Or, one might say: that nurses’ ad is as brutal to Palin as Palin is to wolves.

I’ve seen the wolves ad in Oregon.

Thanks for putting quotes around “hunting”. It’s never hunting if you don’t play fair with the animal.

I’m not quite sure I get this wolf thing.  Is this a predator control thing?  They ‘hunt’ coyotes from the air in Utah but it’s the state or contractors to the state who are trying thin them out.  It’s not something you can get a freaking license for and it’s not for pelts.  Nor would I think Alaska is so small few wolves are bothering anyone.

I think the Cali Nurses ad should have been that scene from the Dead Zone where Walken shakes Sheen’s hand and has a vision of him recklessly nuking the world while President. Except you paste Palin’s or McCain’s head over Martin Sheen’s.

http://thesebastards.blogspot.com/2008/10/california-nurses-association-goes.html

You can have predator control with regular hunting. There’s no need to rig it in favor of humans.

Just when I think that Palin can’t make me any sicker than she does…

This isn’t a sport - it’s just killing, for perverts who think it’s ‘fun.’

Wait until someone teaches the wolves to shoot back - think it’ll still be ‘fun’ then?

This isn’t a sport - it’s just killing, for perverts who think it’s ‘fun.’

Wait until someone teaches the wolves to shoot back - think it’ll still be ‘fun’ then?

There is nothing wrong with reasonable predator control that allows the Alaska natives to have their right to a subsistence hunting/fishing lifestyle (which is guaranteed in the AK Constitution). But machine gunning from bi-planes isn’t reasonable—it’s overkill, cruel, and IIRC even defeated twice at the ballot box.

People out west (and I’m including Alaska in that) have some really weird ideas about wolves.  They literally consider them to be vermin, like rats or pigeons.  In Wyoming, the feds took wolves off the endangered species list this March, the state opened hunting for wolves back up and voila—wolves are be re-listed as endangered.

There’s a bizarre enthusiasm for killing wolves among some people that I just don’t get.  At least you can eat a deer or a moose or even a rabbit.

Gah!  “going to be re-listed”

Verbs are my friend.

“Wait until someone teaches the wolves to shoot back - think it’ll still be ‘fun’ then?”

::eyeroll:: call when you get back from that fantasy world.  Wait: don’t.

Personally, <u>IF</u> Alaska needs wolf control measures, I’d think private contractors/state operatives would be better suited than random hunters.  OTOH, contractors would probably cost more.

Does one need a license to collect wolf bounties?  Is there training involved?  (as if…)

I know Australia has ‘roo hunters for pop control, but I believe it’s a combination of bounty+contract, IOW no random citizen can collect the bounties.

There is nothing wrong with reasonable predator control that allows the Alaska natives to have their right to a subsistence hunting/fishing lifestyle

I am on the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund e-mail distribution list, and the message that was sent asking for donations (to enable the commerical airing of this video) states that Palin wants the wolves hunted/killed to specifically increase the number of moose, caribou, etc. available for hunting by sports hunters.  According to them, it’s not a ‘let’s keep the animal population healthy and balanced’ kind of thing.

I am inclined to believe them.

How is this different from canned hunts, exactly? 

This is just par for the course for Republicans.  They are such lowslung, slimy human beings that they can’t even hunt like the rest of humanity has for eons. 

What a bunch of losers.

I don’t know the specifics of it. I just know that there COULD be a legitimate reason for <u>normal</u> wolf hunting for the sake of the Alaska natives. I’m an easterner so…yeah. I’m not judging that part, but I CAN judge the machine gunning from airplanes part.

<blockquote>You can have predator control with regular hunting. There’s no need to rig it in favor of humans.</blockquote.

The whole point is to rig it in favor of the humans but let’s not call it hunting or sport or whatever.  It’s depredation pure and simple.  I grew up hunting but my culture looked down on killing predators because (yes, I know it sounds weird) they were fellow hunters.  I’ve always thought wolves were pretty neat.

Shorter version:  Are they allowed to do this just for *fun.*

Shorter version:  Are they allowed to do this just for *fun.*

Well then, that’s fucked up.

Pam, I really dislike that wolves ad because I think it’s misleading.  I don’t agree with aerial wolf hunting but it’s ostensibly about game management and the only people who think it’s about hunting qua hunting are people outside Alaska who don’t fully understand the context.  Alaska is really a completely different country, with a surprising number of people living subsistence lifestyles and who *need* to get a moose or caribou every year to feed themselves, a huge tourism and outfitting (hunting/fishing) industry that brings a lot of revenue into Alaska, and so on.  Plus there’s the native villages and native corporations (and if the acronym “ANCSA” doesn’t mean anything to you you don’t have a prayer of a hope of a sliver of a chance of understanding Alaska politics).

I don’t agree with aerial wolf hunting but it’s ostensibly about game management and the only people who think it’s about hunting qua hunting are people outside Alaska who don’t fully understand the context.

Melinda, please follow my link above to see what happened when Wyoming decided to open the state up to wolf hunting after they were taken off the endangered species list.

I think you may be a little too close to the situation if you think that putting a bounty on wolves is a great way to control the population.  Unless you’re one of those people who thinks we should kill all the wolves so humans can have all of the moose and caribou we want?

Heavy regulation by the government of predator hunting (when it’s needed) sounds like the right idea.

Apparently Alaskan hunters don’t approve of Palin’s hunting policies:

“Alaskan sport hunters oppose aerial hunting of bears and wolves, something Palin vehemently supports.  The last ballot measure to limit aerial hunting was actually brought forth by a group of hunters!  Sport hunters also oppose the shooting of bears habituated to human bear viewers, something Palin also supports.”

More here at Alaskan Exposure…

Mnemosyne , I’ve already said that I don’t agree with aerial hunting.  But the situation in Alaska is a heck of a lot more complicated than is being represented here and the ad is somewhat dishonest in letting viewers think this has something to do with the sport hunting of wolves.  It wouldn’t be that difficult to counter it with some piece of crap about Defenders of Wildlife trying to prevent Alaska Natives from living traditional lifestyles, or Defenders of Wildlife choosing to let impoverished Alaskans starve in order to protect wolves.  Demagogy is demagogy, and that ad is purely demagogy.

That ad from the nurses is awesome. The problem with the “both sides run negative ads, see” meme is that ads like *this* are full of accurate information. McPain is old, and he has a history of brush-with-death-bad health. Palin is an incompetent, sadistic extremist. All true. Whereas the anti-Obama ads from McPain are full of lies. They have nothing to run on.

Except, apparently, subsistence lifestyles. Really running as the party of indigenous peoples’ rights.

But the situation in Alaska is a heck of a lot more complicated than is being represented here and the ad is somewhat dishonest in letting viewers think this has something to do with the sport hunting of wolves.

That’s what they said in Wyoming, too, and within 9 months, they’ve managed to hunt wolves back to endangered species status.  Which makes me a little suspicious that allowing open hunting of wolves had much to do with game management.

I think you’re vastly underestimating how much this has to do with the sport hunting of wolves.  Putting a $150 bounty on wolves is not the best way to manage a predator population.

you all haven’t seen this: http://www.salon.com/env/feature/2008/09/08/sarah_palin_wolves/
it’s about her ramming the program through and ignoring the science behind why it was a bad idea.

Oh, and Melinda, if aerial hunting of wolves has such strong support in Alaska, why have ballot measures to ban it passed at least twice by large majorities, with it back on the ballot again this year?  Looks to me like Palin is supporting a very unpopular position.

I’m glad you brought that up, Susan. I steer clear of game hunting myself, but I’m from a part of the country that’s big on gun rights and hunting. All the hunters I know are very proud of the ‘sportsmanship’ aspect of hunting. I suppose you can debate the sporting values of waiting for deer or chasing out rabbits, but there’s nothing even debatable about going after wolves in a helicopter.

Oh, wait, Ballot Measure 2 was defeated by a slim majority ... after the legislature allotted $400,000 for “education” against the measure and tried to pass laws banning the citizens of Alaska from voting on wildlife management.

So, gosh, you’re right—shooting wolves and bears from airplanes is wildly popular in Alaska and everyone loved Sarah Palin for using state funds to try and defeat the measure!  How silly of us to think otherwise!

Mnemosyne, I’m arguing about the ad.  You’re arguing about aerial wolf hunting.  I’ve already said twice that I don’t support the latter and yet you’re still at it.  As for the question about how Alaskans feel, there’s no consensus up there and there are extremely powerful lobbies that 1) want to see the population of moose, sheep, caribou, etc. expanded and 2) think that shrinking the wolf population is the way to do it.  There are also a bunch of people who were pretty freaked out by the wolf incursions last year in North Pole and Two Rivers (wolves killed and ate pet dogs and sled dogs) and they want to see the wolf population reduced, as well.  There is not even close to a consensus in Alaska on this.

In the meantime, there’s some extremely messed-up stuff going on in Alaska today.  Anchorage and Fairbanks have been caught off-guard because a bunch of people in the villages, where gasoline and fuel oil are now running about $10/gallon, took their $1200 energy subsidy check that Palin pushed through and used it to move to cities, where the cost of living is much lower.  Suddenly there’s pressure on the schools, on social services, on housing, and so on, and you want to campaign on wolf hunts?

I’m concerned that Democrats are willing to do just about anything to get elected, which to me suggests that it’s about accreting power rather than about good government, justice, equity, and all those things that those of us on the left say matter to us.  Republicans aren’t just wrong on the issues - they behave like thugs.  I’ve been pretty unhappy with the level of thuggery among soi-disant “progressives” this year, and this ad is probably a reasonably good example of the problem.

The nurses ad is too fast, can’t read the comments (and I’m a fairly quick reader). Otherwise, its a good one.

The idea that hunting is a sport amazes and sickens me. I cant see that its “fair” unless the animal being stalked has a rifle too, and knows how to use it.  I suppose those hunters who use bow & arrows are…ok, though I still think it barbaric.  Hunting from a plane is just plain vile.

Melinda,

In what world is it okay to shoot wolf from helicopters?  Forget population control (there are other, much more ethical ways to do this).  Forget popular opinion.  This is an issue that should never be held accountable to popular opinion.  Anti-slavery wasn’t always a popular opinion, either. 

Personally I react to this issue on the same basic gut level, as when I found out that Palin had rape victims pay for their own rape kit.

Why should we not run ads that depict exactly WHO Sarah Palin is, and what we would get if we voted for her? 

And it really disturbs me that you seem to think that this is some kind of negotiable issue.  It is not. Period. Full stop.

In addition, I’d like to remind you that in those lovely intertubes of us, there are at least a hundred million websites, in addition to thousands of news organizations in mainstream media, as in TV, print, and radio.  However did you come to the belief there is no room to discuss other issues as well as this one?  I do not see the Democrats or anyone else focusing on this issue to the exclusion of others.

To me, this ad is a very clear picture of who Sarah Palin is, what she values, what she will stand up for.  It gives us the facts (yes, the facts, despite your nitpicking of irrelevant details), and gives the view information to judge for themselves.

Mnemosyne, I’m arguing about the ad.  You’re arguing about aerial wolf hunting.

Considering that the ad is about aerial wolf hunting, I’m not sure why I’m wrong to be arguing about aerial wolf hunting.  The ad says that aerial wolf hunting is bad and cruel, and that Sarah Palin supports it.  Given that she apparently came close to breaking election laws with her support of it, I’m not quite sure what your issue is with the ad or why you think it’s unfair.

Suddenly there’s pressure on the schools, on social services, on housing, and so on, and you want to campaign on wolf hunts?

We have cities in California where they’ve legalized people living in their cars and we have the highest rate of foreclosures in the country.  It took 8 months to get a budget because no one wanted to raise taxes even for the services we need, so there were mass layoffs.  Hate to break it to you, but things suck all over right now, so trying to run on the fact that the economy is bad in Alaska isn’t going to get anyone very far in a national election.

Wolf hunts are something people understand and something that sets Palin apart from every other governor.  I’m still not getting what’s so horrible and unfair about pointing out that Palin strongly supports something that a lot of people in Alaska don’t support.

Melinda - I’m not at all seeing where your concern about Dems being willing to do anything to get elected is coming from. Yeah, I’m sure there are issues more important to Alaskans than wolf hunting. However, for the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund this is, you know, their mission. I don’t know about you, but I’m comfortable with them concentrating on their mission and not running ads about housing or the bailout.

Other organizations are expressing their position on the candidates from the standpoint of their mission, so why is this one such a problem for you? It’s not misleading, because it speaks to the facts. It might be simplifying the situation in Alaska, but the Defenders of Wildlife aren’t there to support indigenous rights or subsistence hunting. Sure, they might not care about those things. It’s not their job to do so. For the rest of us, this ad simply highlights an aspect of this woman’s character we find unsavory.

I’ll be looking for the nurses’ ad. I have to figure out whether the firewall prevents playing video clips or the player on my box is obsolete (I’ve run Win2KPro for a while).

The nurse ad: music sucks and isn’t the right mood, so it distracts from the message.  Otherwise, it makes sense.

Melissa is full of shit.  I say that as someone who grew up hunting and was taught to have immense respect for the balance of wildlife in my environment.  Arial hunting is not game management, it’s sadistic, lazyass disney land murder fantasy for the wealthy.  Game management would mean designating certain areas and not others for the hunt according to surveys of the ranges. Not happening here.  Game management means LIMIT YOUR KILL don’t KILL YOUR LIMIT.  Bounties mean that most accessible places are depleted while less accessible areas are uncontrolled - again, not game management.

Don’t even pretend to think that people on this forum “don’t understand” just because we are liberal and educated for the most part.  Many of us are ethnic redneck and ethnic white trash by birth and we know our rural life quite well, thank you very much.

The re-listing of wolves in the Rocky Mountain region is based on very questionable counting techniques.  Winter aerial surveys are the most accurate ( you can actually see them, then).  Defenders of Wildlife are not exactly unbiased.  They are preservationists, not conservationists.  Big difference.  Aerial wolf hunting is, indeed,  meant as predator control and is used because it is effective, not sporting.  Not my kind of hunt.  Polar bears are at an historical high.  The ESA listing has real and very negative economic impacts on native peoples in Canada.  Preventing importation of polar bear hides, which ESA listing does, ends the incentive for U.S. citizens to hunt them.  The fact that no one travels to Canada to hunt them saves not a single bear, as the native peoples still hunt them.  The bears that are imported are from the quota allowed the native hunters.  The bears still are hunted and killed.  The difference is that the large economic impact of having non-natives come up to hunt them is lost.  The listing means lost jobs, lost income and more economic deprivation in communities where any job is precious.

tomonthebay, data please? According to the US Fish & Wildlife Service, the Alaskan polar bear population was decimated in the 70’s, recovered partially in the 80’s when bans were put into effect, and stabilized in the 90’s. According to US Fish & Wildlife, “Consequently, although there is some evidence to suggest growth for this stock in the past, the lack of current scientific information does not allow for an accurate assessment of trend.”

Having had this conversation a LOT about spotted owls vs. loggers, I appreciate your point about the economic impact on locals. People being able to make a living is very important. But once you kill everything, you’re still SOL and in the same position as before. I’m not inclined to give carte blanche for hunting simply because it would provide a near-term benefit.

You could say “fuck ‘em, they’re just bears”. So, fuck ‘em, they’re just owls. Fuck ‘em, they’re just lions. Fuck ‘em, they’re just deer. Fuck ‘em, they’re just poor people. etc. etc.  Fuck ‘em is not a sustainable system, because eventually you run out of lesser animals to fuck.

The studies (such as they are) are here.

I thought the nurse ad tried to cram too much into 30 seconds. It would have been more effective as a minute ad.

To know more about wolves in the wild, please read Never Cry Wolf by Canadian biologist Farley Mowat.  The movie made from the book is a little strange, but the book is fabulous.  You will never think about wolves in the same way.  One of the critical problems with hunting to control predators is the mistaken taking of females with cubs.  There is no way to distinguish this from an airplane.  Biological control of predators may be necessary (ask the residents as I live in a city and dont know) but it should be done by biologists after study of the most effective and humane methods.

Melinda, you say

As for the question about how Alaskans feel, there’s no consensus up there and there are extremely powerful lobbies that 1) want to see the population of moose, sheep, caribou, etc. expanded and 2) think that shrinking the wolf population is the way to do it.

And earlier:

It wouldn’t be that difficult to counter it with some piece of crap about Defenders of Wildlife trying to prevent Alaska Natives from living traditional lifestyles, or Defenders of Wildlife choosing to let impoverished Alaskans starve in order to protect wolves.

So it sounds like you’d agree that the policy is supposed to be on behalf of Alaska Natives and poor Alaskans living the frontier life.

But actually, you are the only one who mentioned the other shoe which has otherwise yet to drop in this:

...a huge tourism and outfitting (hunting/fishing) industry that brings a lot of revenue into Alaska…

There you go! Thanks for bringing it up.

Though you did sandwich it in among lots of concern for poor folks, and never mentioned it again, and it seems we have largely lost sight of it here.

Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I find it much easier to understand Palin’s policies about wolves and bears in the light of tourism dollars rather than on behalf of poor Alaskans.

For one thing it explains why she would persist in the face of mass opposition among her constituents. One dollar, one vote.

The re-listing of wolves in the Rocky Mountain region is based on very questionable counting techniques.

Statistics, please, because the federal government (which isn’t exactly known for promoting endangered species these days) seems to disagree with you.

If you actually read the article I linked to instead of deciding you know what it says without looking at it, most of the people quoted in it are ranchers who have permits to shoot any wolf who comes onto their property, and even they say that the wolf-hunting got way out of control in Wyoming.

When cattle ranchers say that people are killing too many wolves, you know there’s a major problem.

kwillow:
I have to guess you’ve probably never been hunting or talked to a hunter.  You can’t just walk into the woods, find an animal, and shoot it.  You have to find it, stalk it, and then hope you have a clear shot.  It requires extensive knowledge of the animal, the land, your weapon of choice, etc.  It’s not easy and fair chase practice used by most hunters makes for a very sporting contest between the animal and the hunter.  I used to be disgusted by hunting as well, but more knowledge has changed my view.  And, thanks to my hunting husband, we have organic, hormone free tasty red meat year round!
Also, I think arial predator control is a crappy way to go about things, but I wanted to address a disconnect that increasing tourism wouldn’t help poor Alaskans.  As in my town, I’m sure that much of Alaska’s economy is tourism based.  More tourists and hunters mean more jobs for locals. 
And I can’t even keep up with the status of wolves in my own state…but I know that as soon as wolves were delisted, some a-hole felt the need to run one down with a snowmobile so he could catch it and shoot it.  Not fair chase.

I know Australia has ‘roo hunters for pop control, but I believe it’s a combination of bounty+contract, IOW no random citizen can collect the bounties.

It’s not the same thing at all.

I am on the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund e-mail distribution list, and the message that was sent asking for donations (to enable the commerical airing of this video) states that Palin wants the wolves hunted/killed to specifically increase the number of moose, caribou, etc. available for hunting by sports hunters.  According to them, it’s not a ‘let’s keep the animal population healthy and balanced’ kind of thing.

Exactly.  Wolves are predators.  Moose, caribou (or kangaroos, for that matter) are prey animals.  Killing off the top of the food chain is not good wildlife management.  Not, unless, you are doing it so human hunters (often the “sport,” not “subsistence” variety) can have an easier go at prey animals.

Wolves are top of the food chain.  Which means there are fewer of them than the ungulates and other prey animals that they depend on.  I.e., the idea that they would become a pest species comparable to kangaroos (again, PREY animal) is ludicrous and the comparison, stupid.

I don’t know the specifics of it. I just know that there COULD be a legitimate reason for normal wolf hunting for the sake of the Alaska natives.

The only legitimate reason for hunter wolves is if an animal is a clear danger to humans.  I.e., it becomes to acclimated to humans (like some bears).  I’ve never heard of such a thing happening with wolves.  I suspect it is rare.

Also any comparison to coyotes is weak. Coyotes are now the top predator in some locales only because of the elimination of the wolf. When coyotes and wolves share the same ecosystem, the wolves kill coyotes.

(Coyotes surivived the many attempts to eliminate them because, unlike wolves, coyote fecundity increases when the population is put under pressure.  I.e., when a population is put under pressure, coyotes breed like rabbits.)

Killing wolves is not good game management, because it is ultimately bad for the prey animals that rely on wolves to keep their population healthy.  I.e., it isn’t good for subsistence hunters either.

It certainly isn’t good for the ecosystem.

And having a bloodthirsty, dominionist nutjob like Palin as Vice President isn’t any good for America.

Disclaimer: I’m an animal lover, and I have a Siberian Husky and volunteer with Siberian Husky rescue. Siberian Huskies look a lot like wolves.

I saw claims that the aerial hunting of wolves was to control wolf populations, because there were people who depended on moose and caribou meat to feed their families. So I did some research on that.

There is currently a program in Fortymile Caribou Run in Alaska that controls the wild wolf population by sterilizing some breeding pairs. But that takes time and money. Palin would rather sell permits to let people shoot wolves from planes. This study (http://www.wc.adfg.state.ak.us/index.cfm?adfg=management.research_project_detail&research_overview_id=14) by the Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game found that sterilizing and relocating wolves in Fortymile Caribou Run did not increase moose and sheep populations “because wolves were not the primary predators of moose in this system. Also, sheep appear limited by factors other than wolf predation in nearby Alaska Range systems.” They plan to write a final report in September of 2008. So killing wolves won’t help increase moose and caribou populations, but it will make money. Yet she continues this barbaric practice, which does not at all care about the agony that these animals are put through. I believe there is a special place in hell for people who enable and participate in such torture of innocent animals, and I am really pissed that this hasn’t been given more media attention.