still need time to recover. Alaska isn't the only place where this is happening; it's also going on in Yellowstone, Idaho, Montana, and the Rockies. While I sympathize with the Alaskans that hunt for their food, I don't think that there is any just reason for killing wolves in those other areas.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

I'm afraid I don't know what she's doing to them. Could you give us a link to an article or at least an idea of what she's doing?

Also, though I love wolves, I have been blasting my fair share of them in RDR. ^_^

Well, Palin champions the slaughter of wolf packs in Alaska with what she has deemed a "predator control program." I have yet to actually find an article or hear her acknowledge her reasoning behind this, but I doubt that it is logical. If it is simply population control that she's talking, I believe that it's completely unneeded, as wolves only just barely got off the endangered species list recently. If it's about taking care of livestock, there are more peaceful solutions than going out and killing off a threatened species.

Ah, ok. I'll be holding my judgment then, though I appreciate and understand your concern for the wolves' well-being. ^_^

 

[SimuLord]

If Sarah Palin wants to know the fury of a wolf pack, she should go to a Nevada or North Carolina State football home game and yell "Wolf Pack Sucks!"

Although given Ms. Palin's proclivities, perhaps an appearance in the locker room for some sloppy fifty-fifths might be more appropriate.

 

[Pimppeter2]

Many Alaskans depend on hunting for hood and other purposes. Predators kill more than 80 percent of the moose and caribou that die there in a given year.

So we should let humans starve so that wolves aren't mistreated?

While I will admit that I don't know the percentage of kills that wolves make up for deaths in the wild, I know from a National Geographic article about the dilemma with wolves that they only cause about 1% of livestock deaths annually. I don't think we should let humans starve, but I am particularly against the championing of anti-wolf practices because wolves are still a threatened species and still need time to recover. Alaska isn't the only place where this is happening; it's also going on in Yellowstone, Idaho, Montana, and the Rockies. While I sympathize with the Alaskans that hunt for their food, I don't think that there is any just reason for killing wolves in those other areas.

Minnesota alone supports a population of 1,550 to 1,750, and as of 1992, wolves seem to be increasing both in their numbers and distribution.

Inclusion of wolves on the Endangered Species list precludes public havesting of wolves and thus cost the government control program over $100,000 per year to minimize wolf damage to livestock. Some of this money might be saved if wolves could be legally hunted and trapped.

Endangered Species money spent on wolves could be used to help save other, less charismatic endangered species.

 

[Johanthemonster666]

I actually keep up with the news and can sum it up as follows-

When Sarah Palin WAS the governer of Alaska, she wanted to remove Alaskan Timber Wolves fro the endangered species list so that they could be legally hunted. (usually by helicopter...damn cowards).

This is obviously not something she was capable of doing since conservation orgnizations keep tabs on population and it's really their call whether they think it's even something to discuss.

Timber Wolves from Alaska to the midwest of the U.S are still very much endangered, but I believe you're allowed to hunt them under special circumstances.


I believe in conservationism, so the shoting of wolves so only be permitted if there was some sort of freak population explosion and an unequal number of prey animals in the area (which NEVER happens for those of you who think I'm serious). So should any of Sarah Palin's ideas be taken seriously? No.

I mean jeeze, I'm a poltical libertarian and I can't stand Palin or any of these conservative wackos. They aren't the brightest people in domestic politics(as everyone knows), but then again people like Obama don't really tickle my fancy either -_-

P.S Those of you who are against hunting because you think wolves are cuddly, go watch National Geographic and start looking at wild animals with some respect rather than as plush toys. I like wolves too, but I have enough sense to support firearms use in national parks as a means of limited hunting(deer for example) and for self protection (remember all those people that got mauled by bears? The only ones that survived either got lucky or had weapons on them).

 

[direkiller]

Sarah Palin is the political equivalent of Miley Cyrus. She's retarded, has no talent for what she does, will manipulate any media-form or person to get herself more attention, and has an inexplicably devoted fanbase. They only difference is that Miley Cyrus wasn't almost VP.

Whatever she's doing at the moment, I probably disapprove. If it involves shooting wolves because 'hunting is fun,' then yeah, that shit is whack.

EDIT: have there been environmental studies conducted as to whether the wolf packs actually endanger the resources of US citizens?

The vice president has less power then Miley Cyrus(and thats a scary thing)

OT:I want more detail then "there killing wolfs!!!"

because if its i find a wolf eating my livestock in the middle of my field yea shoot it
if its very regulated hunting for food yea im for that too (Alaska alredy has this for wales,Walris,fish,seals)
if its just mindless population control not so much

so if you can find a copy of the bill so i can get details rather then just saying its bad

 

[pln9fos]

I actually keep up with the news and can sum it up as follows-

When Sarah Palin WAS the governer of Alaska, she wanted to remove Alaskan Timber Wolves fro the endangered species list so that they could be legally hunted. (usually by helicopter...damn cowards).

This is obviously not something she was capable of doing since conservation orgnizations keep tabs on population and it's really their call whether they think it's even something to discuss.

Timber Wolves from Alaska to the midwest of the U.S are still very much endangered, but I believe you're allowed to hunt them under special circumstances.


I believe in conservationism, so the shoting of wolves so only be permitted if there was some sort of freak population explosion and an unequal number of prey animals in the area (which NEVER happens for those of you who think I'm serious). So should any of Sarah Palin's ideas be taken seriously? No.

I mean jeeze, I'm a poltical libretarian and I can't stand Palin or any of these conservative wackos. They aren't the brightest people in domestic politics(as everyone knows), but then again people like Obama don't really tickle my fancy either -_-

P.S Those of you who are against hunting because you think wolves are cuddly, go watch National Geographic and start looking at wild animals with some respect rather than as plush toys. I like wolves too, but I have enough sense to support firearms use in national parks as a means of limited hunting(deer for example) and for self protection (remember all those people that got mauled by bears? The only ones that survived either got lucky or had weapons on them).

You pretty much summed up my thoughts completely with that post; I wouldn't much against people who killed wolves in self-defense or if they were competing for the same resource, but I just don't get the reasoning behind the areas where wolves are hunted for neither of those reasons.

 

[soilent]

Aerial wolf hunting, the very definition of cowardice.

 

[SimuLord]

The vice president has less power then Miley Cyrus

Tell that to Dick Cheney.

As far as the Palin-as-VP situation, I voted for Obama over McCain because the one power the VP does have is to become President if the Prez dies, and I wasn't willing to bet the future of America on McCain making it to 2012 without dying of old age or something. If he'd picked a better running mate, I'd have voted for him, but the prospect---however remote---of Sarah Palin becoming president under any circumstances scares the holy fuck out of me.

 

[dogmeat-the-stray]

While I hate Palin and consider aerial hunting to be a cruel, lazy and cowardly means of hunting (they basically exhaust the terrified animal until it makes an easy target,) I'm somewhat ambivalent on this particular situation.

Wolves are no longer endangered, and they are in competition with the Alaskans over animals they, too, eat. So it's a somewhat sympathetic situation, in my eyes.

So, while the method of hunting is quite cruel and I don't endorse the killing of any animal except out of necessity (necessity being an arguable thing,) on the grand scale of things, it hardly holds a candle to the things humans do to other animals on a regular basis. It simply gets more attention because it's wolves, an animal that has a large fan following - and most people are more eager to protest mistreatment of animals our culture has chosen to identify with (deciding that they, therefore, are superior.)

As a quick post-script, I'm not accusing you of caring about wolves and not other animals, as of course I don't know your stance on other issues based on your original post alone. I'm simply noting how many people view the situation through those eyes.