The governor of Idaho has decided to kill off 75 percent of the state's wolf population as soon as they come off of the endangered species list. They will kill them by tracking them by radio collars around their necks, and then kill them from a safe distance by shooting them from a helicopter or a plane. I find this to be incredibly sick and utterly disgusting. The utter ignorance of the United States on many issues disturbs me. This is the reason that I hate Idaho with a passion.
From the original context on the site
http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=12019:BOISE, Idaho -- Idaho's governor said Thursday he will support public hunts to kill all but 100 of the state's gray wolves after the federal government strips them of protection under the Endangered Species Act.
Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter told The Associated Press that he wants hunters to kill about 550 gray wolves. That would leave about 100 wolves, or 10 packs, according to a population estimate by state wildlife officials.
The 100 surviving wolves would be the minimum before the animals could again be considered endangered.
"I'm prepared to bid for that first ticket to shoot a wolf myself," Otter said earlier Thursday during a rally of about 300 hunters.
Otter complained that wolves are rapidly killing elk and other animals essential to Idaho's multimillion-dollar hunting industry. The hunters, many wearing camouflage clothing and blaze-orange caps, applauded wildly during his comments.
Suzanne Stone, a spokeswoman for the advocacy group Defenders of Wildlife in Boise, said Otter's proposal would return wolves to the verge of eradication.
"Essentially he has confirmed our worst fears for the state of Idaho: That this would be a political rather than a biological management of the wolf population," Stone said. "There's no economic or ecological reason for maintaining such low numbers. It's simple persecution."
Wolves were reintroduced to the northern Rocky Mountains a decade ago after being hunted to near-extinction. More than 1,200 now live in the region.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to start removing federal protections from gray wolves in Montana and Idaho in the next few weeks.
A plan drafted by Idaho's wildlife agency calls for maintaining a minimum of 15 wolf packs -- higher than Otter's proposal of 10 packs.
Jeff Allen, a policy adviser for the state Office of Species Conservation, said 15 wolf packs would allow "a cushion" between the surviving wolf population and the minimum number that federal biologists would allow before the animals are again considered endangered.
Allen said Otter and state wildlife officials agree on wolf strategy and will be able to reach a consensus on specific numbers.
"You don't want to be too close to 10 because all of a sudden when one (wolf) is hit by a car or taken in defense of property, you're back on the list," Allen said.
Source: Associated Press
There is, however, hope. Someone, who I thank from the bottom of my heart, has created a petition to save the wolves in Idaho. Here is the petition:
Save the wolves It has come to my attention that it is the intention of the Governor of Idaho and many of the people in said state, intend to try to pass legislation in order to kill off a great deal of wolves. The number, unfortunately, for me, is yet to be ascertained, it seems to change as they look for some sort of compromise. I would like to voice my opinion, and that of many, which is my right in the wonderful society that we live in, that this is a gross injustice on the part of the wolves, and on the people of Idaho itself. You see, wolves are a species threatened by extinction. That may not be a real issue, I realize, as thousands of species are killed off every day. Of course, many thousands of new species are created every day. So I will concede that point. Even if they were no longer endangered, i feel that they should still receive some form of protection. I know that that won't happen, so I'll leave it at that. The real problem, I feel, is the public conception of the role of wolves in the environment. It seems to me that the belief of the people of Idaho is that of the majority of the population--that wolves are an unessential and detrimental item that the environment has produced, one which, as an obstacle, must be removed. That view, however, is highly flawed. The truth of the matter is that wolves are a necessity in the environment, and that their role in has been downplayed for the majority of human history, ever sense the time that wolves, as the symbol of paganism, had their reputation and their role downplayed by Christianity. As a Christian based society, we hold true many of the Customs and ideals of Christianity. And, although we try not to, (or do we) we involve Christian ideals in our governance. (Not that that is necessarily a bad thing.) Because we are a Christian-based society, those who affect our leaders, IE The people, hold true Christian customs and values. And, as we are slow to change our customs and traditions (that we instill in our children) the common conception of wolves is the same as it was hundreds, if not thousands of years ago. But I'm sure you already realize that.
The role of the wolf in the environment is one that is seen replicated by very few other predators in the world. The wolf kills old, ungainly animals, as well as animals which are diseased, and thus unhealthy, (or unwanted) for consumption by humans. Herein lies the irony then. Wolves, through their role in nature, are a necessity for an economy like that of Idaho, which is so dependent on hunting. Wolves free up resources otherwise spent on the old and frail animals, as well as the diseased and ungainly, allowing new, younger game (which is desirable for hunting) to grow and prosper. Thus, wolves help to stimulate this industry upon which they claim is being damaged. The growth of the wolf packs will eventually ebb, and cannot grow beyond a certain point, because wolves are at harmony with their environment, something that people cannot relate to, after having lived like we have so long, we are now barely effected by nature's limits. Wolves, however, cannot outstrip their environment, and as soon as easy prey (the old and frail) die off, they have to move on to a different area. Thus I predict that the number of wolves in said area will decrease or move on within the next ten years, making something like these measures completely unnecessary. Also, wolves rarely reproduce, and when they do, reproduce at an extremely low rate, assuring the survival of a small number of pups, which, essentially, keeps the population low, and slow to regrow. I speak out for those who we refuse to hear. And I also speak out for those who would do damage to themselves, but who are too blinded by those around them to realize their folly. I ask, humbly, that you kindly deny their petition for the killing of innocent, and for the most part, harmless, animals.
What do you think?
Reply
![[+umbra+]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/7f/57/60fedb7d47577f_flip.png?t=1231471139_6.00_11)
I see the ANGELS...
