Please help save Alaska's wolves

Alaska’s wolves are in danger, over 7,500 wolves have been killed over the last 5 years in Alaska due to hunting and trapping since they are not protected by the endangered species act that protects wolves in the lower 48 states, and now the government has passed a bill that will allow the use of aerial hunting of the wolves that was previously overturned twice by Alaskan voters due to the danger it presents to the wolves species and their future survival.

This is something that means a lot to me, I would appreciate any help so if you could please take a couple of minutes to sign this petition and send it in to help out I would be most grateful.

SAVE ALASKA’S WOLVES PETITION (PDF)

Don't live in Alaska.

This will save some time:

http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/s...ad.php?t=25153

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MVS

Don't live in Alaska.

---

Nether do I, but just because I don't live there doesn't mean I don't care what happens to the wolves there... if you want to give the I don't care because it's not my problem or I don't live there so why should I care then fine, but this is something I do care about so please try to understand.

I expected some flak, if this is something you have no interest in please keep any negative remarks out of here is all I ask, this is something that means a lot to me.

I'm not going to give you flack.

Just ask you how many wolves are killed from the air versus the 95% of the land that it's okay to trap wolves on?

The only numbers I can see is between 140 and 170.

How endangered are the worlves?

To my knowledge when animals are endangered they don't hunt them. And if they aren't endangered, hunting them prunes the population making survival for those that remain easier because they have to share the food with less other animals. Am I missing something.

Can you explain why this is a big deal?

PS: I too don't live in Alaska, so this really isn't my business as well.

If harvest means hunt, Alaska says:

1,741 Wolves Harvested for 2001-2002.

http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/hunt_...ng/harvest.cfm

Under the plan unanimously approved by the board, the state would enlist a handful of volunteer pilots, perhaps as few as three to begin with, said Fish and Game regional biologist David James. They must apply to participate, and will be chosen based on their knowledge of the McGrath area and their flying experience. Applications should be ready within two weeks, James said.
The plan calls for eliminating as many wolves as possible from an experimental management area, plus a larger area surrounding it that harbors additional wolves, a total of some 1,700 square miles. Biologists believe about 40 wolves can be taken as part of a plan to reduce predation in the study area.

That mean kill them or take them? I don't get it (MVS)

A slightly different program was approved for hunting game management unit 13, the Nelchina basin. It covers some 7,800 square miles in the center of the unit. More pilots would be required, said Fish and Game biologist Bob Tobey, but the state will only give permits to those who demonstrate the proper experience. Permits are not expected to be ready until January.
Unlike McGrath, the Nelchina pilots would be required to land before they shoot their wolves, using rifles rather than shotguns. The goal is to kill 100 to 130 wolves, Tobey said, which should bring the area's wolf population to a level that should allow moose and caribou stocks to improve.

MVS: I really wasn't directing the flack comment towards you since I understand that you weren't doing that.

As far as why aerial hunting is bad, it really is a bad way to hunt because it endangers whole packs and not just single wolves, since wolves travel in packs chasing them by air endangers the whole pack even if they don't kill them most wouldn't survive it afterwards. It's cruel to run them to exhaustion then shoot them from the air usually only to wound them leaving them suffering till they go back to finish them off.

The wolves in Alaska aren't quite as endangered as the wolves in the lower 48 states and that is one of the reasons they aren't protected in the endangered species act... but going around killing them more is only going to decrease their numbers till they are in danger as well. It isn't really a population problem, or not in the sense that you would consider... the main reason they want to do this is to increase the population of the Moose and Caribou would be understandable if they we're in danger because of low numbers, but that isn't the case and the only reason they are calling for this is to increase their population so hunters have more of them to hunt themselves, the wolves are killing less of these animals then the hunters so the wolves threat isn't really an issue.

140 of them.

Is that going to make a big dent when they kill 1,700 a year on the ground?

Especially since you and Alaska seem to agree they aren't an Endangered Species.

This petition is hippie bullshit. Nobody, nobody, NOBODY in the state of Alaska is gonna pay any attention to it, especially if its signed by a bunch of us mainlanders. Werewolf, if you actually do give a shit, go do something for real. Putting your email on this stupid ass petition isn't gonna do shit except make you feel good about yourself.

"Save the wolves!" is the rallying cry, but really like anything else (and something a lot of bleeding heart liberals can never grasp), there's a lot more going on than what it seems like on the surface or what a 3 or 4 word slogan can adequately describe.

I agree this isn't the best way to go about it and a more direct route is always the best course of action, but that isn't always an option especially on an issue like this that isn't contained to a single area or perspective.

In the end whether or not this actually accomplishes something is questionable, it isn't just a few here and there but much more that is being done as well... sure I wish I could do more and yes doing this only makes me slightly better but doesn't really solve the problem.