Ashley Hofsommer
The New York Times
The Still-in-Danger Gray Wolf
This article talks about gray wolves and being introduced back into the Rocky Mountains. The writer goes on to further say that soon the wolf will be taken off of the endangered list and left to the will of state management plans approved by the federal government. She goes on to say that recently many rules were changed under the Bush administration. The number of wolves required to be kept safe has in fact been lowered. Leaving more wolves susceptible to harm. Nine hundred wolves that were previously protected will not be under the new sate guidelines. The writer is obviously distressed about the situation. He or she (I'm not sure because the article gives no author) uses very weighted words like slaughter. I think the argument is a good one, but there is no apparent reason these wolves would be slaughtered. The article becomes stronger when facts are given suggesting what an important asset wolves are to the wildlife in the mountains. According to the author they are essential to keeping nature in balance. I thought the article in general gave some good points about a subject not often written about or taken seriously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This sounds like a good article, but it sounds like the author is basing the future off of what happened in the past to other animals. If he/she doesn't provide a reason for the slaughter, how do they expect the audience that reads the article to believe them? It is an interesting subject though, and seems to be well written.
Who is going to "slaughter" the wolves? From what I know, wolves don't have too many predators. I thought they were in trouble because their environment was in danger, therefore endangering them. But I didn't get to read the article, so I could be wrong.
I like that the author put a lot of facts at the beginning of the article to help the reader understand what is going on, but it also seems that he is exaggerating just a bit.
Post a Comment