How & Why Wildlife Myths Are Born or Romance Biology as Propaganda

by Jim Beers

    A news article from a suburb of Toronto, Canada has just crossed my desk.  A lady was getting her paper on her driveway as her two dogs frolicked (and were probably concentrating on other things like their toilette) when, “My two dogs were on my property about 20 feet away from my front door … I saw a large animal run by on the street and the dogs started barking. I yelled at my dogs to get back in the house and was able to get the first one inside, but the second dog was just snatched up and had its neck snapped right in front of me."

     She (the dog owner) goes on, “the animals were much larger than regular coyotes and more tanned in colour. She added that responding police and town officials told her that they believe the animals were coywolves, a hybrid between the Western coyote and the Eastern wolf.”
    Enter the “scientist”, “Dr. Bradley White, a professor at Trent University and Canadian research chair of conservation, genetics and biodiversity, has studied these animals for over a decade and says that while attacks on pets are common they generally avoid contact with humans. He noted there’s been just one confirmed attack and fatality across the country – and that involved a jogger in Cape Breton a few years back. "Given the numbers and the recorded interactions with humans, there is no real evidence to suggest that they present any real danger to humans," he said.  The hybrid species is relatively new, first appearing less than 100 years ago after evolving in the wake of mass wolf-culling initiatives in the Eastern United States. As the wolves disappeared, the coyotes moved in and cross breeding occurred. The species has since migrated to Canada and flourished. According to White, the hybrids have become very well adapted to living in both rural and urban areas, with numerous confirmed sightings and encounters in Toronto and across the GTA. He also says that programs to remove the animals are largely ineffective, as those removed through culling or relocation are quickly replaced due to the species' growing numbers and adaptability.
    Finally, the bureaucrat speaks, “Mickey Frost, director of enforcement with the Mississauga Transportation and Works Department, said that this is the third such reported incident to be reported so far this year. Parks staff has posted signs in nearby parks warning of the animals’ presence and will be providing handout material at libraries in the area. Information and safety tips can also be found online at www.mississauga.ca.  "Our thoughts are with the family that lost their pet. We encourage residents to contact Animal Services to report sightings and if any animal is injured or acting strangely," said Frost. "Our officers are reminding residents to be aware and keep their pets on leash."
    Where to begin?  Perhaps explaining the situation in the reverse order reported above will be the most understandable for the general reader.  What I describe here is also happening in Western Europe...
    What I describe here is going on day in and day out involving, wolves, grizzly bears, black bears, moose, elk, deer, wild and domestic sheep, cattle, sage grouse, suckers, smelt, darters, and other animals used as props in the environmental/animal rights’ war on society.

1.   I begin with mention of the primary malefactor (of the 3) responsible for wildlife myths and the creation of Romance Biology as Propaganda.  This primary malefactor is the current crop of politicians mentioned first despite their absence in this particular situation of their making.

For 40 to 50 years now, central government (USA, Canada and EU) politicians in league with the UN have, in fits and starts, increased their power, authority, and jurisdiction at the expense of “lower” units of government like States, European national governments, and regional and Local government units like American Counties...In order for the politicians to continue these environmental/animal rights’ scams over the objections of those they harm (the rural communities composed of families and businesses that are almost always a minority of the voting public the higher “up”; i.e. Ottawa, Washington, Brussels, UN HQ; you go). Wildlife Myths and Romance Biology Propaganda disguised as “science” are increasingly necessary as animal sanctification increases.  Some examples would be:

-       Wolves (or “coywolves”) never attack people.

-       Wolves don’t spread disease.

-       The grizzly would not have killed the girl camper in her sleeping bag if she had stayed home while she was menstruating.

-       The answer to all these bear encounters is better garbage cans.

-       She should have never run from them.

-       Livestock owners must learn new techniques if they want to stay in business.

-       Wolves killing dogs means people must restrain their dogs; dogs being used to hunt wolves is inhumane and a crime against “nature”.

-       Wolves “restore” stream bank vegetation by killing wild and domestic grazing animals.

-       There is such a thing as a “balanced (?) ecosystem” that “belongs” everywhere that “science” (and government) dictates.

-       Problem wild animals should never be killed, but captured and released in a “wilderness” (a value judgment, not “science”).

-       “Science” will (if given enough money over time) designate how people must behave in the presence of wild animals and politicians will pass laws mandating such human behavior and bureaucrats will write, amend and enforce regulations under these laws (if they get more and more money despite the fact that rural taxpayers, rural taxes and rural licensing and permit revenue i.e. hunt, fish, graze, log, develop energy, etc. are dwindling and disappearing).

-       It is inevitable that this animal worship (the correct word) spills into suburban and even urban locations from time to time.  This makes myths about wildlife and romance biology propaganda even more necessary as people are questioning that what is happening is “good”, necessary or endurable. 

2.   The bureaucrats are the enablers of these central government politicians.  They are also the “partners” of the extremist organizations that support the politicians as well as the dispensers of grant money and status so sought after by “scientists” and their assistants. In this case, the bureaucrat (Mickey Frost, director of enforcement with the Mississauga Transportation and Works Department) protects the politicians (that administer the bureaucrats) and quotes the “science” as well as offers condolences.

A.   Since this is, “the third such reported incident to be reported so far this year” any rural person familiar with “habituating” (“science” for increasingly bold) coyote, wolf, dog, cougar or bear) carnivores knows it is a problem requiring the death of offending animals AND a reduction of their densities or even their elimination over the surrounding areas.  To mention this in passing and then mention the next item is how myths and romance biology propaganda are used to mellow out the general public like marijuana or morphine are used to dull the senses.

B.    “Parks staff has posted signs in nearby parks warning of the animals’ presence and will be providing handout material at libraries in the area. Information and safety tips can also be found online at www.mississauga.ca.”  So signs and handouts will tell the people what they must do to make everyone and their dogs “safe”.  The wild animals “always” do such and such and you must always do such and such and everything will be fine.  This is reminiscent of the constant line of malarkey fed to ranchers about “non-lethal” protection of livestock, a game that the wolves keep figuring out as the herds get smaller and the wolves get more numerous and the government boys and girls eventually just shrug...

C.   He goes on, "Our officers are reminding residents to be aware and keep their pets on leash."  Are there really dog walkers that believe that if habituating wild animals are attacking and killing dogs in and around residences and parks, that they won’t soon jump the dog on a leash connected to some kid or elderly person or jogging soccer Mom?  Who in their right mind, no matter how much they “love” their dog or how much they spend on its costume for Halloween (??) wants to get tangled up in a leash and a dog and a wild animal out to kill the dog?

D.   For all you folks that have written me nasty notes over the years about my calling these animal rights’ and animal protection laws, pagan animal worship, I bring your attention to this government bureaucrat giving this pet the attention we all used to give the unborn or the disabled or the elderly when they “passed away”.  I submit that the following words meant to endear self-serving politicians, self-serving bureaucrats and the animal rights agenda to the very people they are harming "Our thoughts are with the family that lost their pet” should give us all pause.  Read them again and think about that.  Corrupt governments put, protect and justify these dangerous and destructive wild animal/human situations in our midst and then tell us it is all “science” to absolve all humans (politician, bureaucrats, radicals, and “scientists”) who are always conducting “research” and searching for silver bullets and a fantasy world that never has and never will exist.  All of which brings us to our last malefactor, the scientist.

3.   The scientists are the wizards out of the fairy tale that concoct the magic potions that are every bit as real as the elixirs described in Cinderella or Hansel and Gretel.

In this case, “science” tells us:

-       “While attacks on pets are common they generally avoid contact with humans.”  “Generally” is a generic term, the use of which implies absolutely no certainty or responsibility on the part of this wizard and his elixir.  This statement is meaningless.

-       “There’s been just one confirmed attack and fatality across the country – and that involved a jogger in Cape Breton a few years back.” So to this “scientist”, “just one” (acknowledged or officially reported) “confirmed attack and fatality” is acceptable (a value judgment he and all his ilk are in NO WAY qualified to make).  Also, these suburban ladies and kids and their dogs are told to accept the idea that having these animals around is no more problematic than having wild parakeets at their birdfeeders.  The more habituated they get and the more dense their population becomes (in the urban/suburban world of unlimited food and total protection) the more dangerous they become.

-       "Given the numbers and the recorded interactions with humans, there is no real evidence to suggest that they present any real danger to humans,"  After acknowledging the death of a jogger in a government park we are told to believe, “there is no real evidence to suggest that they present any real danger to humans”?  Earth to scientists, do you really think the general public is that stupid?

-       Officials told the dog owner, “that they believe the animals were coywolves, a hybrid between the Western coyote and the Eastern wolf.”  FACT – Coyotes and wolves and all dogs cross-breed and produce “viable” (meaning the pups grow up and can make “viable” puppies with any wolf, coyote or dog).  It used to be (before all this romance biology tripe was made into law) that “species” was defined as a group of animals that shared similar characteristics and could breed and produce “viable” offspring.  In other words; wolves are coyotes are dogs.  Now the general public is fed romance biology propaganda such as the “Mexican” wolf, the “timber” wolf, the “Eastern” wolf, etc.: being as distinct as giraffes and elephants.  The truth is these wolves, coyotes and dogs are like human races with all their skin tones and size differences and behavioral differences.  Like humans breeding between races, the sizes and colors and behavior results are a blend of the parents and over time such cross-breeding minimizes differences in succeeding generations.  Coyotes, wolves and wild or free-roaming dogs can, each and every one; kill almost every animal they encounter; eat and digest a wide variety of foods, learn to live in almost any situation where food and safety exists for them, and learn to outwit any deterrent men can come up with short of extirpating them.  Crediting these wolves, coyotes, dogs, and “coywolves” with some sort of separate special characters or habits is like invoking discredited miscegenation laws for fear of imagined offspring characteristics or believing in Nazi or Margaret Sanger nostrums about sterilizing “inferior” races to create a “super” race.  In other words, it is baloney.

-       The “scientist” goes on, “The hybrid species is relatively new, first appearing less than 100 years ago after evolving in the wake of mass wolf-culling initiatives in the Eastern United States. As the wolves disappeared, the coyotes moved in and cross breeding occurred. The species has since migrated to Canada and flourished.”  What nonsense.  First, early (16-1700’s) American Colonists were killing and bountying “wolves” at every opportunity (a sign of their priorities and respect for the primacy of human life and human needs).  Second, there has been much written about how early Colonial bounties went to kill mostly solitary (not pack) animals and how they may well have been simply large coyotes in the East as opposed to the smaller coyotes encountered later as the settlements moved West. Third, this guy is asking you to believe his silly story for which there is only supposition, that this “new” “species” “evolved” AFTER evil humans killed the wolves but then ignored coyotes that also killed cattle, dogs, sheep, etc.?  So those wolf killers and their sons and grandsons all became “Defenders of Wildlife” automatons like the sons of New Zealand whalers became Greenpeace supporters?  Then we are to believe these “American” “coywolves” then migrated to Canada and flourished?  All this while Canadians exterminated wolves on Prince Edward Island but (due to the vast N Woodlands and tundra) could only periodically reduce wolf populations in their settled landscapes when attacks and livestock losses, etc. became intolerable?  I am reminded of how US Mayors of Big Cities are conveniently mostly rabid gun-controllers blaming all the crime and violence in their cities on guns from elsewhere like this guy blaming American “coywolves” that resulted from American “wolf-culling” for a current Canadian wolf/coyote problem.

4.   Finally, the “piece de resistance” for the “scientist” and “science” to ingratiate themselves to the politicians, bureaucrats and radicals; “He also says that programs to remove the animals are largely ineffective, as those removed through culling or relocation are quickly replaced due to the species' growing numbers and adaptability.” There is no hope for any alternative, so sit down and do as you are told..  That American “wolf-culling” stuff so demeaned centuries ago and that provided a safe and productive rural American society for hundreds of years is/was “ineffective”?  Killing them wholesale and then continuing it until there were no more, where WE lived and grew our families, provided a safe place for women and kids and dogs and elk and moose and deer and cattle and sheep and old folks and hikers and campers and fishermen but was futile since they are “quickly replaced”?  What planet do they think we are from feeding us this sort of contradictions?  These dangerous and destructive animals are not only protected and even purposely introduced into rural areas and communities by force over the objections of those coerced into living with them: when they begin damaging the suburban/urban pilgrims the lies, distortions and romance biology propaganda are ratcheted up accordingly so that we are made to appreciate the harm and danger government imposes on us for its own good.  One is reminded of the old saying, “The beating will continue until morale improves!”

5.   Finally, the lady dog owner is you and I.  How long will she (us) believe the unbelievable?  How long will we tolerate politicians and bureaucrats that harm rural (and now suburban) people for their (the politicians and bureaucrats) own benefit?  How long will we let teachers and TV shows indoctrinate our children about mythical wild animals like Soviet kids in state schools being taught about American society?  Will we ever accept the fact that such animals do not belong in settled landscapes and that the will of those people where such animals exist or are slated to exist should first and foremost be the deciding factor on where and how many, if any, will be tolerated?  Will we ever again realize that problem animals like wolves, coyotes, wild dogs and all cross-breeds of the same must be killed and continually killed in order to keep areas free of them or to maintain tolerable densities where they are to be tolerated?  Can the general public ever be told the truth about the centuries and even millenniums of expensive and time-consuming wolf controls throughout Europe and then in the “New World” in order to establish wolf-free civilizations that prospered at faster rates than the “uncivilized” areas where wolves persisted to this day?  Will she (us) ever come to understand that wild animal management, like freedom, takes constant nurturing and sacrifice if succeeding generations are to ever have the opportunities we had and any chance to improve what we pass on to them?

    Today, wildlife “science” is merely Romance Biology used for other nefarious purposes like the ancient pseudoscience of phrenology that taught you could predict the characteristics and behavior of individuals by their skull measurements.  Just as those ancient phrenologists used their own skull measurements to define “smart” and “trustworthy”; so too are these wild animal pseudoscientists defining whatever government and radicals want them to assert for the “treats” they will give them.  Phrenology was finally discredited when the fact of no relationship between skull and characteristics became undeniable and soon enough all this romance biology propaganda will be exposed for the hoax it is in the service of evil agendas. The only real question is how many must be killed or injured and how much property lost before sanity returns?...

 

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow and can be reached at jimbeers7@comcast.net.

Unemployment & Wolves

by Jim Beers

This morning’s news reports on the TV and the radio are full of a news item broken in The New York Post that an employee of The US Census Bureau has revealed that he was told months before last year’s Presidential Election to do whatever it takes to lower the Unemployment Rate below 8% before that Election. As a result this employee (and others?) fabricated interviews and data that did indeed reduce the National Unemployment Rate below the magical 8% level, above which no President had ever been re-elected in recent times.
    As all the reportage of this scandal fulminates about how unbelievable it is to imagine a “federal employee” or a “federal agency” actually lying like this and then further maintaining a political fiction of this magnitude as some sort of scientific or analytical finding for more than a year now; an explanation is emerging. The explanation given is that direct control of the US Census Bureau (as with the IRS managers that “handled” Tea Party tax exemption requests, State Department Security managers that “handled” Benghazi, and ATF managers that “handled” Fast & Furious gun smuggling to Mexican killers and Drug Lords) was placed totally under White House political hacks and czars when the current Administration took office 5 years ago.
    As was once so aptly observed by that American philosopher and former great catcher for the New York Yankees, Yogi Berra; for me this US Census Bureau scandal was “De ja vu all over again”.
    About a month ago I was interviewed for an article about wolves in a Montana newspaper. Last week, I read several comments about the article. Couched in the remarks about how anyone quoting me should (along with me, ranchers, hunters and other rural residents) be declared mentally unbalanced and committed, were the following two quotes:
    “You are not going to change the minds of the thousands and thousands of tourists and potential new residents each year who come to Montana to enjoy and appreciate living, breathing wildlife, and who fully understand that wolves predate (although the incredulously ridiculous wolf depredation “figures” flagrantly bandied about by anti-wolf advocates border on the inane), and increasingly more of whom are not among the dwindling 5 percent of the nation that still hunt (and, overwhelming, for nothing other than the thrill of doing so).”
    “Between 1996 and 2006, the nation’s hunters declined by 400,000. ... [This decline] coincides with a 13 percent increase in wildlife watching since 1996.”
    The foregoing two quotes tell us two things. First the writer is unapologetically a pro-wolf advocate with neither tolerance nor respect for anyone objecting to being forced to live with wolves. Second, and most important for us here, is the use of numbers, percentages and trends (i.e. implied “science” and analysis of mathematical and statistical data if you will) to “prove” the author’s claims about the inevitable ascendancy of the pro-wolf “ecosystem” and the concomitant decline of the biological travesty known as the Rural American “Ecosystem” (economy, lifestyle, human benefits, liberties, etc.) known to rural Americans from the signing of the US Constitution until recently.
    The dirty little secret about these (wildlife, hunters, “watchers”, etc.) numbers, percentages and trends is this: they have been generated, “analyzed” and reported on by the US Census Bureau since 1982. Year-in-year-out the US Census Bureau interviews Americans about fishing, hunting and wildlife recreation, they collate and analyze the “data” they collect and then they issue and update the “National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated Recreation”. This National Survey is both bible and source of unassailable numbers for every radical, bureaucrat, politician, and other ne’er-do-well involved in:
    - Eliminating hunting, fishing, ranching, trapping, cropland and pastures, timber management, wildfire-fighting, private property, local governments, animal ownership, roads, dams, irrigation, animal damage control, animal management for human benefit, etc., etc.
    - Increasing the range and densities of dangerous, deadly and destructive predators from wolves and cougars to grizzly bears; Wilderness; federal land acquisition and control; wild animal claims that diminish human rights and freedoms; government size, funding and power, etc., etc. 
    I know what you are thinking: “Why are federal Census employees and their Bureau doing this?”; “How do Census bureaucrats know what to ask or how to report their findings?” and “How reliable is what they report?” The answer to these questions is that the US Census is merely a tool for truly sinister agendas.
    First of all, the US Census Bureau like every bureaucracy since antiquity wants first and foremost to grow itself. One of the best ways to do so, next to conjuring up some new urgent and important task that no one else can do, is to actually do someone else’s urgent and important task. In this case the US census Bureau is ever on the lookout to “collect” data for others at a price and preferably ad infinitum and thus the US Fish and Wildlife Service has had a permanent staff of “experts” “running” the National Hunting and Fishing (the purposeful common misnomer) Survey for over 30 years now.
    This staff of US Fish and Wildlife Service “experts” (historically run by an anti-hunter overseeing a staff that is at best indifferent to hunting and fishing et al and at worst radical environmental ideologues) composes the questions, analyzes the “data” and actually issues the reports. The US Census Bureau merely accepts millions of dollars during each ten-year Census Cycle for “collecting” the “data”.
    Once again, I hear you thinking: “Why is USFWS doing this?” This is a good question and the answer is because the State fish and wildlife agency Directors let them. So now you ask, “That doesn’t make sense that state Directors let them”? A little history might help you understand.
    Back in the late 1970’s it was not uncommon to hear federal bureaucrats and political appointees in Washington say, “In just a few years, trapping will be banned in most states and hunting will not be far behind”. Also, “Fishing will disappear as well and then the government will concentrate on preserving wilderness, saving keystone species, setting aside more endangered species areas, conducting ecosystem research, eradicating non-native plants and animals, controlling human activities that harm the environment,” etc. While all this tickled the federal bureaucrats who survive on federal Appropriations from Congress: it scared the dickens out of State fish and wildlife agency bureaucrats who survived primarily on licenses, excise taxes, and permits necessary for wild animal management.
    So in the waning days of the Carter Presidency a vision was conjured up by federal and state “partners” that would benefit each. The federal bureaucrats that collected hundreds of millions in excise taxes annually that by law could only go to state fish and wildlife programs would “partner” with the state Directors and skim off millions of dollars each year to hire a USFWS staff to contract with and work with the US Census Bureau to “count” and help “bring together” the gazillions of wildlife watchers and wildlife lovers that heretofore have been ignored so that they will “support” federal Appropriations and state funding from state Legislatures in the future. Al that was needed, they thought, was to count all those folks and measure their enthusiasm and politicians would be bowled over with thoughts of courting their votes.
    The USFWS staff was hired, the State Directors (with State Governor/Legislature approval??), okayed skimming the funding from their state’s portion of the annual allotment in Washington before it made it to the state; and the USFWS holding it, spending it and quietly reporting on what they were doing with it to the state directors. Just as The Endangered Species Act’s precedents influenced the Kelso Decision of government power over private property for whatever government wanted to do; so too did this sub-rosa scheme of federal and state bureaucrats laundering money set the stage for the theft of millions 15 years later from the same federal excise taxes by federal bureaucrats with a “wink- wink, nod-nod” from state directors to capture and forcibly introduce wolves into areas where they destroy hunting, animal husbandry, rural economies and rural life as Americans had come to know it AFTER Congress had refused to fund the wolf debacle.
    Thus began 20 +/- years of USFWS “National Survey staff “ massaging questions and data to “prove” the viability of The Brave New World just around the corner. It was geared to justify “Chickadee (i.e. Non-Game Funding) Check-offs” on state and federal tax returns but it failed miserably. Then there was a proposed tax on birdseed but the birdwatchers and bird paraphernalia manufacturers were less than enthusiastic to say the least. Then there was the proposed tax on binoculars and on hiking equipment and camping equipment; all of which failed : unless of course you count the ascendancy of the current female outdoor activity retail store magnate as Secretary of the Interior, and “about time” I say (not really).
    Even though all those clever schemes came to naught, the federal and state bureaucrats use the National Survey to continue generating largely bogus nonsense at a cost of millions about how wolf lovers and new birdwatchers will generate the GDP of France annually if only the government spends more money and imprisons any rural residents not willing to move to the city when so ordered. They bamboozle politicians and hunters and fishermen while schmoozing the likes of Defenders of Wildlife and HSUS et al with the discouragement of rural residents and the encouragement of fund-raising enthusiasms of urban lovers of TV Nature/Animal shows. Just as Heinrich Himmler, the Head of the Gestapo, once famously observed, “We want to use science that supports our ideology” so too are these federal and state directors and their supposed future constituencies searching for data that supports their ideology. Thus this fellow condemning me thirty years later with the numbers, trends and percentages from no less an authority than the United States Census Bureau!
    But consider the biggest irony in all this, like Lenin’s statement that “we will buy the rope from the capitalists that we use to hang them with”, the federal and state bureaucrats and their radical environmental/animal rights “partners” have been funding this “National Survey” to eliminate hunting and fishing with the very excise tax funds collected from hunters and fishermen to preserve and manage hunting and fishing for 30 + years! Is this a great country or what?
    Finally, “the De-ja-vu all over again” aspect for me is this. For 30+ years the US Census Bureau has been a complicit, though ignorant, partner with federal, state, and radical organizations whose goal is the destruction of hunting, fishing and rural America, truth be known. This has gone unnoticed and is an illegal (in most or all states federal fund eligibility cannot be reduced by state directors but only by the Legislature and/or the Governor each and every time it occurs) activity. So when we are stunned by current White House covert manipulations of the Census Bureau to lie about the Unemployment Rate before an election in order to re-elect a President - remember, the Census Bureau is only acting in the finest traditions of the NSA (no scratch that one), in the finest traditions of our federal and state wildlife bureaucrats and previous Census Bureau heroes who we all know have only the highest standards and goals.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. jimbeers7@comcast.net

For the current issue with the Census Bureau see Report: Census Bureau faked jobless data to help Obama

Why & How Local Governments Are The Answer To Wolves

Editors note:  This is an excerpt of a longer piece by Mr. Beers.

by Jim Beers

...If you have read this far without giving up, let me share what I believe is our best hope about what to do about wolves in 2013.  Here are 3 suggestions that I recently recommended in another article:

1.   A vast majority of State wildlife agencies, conservation organizations, outdoor writers, sporting goods dealers, farm organizations, ranching groups, veterinarians and other assumed “allies” in opposing these laws and their pernicious effects have been AWOL.  They are like the old Bill Mauldin, Willie and Joe cartoon where Willie and Joe are helmeted, dirty, tired and disheveled with their M-1’s over their shoulders as they drink a beer at a bombed-out café.  Two big clean-uniformed MP’s with holstered pistols, pressed uniforms, bloused boots and jauntily-worn garrison caps march by in unison.  As they pass on, Willie tells Joe, “We calls ‘em ‘Garritroopers’.  They are close enough to the Front that they don’t have to wear ties and far enough to the rear that they have to blouse their pants in their boots”.  Like the Tea Party and others against Obamacare, unless and until those harmed by these laws overcome or change “their” own alliances and support groups, things will only get worse and being “nice” alone “ain’t going to cut it”. 

2.   Legally, Yellowstone Park is practically unique in that it is federal property that was never under the jurisdiction of any state government.  It shares with the District of Columbia the dubious distinction of being completely a federal enclave.  If there is such a great desire on the part of many radical Americans to see/hear wolves closer to home than Canada or Alaska, let the federal government put wolves in Yellowstone AND simply let the 220+ year legal precedent of state authority over resident wildlife remain in effect.  If any wolves step into Montana or Wyoming or Idaho, let that state determine their fate up to and including exterminating them continuously. The federal government has no more honestly legal, historic or moral justification for imposing wolves on any state or community without their consent than they have to impose martial law in rural precincts because Mayor Bloomberg wants them to collect all the guns.  

3.   I have come to believe firmly that enlisting our Local elected officials (Sheriffs, Commissioners, Superintendents, etc.) in re-orienting State politicians and bureaucrats to representing the interests of their state is an absolutely vital first step.  Only when Locally-elected officials stand firm and the state performs its historic role of protecting its communities and their elected officials from harm will a credible political power exist to refute the raw political power being employed by federal bureaucrats and politicians working at the behest of environmental extremists and animal rights’ radicals.  Working with and electing state politicians from the ranks of proven Local politicians is the second step.  Third, electing Congressional Representatives from the ranks of State and Local political ranks of those with a proven stomach for the fight is next.  Finally and step four either: a.) elect US Senators from the ranks of proven Local, State, or US representatives or, b.) best of all repeal the 17^th Amendment and return appointment of US Senators to “chosen by the (sic, State) Legislature thereof” as originally laid out in the Constitution to assure that US Senators fought for their State and did not become the current pompous and self-important worthies, like English Lords once were, they pretend and imagine themselves to be.  Today’s Senators are just as likely to support European Parliamentarians, the UN or wealthy New York donors before they give a thought to this or that small group “back home”. 

HOW LOCAL OFFICIALS CAN SAVE RURAL AMERICA FROM WOLVES 

1. It isn’t easy and it takes determination.

2. Local elected officials are most prone to citizen wants and citizen wrath.  Lobby them and elect good ones and defeat bad ones.

3. Read their responsibilities of office carefully.  Rework them where necessary to enable what I am suggesting.

4. Consider County responsibilities concerning free-roaming dogs.  What does the County do or should do about feral or loose dogs that enter yards where children play; attack or kill the owner’s dogs; that approach persons going to mailboxes; that kill and attack livestock; that kill big game animals; that hang around school bus stops or stalk children afoot; that invade camping spots or threaten hunters or hikers; etc., etc.?  If the dogs are trapped and the owner identified; is not the owner liable for costs of capture and transportation?  Is the owner fined?  Are dogs without proof of “shots” (i.e. rabies, distemper, parvo, etc.), released without shots? Are dogs that have not been de-wormed for tapeworms released to contaminate yards and wild spots with tapeworm eggs dangerous to humans and other animals? Are dogs marked so as to be identified if it repeats the offense?  Are repeat offending dogs euthanized?  Are offending dogs neutered?  Do owners pay for all this BEFORE getting their animal back?  Do not state laws allow one County to operate like this while another runs and funds no-kill rescue shelters and yet another simply says if it is on your place you can shoot it?  Does one County have the right to tell another County how to control nuisance or dangerous animals in THEIR County: of course not. Rather than exposing the father or rancher or dog owner or hunter, etc. to federal wrath for protecting his or his families’ life and property by killing a wolf, let the federal bureaucrats argue the right of Sheriffs and County officials – backed up by state law and authority- to protect County residents’ life and property from wolves just as they (must) do from free-roaming dogs!

5. Now consider wolves that do all these things and more.  Consider wolves that carry all these disease and infections and more.

6. County officials should develop local ordinances and regulations that control Canids (dogs, wolves, etc.).  They should hire (jointly?) personnel and build (share?) holding-facilities.

7. Counties should control/manage Canids (coyotes are almost universally subject to year around 24/7 control under state regulations therefore they are irrelevant to this discussion.  Other Canids (dogs and wolves) should be treated similarly when they endanger lives or property.  Differences between County policies due to varieties of human populations, livestock, magnitude of hunting and recreation or the presence of elderly, children, retirees, etc. are only natural and to be expected in any state.  The key is THE WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE OF THAT COUNTY AND WHAT THEY ELECT OFFICIALS TO DO!

8.  County policies can be changed as situations demand it. Just as Local-elected officials are far more susceptible to local voter’s wrath than State officials and certainly far more than federal officials: so too are Locally-generated policies the most appropriate policies for Local families and communities to live under.

9. Local officials should work with state officials to solidify the authority of Local communities to manage/control Canids in accordance with Local standards.  This solid position enables state and Local officials to stand together against federal demands for numbers and densities, indeed the presence of wolves in the state.  It is political power to fight political power.  State and Local standards suddenly make it irrelevant for state and Local officials to jump through the federal hoops generated in league with the radicals that are changed rapidly to make any opposition to federal mandates simply unreported campaigns lost in a maze of rigged “hearings”, “meetings”, “10(j) appeals”, etc., etc.

10. Counties can share revenue from fines to pay personnel. Counties can rent or sell live traps to hold Canids for County pickup for rural residents experiencing Canid problems or who may experience such problems in the future. 

11. Counties can hold them (Canids) for owners for a few days or a week before euthanizing and ONLY RELEASE THEM TO OWNERS THAT PAY A FINE, PAY FOR THEIR UPKEEP, PAY FOR SHOTS AND DEWORMING after they are marked to be killed if they are repeat offenders in the County. Consider neutering them.

12. Clearly convince state bureaucrats that they work FOR the County and its residents, NOT federal interlopers.  This will be easier said than done in many states.

13. Clarify and strengthen Authority for County officials to authorize lethal Canid control on private property much like Weed Control.  If property owners resist needed controls, like reluctant weed controllers or owners of dangerous dogs roaming freely, send in a County contractor to conduct the control (like County weed controllers are authorized to do) and charge the landowner for the control activity and if he refuses to pay, place a lien on the property and collect it as you would other such public bills.

14. Identify and work with state politicians through your Local elected officials and construct a powerful state lobby against federal wolf impositions.  Never mind the rigged public federal meetings and the lying lobbyists for the urban enviro/animal rights radicals and use raw, unified state power to stop it, just as it was raw federal power that started the whole mess.

15. Recognize and protect the ability of certain Counties to entertain wolves to their hearts’ content.  Those Counties that want wolves should have their right to keep wolves protected: just as those Counties that value children, human safety, livestock, dogs, hunting, camping, fishing, etc. should have their right to intervene forcibly whenever any wild domestic Canid is threatening the “domestic Tranquility” and/or “general Welfare” of their communities. 

Maybe this will one day reform the Washington political mess by replacing the current worthless federal pols with former state and Local officials that once solved the wolf mess by Constitutional means and just might be able to do the same for all the other stuff plaguing us today. We can always HOPE!

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow.

Jim Beers commentary on "Idaho senator: Family business threatened by gray wolves"

Idaho senator: Family business threatened by gray wolves

Posted on September 6, 2013 by Austin Hill

 
Sen. Jeff Siddoway, R-Terreton, says gray wolves recently stampeded 176 of his ewes and lambs, costing him $35,000 in lost livestock.

“When I was young, I would have never envisioned that we’d be in a position like we’re in now,” said Sen. Jeff Siddoway, R-Terreton, in rural Jefferson County. “I’ve seen the evolution throughout the years and we’ve tried to fight back as an industry and as individuals to turn the ebb back, but we certainly have not been able to do that.”

In an interview with IdahoReporter.com, Siddoway described how a business that has been in his family for 127 years spanning five generations is now threatened by gray wolves, which are officially regarded by the U.S. federal government as an endangered species.

“Because of those federal rules and regulations, it just puts the anxiety level way up over the top,” he said. According to him, the Siddoway Sheep Company has lost an average of between $30,000 and $50,000 a year for the past several years rendering his business unprofitable. He said that his company recently sustained an attack of gray wolves that led to the deaths of 176 lambs and ewes when they were stampeded over a cliff.

Officials with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) report the majority of the sheep suffocated. A number of others died while being trampled in trying to escape. According to the USDA, fewer than 10 were bitten and only one was partially consumed. Each sheep was valued at $200, thus making the loss to the Siddoway ranch approximately $35,000.

“When you’ve had an attack by wolves, you don’t know if they’re coming back the next night,” Siddoway commented.

Siddoway’s concerns come at a strategic time. Earlier this year the Idaho Legislature voted to begin a process of investigating whether Idaho should seek to take control of the roughly 63 percent of the state that is currently under federal control. If the state were to obtain control of the lands, it could then more effectively control the populations of wolves and protect farm and ranching animals more effectively, some legislators said in supporting a pair of resolutions aimed at the state taking control of the federal lands in Idaho.

Noting that an interim committee of legislators has been considering how the state might move forward with the idea, Siddoway acknowledged that there are unknowns involved with the prospect of Idaho controlling the federal lands, but he nonetheless supports the idea.

“I’m supportive of that,” he told IdahoReporter.com. “I know there are a lot of unanswered questions there, but I truly believe that if Idaho had control of its lands we would be much more productive and we would ultimately end up making money and saving money in the long run.”

A complete discussion with Siddoway can be heard HERE.

Jim Beers Commentary

At great risk of sounding like an “extremist” or ideologue, I would suggest that this Idaho Senator/Sheep Rancher is on to something.

Wolves have been forcibly introduced into areas of the United States where federal “ownership” includes very high percentages of the land within the state.  Whether it is National Wildlife Refuges and National Forests for “red” wolves in the Carolinas and Virginia; or National Forests and National Parks in the Great Lakes states; or the National Forests, National Parks and Bureau of Land Management landholdings in Rocky Mountain States and the Southwest: federal lands have evolved to be considered inviolate lands somehow outside state authorities.  As the federal estate has grown annually (purchase, condemnation, easements, Critical Habitat Declarations, Historic Classifications, Scenic Classifications, trades, expanded federal water authority, seizures, Trusts, money entanglements with NGO’s like TNC, etc.) in large chunks that are nowhere summarized and made available: state and local government authority and the taxes they collect have dwindled.  Federal attitudes and urban environmental/animal rights’ organizations have simultaneously grown in power and fund-raising as they lobby federal lawmakers and bureaucrats to protect wolves; expand grizzly bear numbers; destroy farming (e.g. Klamath, San Joaquin); destroy ranching; eliminate grazing permits; close off water access; destroy hunting (Rocky Mtn. Elk, Minnesota Moose, etc.); expand Wilderness; Close Roadless Areas; abandon timber and fire management; and generally destroy American rural communities as economies, families, and human safety are steadily jeopardized.

Consider that Senator Jeff Siddoway is living with these federally-inserted and federally-protected wolves.  He is a businessman who has watched his business being ruined by federally-inserted and federally-protected wolves.  He has lost his livelihood and rural America has lost and is losing traditional human activities like sheep herding that provide valuable products by the managed use of sustainable and renewable natural resources.  Rural cultural values diminish as well as taxes to state and local governments.  When he says, “we’ve tried to fight back as an industry and as individuals to turn the ebb back, but we certainly have not been able to do that” he confirms the sad situation found in every state wherein State Governors and State Legislatures and their US Senators and Congressmen, with few exceptions, have not and will not stop this 45-year slide into either rural anarchy or rural tyranny by wealthy urban political factions.  Federal bureaucrats from Forest Supervisors to Wildlife Endangered Species managers have, as a result, come to consider rural Americans as so many ants in their ant farm wherein they can do what they want with them.

While familiarity is said to breed contempt: it is fair to say that desperate times demand desperate actions.  When Idaho legislators propose “Earlier this year the Idaho Legislature voted to begin a process of investigating whether Idaho should seek to take control of the roughly 63 percent of the state that is currently under federal control” they are considering what others might call “extreme” but to those being harmed is a perfectly reasonable alternative to a perfectly unreasonable and desperate situation.

While some State politicians worry about “losing” federal largesse, returning federal lands to state authority would replace disappearing Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes for which state and local governments must beg like dogs doing tricks at the dinner table with stable and increasing state taxes from growing economies. Local taxes would also grow from their original land base utilizing natural resources and human ingenuity instead of growing fire fuel amidst campgrounds infected with tapeworms and hookworms from wolf feces and habituated bears roaming about looking for ANY food.  All but extinct “Revenue-Sharing” from federal lands no longer managed to create “Revenue” would be replaced by steady revenue from productive local business.

Some state bureaucrats worry about being “forced” to be paid by and retired on “only” state funds instead of the mix of state/federal funds and retirement jobs with federal or radical organizations if federal lands and federal influence over state policies is eliminated.  Why their dreams of no more hunting/fishing/trapping in vast federal wastelands where state employees merely truck water out to federal bureaucrats and professors with federal grants, all paid for by Washington might be jeopardized.  In truth most state bureaucracies are ill-suited to helping their state government (their ostensible bosses) retrieve federal land authority these days.

There is one area of getting state lands back under State Authority that I would suggest for the esteemed Senator/Sheep Rancher that is the answer to wolf/bear destruction of livestock and rural economies – LOCAL CONTROL.

If the state regains authority over the current federal lands, local communities and their elected local/state politicians can delegate authority to manage and control Harmful, Injurious, Destructive, Predatory, Free-Roaming, Dangerous, whatever-you-want-to call-them animals.  Then Local elected officials (Always far more responsive and accountable to local or rural voters) can set the Ordinances and Conditions for capturing, killing, controlling, managing, tolerating, etc. such animals.  Those insisting that the wolves or bears or “whatevers” are “theirs” would have to pay fines to obtain release of captured animals as well as costs of maintenance and providing proof of “shots”.  Wolf feces, wolf saliva, wolf mucus, wolf blood, and wolf body fluids transmit all the same diseases and infections that endanger humans, dogs, livestock and wildlife as do dogs. 

Local governments are charged with preserving the peace and tranquility of local communities from wolf predation and bear attacks as much as from free-roaming dogs.  Wolves and bears kill and injure dogs owned and used by rural residents.  While urban environmental/animal rights’ radical organizations and their political patrons go into paroxysms of exasperation when told of cockfights or dogfights, the fact that they simultaneously ignore and dismiss thousands of dogs killed and injured by too-numerous wolves and bears should be no deterrent to Local government Ordinances that protect the dog properly in the Local community from death and injury.

Lastly and most importantly, Local Ordinances enacted by local elected politicians at the behest of local voters are the best protection of local residents from the youngest to the oldest from wolf and bear attacks and injuries. The 16-year old Minnesotan grabbed by the head in a federal campground on a National Forest a month ago could have just as easily been a 5-year old going to the biffy from his tent on a one-way trip.  The man attacked by a sow grizzly on an Upper Rocky Mountain highway recently might just as easily have been an arthritic old guy like me incapable offending off the attack.

Just as US sovereignty and US government of US citizens is never enhanced by ceding jurisdiction and authority to the UN or some other (North American Treaty, NATO,) higher government entity: so too is Local community governance only jeopardized and suffocated by an all-powerful State government and State government as we have seen repeatedly in recent years is only diminished and gelded by an all-powerful federal government.  All such shifts of power, upward and away from the individual and his family, start with high-sounding rhetoric that creates power that succeeding rulers abuse more and more unless they are constantly kept in check.

So Good Luck Senator Siddoway and Idaho.  Getting control back on Idaho’s current federal lands and returning control of their daily lives and surroundings to the local communities of Idaho is probably the first and best step in restoring local community life, local economies and the sheep, cattle, dogs, elk, moose, and peace of mind stolen from you by federal interlopers using federal lands as a sort of “badlands” where, for too long, righteous citizens were told they had no authority.

Jim Beers

8 September 2013

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow.