bucdoego
Well-known member
Ward Clark lives in Alaska and therefore, likely has a different perspective than ranchers of the lower 48 states. Still, I wonder if government doesn't tend to have a thumb on the scale for overuse of the endangered species act.
Lawmakers Call for Removing Wolves From 'Endangered' List As Packs Threaten Ranchers
Ward Clark | March 28, 2024
[Last two paragraphs - and a concluding comment...]
Perhaps it's time for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take a different approach to the whole idea of "endangered species." Nobody is proposing wiping every wolf off the face of the planet, after all, and just here in Alaska we have somewhere between 7,000 and 11,000 wolves, not to mention how many are in neighboring Canada. That's a population, here in the state with the lowest (human) population density, that is in no danger whatsoever. That being the case, it hardly seems necessary to list as "endangered" a smaller population in an area where they present a conflict with humans.
Nobody wants wolves deliberately driven to extinction. And they won't be. But ranchers and farmers have rights, too, including the right to protect their own property. We have plenty of wolves here in the Great Land, and we chose to live here knowing that; nobody reintroduced them at taxpayer expense and nobody is offering to toss us in the pokey if we kill one that's after the chickens.
That's how it should be.
source: RedState
Lawmakers Call for Removing Wolves From 'Endangered' List As Packs Threaten Ranchers
Ward Clark | March 28, 2024
[Last two paragraphs - and a concluding comment...]
Perhaps it's time for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take a different approach to the whole idea of "endangered species." Nobody is proposing wiping every wolf off the face of the planet, after all, and just here in Alaska we have somewhere between 7,000 and 11,000 wolves, not to mention how many are in neighboring Canada. That's a population, here in the state with the lowest (human) population density, that is in no danger whatsoever. That being the case, it hardly seems necessary to list as "endangered" a smaller population in an area where they present a conflict with humans.
Nobody wants wolves deliberately driven to extinction. And they won't be. But ranchers and farmers have rights, too, including the right to protect their own property. We have plenty of wolves here in the Great Land, and we chose to live here knowing that; nobody reintroduced them at taxpayer expense and nobody is offering to toss us in the pokey if we kill one that's after the chickens.
That's how it should be.
source: RedState
