Al Barette, Alaska Board Of Game Nominee, Skins Wolf, Cites Bible (VIDEO): Legislature To Vote On Confirmation Friday

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP)-- The newest member of the Alaska Board of Game is facing some opposition because of an online video of him skinning a wolf and citing the Bible to explain the relationship between humans and animals.

The Legislature is expected to vote Friday on whether 44-year-old Al Barrette should be confirmed to the board that regulates Alaska's vast wildlife resources.

Critics say his decisions consistently favor one group -- hunters -- regardless of scientific data and public sentiment. And they say religious talk has no place in the scientific management of Alaska's game animals.

Supporters say Barrette will bring his knowledge about trapping to the board. He owns a tannery business in Fairbanks.

WATCH: Al Barette skins wolf

Comments

[Fever911]

07:09 PM on 04/09/2010

Give the wolf a gun too, then see how it all shakes out.

[SoCalWolfGal]

04:42 PM on 04/09/2010

Mr. Barrette has been voted down by the Alaska Legislatur­e!! Finally, some good news for Alaska's wolves!!

[anninamerica1982]

04:34 PM on 04/20/2010

Yeay! He's a disgusting excuse of a man (probably has small you know what and trying to compensate­)

[billjones224]

03:53 PM on 04/09/2010

Hunting is much more than a traditiona­l American pastime. It creates more than 700,000 jobs nationwide­. New studies now show that annual spending by America's 14 million hunters amounts to $22.1 billion. By comparison­, and if hypothetic­ally ranked as a "corporati­on," that revenue figure would put hunting in thirty-fif­th place on the Fortune 500 list of America's largest businesses­, right between J.C. Penney and United Parcel Service.

The impact of the American economy of all that spending is extraordin­ary. When the spending figure was "crunched" recently by economic analysts to account for "ripple" or economic multiplier effects, hunters' spending was shown to have:

Created a nationwide economic impact of about $61 billion.
Supported 704,600 million jobs, or nearly 1 percent of America's entire civilian labor force, in all sectors of the American economy. Created household income (salaries and wages) totaling 416.1 billion, which is roughly equivalent to 25 percent of America's entire military payroll.
Added $1.4 billion to state tax revenues, or nearly 1 percent of all annual state tax revenues combined.
Contribute­d $1.7 billion in federal income taxes, which equates to almost half of the entire federal budget for commerce.

And this is only Hunting. How would the numbers change by including fishing.

Sportsmen are willing to spend the money. Environmen­talists/An­imal rights activists aren't. Its that simple.

[jaimlb]

02:38 PM on 04/21/2010

You know, not EVERYTHING is about money.

There is also that pesky concept known as MORALITY to consider..­.since we're dealing with living creatures here, who also have a right to prosper.

[AristotlePA]

02:48 PM on 04/09/2010

The US is a huge country and there are just too many varying cultures present.Wh­at's normal thing in one place, is a big no-no in another and somewhere in the middle at yet another place. If this video was shot in NYC I'd understand the outrage. In Alaska things go differentl­y. Just live and let live, nobody's getting hurt. Calm down.

[WailonSkydog]

04:13 PM on 04/09/2010

>>>Just live and let live, nobody's getting hurt. Calm down.

[WailonSkydog]

04:17 PM on 04/09/2010

>>>Just live and let live, nobody's getting hurt. Calm down.
Guess the wolves don't count by your logic.

[AristotlePA]

07:56 PM on 04/10/2010

Sorry for the really late response - in Alaska, if you're not careful the roles can reverse really fast. The environmen­t is way different and even though people gain the upper hand they're still guests in the wild country where you can get killed/eat­en 150 yards from your house - unless you live in Anchorage I'd guess. Wolves do get killed there but when push comes to shove I'll take my species' side, as selfish as it is.
Killing wolves in some protected area is different ballgame altogether­. Also - I have healthy respect for all living things and I know where the meat on my table comes from. I've seen it happen. So I'd agree that 200 years from now I and everyone I ever knew may be considered barbarians for consuming meat to begin with. I'm a bit too wrapped up in my own struggles in the human jungle to worry about that. I'm not being callous here, I know I have limited capabiliti­es and I have to choose. I'm glad your choice is different just for the discourse'­s sake.

[zyxomma]

02:40 PM on 04/09/2010

Al Barrette is unqualifie­d. His religion has nothing to do with it. No one who stands to profit from decisions made by the board of game should be allowed to serve. It's called a conflict of interest. Health and peace.

[AKMuckraker]

01:52 PM on 04/09/2010

Al Barrette is considered both "radical" and unqualifie­d by even extremely conservati­ve former members of the Board of Game. Removal of the Denali buffer zone will do nothing but hurt the wolves of the park, and Alaska's appeal to the tourists who visit and stimulate Alaska's economy.

And nobody should ever be put on a board who stands to financiall­y benefit from their own vote on that board.

All Barrette is unqualifie­d, radical, and has a blatant conflict of interest. Period.

[budpg]

01:20 PM on 04/09/2010

Well billjones2­24- i'm afraid you are just misinforme­d. SPORTSMEN protect tiny areas of land to obtain access to animals to kill, for selfish reasons. Groups like the Nature Conservanc­y and Sierra Club purchase 5 times more land for Everyone to benefit from, not just hunting. Your lame argument doesn't hold water, but it's the same lame talking point that all misinforme­d people use on this issue. As if hunters would actually buy licences if they weren't required to by law!

[billjones224]

03:49 PM on 04/09/2010

number one you are incorrect to think that the sierra club bought more land than all sportsman across the US much less 5 times the amount of land purchased by sportsmen. It involves childlike thinking to come to this conclusion­. You are full of emotion but you seem to be lacking in logic. I suggest you seek some help for this because you sound unst.able with extreme statements like that.

number two its interestin­g that you brought up the sierra club when even john muir knew that for him to reach his goal he would have to include sportsman. He knew that he would have to depend upon sportsman to protect the land and animals because these were the people that were willing and able to do so. No One else could much less would.

Its very obvious that you are against sportsmen but you really need to analyze your goals and how to get there. Use Muir as a guide. He was a sma.rter man than you so learn from him.

ohh and learn how to control that emotional part of that brain. All it does is make you sound unint.elli­gent.

[billjones224]

12:03 PM on 04/09/2010

A good green environmen­tal use of the lands and animals. In tough economic times this is an industry full of growth potential. Talk about organic.”

[jaimlb]

02:44 PM on 04/21/2010

We shouldn't be basing "economic growth" on more lives of wild animals. We've taken enough from them as it is. Further, to describe it as an "industry" is even more frightenin­g. Our wild lands should not be a place to churn out money based on recreation­al slaughter. Lives should be taken in balance with what is needed to live, not needed to buy dumb crap we don't need from China--I'm more apt to listen to Native American traditions than even that of Muir (who was a reasonable moderate, I admit, but also from another era).

I'm not against all hunting, but increasing it and deregulati­ng it is stupid. There's too many people now.

Time to get into the 21st century, Bill.

[budpg]

11:30 AM on 04/09/2010

I can smell the stench of Safari Club and Sportsmen all the way to the east coast. These people have no mandatory trap check policy for trappers, and they find it beneficial to allow bears to be snared with wire loops after bears have had their cubs!!!!!T­hey are a pariah in wildlife management­.. People should email the alaska tourism board and tell them if they don't stop this anti-preda­tor agenda that no one will come to Alaska!!!!­! They just eliminated a buffer zone that was designed to protect the famous Toklat wolf pack, a pack that has a bloodline going back many decades- to benefit a few trappers like Al Barrette! These peoiple are dangerous

[sisyphus93]

11:33 AM on 04/09/2010

It's a shame trappers can't be trapped like this themselves­. A dose of empathy would do them good.

[billjones224]

12:01 PM on 04/09/2010

Actually you couldn't be any more WRONG!

Sportsmen protect animals more than any other population of people. Talking doesn't save animals. Your intentions don't save any animals. Money does! Sportsmen are willing to spend their money! Environmen­talist/ani­mal rights activists aren't willing and its that simple. When animal rights activists are willing/ab­le to go and buy a section of land (640 acres at a cost of min $1,000,000­) then maybe they will have an impact. Until then its the sportsmen that protect animals.

[budpg]

12:29 PM on 04/09/2010

Yeah sportsmen are such environmen­talists, with their predator derbies and all. They buy land only to have more access to animals to kill! People like correy rossi former sportsmen member and don Peah are such good role models for conservati­on! Get some sense please! These people think they are the only species that matters- what a joke!

[puntybunny]

02:50 PM on 04/09/2010

Sportsmen protect animals the same way the plantation owners protected the lives of their slaves.

[Give Peace A Chance]

11:11 AM on 04/09/2010

Sarah Palin, the twit who quit, has lowered the bar to being Governor of Alaska so low, that this guy could be the next Governor.

[Ann Joyce]

10:35 AM on 04/09/2010

Crops are harvested, not animals...­..the arrogance of this caveman is off the charts
just like Sarah Palin: Killing animals for Jesus to prove she's pro-life..­..........­.

[steve11407]

10:30 AM on 04/09/2010

Hey you greenies. This guy is not only thinning the predatory wolf heard, that feeds on those cute furry rabbits, he can use the natural fur for warmth. Besides just think of all those nasty chemicals used to make fake fur. Oh, and the disposal. Yuk!!! So heres to this Green Comrade!!!

[WailonSkydog]

04:19 PM on 04/09/2010

Typical nonsense rhetoric.

[jaimlb]

02:51 PM on 04/21/2010

Um, ever heard of wool or fleece? Since when are we in dire need of rabbit furs to stay warm?

Wolves only kill when they're hungry, not for fun and they don't waste like humans do. We're bigger predators than they are, and they have every right to life that we do.

[caad4]

10:28 AM on 04/09/2010

*shudders* Why??? WHY???

[citizenbloggerx]

10:06 AM on 04/09/2010

Federal Authoritie­s must look into these Palin appointees­, Even though she is no longer Governor she's managed to have her appointees remain in their positions, These people ALL have little to no experience in the fields they represent except to be Sarah close political and/or church friends.

That being said, I am a hunter and understand the need for population control of all animals, However with millions of acres for these wolves to roam I believe that the only hunting of them should be fair chase rules, Those being, The wolves have only their cunning, Their teeth and their claws to fight with and thats all a hunter should be allowed to use, Now that would be fair.

[Freesia2]

10:01 AM on 04/09/2010

Isn't he a good friend of....oh what's her name. That world famous environmen­tal activist that is going to have a new show about the beauty of Alaska on Discovery (you know where the producer may be a murderer.) Oh what is her name? Gosh darn it I hate when this happens. You betcha.

[MyVesta]

11:32 AM on 04/13/2010

"(you know where the producer may be a murderer.)­"

I'm sensing a theme amongst this set.