Head Hunter

Tony Hansen joined the Michigan OutofDoors Magazine and MUCC team in 2003. Since then he's spent more than his share of time in the woods and on the water, gathering the stories and the information you look for in Michigan OutofDoors Magazine's media outlets.

More On Wolves

March 4th, 2010 by Tony Hansen.

Okay, by now I hope you've had the chance to check out the comments from the very "humane" and "civilized" anti-hunting crowd that makes up the bulk of the Humane Society of the United States membership.

Here's a bit of the story behind that blog.

Last fall, Idaho -- after years of lawsuits filed by groups like HSUS and spending millions of dollars that could have been spent on conservation and proper wildlife management -- finally held a wolf season in an effort to control a wolf population that had grown too large and was/is decimating elk and other game populations in the state. The season opened Sept. 1 and Rober Millage was the first hunter to report killing a wolf.

Almost immediately Millage become the target of the anti-hunting nuts. They e-mailed him, called him, staked out his house and business. The comments from his blog are real. He responsed in the best possible way -- by posting their comments for the world to see. The anti-hunting community loves to claim that it's the gentle, civil type. It's us hunters that are the barbarians, the heathens, the immoral.

But here's the deal. We don't lie. We don't twist words or fabricate facts to get our way. Truth be told, we're the type of people that just want to be left alone to enjoy the outdoors and the freedoms that we're entitled to. Groups like HSUS don't like that. They think that everyone should think exactly as they do. Well, sorry, but I have canine teeth for a reason. I eat meat not just because it's tasty but because it's natural. I'm not a cow. I wasn't born with three stomachs designed to digest a steady diet of plants. I'm glad there are cows though. Especially in the summer. On a hot grill.

The purpose of these blogs is to debunk the myths and lies spread by HSUS employee Jill Fritz's editorial that ran in the Detroit Free Press. Obviously, I'm very upset at the lies that Fritz has been spreading. But I'm just as upset that the Free Press didn't bother to check her facts or realize that they were being played. I started my career in the newspaper world. One of my best friends was a very, very good newspaper editor. There is no way that editorial should have ran as written. At the very least, it should have had a disclaimer explaining that Fritz was an HSUS employee and that HSUS is an anti-hunting, animal rights organization.

Instead, Fritz was allowed to tell a tale about wolves in Michigan's that's absolutely untrue. The facts in her article are wrong. Period. In journalism, that's a cardinal sin. But we'll correct those facts in the next blog.

For now, I'd like to focus a bit more on what HSUS is and what it isn't. In her article, Fritz calls HSUS a "conservation organization." If I were drinking milk right now, it'd be shooting out of my nose. Because that is truly funny. If Teddy Roosevelt were alive, I suspect he'd be looking for a tail to kick. Conservation is the wise, sustainable use of natural resources. Wildlife is a renewable resource. Fish and game populations, when properly managed, can and do thrive. They supply millions of Americans with sustenance and recreation. Yes, recreation.

In a few hours, I'll be loading up the boat and heading for the Saginaw River to catch some walleyes. Yes, they are a tasty fish. But catching them is also pure fun. Read that again HSUS fans: Catching fish is fun. Very fun. I love to hook them in the jaw, reel them in and release them. No, I don't apologize for that. I don't feel bad about it. I love it. And I always will. And you can do absolutely nothing about it.

HSUS is no more a conservation group than Al Gore is the inventor of the Internet. HSUS is a politicial lobby group that lies to people in an effort to bankroll its high-dollar ad campaigns. Campaigns designed to make kids afraid of the outdoors. Campaigns designed to convince kids that fishing and hunting are evil things.

HSUS has a $100 million budget. How much of that budget went to hands-on animal shelters? According to its 2008 IRS return, less than one percent. How much of that $100 million budget went to actually create wildlife habitat? How much went to actually provide wildlife with tangible benefits? Yeah, I've asked HSUS those exact questions. They never bothered to respond.

And they won't respond. Because they can't unless they lie. Because if they told the truth, then their ruse would be exposed. I don't have a problem with anyone that dislikes hunting and fishing. Everyone is free to choose as they please. I do have a problem with people lying about their true intentions and I have a problem with people telling others how to live.

Alright, that's enough for one night. In the next blog, we'll focus on the lies in Fritz's article and explain exactly why it is that wolves should have been placed under state control years ago. See, the tale of the wolf in Michigan is a true conservation success story. And that's precisely what HSUS will not admit. And I know why.

Previous Comments

#1 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010

I am hooked keep speaking the truth for the real Outdoors-Man and I will keep reading

#2 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010

Liar,Liar, Fritz on fire…

#3 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010

What can the average Jo do to help fight the good fight

#4 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2010

They (HSUS) finally stopped running ads on the local TV up north, thank God! Every time it would come on I would change the channel. I hope they stopped because no one gave them any money!! Tony, please send your letter to every newspaper in Michigan and let’s see how many print it!!

#5 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 10, 2010

Justin,
The best way to help is to talk to everyone you come in contact with about this. Tell your neighbors, church members, friends and especially, your congressmen or woman. Letters work well, just keep sending them. I work for and am involved in the pork industry and love hunting and fishing. As you probably know, we have had our run ins with HSUS/PETA groups and this seems to help as much as anything. I’m not saying it is easy, but every little bit helps.

#6 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 11, 2010

That Idaho “finally held a wolf season in an effort to control a wolf population that had grown too large and was/is decimating elk and other game populations in the state” deserves references to show it’s not just an opinion. It’s likely we have things to learn from western states.

#7 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 12, 2010

I think HSUS is not that big an issue for me, since the wolf will certainly be delisted here - this is just a slight delay. (I do understand wanting to smack them down, don’t get me wrong.) I think what’s more important is to get better consensus among outdoor people on our post-delisting wolf management strategy, cause that is something we do not have right now. We have folks at one end who think wolf presence is no problem (maybe only if it is far from them though), while folks at the other end think the sky is falling and the deer will vanish. Our author using loaded terms about elk and other game being “decimated” in Idaho by wolves is not helping that situation. Non-hunters may not care (or even prefer it) if wolves rather than humans ate those toploins, so long as there are fewer deer to eat their crops and gardens and endanger them on the roads.
The DNR has very good (and long) documents up about wolves in Michigan. They are not committed about what the effects on deer populations have been, cause it’s not easy to say with certainty - it’s not a controlled experiment. Idaho’s wolf management plan doesn’t make a very big deal about wolf effects on deer populations (but does say there is concern in one area). I recently saw an article covering a conference where “Dr. Jim Peek presented data at the Chico wolf conference showing that the elk and deer population is doing fine in the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness” (in Idaho) in an area with more than 100 wolves:
http://wolves.wordpress.com/2008/04/08/central-idaho-elk-and-deer-doing-fine-in-presence-of-wolves/
I should add (I’ve backpacked in there, twice) that this area is huge and the elk and deer are almost surely at carrying capacity, so that extra predation may more easily be offset by extra recruitment, and that may not be true other places. Michigan documents warn not to extrapolate from elk to deer since deer reproduce faster but Peek also studied mule deer in that area, and found no elk effect anyway.

Anyway, my point is that we need to try to get the more extreme folks on either end to come toward the middle. Telling the public what real information we have could help, though it is often noted that information does not change the minds of those with the most extreme views. I’d like to see reporters writing some good things that can help us ask the right questions about our future policies, and be more understanding about the uncertainties involved, which are many. It’s less fun than HSUS bashing, but we need it more. Let’s be more understanding about the folks having to personally deal with wolves in the U.P. (if wolves are hunted, I’d give them at least 80% of the tags), and also be more open to the idea that though wolves eat lots of deer, our deer hunting success may not be as harmed as some think. I am tempted to write more about that, but this is too long already.

Other minor things that might help are:
1) Maybe not ask for dog compensation right now, even if it is the right thing to do, only since the public likely won’t be on board (66% against). We won’t make friends with that issue.
2) Not be very insistent that we should get to hunt wolves, rather than having officials, ranchers, farmers kill the nuisance animals (perhaps >100/year though). The idea is that we don’t want to appear like we are only interested in wolf management as long as we get a wolf season, but other wise are against it. The surveys (DNR website) make us look like hypocrites right now. We will likely see some hunting permitted soon anyway.

Disclaimer: I’m from southern lower, hunt deer in S and N lower, and don’t predator hunt so far.
-rork.

#8 from .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 26, 2010

I have hunted around the iron river and watersmeet area for or more
than 15 years,Iknow the winter do take deer but when thry are herded up and weak it is afield day for wolves and or coyote if thry are not run out of the area to kill deer that are trap by the deep snows.we should start getting after hsus put them out there in the woods and see what they think of the wolves and charge them so much per animal killed by there pet wolves.

Click here to get the News & Blogs Feed delivered to your RSS.