Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Wildlife is Held in the Public Trust: Why isn't the Public Trusted to Have an Opinion?

Wildlife is Held in the Public Trust: Why isn't the Public Trusted to Have an Opinion?

Authors: Melissa Tedrow, Wisconsin State Director, Christine Coughlin, Minnesota State Director and Jill Fritz, Michigan Senior Director of The Humane Society of the United States

More Decks by Sigurd Olson Environmental Institute

Other Decks in Research

Transcript

  1. Melissa Tedrowe, Wisconsin State Director
    Christine Coughlin, Minnesota State Director
    Jill Fritz, Michigan Senior State Director
    Wildlife is Held in the Public Trust:
    Why isn’t the Public Trusted
    to Have an Opinion on Wildlife?

    View Slide

  2. View Slide

  3. Being invited to speak
    is not the same as being
    listened to
    and heard.

    View Slide

  4. Minnesota

    View Slide

  5. Minnesota Wolf Management Plan
    Authorized the MN
    Department of Natural
    Resources to consider
    hunting and trapping
    seasons no sooner
    than five years after
    wolves were removed
    from the federal
    Endangered Species
    List.

    View Slide

  6. 2013 Minnesota polling
    • 53% of Minnesota
    voters favor
    reinstating a five-year
    waiting period for
    wolf hunting and
    trapping in Minnesota
    • 66% of voters oppose
    allowing the use of
    traps and snares to
    hunt Minnesota’s gray
    wolves.

    View Slide

  7. Native American opposition
    "Many Ojibwe believe the fate of the wolf is
    closely tied to the fate of all the Ojibwe. For these
    reasons the Fond du Lac Band feels the hunting
    and trapping of wolves is inappropriate.''
    Karen Diver, chairwoman of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake
    Superior Chippewa
    "How can you ignore governments that have co-
    management authority of much of the wolf range
    and come up with a plan without their input?'‘
    Steve Mortensen, Leech Lake Band's Division of Resource
    Management

    View Slide

  8. Recommended: A balanced approach

    View Slide

  9. Michigan

    View Slide

  10. North American Model of Wildlife Conservation

    View Slide

  11. …good wildlife management is a judicious
    balance between science and democracy.

    View Slide

  12. Attitudes of Michiganders toward wolves
    2010 MSU statewide public opinion poll:
    “Most residents, including hunters, Northern Lower
    Peninsula (NLP) residents and minorities, highly value
    wolves, are not interested in hunting them and support the
    role of science in making decisions.”
    Mertig, A. G. (2004). Attitudes about wolves in Michigan, 2002. Final report to
    Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Michigan State University: East
    Lansing, Michigan:
    Overall high support for wolf recovery efforts; the majority
    of residents supported a “hands-off” approach as long as
    wolves did not injure people, Michiganders do not support
    consumptive uses of wolves.

    View Slide

  13. October 17, 2012:
    SB 1350:
    Designates
    wolves as game,
    authorizes
    open season

    View Slide

  14. Testimony for/against SB 1350
    50 opposing documents :
    • U.P. and L.P. residents
    • Native American tribes
    • Scientists
    • Hunters
    • Conservation groups
    • Humane organizations
    4 supporting documents:
    • Michigan United Conservation Clubs
    • Michigan Bow Hunters Association
    • Upper Peninsula Sportsman Alliance
    • Cattle farmer

    View Slide

  15. Native American Tribes
    • The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of
    Chippewa Indians
    • The Little River Band of Ottawa
    Indians Tribal Council
    • The Little Traverse Bay Bands of
    Odawa Indians
    • The Chippewa Ottawa Resource
    Authority
    • Keweenaw Bay Indian Community

    View Slide

  16. I own a camp in the midst of the Ottawa National Forest. I am a hunter. I have reverence for the wolf. I have had several close encounters with
    wolves in the wild…. In my opinion misunderstanding, fear and greed is why SB 1350 was introduced.
    Richard Sloat, Iron River
    Mr. Casperson's statement that Michigan residents live in fear of the wolf is just a gross exaggeration!
    Amy Froiland, Marquette
    We…urge you to do more research about wolf predation and survey all your constituents for their views before proposing a remedy that may
    not be needed.
    Sharon and Anthony Zoars, Watersmeet
    The wolves themselves are wildlife management tools. I don't see proponents of the hunt acknowledging the rather obvious fact that wolves
    serve to dispose selectively of sick deer and other game animals, thus limiting the spread of such diseases as "chronic wasting.” That alone
    should justify protection.
    Jack Parker, Baltic (South Range)
    We own a sled dog touring business. We have hosted many visitors from near and afar. They are excited to hear about our region’s wild
    animals—none more than wolves. They have enjoyed seeing wolf tracks in the snow and finding territorial markings.
    Jacqueline Winkowski, Gwinn
    My family lives in the Upper Peninsula and we have seen wolves as we enjoy the wooded areas around our homes and camps. Never have any
    of these animals bothered our homes or us. I urge you to protect this wild animal from a useless death.
    Linda Roncaglione Brecheisen, Negaunee
    Leave Michigan alone, as a safe haven for the wolves where people who simply enjoy the fact that they can exist, or at the most be
    photographed by people like me.
    Judith Kreiger, Baraga
    Wolves pose no threat and play a valuable role and maintain natural balance. Wolves are not vicious killers as some tout them to be. Quite the
    opposite. They are peaceful pack animals and only kill what they need to survive, (unlike humans) like any other animal does.
    Joanna Tomacari , Gwinn
    So far CWD has not spread into areas inhabited by wolves, anywhere in the United States, and the logical hypothesis is that wolves simply cull
    out diseased animals. The public health significance of CWD is hotly debated. However, based on my conversations with many wildlife
    veterinarians, I will gladly consume venison from the U.P. but I won’t eat deer from the CWD district in central Wisconsin.
    Rolf Peterson, Houghton
    Animals that aren't eaten should not be hunted. …Please do not abide by the wishes of a small, vocal group of sportsmen who do not represent
    mainstream hunters.
    James Winkowski, Gwinn
    Does it make any sense at all to try so hard for so many years to get a species reintroduced and then kill it?
    Constance Sherry, Atlantic Mine
    Just from U.P. residents…

    View Slide

  17. December 28, 2012

    View Slide

  18. March 27, 2013:
    256,916 voter signatures delivered to
    Michigan Secretary of State

    View Slide

  19. April 9, 2013: SB 288 introduced
    • Allows NRC to designate game species
    • Bypasses referendum
    • $1 million appropriation to prevent 2nd referendum

    View Slide

  20. View Slide

  21. Ignoring  dismissal  open contempt
    • Citizens mocked and
    belittled in hearings
    • “emotional,” “anti-hunting,”
    “urban,” “uninformed,”
    “not from the U.P.” (even if
    they, in fact, were, or if most
    of the legislators voting on the
    issue were not)

    View Slide

  22. Value judgment  codified into law
    Monumental leap:
    “Those who have a
    different opinion on this
    issue than we have will no
    longer have the right to
    vote on it.”

    View Slide

  23. May 8, 2013

    View Slide

  24. May 20, 2013

    View Slide

  25. Natural Resources Commission votes to designate wolves
    as game and authorizes a hunting season

    View Slide

  26. View Slide

  27. View Slide

  28. “Only 13 of the 3,650
    Michigan submissions
    favored the hunt, the
    remainder opposed such an
    action.
    What’s more troubling is that
    within the pile of comments,
    an email from the NRC
    chairman was found stating
    that he trashed an additional
    2,000.”

    View Slide

  29. View Slide

  30. View Slide

  31. • Nearly identical to
    Public Act 21
    • $1 million
    appropriation
    (referendum-proof)
    • Free hunting/fishing
    licenses for military

    View Slide

  32. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  33. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  34. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  35. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  36. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  37. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  38. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  39. Michigan media reaction to the “Scientific Fish
    and Wildlife Conservation Act”

    View Slide

  40. View Slide

  41. North American Model of Wildlife Conservation

    View Slide

  42. Proposal 1 Proposal 2
    November 4, 2014 election:

    View Slide

  43. Both laws overturned
    • Proposal 2…
    o rejected in 69 of
    Michigan’s 83 counties
    o rejected in all 15 Michigan
    Congressional districts
    • More than 1.8 million “no”
    votes…more than for any
    statewide candidate who
    won election

    View Slide

  44. The people spoke:
    The citizens of Michigan do NOT support handing
    the unprecedented power to designate game
    species to an unelected commission.

    View Slide

  45. Post-election poll:
    • 85% of voters: “Michigan
    citizens should not lose
    their right to vote on
    wildlife issues.”
    • 2/3 of voters: “The
    legislature and the NRC
    should heed the will of
    the people on wolf
    hunting.”

    View Slide

  46. Being invited to speak is not the same as being
    listened to and heard.
    The citizens of
    Michigan were not
    invited—nor were
    they welcome—to the
    conversation on
    wolves. But they
    made sure they were
    listened to.

    View Slide

  47. WISCONSIN

    View Slide

  48. Six observations.

    View Slide

  49. ONE
    DNR wolf biologists.

    View Slide

  50. TWO
    DNR public attitudes survey.

    View Slide

  51. THREE
    Wolf Advisory Committee.

    View Slide

  52. FOUR
    Act 169.

    View Slide

  53. FIVE
    Wolf Advisory Committee.

    View Slide

  54. SIX
    Social media.

    View Slide

  55. Moving forward…

    View Slide

  56. Thank you!
    Melissa Tedrowe
    Wisconsin State Director
    [email protected]
    Christine Coughlin
    Minnesota State Director
    [email protected]
    Jill Fritz
    Michigan Senior State Director
    [email protected]

    View Slide