As we have seen over the past couple of weeks the propaganda being fed to anti-wolf newspaper “outdoors” writers is reaching epic proportions. Now newspaper editorial writers are getting in on the act and publishing offensive and insulting tripe along with the usual DNR kill everything talking points. None of these articles does this more blatantly than an “editorial” published in the Green Bay Press Gazette on June 29, 2013.
The propaganda is spread hot and heavy from the first paragraph:
Hunting in Wisconsin has always been about enjoying the state’s remarkable natural resources while creating memories with family and friends. That’s why last year’s wolf hunt in Wisconsin was so unusual.Instead of celebrating the harvest, hunters faced an outcry from groups who claimed that hunting wolves was wrong on every level. And that was before the court battle heated up and ended up becoming a confusing mess. The question of whether hunters would be allowed to use dogs to hunt wolves was left in limbo through the course of the season. Despite the shouting from a vocal minority of anti-hunters and the courtroom drama that kept the hunting dogs and hunters at bay, the 2012 Wisconsin wolf hunting season was a real success.
Vocal minority? Really? It has been published time and time again that the vast majority of Wisconsin residents oppose the use of dogs against wolves. The Conservation Congress vote proved the same thing even though hunters and trappers far outnumbered us “anti-hunters.” If you think that paragraph was nothing but revisionist propaganda tripe the best (or worst) is yet to come.
One of the reasons the 2012 wolf season will be remembered as a success is because the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and in turn the hunters of this state, were finally given the chance to manage the wolf population in Wisconsin. Not to take anything away from judges, but we would much rather have important decisions about managing animal populations through hunting in the hands of the DNR. The DNR is not perfect, but it has a strong track record when it comes to using science to determine harvest goals, and we are confident the agency has the expertise to determine whether a population can support a hunting season.
So it is wrong for judges to make decisions about animal cruelty issues but apparently the writer of this fluff piece has no problem with people like Rep. Scott Suder (R-ALEC) and the legislature making “management decisions” rather than the DNR? Using science? Where? All I gathered from the “Wolf Advisory Committee” quota setting meeting is that wolves need to be killed because the bear hounders and their allies want them dead. Where is the “science” when the bear hounders along with all of the other anti-wolf groups demand that wolves be slaughtered down to “350” animals? No, certainly no emotion at play here. Then there is this:
It is safe to say there are well over 1,000 wolves living in Wisconsin right now, and that population will fluctuate as time passes. One undeniable fact is that if there was not a wolf hunting season this fall, the number of dogs and livestock lost would increase significantly. Between April and December last year, the state paid out $120,000 in compensation to farmers and dog owners due to wolf depredation.
While many anti-hunting groups and pro-wolf supporters see the wolf as a majestic, beautiful wild creature, they are often unfamiliar with what a destructive force an unmanaged wolf population can have on prey animals and domesticated animals in a region. The wolf is undoubtedly a majestic creature, and Wisconsin is fortunate to be home to a thriving population. Last week, the Natural Resources Board approved a quota of 275 wolves for this year’s season, which is a strong increase over last year’s goal of 201 animals. Hunters and trappers harvested 117 wolves during Wisconsin’s first official wolf hunt last year.
We congratulate the DNR and hunters across the state for last season’s wolf hunt, and we hope this year’s hunt is safe and successful as well. And we hope some of the raw emotion that marked last year’s historic hunt fades away.
So it is an “undeniable fact” that without the wolf slaughter last year there would have been more hounders having their dogs killed and more “missing cattle?” So, where are those “facts?” According to the DNR the wolf population was “stable” in 2013 so shouldn’t the “depredation” numbers stay the same? They seem to forget to mention that now that the wolf killers have to pay for the “depredation” the amount paid out has magically dropped. What a joke. But that is not even the most offensive part in this article:
While many anti-hunting groups and pro-wolf supporters see the wolf as a majestic, beautiful wild creature, they are often unfamiliar with what a destructive force an unmanaged wolf population can have on prey animals and domesticated animals in a region.
I will go on record and call this line absolute B.S. and is a slap in the face of all living wildlife advocates. Destructive force? That is funny considering deer in Wisconsin and elk in other states are at all-time highs AFTER wolf reintroduction/recolonization and the ecological benefits of wolves are undeniable. And the clowns that wrote this have the nerve to claim the DNR is using “science?”
What can we do about the spread of propaganda and misinformation? We can start by calling out these newspapers for their fallacies and insults directed toward living wildlife advocates. There seems to be this mindset among the kill everything crowd and the killing cartels that you are not a “real” Wisconsinite if you don’t buy into their killing culture. That seems to be the right-wing mantra these days with everything. We need to organize a letter writing campaign to these newspapers to counter the garbage that their own staff and “editorial” departments put out. Remember that we have the FACTS on our side and they are the ones using “emotion” to push their agenda. When anti-wolf individuals stand before DNR biologists and employees and make absurd comments about wolves “eating grandchildren” and the DNR does nothing to correct it, something is very wrong. This really occurred before the “Wolf Advisory Committee” and before the “Wisconsin Conservation Congress Wolf Committee” this spring. Only in Wisconsin would Little Red Riding Hood be considered “science.” If the DNR refuses to correct lies and deliberate misinformation it is up to us to do so and we can start by bombarding the Green Bay Press Gazette and other newspapers with rebuttals challenging their ridiculous arguments.