http://www.capitalpress.com/newsletter/AP-wolf-trapping-081413

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — Environmentalists upset with a federal proposal to remove protections for wolves across most of the U.S. have posted a manual on how to disrupt wolf hunts and sabotage traps.

The 12-page manual published online Monday by Earth First! tells would-be saboteurs that Internet activism alone can leave activists with an empty feeling, so “why not try direct action?”

The manual instructs how to find traps and take them out by destroying or hiding them. It also instructs how to release a trapped wolf, noting that doing so is very dangerous, and suggests forming blockades where wolf permits are sold and walking ahead of hunters with air horns.

Earth First! Media spokesman Grayson Flory said his organization published the manual written by a group calling themselves the “Redneck Wolf Lovin’ Brigade.” The impetus was the Obama administration’s announcement in June that it plans to end Endangered Species Act protections for almost all wolves in the United States, he said.

“We don’t believe something being illegal automatically makes it right or wrong,” Flory said. “The wolf hunt manual that we’re redistributing is only about protecting life, not killing it. We’re completely against the harming of living things.”

[Oh really, that’s a welcome switch from their statement in the manual that, “We are hunters and proud of it…feral hogs beware.”]

Wolf hunts already are allowed in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and Minnesota. A hunt is scheduled for this fall in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokesman Ron Aasheim said the state’s wolf hunting policy was a public process that deserved respect.

“This shows you the extremes people are willing to go to in making their points and affecting public policy,” Aasheim said. “But if something comes to pass and people do break the law, they will be prosecuted.”

Montana Trappers Association president Tom Barnes said hunters and trappers help manage the wolf population.

“All we ask is that we can manage these wolves,” Barnes said. “Hunting is a tool to do that, just like trapping, for any other animal species.”

A draft of the U.S. Department of Interior proposed rule to lift wolf protections said the roughly 6,000 wolves now living in the Northern Rockies and Great Lakes are enough to prevent the species’ extinction.

The agency says having gray wolves elsewhere — such as the West Coast, parts of New England and elsewhere in the Rockies — is unnecessary for their long-term survival.

A small population of Mexican wolves in the Southwest would continue to receive federal protections, as a distinct subspecies of the gray wolf.

Federal officials have delayed a required analysis of the proposal after a contractor provided the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with information that could have identified scientists on the anonymous review panel. At least two scientists were told they couldn’t serve on the panel because they signed a letter supporting continuing wolf protections.

More mainstream coverage here: http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20130812/NEWS01/308120015/Radical-environmental-group-advocates-wolf-hunt-sabotage

After receiving 25,000 comments from across the country and around the world, the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks commissioners refused to listen to wolf advocates and compromise on their proposed plan to increase the “bag limit” on wolves from one to five for each hunter or trapper (except on a few paltry acres around Yellowstone) and extend the hunting season to six months, without any annual cap on the culling. Despite heartfelt pleas from wolf lovers the world over to spare the lives of wolves in Montana, the commission took a “no compromise” position.

Well, two can play at that game (it seems to me I’ve heard the slogan, “No Compromise” somewhere before). God only knows what some folks might resort to when they feel their voice is being completely ignored, as though their side—the wolves’ side—is of no significance.

An article in an Idaho paper the other day carried the title, “Non-lethal control of wolves key to future.” While that may sound sensible to some people, there are others who feel the reverse would be more appropriate: non-lethal control of humans is the answer. (Some may even be tempted drop the prefix “non.”) In order for wolves to thrive (or at least survive) and for nature to begin to heal from centuries of abuse, cattle and sheep ranchers need to back off and get their forcibly domesticated grazers off the land. Meanwhile, hunters (like the outspoken members of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation) need to realize that wildlife were not put here purely for their sporting pleasure.

And as long as “game” departments keep allowing and promoting lethal control, there’s always the chance that Nature’s side might follow suit. History has shown that when push comes to shove, people won’t continually stand by while their voices are being squelched and those they care about are being “controlled” or made sport of.

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved

http://missoulian.com/news/opinion/mailbag/states-must-demonstrate-respect-for-wolves-before-assuming-management/article_90c75b9a-da84-11e2-b787-0019bb2963f4.html

letter to the editor

I was very troubled by your (June 18) editorial supporting the delisting of wolves in the lower 48.

Your editorial mentions that wildlife groups worry this could lead to the extermination of wolves in many states, and that concern isn’t unfounded. It is, in fact, supported by recent events in the form of hunting seasons in states such as Idaho and Wyoming and of course, Montana. The widespread hostility of these popular hunting states toward the wolf as a “trophy animal” and the alleged “sportsman” that are eager to simply kill the wolf is appalling. Barely on the cusp of recovery, wolves are killed for the sole purpose of a pelt, a rug or a taxidermy prize. Forty years of protection for endangered species leads to this? What a travesty.

And let’s not forget the fragile border of Yellowstone National Park in Montana, and the killing a few months back of the popular 831F, a collared Yellowstone wolf that happened to wander outside the safety of the park. How many other wolves might suffer a similar fate, a sick and sad potential future for the state of Montana if the wolves are stripped of their protection.

You also mention that if, indeed, human’s overzealous hunting practices take the wolf back to the brink of extinction, the Endangered Species Act can be applied again. What is the likelihood of the ESA being applied again once lifted? My guess is slim to none!

Certainly there can be a balance between permanent protection and wholesale slaughter. A reasonable respect to the wolf lineage that humans destroyed and have worked for many years to rebuild must be fostered before the ESA is removed from these animals, otherwise the individual states will never be able to govern themselves. This, we’ve already, unfortunately, seen.

Jennifer Selzer