Comments on: Voices from the Flats – A Positive Step for the Wolves of Denali Park

By: Susie Snowflake

Susie Snowflake — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 18:21:26 +0000

I was very glad to read this summary of some of the history of the Denali wolves and their “border issues”. I see the efforts mentioned in Dr. Steiner’s essay as in some way carrying on the work of Dr. Gordon Haber. The wolves have lost their greatest advocate, and I am glad that there are others who are still here and at work on the wolves’ behalf. Thank you Dr. Steiner, and please keep the Mudflats updated when you have further information or ideas for how those of us who care about wolves can do things to help make a difference for them.

By: AlaskaDisasta

AlaskaDisasta — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 03:36:37 +0000

We used to cruise up to Alaska quite frequently, but our last trip was and will remain 2004, when our sons went on a helicopter tour outside of Juneau. On the way back to the ship, on board a tour bus, a ‘hunter’ on the side of the road shot at a bird on the other side of the road (main road) sending a bullet through the windows of the bus, about 4 inches above one of the passenger’s head. The police did nothing and the ‘hunter’ (there are other names for goons like that) didn’t have the brains to realize how close he came to shooting someone. If you go to Alaska, don’t go during hunting season (which seems to be year-round up there), you may end up being the trophy because of some of these thick-necked nitwits.

By: Moose Pucky

Moose Pucky — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:37:24 +0000

Good on ya, Anchorage. Keep us posted when it’s time to write to the Board of Game.
The very name of this board gives one pause.

By: Alaska Pi

Alaska Pi — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:14:14 +0000

This is the most interesting thread !
For those of us in Southeast Alaska issues are very different and we have little view into the issues presented here by commenters and poster alike BUT we do hear from our million plus visitors a year about their perception of predator control policies in the state.
Boy- do we hear!

By: huntforfood

huntforfood — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:50:52 +0000

hey Gramiam… i would like to know where you saw “that image”, because i don’t think that ever happened. Prior to quitter girl being governor there were no helicopter predator control programs, and helicopters have ALWAYS been illegal for any other type of gunning.
After she installed good family friend Corey Rossi (spokesperson for SFW, “sportsmen for fish and wildlife” and currently on leave from the feds where he was a professional trapper and “wildlife damage control” agent) in the newly created #3 position in F&G there was helicopter wolf shooting by F&G employees out of Tok within a few days of the close of the Anchorage meeting of the BOG last spring.
To think that the current BOG will extend or maintain the buffer zone around Denali is naive.
The AC’s in the Denali area are quite excited to see the buffer zone sunset…. and they will be a loud voice at the next BOG meeting where this issue is on the table.

By: Lee323

Lee323 — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:47:35 +0000

It’s wonderful to hear of the proposal to protect the Denali wolves.

It’s less than wonderful that in this day and age wildlife protections still have to be presented by necessity in economic terms to win consideration and approval: “If the Anchorage Advisory Committee proposal is adopted by the Board of Game this winter, then the 450,000 visitors / year to Denali National Park will benefit from increased wolf viewing success, thus enhancing the tourism economy at Denali and the state.”

When wildlife protections can be presented with the primary argument that wildlife is inherently valuable regardless of the economic value to humans…..then humans will have evolved a quantum leap.

Thanks for the informative post, Dr. Steiner.

By: Stephen F Stringham, PhD

Stephen F Stringham, PhD — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:38:27 +0000

As on so many other topics over the past 2 decades, Dr. Steiner has offered a host of valuable insights about killing of Denali wolves. Since these are potentially the least-human impacted wolves accessible to researchers in the United States, as well as the most viewable wolves for viewers, their value to humanity is enormous.

Nevertheless, even a 6:3 vote in Anchorage for more wolf protection is not likely to have significant influence on the Board of Game. During the two years that I was on a Kenai Peninsula fish & game advisory council, there was very little indication that the BofG paid any attention to any proposal that we authored or forward to them — unless the proposal supported the BofG agendas, none of which included more protection for predators or for eco-tourism. Quite the contrary, such proposals seemed to elicit only contempt by the BofG. Part of that comes from individual mind sets that are locked in concrete and impervious to contrary facts. And part is due to what many believe to be overwhelming evidence that wolf (and bear) numbers need to be drastically reduced to allow “recovery” of moose and caribou populations. The BofG has shown no interest in evidence indicating that “intensive management” is not the best solution in all situations even where the primarily goal is maximizing hunter harvest of moose and caribou, much less in situations where other goals could and arguably should take precedence over harvest. The BofG does not attempt to meet the needs of all Alaskans, much less of everyone who visits Alaska. Rather, BofG works primarily for the benefit of one special-interest group (ungulate-consumers) and secondarily, if only inadvertently, for the benefit of the firearm and off-road vehicle industries.

Given those realities, the only way to improve protection for wolves on the eastern boundary of Denali is to do a trade — offer the BofG and its special interest constituents something they want more than opportunities to kill wolves (or bears) on the eastern boundary of Denali. For many Alaskan hunters, progressive shrinkage of huntable areas in the state has become an intolerable imposition. They hate it even more than they hate wolves. So find some areas of the state where hunting is no longer allowed, and offer to re-open those areas. The eastern margin of Denali is highly accessible to hunters and trappers from Anchorage and Fairbanks; so any newly huntable lands would likely also have to be highly accessible. Time for wolf advocates to do some clever brainstorming and politicing.

For more information on the scientific limitations to the state’s predator control policies, visit http://www.bear-viewing-in-alaska.info. On the homepage, scroll down to the bottom of the left-hand column and click the link on the wolf photo.

Stephen F. Stringham, PhD
President, WildWatch

By: Kath the Scrappy

Kath the Scrappy — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:37:53 +0000

GREAT news of forward progress! Thanks Rick for an interesting & educational post. Sounds like it was a VERY productive meeting, I just hope Alaska Board of Game follows through.

Speaking as a former tourist, you’re correct. We paid a bundle of money in Alaska State for the chance to see wildlife. If 3-4 people (won’t call them “hunters”) need to decimate the Denali Wolves just to ‘get their jollies’ – your state’s economy will definitely take a loss financially when the tourists take their vacation money elsewhere!

By: Braveny (CA) Rankle Hiway Palin

Braveny (CA) Rankle Hiway Palin — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:12:25 +0000

here is a great site about Denali wolves:

//alaskawolves.org/Alaska%20Wolves.html

By: huntforfood

huntforfood — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:36:00 +0000

First off, AKPetMom, your vitriol is not appreciated or necessary. Trapping provides income for quite a few people who live in the villages or in the bush and can be done ethically. Pain will be inflicted on the animals taken, no doubt, but it can be minimized by good trapping techniques and with the use of good traps. I was happy to see this article on Mudflats, as the management of wildlife has become increasingly politicized and radical in this state. Most Alaskans have absolutely no idea how extreme things have become, even within the dept. of fish and game since Palin appointed friends to positions (newly created, interesting story there) of power high in the dept. Unbeknownst to most AK residents, laws that are barely constitutional have been passed that require the state to manage game for maximum abundance ostensibly to provide food for residents, and yet there is no move whatsoever to restrict non-resident take of game. All readers concerned about the future of wildlife in AK should familiarize themselves with current management practices, and the people involved in passing the laws, our BOG.