I ran across this yesterday from a photographer I follow. First of all I enjoy photography and I enjoy elk steak, but it is amazing how some people think. They love to photograph a pack of wolves killing an elk, or chasing the cows up and down the hills until the calves abort, but when a precious wolf gets killed it's a tragedy.
Here is his post and a reply:
"A bit of tragic news for Yellowstone wolf fans. The alpha female of the Lamar Canyon Pack was killed by a hunter outside the park in Wyoming as part of Wyoming's wolf hunt. While life and death is part of nature it is sad to see an animal I've watched and photographed on numerous occasions die in such a manner."
One reply was: "This killing has got to STOP---NOW!!!!! These people have no idea of what they are doing....I have NEVER seen such bitterness, hate, gun happy people and I come from a long line of hunters, environmental law officers...."
Just a little taste of what we know is out there I guess.
No, you don't come from a long line of hunters and environmental law officers. You just made that up to try and somhow legitimize the fact that you think the way you do. If you came from a long line of hunters, you'd understand the relationship between predator and prey, and you'd understand the need to properly manage, through hunting, both.
Originally Posted by Spud
I sure wouldn't be proud to say I camr from a "long line of ......enviornmental law officers"! IMHO they are a big reason why we are in so much trouble today, at least when it comes to public perception of wilderness, our use of public lands and government control. My neighbor is a retired forest service smoke jumper and supervisor. According to him too many of the young people hired by USFS, BLM and other governmental agencies dealing with wildlife and natural resources do not major in the traditional majors such as forestry, game mgmt & fisheries. They major in the enviornmental sciences and have totally changed the direction of these agencies.
A lot of the thinking today is lets go back to what it was before we(man) intervened. Think about it....no Pheasants, Chukkar, Brown Trout, Largemouth Bass in the west and a lot more species that were introduced to enhance our hunting and fishing experience.
Makes me really wonder where we are going today!
Obviously the wolf is not the problem. The photographer and his like are the problem.
Alpha male down, I say hell yea.
I suppose that i ought to be a little insulted, having made a career as a wildlife enforcement trooper for 20+ years. Like any profession, we had folks that were good, some that weren't so good. Some did the legal aspects of the job well, but had limited people skills. Others were well accepted by the public but were poor at enforcement.
I'd like to say that I did both parts well but it is a day to day or contact to contact thing. Some resource users make it a great job and I made many friends from them over the years. Others made giving them a citation a pure pleasure.
I hope you have a professional, respectful contact the next time a game warden asks to see your license. Most of our troops gave as much respect to the outdoorsman as they received from them. If they seem testy, remember the last guy they dealt with may have been a complete jerk and made them that way.
I hope I didn't insult you as my comments were not aimed at the enforcement side. I was commenting about policy making and how it has changed over the years. Just seems to me that what I have experienced is more aimed at going back to what it was over a century ago. The goal of F & G departments used to be ...what can we do to enhance the sportsmans experience? Pheasants were inported from the far east and stocked in Oregon, Chukkar from Pakistan/Afganistan and stocked in the California desert, even before then, Brown Trout brought from Europe. These are only a few of the things that were done for the sportsmen to enhance their experience. Some of the imports did not work out, but a lot did. The Chukkar for example filled a niche in the desert enviornment where there was nothing else available to hunters.
My main point is that the long range goals of a lot of these agencies is seen as a detriment to hunters and fisherman, and a lot of the public in general. The enforcement side of the equation is tasked with carrying out these policies....not making them. Sorry if I offended you!
Both akaviator and colorado cowboy have good points but even when you read both posts, you can see how divided you are and that is where the problems start. At college (Unity, ME), we had a conservation law enforcement major that I was a part of. There was a large portion of law students that had no understanding of hunting, fishing, trapping or the relationships between them and were more interested in "saving" the animals. There was also a group of tightly wound candidates that want to write as many tickets as possible. I am concerned about how the next generation views everything in such black and white terms on both sides. I have had enough experiences with law officers that hunting, fishing, and trapping rites were not properly being represented. Some of these issues might be regional as well. Maine game wardens, in my experience, have a better understanding of the relationships between hunters wildlife and the general public, than in states such as Massachusetts and Connecticut. I believe it is also the responsibility of hunters themselves to educate the public. For example: I had a Maine warden visit me at a duck hunting spot two consecutive mornings because a resident nearby made a noise complaint. I questioned the warden to make sure I was within my legal rites to hunt there. The response was "yes" as I knew it would be. On the second visit he asked if I could no longer hunt there because of the homeowner complaints. So then I expressed to him that we lose hunting rites and lands yearly and this would be one more loss if I respected his wish (which was not the law). At the end of our conversation he said, "you know what, you're right. You shouldn't have to give up your rites for someone else's convenience." If we can continue to have conversations like these instead of oneway streets, maybe we can get somewhere.
This is just my two cents.
amen. same with politics. if we have a dem prez the vice should be repub or ind. have to have conflict to make things work, but its the far far lefts and rights that mess the pot up
Maineboy and Ivorytip,
You are both spot-on correct, IMO. So is Colorado Cowboy. There is a faction of "Animal Saviors" that are getting into wildlife management. They will try to use emotion and their values to shape the future of hunting and trapping TO us, not FOR us. We all need to step up to the plate and keep our message out there to help counteract what they're trying to do.
There is a line in a Tom Selleck movie where he was in jail and an inmate say's to him " You don't have to stand tall in here, but you got to stand up" The same is true for us as sportsmen. We can figure out for ourselves what that means to each of us. For me, I teach Hunter Safety classes, which is great. I have been appointed to some applicable State boards and have memberships in several outdoor associations; RMEF, NRA etc..
It's also good to take the high ground and recognize that we can disagree with the other side without being disagreeable. Take the wolf issue. I detest the reintroduction of them and the over-protection of them that some want. I've shot several(see my icon) but still recognize then as a spectacular complex part of our eco-systems and deeply enjoy seeing and hearing them. We just have to responsibly manage them, based on science, which means killing them at times.
If the radical conservationists have their way, they'll manage on emotion, not science. That's a poor way of doing things!
I'm preaching to the choir here, I know, but remember to do the things that enhance our passion for hunting and trapping and do it ethically and responsibly. We risk losing this for our kids if we don't get involved. We can't wait for the next generation, it's our turn to stand up