Polarized wolf groups battle with billboards

[ribka]

So you're saying advertising is ineffective? Please post link to a study.

Public opinion is swayed by emotion not facts

I wonder how much good could be done if these polarized groups, each supposedly caring deeply about wildlife, put their billboard money into conservation, habitat, and access projects?

Maybe in a perfect world your comment would apply, but given the circumstances of wolf management it seems that one side has benefitted from advertising cute cuddly wolves to the public and the other side has figured out that perhaps the other side of the wolf story needs to be made public.

Yes, my comment was idealistic and I acknowledge hunters in general have put most of their money where their mouth is...I just loathe the idea of putting lots of money into pr and legal fees etc. like the antis do...even if it's 'necessary'. 

Sitka you make great points on the effectiveness of said billboards.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Household pets are a choice each of us is allowed to make. Wolves are not are not a choice. The argument is oranges to apples and is false. They are two separate issues.

They aren't a choice to your neighbor down the street. But the reality is, all this billboard campaign does is stir up imagined fear. It's not addressing reality.  Remember the little boy who cried wolf? If you keep making things up, or postulating things that aren't happening, eventually people won't hear the rest of your message. They will ignore you.

The message should be, wolves need to be managed in balance with other game animals and people should be able to protect their pets and farm animals. Adding children to the mix dilutes the message, and distracts from the real problems associated with wolves.

[elkinrutdrivemenuts]

It just makes those of us who want to discuss the negative impacts of wolves in the environment look like idiots.  Seriously, this is almost as bad as the birthers still wanting to see the presidents birth certificate. 

[CP]

  Remember the little boy who cried wolf?

I  believe he was eaten by a wolf.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

It just makes those of us who want to discuss the negative impacts of wolves in the environment look like idiots.  Seriously, this is almost as bad as the birthers still wanting to see the presidents birth certificate.

Someone who gets it!

[bearpaw]

Household pets are a choice each of us is allowed to make. Wolves are not are not a choice. The argument is oranges to apples and is false. They are two separate issues.

They aren't a choice to your neighbor down the street. But the reality is, all this billboard campaign does is stir up imagined fear. It's not addressing reality.  Remember the little boy who cried wolf? If you keep making things up, or postulating things that aren't happening, eventually people won't hear the rest of your message. They will ignore you.

The message should be, wolves need to be managed in balance with other game animals and people should be able to protect their pets and farm animals. Adding children to the mix dilutes the message, and distracts from the real problems associated with wolves.

Maybe these problems don't exist for you where you live, but for the people purchasing the billboards the problems do exist!

It is important to teach the urban population that these problems do exist and these problems are affecting other people. Can you imagine the press and uproar if a pack of wolves went into Seattle or Spokane and killed dozens of dogs and other pets and then attacked someone jogging down the street, all within the city limits.

That is what happened to the McIrvin's, Dashiel's, and the hunter who was attacked by wolves, all in Stevens County.

Dozens of livestock killed and a hunter who had to protect himself against a pack of wolves that had surrounded him and a wolf that was leaping at him from behind.

[pianoman9701]

Household pets are a choice each of us is allowed to make. Wolves are not are not a choice. The argument is oranges to apples and is false. They are two separate issues.

They aren't a choice to your neighbor down the street. But the reality is, all this billboard campaign does is stir up imagined fear. It's not addressing reality.  Remember the little boy who cried wolf? If you keep making things up, or postulating things that aren't happening, eventually people won't hear the rest of your message. They will ignore you.

The message should be, wolves need to be managed in balance with other game animals and people should be able to protect their pets and farm animals. Adding children to the mix dilutes the message, and distracts from the real problems associated with wolves.

I disagree. There is no comparison between wolves and pets. And, I'm not making anything up. It's a fact that there are plenty of documented attacks by wolves. You're sugar-coating. You're the one making things up. Wolves in the remote regions on wilderness areas and across the northern parts of Canada are far different then the same animals in populated areas of WA. It's a bad situation and many of the wolves are being allowed to populate inappropriate areas of our state. Ignore it all you want. That doesn't make it better.

[bearpaw]

The message should be, wolves need to be managed in balance with other game animals and people should be able to protect their pets and farm animals. Adding children to the mix dilutes the message, and distracts from the real problems associated with wolves.

I couldn't agree more that wolves need to be managed, I've never stated that all wolves need wiped out, in fact I don't think anyone has said that on this forum.

No matter if you want to admit it or not, people have been attacked in Washington. It's a shame that some people are not put into the same shoes as hirshey when she was stalked by wolves, our family friend who was forced to stay in a tree while wolves surrounded him, and my neighbor who shot an attacking wolf this last fall after being surrounded by wolves which has been confirmed by WDFW.

Does someone have to die before you will admit people have been attacked in WA?

[idahohuntr]

It just makes those of us who want to discuss the negative impacts of wolves in the environment look like idiots.  Seriously, this is almost as bad as the birthers still wanting to see the presidents birth certificate.

Amen. 

[elkinrutdrivemenuts]

The message should be, wolves need to be managed in balance with other game animals and people should be able to protect their pets and farm animals. Adding children to the mix dilutes the message, and distracts from the real problems associated with wolves.

I couldn't agree more that wolves need to be managed, I've never stated that all wolves need wiped out, in fact I don't think anyone has said that on this forum.

No matter if you want to admit it or not, people have been attacked in Washington. It's a shame that some people are not put into the same shoes as hirshey when she was stalked by wolves, our family friend who was forced to stay in a tree while wolves surrounded him, and my neighbor who shot an attacking wolf this last fall after being surrounded by wolves which has been confirmed by WDFW.

Does someone have to die before you will admit people have been attacked in WA?

Has anyone even really been attacked yet?  I have heard of a couple close encounters between hunters and wolves, but cannot recall any where injuries were received.   

[idahohuntr]

So you're saying advertising is ineffective? Please post link to a study.

Public opinion is swayed by emotion not facts

I wonder how much good could be done if these polarized groups, each supposedly caring deeply about wildlife, put their billboard money into conservation, habitat, and access projects?

Maybe in a perfect world your comment would apply, but given the circumstances of wolf management it seems that one side has benefitted from advertising cute cuddly wolves to the public and the other side has figured out that perhaps the other side of the wolf story needs to be made public.

Yes, my comment was idealistic and I acknowledge hunters in general have put most of their money where their mouth is...I just loathe the idea of putting lots of money into pr and legal fees etc. like the antis do...even if it's 'necessary'. 

Sitka you make great points on the effectiveness of said billboards.

No I did not say that...advertising can be very effective.

And I understand wanting to fight fire with fire.  When you have 2 screeching children fighting in the car, if you are one of those children, you might as well screech too.  I'm just dreaming of an idealistic world where we kick all of the screeching children out of the car so the middle 90% of the public can manage wildlife without so much propaganda and distortion.  It's incredibly difficult to take extremes on both sides seriously when both make extreme exxagerations...the damage however is...it's hard for the general public to sort out who is credible when you are surrounded by loud screeching children whose solution is to out yell the other child.

As an aside...I once got into a little hotwater when I described a couple of regional entities debating an environmental issue as crying children... to an audience of 400 or so...I even put up a slide full of pictures of crying children...not everyone saw the humor!

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I disagree. There is no comparison between wolves and pets.

You're right, there is no comparison. Dogs cause far more damage to farm animals and other dogs. And dogs actually regularly attack and kill and maim humans. And dogs are a plague on wild animals. (cats are a plague on song birds)

I have seen many dog attacks on other people's dogs and cats, and I have seen a lot of dog damage to livestock including neighbors' dogs that got into our chicken house when I was a kid, a domestic sheep on Kodiak that had two large dogs grab it by the neck (the sheep was on a tether unlike the dogs) and they proceeded to pull the hide off the sheep all the way to it's ass. I pulled in right after the attack and the poor sheep was standing there quivering and had to be put down. My neighbors pygmy goat was also attacked and consumed by neighboring dogs. It was also on a tether. Ive seen cows harassed by dogs until it affected milk production, and calves killed.

But that's not the point. The point is people should be able to protect their animals and property, and if need be their families from wolves or dogs without fear of the law. If that had been allowed from the start, there would be a lot less controversy about bringing wolves back and the government might even be getting more co-operation from people. Letting wolves get started without having to fear humans if they misbehaved was a bad idea.

[pianoman9701]

OK Sitka, whatever you say.

[JimmyHoffa]

Sitka, you do know that dogs are the wolves that have been separated from other wolves for good temperament around humans and beneficial traits that started around 30,000 years ago.  Some dogs still have wolf behavior left in them.

[KFhunter]

The message should be, wolves need to be managed in balance with other game animals and people should be able to protect their pets and farm animals. Adding children to the mix dilutes the message, and distracts from the real problems associated with wolves.

I couldn't agree more that wolves need to be managed, I've never stated that all wolves need wiped out, in fact I don't think anyone has said that on this forum.

No matter if you want to admit it or not, people have been attacked in Washington. It's a shame that some people are not put into the same shoes as hirshey when she was stalked by wolves, our family friend who was forced to stay in a tree while wolves surrounded him, and my neighbor who shot an attacking wolf this last fall after being surrounded by wolves which has been confirmed by WDFW.

Does someone have to die before you will admit people have been attacked in WA?

Has anyone even really been attacked yet?  I have heard of a couple close encounters between hunters and wolves, but cannot recall any where injuries were received.

Depends on your definition of what it is to be attacked.  Thankfully we can defend ourselves before it gets to point of receiving personal injury.

WDFW said the guy in Stevens CO who shot the wolf was defending himself and no charges were levied, therefore he must have been attacked.  If there was no attack then he wasn't defending himself and it would be contrary to law "poaching" and he would have faced charges.

Seems to me people have been attacked in WA.