All Animals Matter

Icon

A personal perspective on animal welfare

Palin Supports Killing of Wolves (and other Animals)

Again, this is not my platform for politics, however, this one has to be posted. Sarah Palin, McCain’s VP candidate, the governor of Alaska, has been an advocate for the cruel Alaskan Wolf Killing spree for years. As a member of Defenders of Wildlife, an organization that champions for the welfare and survival of this incredible species, I’m sickened to even imagine that someone like Palin can take office. It’s no secret that the Republicans have always fought to drill for oil in this last great American wilderness and support the old misconception that shooting wolves protects livestock.

A photo from the L.A. Times showing palin posing for photo op with daughter after she shot a caribou:

“Palin has used her position as governor of Alaska to ruin the Alaskan wilderness in every way she could. Her most recent “victory” came on Aug. 26, when Alaska’s voters defeated Measure 2, an initiative that would have banned hunting wolves from airplanes for sport,” reported by John Dolin on AlterNet. It is said that according to Palin, shooting wolves is merely a safari. Imagine loud helicopters hanging the in the air, chasing a bunch of frightening little dogs and pups and spraying them with bullets.

Just recently, the Alaskan Game Board approved a free-for-all hunt for wolves near Gold Bay. The hunters killed all 14 terrified wolves from the snow, then raided a den of 14 surviving newborn pups nearby. This all too usual and cruel act is heinous. Please don’t vote for McCain and Palin as not only will these majestic creatures disappear forever, but so will our precious wilderness.

Advertisements

Filed under: animal cruelty, election 2008, hunting, , , , , ,

5 Responses

  1. Yeah, but doesn’t she look so CUTE with a gun!
    That’s about all that matters to these folks.

    The one thing of utmost importance to me is whether or not she intends to continue pouring billions of dollars into the war machine for Iraq. She made it clear, she’s committed to prolong this senseless warfare, which I see as a continuation of the Bush errors. Pretty face; lots of spunk, but in the end — to borrow an expression from Texas – – big hat, no cattle.

    Oh, and what’s with all the cowboy hats? There are no cowboys any more, so aren’t they just playing dress-up?

  2. Zendome says:

    I too am appalled that such a backwards, short sighted and souless person could make the cut for such a high ranking position in national government. I guess since W made it to the top anything is possible. But the challenges and potential ruin that lay before us all calls for the best and brightest of us to lead. I don’t understand how anyone could accept anything less. I don’t care about gender, race or class, anyone associated such barbaric and inhumane activities isn’t fit to hold public office, let alone the one just a heartbeat from the Presidency.

  3. preservetherepublic says:

    I still plan to vote for McCain, but I have to admit that I would like to hear Palin explain this one. This type of hunting is cruel and shouldn’t happen. However, I have a similar issue with Obama because he wouldn’t support Federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act which gives human status to babies who survive abortions. I just recently posted on both of these issues in my blog at http://preservetherepublic.wordpress.com/. The right and left both seem inconsistent on this. It seems to me that the same peope who would be against aerial hunting would be pro-life and vice versa.
    Anyway, this is the first legitimate attack on Palin that I have seen.

  4. preservetherepublic says:

    I apologize if I took things off topic a little, but it is a paradox for me. However, I agree that aerial hunting is too cruel. There is not even any sport in it because the animal has no chance at all.

  5. animalover2 says:

    The bounty on wolves claim is political mis-information to try to smear Gov. Palin. No matter what your politics, it’s not fair to anyone to allow lies about either side to circulate on the net. I researched this claim on the Alaska Legislature site and submitted it to Snopes.com.

    If you look at the official Alaska site, the bounty was proposed by the Alaska Dept of Fish & Game (not Gov. Palin) to be used within a certain remote area where the wolves were decimating the caribou and moose herds as a means to protect help protect the herds. The wolves in this area are overpopulated and each spring during calving season they are killing off most of the newborn calves, homing in on them by the scent of blood. The wolves not only endanger the prey species in the area, but are invested with lice due to overpopulation. Wolves are difficult and expensive to control in this part of Alaska, so the bounty was proposed to help offset some of the expense. The proposal was never implemented. Bounties were historically paid to entice people to help control Wolves but they were ended in the 1970’s. It is also notable that they do not issue “hunting licenses” for wolves only “control permits” because the sportsmen have no interest in them and they are not used for food. There are also some areas in Alaska where wolves cannot be killed at all because there is no threat to other wildlife.

    While I am an avid animal lover and wildlife conservationist, I also realize there will always be hunting. Some areas of the country depend on hunting for a good portion of their food. Alaska has a long history of shooting wolves from low flying aircraft in the most remote areas (not everywhere). I am not advocating nor condemning this method because I understand the argument from both sides. Shooting from low flying aircraft is not something people do for “fun”. They must remove the door from the plane and fly in sub-zero temperatures during winter months when the wolves can be tracked. The wildlife management reports I read, indicated that “wound & injure rates were very low” and they reported wound & injure rates associated with other hunting methods as well. The report also states one of the main reasons for collecting the forelegs is to ensure that animals are actually killed not just wounded. I think law makers have a responsibility to make and enforce laws that require humane hunting practices. As I read the 144 pages of the report I was impressed at the amount of thoughtful study and detailed information that it contained and that they actually are concerned with “wound & injure” rates, lice etc. – and that they outlawed shooting of wolves in areas where they are not a threat. I’m not saying they are perfect or can’t be improved upon, but I don’t believe this is as big an issue as some are trying to “spin” it to be.

    I’m not sure what Mr. Obama’s position on killing wolves (or any other wildlife) is. However I do know he is personally responsible for blocking a bill that would have allowed doctors to give medical treatment to babies born alive after botched abortions. He listened to personal testimony from nurses who were only allowed to hold these babies for their short lives and watch them inhumanly suffer and fade away which often takes hours. Obama personally blocked the state bill even after wording was changed be the same as the Federal Bill which passed the US Senate unopposed (Both Hillary & Kerry voted in favor of the bill). I cannot vote for someone who has that little regard for human life. I also cannot imagine that someone who is not concerned with the humane treatment of newborn babies would somehow be concerned with humane treatment of animals.

    Here are links to the full congressional testimony of some of these nurses- no spin added.
    http://nobamanews.blogspot.com/2008/07/jill-staneks-full-testimony_05.html
    http://nobamanews.blogspot.com/2008/07/allison-bakers-full-testimony.html
    the federal law – no spin added
    http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/BAIPAFederal.pdf

    Jill Stanek is the nurse who took this issue to her state legislature. This is the link to her full report in Citizen Link (non-partisan)
    (Yes, she does have an agenda too – she is pro-life, however her objective in this case was only to fight for babies born alive – not to fight all abortion.)
    http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000007034.cfm#

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: