Letter: State shouldn't pay to solve wolf non-problem
I was pleased to read "Auditor slams wolf lobbying contracts" in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning ("Audit: Contracts for anti-wolf groups didn't safeguard tax dollars," Oct. 15). The question remains, what is the difference between a "political contribution" as used by lobbyists to persuade legislators to provide a certain outcome, and a "bribe"? How much of the $800,000 went to lawmakers?
The reintroduction of wolves in the region of Yellowstone Park has been successful and they could be removed from the Endangered Species List there. This is not so in Utah and the wolf should remain as an endangered species under the control of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Utah taxpayers should not spend money on a non-existent wolf problem.
Alden H. Laney
Salt Lake City
See more about comments here.