How is it that a minority that hunters are actually, can threaten and blackmail of words: If we do not satisfy us to shoot off some wolf legally, so the wolves will still disappear…
Do not know of any other area of policy where the threat of organized crime would work for a minority who want to pursue a special interest. But hunting lobby pushing and are diligent in the media and run his usual horror theme that people fleeing rural areas and that all industries in the livestock must be settled… There is no evidence to support these claims from hunting organizations. Interesting to read about them various political representatives who speak out. The Governor Mary Norrfalk points out today that she finds it puzzling that the Environmental Protection Agency rejected the licensed hunting in Dalarna: -“It is a completely absurd situation. There is considerable confidence in wolf policy eroded, that people taking the law into their own hands.”
WAS find it strange that these various politicians argue that little wolf hunting each year increases the acceptance of these hunters and thus all would be quiet and peaceful in the wolf debate. Is a lot to take into consideration and not least that we ensure favorable conservation status (Cub) the wolf and work on how to minimize inbreeding problems, etc..
The hunters believe that there should be acceptance (even from different political representation) of those wolves, you must get them kill the wolf legally each year… When it became legal to threaten of offenses and aggravated such, otherwise deplete them of the law? How can the media reflect these hunters and give them as much plastic in the media, blackmails them on the rough hunting crime??
A cull that took place recently in a wolf territories, where the mean WAS that launched culling in error. They did not know what the wolf that caused problems, but still gave permission to shoot the alpha male and killed them instead a bitch. Replies will probably soon about this bitch, who may / probably was the alpha female to them 5 puppies in the territory. Taking skyddsjakts decision without first ensuring who or what is known problems wolf, is not right. You can shoot away genetically very important wolf and then transpires that first developed during an autopsy, and far too late.
Jan Guillou already wrote 2011 if the word of acceptance that was made up of hunters' organizations and were found even in politics. Anders Carlgren föll för minoriteten jägarnas grupptryck och började även han använda ordet acceptans. See link: Fakta spelar ingen roll för varghatare
By: Jimme Persson*/WAS