Monthly Archives: January 2015
Patricia Randolph’s Madravenspeak: Touching the wild: Joe Hutto’s seven years living with mule deer
Wisconsin Wildlife Ethic-Vote Our Wildlife
“I don’t know how long I can continue because the sorrow I see in these animals is exhaustive. I can’t help but experience it with them.” – Joe Hutto
I wanted to follow up my column about Carl’s deer with a scientist’s observations about and heartfelt relationship with deer in “Touching the Wild,” a beautifully filmed, poignant documentary on public television.
Deer are the main species killed in the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources’ killing business. It is time to pay attention.
Joe Hutto, a trained wildlife biologist, says in the video that his seven-year journey started with a chance encounter with a young mule deer buck in the sagebrush. The deer “had such a peculiar interest in me.” Exchanging a series of head nods, Hutto said, “that deer was willing to see me as an individual and he very clearly saw that I also granted him his individuality. I…
View original post 931 more words
Patricia Randolph’s Madravenspeak: Touching the wild: Joe Hutto’s seven years living with mule deer
Wisconsin Wildlife Ethic-Vote Our Wildlife
“I don’t know how long I can continue because the sorrow I see in these animals is exhaustive. I can’t help but experience it with them.” – Joe Hutto
I wanted to follow up my column about Carl’s deer with a scientist’s observations about and heartfelt relationship with deer in “Touching the Wild,” a beautifully filmed, poignant documentary on public television.
Deer are the main species killed in the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources’ killing business. It is time to pay attention.
Joe Hutto, a trained wildlife biologist, says in the video that his seven-year journey started with a chance encounter with a young mule deer buck in the sagebrush. The deer “had such a peculiar interest in me.” Exchanging a series of head nods, Hutto said, “that deer was willing to see me as an individual and he very clearly saw that I also granted him his individuality. I…
View original post 931 more words
Is it Time to End Coyote Hunting in California?
Environmentalists Couldn’t Stop the Slaughter at Idaho’s Annual Coyote and Wolf Derby
http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2015/01/07/environmentalists-couldnt-stop-the-slaughter-at-idahos-annual-coyote-and-wolf-derby/
Environmentalists Couldn’t Stop the Slaughter at Idaho’s Annual Coyote and Wolf Derby
Last year I learned that anti-predator activists were organizing a predator killing derby to take place in Salmon, Idaho – a place smack dab amidst one of the largest and most breathtakingly diverse public landscapes in the country. A few of us infiltrated the event with the aim of exposing the extent of the depravity to the public (See: VICE: How to Kill a Wolf), and hopefully aiding any litigation and legislative efforts that may follow in the future with factual support.
This year the event garnered a great deal more attention from the environmental community. Lawsuits were filed but, unfortunately, the existing state of the law has yet to secure protections that would effectively curtail this very public wanton infliction of suffering, destruction of life, and appalling disregard for the potential impacts to ecological communities inhabiting this profound public landscape.
On the third day of the wolf-killing contest, an earthquake shook the mountains near Salmon, Idaho. “It’s Mother Earth revolting against the cruelty, the violence, the madness, of what’s happening here,” said Brian Ertz, president of the nonprofit advocacy group Wildlands Defense.
Read about the rest in VICE. Environmentalists Couldn’t Stop the Slaughter at Idaho’s Annual Coyote and Wolf Derby – VICE Magazine – by Christopher Ketcham
January 6, 2015
On the third day of the wolf-killing contest, an earthquake shook the mountains near Salmon, Idaho. “It’s Mother Earth revolting against the cruelty, the violence, the madness, of what’s happening here,” said Brian Ertz, president of the nonprofit advocacy group Wildlands Defense. A year ago this week, Ertz and I went undercover for VICE in Salmon to infiltrate that town’s annual Coyote and Wolf Derby, an event as primitive as it sounds: Dozens of contestants compete to mow down as many coyotes and wolves as quickly as possible, piling up the cadavers in their trucks, vying for $1,000 prizes for most animals killed. Kids as young as ten are invited to join in the slaughter with their families, with special awards handed out to the children who shed the most blood.
This is not hunting for meat. It is not hunting to prevent threats to human safety. It is killing for the sake of killing. To join in the derby was an unnerving experience for me, an immersion into the ugly side of rural mountain folkways in the American West.
I had thought, quixotically, that exposure of Salmon’s atavistic blood rites in an international magazine would have helped put an end to it. After all, much of the derby hunt occurs on federal public land, which is subject to federal law and oversight by agents of the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. A year later, however, the derby was on again, and with great fanfare. Government regulators had done nothing to stop it, and environmental groups had failed to galvanize public opinion against it. The event’s organizer, the ironically named Idaho for Wildlife, had announced, proudly, that the derby would be expanded to four days from the previous year’s two. By the end of day one, derby-goers brought in 17 coyotes to a warehouse in Salmon where their bodies were measured, weighed, and skinned, the pelts sold to fur buyers on hand for the nightly bringing-in of the dead.
Not a single representative from the environmental groups that had publicly criticized the derby—and litigated unsuccessfully to shut it down—showed up to confront the bands of hunters. The sole exception was the ad hoc crew of eight hungry young activists that Ertz, 32, had organized, among them a staff member of the ACLU of Idaho, Ritchie Eppink, who joined in the mission as a legal observer, and Stephany Seay, media director of the Buffalo Field Campaign in Montana.
There was good reason to shy away from confrontation: The folks in Salmon hate environmentalists. It’s a small town, and the people, thin-lipped and narrow-eyed, easily sniff out strangers. On the first day of the derby, Thursday, Ertz stood at a gas station in Salmon when a local ranch hand approached to offer a warning. “All these people know you’re here,” said the man, according to Ertz, “and they’re gonna be looking for you. I’d keep your head down, and, if I were you, I’d get out altogether because what they’re gonna do to you ain’t good.” By Friday, one of the activists had fled a hotel in Salmon after Idaho for Wildlife organizers called the owner and warned about environmentalists holing up there.
I asked Ertz why he was taking the risk when he could’ve tried again to go undercover. Last year, disguised as hunters in camouflage, rifles on our backs, blood thirst in our mouths, we had been welcomed in Salmon. This year, he and his colleagues broke up into teams of two; armed with video cameras, they trawled the hills in their cars to document the slaughter for a future lawsuit.
“The objective,” said Ertz, “is to be very much in their face, to let them know we’re out here on patrol, looking for violations of federal law. We want to project the image that we could be anywhere, everywhere.”
A related objective was to stand in open defiance of what Ertz described as “a culture of death.” Salmon, like many small towns in the rural West, is a ranching society. Ranchers who run their cattle on the open range have historically regarded wild predators not as majestic creatures but as vermin to be exterminated. Investigative journalist Jack Olsen, writing in his 1971
book Slaughter the Animals, Poison the Earth , concluded that the livestock industry’s hatred of predators—wolves and coyotes foremost, but also cougars, black bears, grizzlies, wolverines, lynx, bobcats, hawks, eagles, and on and on—went “so far beyond the dimensions of reality as to be almost pathological in origin.” Indeed, the desire to annihilate the enemy is not based on a rational assessment of the threat to cows and sheep. The number of rangeland livestock lost each year to carnivore depredations is insignificant—less than a half of a percent, according to the Department of Agriculture.
“These people honestly believe that sterilizing the landscape of predators will enrich their economy and preserve their culture,” says Ertz. “Events like the derby validate those who have been conditioned to believe that their way of life, or more accurately their way of death, is under assault by environmentalists. They’ve got a point. Americans in general are becoming more compassionate toward nonhuman animals, and our appreciation of ecology and the contributions of wildlife communities is growing. This awareness and compassion threatens any culture that predicates itself on wanton destruction and an appalling disregard for the suffering of sentient beings.”
By the final day, Sunday, the hunters had killed 30 coyotes, according to the event’s Facebook page. (No wolves were taken, either by trap or gunfire.) At the awards ceremony that afternoon, Ertz’s crew in separate parties attempted to enter the warehouse where the cadavers had been hung on meat hooks. One of the teams, which included Eppink of the ACLU, carried a hidden camera. They were stopped by an imperious little man in a big cowboy hat. “Are you guys entered in the contest?” he asked.
“No, we just came to see the ceremony,” said Eppink.
“Out!” said the cowboy. “There’s all kinds of animal terrorists here taking pictures and harassing us!”
When Natalie Ertz, Brian’s sister, approached to capture the spectacle of the awards with her Nikon, one of the members of Idaho for Wildlife, a woman with funny blackened teeth named Billiejo Beck, cut off her passage. “No cameras—this is private property,” she said.
“What are you hiding?” asked Natalie.
“Absolutely nothing,” said Beck.
“Where’s the property line?”
Beck pointed beyond the fencing of the parking lot, and yelled for assistance to a county sheriff who was standing nearby. So Natalie and her brother and the rest of the crew stood at the fence line. Natalie howled three times like a wolf and smiled.
When Beck again emerged, Natalie called to her: “Billiejo! I’d love to talk to you. What does wildlife mean to Idaho for Wildlife? What does wilderness mean? Wolves and coyotes are wildlife! Where’s your ethical line in killing?”
There was no response. “Why won’t you talk to me if you’re so proud of what you’re doing?”
The protesters had a partial view into the warehouse—they could spy the coyotes tossed from trucks and hung on the hooks—but Beck at last placed a bloody tarp across the doorway to obscure the line of sight.
“It’s no different from last year,” said Brian Ertz, “except in one way: This year they were forced to hide their carnival. This year they feared the cameras and scurried like cockroaches to avoid the light.”
This year, in other words, there was shame. That’s progress.
Christopher Ketcham is a contributing editor at Harper’s magazine. Write him at Cketcham99@mindspring.com.
Field identification of wolves vs coyotes often difficult; Utah’s coyote bounty criticized
The recent killing of a wolf by a coyote bounty hunter in Utah again raises the question of field identification.
Oregon, with several established wolf packs but without a statewide bounty on coyotes, nevertheless faces the same identification issues.
The Utah case hasn’t been settled, but Brett Prettyman, outdoor writer for the Salt Lake Tribune filed this story Monday and shared it through the region’s Outdoor News Group.
By Brett Prettyman
Most of the time, wolf researcher Dan MacNulty can tell the difference between the apex predators and coyotes.
In his work at Yellowstone National Park, MacNulty routinely has to correct bystanders confused by the wild canines.
“I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had people point and tell me to look at the wolf,” said MacNulty, an assistant professor of wildlife ecology at Utah State University. “I hate to rain on their parade and tell them it is a coyote.”
Telling the two animals apart — one protected by federal law, the other considered a varmint ripe for culling — can be difficult to the untrained eye, MacNulty says.
A coyote hunter who killed a 3-year-old female gray wolf Dec. 28 outside Beaver has said he couldn’t tell the difference.
More: http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/bill_monroe/index.ssf/2015/01/post_146.html
Idaho Coyote Contest Aftermath: 30 Coyotes Senselessly Killed
Here are some articles on the coyote-kill aftermath:
Predator-killing contest yields* 30 coyotes
[*Their word, not mine.]
Jan 6, 2015
Thirty coyotes but no wolves were killed during a three-day predator-hunting contest held near Salmon over the weekend, organizers reported.
The Predator Hunting Contest and Fur Rendezvous, hosted by a statewide hunters organization called Idaho for Wildlife, offered $1,000 prizes for the most wolves and most coyotes killed.
__________
Two Dozen Coyotes Killed So Far in Salmon Area Predator ‘Derby,’ No Wolves Reported Taken
Posted By Zach Hagadone on Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 2:14 PM
A wolf- and coyote-hunting derby that has caused international controversy wraps up today in the mountains outside Salmon, and according to event organizers, about two dozen coyotes have been killed so far—though no wolves.
Posting on its Facebook page, Idaho for Wildlife, which put on the derby, reported 17 coyotes killed on the first full day of the so-called Predator Hunting Contest and Fur Rendezvous, Jan. 2, and seven “non-BLM” coyotes killed the following day.
The second-annual hunt, which drew criticism around the world, was barred from Bureau of Land Management property and instead went forward on private and U.S. Forest Service land.
In an interview with Newsweek, Idaho for Wildlife Executive Director Steve Alder said more than 125 hunters entered this year’s contest, vying for $1,000 cash prizes for most animals killed. Separate prizes are offered for hunters 10 to 13 years old and 14 to 17 years old.
Wolf-Kill Derby Closes, Claiming 30 Coyote Deaths, No Wolves
Posted By Harrison Berry on Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:46 AM
A predator-hunting “derby” targeting wolves and coyotes near Salmon is over, and hunters this year brought back to base camp 30 coyotes—but no wolves.
In a Facebook post, event organizer and promoter Idaho for Wildlife closed out the derby by thanking participants and confirming the number of wolves and coyotes that had been killed during this year’s event. Facebook user Spencer Jensen left a comment, “Looking forward to it next year!”
No wolves shot at second derby, either, as earthquake spooks animals

Here’s a news item from the Associated Press: SALMON, Idaho (AP) — Hunters participating in a wolf- and coyote-shooting contest in east-central Idaho killed 30 coyotes but no wolves. Idaho for Wildlife’s Steve Alder says the Predator Hunting Contest and Fur Rendezvous that ran Friday through Sunday near Salmon drew less than 100 hunters, down slightly from last year. A 4.9-magnitude earthquake struck about 60 miles to the north of Salmon on Saturday and was followed by aftershocks on Sunday.
Hunters: Control Your Own Population
One of the unwelcome, unapproved hunter-comments received today asked the hypothetical question, “So what do you suggest?… Control the human population limiting each family to one child so we stop ‘encroaching’ animal habitat?” He surely knew not the wisdom of his words.
Dave Foreman, founder of the original Earth First!, posits in his book, Man Swarm and the Killing of Wildlife, that no one can call themselves a conservationist (and what hunter doesn’t like to call themselves a “conservationist”?) if they’re unwilling to at least acknowledge the human overpopulation problem.
The following quote from Man Swarm should make this point clear.
“…whenever conservationists spotlight threatened landscapes or wildlife, we need to bring in the ways high population and ongoing growth are behind that threat.
“Right now this is not being done. When horror stories pop up about the dreadful loss of wildlife somewhere in the world, population growth is rarely mentioned, much less blamed for it. A glaring example comes from a 2009 news story about the crash in wildlife numbers in the big game haven of Kenya. Nowhere in the article is Kenya’s skyrocketing population mentioned. Of the fabled big five animals only the buffalo is not now endangered, while Kenya could lose the others—lion, elephant, rhino and leopard. In all cases wildlife are threatened because swarming new populations of Men are pouring into former wildlife habitat. When conflicts arise, the wildeors are killed.
“In 1963, 20,000 lions lived in Kenya. In 2008 there were only 1,970. A ninety percent loss. Elephants went from 167,000 in 1963 to 16,000 in 1989. They are back at 32,000, which is still piddling. Black rhinos were poached down to 20,000 in 1970 to 391 in 1997. Now they are at 603 only with tough protection. Other big, wide-ranging wildlife are at all-time lows. Conservationists need to take such figures and show how exploding human populations are to blame and that, without serious birth reduction, wildlife will go.
“Now, let’s look at how growth is behind the Seven Ecological Wounds. Wound 1: overkill
“When I was in grade school I read the Weekly Reader telling us how more thorough harvesting of the seven seas would feed more and more mouths. Well, we did that. The upshot is crashing fisheries throughout the world, die-off of coral reefs, and the functional extinction of once-teeming highly interactive species such as cod, sharks, and tuna. When highly interactive species are killed off, their neighborhoods crumble and whither.
“As hungry little settlements swell and spread out, they gobble up bigger wildlife from rainforests and other wild lands. Even a little knot of huts with near-Stone Age tools can clean out the bigger wildlife in a nearby protected area. As more babies become more mommies and daddies, hunters go ever farther afield with snares, nets, and old guns. There are tropical National Parks still full of tall, never-cut trees and heavy lianas that are empty of big wildeors thanks to this belly-driven hunting.
“Historically, hunting has caused the extinction, local extirpation, or near extinction of wildlife, including once-highly abundant bison, passenger pigeons, shore birds, whales, cod, elephants, sea turtles, and many more. Such hunting has been driven by the “need” for meat and for new settlements and cropland by growing populations of Men worldwide and locally.”
Another Day, Another 50,000 Hunter-views
…many of whom still think they’re welcome here.
Here are a couple of their choice comments from today:
“Hunting had been a “sport” since the the 14th century… And it’s going to be around in 2015 too.”
“So what do you suggest?… Control the human population limiting each family to one child so we stop ‘encroaching’ animal habitat?”
Sorry to the rest of you to have to repeat myself, but to all the hunters visiting this blog site, hoping to leave a comment or two (or five) in defense of coyote/wolf contest hunts, go away—you weren’t invited! Some troll must have posted a link to this onto one of your evil pro-kill sites and you’ve apparently followed it back to a blog site dedicated to the defense of wildlife.
Now you think you have the First Amendment right to comment on the merits of predator killing. Well, you don’t—not here anyway. If you would have bothered to read this blog’s “About” page, you would have learned that it’s not a chat room or message board for those wanting to argue the supposed merits of animal exploitation or to defend the act of hunting or trapping in any way.
It’s not just you; in the spirit of fairness I eighty-six all comments from all types of hunters or trappers.
Believe it or not, some people might not be interested in your opinion in support of killing. I know I’m not. I’ve heard it all before, ad nauseam.
When I shared the article, “Idaho Gun Nuts Start New Year with Three-Day Mass Slaughter of Wolves and Coyotes,” I provided a link http://news360.com/article/272715208/# to the source right at the top of the page. Maybe readers there want to hear what you have to say, but this site is strictly on the side of the animals.
Again, you weren’t invited here, and if you’re on the side of killing, you’re not welcome here. No new comments are being approved, so don’t bother leaving one.
“Why Don’t I See My Comment on this Blog?”
This post is for all you predator hunt supporters out there wondering, “why hasn’t my comment been approved?” Seeing as how the number of web hits
to this blog site in the last twelve hours exploded to 98,250 and STILL CLIMBING by the minute, there’s no way I’m going to go through thousands of comments from wolf/coyote haters. (Considering that daily hits to this site average in the hundreds, the stats graph looks like a chart depicting human population growth over the past couple centuries.) Some of them are simply posting the same comment over and over, dozens of times, in hopes of overwhelming the comment section of the post, ID Gun Nuts Start Year With Three-Day Mass Slaughter Of Wolves And Coyotes. The only way I can keep up is to delete them in bulk, unread.
Too bad, but they all sound the same anyway. Actually, there’s about three different types of comments that most of them fall into.
1) The first category, I’ll call the ‘kill ’em all’ crowd:
” Kill all of them coyotes and wolves start more contests to control those over populated predators that ate killing all the other animals”
“…kill them all! Wolves are one of the biggest problems we have in Idaho, wyoming and Montana!”
2) The next group are the ‘poor me for living where there’s wildlife’ bunch:
“… maybe we should restore wolf populations to ALL its native habitat. Let’s say Central Park, Chicago, etc”
“If you are all so upset about this, petition the government to have them relocated to your house. That way you can take care of the nucience they cause”
These folks don’t seem to understand that we pretty much all (even those “tree lovers” who live in cities), have coyotes living among us, and are we’re thrilled about it.
3) By far the largest category are the smart-mouthed-smarty-pantses that just want to point out that the photo included with the article (Right) was not from this particular ongoing contest hunt in Salmon, ID. Yes, that’s true, but so what? It definitely illustrates what they’re out there trying to do: shoot mass quantities of coyotes and pile up their dead bodies like some scene out

I deleted the photo from the article in question and added the one at the bottom of this post instead.
of Auschwitz. (Just last week, nearly 40 dead coyotes were discovered, dumped in such a pile outside of Las Cruces, NM, after a coyote contest hunt was held there. The picture could have been taken anywhere; that’s not really the point).
“I’m not sure where it came from since first, the area where this event is located is covered in snow…”
And there’s a sub-category of commenters: the ones that pretend to be polite and intelligent and just wants to educate people on what they think about the merits of predator control. But intelligent-sounding comments from these folks are few and far between, and after looking through dozens, this was as close to an example as I could come up with,
“There is nothing wrong with the killing of these animals it’s a all in an order to control population. Coyotes and wolves kill livestock and game animals by keeping they’re population down it insures their long term survival and balance in the food chain. Don’t just take my word or the word of this article in stone, research for yourself what is actually going on.”
I’m sure a lot of hunters wish they hadn’t wasted their time trying to post their anti-animal comments here, but all this could have been avoided if they’d only read this blog’s “About” page first:
About:
This blog site is a haven for wildlife and animal advocates, a wildlife refuge of sorts, that’s posted “No Hunting,” as any true sanctuary should be. Just as a refuge is patrolled to keep hunters and poachers from harassing the wildlife, this blog site is monitored to keep hunters from disturbing other people’s quiet enjoyment of the natural world.
It is not a message board or a chat room for those wanting to argue the supposed merits of animal exploitation or to defend the act of hunting or trapping in any way, shape or form. There are plenty of other sites available for that sort of thing.
Hunters and trappers: For your sake, I urge you not to bother wasting your time posting your opinions in the comments section. This blog is moderated, and pro-hunting statements will not be tolerated or approved. Consider this fair warning—if you’re a hunter, sorry but your comments are going straight to the trash can. This is not a public forum for animal exploiters to discuss the pros and cons of hunting.
We’ve heard all the rationalizations for killing wildlife so many times before; there’s no point in wasting everyone’s time with more of that old, tired hunter PR drivel. Any attempt to justify the murder of our fellow animals will hereby be jettisoned into cyberspace…







