Wolf Politics

The New York Times Weighs in on the wolf issue.

The New York Times doesn’t like the proposed legislation which would remove protections from wolves either.

Either [bill] would set a terrible precedent, opening the door for special-interest groups to push other inconvenient species off the list. The bills would undercut one of the primary reasons for the act, which was to relieve Congress of the impossible task of legislating protections species by species and leave the final determination to scientists and wildlife management professionals.

Wolf Politics – NYTimes.com.

31 Responses to “Wolf Politics”

  1. william huard Says:

    “What accounts for these outbursts, except the usual political pandering to hunters”. Could be his tight fitting cowboy hat- might be cutting off circulation to his brain. Everyone should call Baucus and Tester at 2022243121 and voice your opposition to a bill being added to the Appropriations Bill. How about Wyoming joining the 21st century for starters.

  2. Cody Coyote Says:

    Post this same NYT story on some of the more inflammatory antiwolf websites like the Black Bear Blog , and there will be a blizzard of commentors saying wolves should be reintroduced to Central Park…

    … which unfortunately is representative of the common majority of Baucus and Tester’s constituency. That says a lot about how our education system has failed us, especially the sciences.

    • Daniel Berg Says:

      Well I’ve heard that the occasional Coyote has no problem with calling Central Park home!

      • Cody Coyote Says:

        Ditto that . Coyotes have been seen in Central Park . Moi. The first time I ever set foot in the place, the Saturday of Easter week on a fine spring day of a 5-month hitchhiking odyssey across eastern America , Central Park was jammed with people who had spent most of that bad winter indoors. Here to my surprise hurriedly walking under the stone bridge came John Lennon in his long pea coat and dark blue round-eyed sunglasses , with Yoko and the two boys walking the other way trying to go see the fun marionette show I’d just left. The Lennons were followed by a throng of the curious at a distance, sneaking thru the trees and scurrying about. A genuine Lennon sighting draws a crowd , it seems. I looked him in the eye and just shrugged with my hands upturned as they walked by , a gesture of ” I feel for you , folks . No privacy to be had here today .

        Looking back now it was like we both want to be here but it’s hard with all these people….

        He saw a Coyote. I saw a Beatle.

    • WM Says:

      Actually, wolves in the Adirondacks in up state NY was recently a possibility, until the state of NY and the Adirondack State Park along with discouragement from the ASP economic development organization (the name of which escapes me at the moment) decided they didn’t want them.

      FWS then backed off.

      • JimT Says:

        I spent a lot of time as a youngin’ hiking, camping and canoeing in the Adirondacks. Yes, it is a HUGE area, but one that is riddled with small towns and inholdings that make it a pretty fragmented habitat from a wolf’s point of view, not to mention the usual hysteria of kids being snatched off porches arising from the opponents. Best place would be Baxter Park in Maine as far as the East goes…very small population, few roads and inholdings and LOTS of space and prey.

        But, I don’t see any Eastern politicians championing their return…so doubt it will happen unless they do it on their own, and there have been some few reports of wolf sightings, but nothing to say they are back as a viable population.

  3. Ralph Maughan Says:

    Cody Coyote,

    It does make them look like a bunch of illiterates, although it’s same way in New York. You mention “Idaho” and they will think it is the land of tornadoes and tall corn. The idea that wolf recovery is pushed from New York is absurd.

    Politicians take advantage of this geographic ignorance and parochialism almost everywhere. Most of the “states rights” argument is based on the mobilization of bias by entrenched local political elites who do not benefit from outside attention. These same elites certainly love the federal dollar though even while they often profess horror at the size of the federal deficit.

    • Elk275 Says:

      Ralph

      ++You mention “Idaho” and they will think it is the land of tornadoes and tall corn.++

      I think Iowa is what one would think of tornadoes and tall corn.

      If one mentioned Idaho then the response would be: what I have never heard of it, or why would anyone want to go there, or isn’t that where Sun Valley is, or Boise State has a good football team.

      I read that Woody Allen asked Mariel Hemmingway what is there to do in Ketchum and after several days of visiting chartered a jet out of Hailey and went back to New York.

    • STG Says:

      Well said!

  4. WM Says:

    Speaking of wolf politics, it appears reports are now coming out about the big meeting this morning in Denver with the 3 governors and Secretary Salazar. AP article:

    http://www.necn.com/11/29/10/Wyoming-gov-Meeting-seeks-roadmap-on-wol/landing_scitech.html?&blockID=3&apID=86b60b3727d4428bb7d849dd392e351d

    • william huard Says:

      “All three states are anxious to reduce wolf numbers to protect other wildlife and reduce livestock attacks.” Those robust numbers of wolves that these 3 states want to “manage” won’t be robust for long. These arbitrary numbers that the wolf haters keep throwing out there have nothing to do with scientifically viable numbers. All you will have is fragmented wolf packs that will undergo turf wars to re-establish territories. That is hardly the intent of the ESA. Once again it is ALWAYS about the hunters and ranchers

    • JB Says:

      “Freudenthal said Wyoming and the other states haven’t committed to anything. And while he emphasized that Wyoming is open to talking about changes it tactics, he said it’s not willing to change its fundamental principle that it needs to be able to manage wolves as it sees fit outside the ‘recovery area.'”

      Mark: If you are listening, this is what wildlife advocates fear for Idaho and Montana. What Wyoming is demanding is the equivalent of a big “wilderness zoo”, except instead of fences, the animals will be kept in with guns.

      • WM Says:

        So if WY continues on with its “Never give a inch” negotiation tactic (to use a phrase from a Ken Kesey novel, “Sometimes A Great Notion”), where does that leave the status of wolves in WY? Protected but possibly mysteriously dying with populations static or going down, while under protection of FWS in the predator zone?

        If they are crafting a “way forwad” something has to give on WY’s end, or ID and MT find themselves in a “Catch-22 situation forever. They could come up with respective plans that even the most strident pro-wolf group would find acceptable and wolves would still not be delisted because of the WY – I won’t play- attitude and the technical flaw of the DPS concept that keeps wolve delisted in the entire DPS even while under the protection of FWS in WY.

        Is this nonsensical, or what?

      • william huard Says:

        JB, WM

        If you guys read Predatory Bureaucracy then you would see that Wyoming has a history of this crap. Back in the 70s they were still killing eagles and hoarding poisons to use on other predators. They have no respect for the law, the ESA, or the Federal Government. This States Rights BS has put wolves right into the crosshairs scapegoat zone once again. It’s not about wolves and their protections , the focus always turns to hunters, ranchers and states rights to manage them. They are arrogant fools

      • ProWolf in WY Says:

        The only animals allowed out are the ones that are fun to shoot and taste good. (Although I don’t think antelope is particularly tasty.)

      • JimT Says:

        It essentially is what the ranchers are doing with bison; the only acceptable place for wolves would be a defacto zoo inside of Yellowstone…outside, varmints to be shot on sight with no consequences.

        There was a time in the country’s history when I could understand the tremendous bias for game animals because most families relied on hunting to feed their families..same as any predator. But today…not the case. Hunting in most instances is a chosen addition to other food supplies more easily had, and now commercial interests have taken over–ranchers and big game guiding industries. Natural predators supposedly “endanger” a revenue source, and we all know, especially after the hundreds of millions spent during this last campaign season, money rules.

  5. Rita K. Sharpe Says:

    I am not so sure that people do not know where Idaho is , after being hit with all the commericals on t.v. lately ,saying to buy Idaho potatoes and telling us to make sure we look on the label.We at least know about the potatoes in Idoho in my neck of the woods.

    • Save bears Says:

      Rita,

      I think everybody knows where Idaho is, but I just don’t think they consider it the land of Tall Corn and Tornado’s

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      Rita and Save Bears,

      I have heard people confuse Idaho and Iowa many times when back East. I know many Idahoans don’t know where New York City is in relation to New York state. They might even think they are the same.

      Is Connecticut north or south of Massachusetts?

      They don’t know the East is mostly forested country and deer exceedingly plentiful.

      More subtle things such as why there are so many lakes and forest in Minnesota, Wisconsin and U.P. would be known by few here in Idaho

      Many residents of central Idaho have probably never even heard of the Idaho batholith or of the Challis volcanics!

      People on this forum are better informed about these things than probably the other 99%. That is why they are here.

      • Barb Rupers Says:

        I know of a person who spends considerable time in the Idaho batholith country for various actividies including fishing cirque lakes which he claims are volcanic craters because of their steep walls nearly all the way around.

      • JimT Says:

        A good start for anyone interested in geography and geology of a region can be the “Roadside Geology” series for states; I can’t imagine there isn’t one for Idaho.

        I think a lot of people remember the White Supremacists in the Hayden Lake area, and all the publicity of the conflicts there. And that kind of spectacular stuff sticks in people’s minds. Personally..Idaho is a gorgeous state, but politically, it has a long way to go to climb out of the dark ages into some semblance of tolerance. Same thing could be said of any number of states as well..Arizona, the Southeast..so I am not picking on Idaho…;*)

      • JimT Says:

        Ralph, the people in New York City think they ARE New York State :~)

      • WM Says:

        …and the people in New York City (Manhattan, at least) think they run the country, and maybe the world. Some of those folks with lots of $$$ made on Wall St. are the same ones building mega-mansions, golf courses and condos in the West and ruining lots of wildlife winter range.

  6. John T. Soine Says:

    We can comment all we want on this site and others but until we send a letter or email to Salazar/Obama nothing will happen. It takes some time but the results could be fantastic.

    • Ralph Maughan Says:

      I think folks should be sending emails to Jon Tester. He isn’t going to pull his bill, but he is running for reelection in 2012 and these anti-wolf leaders are turning out to be a bunch of lawbreakers, e.g., Rex Rammell, the latest.

      He might not push it very hard.

      http://tester.senate.gov/

      I gave him money back in 2008. There could be a lot of people who won’t be so enthusiastic the next time around.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: