Dem Senators Take On Palin, Offer Bill To Ban Aerial Wolf Hunting

Dem Senators Take On Palin, Offer Bill To Ban Aerial Wolf Hunting
Sam Stein. Huffington Post.

On Wednesday, Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Ben Cardin of Maryland introduced legislation that would explicitly prohibit hunters from shooting and killing wildlife from aircraft. To ensure that anyone following the issue didn’t miss the political element, the senators noted in the press release announcing the legislation’s introduction that it would specifically end the targeting of “wolves.”

The bill, which is endorsed by, among other groups, the Defenders of Wildlife, closes a loophole in the Aerial Hunting Act of 1971. And in an accompanying statement, Feinstein didn’t hide her disdain for the practice that Palin now uses to illustrate the contrast between herself and the Hollywood crowd.

July 30, 2009 related. Palin’s Last Shot On Wolves & Ashley Judd; Congress Shoots Back. By Shannyn Moore . . . “Just a girl from Homer [AK]. Huffington Post.

61 Responses to “Dem Senators Take On Palin, Offer Bill To Ban Aerial Wolf Hunting”

  1. John d. Says:

    There is a possibility that ending the aerial gunning program will not be enough, culling may still be performed using other methods.

  2. Steve c Says:

    Does this also ban helicopter shooting of coyotes or affect darting wolves from copters?

  3. Salle Says:

    Hey, at least Palin was good for something that has a positive effect… Prompting these guys to act on one horrible aspect of so called wolf management. Now let’s see if snowballs into something bigger and positive. I certainly hope that’s what happens.

  4. Maska Says:

    Now if they would just develop the backbone to take on Wildlife Services (sic). Fiscal conservatism alone should provide sufficient motivation.

  5. timz Says:

    We here in Idaho can look forward to the embarrassment of our congressional delegation opposing this bill.

  6. Larry Thorngren Says:

    Banning Wildlife Services from using helicopters to kill wolves and banning park service biologists from harassing wolves and other wildlife with helicopters in our national parks should be part of this bill.
    I watched Wildlife Services take out a wolfpack using a helicopter above McCall,Idaho a few years ago. The wolves were located using a spotter airplane homing in on the one radio- collared wolf and the helicopter had a shooter in the back using a ten gauge shotgun to kill the wolves. The collared wolf was the last one killed.
    Wolves in Yellowstone cower in the sagebrush everytime they hear a helicopter. It is time to take the helicopters and capture guns away from the park biologists as well.

  7. Cris Waller Says:

    Here’s the info on the bill-|/bss/|

    At this point, it’s too new for the text to appear. But the wording . “So, I’ve introduced a balanced bill that will enable states to responsibly manage wildlife populations, but ban the cruel practice of aerial hunting for sport.” makes me very doubtful that the bill covers Wildlife Services, which is a shame.

  8. Linda Hunter Says:

    Reading the comments to the article was really depressing. With all the money that environmental groups collect they seem to concentrate on lawsuits . . isn’t there a way they could spend some money on educational entertainment . . like maybe a movie as big as Grizzly Man but with the right information.

  9. JimT Says:

    Environmental litigation still remains the number one weapon in the activist arsenal to effect change quickly (relative to legislation process) and with the potential for positive changes on a large scale legally and physically. Education is great, but often diffuse and passive, and there are times the right tool needs to be applied to the right situation. Congress needs to fix this act, and lawsuits are one of the ways to prod them into action. Education efforts have their place as well as part of the “quiver of arrows” we use in this battle with folks who only see natural resources of all types as opportunities for profits and exploitation.

    Make no mistake..this is about Palin, and the opportunity her reputation and lack of credibility gives the enviros to get this done. I doubt adding in a bunch of stuff about Wildlife services, or other subjects would be helpful to the bill, and may just grind it to a halt. Wildlife Services will have to be a separate fight…Personally, I think they decide not to fund the agency for budgetary reasons. Period. Easier than trying to make it go away as an entity.

  10. Ralph Maughan Says:

    JimT is right, but nevertheless, I’d like to see “liberal” Hollywood do a realistic story about a Palin-type governor, a corrupt Board of Game, fat-assed airplane hunters, etc.

    It would draw a crowd if they bothered to put some research effort into it. The truth is plenty gory, so some stupid invention in the plot would be unnecessary.

  11. jdubya Says:

    Ralph, sounds like a nice 60 Minutes piece, like they did last Sunday on the poisoning of African lions. Anyone here know a 60 Minutes producer to pitch the idea to ?? If so, toss in the life story of Alex Morton as well.

  12. Lynne Stone Says:

    Most of the wolves killed by Wildlife Services in Idaho last year (I recall something like 124) were done from either one of their three fancy airplanes, or with a lease helicopter. I am curious on whether the introduced bill will include aerial gunning by WS, or not. I sure hope so. Like Larry, I’ve seen the spotter plane and chopper in action, and it’s a horrible experience. It even happens on the Sawtooth National Recreation Area, where wildlife is supposed to have a rung up over livestock.

  13. jerryB Says:

    Lynne or anyone else…….to your knowledge, does anyone have video of aerial gunning such as you describe taking place in Idaho, Montana or Wyoming? Is it possible to find out before hand of any “control” action, so that someone with a camera could document the killing?
    Just a thought, but it would be possible if one knew ahead of time, to actually fly over and catch the action from another airplane. I’m sure they don’t set up a “restricted airspace”. That’s too complicated.
    Makes me want to come out of retirement.

  14. Ralph Maughan Says:

    There have been rumors of control actions, and its pretty clear Wildlife Services doesn’t like people following them around, but I don’t think anyone has got a photo of them gunning or trapping wolves in Idaho, Wyoming, or Montana except those that are in the official files (of which I think there are plenty).

    It’s harder to get these photos than those of Cheney having people tortured.

  15. Larry Thorngren Says:

    If the control action takes all day, the helicopter has to land to refuel. The Wildlife Services Helicopter I saw landed to refuel near the road going to Granite Lake above McCall. They were just taking off to shoot more wolves when I arrived and all that was left was the fuel truck and I didn’t get any good photos of the helicopter and crew. Wolf control actions in this part of the state( McCall area) used to be covered before and after in the local paper, but killing wolves by Wildlife Services is so common place now, that it isn’t considered news. I think the Nez Perce tribe was better about informing the newspaper than the IDFG is.

  16. Ralph Maughan Says:


    Actually I think it is OK that they don’t cover this much anymore. The news releases about how wolves had killed a poor cow calf and were going to be “controlled” created a perception among those who didn’t follow it closely that wolves were running amuck when they were only 20 or 30 incidents a year.

    Some might say I’m callous that I don’t weep for the life of ewe, heifer, or calf. I don’t weep for the dead wolf either, but the expensive dead livestock/revenge process is very irritating.

    Now, minus the news releases, it is mostly a matter between Wildlife Services who wants to exact revenge and Idaho Fish and Game who takes a somewhat more measured stance (I think).

    It would be great to get a photo of Wildlife Services doing their job killing. Maybe a monetary offer would bring some photos?

  17. jerryB Says:

    “Maybe a monetary offer would bring some photos?”
    I’m all for that!…Maybe DOW would come up with a “compensation” program to reward anyone submitting video of an aerial control action( damn, I hate the term “control action”) .
    Brian….how about approaching them with that idea?????
    We could all write to Roger Sch———- and tell him to keep his backpacks and water bottles and put that $$ towards a video reward.

  18. SEAK Mossback Says:

    It may be difficult to get footage of Wildlife Services aerial gunning. Ground efforts can be much easier to document. You may recall in the 1990s in interior Alaska when Gordon Haber was paid by Friends of Animals to shadow & photograph ADF&G wolf control on the Tanana Flats. He really got the goods – video of live snared wolves in bad shape and a biologist emerging from a helicopter and trying to dispatch one with the wrong ammunition. Governor Hickel basically constructed that film set for Haber by decreeing that the program be carried out without shooting from the air, hoping to make it more publicly palatable. What resulted was a public relations debacle. Biologists ended up tending something like 700 snares (likely costing the state far more in helicopter time than simple aerial tracking and shooting), with many wolves certainly dying in a less humane fashion, and they even snared and killed a number of caribou (among other incidental catches) from the very population the program was aimed to benefit.

    Palin is a perfect lightning rod, but all sensibilities about aerial shooting went out the window with the swearing in of Frank Murkowski, the last King of Alaska, whose autocratic ways eventually made him so unpopular he came in third in the last Republican primary (The brief apex of his popularity being the public spectacle of Priscilla Feral pounding sand). I know one long-time predator control advocate (who worked for the USF&WS disseminating strychnine-laced seal baits on frozen lakes by airplane in the 1950s) and even he was set briefly back on his heels when Murkowski announced the resurrection of private pilot/gunner teams. However, it’s quickly become “the new normal”.

  19. Ralph Maughan Says:

    I don’t think the new governor of Alaska will be any better. He will be in the new much less. He is apparently not a publicity seeker.
    – – – – –
    To clarify regarding aerial gunning or calling and shooting wolves, I am interested in photos or video of this going in Idaho, Montana or Wyoming.

  20. jerryB Says:

    Couple questions……..

    Are the aircraft involved owned by WS or state agencies?
    Can they legally prevent the public from entering areas where control action is underway if it’s on public land?

  21. Brian Ertz Says:

    jerryB says :

    Maybe DOW would come up with a “compensation” program to reward anyone submitting video of an aerial control action( damn, I hate the term “control action”) .
    Brian….how about approaching them with that idea?????

    jerry – we both know i’m not the diplomat for such a suggestion 😉

    as for documenting WS while they do their dirty deed – here’s one attempt we made :

    WS speeding off when they realized that I was there with a camera to video/take photos of an agent – on public land engaged in an official capacity, rumored to be howling Soldier Mountain pack wolves in to kill on Willow Creek north of Fairfield. He sped away, presumably when he realized there was public there to document the “control action”. we did not obstruct him in any way.

    the allegation is that he proceeded to call the Camas County Sheriff on me – and file a report. this was a few weeks ago.

    so I guess what I’m saying is ~ I agree with you, and i hope we can get a reward up there – my family could use a good reward for a photograph or 2 😉

    as for your second question ~ from what i understand no, they can not legally prevent public from being present on public land, nor can they legally prevent public from documenting government officials acting in their official capacity to kill wolves on public land – so long as the public is not obstructing their work.

    though they will try to intimidate you ~

  22. JB Says:

    Anyone have the text of this bill? I am interested to see how they define “hunting”; that is, will hunting be defined such that it includes control actions, effectively closing the door on WS aerial predator control?

    “Seak Mossback” raises an important issue: Even if people here get what they want and all aerial killing of predators was banned, what would happen in lieu of aerial control? The answer: snares, leg-hold traps, and M44s. This would be more time-consuming and less effective for WS, which might be good for wolf populations. However, the individual wolves caught and killed in these actions would certainly suffer more.

    I believe that calls to do away with WS are misplaced, as the agency does provide some legitimate public services (especially when you get out of the Intermountain West). And again, you have to ask yourself what would rise to replace WS? Would you rather have animals killed by a government-regulated agency or a bunch of private wing-nuts with household chemicals in syringes attached to broomsticks? (No, I’m not exaggerating).

    Aerial “hunting” is a cowardly practice, that serves no purpose other than to entertain people with too much time and money and a twisted view of humankind’s relationship with its environment.

  23. Ralph Maughan Says:

    JB and all,

    I think there are several levels of killing wolves (or other wildlife) here. Each has its own debatable points.

    1. Aerial hunting for fun because it is easy.
    2. Aerial hunting to reduce populations and for fun
    3. Government aerial control of “problem” animals, herds, or packs.
    4. Non-aerial government control of “problem” herds, packs, or other groups of animals.
    5. Non-aerial government control of “problem” individual animals such as by treeing and shooting a cougar or trapping and killing a wolf.
    6. Private (and this doesn’t fit in the hierarchy neatly) private non-hunting, killing of animals by various methods. Many of these are already illegal if the animal is classified as wildlife by the state or federal government.

  24. JB Says:

    Good point, Ralph. My last sentence was in reference to #1 and #2. The others are much more complicated.

  25. Lynne Stone Says:

    Jerry – I don’t know if anyone besides Wildlife Services has video of aerial gunning. When I watched the Buffalo Ridge wolves being controlled in 2008, the aircraft were 1/2 mile away, too far for my camera. You can view a couple photos on our Boulder-White Clouds Council website, and read the photo essay I wrote at the time. Buffalo Ridge was the 1st pack that I ever observed at length and it was hard to see them go down because of one cattle rancher.

    Here’s the link. Click on Buffalo Ridge in the sidebar.

    Last summer I took video (the 1st I’d ever tried with a new camera) of a WS plane circling over the most popular mountain biking trail in Idaho – the Fisher-Williams Creek Loop in the White Clouds. It was flying tree top at times. But the wolves had gone into hiding that day.

    On other mornings, I watched the same white and red WS plane flying over a millionaire’s cattle ranch at Champion Creek, looking for Galena wolves to shoot. The light was too poor to try and do any video.

    My camera equipment is not designed to take video or stills like what is needed for use in ads. I was out with several people who had HD (high definition) camera this Spring, and they got good footage of the Phantom wolves near Ketchum, even at quite a distance and in dawn lighting.

  26. Lynne Stone Says:

    I just remembered this. In 2000, film maker Vanessa Schultz was taking video in the Sawtooth Valley, of on-going trapping and control of the Stanley Pack. In 2001, it was of the Whitehawk Pack. Vanessa was able to get a pilot sympathetic to wolves, to take her flying, and follow a WS trapper on an ATV as he checked traps. I recall this footage is in her film: The Cost of Freedom. WS reacted typically to the plane following the trapper, calling the sheriff, and reporting a low flying plane, harassing an agent (or words to that effect).

    On another day, several of us were pulled off 4th of July Road in the White Cloud Mountains, watching a WS plane fly in and out of the mountains, looking for wolves to shoot. A local rancher called the law and said we were blocking the road. Eventually we had the law from the Forest Service, Idaho Fish and Game, and Custer County coming up to visit us.

    It might be public land, but in rural counties where the law and ranchers don’t like wolves, or wolf supporters, or environmentalists of any ilk, one needs to be extra cautious. I was reprimanded and threatened with a ticket, for pulling over on a highway shoulder, and having a little bit of tire still on the white line. This was on a December day near Stanley when the only traffic was the mailman and the school bus.

  27. Barb Says:

    Although Palin certainly did not start the aerial hunting, she definitely supported it.

    PS: Anyone who is interested in the upcoming November 2009 Carnivore Conference, here’s information:

    And “Lords of Nature” DVD:

  28. Barb Says:

    Jerry B: What a great idea………

    “We could all write to Roger Sch———- and tell him to keep his backpacks and water bottles and put that $$ towards a video reward.”

    They must get a lot of donations from giving away that junk; otherwise, they probably wouldn’t continue?

  29. JimT Says:

    IF videos or pictures are taken as a record, I am wondering why FOIA would not apply since there is a Federal nexus here if WS is doing the shooting, or the feds are providing the funds, or the shooting is happening on federal lands. I would be both heart rending and a powerful weapon to have videos on the killings in Alaska, Idaho, Montana…DOW”s video on Palin went viral on Youtube and was credited with making a huge dent in her “cuteness” factor.

    As far as FR goes, alot of folks like getting stuff in return for their donation; alot of them are not total true believers like the folks here…~S~ I usually tell them NOT to send me a fleece or anything else…I have enough already. And it works.

  30. jerryB Says:

    Anyone interested in the” Lords of Nature” movie mentioned by Barb , it will be shown in Missoula at the Roxy Theater on Sept 3rd. Sponsored by Western Watersheds Project, Yellowstone Country Guardians and Wildlife Watchers.
    And yes, Barb…I second the “junk”

  31. Ryan Says:

    “fat-assed airplane hunters”


    No offense, but show me a state where its legal to hunt out of a plane, its illegal in almost every state to my knowledge.. The fat cat comments about AK hold no value as its illegal to hunt the same day airborne in most cases and at a minimum its illegal to hunt, even on the special hunts, within 400ft of an airplane.

  32. Lynne Stone Says:

    Re. FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests to Wildlife Services. They simply don’t answer them. Maybe this will change under a new administration. The request goes to D.C. and for eg., the last I heard, the FOIA requested by Earthjustice 18 months ago on wolves, has still gone unanswered. (If anyone knows different, please chime in.) However, the state of Idaho does respond through the State Record Request and that’s a way to at least find out some information re. control actions, since the Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game now authorizes them.

  33. Barb Says:

    I am totally against Wildlife “Services” (servicing 1,000,000 animals per year!) “lethal control” program BUT

    simply trying to disband it won’t solve the problem. Then you will have the good ol’ boys out there shooting coyotes on their own — maiming them, etc.

    There has to be AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN.

    Wildlife Services “claims” they are “working on non-lethal methods,”….. but their heart and history seems intent on killing. That’s what they’ve done for what — 100 years plus?

  34. jerryB Says:

    In 2004, I filed a FOI request with USFWS and WS about a pack that was terminated in Montana for what I still believe were bogus reasons. My request was denied…I appealed, and that was also denied. I then received notice that I would have to take them to US District Court to get the info. I couldn’t afford an attorney and got no help from the non-profits, so I had to drop it, which still haunts me.
    I learned from it…….the people at the top of these government agencies are corrupt slimeballs and some of the non-profit people are no better.

  35. Ralph Maughan Says:


    I can’t find where I said that — “fat-assed.” A least on this thread.

  36. Save bears Says:


    What reason did they cite for turning down your request?

  37. jerryB Says:

    Save Bears… I’ll dig around and send more info to your email.

  38. JimT Says:

    If memory serves, I believe Obama issued an ex.order on FOIA requests that eased most of the restrictions and directed agencies to be more cooperative, and the presumption was to assume release was ok unless there were the usual ” justifications”.

    Now, whether or not the moles from the previous Administration believe in obeying the law and the regs, or they are part of the problem…..that is a different story. FOIA can be a tricky thing to manage without a lawyer. There is out there somewhere an old “citizen’s guide to FOIA” that was actually quite helpful, but I don’t know where mine is. I will check with my wife, whose files are better than mine, and see what she can come up with. It may be so far out of date as to be virtually useless.

    JB, you may want to re-file the request with the agency; you may find a cooperative attitude with the changeover. And if there is a law school near you, check with the clinic directors…that is often a great way to get free legal help.

    Webmaster note: It is JerryB, not JB. Thanks for the comment JimT.

  39. Barb Says:

    Denied? Unbelievable. Yes, and as was suggested, an environmental attorney with a local university should be interested and able to help. Jeesh! That kind of thing really ticks me off.

  40. Save bears Says:


    Get ticked off all you want, unless you follow the proper protocol, you will be denied..that is the reason I asked if a reason could be provided or cited for the denial…

  41. timz Says:

    We need to have a few more of these planes and copters crash, than they may rethink the program

  42. Save bears Says:

    Yup Tim, that is the way to do it, as 99% of those involved in plane crashes and airplane crashes are killed, believe me, there are far better ways to get a point across and change things…and fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view , most of these pilots are ex-military and do a very good job of flying in difficult situations..

  43. Save bears Says:

    That was airplane and helo crashes are killed, but to reiterate, there are better ways to accomplish a goal that hoping someone gets killed…

  44. timz Says:

    “there are far better ways to get a point across and change things”

    Such as?? it’s been going on for years and will continue to do so. Nothing as dramatic as a good plane crash to make a point.

  45. Save bears Says:

    I don’t think a plane crash would change anything, lets look at a couple of other industries that use planes…firefighting and crop dusting, which both have fatal crashes every year, neither one of them have stopped using air planes have they? It will take legislative action to bring change, not violent crashes…any agency or business has a little thing called acceptable risk, and I am sure they have factored in a crash here and there….

  46. jerryB Says:

    Barb and Save Bears…….. if you go to this website, click on photos and scroll down to the last 3, those are the ones I obtained which pertained to my FOI request. I’ll have to find the paperwork and the exact wording, but from what I remember, they just “didn’t have any information”, so my FOI was denied. Course this was contradicted by an agency biologist familiar with the area.
    To recreate this would take pages.

  47. Save bears Says:


    That is actually a pretty common answer when a FOI request is received, the strategy is say you don’t have any information and hope the requester goes away, at this point in time you need to find a sympathetic lawyer and see if they will submit a judicial FOI request, often times they will do this for little or nothing..I would submit again, and keep submitting every time they deny your request, what this shows is a pattern of deception and failure to follow the law. Once you have established that pattern, it is normally pretty simple to find a young just out of school lawyer who will file a request for inappropriate denial of request with the court. We both know they have information and they are just using that as an excuse to not follow the law…of course a really good lawyer would interview the biologist that claims to have information…

    Timz, by the way, if you look at those photos, did ya notice there are two aircraft wrecks included, now I don’t know if any deaths were involved, but it has not changed policies…

  48. timz Says:

    “It will take legislative action to bring change”‘

    Like the “hope & change” that just got elected?

    Funny, I was riding the back roads near my house and ran in to a wolf on the road. I asked him, “hey, how’s all that Obama hope and change working out for you.” He replied, “not so well, now it’s not just WS I have to avoid, it will be hunters for 5 months a year as well.”
    I posed the same question to a bison and a grizzly I met on highway 191. The buffalo said, “not real good, they continue to kill my friends and relatives just for leaving the park looking for a meal.” The bear said, “we had a lot of us killed this year yet they still fight to keep us off the ESA list.”
    In AZ a asked a Mexican wolf the same thing, he replied,”you read Ralph’s web site why bother asking.”

    While we wait on “legislative action” wildlife keep dying. I would not be at all surprised if the PAW act fails to pass because some Western legislator will try to hang a bunch of unrelated crap on to it.

  49. timz Says:

    Oh, and please spare me the it’s “better than Bush or McCain, ” because in fact it really isn’t.

  50. Save bears Says:


    I think your mistaken, I am NOT an Obama supporter, I would love to see someone find a way to get him out of office..The best solution, is get rid of all of their asses and start over…but I know for a fact, wishing others would die, only shows the radical extremes that some are willing to go to or wishing to see happen..

    And your little scenero of what the Wolf, Bear and Bison said, is pretty cute, kind of like Little Red Riding Hood or Yogi Bear! Thanks for the incite…

  51. Save bears Says:

    “scenario”, sorry, fingers got carried away..

  52. timz Says:

    “Thanks for the incite”
    if you meant “insight” your welcome, glad you find that sad scenario “cute”.

  53. Save bears Says:

    Yup, Tim your a genius, you found the other mistake that I made…Yikes, I guess I should turn my degree in and hang my head in shame!!! Oops I guess I already did that!

    Of course if you want to see more air crashes, you can do it, grab your self a 30-06 hang back about 400 yards and a well placed shot could instigate those crashes you crave, heck a few years ago, a bowhunter shot down a helocopter with a bow because wildlife services were breaking up elk herds on the opening day of bowhunting season, so I know that an .06 could bring one down!

  54. Save bears Says:

    By the way, you did see the pictures in the link that Jerry posted of the aircraft crashes that have occurred while under the control of predator control?

    I want it stopped as much as you do, but after working wiht both the Fed’s as well as for the State, I do know what it is going to take, and wild claims, wishing for actions that get humans killed and ranting are not going to do it..I can tell you that for a fact…the agency I worked for, probably received over 1000 FOI request in the time I worked for them and I would say 95% of them were answered the same way that Jerry’s was! The ones that finally got answered were to those who became a thorn in the side of the agency..and it did change things when they finally had to disclose what we are legally entitled to…

  55. Ryan Says:


    Tenth post down..

  56. rick Says:

    Does anyone know if Texas passed their bill to allow aerial hunting of feral pigs?

  57. rick Says:

    I doubt that WS has many official pictures of aerial gunning actions. Their may be a few from WS Specialist’s personal cameras, but I don’t think a FOIA request would result in much information.

  58. rick Says:

    “Nothing as dramatic as a good plane crash to make a point.”

    “We need to have a few more of these planes and copters crash, than they may rethink the program”


    I think these comments are abhorant. How many people would you recommend be killed to stop aerial gunning? Would you personally like to choose which WS employees should be involved in the crash and then tell their families that it needed to happen to “make a point?”

  59. rick Says:

    Sorry, but one more post, Brian, was anyone with you when you got the picture of the WS truck driving around the corner?

  60. ProWolf in WY Says:

    I sure hope they can pass this. However, I do see Idaho opposing it, as timz said, along with Wyoming and possibly Montana.

  61. anthong cicci Says:

    it’s a damn shame that these hunters are so coward that they cannot have the courage and strength to go across the alaskan WILDlife in order to hunt these wolves. they are freaking cowards to do it from an aerial assault in which wolves cannot run and hide in time to avoid a shot. wolves are people shy and it’s just inhumane what the hunters are doing to these wolves, and bears.

    sarah palin thinks that hunting wolves helps preserve moose and other creatures there so that alaskan people living off the wild will have more food to eat. but, 73% of the hunters are doing the killings for sport, NOT for food.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: