WISCONSIN legislative WOLF hunting bill places science, religion, and politics at odds ~ CANADA: MOUNTAIN LION attacks DOG walking with owners near ALBERTA’S Banff National Park ~ ONTARIANS alerted to recent rash of COYOTE attacks on PETS.

Gray Wolf. Courtesy U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

Wisconsin 03/12/12 nytimes.com: by James Gorman – Once again, science, religion and politics have become entwined in a thorny public policy debate. This time, however, the discussion is not about abortion, birth control or health insurance mandates. It’s about wolves. Specifically, a bill in the Wisconsin Legislature to authorize a hunting season on wolves. The State Senate has approved it, and the Assembly is set to consider the bill on Tuesday. Hunters approve of the season, and Republicans are all for it, as are some Democrats. Wildlife biologists have a number of criticisms and suggestions about the bill involving how, when and how many wolves should be killed. But the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Game Commission, which represents 11 tribes of the Ojibwe (also known as the Chippewa, or Anishinaabe) in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan, opposes the hunt on the basis of religious principle and tradition.

In written testimony presented to both legislative houses, James Zorn, the executive administrator of the commission, said, “In the Anishinaabe creation story we are taught that Ma’iingan (wolf) is a brother to Original man.” He continued, “The health and survival of the Anishinaabe people is tied to that of Ma’iingan.” For that reason the tribes are opposed to a public hunt. Joe Rose Sr., a professor emeritus of Native American studies at Northland College in Ashland, Wis., and an elder of the Bad River Band, said in an interview that he saw a collision of world views. “We don’t have stories like Little Red Riding Hood, or the Three Little Pigs, or the werewolves of Transylvania,” he said. Wolf, or Ma’iingan, is a sacred creature, and so even keeping the population of wolves to minimum levels runs counter to traditional beliefs.

Leech Lake Ojibwe delegation to Washington 1899. PD. Wikimedia Commons.

The opposition of the Ojibwe to the hunt may not swing a vote, but it is not a small matter. The Ojibwe have significant rights in lands that were once theirs, lands that, in Wisconsin, amount to about the northern third of the state. That, of course, is where most of Wisconsin’s wolves live. Peter David, a conservation biologist with the Indian Fish and Game Commission, said that court settlements on treaty rights mean that the tribes must be consulted about decisions like the wolf hunt, and they were not. Also, he said, “the tribes can legally lay claim to half of the biological harvest.” What that could mean for a wolf hunt that the tribes oppose is not clear. What is clear is that the opposition of the Ojibwe is more like objections to funding for abortions or birth control than it is the calculations of scientists, not in political tone, but in its essence. All the other arguments center on numbers, practicality and consequences. How much damage do wolves do to livestock? How effective is this kind of hunt in reducing those depredations? How many wolves should be killed?

The original goal, set once it was clear that wolves were coming back in the state, on their own, was 350 wolves. With protection, the wolf population has grown to about 800. Adrian Treves, an associate professor of environmental studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, says that the carrying capacity of the state is probably about 1,000. Dr. Treves has also testified about the bill. He would like to see fixes — for instance, ruling out hunting with dogs. But he sees the issue as one of wildlife management. Mr. Zorn said in his testimony that for the Ojibwe, “wolf recovery does not hinge primarily upon some minimum number of animals comprising the current wolf population.” Rather, he said, the goal is “the healthiest and most abundant future for our brother and ourselves.” Mr. Rose put it this way: “We see the wolf as a predictor of our future. And what happens to wolf happens to Anishinaabe.” And, he said, “whether other people see it or not, the same will happen to them.”

CANADA:

Alberta 03/12/12 vancouversun.com: by Tony Seskus – Excerpt: “This is cougar country. Locals were reminded of that fact again this past week after a cougar attacked a family dog out for an evening walk with its owner and another dog. The owner, Dave Weighell, kicked, yelled and chased off the cougar. The dog didn’t suffer major injuries, but the incident still had the town buzzing. “All of a sudden it makes it really real,” said Kim Titchener of Bow Valley WildSmart, an organization that works to reduce conflict between people and wildlife. “To have it actually happen downtown in your community is a lot scarier than having it happen on a trail or out there in the backcountry,” Titchener added. Canmore, located about 100 kilometres west of Calgary and a short drive from Banff National Park, is a community where residents are accustomed to living with nature on their doorstep.” – For complete article see http://www.vancouversun.com/news/alberta/Canmore+buzzing+after+cougar+attacks+family+middle+town/6288197/story.html

Ontario 03/13/12 theontarion.com: Officials have received a number of reports about coyotes attacking pets in the last few weeks. Families are being urged to keep a close watch on small children, and to keep pets inside at night. See http://www.theontarion.com/2012/03/coyotes-attacks-increase-in-frequency/

About these ads

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s