House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Approves Of Animal Slaughter
September 16, 2008
If you don’t like that headline then perhaps you should also not like one that states that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is an animal killer and an abuser. There are however a few marked differences between what some are accusing Gov. Palin of being and what I am accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of being but both bear striking similarities………..that is if you are willing to look at things from a honest perspective.
There will always be people who will have an issue with the killing of any animal and some to the extreme of any living thing whether plant or animal. We witness everyday people who ignorantly support the protection of a handful of animals while being responsible for the deaths of more than they saved. For that, I offer no cures nor do I pretend that I can in all honesty have any marked alterations to their beliefs. I expect nothing different in return either.
With that being said, we have all come to learn, some of us much sooner than others, that Alaska’s Sarah Palin is an “outdoors” person, having grown up in the wilds of Alaska learning to hunt and fish and like many of us growing up in similar geographical locations that provide us outdoor activities, it has become very much a part of our lives. Some people have a problem with that much because they didn’t grow up in it and have very little tolerance for those of us who have. Life goes on.
What Sarah Palin is being haunted by is her support of the use of planes and helicopters to manage wolf populations in a few remote areas of Alaska and some, including hunters, have a problem with that. For those Alaskan wildlife experts, whom Sarah Palin listens to for advise and recommendations, they see aerial wolf management as a bad thing but a necessary thing, albeit controversial. More on this in a moment.
Back to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi has been a U.S. Congresswoman for the state of California since 1987. She was elected as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives on January 4, 2007. We can only conclude then that Speaker Pelosi approves of the slaughter of as many as 40,000 animals in the state of California from just one event!
The end of September, just about one year ago, the state of California, with the approval of the California Fish and Game Department, poured 16,000 gallons of rotenone, a chemical commonly used to kill fish, into Lake Davis in Plumas County northwest of Lake Tahoe. This action resulted in what the San Francisco Chronicle described as leaving 41,000 pounds of dead fish to be scooped out of the lake.
Some 41,000 pounds of dead fish have since been scooped from the lake at the northern headwaters of the Feather River in Plumas County. The carefully hatched plan was to kill virtually every living thing in the high Sierra lake and its tributaries, assuring that the pike would be exterminated.
The goal here was to kill unwanted species of fish in order to then be able to restore the lake to provide better recreational and fishing opportunities for California residents. In fairness here, members of the California Fish and Game Department really didn’t want to have to do this but felt it was necessary.
“No one wants chemicals dumped in their lake to kill fish and we don’t like doing it, but you have to look at the big picture,” said Steve Martarano, a spokesman for the Department of Fish and Game. “It’s something we needed to do and we gave it our best shot.”
So, where’s the outrage?
Actually, the use of rotenone to kill off what is commonly referred to as “crap” fish from waters in order to restore “game” fisheries, is perhaps more common that many of us know. Of course it doesn’t come without some disputes but the facts remain the facts. 41,000 pounds of dead fish equates to an awful lot of dead animals. Again I ask, where’s the outrage?
It’s true that California F&G spokesman Steve Martarano isn’t on the ticket with John McCain as his vice presidential nominee. It’s also true that there are fewer of those who stand up for the rights(?) of fish than do wolves. Aside from “Finding Nemo” most fish stories are about deadly sharks.
Granted there is a mysticism about the wolf, mostly because the majority of people don’t understand the animal. Their perceptions are mostly built from story books, pretty pictures and a movie or two.
Let me make one thing perfectly clear. I do not and would not approve of hunting, in the classic definition of what us hunters do, from an airplane, a helicopter or any other airborne mechanical device or balloon, etc.. For those that know me, they know that I even have a difficult time with the use of tree stands to hunt from and other things like bait and hounds. Most of that is because I never grew up with any of that so it isn’t a part of my hunting past.
Shooting wolves from an airplane is a tough pill to swallow no matter who you are, but as Cal. F&G spokesman said, “…you have to look at the big picture.” You also have to look at the entire picture as why Alaska feels they have to do this.
For one, the Alaska Constitution says that game animals have to be managed to provide game for its citizens, including subsistence hunting for the natives. Unless you are willing to find a way to travel into these remote areas, we have to believe that the caribou and moose populations are in danger of reaching a point where they can no longer sustain viable populations. It would be irresponsible for Alaska’s wildlife managers and the governor, to do nothing about it. They would be violating their own laws.
Secondly, these areas are remote. They are open to the hunting and trapping of wolves and other animals but it is so difficult to access, nobody will venture in to hunt a wolf because there is little value in doing so. The pelts aren’t worth that much and the cost of getting into these regions makes the effort far from worthwhile.
It is far reaching and disingenuous to state, as I have read countless times, that Sarah Palin is offering high-priced wolf hunts from airplanes in order to make money for the fish and wildlife department. If you think I’m kidding, give the Alaska Department of Fish and Game a call and tell them you want to book an aerial wolf hunt. You’ll soon discover you can’t and you’ll also find out what is involved in being able to get a permit to go on a shoot.
It’s a terrible thing to be a part of something like that but it has to be done, much the same way as killing 41,000 pounds of fish in Lake Davis, California. Is there a difference between the life of a fish and the life of a wolf?
While Alaska continues to struggle to find effective ways to control wolf populations, while protecting herds of caribou and moose, some will continue to call Sarah Palin an animal killer. That is of course their choice to do such and I assume, because this isn’t merely a political stunt, then Nancy Pelosi should also be considered an animal killer.
Wildlife management takes on many forms, much of it the vast majority of Americans are ignorant to. I could have quite easily picked on any politician from just about any state in the Union in order to show that we all contribute to the death of living things everyday. Some we refuse to look at and others we focus on.
If we can get beyond the gruesome images the animal rights groups put up and with an open and honest approach, we soon can come to realize that taking a few wolves conserves the life of many others.
Tom Remington
Check Out Related Articles
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!




We feature the latest news, events and politics effecting the sports of hunting, fishing, and all outdoor activities in North America.




why and how can you live with yourself knowing you are all for killing wolves and all other animals,you should be ashamed of yourself.you are supposed to protect wildlife.who gives you or anyone the right to do this?these animals have every right to live as you do.you don’t have any right taking it away.i know how i feel,and i would protect an animal,what kind of person would hurt one?these animals are in their own habitat,just leave theirs alone!stop the building all over ,all the greedy builders that are taking the wildlife habitat to build to put money in their pockets.and it is sad that i heard on a web site that someone said they don’t care how the wolves are killed,poisoned,
shot or however just as long as they are out of there,well thats real nice of you to say that! god put them here and you have no right to take their life or habitat from them.
Save Wolves from Senseless Slaughter!
Give yourself or that special someone in your life an adorable gift — and help save America’s wolves when you adopt a wolf!
Once virtually eliminated from the lower 48 United States, wolves have made an incredible comeback since Defenders and others successfully fought for their re-introduction into Yellowstone National Park in 1995.
But the killing of wolves has already begun in the Greater Yellowstone area since they were stripped of federal protections in March. At least 37 wolves have been killed so far, and the count is rising almost daily. A famous wolf, known as “Limpy,†who was a beloved member of Yellowstone’s Druid Peak Pack, was one of the first Northern Rockies wolves to be shot dead.
Defenders of Wildlife has already filed two legal challenges including Defenders of Wildlife vs. Hall, but we have a long fight ahead.
Help us stop this senseless slaughter of wolves with your wolf adoption today.
Adopt a Wolf Family and you’ll receive a big 17″, super-cuddly plush wolf toy, a personalized Certificate of Adoption with an attractive 5″x7″ wolf photo and a fact sheet full of great information about these magnificent animals. You can also choose to receive a Kids Wildlife Activities book for that special young person in your life.
In Alaska, a state-sanctioned slaughter from the skies continues as aerial gunners shoot wolves from aircraft, or chase them to exhaustion, land and shoot wolves at point-blank range.
In the Southwest, fewer than 60 wolves struggle to maintain a foothold in the wild as anti-wolf forces rally to eliminate their very existence.
But by Adopting a Wolf Family, you’ll support our work to save these magnificent animals. We’re urging Congress to pass vital legislation to put an end to Alaska’s aerial gunning program — and prevent programs like it from spreading to states like Idaho and Wyoming.
We’re fighting to keep critical federal protections in place for gray wolves in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Rockies region so that wolves will be protected for future generations. We’re on the ground in Arizona and New Mexico, countering anti-wolf misinformation to ensure that wolves have a future in the Southwest.
But our work doesn’t stop there. We continue to work with ranchers to compensate them for livestock losses attributed to wolves and to find ways to prevent conflicts between wolves and livestock before they occur.
Whether you Adopt a Wolf Family, Adopt a Wolf, Adopt a Wolf Pack or Adopt a Wolf Mom & Pup, you can take pride in knowing you’re doing your part to protect America’s majestic wolves for future generations to cherish.
Now if I can’t have at least 38 of them, I’m going to throw a temper tantrum like you’ve never known…..or ever want to see again!
Sarah Palin’s Alaska wolf hunting aerial program gives hunters who hunt for food a bad name.
And here’s a scientific document that some of you may find interesting to read. Greg, you may need help reading it perhaps?
http://www.sinapu.org/PDF/Ripple04.pdf
Hey, George, I had about 30 of those little toy wolves so I finally donated them.
The fish story — were the fish native? Either way, I don’t approve of it — seems to cause a toxic pollution problem too.
My point exactly
OH MY it’s going to be snake head soup for us all!
Bea, I guess your opposed to this uninvited guest from China?
http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries/snakeheadinfosheet.html
Here are the ANTI-HUNTING groups that sued to stop scientific wolf management:
Earthjustice
Defenders of Wildlife
Natural Resources Defense Council
Sierra Club
Center for Biological Diversity
The Humane Society of the US
Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance
Friends of the Clearwater
Alliance for the Wild Rockies
Oregon Wild
Cascadia Wildlands Project
Western Watersheds Project
Wildlands Project
How would you get rid of them? If you could not use herbicides or pesticides.
Well you say your opposed to what sounds like a toxic solution. I was wondering that’s all