"An outright war" on wolves



A recent editorial by J. William Gibson, a sociology professor at Cal State Long Beach, has touched another nerve in the never-ending wolf debate. The editorial, which originally appeared last week in the Los Angeles Times, includes some strong language that has already garnered equally strong responses.

Here's one example from Gibson's editorial, about why the reintroduction of wolves was controversial:

Part of the reason was the increase, particularly in Idaho and Montana, in paramilitary militia advocates, with their masculine ideal of man as warrior who should fight the hated federal government, by armed force if necessary. They were outraged by what they saw as federal interference in the region spurred by environmentalists, and their ideas found a willing reception among ranchers, who view wolves as a threat to their livestock — even though they ranch on federal land — and hunters, who don't want the wolves reducing the big game population.

Gibson also connects Sen. Max Baucus' excitement over a new drone aircraft to the possibility of it one day shooting wolves from the sky.

Thrilled at the testing of a drone aircraft manufactured in Montana, Baucus declared: "Our troops rely on this type of technology every day, and there is an enormous future potential in border security, agriculture and wildlife and predator management." A manufacturer's representative claimed his company's drone "can tell the difference between a wolf and a coyote." Pilotless drone aircraft used by the CIA and the Air Force to target and kill alleged terrorists now appear to be real options to track and kill "enemy" wolves.

Read the whole editorial at the LA Times.

Add a comment