Today, I came across this article from the pro-hunting Wisconsin Outdoor News, where the head of the deceptively named hunting group, the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, George Meyer, defends hounders and brags about how hunting is exempt from animal cruelty laws. Meyer then goes on to offer to the DNR that he will file a lawsuit to defend hounding and wolf killing. If anyone wants insight into the mind of a sadist this article gives us quite a glimpse:
If there was ever any doubt who the Wisconsin DNR really works for this article spells out out very clear:
“As for the Humane Society lawsuit, Meyer believes it’s dead in the water because state law exempts hunting, fishing, and trapping seasons from the animal cruelty law. Exemptions to that law also are provided for animal research and dog training (captive animals) situations.
“That law is very solid and it’s something that everyone has known about from the hunting side from day one,” Meyer said. “There is an exemption for the taking of animals as described in sections of the DNR’s Chapter 29, which is all of the DNR’s hunting, fishing, and trapping regulations. The law explicitly exempts Chapter 29 from animal cruetly welfare statutes.”
Meyer said the DNR talked to the AG’s office before the agency drafted the wolf-season rules on that point “because a lawsuit was fairly predictable. The AG will be using that as a defense in the lawsuit,” he said.”
So hunting and trapping had to be specifically exempted from animal cruelty laws by the state of Wisconsin. What does that tell us? People like Meyer know damn well their “sport” is flat out animal cruelty, but the state exempts hounders and trappers. Meyer seems to conveniently forget about the fact that his very organization was involved in this court case that shows wild animals can indeed be treated cruelly under the law:
Of course in his world hounding and animal fighting is perfectly normal and state sanctioned. Meyer even offers to file a lawsuit to help the state:
“Meyer said he expects Habush Sinykin to argue that on Aug. 29. WWF has asked the DNR if the agency would like to hear from hound hunters who have experience with wolves, or if the DNR wanted WWF and other conservation groups to file suits in support of the season.
“We offered that to the DNR and AG. They don’t want other groups to intervene at this stage. They want to keep it simple. If it heads south, there will be an opportunity to file in the appeal process. Motions to intervene would be appealed by the other groups and delay the ruling. The DNR and AG want to keep the clutter away so the judge has to rule and rule quickly,” he said.
“If it would go to trial, the motion for a permanent injunction will largely be decided on law – a legal argument as opposed to factual argument. (The DNR and AG) said they’re not going to need (hunter testimony) at this time because they have the law on their side.”
Meyer acknowledged that Habush Sinykin likely will make claims on Aug. 29 that the season framework will encourage wolf-dog confrontations.
“They’re going to have to show harm, which is going to be very difficult. Also, there’s an old saying – if you’re weak on law, argue facts. But, with the current animal cruelty law exempting Chapter 29, even if the Humane Society were right, the Legislature could say, like it or not, it’s exempted,” Meyer said.”
So Meyer thinks that “showing harm” is going to be difficult. If no “harm” has been done to dogs in these confrontations then why have hounders been paid $447,685 since 1985? Did these dogs just die magically? The DNR is supposed to represent ALL of the citizens in Wisconsin, yet on wildlife issues they only care about what people like George Meyer and the bear hounders want. The rest of us are ignored as the “public” hearings held by the Legislature and Natural Resources Board showed. Whatever Meyer and the bear hounders want, they get. Contrast Meyer’s actions with this from his hunting group’s website:
“We strongly believe that conservation policies should be scientifically, professionally and factually based, not politically based.
We are the state affiliate of the National Wildlife Federation. Together we promote the protection and conservation of our natural resources on a national level with the US. Congress and federal agencies.”
So this whole thing has not been politically based? Where is the science in allowing packs of vicious dogs to fight wolves? Shame on the National Wildlife Federation for allowing this group to be considered an “affiliate.”
Then we have this nice little racist comment that follows the article by a “sportsman” who calls them self Cazups:
“I am so sick of hearing about the Indians. The treaties that were signed so many years ago should be done with. If the Indians want the wolves and all the fish in northern Wisconsin then they should go back to canoes and torches to do the hunting and spearing like they had to back then. If they want to use modern technology then they should have to abide by our rules. They cant even prove they were here before the “whiteman”. Someone in our government should do something about this, i’m sure he would have the backing of the majority.”
Any bets this person is an anti-wolfer too? Any bets that they are a “limited government” right winger as well? Of course they only believe in limited government when it doesn’t apply to their twisted view of the world. If anyone thinks this mindset is an anomaly in Northern Wisconsin, think again. Remember these are the same people who resorted to violence when Native tribes were allowed to exercise their treaty rights to spearfish in the 1980’s. They can’t prove that they were here before the “white man?” Really? Remember Wisconsin these are the people who kept Scott Walker in office. These are the people who the DNR panders to. Is this what we really want in our state? Well this is what the rest of the country sees.