A Wolf in Sheeps Clothing

I know that the title of this entry is another negative stereotype associated with wolves, but I couldn't help but think of it while watching Senator Christensen speak to the media about his bill. The first sentence out of his mouth was a lie, and after that it didn't get much better. Christensen claimed that his bill would be a less harsh bill and that it didn't promote killing of all wolves. If the media had read the bill they may have been able to quote it to him and prove that his bill is a call for the removal of all wolves.

Watch this video with the following quote from Senate Bill 36 in mind.

"Policy.
42 The wolf is a predator and its presence in the state threatens the state's wildlife and
43 ungulate populations, therefore, it is the policy of the state that the wolf shall be destroyed

Destruction or removal of wolves --
Delegation of authority.
48 (1) The division shall capture or kill any wolf it discovers in the state, except for a wolf
49 lawfully held in captivity. (Utah Senate Bill 36)"

If Christensen claims he wasn't lying because they aren't technically allowing the killing of all wolves because they are not going to allow hunters into the Hogle Zoo, then I guess he may have a point.

The Circle of Life

The Circle of Life:

“When we die, our bodies become the grass, and the antelope eat the grass. And so we are all connected in the great Circle of Life” (Lion King). You may roll your eyes at this quote, but one study show s just how important this concept really is.

Many people argue for killing wolves because they are what is sometimes considered an “apex predator”. This is a predator that has no natural enemies. They are at the top of the food chain, so to speak. Many people have the idea that their only real effect on the environment is thinning herds of deer, moose, and other ungulate species.

Before Utah should consider spending money to kill these so called useless creatures, it may want to investigate any benefits wolves might provide for the environment. Below is a study that shows how wolves actually help ungulate species more than hunters do. The decomposition of the carcass and the ungulate filled feces of the wolf are important factors in enriching soil and plant life and creating biological hotspots.

Wolves modulate soil nutrient heterogeneity and foliar nitrogen by configuring the distribution of ungulate carcasses

Joseph K. Bump, Rolf O. Peterson, John A. Vucetich

Ecology 2009 90:11, 3159-3167

Hunters find themselves in the Crosshairs of SB-36

The state of Utah wants to kill people who hunt. Although it is somewhat hidden in Senate Bill 36, there is no getting around the fact that SB-36 is a call for state sanctioned murder.

The exact wording in the bill is this:
“The wolf is a predator and its presence in the state threatens the state's wildlife and
ungulate populations, therefore, it is the policy of the state that the wolf shall be destroyed or
removed from the state.” ( UT senate bill 36)

Of course, this is a statement about wolves, but let’s take a closer look at the logic. According to this statement, the wolf is a “predator”. It is also a threat to the state’s "wildlife" and “ungulate populations”. The statement then goes on to claim that because the wolf can be categorized as a “predator” and a threat to "wildlife" and “ungulate populations” it is the “policy of the state” to “destroy” it.

Alright, you might be confused by now as to what this has to do with murdering hunters. Well, let’s first define the word ungulate. Ungulate is defined as any of a number of mammals with hooves that are superficially similar but not necessarily closely related taxonomically. Hmmm. Sound familiar. Yeah, those are deer.

The argument the state legislature is using to kill wolves is that wolves are evil because they kill wildlife and deer. This argument only makes sense under the assumption that anything that kills wildlife and deer is evil. If you haven’t seen where I am going with this already, I will tell you. Hunters also kill ungulate populations and wildlife, and therefore, “it is the policy of the state that the hunter shall be destroyed or removed from the state”. It is ironic that this bill is widely supported by hunters, who are considered a nuisance to the state according to the logic in SB-36 and will either be removed or exterminated.

I know this seems a little far fetched, but if you really think about the logic this bill uses as a reason to exterminate wolves, it is extremely flawed. Here is an enthymeme I completed for this bill just to show how ridiculous the argument really is.

WATCO:

What are the consequences of wolf extermination on wildlife and ungulate populations

Claim:
Wolves should be exterminated

Reason:
wolves kill deer and wildlife

Assumption:
anything that kills deer and wildlife should be exterminated.

This assumption clearly includes hunters.

Rhetorical Analysis: NYT vs. Rammell

Rhetorical Analysis: Hunting Wolves, and Men

In 2009 Idaho legalized hunting for the grey wolf, but the new law didn't come without controversy. Heated comments by one Republican candidate were used by the New York Times to show the attitude of some of the people who support the slaughter. The NYT's purpose was to paint the law as a representation of everything that is wrong with Idaho.

The article starts out by quoting a Republican candidate for the governorship for the state. At a political barbeque, Rex Rammell was quoted as saying "Obama tags? We'd buy some of those." His statement was in response to a conversation about the wolf tags which were recently put on the market for hunters. Tags allow the hunter to be able to shoot and kill the animal legally. When asked about his comments, Rex Rammell said he was joking and that "Everyone knows that Idaho has no jurisdiction to issue tags in Washington D.C." The purpose of exploiting this quote is to show readers that supporters of the law are radical, and are even okay with jokes about assassinating the president. This is clearly a gross generalization by the New York Times, but it does resonate with people who already agree with the position of the article.

The article even goes on to attack Rammell as a "nature-phobe" because he was an elk rancher. Again, this characterization of Rammell as a liberal-hating-anti-environmentalist will not have any influence on people who already support the hunting of wolves. The most effective thing the article does in influencing people not to hunt wolves is paint the wolves as harmless and natural to the west. This approach goes a lot further than the sarcastic rhetoric used by the author.

Hunting Wolves, and Men is an entertaining but unpersuasive piece. It is interesting to here the attitude of a supporter of the law, but it only represents one persons views, and hopefully not the most intelligent views out there. Rex Rammell is admittedly a fringe candidate, and his comments are not likely to sway people to jump ship and save the wolves.

The Lobos (wolves) haven't heard of SB 36

Today the University of New Mexico's basketball team defeated Brigham Young in a thriller that went down to the wire. What does that have to do with senate bill 36? Well, not much, but New Mexico does have a wolf as its mascot, and from observing the way the UNM played, apparently they had never heard of the political initiative to remove all wolves from the state.

In this entry I am going to define some terms involved with this issue by simply stating and defining. Here is the list.

1. Wolf: defined as canis lupus. Commonly known as a grey wolf.

2. Service: the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife

3. Endangered Species Act: Law passed in 1970 to protect specious in danger of becoming extinct.

4. Sympatric: When different organisms geographical boundries overlap. An example would be when wolves and livestock live in the same area, or wolves and humans.

5. Ecosystem: An environment where organisms are interdependent on one another.

6. Livestock: Domesticated animals raised for agricultural purposes.

These terms will hopefully help you as read my blog and form your opinion on SB 36.

Wolf Stories

If you think back to your childhood you may remember some fairytales involving wolves. These stories include The Three Little Pigs (wolf tries to blow pigs’ houses down), Peter and the Wolf (wolf is captured and taken to the zoo), The Wolf and the Seven Kids (wolf eats a family of goats only to be gutted and filled with stones), and what you might remember hearing from these stories is that the wolf was the villain and sometimes the subject of nightmares.

Most wolf stories in the first half of the 20th century have been portrayed wolves as violent, cruel, and dangerous. Characters are to avoid ravenous wolves, or they end up paying the consequences. This may have something to do with public opinion of wolves in the first half of the 1900’s. In Utah, wolves were captured and killed by the hundreds from 1900 to 1930. Eventually, in 1930 the last wolf was killed.

More recently you may have seen wolves portrayed in stories as being honorable (Dances with Wolves), family oriented (Jungle Book), and most familiar to many as masculine and sexy (Twilight Series). This more recent portrayal of wolves has come with a new effort to bring wolves back into the places they once thrived.

Now that the wolves have made a comeback, which one of these two stereotypes are more accurate? This is one question I will try to answer throughout my blog. Should we see these animals as the hungry, Big Bad Wolf, or as the hunky and honorable Jacob, from Twilight? At least we don’t have to deal with conservation efforts of vampires.

The Big Bad Wolf

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf? Well, according to Utah state senator Allen M. Christensen, Utahns have a great number of reasons to fear lassie's more muscular cousin. Christensen feels that wolves have become such a large problem in Utah that he has proposed a bill to eradicate wolves from the state. Senate Bill 36 allows the hunting of wolves and serves the purpose of "manag(ing) the wolf to avoid the establishment of a viable pack" In areas where the wolf is considered endangered, the bill asks for federal assistance in the removal of the wolves. The wolves have been blamed for hurting deer, elk, and livestock populations.

My blog will serve the purpose of getting to the bottom of this bill. I will find out if the supposed threats of the wolf population are real, and if so, are they worth the cost of removing them.

At least for now, if I was a wolf, I would hold off on buying any real estate in Utah.