Our Position on Hunting
Our organization is not opposed to hunting when the hunters eat what they kill out of necessity or because they prefer wild foods to meat sourced from industrial animal agriculture. Our coalition partners hold a diversity of positions on hunting. However, we are all pro-science, pro-democracy, pro-justice and in favor of treating wild animals with compassion and respect, which is why we believe the system of wildlife management in the U.S. must be changed.
Letter To The Editor: Gov Gordon’s Praise Of Wyoming Wolf Management Is Wrong
By Kristin Combs
This compelling letter, written by Wildlife for All coalition member Kristin Combs, challenges Wyoming Governor Gordon’s claims that wolf management in the state deserves praise. Combs explores the many ecological and economic benefits of wolves, while disproving the Governor’s claims that wolves are recovered and that the state is using best available science in its management practices.
The Sale of a Product Responsible for Bloodshed and Fear Is Still Tied to Our Wildlife
By Christopher Ketcham
85 years ago, hunters were one of the primary user groups of public lands, and so the passage of the Pittman-Robertson Act seemed reasonable. However, over the past century, hunters have become a minority among gun owners, which begs the question, “Should the sale of a product that today is responsible for so much bloodshed, mayhem, fear and social division be tied to the financing of conservation?”
Why Republicans Turned Against the Environment
By Paul Krugman
In this op-ed in the New York Times, Paul Krugman argues that the current opposition of Republican politicians to environmental protection is not based on ideology or contributions from polluters, but rather because the environment has become part of a culture war with its roots in issues of race and ethnicity. Although Krugman focuses on climate policy, the same argument could be made about wildlife policy, as described in this excellent article in the New Yorker.
