Another End of Term Bush Insult?
Expect to see a string of this stuff during the remaining (mercifully short) year of the environmental disaster known as the Bush administration. A week or so ago it was the opening of sensitive arctic areas to unnecessary oil production, yesterday it was a plan to kill more wolves, and today it was a plan for more corporate welfare for logging firms in Alaska.
About the wolves:
Under pressure from another alpha predator, human hunters (along with state officials eager to keep hunters happy), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has changed a rule in a way that has wildlife campaigners howling.
The complaints are not about the section allowing someone to kill a wolf attacking, say, a dog or livestock. It’s the part about states and tribal governments having the right to allow greatly expanded killing of wolves in “non-essential” populations where local officials determine that wolf packs are taking too big a share of deer and elk herds also coveted by hunters.
What is a “non-essential” wolf. Anyone?
4 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
-
Archives
- March 2015 (1)
- April 2012 (1)
- January 2011 (1)
- September 2010 (2)
- August 2010 (1)
- July 2010 (4)
- June 2010 (6)
- May 2010 (11)
- April 2010 (4)
- March 2010 (1)
- February 2010 (1)
- January 2010 (5)
-
Categories
- Abstract
- Black and White
- Castle Rock
- Commentary
- Death Valley
- Desert
- Environment
- Equipment
- Events
- Gear Reviews
- Green World
- History
- Mission Peak
- Mono Lake
- Mount Shasta Area
- News
- Ocean
- Owens Valley
- Pacific Northwest
- People
- Photography
- Places
- Point Lobos
- Quicksilver
- Quicksilver Historical
- Quotable
- Random
- San Francisco Bay Area
- Santa Teresa
- Sierra Nevada
- Site News
- Technique
- Trails
- Trips
- Uncategorized
- White Mountains
- Wildlife
- Yosemite
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
I believe that would be one working in DC.
Ha! :-)
I second Tom Clifton!
The only non-essential wolf I can remember is “wolf-man” Jack