"H.J. Res 69 passed. Pass it on."
April 8 / March 27 2017
Subsistence hunting. Yes, people do it and no, we'd never thought much about who makes the rules, either.
Bear cubs, and wolf pups and Alaska air. Oh boy.
Let’s take a short stroll down (bad) memory lane here at Two Weeks Ago News. While growing up, our intrepid editor visited her paternal grandfather a handful of times each year. (The reasons for these infrequent and uncomfortable visits are many and justified. You’ll have to just believe that.)
Displayed on the floor of the very tiny living room was a bear. More precisely, the hide of a black bear – formerly a resident of the Yukon territory - including legs, claws, head and teeth. Up the stairs, in a small bedroom that served as something else – a poker room? A study? ...we have no memory of its actual purpose - was the mounted head of a big horned sheep and a caribou head, too, two more souvenirs of the old man's hunting prowess. We hated all of it; and scampered past the “head room” whenever we had to be on the second floor.
Because we couldn’t avoid it, the bear rug itself became just another part of the TV room décor. But still weird, uncomfortable, bizarre, sad – coincidentally, almost exactly the way we felt then – and now – about those visits to see the grandfather.
Fast forward to now – approximately forty years after we’ve last stepped foot on that bear rug. Here’s what we love the most at Two Weeks Ago News. Objective, just-the-facts headlines that inform – don’t inflame – the public. Headlines like this one: Bill Allowing Slaughter of Alaskan Bear Cubs, Wolf Pups, Sails through Senate to Trump’s Desk.
But what does Alaska have to say? Is it a “win?” According to an opinion piece in News Miner com, it is. But an opinion piece is hardly a definitive piece of research. We decided to go elsewhere for the backstory and details on H.J Resolution 69, which called on the House and Senate to nullify the previous administration’s rules banning the use of what they termed “predatory control” hunting methods used on the 76.9 million acres of federally-protected preserves in Alaska.
Some of the more controversial aspects of this legislation include disputes over the legality of “bear baiting,” killing hibernating bears and killing wolves, coyotes and offspring while in their dens, hunting by air and other practices. Killing wolf pups? Cubs? Bear mommies? Luring bears with bait to get a good shot at them? Shooting at animals while flying over their habitat? Could that be right?
So we looked and looked for details on all of it. We found them. Boy, did we find them.
Go here if you want to read about the resolution itself.
Here’s what the Humane Society had to say. You don’t really have to hop over to the link to get the jist. These words and phrases appear in the first paragraph: appalling, unsporting predator control, egregious practices, shooting or trapping wolves at their dens with cubs, using airplanes to scout for grizzly bears to shoot, trapping bears with cruel steel-jawed leghold trap, luring grizzly bears, point blank kill. Suffice it to say: They were outraged.
NPR checked in as well. They reported the basics of the Fish and Wildlife Service restrictions established in 2016 (the one being repealed) as follows: The FWS rule facing repeal explicitly prohibited many kinds of "predator control" on the 16 federally owned refuges in Alaska. That prohibition included a ban on the aerial hunting, live trapping or baiting of predators such as bears and wolves — as well as on killing those predators while near their dens or their cubs. (Just in case you want to read it for yourself – we did - here’s a link to that 2016 regulation.)
(Sarcasm alert) In an effort to write a non-judgmental headline, here’s what appeared on NBC News: House Overturns Obama-Era Law to Protect Alaskan Bears and Wolves. From their article:
“Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, is behind the resolution to strip away some of the federal government's control over Alaska's 76 million acres worth of federal wildlife refuges. Under the federal law, hunters are prohibited from shooting or trapping wolves while at their dens with cubs, using airplanes to scout for potential grizzly bear targets, trapping bears with wire snares and luring bears with food to get a point-blank kill.
But essentially, hunters could once again kill such predators from the air or in dens if the law is overturned.”
Must Read Alaska felt a little differently. The “conservative voice of Alaska” indicated that the claims made by the Humane Society were “fake news” and not worthy of concern. According to their article, it’s illegal to kill wolf pups in dens or hunt bear from airplanes. From their article:
“Alaska’s senators have been under intense pressure from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the Humane Society, both of which have made false claims that Alaska allows hunters to hunt grizzly bears from airplanes and kill wolf pups in their dens. Neither of these hunting practices are allowed in Alaska, but these “fake news” claims have received wide press coverage and have been promoted across social media.”
Alaska Dispatch Publishing had this to say:
By signing [H.J. res. 69], the president has upheld states' rights, protected Alaska's hunting and fishing traditions, and put a swift end to the Fish and Wildlife Service's wanton effort to take greater control of nearly 77 million acres of our state," [Alaska Senator] Murkowski said in a statement.
[Alaska Senator] Dan Sullivan touted the signing of the resolution as a win for "the sovereignty of Alaska in managing fish and wildlife on our lands."
ADN had this summary as well – Thank you, God – bold, from Two Weeks Ago News:
“At the heart of the disagreement between state and federal wildlife managers is what each group thinks should guide its purpose. The federal government has argued that the goal on refuges and in parks should be biodiversity. The state Board of Game has an interest in ensuring maximum sustained populations for hunting.
The state Game Board and the federal agencies have clashed over managing predators, which could drive down available game for subsistence hunters, as well as authority over managing the lands.
Both the state and federal agencies argue that it's the principle of the matter, and that right now the regulation wouldn't change a great deal in the management of federal wildlife refuges.”
Here’s a thought. Let’s get away from the lawmakers and politicians and pundits. Should you have any inclination to do so (we did), here’s a link to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game Hunting Regulations. The booklet is 144 pages but you can skip to the individual animal regs -bears, for example – if you want. Let's just say there are a lot of rules about hunting. It's hardly the bloody mayhem we were led to believe the resolution would encourage.
Here’s the point we really want to make at Two Weeks Ago News. Remember all the outrage your read about this legislation? All the killing and vile attitudes by people who hate wildlife? We can practically guarantee you that you have – the last 15 minutes - become better informed than 98% of the people who posted their outrage about House Resolution 69.
But we long ago reconciled ourselves to the fact that people hate to read and no one is going to click on a link that challenges their outrage. So here's our other point. We don’t have the perfect answer or a perspective that comes from experience. The only aspect of this that’s very clear to us is this: It’s the perfect illustration of a Republican perspective (less federal interference) and a Democratic perspective (more oversight from a federal agency).
The details of the outrage – even details that include adorable bear cubs – are irrelevant. And unending. And they’ll keep on coming.
Subsistence hunting. Yes, people do it and no, we'd never thought much about who makes the rules, either.
Bear cubs, and wolf pups and Alaska air. Oh boy.
Let’s take a short stroll down (bad) memory lane here at Two Weeks Ago News. While growing up, our intrepid editor visited her paternal grandfather a handful of times each year. (The reasons for these infrequent and uncomfortable visits are many and justified. You’ll have to just believe that.)
Displayed on the floor of the very tiny living room was a bear. More precisely, the hide of a black bear – formerly a resident of the Yukon territory - including legs, claws, head and teeth. Up the stairs, in a small bedroom that served as something else – a poker room? A study? ...we have no memory of its actual purpose - was the mounted head of a big horned sheep and a caribou head, too, two more souvenirs of the old man's hunting prowess. We hated all of it; and scampered past the “head room” whenever we had to be on the second floor.
Because we couldn’t avoid it, the bear rug itself became just another part of the TV room décor. But still weird, uncomfortable, bizarre, sad – coincidentally, almost exactly the way we felt then – and now – about those visits to see the grandfather.
Fast forward to now – approximately forty years after we’ve last stepped foot on that bear rug. Here’s what we love the most at Two Weeks Ago News. Objective, just-the-facts headlines that inform – don’t inflame – the public. Headlines like this one: Bill Allowing Slaughter of Alaskan Bear Cubs, Wolf Pups, Sails through Senate to Trump’s Desk.
But what does Alaska have to say? Is it a “win?” According to an opinion piece in News Miner com, it is. But an opinion piece is hardly a definitive piece of research. We decided to go elsewhere for the backstory and details on H.J Resolution 69, which called on the House and Senate to nullify the previous administration’s rules banning the use of what they termed “predatory control” hunting methods used on the 76.9 million acres of federally-protected preserves in Alaska.
Some of the more controversial aspects of this legislation include disputes over the legality of “bear baiting,” killing hibernating bears and killing wolves, coyotes and offspring while in their dens, hunting by air and other practices. Killing wolf pups? Cubs? Bear mommies? Luring bears with bait to get a good shot at them? Shooting at animals while flying over their habitat? Could that be right?
So we looked and looked for details on all of it. We found them. Boy, did we find them.
Go here if you want to read about the resolution itself.
Here’s what the Humane Society had to say. You don’t really have to hop over to the link to get the jist. These words and phrases appear in the first paragraph: appalling, unsporting predator control, egregious practices, shooting or trapping wolves at their dens with cubs, using airplanes to scout for grizzly bears to shoot, trapping bears with cruel steel-jawed leghold trap, luring grizzly bears, point blank kill. Suffice it to say: They were outraged.
NPR checked in as well. They reported the basics of the Fish and Wildlife Service restrictions established in 2016 (the one being repealed) as follows: The FWS rule facing repeal explicitly prohibited many kinds of "predator control" on the 16 federally owned refuges in Alaska. That prohibition included a ban on the aerial hunting, live trapping or baiting of predators such as bears and wolves — as well as on killing those predators while near their dens or their cubs. (Just in case you want to read it for yourself – we did - here’s a link to that 2016 regulation.)
(Sarcasm alert) In an effort to write a non-judgmental headline, here’s what appeared on NBC News: House Overturns Obama-Era Law to Protect Alaskan Bears and Wolves. From their article:
“Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, is behind the resolution to strip away some of the federal government's control over Alaska's 76 million acres worth of federal wildlife refuges. Under the federal law, hunters are prohibited from shooting or trapping wolves while at their dens with cubs, using airplanes to scout for potential grizzly bear targets, trapping bears with wire snares and luring bears with food to get a point-blank kill.
But essentially, hunters could once again kill such predators from the air or in dens if the law is overturned.”
Must Read Alaska felt a little differently. The “conservative voice of Alaska” indicated that the claims made by the Humane Society were “fake news” and not worthy of concern. According to their article, it’s illegal to kill wolf pups in dens or hunt bear from airplanes. From their article:
“Alaska’s senators have been under intense pressure from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the Humane Society, both of which have made false claims that Alaska allows hunters to hunt grizzly bears from airplanes and kill wolf pups in their dens. Neither of these hunting practices are allowed in Alaska, but these “fake news” claims have received wide press coverage and have been promoted across social media.”
Alaska Dispatch Publishing had this to say:
By signing [H.J. res. 69], the president has upheld states' rights, protected Alaska's hunting and fishing traditions, and put a swift end to the Fish and Wildlife Service's wanton effort to take greater control of nearly 77 million acres of our state," [Alaska Senator] Murkowski said in a statement.
[Alaska Senator] Dan Sullivan touted the signing of the resolution as a win for "the sovereignty of Alaska in managing fish and wildlife on our lands."
ADN had this summary as well – Thank you, God – bold, from Two Weeks Ago News:
“At the heart of the disagreement between state and federal wildlife managers is what each group thinks should guide its purpose. The federal government has argued that the goal on refuges and in parks should be biodiversity. The state Board of Game has an interest in ensuring maximum sustained populations for hunting.
The state Game Board and the federal agencies have clashed over managing predators, which could drive down available game for subsistence hunters, as well as authority over managing the lands.
Both the state and federal agencies argue that it's the principle of the matter, and that right now the regulation wouldn't change a great deal in the management of federal wildlife refuges.”
Here’s a thought. Let’s get away from the lawmakers and politicians and pundits. Should you have any inclination to do so (we did), here’s a link to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game Hunting Regulations. The booklet is 144 pages but you can skip to the individual animal regs -bears, for example – if you want. Let's just say there are a lot of rules about hunting. It's hardly the bloody mayhem we were led to believe the resolution would encourage.
Here’s the point we really want to make at Two Weeks Ago News. Remember all the outrage your read about this legislation? All the killing and vile attitudes by people who hate wildlife? We can practically guarantee you that you have – the last 15 minutes - become better informed than 98% of the people who posted their outrage about House Resolution 69.
But we long ago reconciled ourselves to the fact that people hate to read and no one is going to click on a link that challenges their outrage. So here's our other point. We don’t have the perfect answer or a perspective that comes from experience. The only aspect of this that’s very clear to us is this: It’s the perfect illustration of a Republican perspective (less federal interference) and a Democratic perspective (more oversight from a federal agency).
The details of the outrage – even details that include adorable bear cubs – are irrelevant. And unending. And they’ll keep on coming.