Letters to the Editor
-
Tyler-Mason
You would be wrong about the backpacking thing. Now that I'm 60, I have slowed down some, but I still get in 2 long trips a year plus weekends. You can make all the weird assumptions you wish, but it doesn't change the fact that bear hunting with radio-collared dogs should get you jailed not praised.
If you love nature so much, why are you out there killing animals, especially predators. Wolves and mountain lions will gladly manage deer for you, but, oh yeah, you killed almost all of them.
Another thing. Working with hunters is an environmental necessity if one wants to achieve certain things, but hunters, in my experience, are very unwilling to do some very simple things that would make a difference. The guys in Ducks Unlimted, for example, were willing to work with us to put pressure on rice farmers, but they were totally unwilling to switch from lead shot to steel shot even though lead is extremely harmful to ducks. I don't see the environmentalism of hunters.
I acknowledge that there are responsible hunters, but none of them are trophy hunters.
-
Tyler_Mason
I forgot about the dogs. No, I am not a fan of the so-called Dog Whisperer - too heavy on the dominance thing. I'm more a fan of Patricia McConnell or Gwen Bohnencamp. Try teaching a Siberian Husky to do agility or flyball, and you'll find out what a dog training challenge is all about. Also, how do you teach them not to run you over a cliff when you tell them to go right, but still have them obey when you're not running the sled? I have six Siberians today, and you might be surprised about my dog training skills if you met them.
-
USA Today: "Polar bears caught in a heated eco-debate"
For a more balanced report, see "Polar bears caught in a heated eco-debate", USA Today:
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-03-09-polar-bears_N.htm
Excerpts:
Although they say sea ice has melted, some Natives question the accuracy of the most dire predictions of a warming climate in the Northern Hemisphere, and members of the Inuit Circumpolar Council seek evidence that a change would seriously harm the bears. Their stance has put them at loggerheads with a usual ally: environmentalists who say the bears need protection now to survive a warmer climate in the future.
"It would have a really big effect on us Inuit, because we go by dog team to traditionally hunt polar bears," said Jamie Kablutsiak, who guides U.S. trophy hunters for big money onto the ice on Canada's Hudson Bay. As for the bears, "I don't think they're decreasing because there's usually lots, even in summer time," he said
The [Endangered Species Act] petition marks the first time a healthy species would be considered at risk under the Endangered Species Act and the first time global warming would be officially labeled a species' main threat. Polar bears have increased from a population of 5,000 in 1972 to between 20,000 and 25,000 today.
The Center for Biological Diversity submitted a petition in 2005 for endangered species protection based on projected habitat loss due to global warming.
The petition resulted in a 2007 report by the U.S. Geological Survey, which predicted a loss of two-thirds of the world's polar bear population by 2050, based on a projected 42% summertime loss of "optimal polar bear habitat" such as shallow-water sea ice.
Some scientists, however, question predictions that sea ice will disappear, and even that polar bears would disappear if it did.
Richard Glenn, an Alaskan Inuit hunter and ice researcher, told U.S. senators in January that "marginal ice," which freezes in winter and melts in summer, will grow as multiyear ice disappears.
"Even the Fish and Wildlife Service study acknowledges that … may be beneficial to ice seals and polar bears," he said.
The aim of the environmentalists is to use the Endangered Species Act to force the U.S. government to take action on global warming, said Kassie Siegel, a lawyer for the Center for Biological Diversity. It would require federal agencies "to look at the cumulative effect of greenhouse gases on polar bears" and limit emissions by cars and power plants, Siegel said.
Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin disagrees with that approach.
"If you want to address climate change, address it directly," said Doug Vincent-Lang, Palin's coordinator for endangered species.
Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said far too few data were used to make predictions about both climate change and polar bear behavior and populations.
"We looked at historical studies. The first thing you notice is the whole climatic system undergoes huge fluctuation," Soon said.
Over the possibly 200,000 years the polar bear has existed as a species, it has survived "very harsh conditions" of extreme cold, such as ice ages, and warmth, such as the last interglacial period, 100,000 to 110,000 years ago, Soon said
-
@Portlander
Your dog training skills might amaze me, dunno. It sounds like you've settled on what works for you and them. I'm kind of a fan of the dog whisperer because of the way he handles the dog owners. I was taught as a tot the there are no bad dogs, just bad handlers.
Why do I hunt? Largely because I'm not vegan. From there either you outsource or get your hands dirty. I also don't see any moral or ethical dilemma in hunting. As for people who are anti-hunting, most are really anti gun. They have no problem with the circle of life as long as a person isn't in there. On the other hand, I see myself as a part of that circle. Currently near the top of the food chain, but we never know when we'll be suddenly demoted. So it goes.
I understand what you mean by the steel shot v. lead shot battle. One issue, that is kind of silly, is that hunters are unsure of making clean kills with lighter shot like steel. It actually means they have less range. Deal with it. Other than that, there are lots of hunters who see only one problem with moving away from lead. That problem is the anti-gun crowd. They are on record as wanting to end all hunting and all gun ownership. As such, hunters tend to see gun bans and hunting bans in every environmental effort taken by non-hunting organizations.
I am confused, you say you don't see the environmentalism of hunters. Yet you worked on habitat with DU and taught others how to pick the best animal to take. You've also hiked parks and forests that are maintained largely from hunting specific taxes that us hunters pay.
Finally, I think you are confusing trophy hunters with trophy killers. As I said before, I'm not a fan of the bear dogs. Actually, they are illegal in some states. That's fine with me. I do have to pick allies though. They are better allies for me than the anti hunting crowd.