Playing cowboy at the wolf's expense
Let me see if I have this straight: In Catron County,
N.M., a place notorious for its anti-federal government and
anti-environmental stance, we're shooting and trapping wolves that
have been fraudulently set up to violate the "three strikes" rule
by the lackey of a wealthy foreigner who ranches for pleasure and
not need (HCN, 12/24/07). Your article didn't
mention how many cows this foreigner/make-believe cowboy runs
versus how many are lost to wolves, as in, "Do we have an ACTUAL
problem here?" nor how much of his 275,000-acre spread includes
federal grazing allotments, nor how much he gets compensated by the
federal government for each loss. I like to give ranchers the
benefit of the doubt when it comes to their opposition to wolf
reintroduction.
Real loss from real ranchers is one
thing, and reasonable people can disagree. But this story makes it
hard to feel charitable. We're killing wolves for a wealthy
foreigner who simply wants to play American cowboy and who thrives
in part thanks to the generosity of the American system ... and
Catron County thinks they're being manipulated by WHOM? Is it just
me, or does this make about as much sense as the old '60s mantra
about screwing in the name of virginity? Gimme a break!
Wayne Hare
Fruita, Colorado
I'm a 84 yr. old WW11 vet. who loves wolves. I was raised in NE Oregon when there were a lot of wolves and cattle. Never heard of a cattle grying about the wolf feeding on His cattle, guess things have changed, not for the better, the wolf is a great magestic animal and should be treated as such and not distroyed for the benefit of a few "cry babys" sincerely, j turck, idaho city,ID