A bounty was against Alaska’s state law, and despite calling it an “incentive,” it was still a bounty.

Lack of snow made it hard for the wizards at the Board of Game to see as many wolves killed as it wanted, so the Board of Game and the governor came up with the “incentive” scheme for gunner pilots. They would get $150 for each shotgunned left leg of a wolf.

I wonder if lack of snow in Alaska’s winter made them at all thoughtful about nature?

Story Judge halts “bounty” on wolves. By Rachelk D’oro. The Associated Press

Editorial in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner. A mutiny on the bounty. By John Toppenberg. Even you like the idea of a bounty, bounties rarely work as intended. That’s one reason why most states stopped them long ago.

It looks like the governor is under the thrall of small group of trophy hunters rather than the average Alaskan hunter.

 
avatar
About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is President of the Western Watersheds Project.

One Response to Judge halts Alaska's wolf bounty

  1. avatar kt says:

    The editorial at the link includes mention of a “unanimous resolution by the 500 members of the American Society of Mammalogists calling on Alaska to develop a scientifically creditable [credible?] predator management program.”

    Is someone working with the various scientific professional organizations to try to get them to weigh in on the course of Wolf Management in Idaho/consequences of De-Listing under the continued Chokehold of the Livestock industry???

    Elevating the issue of the impending Wolf Slaughter in the West in professional scientific circles (outside the Game agencies and the Land Grant colleges) seems to me to be an important thing to do. Especially since I understand that the Butch Otter Idaho Fish and Game Department has hand-picked a select and limited stakeholder group for window-dressing on its predator killing schemes. The group includes both a Woolgrower (a member of the Soulen sheep empire – the same wealthy and well-connected ranching family group that runs the domestic sheep in Hells Canyon and Salmon River country that reports link to bighorn sheep die offs) — and also a Cattleman/woman. There are what – 2000 or fewer public lands ranchers in Idaho (compared to 1.3 million (?) citizens), and yet their whines will dictate the wolf “management”

    The Press release on the Payette-Nez Perce bighorn sheep situation Ralph linked to yesterday deferentially tippy-toed around naming any names of allotments or ranchers involved. I think it is partially because the public lands livestock interests don’t like specifics linked to any particular parcel of public land where envtl damage is occurring. And they also don’t like the public to know how few ranchers there really are – and that the same last names show up in relation to both bighorn die-offs and the impending wolf slaughter planning.

Calendar

March 2007
S M T W T F S
« Feb   Apr »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: