I should be the first the mention that this article may be brushed off immediately by many of those with opposing views, firstly because I have no formal education in wildlife management outside of my 30+ years of being a native Montanan and an advocate for the outdoor life and culture that I consider unique to this part of the United States. On the other hand, in the area of health care I have obtained a doctorate degree in Pharmacy from the University of Montana and have been practicing as a Clinical Pharmacist since. With that, I’ve concluded that within these two distinct disciplines, I’ve found some similarities, specifically between the anti-vaccine movement perpetrators and supporters with those who are whole heartedly against wolf management. These two groups are undeniably connected in the manner in which they proceed to broadcast their opinions and lies.
The anti-vaccine movement was perpetrated initially by a false, fabricated, and altered scientific study by then Dr. Andrew Wakefield, which led to a widespread scare that vaccinating our children could increase their risks of developing autism. This particular 1998 British study has been described as an “elaborate fraud” and has done long term damage to public health and led to Wakefield’s jailing and revocation of his medical license. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 2013 had the second largest measles outbreak, a vaccine preventable disease, since being considered eliminated from the US in 2000. These fabrications brought on drastic changes in how vaccinations were viewed by parents across the country and world. Not only did the fraudulent study harm the lives of so many, it also allowed those with absolutely no background in the area of science or medicines to become spokesman or spokeswomen against vaccinations, i.e., see Jenny McCarthy. A loud, emotional, public figure, with plenty of media exposure was able to spread these fabrications across the airwaves of the United States and we are now dealing with this issue on a daily basis 15 years after the initial study was published. The anti-vaccination rhetoric often includes it being government conspiracy, a huge money maker for drug companies, containing faulty or flawed science, which interestingly are also used by animal rights organizations. All in fact are fabricated from the minds of those who have little insight to the American health care system, immunology, medical sciences and wildlife management in general.
First and foremost, many people responsible for the blocking of the initial wolf hunts and re-listing wolves as an endangered species are just as much wildlife biologists as Jenny McCarthy is an immunologist or medical professional. Claiming an animal is on the brink of extinction in Montana when it’s able to simply walk a few miles north of Eureka, MT cross the Canadian border and instantly become one of thousands of wild Canadian wolves lacks discernment. They use scare tactics and processes that those in the anti-vaccine movement did years before. Preaching for “wildlife conservation”, while they have little to no background in the matter except for having a deep love and appreciation for the animals that they cherish. I can relate on how they feel a wolf is a beautiful animal that deserves to be protected, as I share the same feelings but where we differ is where we get our information and how we proceed from such. Many of these “conservation” organizations are based out of big cities like New York City, Oakland, California, and Washington DC, while I prefer to obtain my opinions from wildlife biologists, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Montana FWP, and others close to the issues at hand here in Montana. Montana FWP puts out statements like “Wolf hunting seasons and harvest quotas are established based on actual wolf population data and statistical models which simulate harvest” while Defenders of Wildlife issues statements like “These wolves face rabid anti-wolf politics, aggressive lethal control, unsustainable hunting, intolerance and other threats across the entire country.”
Common misconceptions that are actively spread about wolves are that: they only eat what they need to survive, they are herd “thinners”, i.e. taking out the least healthy individual which makes herds stronger, they will become non-existent again with continued hunting and trapping efforts, that hunting wolves has no real benefit other than to satisfy “blood thirsty” hunters who hate a little competition when hunting. All of these have been continually disproven. Wolves are fully capable of taking down a full sized mature bull elk and do so often. In a historical sense, not actively managing wolf populations is what led to their eradication in the first place. Without proper management it’s not unforeseeable that it could happen again. Hunting wolves gives them awareness that humans are meant to be feared, which gives those who don’t hunt the opportunity to enjoy the woods and outdoors that Montana has to offer without fear of attack…just ask any Russian historian how unmanaged wolf populations affected the lives of their predecessors.
The anti-wolf hunters (or wolf huggers as I call them) preach that Montana FWP wants these hunts simply to increase elk populations in order to have an abundance of hunters that spend thousands of dollars on hunting and tags throughout the state of Montana, while it was the hunters through tax dollars and the FWP that actually paid for and put through the reintroduction efforts of wolves into Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho. Destroying the wolf population would be extremely counter intuitive to hunters’ priorities as millions of dollars already spent on management would have gone to waste. Conservationists are masters of deception using words like cruel, inhumane, and violent instead of words like carrying capacity, ecological balance, and management objectives. Without deception, these wildlife conservation groups would not be bringing in millions of dollars in donations every year.
Lastly, there is a petition being spread throughout Montana to ban trapping on public land here. While I am not a trapper, I still feel this is part of a continual attempt to restrict rights of hunters and trappers alike by these wildlife conservation groups. With many failed lawsuits to keep the wolves on the Endangered Species List, these groups are now attempting to bypass those already tasked with managing Montana’s wildlife by using emotional, non-science based ideologies. By eliminating trapping on public lands, they can begin to expand to other areas, targeting private land trapping, banning mountain lion hunts with hounds, which already has happened in a few states, banning bear and other predator hunts, etc. A blanket ban on trapping fails to address that all types of trapping are not equal, just as all hunting is not appropriate. There are multiple types of traps, animals, seasons and reasons to trap. This ban is an easy way to avoid discussion and rational thought on the issue. Instead of addressing which issues of trapping these organizations have issues with, they simply try to ban everything. By modifying or discussing current practices and laws in which they seem unfit, a more reasonable and humane way of trapping may be possible without completely banning trapping as a whole. Discuss where traps should and shouldn’t be placed, what times of years trapping is appropriate, what types of traps should be used, what animals should and shouldn’t be trapped, etc. is a more political way to come up with a solution that may provide mutual agreement. Under the guise of animal cruelty (nature is inherently violent) they force their agenda upon the citizens of Montana with uneducated, non-science based, emotional ploys that I for one won’t be fooled by.
Whether it’s Jenny McCarthy’s crocodile tears or the Defenders of Wildlife and other such groups’ protests, lawsuits, and propaganda I hope people can see through the falseness and nonsense that these groups claim to be realities. I don’t want to be the one 15 years from now saying “I told you so” as these falsities have detrimental effects on our society and ecological balances.
