No blood for WINE!
In northern California, there’re a lot of wine vineyards. (If you’re ever in the area, incidentally, drive through a town called St. Helena, in Napa County — a great little place.) Black Bears, wild pigs, deer, turkeys and mountain lions have been eating the grapes off the vines, destroying fences, and generally acting like wild animals. So, naturally the vineyard owners have demanded the authorities take some action.
Earlier this year, animal control officers caught and killed four black bears – two males and two females – at the Aetna Springs Vineyard in the rugged Pope Valley. Winery owner Paul Maroon said he had tried scaring off the bears, but resorted to getting rid of them for good because he feared they might hurt his field workers.
“They damage the fences on a daily basis almost faster than we can repair them,” Maroon said. “The damaged fences allow the deer to enter. The bear eat the grapes, as do the deer, and they both damage the vines, sometimes killing … old vines.”
But here comes the animal-rights lobby with a different opinion altogether:
But some of Maroon’s neighbors are outraged by the trappings. Ann Curtis, who runs a golf course down the road from the winery, called the controversy “wine for blood, life versus profit.”
“To come into a wildlife area and then kill off the wildlife is wrong,” said Curtis, who has lived in Pope Valley for 34 years. [Naturally, she moved to NorCal during the 70s - CardMart] “I don’t see much difference between throwing a sandwich out the window for bears in Yosemite (National) Park and inviting them to dinner here by putting grapes out for them to eat.”
Dude, why are you throwing sandwiches out your window? Don’t feed the bears! And then there are some loony vineyard owners who think humans should be paying taxes to bears:
Jerre Sears, owner of Black Sears Vineyards on Napa County’s Howell Mountain, said all the growers he knows on the 1,800-foot peak shrug off the grapes they lose to bears and other wildlife as a kind of tax for doing business in hillside territory.
“We’ve had our vineyard for 20 years and we’ve had a bear in our vineyard every year,” Sears said. “We feel it’s just part of life, of nature, so we share.”
You know what I think is “just part of life”? You kill the bear, and you eat it while sipping a nice red wine.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:35 am
What is your position on these killings. I think it’s cruel, and unnecessary, and the winery owner is arrogant and cheap, too cheap to put up a decent fence to keep out wildlife. The law also needs changing so Fish and Game preserves wildlife rather than working for winemaker’s profits. If you’re likeminded do you know how to effectively start a boycott of this winery’s product?
December 27th, 2005 at 12:02 pm
I think I have a less romantic view of wild, dangerous animals than some people. I also think that the pro-animal vintners in the story have a rather cavalier attitude about the bears. The fact is that intentionally attracting bears to areas populated by people is bad for the people and the bears, and they are the real trouble-makers in this story. If anyone is going to boycott any of the vineyards, I’d suggest it be the one owned by the woman who feeds sandwiches to the bears in Yosemite.
Fish and Game should work for people. The winemakers should be working for a profit.
If it is unnecessary to kill the bears, but instead they can simply be moved someplace else, then I’m in favor of that.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:06 pm
[...] In the comments thread to an earlier post, “No blood for WINE!” Steven, whose IP address belongs to a college in The City, has left an interesting post: What is your position on these killings. I think it’s cruel, and unnecessary, and the winery owner is arrogant and cheap, too cheap to put up a decent fence to keep out wildlife. The law also needs changing so Fish and Game preserves wildlife rather than working for winemaker’s profits. If you’re likeminded do you know how to effectively start a boycott of this winery’s product? [...]
December 28th, 2005 at 8:32 pm
Should we trap and kill bald eagles that eat grapes, too? Killing then eating bears “while sipping a nice red wine” is not just a part of life. At least not mine.
Write a letter to the owner and let him know how feel.
Aetna Springs Vineyards
Attn Paul Maroon
1325 Imola Avenue #508
Napa, CA 94559
You can stop by the winery or call and find out who their distributors (resturants, stores, etc..)are, then contact them. Let them know that you will stop doing business with them as long as they do business with him. Let them put the pressure on Paul.
December 28th, 2005 at 9:50 pm
[...] In an earlier post, I advanced the idea of killing bears that have been stealing people’s grapes in Northern California, and then eating the bears while sipping wine made from the very same grapes. Clever, no? In the comments section to the post, No Blood for Wine! (which was followed up by More on Killing Wild Bears), a gentleman named Leland suggested we boycott bear-unfriendly wineries, and was also apparently hungry so he asked what we thought he should prepare for supper: Should we trap and kill bald eagles that eat grapes, too? Killing then eating bears “while sipping a nice red wine” is not just a part of life. At least not mine. [...]
January 31st, 2006 at 12:06 am
Killer Pepsi wants Bambi DEAD!…
Okay, so in the past I may have gone a little overboard and called Pepsi “evil” and the “Devil’s elixir”, but I was just kidding. In fact, even though I don’t like Pepsi itself, I have on occasion eaten some……
February 16th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
To shoot four bears to protect one’s property is the same reasoning as the ranchers who had government officials shoot as many as two hundred coyotes to protect their cattle. Environmentalists claim,and rightly
so, that such action is inhumane and ultimately ineffective. Wine growers in Italy use only a fraction of
their acreage for their vines and let the rest remain wild for other species.I’m sure if the proprietor of Aetna Springs had thought about why bears had been invading his property, he would have concluded that they
are only doing what nature intended them to do. He could
have consulted someone knowledgable in bio-dynamic practices and come up with other options.That he chose the least effective, least humane and easiest option says
quite a lot about his character.My condolences to the bears.