Anti-wolf extremists seek to threaten reporting on wolves-
It seems like a fair piece to me, although the report consistently overestimates the number of wolves. There are no longer 1700 wolves in the Northern Rockies. There never were 1000 in Idaho though this is what the report says. Cowboys v. Gray Wolves.
The usual suspects are trying to threaten them, nevertheless. Here is an alert and complaint sent out by “dispatcher” who regularly sends out this kind of material to all interested.
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: <Dispatcher>
Date: Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:53 PM
Subject: Fw: PBS piece on wolves
To: Jim and Barbara Hagedorn <jhag1@frontier.com>
From: <Dispatcher>
Date: Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:53 PM
Subject: Fw: PBS piece on wolves
To: Jim and Barbara Hagedorn <jhag1@frontier.com>
I would encourage everyone to go watch the piece that PBS did on Wolves vs Cowboys on PBS’s 6 p.m. Newshour report last night.
Video of the piece, and a transcript, can be found at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/
PBS runs on donations. Let them know you won’t be contributing because of their biased reporting. Also, I would encourage comments left concerning the truth of these wolves. They may not print your comment, but if they don’t, their bias becomes all that more apparent.
We have got to start holding these people accountable for the clap-trap they publish regarding wolves.
Lynn
What we send out is for information on the wildlife issues. We do not always agree with the position or statements of the articles. If you wish to be removed please send the word “remove”.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/
Print Friendly
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.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Dr. Maughan, thank you for sharing this. I will be sending a donation to my local PBS station ASAP because of this. That was far and away one of the most unbiased piece about the NRM wolves that I have seen. They told the ranchers side, spoke with ranchers working to non-lethally solve the problem, and they showed the benefits of having wolves for eco-tourism, and the environment. I guess the antis are upset because they did not portray wolves as bloodthirsty killers stalking children, spreading parasites, and eating their cattle and children like they were on a buffet line. It is astounding how “the truth” for some is actually an absurdity for others.
I posted this comment yesterday, but did anyone notice the irony of the anti-wolf rancher walking down that road with his dog? Also check out the comments section. The usual suspects make an appearance.
Wolf haters, don’t contribute to pbs then.
I thought Miles O’Brien’s piece was fairly straight down the middle actually. I didn’t detect much bias against wolves. YMMV
Having said that , I don’t think the Wolf Haters contribute very much if anything to any state or national public broadcast coffers. Or if they do, the don’t fess to it. They are more the right wing AM talk radio crowd, and likewise all those low power FM religious station supporters if anything. At least in my neck of the woods and radio-television spectrum here in Wyoming.
Next we’ll see a congressional act to defund PBS… Oh, wait, that already happened!
Good segment! Where’s the bias? Is it because they failed to mention tapeworms? Or that they didn’t interview angry (overweight) hunters who “didn’t get their elk”?