Alaska Kills 276 Wolves During Second Season of Wolf-Shooting
On April 30, 2005, the state of Alaska concluded its second aerial wolf-shooting program, killing 276 wolves between November 2004 and April, 2005. Since the program began in November, 2003, hunters have killed a total of 420 wolves.
Friends of Animals and our organizers across the country and around the world have held 231 Howl-In protest during the two seasons of wolf control. People have joined Friends of Animals and our organizers in 40 states, the District of Columbia, Germany, Japan, Great Britain, Spain, and South Africa to protest Alaska’s disgraceful conduct.
Participants and supporters have signed postcards pledging to boycott Alaska’s $2 billion-a-year tourism industry until the state calls off the aerial wolf-shooting scheme. To date, Friends of Animals has distributed more than 470,000 of these postcards.
To spread the word, Friends of Animals advertisements have appeared in The New York Times Sunday Magazine, Mother Jones Magazine, The Nation, USA Today, the New Jersey Star Ledger, and other publications. We also have a compelling, 60-second TV spot that can be viewed on our website.
Persistence will be the key to ending aerial predator control programs. We continue to challenge the legality of Alaska’s wolf-killing program in the Superior Court in Anchorage. Please write Gov. Murkowski and tell him you’ll boycott travel to Alaska until his wolf control campaign ends.
Address:
Gov. Frank Murkowski
P.O. Box 11001
Juneau, AK 99811
E-mail:
governor@gov.state.ak.us
Phone:
907-465-3500
Fax:
907-465-3532
Kindly support a tourism boycott of Alaska to put economic pressure on the people responsible for establishing the killing policy: the Murkowski administration. Your financial contributions to FoA strengthen our efforts to empower Alaska’s wolves.
Post your comment
Comment Guidelines: We welcome your expressions of opinion on this subject. Please avoid false commentary about individuals or groups. Facts must be verified by the person posting. Off-topic comments, and comments inappropriate for a readership of all ages, may be deleted. E-mail addresses will never be published. Only comments with valid e-mail address will be published.
46 Comments
On June 7, 2005, Ana María Aboglio wrote:
Wolves are one of the most important non human animals in the worlds. They have intrinsic value as all the sentient beings but the wolf is also a symbol of the nature that the civilization wants to destroy and dominate. It is very important this program of Friends of Animals to de-mith-ing “the beast”.
Ana María Aboglio.
Ánima. Argentina.
On June 11, 2005, Lee Hall wrote:
Thank you for your kind note, Ana, and for joining the discussion. Do you mean that wolves have received a special designation as objects of acute human anger? It seems that this is indeed the case.
Jon Coleman, author of the new book Vicious: Wolves And Men In America, states that wolf-haters seek mementos of power … a stockpile of masculine totems—guns, skins—and that their victims heads “helped a small man feel big.”
To paraphrase Alice Walker, the wolves exist for their own reasons. They might have been symbols to some, but to themselves, they are real individuals of flesh and blood, with mates, communities, and interests of their own. We strive to respect them on their own terms, and we’ll continue our interventions on their behalf, hoping that others will join the call. Glad to have you with us.
Lee Hall,
Friends of Animals.
On June 12, 2005, Ana María Aboglio wrote:
Hello Lee!
Yes, I mean that and more yet. I am thinking about mythical animal and the distortion of the meaning of the behaviour of wolves emphasizing some aspects of it to spread the anthropocentric idea that they embody the bad instincts of human animal.The wolfman. The ferocious wolf in Little Red Riding Hoods. “The beast of the desert and desolation”, as T. Roosevelt called them. The features of their behaviour are very good for a hunting human society but are very bad for a cattleman and a few times people remember that it’s because the wolf is the dog’s ancestor that dogs are be able to cohabit with us.
In Europe there were horrific slaughters but in America I think it was worst. The cruelty was incredible. They were poisoned with others animals too. The wolves were tortured in public places until the death. (E.Curnow say that there was a “pathologic hate”.) This cuestion isn’t a problem with the real wolf.
Mike PHillips said that he had learned from wolves one important things among others: Humility. We have to create a new symbol: The wolf as a wonderful non human animal. A friend to Little Red Riding Hood.
Ana Maria Aboglio.
On June 14, 2005, Marie wrote:
If the aerial wolf-hunting program isn’t stopped then they’ll hunt the Alaskan wolves to extinction just like North America has done to 7 other types of wolf. This way of killing them is brutal because the wolves can’t fight back or even get away. People need to learn to conserve wildlife and not destroy it.
On June 17, 2005, J Bowne wrote:
Perhaps you should travel to Oregon and let us hunt you. It is so simple to use guns to kill defenseless animals…just as we kill defenseless people in Iraq and Afghanistan. When will we learn to be part of the web of life instead of its detroyer!!!
On June 22, 2005, Marjorie Markley wrote:
You mean to tell me that there is not enough room in Alaska for wolves. If not there? Where? This is OUTRAGEOUS, do we start an aerial human hunt — we definitely have too many of them? Wolves are vital to the environment! The killing of ANY animal because there are too many or because they have nice fur SHOULD BE STOPPED IMMEDIATELY. We are supposed to be on the top of the evolutionary ladder — Are we sure about that? Why don’t we stop human overpopulation? We don’t do that, yet we kill innocent and vital animals. It’s sickening, stupid, inhumane, and against God’s law.
On June 27, 2005, star-scent wrote:
“North America” was in wonderful condition, a pristine paradise, when the humans from the other side of the water arrived. Now our world has been demolished, stolen from us, used. The soil cries out in pain, the trees wail. It’s a big enough world—why can’t we share it? Why must they see blood to be assured of their dominance? These humans are rulers more cruel than an alpha who has fallen victim to the foaming sickness. Yet we rest assured under the waning moon that there are a few who have not let go of the compassion that they were created to have.
star-scent
On July 19, 2005, Kristal wrote:
Well I know they kill other animals for two reasons beacouse they might be to many of them or they would starve to death,but i think its just wrong to kill them because there beautiful animals.
On August 3, 2005, TRM wrote:
PLEASE STOP THE MADDNESS….This is so wrong in so many ways.. This is teaching our children it’s ok to kill animals for no reason, it makes me so ANGRY that people are so STUPID…
On August 6, 2005, scully wrote:
wolves have parents just like we do. wolves have children and babies just like we do. wolves have brothers and sisters just like we do. wolves are in families just like us. do not kill us we are just like you.
On August 15, 2005, upset upstater wrote:
It fails to suprise that all of humanity has lost all sense of decency.We can find a cow in canada that may have had mad cow but we cant create a safe habbitat for wolves.The system is fundamentaly wrong and our elected officals are part of the problem.The powers that be have a big eraser,We all need to live by a diffrent set of rules.
On August 17, 2005, Lynn Marie Heckel-Taavola wrote:
I believe in controlling a animal population if there is a problem of over population which leads to starvation, sufferring,death. Or if they are sick or diseased and can cause more damage to the rest of their pack or herd. Simply killing off a beautiful creature is unfair and unjust. It most come to an end. The wolf has to be saved. It is far to wonderful a creature to be extinct.
On August 18, 2005, Kelsey wrote:
I believe wolves are the most wonderful creatures in the world!- They are clever, considerate to each other and most of all beautiful!- I do not know who hunters think they are killing poor innocent animals just to act like some big cheese!- They believe killing a poor defenseless animal is very manly!- I believe it is sicekning and makes me want to cry, hunters must have a big black hole where their heart is supposed to be!- Wolves were here before us and deserve to be treated with respect,kindness and consideration!- After all dogs descend from wolves!- So how would hunters like it if someone went up to their gun dog and just shot it!- It’s basically the same thing as killing a wolf!- We have to remember we are all EQUALS on this planet and this INCLUDES THE ANIMALs!~
On August 19, 2005, Rebecca Rodriguez wrote:
PLEASE STOP ALL OF THISKILLING CANT WE LIVE IN WORLD OF PEACE!!!
On August 23, 2005, Ellie Maldonado wrote:
It’s important to remember that absent human interference, non-human animals will stabilize their populations in keeping with their habitat, and achieve a natural balance between prey and predator.
Although hunters claim certain free-living animals are overpopulated, close inspection often shows their statistics are exaggerated. In fact, hunting disrupts ecological balance, and leads to an unnatural increase in population.
Every conscious being has interests that should be respected, regardless of species, intelligence, or appearance that we may or may not find appealing.
Ellie Maldonado
Friends of Animals in New York City
On September 17, 2005, samantha lynch wrote:
wow why would people do this.thats really rude.they should put a stop to this.people dont think that the wolves are almost like humans.they need to eat sleep and live just like we do.why doesnt anyone understand that.they should put a stop.they dont need to kill them for their fur either.how about if someone did that to them and used their skin for coats.well this needs to stop now!
On September 18, 2005, Holy Roller wrote:
That’s horrible!. Wolves are so important to this world. Having a season, just to Kill these magnificent creatures is doing the unthinkable. God put us on the earht for a reason. Humanity is destroying it! We have sooo many endangered spiecies that are rapidly disappearing. Has anyone elso noticed that it’s all humanities fault?! I hate being human!
On September 21, 2005, Samantha Carter wrote:
That is so sad that they kill wolves. Do you even know why they kill them. I mean they are such beautiful, graceful, and smart animals.
ttfn
sam!
On September 21, 2005, Samantha Carter wrote:
I agree with you TRM it is s wrong to kill for ANY REASON
ttfn
sam!
On September 30, 2005, Lisa L from MA wrote:
Maybe these ignorant people should open a book and see what these beautiful smart animals are all about. Do they not relize that wolves are such an important part of our World? How can this be legal? Why would they want them killed? Bring them to Idaho or Oregon where “real people appreciate their beauty. I’m quite sure the Nez Perce would love to take them in.
On September 30, 2005, Samantha Carter wrote:
We should do something like have more Howl-in protests or something we can’t just sit around while animals are being killed! by doing so we might as well be helping them!!!!
ttfn
Sam!!
On October 4, 2005, Marsha wrote:
I really feel sadened when I think there are people who enjoy killing beautiful wolves just for the sport of killing.They may think it’s ok but I believe some day when they meet the higher power they then will be held accountable.
On October 10, 2005, Donna Whitman wrote:
I totally agree with the person who says they hate being human. To think that I belong to this race of killers saddens my heart. The wolves deserve every right to exist on this planet as well as so many other animals that man is desicrating. I would just love to be able to go to Alaska and hunt the hunters and see how they would like to be chased down to exhaustion, poisoned or whatever I see fit. See how they would like it!!!!!!!!!
[ Blog editors’ note: Thank you for writing in, Donna. You might take courage from Martin Luther King, who once wrote:
“The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it… Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate…. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid
of stars. Darkness cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”]
On October 24, 2005, lindsay laforce wrote:
wolves are my favorite animal and it just sickens me to see some of the things they are doing in not just alaska, but mostly every where to these poor animals. if we all just stop and look at ourselves we’ll realize that the wolves aren’t the monster here but us ourselves!!!
On October 29, 2005, Lauren Weeks wrote:
The mass killing of wolves in Alaska is going to lead to the same problems we see in the rest of the US: Overpopulated herbivore herds that become unhealthy and genetically weakened by a lack of predation. Wolves are key members of the ecosystem. They are more efficient at keeping herbivore populations down than hunters, and promote healthy, strong, intelligent hoofstock. Alaska needs to learn from history in every single other continent of the world, and realize that killing wolves kills a healthy environment.
On November 9, 2005, JA from AK wrote:
I am just curious if any of the comments posted here came from people living in Alaska. Or from anyone who has seen a wolf in the wild. I fail to see how a boycott on the tourism industry will help save the wolves, please enlighten me. I have seen a growth in tourism since the boycotts started, perhaps its time to figure out another strategy. I am also confused by those who say they would like to come to Alaska and ‘hunt the hunters’. I realize they are just blowing off steam, but what a bizarre statement.
[ Blog editors’ note: Yes, and we did address that statement before, JA. As we wrote to the commenter:
“The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it… Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate…. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”
If you are asking if people of Friends of Animals have ever seen free-living wolves, the answer is Yes. Some of the other commenters might not have seen them, but that is because wolves have few areas of wilderness left. Best wishes to you.]
On November 10, 2005, m gore wrote:
Are you also friends of the baby moose and caribou, and the mother moose killed for her baby in the womb and that’s it? If that is ok for the wolf to do then it’s also ok to manage them so the wolves themselves don’t starve to overpredation. I’ve lived in Alaska and the wolves are definitely beating the moose and caribou, the moose are few and far between. Read Sidney Sheldon’s book for another historical perspective on this subject from someone who has lived it. Listen to the native elders for they truly know what’s best.
On November 10, 2005, Priscilla Feral wrote:
Not all Alaskans — Native elders or others — share the same views. Fourteen percent of Alaska’s residents hold hunting licenses. Twice in recent years, the majority of Alaska’s voters have voted to prohibit aerial wolf-shooting. Gov. Murkowski’s opinions on predator control influence his bureaucrary, and the Fish & Game Board members he appoints. Since November 2003, to appease the Department of Fish & Widlife’s hunter-clients, the State has sponsored shooting wolves from aircraft to make moose and caribou hunting easier in five areas of Alaska over a five-year period.
Friends of Animals maintains that the State can’t gerrymander to justify wolf control. We’re adamantly opposed to a tightknit groups of politicians who contrive and inflate animal populations and hunting goals to justify aerial wolf-shootings. Further, we think the world community should have something to say about the treatment of wolves and other free-living animals. These animals don’t belong to Alaska, or any certain state. Their home is the planet.
Hundreds of thousands of residents inside and outside Alaska, have supported a tourism boycott — sending a message to the Murkowski administration that the State shouldn’t be rewarded for deploying an air force to decimate wolves and bears. Money appears to be the only language Gov. Murkowski understands. Meanwhile, we’ll continue to oppose Alaska’s wolf control program at every level, in every forum, and at every opportunity.
Retributions include an educational program, a tourism boycott and legal challenge. Friends of Animals is waiting for a ruling in our lawsuit. It’s possible we’ll have a ruling against the State, holding that the current predator control programs are illegal. Such a decision would halt airborne or same-day airborne wolf-shooting this Fall and Winter.
Priscilla Feral
Friends of Animals
On November 10, 2005, JA from AK wrote:
Thanks for your response Editor. I must disagree with your statement that wolves have few areas of wilderness left. That may be the case in the lower 48 but definitely not in Alaska. I see them all the time. Their tracks are in every trail. They, along with the bears, have all but wiped out moose and caribou populations in several areas. Granted, they have been helped by hunters. If we are to allow the harvest of moose and caribou for human consumption we must also balance out the predator population. It is not done for sport as some have suggested but rather for survival. Whether you believe it is right or wrong it is for certain that Alaskans will continue to harvest wildlife for food. In places with no stores and frozen ground inhibiting gardens, what choice is there? And the statement that overpopulated herbivore herds is a problem may be true but, at least up here, it is a problem easily solved. I must add that while I do not hate wolves, quite the opposite in fact, I do compete with them to feed my family.
Thanks for the blog and for allowing for an opposing view. And while we disagree I applaud your organization for standing up against something they feel is unjust.
With respect for you and your right to have an opinion,
JA from Ak
And best wishes to you also.
On November 10, 2005, JA from Ak wrote:
Regrettably I posted my last statemant prior to Priscilla’s so was unable to respond. I would like to do so now.
I do believe that the people of Alaska should have a say in this matter. I cannot agree with the aerial wolf hunts for this reason, and this reason only. I do agree with predator control. As I have stated, since we harvest moose and caribou for food we must balance the predators. While I commend your commitment to your cause I doubt you believe you would ever stop Alaskas from hunting.
That “Hundreds of thousands of residents inside and outside Alaska, have supported a tourism boycott…” may be true, it is also true that tourism has increased since the boycotts started. I suppose it would be like me boycotting Los Angeles or New York City. It would mean very little as I would never visit these places to begin with. I doubt the Murkowski administration has felt any pressure from these boycotts as they have apparently been ineffective.
On November 10, 2005, Bob Orabona wrote:
Friends of Animals is opposed to all forms of hunting, and would certainly never refer to the killing of a sentient being as “harvesting”. If the conditions in areas of Alaska are so adverse that hunting is the only way to survive, then humans there can leave the area and live somewhere else. But, as pointed out, today’s Alaska residents have a modern economy and way of life, far different than the original Alaska natives.
It is not logical to conclude that because tourism is alleged to have increased during the current tourism boycott that the boycott has been ineffective. Perhaps the relatively small gain in tourism that has been claimed would have been much greater without the boycott. More importantly, just because an act may in the end be ineffective does not mean it is not the right thing to do. If you do not support the aerial-gunning of wolves or predator control, it is wrong then to support the Alaska government with your tourism dollars.
Friends of Animals will continue to fight the wolf predator control programs in Alaska. FoA has been around a lot longer than the Murkowski administration, and will certainly be around long after they have left office.
On November 10, 2005, JA from Ak wrote:
Is it your belief that while we as humans have consumed meat since the dawn of creation we have been wrong in doing so? Or that a people should leave their native land and culture to appease those who disagree? I disagree with much that happens in our urban areas but would never suggest that those who live that lifestyle embrance mine.
Because you choose not to call it a harvest makes no difference, that is what it is.
My view on the boycott is, if you refer to my first posting, that perhaps a new strategy may be called for. By all means continue with what you believe is the right thing to do. But your tourism dollar not only supports the Alaska government but the Alaskan people, who have voted to end the aerial wolf hunts. You have made an excellent point about how to spend your tourism dollars. But is it logical to deprive yourself of the “Alaskan Experience” because you do not agree with a policy? To be honest with you most of us Alaskans would prefer less tourism.
Again, please do what you believe is right, I commend you for that. But know too that I and those who are like-minded will continue with what we believe is right. I have no more right to stop you then you have to stop me.
I realize I am a guest on this site and appreciate that you allow me to disagree. Please know that it is with no disrespect. I have no intention of changing your views but wish merely to exchange ideas and offer another perspective.
[ Blog editors’ note: Increasingly, anthropologists are conceding that early humans, like great apes generally, were largely gatherers. Our bodies were designed to live near the equator. And we’re agreed that we all do have a right to our opinions. But where lives of conscious beings are concerned, there is a third party, albeit absent from this blog. Best wishes.]
On November 11, 2005, Bob Orabona wrote:
Stripped of rhethoric, the idea that JA from AK is trying to exchange is that it is acceptable to kill sentient beings to maintain a particular lifestyle or culture.
Friends of Animals wholeheartedly rejects this idea.
On November 11, 2005, JL from MI wrote:
Well I just stumbled onto this site and as I was reading, felt the need to reply a post, wether or not you agree with me is your right, and I hope I do not offend anyone, If i do, i’ll say sorry nopw but this needs to be said. First off let me start with comment from
On June 17, 2005, J Bowne wrote:
Perhaps you should travel to Oregon and let us hunt you. It is so simple to use guns to kill defenseless animals?just as we kill defenseless people in Iraq and Afghanistan. When will we learn to be part of the web of life instead of its detroyer!!!
First off, I can see that you have a love for animals, and people, thats great, but let me say this, have you ever been to Iraq?, have you ever been to afghanistan? just from viewing your post, I can see not, first let me say that I am a soldier, yes you know, that guy you see on the news every once in a while who leaves their family for years on end so people like you have the right to bash the very same person who made it possible for you to live the high quality of life you shrug off and forget about. second, have you ever been shot at? even more so, have you ever been shot at by a eight year old kid who was just “testing out his new ak-47 he got for christmas” on you because it looked fun. third, I think you might know the number of people we have killed or injured, but do you know how many we have lost or have had come home injured? the very same person that made it possible for you to read this might have come home with no legs and blind but instead of saying thank you, you channel your anger back at him, yeah thats right, when you make those comments you made, its a big slap in the face to us soldiers, to your country, and a BAD example to your children and others around you.
Okay now that I have that off my chest, lets get into the next portion of my “peace”.
Guess what I like the wolf, I like what they stand for, and I hate to see any animal suffer, but on the flip side to that not all hunting is bad, yes flying in the air shooting down wolves into a big massive waste-pile is not what I would call “good sport” and I would never do it, but obviously they have a problem up there, and need a solution.. In conclusion, it would be more effective, if you would better spend you time on trying to get a better solution then slaughter, like moving them to a better location where they can have the same, if not better, quality of life. so that everyone is happy. just my two cents
[ Blog editors’ note: Actually, we don’t agree; you do offend; if anyone gave an AK 47 to a child as a Christmas present, it was probably a Christian, and not a very consistent one; and of course the wolves should not have to move out of their home.]
On November 13, 2005, Tom Classen wrote:
The comment of wolves being everywhere must be an exaggeration. Actually they are hard to find. The numbers quoted by the Fish and Game Dept. are nothing but a guess and seems to grow each year. There are many areas in Alaska that are completely barren of wolves as they tend to concentrate around around a food source where they compete with humans for this resource. In many of these areas the Dept. has virtually eliminated the wolf and as one would expect a population boom of moose or caribou occurs. Then the Dept. says the numbers exceed the capability of the land to support these high numbers and there will be many lost to starvation. This is a typical example of our interference in the functions of nature. To avoid the loss of these animals the hunting seasons are expanded and a big slaughter occurs. The Dept. is pleased with their success in providing animals for human use.
I don’t agree with any of this. Our efforts should be toward the maintenance of a natural ecosystem. Nature always produced a surplus and as long as we, the predator, keep our killing within this limit the herds will remain healthy. The wolf is an importand part of the ecosystem and should not be killed as it is a usless effort and merely results in a higher birth rate.
The prey animals belong to them not us. When the requirements of humans, like in the McGrath area, exceeds the capability of the land to produce, we must find another source of food. In the old days, the natives solved this problem by moving to a different area.
As the population of Alaska grows these problems will become more acute. I hope we will not follow the example set in the Lower 48, as it should be apparent to everyone that is not the right way to go. We are on the wrong track now, but our politicians and the Dept. seem to be as blind as bats, so I don’t look for much change.
Tom Classen
Fairbanks, Alaska
On November 26, 2005, Jack Tims wrote:
As a fellow Alaskan, I agree with many of JA’s sentiments. I think part of this is an inherent Provencialism that is part of the Alaska archetype; reduced to a single phrase, we don’t give a damn how they do it Outside.
Alaska has been treated as a colony for much of its history. We are a somewhat reluctant member of the Union. The fact that you are an Outside group offering opinions on “our” wolves is offensive to many Alaskans. Most wolves are pretty ghosty, you hear them and see tracks but it is pretty rare to see them, even if you spend a lot of time in the woods. However, they are there and in numbers almost anywhere outside of the metropolitan areas.
Enough of the history - this Blog is about wolves isn’t it? Most of Alaska’s economy is not “modern” by any definition. Subsistence hunting is a major source of protein. There is no way around this - it is just too expensive to ship meat to anywhere outside of the major transportation hubs.
It is offensive to suggest that rural Alaskans move to cities to suit your political sensibilities. This is like suggesting that poor people emigrate back to the countries their ancestors originated from since they can’t make it here. In the Alaska context, it is also racist; for thousands of years, aboriginal peoples lived and hunted in Alaska. What right do you have to tell them to move so you can make their hunting grounds a preserve?
Having said all this, you might think i’m a big proponent of wolf control - but i’m really not. My personal feeling is that the moose population problem is more likely rooted in years of fire supression that have limited moose browse around many villages. Fire control is a major source of cash to the rural economy so there is a complicated catch-22 at work. Caribou are less affected by this but their numbers are also subject to broad, little understood fluctuations.
Bottom line is that this issue is a lot more complicated than anyone wants to admit. Balancing thousands of years of culture, the economics of subsistence hunting, the modern economics of living off the road system, and the PR pressures of Outside observers and bloggers is not something that will be resolved today or tomorrow.
You have to ask yourselves are you looking for solutions or are you just trying to fund raise? Much of this blog is FOA preaching to the chior and the choir praising FOA. There is some well intentioned hand wringing and some frightening threats but really very few workable solutions. Alaskans don’t need your “advice” and threats.
Look for solutions that are outside the political rhetoric that has clearly not worked. Any true solution will cost. Offer to subsidize village fire crews so they dont stomp every fire before it can open up moose browse; sponsor flying meat into bush villages so it can be sold at the same price as in the cities - you can often purchase salmon from hatcheries that simply strip the roe; use your considerable economic power and intellectual energy to generate solutions, not conflict.
j
Friends of Animals comments:
As already stated, it is not acceptable to kill sentient beings to maintain a particular lifestyle or culture. FoA is not singling out any culture, nor allowing any culture an exception to this moral standard.
Alaskans then, native or not, need not feel so offended or put out by the the idea that it is time to end the killing of sentient beings to maintain a lifestyle or culture.
Bob Orabona
Friends of Animals
On December 3, 2005, VIVIANA wrote:
I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY WE NEED TO KILL WOLVES, BEARS, DEERS, ETC, BECAUSE THEY ARE OVER POPULATING THE WORLD. I JUST DONT UNDERSTAND HOW PEOPLE ENJOY ABUSING, AND KILLING INNOCENT ANIMALS.
On January 18, 2006, Ty duncan wrote:
This is wrong and inhumane that the Alaskan government is doing this. They should put this Alaskan wolf shooting program down.
On January 18, 2006, Alexis Allen wrote:
Update: The Superior Court of Alaska decided that the state’s aerial shooting of wolves is illegal. Friends of Animals initiated this lawsuit on behalf of free-living wolves in November, 2003. The court found that the state’s Board of Game flouted state regulations when it adopted the wolf control plans to boost caribou and moose populations for human hunters.
Click to read the AP news article.
Alexis Allen
Friends of Animals
On February 8, 2006, Angela Lindner wrote:
Hello,
This is my first time ever on this site and I love wolves. I’ve heard that wolf hunting is legal and I can’t believe it! I mean wolves are endangered and are barely different from loved domestic dogs. I don’t live where wolves live but I just want to say SAVE WOLVES!
On April 4, 2006, mike wrote:
Blog editors’ note: And now this outburst from Mike, one of the less astute detractors, who illustrates that not all life on earth is particularly intelligent.
i think that the wolves deserve to die i mean there just dumb animals
On May 11, 2006, Ann wrote:
please stop killing wolves I love wolves. My room is full of wolf stuff.In other words I love wolves
On June 20, 2006, Angela Lindner wrote:
A month or 2 back I went to a duck hunting thing. I saw a tent with pelts in it. Then I asked what one of them was and the freaky freakin’ man said AN ALASKAN WOLF! GRRR…. I cried, because the entire wall was full of them! I wanted to take a bee-bee gun from a stand away and shoot him! Then, my Dad tried to cheer me up by saying that there’s only a limited amount of time that people can hunt them. But the entire stand was full of the wolf pelts! I cry every day… that day changed my life. How could they do that?!?!?!?!?!?!!? At least my 7 year old, two 4 year olds, and a bunch of my little and older cousins and family members listen to me about how wolves could be extinct soon. Oh yeah, and my brother. And I tell the good of them. But, the day I saw those pelts turned my life from a happy walk in the park to being torchered in the MiddEvil times… But I got the rest of my young life to change the reputation of wolves around. I need some time to cry about that memory… =’ { SAVE WOLVES!!!!!
On November 14, 2006, Courtney Clark wrote:
Well I think this is outrageous. How do we have the power to say what dies and what lives? We are animals as well, the only thing that separates us is that we have a conscious, but I’m starting to think maybe we are the ones without a conscious?? This is cruel what they are doing to such beautiful animals, It breaks my heart just even hearing about this troubling fact. I hope all these people’s comments will get noticed and that something will be done about this immediately! These beautiful creatures and all the animals of the world have done nothing but live their lives, not harming us.
On April 1, 2007, Angela Lindner wrote:
Well, hello Mike. Wolves are NOT just dumb animals! They are just as smart as you or me! The only reason why they aren’t making robots is because they don’t have thumbs and people keep on killing them!
On March 18, 2008, Tiburcio Guerrero, La Junta, Colorado wrote:
I can’t understand why killing these magnificent animals has to be done from the air that’s just sheer maddness not to mention down right merciless. Without these animals to control the Moose, Elk, and Deer population it’ll get out of control and those populations will explode out of control. Wolves are the caretakers of the nature they weed out the weak,old and injured but they never go after the healthy ones. We’ve managed as people to move in on their territory giving them little or no place to go to now. Destroying these animals is just plain senseless. Hunting from the air is an unsportsman and cowardly act. What kind of hunter goes and hunts wolf from the air they wouldn’t do that to elk or moose. I hope people will take notice of the fact that given the chance these so called aerial hunters are going to put the wolf on the extinction list and we’ll never again will be able to see these wonderful animals again.
[Blog editors’ note: Our 2006 ad theme comes to mind: Are They Out of Their Minds in Alaska? — If you shoot wolves to save caribou, and then you shoot the caribou, you’re either out of your mind or in Alaska.]