Setback for groups opposed to Minnesota wolf hunt

  • Article by: DOUG SMITH AND ABBY SIMONS , Star Tribune
  • Updated: May 28, 2013 - 9:32 PM

Only option left is an appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

  • 27
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
gking2mnMay. 28, 13 2:46 PM

I am a animal lover but come on folks you can have to many ash boar bugs also.

14
10
markapMay. 28, 13 2:47 PM

It is not about meat or trapping. The goal is population control to keep the species in balance. The rest is peripheral.

21
12
lloyd55423May. 28, 13 3:12 PM

I have a feeling some of those animal rights groups will have something to say about this court decision, and - mark my words - it will not be very favorable.

14
10
EleanoreMay. 28, 13 3:19 PM

When the people of Minnesota are not considered to have standing in their own affairs by any court, there is likely something very wrong with that court. on the surface, it would appear this decision was a very unsupportable one. And Minnesota is again a more dangerous place to live because of this lack of respect for our basic social compact. No one has more standing in this case than the people of MN and they were kept out of the decision to open up this season so immediately after delisting.

11
42
oleprofessorMay. 28, 13 3:19 PM

I think that Maureen and Collette need a little camp-out in wolf country.

27
12
yoymrdoeMay. 28, 13 4:14 PM

How about a win for hunters!

23
16
SwiftBoatMay. 28, 13 4:19 PM

A DFL governor, a DFL majority in the House and Senate didn't think it was worthy enough to vote on this year. Which means they are OK with it.

24
6
thlipsis29May. 28, 13 4:22 PM

Eleanore, It would be helpful if there were a link in the article to the text of the decision to read the judge's exact words but the issue isn't whether or not the people of MN have legal standing, the judge simply said these groups are suing the wrong agency. I'm not sure how you would go about suing the legislature, but you can always work to vote them out of office. And I'm curious as to how you would define the "people of MN" because if I remember correctly, polls show the majority of Minnesotans are not opposed to a wolf hunting season. Obviously there is a group of Minnesotans who are vehemently opposed (and that is within their rights), but the I applaud the court for exercising restraint in this decision and applying the law as it is written.

24
9
redstateMay. 28, 13 4:46 PM

“We’d hoped that the court would require the state agency to follow the law and give the public a real voice in how our state’s wildlife is managed.” We didn't with the Vikings stadium or the light rail line, why would we do it here?? Let's vote on it.

12
8
jg1983May. 28, 13 4:59 PM

This is a win for the people of Minnesota. It's good to see that the courts aren't folding to special interest groups like Howling for Wolves or The Center for Biological Diversity, and are upholding the law. As for the wolves, there are more than enough of them in Minnesota to sustain a healthy population. The wolf season will make them more wary of people and less likely to come into contact with them and cause trouble. Now, let's see if I can draw a license again this year and get the pure white one we've been seeing. Its pelt would look great next to the full body mount of my wolf from last fall!

22
13

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Can the Wild rally to win its playoff series against Colorado?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT