IDFG adopts rules allowing trapping, snaring, baiting, and electronic calls for wolves and other predators

Inexperienced trappers will likely trap pets and other non-target animals.
Backlash will ensue

I think people should be prepared for many non-target animals to be taken with snares and traps including pets. It takes years and years for government employees to learn how to properly trap and snare wolves without taking non-target species and there have been incidents where pet dogs have been trapped even by experienced trappers.

Snares are another story altogether. Stories of pet dogs being snared around the neck are heart-wrenching and death ensues quickly. Oftentimes the owners don’t realize what is happening and are unable to release their dogs from these killing devices.

This being said, I think there will be an increase interest in wolf trapping by inexperienced trappers who will trap on or near heavily used trails and roads. I’m sure that you can imagine the bad press that will ensue if this does happen. This is a very misguided decision and it will possibly result in a strong backlash even from those who aren’t paying attention to the wolf debate.

It remains to be seen whether these activities will be allowed only in certain areas or over the entire state. Nonetheless, I predict that we will see pets taken by traps and snares.

Commissioners adopted rules that would allow the use of electronic calls for bears, mountain lions and wolves, and traps and snares for taking wolves in areas and with bag limits and seasons to be specified by the commission. The commission will set wolf seasons and limits during the August meeting in Idaho Falls.

They also adopted depredation hunts on black bears and wolves, and a provision that would allow hunters to take wolves incidental to hunting over bear bait, and extended the mandatory check-in for wolf hunts to 72 hours to report a kill and 10 days to check the skull and hide with Fish and Game.

F&G Commission Changes Game Rules
IDFG News Release

Update: The IDFG Commission also adopted a rule to “Prohibit use of telemetry or other electronic tracking to hunt game, except for use with hunting hounds or other sporting dogs.”

I wrote about this earlier in the year here:
Is it legal to hunt Idaho wildlife by honing in on radio collars?

105 Responses to “IDFG adopts rules allowing trapping, snaring, baiting, and electronic calls for wolves and other predators”

  1. mikarooni Says:

    Trappers aren’t even fully human.

    • jon Says:

      No, they aren’t. I heard from some on other forums that trapping needs to down year round in order to control the wolves.

    • jon Says:

      done is what I meant to say.

    • Mark J. Dinkel Says:

      Get ready for more pictures and stories like the one in this article – traps maim and kill indiscriminately – I hope those that are injured or who have pets injured on public lands by these things find out who set them and pursue all available legal remedies. While IDFG is unwilling to restrict trapping, there still may be issues of tortious conduct in these activities that courts can remedy.

      http://www.saljournal.com/news/story/carson-mansfield-and-trapping-31209

    • jon Says:

      Thanks for that article Mark. What surprised me a bit is that hunter saying he wants kill traps off of public lands. Good for him in realizing that traps are a danger to our pets and other animals as well and maybe even people.

  2. JB Says:

    “The sportsman has no leaders to tell him what is wrong. The sporting press no longer represents sport, it has turned billboard for the gadgeteer.”
    – Aldo Leopold

  3. Nancy Says:

    Yeah, got to agree with that comment mikarooni.

    Trapped in this day and age, pertaining to humans, means a dinner or an engagement you’d rather not attend. Whole nother defination when it comes to wildlife and the situations they find themselves in when it comes to human greed.

  4. Angela Says:

    This makes me sick and it seems so out of touch with how the general public feels about trapping and humane hunting–outside of Idaho I mean. The idea of a wolf snared around the neck with its pack mates watching makes me ill. I don’t have a dog right now, but you can bet there would be hell to pay if a dog of mine was hurt by a trap or snare. I’d probably lose it. It seems like the reintroduction of wolves has restored 19th century attitudes towards wolves. It is so far from how I feel about wildlife and hunting that I just can’t fathom what makes them tick except for some sort of dominance over nature paired with a complete lack of compassion towards animals, the denial that animals are sentient creatures, regardless of the fact that the social animals are the most intelligent of all. And on top of all that–what woman would debase herself to the degree that she would sleep with one of these brutes? Oh, wait, maybe that’s why they are out there snaring wolves. No girlfriend to beat up and an overabundance of testosterone. Time to call PETA. I really think it’s time for video documentation and sharing of the methods used to “control” wolves this time around.

    • Save bears Says:

      Time to call PETA?

      Are you sure you want to take this war to that level, because after they threatened my life a few years ago, I can tell, I will . . . . [ed]

    • Cobra Says:

      I’m there with you S.B.
      Angela,
      How come you think that all trappers must beat their wives and have low sloping forheads. The way you jumped off there your acting just like PETA. Nothing but pure emotion. Trapping and hunting will still be better than W.S. cutting loose. Hunting a trapping kills one at a time. W.S. kills entire packs in an instant. Time to think with our heads and not our hearts.

    • jon Says:

      What you fail to mention cobra is that trapping sometimes kills other animals instead of the intended target. People’s pets are also at risk.Public trapping should be banned. It’s cruel and inhumane due to the fact that other animals end up getting trapped and sometimes killed and sometimes, even people’s pets. sb. I agree with you, I don’t like peta. I dislike them for the simple fact that they are responsible for killing many many animals they rescue. I think they are better organizations out there that are animal advocates.

    • Angela Says:

      Settle down people, I was trying to be funny. I knew I should have used an emoticon.

      Cobra, I am a biologist and consider myself pretty level-headed about the whole wolf thing. It might actually be better for everyone if entire packs are wiped out instead of individuals. Let’s see the studies before making a decision.

      I do not like snaring.

    • Angela Says:

      I was trying to be funny about the women and PETA part, that is. The rest I will stand behind.

    • Save bears Says:

      Angela,

      I am a biologist as well and I don’t know any legitimate biologists that would even use the PETA name in a joke, if I may ask, what area of study and what school did you study at?

    • Angela Says:

      SB, now who is being emotional? I think your overreaction to PETA is silly. I don’t support them either, but I hardly lose my cool if their name is dropped.

      I went to a rather unconventional, but well-respected college called the Evergreen State College in Washington where I studied mammalogy, entomology, avian ecology, toxicology (gas chromatography of Puget Sound seal tissues for DDE), and spent much time in the field each year of college doing wildlife surveys and collecting and putting up museum specimens in eastern Oregon. In my last year I designed an individual study program with a limnology professor to study salmon ecology. Following that I have 23 years of work experience as a salmon and native fish biologist and wildlife biologist.

    • Save bears Says:

      Angela,

      You have to understand, I was a military officier, before I was a Wildlife biologist, after having my life threatened by them and their radial arm ALF, I don’t take the name PETA as a Joke, the individual who called me on December 14th and said when they found me in the woods, they would kill me is now serving 15-25 in the Montana State Pen, so the authorities took it very seriously as well, serious enough that they prosecuted him successfully.

      I am very familiar with Evergreen, I have worked with many who graduated from that college…I don’t consider it unconventional, but I do consider it turning out some of the fringe elements in the wildlife biology field, I received my Masters in Biology from Washington State, so I know where you studied and am familiar with the curriculum..

    • Save bears Says:

      I am now thinking since my departure from FWP in Montana, I may either further my education in biology, or as my wife is encouraging me to pursue a Law degree, I might head that route..I still have some benefits from the Military I could use to further my education, but cannot decide which way I want to go..

    • Angela Says:

      Ah, well now I better understand your response and sorry if I didn’t before.

      In terms of fringe elements coming from Evergreen, I think the reason has more to do with what kind of people want to go there rather than the quality of education itself. There is definitely more freedom to study something from a different angle; e.g., I expect that ecofeminism has been one angle because it’s well known for attracting lesbians and radical feminist types. My professors were more the 19th century naturalist types, full of enthusiasm and insistent on being in the field and not just the classroom. Some pretty fantastic biologists have also come out of Evergreen too. But yeah, if you want to be the kind of person who works at Fish and Game, you would go somewhere like Oregon State, whereas if you want to do something a little less ordinary, you would go to Evergreen. I liked it because my professors kicked me out of classes around April 1st each year and sent me to do field studies instead. I think I learned a lot more living in a wall tent in the field than in the classroom. I also studied scientific illustration, which I love, by attending courses at UW. Throughout junior high and high school I volunteered twice a week to collect behavioral data on a wide range of animals involved in enrichment programs for grad students working at the Oregon Zoo Research Center that is no longer there.

      I’m sure I have a less than “conventional” view on some things related to wildlife, but I also think that there are many wildlife biologists and managers who don’t keep up with the latest literature on animal behavior and cognition. That’s a particular non-career interest of mine and it does affect how I view certain social and intelligent animals.

    • Angela Says:

      Save Bears, have you considered Environmental Law? Great program at Lewis and Clark College ya know. Seems like you would be a great candidate for that field.

    • WM Says:

      JB,

      I too am a bit surprised at SB’s comment about PETA. Memebers of this or other groups sometimes do make threats of violent acts against. The group would be stupid to own or even be associated with illegal acts.

      However, just to add a little balance to this converation allow me to offer up that PETA has had in the past had formal relationships with its more violent cousin, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). The ALF, which is largely underground leaving a shadowy forensic trail. Membership in PETA does not preclude membership in ALF, nor funneling money to it either as individuals or as an organization, for its known “ecoterrorism” activities.

      And, as you say, some PETA members are, “well-intentioned, if a bit misguided.” It is all a continium, but some misguided souls (going beyond the bounds of the law), do stupid things. Of course, we know there are equally misguided souls in the anti-wolf crowd who are also doing illegal things. It appears some things previously illegal regarding wolves have been made legal by a misguided (in my opinion) IDFG commission. This just blows me away, really.

      Background on ALF (with a couple of references to PETA):
      http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/ecoterrorism.asp?learn_cat=extremism&learn_subcat=extremism_in_america&xpicked=4&item=eco

    • WM Says:

      Ooops, first paragraph, second sentence should read: Members of this or other groups sometimes do make threats of violent acts against people and property.

    • JB Says:

      WM:

      Along those lines…

      A few years before I went to Utah State there was an incident at the USDA Millville research facility (which houses a number of captive coyotes). Some individuals broke into the facility and set free a number of coyotes. Unfortunately, most had been captive-bred and raised and were not only habituated to people, but, food-conditioned as well. In a more serious incident at the same facility, someone set off a bomb in one of the researcher’s offices. My understanding is, had he been there, he would have been killed.

      Personally, I see no place for violence in advocating one’s political views.

      [PS. Thanks to the moderators for removing those comments]

    • Save bears Says:

      Okay, okay,

      I have very strong feelings about those two organizations, and I will continue to have them after what happened, but if I offended anyone because of my comment, then I apologize..Ralph removed the statement, and I am glad he did, I have no desired to get the blog in trouble…

  5. Angela Says:

    I have watched bear baiting videos on youtube and it really disturbed me. I guess sportsmanship means nothing to some people.

  6. pointswest Says:

    ++ And on top of all that–what woman would debase herself to the degree that she would sleep with one of these brutes? Oh, wait, maybe that’s why they are out there snaring wolves. No girlfriend to beat up and an overabundance of testosterone. ++

    That is so interesting you would say that. I went through this one period in my life where I wanted to trap for a living. I was 18 and had seen the Robert Redford movie called Jeremiah Johnson and had read a book ‘Journal of a Trapper’ by Osborn Russell. My trapping skills were a joke. I tried trapping foxes and coyotes and did not even get one, and so gave it up. I did get a couple of foxes and coyotes by chasing them down with a snowmobile and shooting them. The fur market was very high that winter and I got good money for he pelts.

    I mention this, however, because during this period when I was calling myself a trapper, I was banging this girl attending Ricks College in Rexburg, Idaho named Casey. Casey was the reigning Jr. Miss of Nevada. So I guess that’s your answer: a Jr. Miss might bang a trapper.

    I might have seriously dated her but she was way too religious for me.

    • pointswest Says:

      You know, I really like that book called ‘Journal of a Trapper’ by Osborn Russell. It was very descriptive of the Yellowstone area in the 1830’s. I noticed a few years later that in the reading list of a Playboy Centerfold, one of her favorite books was Journal of a Trapper. So I guess I Playboy Centerfold might bank a trapper too.

    • Angela Says:

      Lol, great story. Oh, I’m sure there are plenty of women willing to be with someone who traps. It appeals to their cavewoman instincts, after all.

    • pointswest Says:

      …that’s supposed to read: I guess a Playboy Centerfold might bang a trapper too.

    • pointswest Says:

      It was sort of the beginning of the ecology movment.

  7. Connie Says:

    Angela may have been joking about the PETA remark, but she is not far off the mark by implying that something needs to be done. Some group needs to be all over this trapping issue and be willing to file suit if necessary. Trapping is dangerous, cruel and sadistic.

    • Save bears Says:

      Connie,

      don’t worry, I am sure some group some place will file suit, most likely an out of state concern with deep pockets..as I said, I am not pro trapping and I think it is an activity, that probably should fade into the past, but it is amazing how it continues to bring those donations in…

      I am wondering what all of these organizations are going to do, if they finally win all of their battles!?

    • pointswest Says:

      Yes…and those donating money will live in some city with thousands of stray dogs and cats that suffer from starvation, parasites, disease, etc. and they will turn a blind eye to the long term suffering of these animals and focus on a few men trapping (emphasis on men).

      I tend to agree that trapping is cruel and should be avoided but it is interesting how groups can become focused on one form of cruelty that may not even be widespread and will turn a blind eye to a mass of suffering in the alleyways of their own city.

      And then there are the homeless and mentally ill in our citeis that suffer every day. But let’s forget all that and talk about chic things like wolf preservation.

    • MJ Says:

      Perhaps the Humane Society of the United States would take this on.

    • Angela Says:

      pointswest, don’t go down that endless road🙂 There are a million causes out there and millions of animals and millions of people suffering. You can’t force people to care about something. Often, those who care about cruelty care about all kinds of suffering because they are empathetic and compassionate people. I am really curious about all the people on the “right” these days who seem against all social welfare programs, like government health care, unemployment, etc. I wonder if they care about Haitians or animals.

    • pointswest Says:

      What people do a lot is called “acting out”. They will act out abuse because they want to call attention to the own abuse that happened to them and which was never rconciled. If you ever listen long enough to some right-winger who just wants to let people die in the streets, he/she will eventually start talking about themselves and say something like, “…because no one ever gave a shit about me. I had to work my way through high school because the old man like to beat me with a cane and only cared about his whore girlfriend.” If you listen to them long enough, that is what it always comes down to…what was done to them. They just want to call attention to what was done to them by doing it to someone else.

    • pointswest Says:

      Adolf Hitler was beat by his drunk of a father, one time so serverly that his father left him for dead. So WWII was really about a man who never had this abuse by the man who was supposed to protect him reconciled. Hitler acting out trying to call attention to the pain and turmoil inside.

    • Ryan Says:

      Angela,

      As a right winger, I don’t give 2 shits about the hatians. I care about wild places, but animals individually not so much.

      PW,

      I work my butt off, I don’t resent that my parents made me go to college or work since I was 12, what I do resent is being forced to pay for people who don feel it necessary to work and or who have made piss poor life decisions. Want health care, get a job or save your money instead of pissing it away. Fuck welfare too, it creates a culture of entitlement instead of self reliance and innovation.

    • WM Says:

      Ryan,

      I am nearly speechless. Yours are the words of someone understands little about the world, the inherent inequities and injustices it, or a desire to change it for the better. Me first, always and forever, would also seem to be your motto.

      By the way, the Haitians didn’t create their own problem. They are the exported by-product of colonial exploitation and slavery, left to rot and procreate on half an island with no resources, and no opportunities to become educated or acquire skills or economic prospects for the future. And then, whatever diety rules our world (God, if you like) decided to shit on them with a one two punch, of an earthquake, followed by shitty weather (the inequities of the world I mention above).

      And you can’t even give them the decency of compassionate acknowedgement of getting a loser hand in life, through no fault of their own. Man, do you need a smack on the back your head!

      [Ralph, Sorry for being of topic. Pull my comment if you like]

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Ryan and WM,

      Well, I had to work my way though college, sometimes 4 jobs at once. I went to work at 15.

      I probably do care more about wildlife in general than most social problems, but I know enough that people who are getting unemployment benefits (used to be called “the dole”) are mostly not there because they want to be. They lost their jobs because of economic conditions.

      I comment because I am shocked at how callous and self righteous economic right wingers are nowadays. I head it was the same during the Great Depression.

    • Ryan Says:

      I’ve never had a problem with unenjoyment, but its paid for by people who work and paid for it.

      There has been tradgedies and causes going on since the start of time and will be until the end of time. People live and people die, that includes the poor hatians. But if we are going to allocate resources, allocate them to the problems at home (preserving the enviroment etc), if you felt bad for every sad thing… You’d never leave the house…

    • Ryan Says:

      BTW, as far as being callous goes, at what point is enough enough? 25%, 50%, 75%

    • JB Says:

      Ryan:

      I won’t try and convince you of anything, but I will say that the science on the topic indicates that two factors primarily contribute to a society’s subjective well-being: their economic well-being (i.e. GDP) and the extent to which they provide a “safety net” (i.e. welfare) for their citizens.

      This figure (which appears in the work of Ronald Inglehart) tells an interest story:

    • JB Says:

      A map version of the previous figure:

    • pointswest Says:

      …but Ryan, you nearly proved my point. The first words out of your mouth were that you were made to work from the age of 12. Your motives are not about what is happening here and now to the people on welfare and unemployment, your motives are from things in past that happened you to you. You did exactly what I said a “right winger” will do, they will draw the attention to themselves to reconcile past abuses.

      I can gurantee you that you do not pay a fraction of the taxes I pay.

    • pointswest Says:

      PS I started working a lot earlier than 12.

    • Ryan Says:

      PW,

      It sounds as though you view work as a bad thing.. I wouldn’t trade it for the world. To call it an abuse is weak at best. You miss the boat completely, the point is that Hard work and accomplishment should be a matter of pride, not classified as an “abuse”…

    • pointswest Says:

      I think you are reading things into my statements. I started working for my father at nine or ten years of age along with my older brother. One thing we did was build a contract power line on Henry’s Lake Flats in exchage for a land there. It was great fun. I was driving trucks and operating equipment at the age of 9. I even got to operate a snowcat when such a thing was a real novelty in about 1966. It was the very snowcat that took the first skiiers to the top of Fred’s Mountain when the people of Driggs were contemplating the creation of the Grand Targhee ski resort. It was just fun to be up on Henry’s Lake Flats in the summer (and winter) with my father and broher and sometimes cousins and uncles…so many interesting critters and places to explore. Lots of elk and grizzlies and the like too. I enjoy work. I would work even if I was not paid.

      Why do you say that I see it as abuse?

    • Ryan Says:

      but Ryan, you nearly proved my point. The first words out of your mouth were that you were made to work from the age of 12. Your motives are not about what is happening here and now to the people on welfare and unemployment, your motives are from things in past that happened you to you. You did exactly what I said a “right winger” will do, they will draw the attention to themselves to reconcile past abuses.

      PW,

      How could I not draw that conclusion from the comment made by you above?

    • pointswest Says:

      There is nothing in your quotation about my opinions of work. I do not understand how you could possibly have come to the conclusion that I do not like to work from that quotation and you conclusion is simply wrong.

    • Ryan Says:

      “They will act out abuse because they want to call attention to the own abuse that happened to them and which was never rconciled. If you ever listen long enough to some right-winger who just wants to let people die in the streets, he/she will eventually start talking about themselves and say something like, “…because no one ever gave a shit about me. I had to work my way through high school”

      WM,

      I guess I was confused, only right wingers think work is abuse, an enlightend person like yourself knows works is a great thing… If you want to, if not somebody should be more than willing to pay for you to sit on your ass.

      Every quotation above with the exception of the one extolling your own work expirience refers to working at an early age an abuse.

    • WM Says:

      Ryan,

      You incorrectly attribute a quote from PW to me. You guys are both over the edge on this one.

      P.S. These economic times have alot of good, hard-working people unemployed who want to be working, regardless of their political views and socio-economic status. Tell me you don’t know somebody whose been kicked out of their house or had their retirement nestegg lose 1/3 its value. And, it aint over yet.

      It is probably a good time to show a little compassion for those who are involuntarily unemployed, underemployed or who have endured misfortune at the hands of these jerks on Wall Street. Goldman Sachs gets slapped with a paltry $550M fine yesterday, largest in history, and their stock goes up 5% while the rest of the Dow tanks. Lloyd Blankfein rakes in another bonus to add to his $50M/year compensation package. Gee, I wonder who runs America?

    • Ryan Says:

      Sorry WM..

      I lost 60% of my retirement. Shit happens. I know bothside of the equation, I have friends who lived beyond their means with no savings who lost their houses, and I have friends who lived within their means and survived job loss and underemployment just fine. When I lose my job (probably in the next 6 mos) I will be alright on unenjoyment until I start work again.

    • pointswest Says:

      Work in and of itself is never abuse. Being forced to work might involve abuse. You said that your parents “made” you work. That was not the case with me. I just liked doing things with my dad. Later, I wanted jobs. I was, in general, never “made” to work.

      But see Ryan, now the conversation is turning towards how you were “made” to work. So it the conversation has gone from people not working to how you were “made” to work.

      It is not appropriate to talk of this here. You can blame me for turning the conversation in this direction but I am finished with this thread now. You can have your final say but I will not respond.

    • Angela Says:

      pointswest, I thought it was an interesting psychological point and I believe I have seen evidence of this. I almost burst out laughing when I read Ryan’s response. “Exhibit A.”

  8. Jay Barr Says:

    Is the ID F&G Commission just looking for cover when they “”would allow the use of electronic calls for bears, mountain lions and wolves.” What type of vocalization would be broadcast to attract mt. lions and bears? I suppose some sort of animal in distress, whereas for wolves I’m thinking more along the lines of playing recorded wolf howls.

    I’m not here to defend trapping, but those that know what they’re doing can kill the target species humanely. For many of you I know that’s not the issue, but rather how could anyone even consider killing an animal in such a fashion? And with ID’s 72 hr. trap-check regulation I’d agree with you- it is completely unethical to set a trap and not return for 3 days in the case of those species where kill-type traps aren’t used (on the large predators like the ones this rule address [wolves, bears, cougar]).

    I’m not sure how many people would really be gung-ho to try their hand at wolf trapping; the proper traps cost upwards of $150 each, which is a substantial outlay of cash in this troubled economy. Sure there will be plenty of guys that will throw out any old trap they have access to, and like Ken says, that will result in lots of non-target animals being pinched. Traps not big enough to hold a wolf, that happen to have a wolf step in them, will get smashed up and that wolf will probably be that much smarter at avoiding such a situation again.

    • Ryan Says:

      I seriously doubt more dogs will be caught because of this, the description reads like another beg for money done by ________ (insert your group name here) there is very little over lapping personal pet and wolf habitat, and there will most likely be very little effort put out.

      Jay,

      I have called in bears with fawn in distress and know a few guys who are successful using the same calls for cougars. If I was calling wolves I’d use pups in distress or coyote howls most likely.

    • SEAK Mossback Says:

      Ryan –

      Deer bleat calling (fawn distress) was pretty much invented by the Tlingit here – probably well known over the country by now. I once tried it in the west on some mule deer does and my family had great fun watching me run for the car with a string of mule deer does closing in. Anyway, one hazard is it will at times bring in bears. A Juneau hunter was killed on south Baranof Island when a bear caught him from behind while sitting and calling. Sitka search and rescue found his rifle stuck to the hilt in muskeg and followed drag sign up the mountain well over 1,000 feet – were charged and killed the bear, a large male.

  9. WM Says:

    Notwithstanding the inartful trapping rules, many of us commenting here should be applauding the IDFG Commission’s new rule on the following, which Ken brought up as an issue (and I researched in other states and posted here). This brings ID in line the mainstream view of other wildlife agencies in the West.

    – Prohibit use of telemetry or other electronic tracking to hunt game, except for use with hunting hounds or other sporting dogs.

    Regarding trapping of wolves, do remember Judge Molloy still has to rule on delisting. So, if wolves go back on the list some of this trapping and call business for wolves at least, will go back to a protective status.

    • Ken Cole Says:

      Interesting, I knew that was on the agenda but I didn’t see it in the release yesterday. They must have changed it to add new information because I was looking to see if they adopted that rule change and it wasn’t there.

    • Ken Cole Says:

      Also, I see that the IDFG awarded bighorn sheep tags to the Wild Sheep Foundation. I guess they saw the error in their way when they awarded one of them to Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife who only got $41K for the last one they auctioned rather than the $120K that WSF got the previous year.

      I saw this as a way for the IDFG to coerce WSF back into the Bighorn Sheep/Domestic Sheep Advisory Committee. Underhanded politics at its finest.

    • JB Says:

      How do you tell hunters its unethical to use electronic devices on one hand (tracking), but okay in other instances (calls)? These inconsistencies are one of the reasons it is so hard to establish a hunting ethic. Let’s be done with the gadgetry and be consistent with our message!

    • Angela Says:

      I noticed the telemetry rule, but thought it was a pretty low bar! But how do you enforce? Anyone that uses telemetry to kill game probably breaks a lot of regulations.

  10. jerryBlack Says:

    Save Bears says……”You have to understand, I was a military officier, before I was a Wildlife biologist, after having my life threatened by them and their radial arm ALF, I don’t take the name PETA as a Joke, the individual who called me on December 14th and said when they found me in the woods, they would kill me is now serving 15-25 in the Montana State Pen, so the authorities took it very seriously as well, serious enough that they prosecuted him successfully.”

    Sounds like an interesting case and one that “inquiring minds” would like to research.
    Please give us a reference, case #, date, etc so we can read up on it.

    • WM Says:

      Ryan,

      ++i love seeing the images they capture.++

      That is exactly the reason they should be banned, at least just before and during hunting season. Seeing what is out without making the effort to be there in real time encourages illegal activities like salt licks and baiting to concentrate the animals before the camera lens. People want to increase the opportunities for recording images, and possibly acting on what they see. I came across two such cameras over illegal salt licks during elk hunting season last year. I almost engaged in a little target practice, but decided I didn’t want to ruin my own hunt, and of course that would be destruction of private property. The owner would also conclude pretty quickly who likely did it (a few, but not a lot of folks hunt in the area we do), and that would likely set off some kind of retaliation. No need to encourage a bad actor to engage in even more bad acts. I did briefly think about taking the cameras down and placing a note that said “Please call IDGF at 1-800-xxxx to reclaim your camera,” but then concluded that would still be a bit too obvious.

    • WM Says:

      jerry,

      While SB is looking up that case number, here is a little more general information on ALF for you to read and research, which SB rightfully describes as the radical and often violent shadow operation some claim is associated with PETA.

      1) Congressional testimony from the FBI on eco-terrorism 2002:

      http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/jarboe021202.htm

      2) The website below is from a near over-the-top anti-terrorist group, but the list of convictions and alleged crimes for which ALF takes credit are believed to be reasonably accurate, though stopping in 2008 (links to ALF’s own anonymous communiqué website continue the string of self described “accomplishments,” some of them quite scary).
      There are many more not reported, or stopped, and the current value of property damage caused by these illegal acts exceeds $100 million. One thing I found really interesting. ALF went after a major insurance broker (Marsh – It is the first or second largest in the US. They do insurance placements for airlines, too.) for doing placements for a large bio-research company ALF did not like. They set off smoke bombs causing office building evacuations, and I think maybe even burned something down.

      While most ALF eco-crimes are directed at property, there are incidents of attacks on persons directly, or collateral to property attacks, and commonly threats of bodily injury on all kinds of folks- with the added element of you will never know where, when or how. There should be no tolerance for this kind of crap in America.

      http://www.targetofopportunity.com/alf.htm

    • Angela Says:

      Back in 2005, Barack Obama made a statement to the Committee on Environment and Public Works, which was holding a hearing on domestic terrorism and ecoterrorism. It may have been when I first heard about him, can’t remember. Anyway, I really liked his statement:
      http://epw.senate.gov/hearing_statements.cfm?id=237833

      “We also need to put these violent acts into context. The FBI has indicated a downward trend in the number of crimes committed by these groups – approximately 60 in 2004. While I want these crimes stopped, I do not want people to think that the threat from these organizations is equivalent to other crimes faced by Americans every day. According to the FBI, there were over 7,400 hate crimes committed in 2003 – half of which racially motivated. More directly relevant to this committee, the FBI reports 450 pending environmental crimes cases involving worker endangerment or threats to public health or the environment.

      So, while I appreciate the Chairman’s interest in these fringe groups, I urge the Committee to focus its attention on larger environmental threats, such as the dangerously high blood lead levels in hundreds of thousands of children. With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, I believe the Committee’s time would be better spent learning why EPA has not promulgated regulations to deal with lead paint in remodeled homes. Such an oversight hearing could have a significant impact on improving the lives of children all over the country.”

  11. WM Says:

    JB,

    I think the concepts of call and telemetry are simply different. A call is essentially a decoy, whether visual or vocal, and whether manual or electronic. Decoys have been used for thousands of years, maybe longer by hunters to lure in their prey. Think reed or wooden duck decoy, as an example – American Indians used reed woven duck and goose decoys, long before the white man showed up on the shores of Chesapeake Bay. Electronic voices, like their predecessors, are vocal calls. American Indians became very adept at bird and small animal calls (like a fawn or rabbit in distress).

    Telemetry, in my view, is simply different. You locate and pursue the collared animal using even though you cannot see or hear it. Of course, telemetry’s original purpose was for research and not hunting, which is another big distinction. And, if telemetry is used to locate these animals for harvest, that has its own set of negative consequences – the research may be ruined and possibly at some substantial cost.

    With a decoy, the prey comes to you. With telemetry you go to the prey. Voluntary act of the prey vs. involuntary pursuit, in which the prey may choose to go away from you.

    Just to be clear, I, too, have a problem with electronic anything to hunt. It is not necessary. And, I do not like these damn game trail cameras, which some states have found the good sense to ban.

    • WM Says:

      First paragraph, second sentence: visual or audio (not vocal).

    • JB Says:

      WM:

      I appreciate the difference, my problem is with allowing these gadgets to be used to attract/call, locate, track or take game at all. Hi tech hunting just doesn’t sit well with me. But frankly speaking, it is worse in fishing. There you have lighted lures, color sonar, depth finders, etc. Christ, with the advantages of all that electronic equipment you might as well use a net! I grew up fishing out of a row boat with crawlers we picked up from under the rocks in the back yard (yeah, I know all the fly fisherman just turned up their noses).

      I guess I just have a different idea about what constitutes FAIR in “fair chase”, and it worries me that F&G agencies are not sending a clear, consistent message. Moreover, I worry that F&G agencies know that more gadgets mean more federal excise tax dollars, thus creating an incentive to allow them.

    • Ryan Says:

      WM,

      I’m the opposite, I love my trail cameras, i love seeing the images they capture. that being said, I’ve never killed a critter I have caught on my trail camera..

    • WM Says:

      Ryan,

      See reply post to you on this topic above under jerry’s comment. I am having a rough morning with spelling, grammar and organization. Must be one of those bad bio-rhythm days where all three bio-cycles of different duration hit a trough at the same time.

    • Ryan Says:

      WM,

      Salt is legal in Oregon and other many states. I like to see what is out there in the offseason, with out messing it up by tromping around in the area and running the critters out. I run them all year and get some amazing pictures.. Most of the trails cameras laws I have seen deal directly with the remote reporting cameras. I also have gps tracking collars for my bird dogs. I have way too much money invested in them to risk losing one.

  12. Mike Says:

    There is something very wrong with Idaho.

    Come on judge Molloy.

    • mikarooni Says:

      Judge Molloy may be able to rule on some specific cases; but, he really can’t issue enough rulings to correct what is very wrong with Idaho.

  13. John Glowa Says:

    Allowing trapping and snaring of wolves should come as no surprise to anyone. The real surprise is that Idaho waited so long to do it. I hope wolf advocates will have their cameras ready to photograph these animals while they are trapped/snared. An animal that has a snare around its neck is not a pretty sight after it has struggled to break free. Maine stopped the snaring of coywolves (at least temporarily) due to concerns that Fish and Wildlife could be held legally responsible for the deaths of lynx killed by snarers. Perhaps wildlife advocates in Idaho will be able to make the same argument.

  14. Nancy Says:

    WM said:
    While most ALF eco-crimes are directed at property, there are incidents of attacks on persons directly, or collateral to property attacks, and commonly threats of bodily injury on all kinds of folks- with the added element of you will never know where, when or how. There should be no tolerance for this kind of crap in America.

    Hello?????? Not in any way condoning acts of terrorism (And if you pull this Ken, I’ll understand) but the thoughts below speak volumes as to why the human species has so little tolerance and understanding when it comes to not only other species, but our own species as well.

    RELIGION AND WAR

    by Barbara G. Walker

    (author of Man Made God, et al.)

    A nation that harbors a huge, expensive war machine must employ the machine by creating wars, and must maintain a relatively unthinking public willing to support the military behemoth when fed buzzwords like “God and Country.” Hate-the-enemy propaganda is combined with promises of some kind of apotheosis — medals, adulation of heroes, elaborate honors for the dead, assurances of paradise, or sexy houris (in the Muslim view) — to make the young willing, or even eager, to throw away their lives for somebody else’s economic benefit. It is essential that the young be trained as killing-robots, expendable and replaceable parts of the machine.

    The ultimate goal of any war is not World Peace, Freedom, Democracy, Fatherland, or any other energizing buzzword. It is always economic aggrandizement: plain and simple greed. Wars are undertaken because the leaders want to seize an economic advantage from somebody else, and the somebody else doesn’t want to give it up.

    “Powers that be” are perfectly content to let their constituents become intellectually lazy, naive, ignorant and superstitious. It is not to any government’s advantage to have a savvy, thoughtful, rational public. Governments want technological expertise, sure, but they don’t want critical thinking to go along with it.

    Fundamentalist and anti-intellectual trends in society are regarded with favor by warmakers, since war machines have no place for eggheads. The young and stupid are their fodder: the younger and more stupid, the better. We despise Muslims for putting guns into the hands of thirteen-year-olds and teaching them to kill; but we seem to think it’s all right for those who are just five years older. We know any teenager is likely to be thrilled by being able to claim an adult-sized destructive power, and unlikely to be able to form any clear perception of his own physical vulnerability. Do not most of us, before we actually come of age, somehow believe that we can survive even the riskiest of situations?

    Religion serves the military establishment in a number of important ways. Religious authorities firmly support their country’s wars even if they call their deity “Prince of Peace.” (After all, Jesus did say that he brought “not peace, but a sword” [Matthew 10:34] and history has proved it so.) Religion encourages childlike obedience and dependency on the father-figures represented by the chain of command, culminating in generals, national leaders, and ultimately God. Religion evokes the Big Daddy’s rage against those who don’t worship him correctly, and gives permission to kill them. Religion preaches unquestioning faith in the establishment, in doing what one is told without hesitation, and in the rightness of punishment for going against orders. Religion also encourages belief in an after-life to allay the natural fear of death that makes all other creatures flee from danger. Inexplicably, for many people even the fear of hell is preferable to their fear of permanent nonexisten

    Militaristic societies like the expression “There are no atheists in foxholes,” though it is not a statement of fact, but an earnest wish on the part of the leaders. Atheists are not wanted in foxholes. Without Big Daddy’s orders to keep them in place, they might even prefer being a live coward to being a dead hero. By all means let the troops pray while the bombs are bursting around them: if they survive, they can thank God, and if they don’t, then their families can be comforted by the assurance (sadly) that it was God’s will. Too bad. Nobody notices that it was the will of the government more than that of God. Nor do we notice that God professes to find human life so precious as to forbid the destruction even of an unwanted fetus, since that decision would be made by a woman and not by a government. Religion thus condones even the most obvious hypocrisy.

    So the dumbing down of America is by no means deplored by all of America’s leaders, religious or otherwise. Dumb means malleable. Those who don’t think too much are more easily brainwashed, and perhaps more in need of an imaginary parental authority to tell them what is right (our way) and what is wrong (the other way), because it’s too much trouble to figure it out for themselves. As long as there are religious differences of opinion, there will be wars; and as long as there are wars, religions will conspire to keep the populace suitably naive, ignorant and superstitious.
    What gullible, malleable puppets we all are, when it comes to propaganda! In what many claim is a “Christian” country, most people grow up learning “Thou shalt not kill;” learning empathy, being trained not to injure others — on pain of risking hell, or at least the displeasure of God. We are taught good manners, thoughtfulness, tolerance. Then along comes a war, and it’s all abruptly reversed. God suddenly says thou shalt kill. Those who dare to threaten our economic comfort are all subhumans and deserve killing. What, all of them? The women and children, the innocent ones too? Yes. All of them. And the nation, mindlessly obedient, “supports the troops” that make it so.

    It has been asked, what if they gave a war and no one came? But we have a vast propaganda machine standing ready to insure attendance at whatever killing spree our government fancies. We are given a plethora of reasons to reverse all the care-for-other-humans training. God may still insist on the survival of every fetus, but he has no problem with the deliberate destruction of thousands, even millions of fully developed lives. God is ever and always the compliant tool of politicians; it’s no wonder that they are usually at pains to claim belief in him.

    As a precept, “Thou shalt not kill” didn’t even last two chapters’ worth in the Bible. The biblical God orders his chosen people to kill huge numbers of their fellow humans: ten thousand here, twenty thousand there, whole cities wiped out, every infant and suckling and animal destroyed, collectively adding up to a matter of millions. If there is any historical truth at all behind Bible mythology, it is this: the God our politicians claim to believe in is a bloodthirsty monster who not only condones war but actually commands it as the primary means of increasing temporal power. Even Hitler said that God was on his side, and so did every other war leader in the long and bloody history of Western civilization.
    Apparently we cannot imagine an end to warfare until we can, as John Lennon suggested, “Imagine no religion.”

  15. howlcolorado Says:

    I am worried about organizations like PETA being tossed in with the likes of the ALF and either of them making their way into these conversations.

    Whether you like PETA or not (I find them to be highly detrimental to the cause they supposedly support), the ALF is a completely different animal – this is not saying that PETA is a harmless group, it’s saying the ALF is a different level entirely.

    I get the feeling that SB was targeted by a crazy individual who may have claimed affiliation with a specific group. However these people tie themselves to a group to support their own agendas, usually those of anti-government violent sedition.

    Please for the mental health of all of us that actually are animal rights activists (for decades in my case) don’t bring up, even in jest, a group like PETA. They are in my mind incredibly detrimental to our message and they do little or nothing that isn’t designed to push them in to the spotlight of media coverage.

    Lets not discuss the ALF. If the closest you get to them is an internet page on wikipedia, then you can count yourselves fortunate.

    On a related note to the actual reason I think those groups even made it into the discussion, Idaho strengthened their hunting interference laws last year presumably because they assume people will start attempting to interrupt the hunts and protect wolves that way. When fox hunting was prevelent, people would lace fox trails with aniseed and create false trails to guide the hunting dogs away from where the foxes were. I guess the scent of aniseed is either very confusing or very appealing to dogs.

    I am certain there will be some who try and stop the hunting through interference, but it won’t do much other than make a few headlines while the real point is overlooked – which is that Idaho has taken a step closer to the 19th century with this decision.

    If wolves are so numerous in the state that they must be massacred how is it that hunters had such a hard time finding them and shooting them?

    • jon Says:

      Howl, there is no doubt that some pro wolf advocates will be out there trying to find traps and dispose of them, illegal or otherwise. By allowing trapping, Idaho is sending a message loud and clear, we want the wolf population severely reduced and we don’t care how it gets done even if people’s pets and other animals get caught in the traps. Traps are indiscriminate and Idaho fish and game knows that, but they are still going to allow it.

    • WM Says:

      Howl,

      I expect the conversation about PETA and ALF has taken up more space on this topic than necessary. But if you haven’t figured out there is a long association between the two groups you are not as perceptive as I believed you were. Make no mistake ALF does the wet work and heavy lifting for PETA. They are alter-egos of the same organization, one persona formal, the other informal and anonymous, AND some of the same individuals.

    • howlcolorado Says:

      WM,

      I am just going to ask you to trust me when I tell you that the only way I can see PETA and ALF being the same is if the ALF started PETA. You aren’t wrong when you say they have worked together (or at least that PETA has accepted things from ALF), but 20 years ago when I was in Europe walking the streets in protest of testing on animals, I was utterly unaware of PETA and painfully aware of, and fighting to shed the stigma of what the ALF was doing in that country.

      I couldn’t and wouldn’t argue your point regarding shared membership or that the ALF may do things for PETA. I have absolutely no insight into that – by choice I must say. That militant arm of animal rights is something which offends me to the core.

      I just know that the ALF is not some baby militant wing of PETA – to propogate that as fact is to marginalize them in a way to make them seem far less dangerous and threatening.

      Now, enough talk of those two groups. I am disturbed by just mere recollections of the ALF. And I could care less about PETA. Just do me a favour and don’t assume (and I know you don’t) that either group has anything to do with true animal rights activists.

      We care for people just as much as we care for animals. The key being that we care for both – I don’t think you can make that claim for all groups and individuals claiming this cause as their own.

  16. Craig Says:

    WOW hit the fucking panic button! You really think people who hunt are going to go out and buy traps and check all the gear just because it’s legal? It would be less than .1% of hunters who would even scew with trapping, most would just say screw it, buy a tag and if I see one shoot it!
    Jeeezus christ you guys are pathetic! It’s know wonder why everyone thinks you Wolf lovers are nuts, just read this thread!
    You blow everything so far outta perportion it’s insane! Calls will help call them in for a while until they become savy to them. But I had a pack howl at us last year while Elk hunting in Tyndle medows and tried to Cow call just to see if they would come in and they wouldn’t!
    I do not condone trapping and think it should be illegal but I gurantee people will not start trapping Wolfs if they are not trappers already!

  17. Mike Says:

    Anyone else notice how when the actions of pro-torture, anti-wolfers can’t be defended the topic mysteriously changes to another target? This is the usual tactic of the confused right wing, and this thread is no different.

    • Craig Says:

      This is your typical left wing nut job who only see’s things in the extremist way and will not listen to reason! You Mike are pathetic and a reason why there is no middle ground for both sides! I feel sorry for you and your blind view of how things really are in the world today! Your lack of reality does nothing to justify your inept reasoning of hunters or others who have a differn’t view than yourself! I myself hunt, but do not Hunt or choose to hunt Wolves! I buy a Wolf tag to help give funds to do studies, but I only eat what I kill!

    • pointswest Says:

      I agree that the “left winger” is just as irrational as the “right winger.” Something that must be understood today is the symbolic meaning of the environment. The environment is a mother symbol. Our earliest consciously perceived environment is our mother since our consciousness begins inside of our mother womb. Then, as babies, most of our waking moments are spent in our mother’s arms. Humans, until the age of three or four, are generally never very far from their mother. Consequently, on a deep cognitive and emotional level, we associate the environment with our mother. It is why we have terms such as “mother earth” or “mother nature” or why we might talk of the “mother country.” The “left winger” acts out too but it is generally about the deep ties to mother. They often want exclusivity with mother and can act this desire out by being active in environmental issues. You see particularly hostile feelings in “environmentalist” toward father figures and hear remarks thrown out at father figures or men in general. Many negative remarks are about testosterone or manhood or aggression in men. They can come from male or female. A “Left Winger” may identify with an animal and then view this animal as an innocent child of nature and express anger and hostility towards hunters or ranchers or game managers other men who interfere with these animals and their exclusive relationship with mother (mother nature). They may even want civilization to end to preserve this identified animal’s exclusive relationship with mother (mother nature). But it is not really what they want. They, like the “right winger,” are only acting out to call attention to the trauma their suffering from in resolving the symbiosis with their real mother. You see these things all over this blog.

    • Kristin, Northern CA Says:

      ^ Bs.

    • WM Says:

      Should we be reading this while in a slightly reclined position from our makeshift psychoanalytical couch?

    • pointswest Says:

      That is not to say that all aspects of environmentalism is someone’s acting out.

      I think one of the most interesting things I have ever pondered is the debate about global warming. I believe global warming is real. Most scientists believe it is real, but Bush and the right wing had most of the country convinced is was some kind of hoax or childish fantasy.

      How did they do this?

      I think it is because the right wing does see through some of the left wing’s acting out and environmentalist’s obsessive behaviors towards mother symbols. They convinced many people, near the center, that global warming was just one more left wing exclusive mother fantasy…the left wing does have many exclusive fantasies. As it turns out, however, they were wrong and it is becoming harder and harder to deny every day. Because people are aware, on some level, that the left has many fantasies, the right was able to convince many that global warming was just the latest.

      In general, there may be truth in anything but it does not preclude people from seeing some deep symbolic meaning in it and using it to act out some past trauma. So simply because people may use environmentalism to act out trauma does not mean its tenants are invalid.

    • pointswest Says:

      WM

      You do NOT want to get me started on you in a public forum. 🙂

  18. pointswest Says:

    “It is not truth that matters, but victory.”

    –Adolf Hitler

  19. Linda Hunter Says:

    I know this is a little off topic but when I hear people say they don’t want to pay for the “dole” for other people who just don’t want to work it is only out of a complete lack of understanding for the state of the human population in the US. Welfare, foodstamps and disability go to our broken, dirty, socially unemployable, crazy, chronic pain sufferers, hurt and broken walking wounded mainly caused by the perpetuation of alcohol and drug abuse with the associated domestic violence which is passed on from generation to generation in ever widening circles to include more and more of the population. Very very few people are in programs they don’t really need. I used to be an welfare worker in San Diego county before I was a boat captain. . . it is an eye opener to see the suffering that is caused by these things. If a person is really upset by paying taxes for these people they should spend some time contemplating how they can help stop the vicious circle that creates these people.

  20. Craig Says:

    I really could give a rats ass who’s left or Right wing! I care about what is going on with the inviroment and our Gov’t selling it off for energy consumpution! That’s going to be the root of everything, the more they sale, drill, explore the more we loose as Hunters or people who just enjoy being out in the Wilderness to watch! They love to see this pissing match because it lets them go in and do what they want while we fight amonsgst ourselves!Get a grip and realize this our last days/efforts to get shit stopped or were going to lose everything before long! Wolves are the very last of the big energys concerns the WS can take care of them and erase that problem with no consequences! You all better start thinking a little more towards Hunters helping or you are in for a lot worse situation than you think!

  21. jerryBlack Says:

    Yoooo General, Colonel or whatever, Save Bears….You out there somewhere???….still waiting for the case #.

    WM…..here’s a view from a different perspective on the dreaded ALF etc.

    http://www.animallaw.info/articles/ddusecoterrorism.htm

    http://www.animalliberationfront.com/ALFront/memories%20of%20freedom.pdf

    I’m not afraid of the ALF, the ELF, PETA, HSUS, Earth First etc. What does scare the hell out of me is the GOP.

    Be back in a few days to check comments (unlike some people on here, I have a life and a job).

    WM….one more comment especially for you…
    The liberation from self-absorption comes most of all in the battle to help others and in the vision of a world that makes sense to our minds, a world where no single idea holds sway.- Bill McKibben

    • WM Says:

      jerry,

      Really objective sources for ALF, there jerry, its own eco-terrorist handbook with romanticize call to action, and a psuedo-legal advocacy piece suggesting its ok to be an eco-terrorist.

      Especially like the noble term “warrior” used to describe those who engage proudly and defiantly in these illegal acts. Match it with the legal analysis that suggests that penalties for burning down buildings is too harsh and you have a real one-two punch for impressionable young minds. Gee, ya gotta wonder if any other terrorist groups, whoever and wherever they might be throughout the world, have similar tools for recruitment and to rationalize their actions?

      Think I’ll stick with the FBI testimony, a long string of criminal convictions of some individuals, and a self-proclaimed string of credits for destruction of property and a few attacks on persons.

      You are definitely right about the GOP. On one thing, at least, we agree.

  22. Urs E. Gattiker - @ComMetrics Says:

    Dear JB

    I wanted to thank you for your response to Ryan (JB Says:
    July 15, 2010 at 6:26 PM) and linking to material on our blog to support your important case.

    I wanted to point out that there are several authors to this work not just Ingelhart, namely:

    Ronald, Inglehart and Roberto, Foa and Christopher, Peterson and Christian, Welzel (2008) Development, freedom, and rising happiness – A global perspective (1981-2007). Perspectives on Psychological Science 4(3):pp. 264-285.

    You can get the article as well as more charts at the link with my name.

    Respectfully, Urs
    http://My.ComMetrics.com

    • JB Says:

      Thanks, Urs. I first encountered this figure (or one quite similar) in Inglehart and Welzel (2005), and was happy that it was so readily available online. Thanks for making this work available beyond the scientific community!

      Cheers,
      JB

      Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy : The human development sequence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

  23. Richie G. Says:

    TO SB;
    THE organizations will feel a sense of accomplishment, and move on to other cruel and inhumane treatment of animals. I must thank PETA for the clip on race horses being sold to oversears slaughter houses. A Kentucky Derby winner was sold to a person in Japan, then he sold the horse to a slaughtrerhouse that was made for cattle. The only problem was the electrode was designed for cattle not horses.The horse many times are still alive , so they are gutted alive. I must thank PETA FOR THIS ONE.

  24. Mike Says:

    *still wonders how a thread about extreme wolf killing regulations turns into an anti-environmentalist rant*

    • Ryan Says:

      You are confusing enviromentalism with liberalism..

    • howlcolorado Says:

      This really isn’t the topic of this post.

      Right wing vs. left wing doesn’t mean what it used to. Ryan says Mike is confusing Environmentalism with Liberalism, but most conservatives at this point don’t actually see a distinction.

      Don’t believe me? Ask people about global warming. Liberal conspiracy or scientific fact?

      If truth be told, there are people who merely wish to fight. The internet community refers to this as trolling. When a “news” organization can publish a statement saying that only 6 hours of their 24 hour cable news channel is news programming with the rest being opinion, you have to know it’s entertainment programming aimed at the highly vocal supporters. Give them talking points, and they will go out and wherever they can, spout those without provocation and often without context.

  25. Marc Cooke Says:

    Save bears:
    The comment about the individual that threaten your life is very disturbing and of particular interest. I am shocked that a national group would allow such behavior. Does this offender have a name?

  26. Nancy Says:

    Nice way of putting it into context, Howlcolorado.

    Tons of talking heads out there, on lots of issues, but little concern for anything other than mankind’s desire to dominate (and destroy) what’s left of the landscape and the wildlife.

    I am thankfully, living in one of the last, best places in this country. Anyone else out there feeling the same way and realizing it won’t last much longer if nothing’s done to address it?

  27. Angela Says:

    I found this thread very interesting–there are not too many venues where people having beliefs and attitudes from such a wide spectrum actually discuss the bigger picture. What I got out of reading this entire string just now was that, even though many of us disagree with each other, there does seem to be a convergence of beliefs in that most or all feel that wild places and animals are very important to us, and we wouldn’t want to live in a world without such places. Even a fur trapping tea-partier and a bunny-hugging Green might agree on this point.

    As Craig put it:
    “the more they sell, drill, explore, the more we lose as hunters or people who just enjoy being out in the wilderness…realize these are our last days to get shit stopped or we’re going to lose everything…”

    • Save bears Says:

      I agree Angela,

      Despite our differences, we all have a common bond, and have our own thoughts on how we should accomplish it..

  28. Dawn Rehill Says:

    Sounds like can hunting to me , just wrong .

  29. Richie G. Says:

    So where do we go from here? We still have our differences,about wolves and nature in general. We all agree it should be saved, I hope? But what common ground can we move on. We must join together to fight too much industrialization, that should be our common ground, now to what degree can we agree on ? That is the big question !


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: