Jennifer Lovett | Seven Days | Vermont's Independent Voice

Jennifer Lovett 
Member since Oct 12, 2016



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “One Controversial Coyote Hunt Is Canceled, and Another Crops Up

Coyote contests are nothing short of barbaric and are ecologically dangerous. There are so many reasons to ban them! First of all, the typical rationale for these killing fests is that coyotes harm the deer herd. That is completely false. Even the VT Fish and Wildlife Department state emphatically on their website that coyotes have no impact on the VT deer herd. Livestock and pet predation is the other reason given for the desire to exterminate one of our top predators. But multiple studies have demonstrated, again and again, that hunting coyotes does not control their population or aggression toward livestock. In fact, and this is also supported by VT F&W, hunting tends to result in greater coyote numbers and greater aggression toward non-native prey. Coyotes have evolved to react to the stress of being hunted by adapting their reproductive cycles to protect pack survival. If the breeding/hunting alpha pair is killed, sub-adults in the pack will start to reproduce at a younger age and with larger litters. There is abundant evidence that killing coyotes has little impact on livestock predation and may in fact cause it to escalate. Coyotes are extremely important to our environment and play many roles in balancing ecosystems. It is past the time for co-existence, the proven effective means for controlling coyote numbers and behavior, to be the norm. They control the abundant rodent population, assist in tick control ( VT has the 2nd highest rate of Lyme disease in the country last year), clean carrion from our woods (most deer consumed by coyotes are already dead!), and disperse native seeds, among other benefits. There is no place in a civilized world for killing contests. They need to be banned.

65 likes, 58 dislikes
Posted by Jennifer Lovett on 01/12/2018 at 10:46 AM

Re: “Hunting Foes Want to Snare Seats on Vermont's Fish & Wildlife Board

The reason none of Mike Covey's "management issues" were discussed above by those of us who oppose his expansion of trapping, is that his list of issues are not caused by wildlife but by human involvement in the landscape. There are numerous scientific studies that clearly demonstrate the ineffective and ecologically destructive nature of trapping. This is particularly true with regard to coyotes and beaver. It is sheer ignorance to say that trapping is a valid means to control populations, health, or habitat degradation. This is a smoke screen for a sadistic sport that supports an obsolete industry. There is not room here to go into all the arguments against the efficacy of trapping (some of which were mentioned in above statements---I guess Mr. Covey overlooked those). The information is easily available to anyone who can read and think critically. Mr. Covey's arrogance is unveiled when his identity is revealed. He is the very trapper who proposed the contentious petition that was the subject of debate at the September 21 Fish and Wildlife Board meeting. The Department's own biologist recommended against the extension of a bobcat trapping season for several reasons, the most important being that there is no accurate assessment of the bobcat population in VT. Mr. Covey is an active trapper who routinely denies and denigrates both the science that dispels the many myths supporting trapping as a valid means to manage wildlife, and those informed and professional members of the non-trapping community who would like to see this archaic, ineffective, and sadistic tradition end.

9 likes, 17 dislikes
Posted by Jennifer Lovett on 10/16/2016 at 12:18 PM

Re: “Hunting Foes Want to Snare Seats on Vermont's Fish & Wildlife Board

Evan W., labeling wildlife activists "older woman" as a means to denigrate their relevance and demean their contributions to the discussion is offensive and sexist. Jane Goodall is an older woman. She is perhaps the most respected wildlife advocate and environmentalist on the planet. Since when does age and gender define someone's right to fair representation by a State organization? I would much prefer the F&W board be composed of informed, professionally relevant, intelligent, and compassionate older women than macho, ignorant, and uninformed men mired in the sadistic traditions of trapping that are no longer relevant and are destroying biodiversity and hindering the balance and function of our ecosystems.

9 likes, 17 dislikes
Posted by Jennifer Lovett on 10/14/2016 at 9:06 PM

Re: “Hunting Foes Want to Snare Seats on Vermont's Fish & Wildlife Board

I too resent being labelled by trappers/hunters as a flatlander, outsider, bum, freeloader, etc. simply because I disagree with their sadistic exploitation of public resources. The State's wildlife does not belong to consumptive users and many of us who want to protect wildlife from the horrors of trapping pay plenty of money toward the state's conservation programs. Most of us would likely pay more to offset the meager $23 license fee for trapping. In fact, I already pay $26 for conservation license plates on my car! That's $3 more than a trapping license! In addition, I post two parcels of land, that's another chunk of change the F&W Dept get from me. Those of us who boat or hike or use State parks pay fees throughout the year. In addition, my family has lived in Vermont since 1806, probably longer than many of the trapper's families have. I own land here, pay taxes, and have as much right to use public lands as anyone else in Vermont. But, ultimately, this issue is not about money or heritage, it is about ethics and responsible conservation of public resources. Trappers typically resort to insulting those of us who they disagree with because the facts do not support trapping. It is simply wrong on many levels, from morally to scientifically and ecologically. Trapping needs to be relegated to the trash heap of similar obsolete and irrelevant historical past-times.

21 likes, 16 dislikes
Posted by Jennifer Lovett on 10/13/2016 at 3:43 PM

Re: “Hunting Foes Want to Snare Seats on Vermont's Fish & Wildlife Board

I was at that board meeting and it was astounding to see how hard the board worked to vote down the recommendation of their own wildlife biologist who recommended against expanding the bobcat season. It was crystal clear that this board has its own agenda and a very strong bias toward trappers. There was a real sense of entitlement and ownership---a strong sense of conflict of interest--- that I resent as a resident, landowner, and taxpayer in VT. The fact that trappers make money on the pelts of our wildlife killed on public lands seems very wrong to me. I am against trapping for many reasons. It is not supported by sound science since it is inherently indiscriminate. Many non-target animals are killed every year here in VT including domestic pets and protected species. There is no way to know what trappers really do and no way to know if they report their kills honestly and accurately. At this point in time, with growing stresses and concerns related to climate change and habitat loss, conservation really should be the primary focus of all F&W policies. Conservation and trapping are not compatible. Ultimately, I am offended by the tolerance of the department to the inhumane and sadistic nature of trapping. This is in no way an ethical manner to manage wildlife and has been proven to be ineffectual as an effective control of predators.

46 likes, 26 dislikes
Posted by Jennifer Lovett on 10/12/2016 at 12:25 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Keep up with us Seven Days a week!

Sign up for our fun and informative

All content © 2019 Da Capo Publishing, Inc. 255 So. Champlain St. Ste. 5, Burlington, VT 05401
Website powered by Foundation