Wolf Hunting Shouldn’t Be Taboo

  • As wolf populations are increasing, an old question arises: whether or not to allow wolf hunting. (Photo courtesy of the USGS)

In 2003, federal protections for the gray wolf in many parts of the country were downgraded. But last January, a federal district court in Oregon struck down that decision. In this region, the court ruling meant that wildlife officials lost the legal authority to kill problem wolves. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Bob Butz thinks these courtroom battles are delaying the inevitable… and that hunters should have a hand in managing wolves:

Transcript

In 2003, federal protections for the gray wolf in many parts
of the country were downgraded. But last January, a federal district
court in Oregon struck down that decision. In this region, the court
ruling meant that wildlife officials lost the legal authority to kill
problem wolves. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Bob Butz thinks these courtroom battles are delaying the inevitable… and that hunters should have a hand in managing wolves:


Today over half the entire wolf population of the continental United States can be found right here in the Upper Midwest. Around 3,000 in Minnesota. Roughly 800 more split evenly between Michigan and Wisconsin.


Some biologists think that Michigan’s wolf population might actually double within the next decade.
So why are so many people acting as if wolves in these parts are still teetering on the brink of extinction? Why this push for stronger federal protection when is seems what we really should start thinking about is how we plan to keep wolf populations responsibly in check?


With every new courtroom delay, I’m beginning to understand that for some people no amount of wolves will ever be enough. But very soon some judge is also going to figure that out, and finally wolves will be taken completely off the federal list of endangered animals. Then it will be up to the states to manage them.


Yet right now no one is talking about how we’re going to do that. Or where the money to sustain a healthy management program will come from – all because of a dirty little word – hunting.


Wolves… hunting. Remember in public to duck and cover when you say that.


But for the sake of the wolf, somebody needs to start talking about managing them as a big game species. Up until the latest court ruling, some government trappers had a fulltime job killing an increasingly number of nuisance wolves.


Minnesota officials are killing an average of a hundred and fifty wolves every year. In Wisconsin and Michigan each they kill a couple dozen more. Why are these wolves dying for nothing? If biologists used hunters to control the population, each wolf taken out of the system could result in money,lots of it, necessary for managing the species.


While most state biologists sit on the sidelines apparently without a plan, some people are taking matters into their own hands… killing the wolves illegally. In the Upper Midwest, poaching has reached levels unheard of a decade ago.


The reasons for this are simple: As one biologist told me, when an animal becomes too prolific it becomes devalued. As wolves make more and more trouble for farmers, ranchers, and locals, people are starting to wonder where all this is headed.


If brought into the management loop, hunters could easily outshine courtroom environmentalists as the wolf’s biggest hero and financial benefactor. Think of the giant Canada goose, believed to be extinct in North America until their rediscovery in 1965.


And how about all those shrub-eating, bumper bending whitetail deer? Call it tough love, but if anything when hunters get behind an animal recent history proves that the species will flourish.


But first biologists need to come up with a plan that gives the public a stake in helping with the long-term survival of the wolf. Wolves might be endangered elsewhere in the U.S., but not here. It’s time for leadership, time for a vision. Time for game managers to actually get out there and manage. It’s time for biologists to stop playing wait-and-see and, in the spirit of the wolf—for the sake of the wolf—get out in front of this issue and start leading the pack.


Host tag: Bob Butz is a hunter and author of the book “Beast of Never, Cat
of God: The Search for the Eastern Puma.” He lives in northern Michigan.

Related Links

Smaller Fish After Alewife Die-Off

  • Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus). The fish is not common in Lakes Superior or Erie. (Image courtesy of Wisconsin SeaGrant)

This past year, the size of salmon in some Great Lakes
is getting smaller because their main food source is dying off in some
areas of the lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports:

Transcript

This past year, the size of salmon in some Great Lakes is getting smaller because
their main food
source is dying off in some areas of the lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Lester
Graham reports:


In the 1960’s, fish and game officials introduced Pacific salmon such as chinook,
coho and
steelhead to control the invasive species alewife. That’s a small fish that moved
in from the
Atlantic. The salmon are popular fishing. But since the alewives are not native…
they’re
especially susceptible to quick weather changes. And fisheries managers suspect
competition
with zebra mussels for food also affects alewives. Recently, alewife populations
have crashed in
some places. Jim Dexter is with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources…


“The primary reason that there are not alewives in Lake Huron and you get
fluctuations in Lake
Michigan is related more to the climate. You know, now, zebra mussels are tied into
that, into the
equation at some point but not probably to the affect that the climate is having on
those.”


So, without as many alewives, salmon don’t have as much to eat… and they’re smaller
than usual.
Fisheries managers say the effect is probably temporary.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

If You Build It… Will They Really Come?

  • Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, OH just before detonation in 2002. The 32 year-old stadium was demolished to make way for a new stadium paid for by a sales tax. (Photo by Eric Andrews)

In cities across the nation, taxpayers are finding themselves facing the same dilemma: cough up big bucks for a new sports stadium… or else. Right now it’s happening in Washington, D.C. as the capital city tries to lure a baseball team. It’s happening in New York where the city’s deciding whether to spend 600 million dollars on a new home for the Jets in Manhattan. The debate is over what the taxpayers get. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Richard Paul takes a look at whether sports stadiums really can hit a homerun for taxpayers:

Transcript

In cities across the nation, taxpayers are finding themselves facing the same dilemma:
cough up big bucks for a new sports stadium… or else. Right now it’s happening in
Washington, D.C. as the capital city tries to lure a baseball team. It’s happening in New
York where the city’s deciding whether to spend 600 million dollars on a new home for
the Jets in Manhattan. The debate is over what the taxpayers get. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Richard Paul takes a look at whether sports stadiums really can hit a
homerun for taxpayers:


It’s sort of funny when you think about it. The most hackneyed rationale you can think of
for building a ballpark is… it turns out… actually the primary motivation when cities sit
down to figure out whether to shell out for a stadium. You know what I’m talking
about…


(MOVIE CLIP – “FIELD OF DREAMS”: “If you build it they will come…”)


Just like in “Field of Dreams.” Put in a stadium. People will show up, see the game, eat
in the neighborhood, shop there, stay overnight in hotels, pay taxes on everything and
we’ll clean up!


(MOVIE CLIP – “FIELD OF DREAMS”: “They’ll pass over the money without even
thinking about it…”)


Here’s the thing though… it doesn’t work.


“In the vast majority of cases there was very little or no effect whatsoever on the local
economy.”


That’s economist Ron Utt. He’s talking about a study that looked at 48 different cities
that built stadiums from 1958 to 1989. Not only didn’t they improve things, he says in
some cases it even got worse.


“If you’re spending 250 million or 750 million or a billion dollars on something, that
means a whole bunch of other things that you’re not doing. Look at Veterans Stadium
and the Spectrum in South Philadelphia or the new state-of-the art Gateway Center in
Cleveland. The sponsors admitted that that created only half of the jobs that were
promised.”


But what about those numbers showing that stadiums bring the state money – all that
sales tax on tickets and hot dogs? Economists will tell you to look at it this way: If I
spend $100 taking my wife to a nice dinner in Napa Valley…


(sound of wine glasses clinking)


Or we spend $100 watching the Giants at Pac Bell Park…


(sound of ballpark and organ music)


…I’ve still only spent $100. The hundred dollars spent at the ballpark is not new money.
I just spent it one place instead of another.


In Washington right now, fans have been told they can keep the Washington Nationals, if
Major League Baseball gets a new stadium that the fans pay for. Washington is a place
was more professional activists, more advanced degrees and more lawyers than it has
restaurants, traffic lights or gas stations. And as a result, it’s practically impossible to get
anything big built. But the mayor’s trying. He wants the city to build a new stadium in
really awful part of town and use baseball as the lever to bring in economic activity. The
reaction so far? Turn on the local TV news…


NEWS REPORT – NEWS – CHANNEL 8
ANCHOR: “Baseball’s return to the District still isn’t sitting well with some folks. One
major issue is the proposal for a new stadium.”


ANGRY MAN GIVING A SPEECH: “Tell this mayor that his priorities are out of
order.”


Turns out that guy’s in the majority. A survey by The Washington Post shows
69% of the people in Washington don’t want city funds spent on a new baseball stadium.
We Americans weren’t always like this.


MOVIE CLIP – SAN FRANCISCO WORLD’S FAIR
ANNOUNCER: “You will want to see the Golden Gate international exposition again
and again in the time you have left to you…”


Today politicians need to couch this kind of spending in terms of economic development
because no one will support tax dollars for entertainment. But there was a time in
America when people were willing to squander multiple millions in public money for the
sake of a good time.


MOVIE CLIP – SAN FRANCISCO WORLD’S FAIR
ANNOUNCER: “Remember: Treasure Island – the world fair of the West closes forever
on September 29th.”


In 1939, in New York and San Francisco, and then again in New York in 1964. they
spent MILLIONS. And the purpose was never really clear. Here’s Robert Moses… the
man who made New York City what it is today… on the 1964 Fair.


REPORTER: “What is the overall purpose of the new Fair?”


MOSES: “Well, the overall stated purpose is education for brotherhood and brotherhood
through education.”


MOVIE CLIP – NEW YORK WORLD’S FAIR
ANNOUNCER: “Everyone is coming to the New York World’s Fair. Coming from the
four corners of the earth. And Five Corners, Idaho.”


Maybe those were simpler times. When people were a lot more willing to let rich men in
charge tell them what was right and wrong. Today, a politician looking to build himself a
monument is going to have to convince people it’s for their own good – and economic
development is the most popular selling point. Looking around these days – more often
than not – it seems voters are willing to rely on a quick fix. Taken together, that’s a
recipe for this kind of thing continuing. After all, when you’re a politician building a
legacy for yourself, a sports stadium is a lot sexier than filling pot holes or fixing school
roofs.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Richard Paul.

Related Links

Recent Deer Hunts Help Feed the Poor

  • Overpopulation of deer is causing problems for forest understory, farmers, and increased car/deer accidents. Some programs are encouraging hunters to take an extra deer and donating the meat to charity. (Photo by Lester Graham)

The hunting season for deer has ended or is about to end in most states. But the deer are still plentiful. Overpopulation of deer has led to an increase in deer-and-car crashes. Too many deer also damage the understory of forests. In some states, though, the deer overpopulation also means more deer meat is made available to low-income people. That’s because hunters, meat processors and food banks are working together to get venison to the poor. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Skye Rohde
reports:

Transcript

The hunting season for deer has ended or is about to end in most states. But the deer are
still plentiful. Overpopulation of deer has led to an increase in deer and car crashes. Too
many deer also damage the understory of forests. In some states, though, the deer
overpopulation also means more deer meat is made available to low-income people.
That’s because hunters, meat processors and food banks are working together to get
venison to the poor. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Skye Rohde reports:


It’s only been in the last decade or so that states have begun allowing hunters to donate
wild game to charitable organizations. In New York, meat processors and hunters started
the Venison Donation Coalition in 1998. Starting out, they gave a thousand pounds of
deer meat to food pantries in two counties.


Kathy Balbierer handles the coalition’s public relations. She says since that first thousand
pound donation, the program has grown…


“Last year, we had 108,000 pounds of venison donated, which on the average is, you
know – a deer is 40 pounds. It was approximately 27,000 deer. This year we have 119
participating processors throughout the state serving 52 counties.”


It’s an idea that hunters and meat processors across the nation are embracing. There are
venison donation programs in almost every state. Some, such as those in New York and
Illinois, are administered by state government. Others, like Michigan’s and Minnesota’s,
are run by private organizations.


Here’s how it works. First, a hunter who wants to donate meat takes it to a participating
processor. Ed Tanguey operates a meat processing facility in Kirkville, New York. He
says it’s a pretty simple process.


“Once the hunters show up to the building, we’ll have them come into our skinning room.
We’ll have them fill out some paperwork and once it’s brought in, we’ll start to skin the
deer, remove the hide and trim off any meat that’s not edible. We’ll bring the deer into
our cutting room.”


Butchers section the deer into shoulder, torso and hindquarters.


(sound of grinder starting up)


Then Tanguey sets up the grinder and grabs the meat from the cooler.


He packs the ground meat into five-pound black-and-white tubes and slaps a label on
with his name and the hunter’s license number on it.


Tanguey has processed 250 deer so far this season, 44 of them for the Venison Donation
Coalition. The coalition pays him a reduced rate, about a dollar a pound. Once there’s
enough meat in Tanguey’s cooler, he calls the Food Bank of Central New York to pick it
up.


Tanguey says this is his way of giving back to his community.


“When I see a hunter bringing in his son or grandson and they’re giving a second deer or
a third deer to the food bank, I think it’s going to pass it on to them. And years from now
we’ll keep the coalition supplied with some more food for the food bank.”


Jim Giacando is operations manager at the Food Bank of Central New York. He says
200 of the 600 agencies he works with ask for venison.


“In our freezer, we have almost 1,000 lbs ready to distribute, and it’s already committed
to a number of agencies throughout our 11-county area. And we’ll be distributing it this
week and next week, and then hopefully we’ll receive more in and fill more orders.”


The food bank will receive venison up until January. But Giacando says the greatest
challenge is keeping up with the demand for deer meat. A lot of people want it.


“I think we actually may have to get to a point where we might have to say ‘you know,
you can’t order that much. We have to keep it for all the other programs.'”


(ambient sound in church)


One of the food pantries asking for the deer meat is the University United Methodist
Church in Syracuse, New York. Norma Goel ordered venison from Giacando’s food
bank. The church’s food pantry feeds about 150 people every week.


Goel says she can’t buy as much food for the pantry as she’d like to because of the
church’s limited budget and an increase in the number of poor people asking for food.
She says farm-raised meat is a high-priced commodity…


“We’re always looking for a way to provide meat to participants in the pantry. And it’s
become increasingly difficult to buy frozen meat that the food bank has. By and large,
we’re not purchasing frozen meat from the food bank because we can’t afford it.”


So the deer meat is a cheaper alternative. Last year, Goel ordered venison too late to
receive any. This year she got all she could for the pantry: 60 pounds. She only has to
pay the handling costs – the coalition covers processing.


Goel says she’ll encourage people to use the deer meat in place of ground beef because
it’s high in protein and low in fat. She says the 60 pounds will feed a lot of hungry people
in her community.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Skye Rohde.

Related Links

Asian Food Stores Adding to Carp Problem?

  • An Illinois Natural History Survey intern shows off her catch (a bighead carp). Officials are concerned that human behavior may help the invasive fish get around the barrier on the Chicago River. (Photo by Mark Pegg, INHS)

Over time, invasive species have upset the natural balance of the Great Lakes. Now, officials are working frantically to stop a new threat, the Asian carp. The carp lives in tributaries connected to the Great Lakes. But there may be another route into the water system – through Asian food stores. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, live carp can be purchased in many cities throughout the region:

Transcript

Over time, invasive species have upset the natural balance of the Great Lakes. Now, officials are
working frantically to stop a new threat, the Asian carp. The carp lives in tributaries connected to
the Great Lakes. But there may be another route into the water system – through Asian food
stores. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, live carp can be purchased
in many cities throughout the region:


“This one in Chinese, layoo. This one in Chinese…”


York Alooah stands in front of a crowded fish tank at the 168 Market in Ottawa, Canada’s capital.
He points to the fat, foot and a half-long bighead carp swimming behind the glass.


The fish are brought to his store by truck from Toronto. They originate at farms in the southern
U.S.


Speaking through an interpreter, Alooah says it’s unlikely that a carp could escape during
delivery.


“They use a big truck and have the fish tank inside.”


Alooah says the fish can’t jump out because the tanks are covered. Still, the live sale of these fish
has many people worried. That’s why states like Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio have
banned the possession of live Asian carp.


Several states are also asking the federal government to add these carp to a list of invasive species
considered harmful. That listing would make it illegal to possess them alive.


In Canada, there aren’t laws like that on the looks. But officials say they’re considering action.


Nick Mandrack is a research scientist with the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. He
says Canadian researchers are keeping an eye on an Asian carp population that’s moving north up
the Mississippi River. They worry that the fish will migrate through a manmade canal into the
Great Lakes.


“If they were to become established, either through dispersal up from the Mississippi or
unauthorized release as a result of the live food trade, they could have enormous impacts on the
Great Lakes ecosystem, which would likely result in a dramatic decline in the biomass of game
fishes.”


That’s because two species of Asian carp eat the same food as small forage fishes. And those
forage fishes are what the larger gamefish rely on. The Asian carp are too big for the gamefish to
eat.


Researchers are also worried about two other species. The black carp could wipe out endangered
mussels that live in the lakes. And the grass carp destroys aquatic plants where native fishes live.


Mandrack has seen both the bighead and the grass carp sold live in Asian food stores. He and
others say that poses one of the greatest threats to the Great Lakes fish population.


(sound of fish scaling)


Back at the 168 market in Ottawa, York Alooah uses a long knife to butcher and scale a fish he’s
pulled out of a tank. He laughs when an interpreter asks if people ever leave his store with live
carp.


“When people buy, it’s not alive. He clean and kill and clean everything.” Is it never alive?”
“Never.”


In fact, the city of Chicago is hoping to guarantee that doesn’t happen. Officials want stores that
sell live carp to operate under permits. And the fish would have to be killed before it left the
store.


But not all fish is bought for consumption. There’s also concern about a Buddhist practice in
which captive animals are released into the wild.


Tookdun Chudrin is a nun with the MidAmerica Buddhist Association. She says the carp sold in
food stores are not likely candidates for release.


“I think that people would not buy such a large fish for liberation because they tend to get very
small animals and very often will put them in a pond at a temple.


And Chudrin says, Buddhists would want to know if the religious practice was harming other
animals.


“I think definitely if there were a sign saying that said putting these fish in the lakes could be
detrimental to other species, I think people for sure would heed that if this was going to endanger
others and the people knew it, I don’t think they’d do that.”


So far, only two Asian carp have been found – in the Canadian waters of the Great Lakes.
Another was released in a fountain in Toronto, just a few blocks from Lake Ontario.


Whether from pranks, or acts of kindness, some fear it’s only a matter of time before more carp
get into the water. They say the Great Lakes could become a giant carp pond, and many of the
species we’ve come to know would disappear.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.

Success in Controlling the Lamprey

  • Sea lampreys feed on a lake trout. The invasive species damages the Great Lakes fishery. (photo courtesy Great Lakes Fishery Commission)

A new effort to eradicate the sea lamprey is attacking one major
trouble spot. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports… the parasite is being trapped and poisoned:

Related Links

Great Lakes CD-ROM

Chances are when you were in elementary school, you saw your fair share of film strips. They weren’t much more than a boring lecture, with pictures…And the only good thing about them was getting chosen to run the projector. But today, computers in the classroom can really jazz up a lesson. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Wendy Nelson reports on some new software that’s helping kids learn about the Great Lakes: