To the Journal editor:
"Wolf hunt debate heats up as season nears" announced the headline on the Nov. 9 Mining Journal. Even though by realistic political reckoning, this year's hunt is a done deal, obviously it still kindles front page news!
I've made my peace with raw political reality. I've reconciled with the inevitable. Casperson, Nyberg, Snyder, et.al., have their hunt this year. But I'm also frank to call myself a wild wolf advocate and I would hope that there will not be another wolf hunt in Michigan.
I mightily appreciate and deeply respect the way this animal has so tenaciously defied man's relentless attempt, based largely upon myth, unmitigated and mostly unjustified hatred and thoughtless custom, to eliminate them from their legitimate space on earth.
Accordingly, I wish to take exception with (what I believe are) two grossly misleading and distorting words in The Mining Journal article. They are: "Forward" and "harvest" as in "move forward with a very limited, science-based wolf management harvest."
It should be clear to all that there is nothing forward-moving about killing wolves. The practice is ancient and it started long before man had anything like a science-based ecological sense or ethos. Indeed, If any one word describes the upcoming wolf hunt in terms of management and ecology
I would think that it's backwards! And harvest? Isn't this a word most commonly and perhaps more legitimately applied to, and thought of in terms of sustenance, something consumed, like food. In that sense a case might be made for applying it to the upcoming deer hunt, but certainly not the wolf hunt.
Who eats wolves and what good reason is there to harvest them otherwise? No, 1,200 people will shoot them, kill them, slaughter them by way of a backwards-looking nod to a dubious 21st century sport called trophy hunting.
Congratulations Michigan, you've done what many have only dreamed of doing, you've gone backwards in time!