READERS COMMENTS

This is a very sad article to read, after writing an article about the grey wolf last week for my ecology class, and hearing that Haber recently died in a plane crash and now there is no one left to spearhead the campaign for these beautiful animals. I can only imagine the great love and respect he had for the Toklat pack after studying them for almost half a century. I would love to do such extensive research.
While I could never imagine killing an animal, I am not against hunting. I do, however, believe there are limits as to how many animals you should be able to kill during a period of time, etc. I also am against trapping and snaring, because of the creulty of such practices. A kill should be quick - no one should end life in pain. I also think the meat of the animal should not be wasted, nor the pelt or skeleton.
People need to realize the important role wolves play in keeping populations in check. It's not the peoples place to replace wolves in this respect. As well, people simply can not keep caribou/moose/deer populations in check on their own. Wolves are natural hunters, here for a good reason. They should not be hunted. Think of all the car accidents involving cervidae? This is dangerous for humans!
I understand that wolves are not endangered in Alaska, but that does not mean that Wallace and his buddies should lay in wait for these wolves and slaughter them. The thing about wolves is, they're on and off the ESA all the time, being hunted to the brink and put on the list, rebounding, and being taken off - and then the viscious cycle starts again! Why can't we just leave them be?
Studying wolves you realize a pack is like a family. Only a single pair mates and reproduces, all the wolves care for the pups, they cuddle and nuzzle muzzles, and play. They mourn when a family member dies. I swear they are capable of love. We should appreciate the value of their existence as we value our own.
Posted: Oct 17, 2009 Andalora

I was Artist in Residence in Denali a few years back. I stayed at the Murie cabin hoping to photograph wolves for my art. That was not to happen. That was the summer right after Coke killed one of the young and the alpha female of the pack I was hoping to see. Years I waited for this moment. The pack had moved on because of this. In my annual trips to Denali I have only seen one wolf since. The park is not there for a few pricks to trap, it is for everyone. More moose are killed by highway traffic than wolves. So now we have to kill wolves so people can shoot more moose. This is fixing the balance? Can humans be more stupid or bigger scumbags?
Posted: Aug 04, 2009 Eric

Theres another side of the 'coin' here. And I know from experience.
Most of the time when a wolf is caught in a leg hold trap or snared by a leg (which generally does not happen, snares are usually very lethal), they don't expend a lot of effort once they 'know' they are caught,so they lay or sit to avoid any further pain. Now if someone in a airplane starts buzzing and circling for pictures or just getting as close as they can to look at the wolf, this scares and or agitates the wolf, then they will make a very desperate effort to get loose, tearing skin, flesh and or breaking joints. Now visualize the plane flying off, and returning the next day to,, lets say, get better pictures, and lets say before the plane first found the wolf, the wolf was caught, but hadn't 'fought' wildly to get untrapped and it hadn't even torn its skin, and its joints were okay. So when the airplane arrives the next day the wolf is in much worse condition from the previous days 'airplane buzzing', NOW the photographer gets pictures of a wolf with a broken bloody leg highly visible. These are pictures that $ELL, and bring fame to those that show how 'horrible' trapping is. Better yet, buzz the wolf closely for 1/2 hour for 3 or 4 days, then the pictures get 'better and better'. Don't think for a moment some 'people', independent or paid by a organization, have 'morals or ethics' that are far ABOVE those who trap. Its the unspoken calling, the "pot calling the kettle black"!
Posted: Mar 23, 2009 Reece

The fact that man does not interfere with the Denali wildlife is what draws millions every year. It is no coincidence that nature has done such a wonderful job. Once man steps in, all will probably be changed forever-for what-- MONEY.. how sad.
Posted: Feb 17, 2009 Jim Smith

People on the forums know I am considered "anti" wolf by most but I seriously encourage you to rethink how you introduce Ms. Ross's article here. With all due respect and IMHO you do Ms. Ross's excellent piece great disservice with the "...park under siege" in your byline. I read it in the magazine and its actually one of the better articles I've read on wolf controversy when it comes to balance in recent years; and although her conclusions seem invalidly drawn IMHO I personally appreciated her introspective honesty.

Given that: 1)Wolves and no other large mammals are really under siege by any stretch of any rational imagination IN Denali National Park or any National Park for that matter. 2) Wolves are not even remotely endangered in the State of Alaska. 3) You are a publication purportedly bound to dispense not misrepresentation but veracity in your pages...

B) I humbly suggest you leave your editorializing for somewhere much farther down the line than the byline. I have come to like your magazine more and more every time I read it at the Library in recent years, but when it becomes apparent a publisher or editor's kenning is in traction before any substance is presented reason forces me to doubt that some of you are not held hostage to your own emotional preconceptions.

But alas I am not a subscriber. Thank Ms. Ross for her own restraint, I will get a subscription when I relocate in April.

My apologies for the consternation but I know if you truly want your already fine publication to be better you will find it well founded. Thanks for yur time,

John
Posted: Feb 15, 2009 Double Cabin

This Coke guy is sick.
Posted: Feb 12, 2009 Casie & Laura

Let the wolves be. The system of nature far exceeds any invention by human beings.
Posted: Feb 07, 2009 Nicholas

It's funny to the extreme side of anti's and the more balanced view of others. I love the outdoors and nature. I love hunting. There should certainly be laws and penelties against irresponsible trapping. Snares are also more humane than some of the gripping traps. The vast majority of hunters agree with rules and regulations for the sport. Yes, there are idiots in the hunting world just as there are idiot hikers. Balance is the key to everything. We as humans should do our best to keep this balance.
Posted: Feb 03, 2009 rich

I under both side's points.Hunters have the right to hunt and yet the wolves at the same time need protection from being hunted to extention. So why not hunt with a bag limit like on other game along with a park boudary instead of just a park boundary they can go outside of and be killed to extention. Also, I was just horrified at the way they are allowed to trap the wolves. The story of the way the alpha female was captured and allowed to lay there in excruciating pain for two weeks until her death was unbelievable to me. Coke wallace and other hunters have no right to use basically "torture traps" dug in and hung into their flesh of these animals untill they die. These traps should be outlawed immediately by the state legislature. Shooting an animal is one thing; torturing them till death is quite another! These very social and smart creatures feel just as much pain as we do. These types of slow torture till death is no different than what Sadam Hussien did to his helpless victims; How is this any different just because they are animals and not human!
Posted: Feb 03, 2009 Tony Dalon, Roopville GA

One could best say that we, the ignorant humans, fear that which we do not know. And rest assured that most do not even begin to understand of the making of the wolf pack. We so under estimate that of the wolf, their love for one another, the place that they hold in the pack, the bond that holds them and most importantly the roll that was given to the wolf, HUNTER. We could learn a lot from our brother wolf. Every pack member has a place and every member has an importance, a roll to play in the family. The very essence of a wolf pack is family. How many readers out there know that a wolf pack consists of only one mating couple? My guess, only those of us who have taken the time to learn. How many of us know that a wolf holds the key to the ever precious food chain? We have seen time and time again that when we eradicate the top predators, we begin to unravel that which is not our place to control. We throw off the balance of life, the caribou become overpopulated, the native plants fade as the caribou feed on them, and so on down the line. The wolf will not destroy the caribou or the elk! They are there to keep the balance in check, taking out the weak and the sick! It is absolutely ridiculous to even believe that hunting a wolf is okay. There is no need to keep wolf population under control via human intervention, a pack keeps it self in check. If they over hunt the caribou or deer, there is no food, STARVATION occurs. The pack cannot survive. It is high time that we learn more about our environment and our roll in the effects we create when we change anything. Tell Palin to back off and leave the wolves ALONE!
Posted: Jan 30, 2009 Wolf Friend

Just as hunting is a sport, trapping is a profession and done for income rather than sport. Trapping is what helped settle the West here in American. First the French coming down from Canada, then the British, and finally the Americans. It is the prospect of earning money from the pelts of animals that is behind trapping. Not only does it not require waiting for hours for a single shot, it allows the trapper to catch and harvest many pelts, but it also does not leave a bullet hole in the valuable hide. I won't go as far as to say there should be a law saying how often you are to check your traps as this is unconstitutional, but I do not like the animals waiting to long or potentially getting away wounded when no one benefits. Ultimately it is up to the trapper when he checks his traps and you have no business telling him how to run his business when you know next to nothing about it, how would you feel if he was the one telling you how to run your business.
Posted: Jan 29, 2009 bill

Someday, I hope to hear stories about people taking out hunters who hunt wolves, especially the so-called hunters that hunt from helicopters.
Posted: Jan 28, 2009 Lenny M.

Just as hunting is a sport, trapping is a profession and done for income rather than sport. Trapping is what helped settle the West here in American. First the French coming down from Canada, then the British, and finally the Americans. It is the prospect of earning money from the pelts of animals that is behind trapping. Not only does it not require waiting for hours for a single shot, it allows the trapper to catch and harvest many pelts, but it also does not leave a bullet hole in the valuable hide. I won't go as far as to say there should be a law saying how often you are to check your traps as this is unconstitutional, but I do not like the animals waiting to long or potentially getting away wounded when no one benefits. Ultimately it is up to the trapper when he checks his traps and you have no business telling him how to run his business when you know next to nothing about it, how would you feel if he was the one telling you how to run your business.
Posted: Jan 28, 2009 bill

Just as hunting is a sport, trapping is a profession and done for income rather than sport. Trapping is what helped settle the West here in American. First the French coming down from Canada, then the British, and finally the Americans. It is the prospect of earning money from the pelts of animals that is behind trapping. Not only does it not require waiting for hours for a single shot, it allows the trapper to catch and harvest many pelts, but it also does not leave a bullet hole in the valuable hide. I won't go as far as to say there should be a law saying how often you are to check your traps as this is unconstitutional, but I do not like the animals waiting to long or potentially getting away wounded when no one benefits. Ultimately it is up to the trapper when he checks his traps and you have no business telling him how to run his business when you know next to nothing about it, how would you feel if he was the one telling you how to run your business.
Posted: Jan 27, 2009 bill

This is a lively discussion. I do take exception to the broad-brush statement that this "will pit hunters against hikers..." Does this mean that I will battle against myself? I am an avid hiker. I also hunt. Let's not assume that hikers are against hunting. And let's not assume that hunters are anti-environment.
Posted: Jan 27, 2009 Steve

I'm glad you wrote this fair article, presenting multiple viewpoints. I'm disgusted and outraged to read about any animal being trapped for so long as that alpha female was, or animals roaming with embedded snares in their necks.

Here in New Zealand we have no natural mammals (except bats) and massive problems with native species becoming extinct. One of my pals trapped possums here in New Zealand. He would go out on bitterly cold mornings to check his traps he'd laid the day before as he knew it wasn't right to leave the animals suffering.

My sister also trapped possums and she used to reverse the sharp points on the trap so the possum was only held, not pierced. Again, she would check her traps the next day and kill the possum with a single blow to the head.

Surely leaving animals trapped so long is illegal? By all means, hunt an animal and then quickly dispatch it with a bullet if you must but why are trapping and snaring game animals socially sanctioned? Don't you have organisations in the United States to assess and minimise cruelty to animals?

It's obvious that these animals are like family to Gordon Haber and if you had any respect or liking for wolves then you wouldn't do anything other than killing them mercifully i.e. not trapping or snaring.

My partner was on a hike once and he and others came upon a trapline with caught possums. They had been there so long that some were dead. One of the guys released all the still live animals and threw the traps in the bushes as he went and no one disagreed with his action ans they know the trapper was reprehensible.

Keep up your good work doing what is right with "jumping on the environmental bandwagon" etc. You will be more assured of a subscription from some of us.
Posted: Jan 26, 2009 Honora Renwick

I have to agree with those who believe you should stay away from promoting the radical environazi agenda.I come from a long line of people who have hunted and eaten what we take,the majority of hunters I believe are there for the meat,the guys who hunt only the biggest and healthiest animals are by far the minority in the field.All one has to do is checkout the success ratio of hunters who connected with game to amount of hunters with tags,rarely will you find success ratios of,or higher than 30%.Man even with all the technology is still not a devastating factor on herds because of the seasons and regulations.If i wanted to read a bunch of eco scare,doom and gloom crapola I would read the Sierra Club rag instead of using it as toilet paper!Stick to what you know and are good at,Iam outside because I love the outdoors and hunting is a bonus and the eats are great!
Posted: Jan 25, 2009 Vern T

I do have a problem with an animal suffering for hours until someone checks their trapline or the traps that "malfunction" and the animal escapes to endure a slow death from the injury caused by the trap or snare. Comments?
Posted: Jan 25, 2009 J.R.

I would like to see the Toklat pack saved. I was in Denali this summer and saw part of the pack. It was a great trip. If we have to expand the buffer zone to protect the pack, so be it. As for hunting, I dont have a problem with it. I do have a problem with trapping. That is not right. However, when it comes to hunting, dont call it a sport unless the outcome is uncertain. For example, when the cardnials and the steelers play in the supper bowl next week, we dont know the winner; it is uncertain. The same should go for hunting. Go hunt a wolf or a bear or a deer using only a knife. That would be a true sport becuase we dont know the outcome. When you use rifle with a scope, the outcome is know and is very predictable.
Posted: Jan 24, 2009 Bob Florida

I like my meat local, sustainable, and organic; that's why I hunt. My guns, a phallic substitute, I think not; a family tradition dating back over 200 years, yep. How about you keep the conversation on point without turning it into yet another debate of the second admendment. My guns are off limits to "you people", as safe if not safer than every other right we have.
Posted: Jan 24, 2009 Greg

ADD A COMMENT