End Aerial Wolf Hunting

TV please. Stop hunting wolfs

I presented an issue to Alaska's Board of Game. Alaska's wildlife organizations such as mine are well aware of how the wildlife is managed in this state and it is always in favor of the hunters. Mike Fleagal told me at a BOG meeting that "if you can't hunt it, eat it or wear it we don't manage it." Aerial wolf hunting is not about predator control It is about resource control: having enough caribou and moose to feed Alaskan's large growing population. This video is well done and and tells the truth.

I believe aerial preditor hunting should be banned by federal law.

I did go to the ADF&G website; below are some excerpts from there -

"Grizzly bears have been shown to be particularly effective predators of moose calves from birth to about 2 months of age and often kill adult moose in the spring. In this regard, one grizzly bear is equivalent to many black bears.

Black bears have been found to be the most important predator of moose calves in some areas of Alaska ... In these areas, black bears killed about 40% of all moose calves that were born.

...in areas of Canada and the northern states where moose coexist only with wolves, moose are often found at high densities that fluctuate with weather and habitat...

ADF&G estimates that roughly 7000 to 11000 wolves, approximately 30,000 grizzly bears, and more than 100,000 black bears live in Alaska.

ADF&G research has shown a single wolf consumes 12-13 moose in a typical year... mostly calves.
About 175,000-200,000 moose live in Alaska..."

My conclusions are:
1. Wolves aren't the problem; politics, population, and bears are.
2. ADF&G is exaggerating wolf predation numbers - it's not possible that ~9000 wolves could consume more than half the moose population (~112,000 of less than 200,000 - you do the math) yearly, and have 3 times as many grizzlies, ten times as many black bear, plus hunting, and sustain ANY moose population.

Aerial hunting of wolves is unfair, immoral, unethical, and unacceptable. Man should be a protector of our wildlife. Alaska is our last great untouched frontier in the United States. Running a wolf down in the snow until it is too exhausted to move is not sport. Killing of wolves and bears to inflate the moose population for urban hunters who are not using the moose for food is unthinkable. Killing for pleasure is immoral. There are no wild wolves in Indiana and many other areas in the lower U.S. We will never glimpse one of these magnificant animals who mate for life and live as families. I hope Alaska learns from our mistakes. We will not visit Alaska and will encourage others to do the same until the barbaric aerial hunting of wolves ceases.

I grew up in Montana, my wife grew up in Idaho. I've spent my whole life hunting to put meat on the table for me and my family. last year i saw more wolves then elk where i hunt. I now of more that 100 people that hunt for one purpose - to feed their families. It is a way of life in MT, and wolves are jeopardizing that.

When i was at my sister-in-law's house in Idaho I saw a wolf less than half a mile from her house, and 5 more within 4 miles of her house. She has daughters that are almost 3 years old. Do you think she feels safe letting them play in her yard? I sure don't.

Would you like to have a pack of wolves live in your neighborhood? Less than a mile from your house. Between your house and your child's school? If you would I would be happy to transplant the ones from my backyard to yours instead of hunting them.

I have lived in Alaska, Denali and Sitka. In Denali I saw my first "Wild" Wolf from the East Fork Pack. The Alpha Male cruised by our shuttle.. I was overwhelmed and started to cry. Several Months later he was shot.. I broke down while living in Sitka. This video is powerful and I applaud Dorothy for it, whom I know from Care2.. I have been reading Three Amongst the Wolves currently, by Helen Thayer, an adventurer who was the first woman do walk across the magnetic North Pole. In this book they meet up with an Inuit Man who at one time hunted wolves. After a very touching experience when he rescued a captive wolf then released her, he shifted gears and no longer hunts them, he only respects them. This book was awesome. Anyway, The Aerial hunting has to end, no more violence I am fed up with it. For anyone who feels destitute that Wolves are interfering with their meals, they have a misconception of Wolves and their behavior. Have you studied Wolf Behavior, they are so much like us, and all they want to do is survive and feed their family too. Who are we to take control of a beautiful wild creature and determine their fate. There are options for your food plate, change your consciousness and attitude, Wild animals are alot more instinctive than us, they weed out the sick and the old, not the healthy animals. I wish people would just get more educated on Animal Behavior it would save lives, human and animal. We do not have any right getting in the way of natures way and the natural balance of life. Once we stop interfering with this, this planet might heal for the higher good of all concerned.

â??thethreshold,â?? who made a post above about not finding elk, must not hunt in one of the
Elk Management Units that have too many elk. That is especially sad since the November-December issue of Montana Outdoors reported â??most of the stateâ??s 35 EMUâ??s exceed the stateâ??s desired objectives for elk numbers.â?? Unfortunately, he is spreading the Little Red Riding Hood myth as well as the myth of many people hunting for the sole purpose of feeding their family. I was raised in a family of 5 hunters and we likely led the same type of life the 100 people that â??thethresholdâ?? mentions. To me, hunting has many purposes, not just feeding a family. If â??thethresholdâ?? and his 100 friendsâ?? sole purpose are truly to feed their family and they are not successful during the regular hunting season, what do they do??? Our family used other sources, such as more small game and fish. That is a common practice even in Alaska where things are much harder to come by than in Montana, which I know from living in rural towns in both States. While living in Alaska, I was appointed to the Board of Game, the 7 person group that establishes hunting regulations. I was also appointed to the McGrath Adaptive Management Team to determine if wolf predation really was why the hunters from McGrath were having a hard time getting moose for their families. Hunters from McGrath were also crying wolf, complaining of seeing more wolves than moose and talking of being fearful for their children.

Fish and Game personal assigned to monitor changing subsistence needs and available resources, and people from McGrath helped us determine the need for a moose population of about 3,000 in and around McGrath. When Fish and Game finally did some good surveys they found here were already 3,200+ moose in the area. Those surveys also showed the real problem â?? over hunting. A well managed moose population that is hunted usually has 35 bulls per 100 cows. But near McGrath the ratio was as low as 6 per 100. The antler size of the bulls was also very small, indicating over hunting.
Talking of being afraid because wolves were seen near town became another rallying cry for those desiring to kill wolves. Losing dogs to wolves became controversial, even though it has been happening for decades. Wolves hate dogs and coyotes and will try to get them even when the dog is on a leash outside a cabin or on a leash during a hike or walk.

Bears have killed enough people to fill several books with actual stories, but the rare stories of wolves threatening people always center on the wolves having been fed or chasing dogs. Families living in rural areas are usually aware there are many more natural hazards near home than in the cities. Most educate their children on how to deal with bears, wolves and other hazards they may encounter in life.

The reintroduction of wolves has become a cause to rally around, both to reduce the number of wolves and to prevent any hunting of wolves. Both sides have a justified purpose, based on their backgrounds and beliefs. Both hunters and non-hunters have specific goals they want wildlife mangers to provide for them. Unfortunately everyone can not have what they want, that is something I learned before I learned about politics. I hope this video makes people aware of the politics behind hunting wolves from airplanes.

Ending Aerial Wolf Hunting and supporting H.R. 3663, legislation now being considered in the U.S. Congress is the right thing to do for wildlife in all states.

re: Lillilee - Let's ban everything at the Federal level, including your right to own property or speak freely. Are you serious! Get real. You don't know the issues, live in the region or have a say in the matter. Just as much as I don't have a moral authority to judge what happens to wildlife in the bayou of Louisiana. States DO have sovereignty over their own resources and our nation was designed that way for a reason. This is not a democracy and wolves do need to be killed from time to time. If a hundred wolves are shot by someone who used an airplane to spot them - so what! It's no different than spraying a can of RAID at a wasps nest - problem solved.

If you are going to question our management then please Don't visit Alaska.

Unless you are a resident, unless you live here, work here and survive here, its not your business.

And for those that think they can form an educated opinion based on what you read (not what you *live*)

Wolf packs attack sled dogs in the villages. These aren't pets, these are working animals who are needed for survival.

Wolf packs sling around the edges of town and lure domesticated animals out to "play" then the pack decends and rips the animal to shreds

Wolf packs sling around humans and stalk them in town. Many are not afraid of humans and do not even run when rocks or thrown or voices shouted.

I don't think I need to go on with any more examples.

Alaska needs wolf control. Period. Don't like it? Then invest your energy on the wild life in our own state.

Does anyone NOTICE the terrible "cutting" in this "explosive new video". It is clear the film has been edited to take statement made my people in this film completely out of context.

This video also is selling one view biased propaganda. Where is the scientific basis for many of the outrageous statements in this video? Where are the sources, I don't see any cites.

Its an "opinion" from a radical.

And yes, the newsletter is called "all you can eat". Many of us who live in this fine state don't like to eat prepackaged, hormone and antiobiotic fed commercial beef. We prefer HEALTHY living and eating wild meat. Sorry if you can't stomach the fact that real meat comes from being slaughtered. It isn't suppose to be altered.

re: myalaska - According to Dr. Victor Van Ballenberghe, a former member of the Alaska Board of Game, "A 1997 National Research Counsel review recognized important ecological relationships and their significance to predator control programs, and provided guidelines for incorporating them in management actions. The Alaska Board of Game approach in approving recent control programs was to accept crude, qualitative information and broad generalizations on habitat quality and carrying capacity rather than requiring quantitative data, a serious breach of recommended standards. In general, the BOG's recent approval of programs to reduce wolf and bear numbers in an attempt to increase ungulates represents a retreat from the sound science standard in place in Alaska during the past decade." He argues that" most of the important biological standards and guidelines recommended by the NRC (1997) have not been followed." Dr. Van Ballenberghe and the majority of Alaskans who do know the issues, do live in the region, and have had a say in the matter, voting in the past to ban aerial hunting, have my support. Only 15% of Alaskans have hunting licenses; the subset of those who want to shoot wolves from airplanes, and the corrupt politicians who are ignoring the science in support of them deserve to lose this fight.

Technophile
Shouldn't you cite your source regarding 15% hunter and 15% support of wolf control? Because the general consensus of most Alaskans is we are all for wolf control. Except the few who think they are cute...... and those that haven't supported it in the past sure change their tune when said wolf is in their backyard licking its chops while stalking fido.

I agree with this video presentation completely. Aerial hunting of wolves or any other creature, except man in time of war, is barbarian blood sport. Congratulations for putting it together in a manner that is not confrontational, but is informative. I could not do nearly so well.....I being of the ax handle theory of persuasion.

What I see in some of the disagreement comments is rationalization. It is asked what subsistence hunters do when game is out of season (with a nice legal suggestion posed)...let me tell you my experience, they hunt anyway in all too many cases. I have personally dragged more than one poacher to the Sherrif. You want excitment, go in to dark field and disarm a poacher, and usually his partner, also armed, and do it unarmed yourself. See if you're quick enough to disarm the 44 magnum revolver from the meat head pointing it at your head. okay. Then tell me aboput his rights. Or, why bother at all?....I mean they can hunt for free while you and I must shop at Piggley - Wiggley right? They own 20 puny acres somewhere and presume that entitles them to game all over 10,000 acres?

Next, this presumption that man has precedence over all others as predator in chief. Says who? And man has a "right" to frigging "jog" or "run" through cougar and wolf country, right? Tell you what, just "jog" fast by my German Shepherds when I unleash them and say "packen" or "fas im" and see what "Prey drive" is all about....and you think it's cool to "jog" in cougar or wolf country? Or is it that once you arrive in any country, it is no longer the country of anything else....only you? The recent close encounter of wolves and 3 lady joggers in Eagle River is a classic example of settler stupidity....and not one of those ladies was even scratched. Tell you what, I will walk among wolves and coyotes any day, even cougars if I watch the back trail closely, versus stroll big city streets at night. How about you?

No I wouldn't. Because, my dear Zoya God gave me brains. Your comment regarding your "German Shepards"....appear as a threat to those that disagree with you. Is that true? Is that how you handle opposition, sick your dogs on people? What would you have been spouting if those ladies had been scratched, bitten, terrorized? One day, while you visit Alaska, a polar bear could have your head in his jaws....from your comments I except you to believe we should all stand back and watch you be mauled because YOU were walking in the Polar Bears yard?

Sounds like you have more of a personal vendetta against those that have the right to "hunt free" and you have a personal vendetta against those who choose to not eat tainted commercial meat from the "piggly wiggly" (which we do not have here). You make it sound as if you are a resident of this great state...hmmm.

Guess what, we are going to SHOOT wolves. We are going to TRAP wolves. We will use their pelts and we will keep them away from our dogs and our community members. And you can't do a darn thing about it.

The fact of the matter is the video above is obviously cut and pasted together. Therefore no credibility. There are no sources cited, nothing to back up any of the statements.

Its propaganda, rhetoric and unbelievable. Its just goes to show how uneducated those are in the lower 48 in regard to Alaska and our way of life. You will never get it.

Alaska Photog.....you're one of shout 'em down types right? You got polar bears (a mild non-sequitur, no?) in mountainous wolf country up thar?

About those ladies....but NONE were scratched or bitten were they?

About my dogs...yes they are partially Schutzhund trained, which means they are obedient first and fore most....and they will NOT attack anything without a release to do so AND a perception of threat. That bite on command crap is movie baloney. Yes, they possess the same prey drive a wolf does, that is what drives pursuit....so if you ran by them AND I gave them a release command, they would pursue. they would also stop on order to "out." Dogs are not wolves ( and I have recused both, dogs and wolf-hydrids), so "running" in wolf country is stupid, period. Go ahead and kill them all if you must, then pave the whole palce over while you're at it. I am sure it will be nice.

As for subsistance poachers...you sound like one to me, and lacking any more information, that makes you scum....you think the world owes you something and the means for you to even be there at all is your birthright regarldless of how much other pay in taxes to enable it...check my profile, dude, I am very aware of the considerable federal subsidies sent your way annually.

Ill attempt to address your nonsense statements.....

Alaska Photog.....you're one of shout 'em down types right? You got polar bears (a mild non-sequitur, no?) in mountainous wolf country up thar?



Shout em down types? What is that exactly? Is that what you call your opposition? Those that disagree with you are considered "shout 'em down"? What I am is someone who calls BS when I read it. My point regarding you being mauled by a polar bear was in direct reference to your comments that you should take what you get when walking around in the wild. You stated that if you are in an environment that is not your own you are now in the food chain. I took your statement and put it back on you. But I guess its only for those that don't share your skin huh?



About those ladies....but NONE were scratched or bitten were they?

And how long until the next ones are? The pack that is cruising Anchorage and Eagle River aren't behaving as wolves normally behave. They have become braisen and no longer are interested in small game or young moose. They are interested in people and domesticated animals. THAT is a problem.

About my dogs...yes they are partially Schutzhund trained, which means they are obedient first and fore most....and they will NOT attack anything without a release to do so AND a perception of threat. That bite on command crap is movie baloney. Yes, they possess the same prey drive a wolf does, that is what drives pursuit....so if you ran by them AND I gave them a release command, they would pursue. they would also stop on order to "out." Dogs are not wolves ( and I have recused both, dogs and wolf-hydrids), so "running" in wolf country is stupid, period. Go ahead and kill them all if you must, then pave the whole palce over while you're at it. I am sure it will be nice.



My comment to you regarding your dogs was the direct threat you made with them. You stated you would release them and order them to pursue or attack. Or are you currently editing that as I type this? You don't want to address that you are making actual threats against someone who heatedly disagrees with you?

As for subsistance poachers...you sound like one to me, and lacking any more information, that makes you scum....you think the world owes you something and the means for you to even be there at all is your birthright regarldless of how much other pay in taxes to enable it...check my profile, dude, I am very aware of the considerable federal subsidies sent your way annually.

If you want to complain about subsistence learn how to spell it. Also, learn what it is. Learn the difference between hunting and subsistence hunting. And lets just throw in trophy hunting here so I can define that too: That is what those of you from the lower 48 do when you fly in and invade our space.

Your statement stating I lack any more information regarding...ah regarding what? Would you like to complete a sentence so it is coherent? The world owes me nothing, nice ASSumption. You call me scum because I believe in subsistence and you ASSume if someone believes in subsistence they must ALL be poaches and therefore scum. You state "taxes enable it" what is "it", is "it" subsistence? Can you be clear? So you are stating that YOUR federal income taxes pay for a native's right to hunt for subsistence. What are you smoking? Check your profile?for what? Your lack of applying the education you supposedly received in school? What does that have to do about managing OUR wolf population? What do any of your comments have to do about Alaska managing Alaskas resources or problems "dude"?

I am SO happy you are the voice here for Anti-ALASKA Wolf Control! Your spouting of nonsense proves that your camp doesn?t have one leg to stand on.

Alaska belongs to Alaska.

I don't remember which website I got the 15% number from, but I checked http://www.admin.adfg.state.ak.us/admin/license/2007inf... which shows 90481 hunting licenses, or about 14%; 15% may have come from 2006 data. Presumably only a small number of these get permits to hunt wolves from airplanes, and some other subset(probably not all, but i don't know how many) of licensed hunters supports it. There is a difference between aerial hunting and predator control. The majority of Alaskans voted against aerial shooting in 2 separate referenda (2001 & 2004 I think). If wolves become habituated to humans by being fed or scavenging garbage, or otherwise become a threat around residential, camping, & ect areas, something must be done, and killing them is a viable option. Using the mantra of "predator control" as a smokescreen for aerial hunting by private parties when there isn't scientific data to support it, or even when there is data that says it isn't necessary, is bullshit. FYI, I have had a NC lifetime sportsman(hunting and fishing) license for 30 years. I'm not opposed to hunting, but I am opposed to bad political decisions and slob hunters.

Alaska Photog....while you are correcting my spelling, suggest you pick up on your own reading comprehension.

I made no "threat" with my dogs, I offered an example of canine prey drive, and why running triggers it. If you truly think it is wise to run or jog in the company of wolves or mountain lions, I can't help you. My dogs, as I clearly said, are under control, but retain instinctive reactions, where a wild wolf (or courgar) is reacting solely to instinct.

Now if in the process of reacting to those instincts they discover a food relationship, whose fault is that? Whether it is scattered picnic remains, or bringing domestic pets in to wilderness areas, the result is the same....you are teaching the wild animal something you shouldn't be. Those nice ladies ignored clearly printed signs on the road gate they crossed that said NOT to bring dogs in to the area, and why. they did it anyway.

Yes those Eagle River wolves may now be behaving strangely compared to other wolves....I wonder why that is?

Fact remains, the ladies, and their dogs on leash, we able to back up 1.5 miles to their cars, with only minor makrs on one dog. What about next time? donno...they donna ingnore signs and take their dogs again? They gonna ignore basic common sense an run in a wilderness area? At what point do they assume som responsibility for their actions?

Or is it that you all fear wolves, bears, cougars and therefore must kill them willy to protect unglulates for yourself? Or is there a bit of fear for yourself in there too? YOu can't dominate it, so kill it, right?

And do so in as cowardly a manner possible, from an airplane or helicopter. I gotta admit your firey pioneer spirit is awesome....words fail.

BTW...so long as Alaska takes federal money from us down staters (and you take a wad and you know it), you will be abiding federal law....I think that was settled at Appomatox Courthouse a while back.

In reference to AlaskaPhotographer's remarks a fair bit of correction and clarification is needed.
Like most of the anti-wolf fction, he (or she) trots out the old "leave this to Alaskans" routine. Well, twice aerial hunting has been put to a vote in Alaska and both times it was banned BY ALASKANS. Let me repeat that for the sake of folks such as Ak Phot. BOTH TIMES IT WAS VOTED ON IT WAS BANNED BY ALASKANS. On that basis alone perhaps it is Ak Phot who needs to find somewhere else to live.
Our Board of Game is controlled by the Alaska Outdoors Council as all of its board members are also AOC members. Thus, even though they represent less than 15% of Alaskans (according to ADF&G stats only about 15% of Alaskans hunt or trap) they have pretty much full control over our wildlife; hardly representative, wouldn't you say?
Further, in a 2004 census of areas in the middle of the state subject to 3 years of aerial hunting it was found the number of moose taken by hunters was actually declining.
The aerial gunners are difficult to monitor, wounded wolves may or may not be tracked down and killed, and the program as a whole has been denounced in a letter sent to Gov. Palin 9/26/07 by 172 wildlife professionals across the nation including several from Alaska.
In short, this is a program designed not to help the moose who, dead by a woif or an AOC bullet, will die anyway. It is a program designed to temporarily boost numbers for the urban hunters (or so it is hoped) despite what longterm effects may result and it is being done with little backup biology and no scientific justification.
Now, since AlaskaPhotographer is so intent on locking Alaska up I'll throw in a c.v. noting I have lived in Fairbanks almost 40 years, I have hunted many times, hiked extensively, have had encounters with wolves in the wild, and frankly between encounters with wolves and moose it was only the latter that ever caused me any concern for my safety.
On the topic of danger to humans, we have had wolf packs around Fairbanks since the first cabin went up shortly after 1900 and we have them today. No one has ever been attacked or menaced by wolves but we have had plenty of folks injured and even a few killed by moose. The hysterics of "save our children from the wolves" is the sort of tactic employed by someone who, lacking facts, falls back on emotion in hopes of convincing folks that the despicable is acceptable. Fortunately for Alaska, Alaskans, and our wildlife to date a majority of Alaskans have disagreed with the viewpoints of people such as AlaskaPhotographer. The day his perspective takes over is the day we can kiss goodbye what makes Alaska the amazing place it is.
...dobieman, Fairbanks, Ak.

BTW, for those of you going to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game website for info on aerial gunning of wolves and bears, I suggest you keep a few things in mind.

1. The department's budget is set by the governor who is a strong supporter of aerial gunning.
2. The departments budget is modified/approved by a Legislature that for the most part is a strong supporter of aerial gunning.
3. The department has been told it will support aerial gunning.
4. Unless you are a department biologist who wants to spend the rest of their career doing January population counts of voles on the North Slope, it's best to toe the line on this or remain silent. (That's not an official statement, mind you, but it's a simple fact of life.)
5. Currently, the area across the Tanana River from Fairbanks has had an open hunting season on cow moose and calves which has upset many hunters but which ADF&G says is necessary. This is an area that also has a good wolf population.
6. There is little consideration being given anywhere to global warming effects on the required vegetation for moose, either its quantity or quality. There is no doubt these effects are showing up in Alaska already as witnessed by Native elders along the North Slope Coastal Plain who say the sea ice has never stood this far offshore in their memories. Also, we are seeing warmer winters (I used to see at least a couple days of -60 each winter. Now, we barely hit the -50 mark!) which can lead to increased forest cover. Moose do not browse well in forests so as it becomes more prevalent they lose foraging areas. Too, the increase in human population causes problems for moose in terms of deleterious (for the moose) vehicular encounters, loss of foraging areas due to construction, more access by hunters to previously unhunted areas, pollution (contrary to Ak Phot's idyllic meanderings pollutants are showing up in wildlife in their meat consumed by Alaskans), and increased harassment by free-running dogs which will sometimes form packs and harass moose, injuring or killing calves.
...dobieman, Fairbanks, Ak.

I support taking wolves from planes. I am one of those Alaska "urban hunters" you despise and rank us together with non-resident hunters. Last time I checked, I have a legal right to hunt for caribou, bear, wolf, sheep. It doesn't matter where someone lives, I harvest what I kill. And yes I shop at Carr's and Fred Meyers. Stop treating Alaska like it is all a giant park. Wolves tend to hunt in packs, and when it comes to moose, they usually eat 20-25 percent of the animal and then move on. Why don't you show how packs of wolves are attacking dogs in Eagle River. Slipped your little closed minds I bet. Thank You for giving me the chance to show there is another, less vocal side to this story.

Stuski.....reference Eagle River incidents. If you read the entire thread you would have seen that it was in fact mentioned. The fact of the Eagle River matter is that no humans have been attacked.

Canid behavior is part instinct and part learned. Dogs are canids, and as such as instinctiely perceived as tresspassers by wolves in a given area. When humans take domestic dogs in to a known wolf area, or alllow them to run free there, they are causing the problem, not the wolves. Once the wolf learns about domestic dogs as food, perhaps, the humans have succeeeded in perverting the normal instanct of the wolf.

Humans are NOT perceived this way, and if you want to go in to a long discussion of just what "Civil Drive" (willingness to bite humans) is in canids, email me. I will say here that it is almost always a developed trait, seldom a nascent trait awaiting provocation. The exception is the fearful, weak temperamented dog, who bites out of fear alone....frequently a inbred (recessive) induced trait.

That said, "prey drive" is a surface trait of all carnivors, wolves and domestic dogs are no exception. "Prey Drive" is triggered by fast motion, by running things, even a thrown ball (no the dog isn't enjoying a ball-game with you, he's enjoying the CHASE and retrives becasue he learns if he does so he can chase the ball again and again. Dog trains man.) Now when you take domestic dogs in to wild wolf territory you are doing two things..one introducing a tresspasser to the wolves (you are a "curiousity", but your 4 legged buddy is a tresspasser), and two teaching the wolves a potential connection between food and humans. Now if, regardless of what you think your "rights" are, you chose to jog or run on trails in wolf or cougar country, even grizzly country, eventually you will draw curious interst by wolves, and lethal interest by cougars.

Finally, if you consider taking wolves, or any other game from aircraft as hunting, I can't help you. That is in the same vein as shooting deer over bait piles and bears in municipal dumps. As for what happenes to a wolf kill once the wolves are filled...I suggest you find one and watch it, see just how many birds and animals depend upon that food source...and how much is really left when they all are done. I have no issues with hunters who hunt, and who eat what they hunt, whether urban or rural in domicile. I have little use for poachers and blood sport hunters. You want to hunt for blood sport, join the military and chances are you'll get to visit places where the "game" shoots back, sometimes first.

Stuski....before you start feeling too righteous you might bear in mind that I along with a majority of Alaskan voters have twice expressed our disgust for what you seem to find such pride and enjoyment in doing. In the Lower '48, they are now spending millions to re-introduce wolves to their previous ranges in a number of western states as they find even hunting cannot control the ungulate populations. It takes an intact ecosystem to function properly and for the most part they have destroyed vital aspects such as the predator/prey relationship. Now, they have to undo that error.
In Alaska the Alaska Outdoors Council has hijacked the scientific process of wildlife management and is turning it into a fatal farce. Witness the disfavor even amongst hunters of what they have done with the subsistence hunting privileges for the GMU 13 caribou as evidenced by a number of letters-to-the-editors by hunters. Look at the complaints about the way they are allowing cow and calf moose hunts across the Tanana, again generating many unhappy hunters' letters. Look at the Mulchatna caribou hunt wherein an F&G biologist told the AOC in 2007 their harvest limit was way out of line with reality. In 2000 over 100 hunters in the Fairbanks area alone signed a petition to stop the aerial gunning, seeing it as unjustified and even cowardly, many of them adding comments of how they understand the immense black eye it gives ethical hunters.
So even within the hunting community your kind is looked down upon and with good reason.
You can try and take the righteous upper hand and do the old "we do what we want in Alaska" bit but the fact is twice a majority of Alaskans have said at the polls it is you and people like you that are ruining what makes Alaska so unique and they won't allow it. You exmplify the difference between the ethical hunter who understands there is room enough for wolf and bear and human hunter, and the hunter such as yourself that feels the kill is the thrill.
BTW, predators will often feed till they are full then leave a carcass only to return it later and feed again, repeating the process until it is gone. Bears cache their food, wolves, coyotes, foxes....all predators cache their food when there is too much for one feeding. If, for some reason, they cannot return to it ravens, foxes, coyotes, bears, wolverines, and many other predators large and small are ready to clean it up. Wolves, like any other predator, have no desire to expend the energy and take the risks of bringing down a moose or caribou when they already have a kill on the ground they can utilize.

As for the preying upon dogs, that has been going on since the first dog wandered into Alaska some 14,500 years ago (at the best estimate archaeologists can offer at the moment) with the first Alaskans. Anchorage and Fairbanks loses dogs to wolves every year. We also lose many to moose (especially when a dog team rounds a curve and finds there is a moose ready to contend the pathway with them), many to vehicles, many to traps, and many to the plain stupidity of their owners.

An excellent example of the latter was shown a few months ago when a fellow up here, following the first week of wolves attacking dogs around 20 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road, actually left his dogs staked out 200 feet from his house and decided to sit up all night nearby with a gun. This, despite ample warnings to the public from F&G that people should move their dogs as close to their houses (if not bring them inside or at least erect a fence) as possible. Essentially, he used his "beloved" dogs as bait. During the night the wolves came in, killed one of his tethered dogs, and he never even knew it had happened till dawn showed him an empty collar and some fur fragments. The idiot (and I'm being very generous in not calling him what I really think he is) was astounded. Most folks had had the intelligence and concern to move their dogs closer to their homes and while this did not always preclude attacks it certainly seemed to reduce them greatly. It has been months since there has been a dog taken in that area. I noticed in the Anchorage instances even after similar warnings from F&G some people persisted in taking their dogs running in areas where wolves were known to be hunting, even letting the dogs run off-leash. Not only does that offer wolves an inducement to hunt but it leads to harassment of moose and possible injury or death to a dog (even the owner) when dog and moose tangle, not to mention when said dog encounters another free-running dog who feels territorial that morning. So, as is often the case, it is human stupidity that leads to the tragedy.
As was mentioned to me recently, the wolves were here long before any of us people, Native or non-Native. Maybe it is up to us to learn to get along with them.

People in this blog are asking a lot of questions. One question not asked or discussed is this - Why did the Federal Government have to take the management of fish and game away from the State and establish federal regulations for hunting and fishing on federal lands? UNDER FEDERAL LAW, PEOPLE LIVING IN RURAL ALASKA (all people, not just native people), ARE TO HAVE PRIORITY IN HARVESTING FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES. Alaska?s game management system considers every hunter a subsistence hunter and does not allow a rural priority. Urban hunters and lobbyists have fought to prevent changes in Alaska?s system to allow a rural priority for decades. So I wonder if those in this blog that say they need to kill wolves in order to meet their subsistence needs really live in rural areas, or if they are urban hunters who are trying to protect actions intended to make it easier for them to have a successful hunt that they can tell their neighbor about. Many feel improving success ratios for urban hunters does not justify predator control.
Yes, I understand that most hunters use the meat they harvest, as I always have. But being dependent on it in rural Alaska is not the same as being what Alaska calls a ?subsistence hunter? with a Wal Mart nearby.
Fearing the spread of aerial wolf hunting to the lower 48 states, people are asking for facts about the aerial wolf hunting program in Alaska. Some hope those facts will counter the proposed Protect America?s Wildlife (PAW) Act. Few realize the PAW Act does not stop all aerial hunting, but requires it to be based on sound science, not just the wishes of the hunting lobby, a small vocal minority. (Less than 15% of all Alaskans hold a hunting license. ( http://www.adn.com/outdoors/hunting/story/9219177p-9135.... html )
McGrath, Alaska, was ground zero for the startup of aerial wolf control and has had the most scientific studies of any area of the state. I was appointed to the McGrath Adaptive Management team assigned to find out why hunters were not finding enough Bull Moose to harvest. Studies of subsistence needs for just the McGrath area indicated the need to harvest 100-150 moose, which Fish and Game said required a population of 3,000-3,500 moose. Predation studies showed that bears were the main predators, and a study was done removing bears in the spring so more calves survived. That increased calf survival lasted until the next winter, which was more severe than normal, and most of surviving calves died because of weather, not predation.
Intense population studies were done at McGrath, rather than the general population trend survey that had been done for years. The good studies showed that there were between 2,800 and 3,200 moose in the area we desired to have 3,000-3,500, and it showed the core of the problem, the bull cow ratio, which should have been nearly 25 - 40 bulls per 100 cows was down to as low as 6 per 100. That ratio indicates over hunting. Over hunting was also indicated by the bulls having smaller antlers. (Look under Harvests - http://wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.moose and http://www.akwildlife.com/Page5.htm )
All this scientific information was set aside when Governor Murkowski came into office and appointed a new, very radical Board of Game. This Board is so radical, that I fear they will soon approve ?DENNING? ? the practice of killing wolf pups and bears and cubs while in their dens ? just to increase urban hunter success ratios, without any real regard to helping those living in rural areas that have a higher dependence on natural resources.
If they want to show real concern for rural Alaskans, those crying wolf should be crying for better control of urban and trophy hunters and initiating permit systems that help guarantee bull cow ratios do not drop as low as they have near McGrath.

Sounds like an asshole thing to do.