You are here

Comments for Repeal of Fish & Wildlife rule bad for wildlife

  • Your story about protecting wildlife is good but every state has fish & wildlife agencies to manage game and non-game wildlife. Virtually every land grant college in America teaches about wildlife. Most federal management is duplication.
    You also told about problems with Geese and using dogs to run the geese off. In most states, it is against the law for dogs to harass wildlife. Most issues are best managed close to home by people that live locally in a community and care for it.

    • Whether federal wildlife management duplicates local agencies, the real point is that any measures taken on federal wildlife management properties could affect what happens on ALL federal wildlife properties. That is why this bill is so dangerous.

    • Nice, blanket statement about the “virtues” of local “rights”, but the evidence doesn’t support the idea that the local moneyed interests (politicians and the people who buy them) actually “care ” for the community. All too often the local agencies (ESPECIALLY Fish and Wildlife) are influenced by politicians (especially in Alaska, Montana and Wyoming) who don’t follow science. Instead, they cater to the ideologically constipated local interests who live in a fact-challenged world. The federal govt. is not simply here to provide military protection. It also exists to override the selfish and harmful interests of local mobs. That protection has prevented our national parks from being decimated by private logging interests, etc. Unfortunately, the current powers that be are moving towards blanket privatization and moving to sell off public lands to the highest bidder in addition to removing protections for species. Ironically, the GOP actually used to be big supporters of conservation. What in the heck happened to their sense of decency? There are some who still have it, but they’re being drowned out. Hopefully too much damage won’t accrue before the pendulum swings back.

  • Reducing the wolf population has an immediate detrimental effect on the entire ecosystem, fauna and flora alike. Wolves control overpopulation of elk and deer. This overpopulation leads to habitat loss for other species through overheating. Wolves also prey on smaller canine species that control mice, rats, and rabbits. As the residents proliferate, along with elk and deer, grasses and saplings are grazed down leading to increased erosion along streamlines. Flora differs, leading to reduction in birds and bees.

    In areas devastated by erosion where wolves have been reintroduced, the entire ecosystem starts regenerating and working as nature intended.

    Hunting with cameras is, the best way to hunt. You have to be cunning and close, and you take home a trophy to hang on the wall, leaving the animal alive.

  • Well meaning politicians and animal rights groups just don’t get it.
    We have problems with overpopulation of many species of geese.
    Greater Canada geese are a public health concern along the Alantic Flyway. Their droppings polite parks and golf courses as their numbers expand out of control. Hunting bag limits have been increased
    year after year…hunting seasons extended.
    Snow geese in the mid-west have exceeded the carrying capacity of the lands the inhabit. Year round hunting seasons with no bag limits seem unable to control their numbers.
    Deer populations are on the rise and out of control in many areas of the country.
    Man’s overpopulation, anti-hunting attitudes and animal rights organizations have not helped.
    Wildlife management must be left to the professionals. Politicians representing special interest groups should be excluded from the process.

  • Thank you all for your comments and discussion. They are most appreciated and hopefully will help to reach more of us who are concerned about wildlife and conservation in general.

  • It’s not some generic “politicians” that are doing this, it’s REPUBLICAN politicians. We’ll never solve the problem if we can’t accurately name it for fear of offending Republicans and their voters.

  • We absolutely planned to donate money to support this newsletter but after seeing that the bashing back and forth of political views and personal beliefs is tolerated, we are completely rethinking it. I think editorials are important but I read for the author’s view, not the self-righteous hate mongrels on both side of the political fence. I may not always support the author’s view but by allowing the, oh so subtle, name calling within the supposedly eloquent comments cheapens the author’s comments.

    • This is not a political article, nor is it ” bashing back and forth of political views” but is based on a personal belief that this is a bad bill and not good for wildlife in Alaska or on any Federal Wildlife Refuges. You may, of course, present your opposition comments.

      • I am not talking about the article, I appreciate the article and value your opinion. I am talking about the comments to the article. It is like every discussion on any topic these days. Someone disagrees with someone else and the mud starts slinging.

  • I think the people of Alaska (and all the other states) should be able to decide what is right for the people of Alaska. Not people who live thousands of miles away or visit once in their lifetimes.