April 24, 2017

Benevolent Wolves & Stubborn States

*Editor’s Note* – I have taken the liberty to highlight the paragraph that I think is the absolute best. It sums it all up.

By James Beers

The following is a response to two assertions about wolves in Wyoming and my recent article about the recent elk predation by wolves on 19 elk in one March night on an elk wintering ground.  These came to me from Utah by way of California.

1.)       They (i.e. wolves) only kill what they need to eat!!!!

2.)      As I understand the problem…the Feds have been after the state of Wyoming to write a “Wolf management Plan” that they can approve so management can be turned over to state F & G …..but WY refuses to take the word ‘Predator”  out and the general philosophy that:

          “WOLVES NEED KILLIN ANY TIME AND ANYPLACE”…..so the Feds won’t approve their plan,

As to Question #1; wolves by definition must kill to sustain themselves.  All sorts of things enter into what they kill and what they attempt to kill:

–       There is the difficulty of killing the prey.

–       There is the opportunity to kill the prey.

–       There is the energy-expended/calorie-reward ratio of potential prey.

–       There is the desirability of the prey (i.e. veal v. a rotting carcass).

–       There is the state of hunger of the wolf.

–       There is the need to feed young in a den.

–       There is anticipated danger from attacking certain prey.

–       There is the behavioral experience of the wolves.

–       There are the dangers associated with certain locations.

–       There is the anticipation of future food opportunities.

–       There is the physical condition of the wolf or wolves.

Wolves will kill and eat any mammal or bird at any given time.  They routinely kill and eat adult, young and unborn (evidently a preferred meal) of everything from big game and livestock to dogs and, yes, humans.  While they prefer live prey and freshly-killed meat; wolves scavenge freely when food is scarce as in winters or when pushed into unfamiliar territory.

History is full, yes full, of incidents of wolves attacking and killing joggers, hikers, shepherds, children, old ladies, soldiers, loggers (one even while operating a chain saw), Native Americans, Europeans, Russians, Christians, Moslems, etc. from Oregon to Massachusetts and Ireland to Kazakhstan and Kamchatka.  Some wolves had rabies, some were spreading Smallpox from feeding on the dying and many just dragged the carcass into nearby vegetation and ate their fill and went on.  Anyone with half an interest in history realizes that most such attacks were never reported or documented for centuries while those living with the wolves had no doubts about what was happening and accordingly invested enormous time, money and scarce resources to control and eliminate wolves from the time of Plato and before, to North American Colonists and Western Expansion settlers and ranchers.

When wolves, just like a pack of dogs running loose from some town, encounter a flock of sheep; or some deer in deep snow; or some kids at a rural bus stop; or elk near some fence or cliff; or some jogger on a lonely road running away from them; or some unfamiliar dogs; or some or a coyote; or some old lady walking to her mailbox; they quickly run down the items listed above and make a decision.  Whether we call it “fun” or “surplus killing” or a “behavioral response” is immaterial.  When the decision to chase or attack or simply to boldly investigate is made; the outcome, especially if it is a pack of wolves or a pack of dogs, is too often harmful to human life, human interests, human society and what the Founding Fathers called “domestic Tranquility” – A Primary and Stated Reason Why The States Drafted, Signed and Agreed To “this Constitution for the United States of America” that established a federal government.

Wolves and free-ranging dogs often attack flocks of sheep or llamas or a group of calves or a herd of wintering deer or a moose cow close to giving birth just like sharks attack a school of mullet or swordfish attack a school of young tuna or wintering striped bass attack a school of menhaden; that is to say they slash, bite, and stab as quickly as they can and then eat what is unable to escape or that has been made into pieces.  They do this until they are full or until they find nothing left to eat.  Wolves and dogs will do the same and when they are “done” chasing, biting, and killing they may eat some of the choicest parts like eating out a cow’s rear-end while she lives and pulling out and devouring the fetus.

Every one of you urban wolf-lovers knows this and fears it about dogs roaming free in your neighborhood as you quickly call 911 or “the Animal Warden” and demand big fines and even jail for persons that let their dog or dogs loose, or that fail to get them vaccinated or wormed or keep them leashed – YET you whinny about how wolves (wild, unvaccinated, undomesticated, big, hungry, etc.) are NOT like that!  It is so stupid it defies a sensible answer.

The most important part about this Romance Biology theorem that “They only kill what they need to eat!!!!” is that it is then inserted into Environmental Voodoo for the media as in, “A wolf only needs 1493 calories a day to sustain itself and an average cow moose weighs 857 lbs. that provides 60, 472 calories: therefore it only takes 8 moose to sustain 2,376 wolves so don’t believe this stuff about wolves having to kill livestock or elk or deer or dogs or certainly not humans when only a few big game animals lost are of no concern except to a few greedy and selfish hunters.” Just like it takes a whole lot more mullet and menhaden to sustain those sharks and swordfish and striped bass than what they eat and just like all those urban mothers fear dogs harming or attacking children; the ideas that wolves ”never” attack people, and that wolves have some magical brain brake that tells them to stop when they have killed, “what they need to eat!!!!”, and that wolves should stick around a carcass (a dangerous thing to do) until it is “all cleaned up” despite preferring fresh meat: these things are the “issue” of the marriage of Romance Biology and Environmental Voodoo ground into documentary fecal matter for the general public.

As to Question # 2; I must immediately dismiss the pejorative statement “WOLVES NEED KILLIN ANY TIME AND ANYPLACE”.  It is silly to request a serious answer when you treat those that do not agree with you like Presidential candidate Kerry applying for an Ohio Hunting License saying, “is this where I can get me one of those huntin’ licenses?”  If you are going to write “killing” I suggest you put a “g” on the end and, even though they are fictitious assertions, write ANY TIME and ANYPLACE as either one word or two words but not in two different preferences separated only by “and”.  More than a few of us advocates for local authority over what is or is not in OUR environment do not drag our knuckles as we walk nor do we have more tattoos than teeth; those are simply fund-raising ploys spread by those environmental/animal rights organizations behind much of this issue.
As to everything else in your question before the final 7 words, I agree with your statement.  It is those last 7 words, “so the Feds won’t approve their plan”, that are the crux of the problem not only in Wyoming but in virtually every Local Community in the Lower 48 States that has been forced and coerced into hosting and living with wolves and the uncounted harms they cause to those forced to live with them.  Believe it or not, many of us feel strongly that the federal (government, politicians, bureaucrats, agencies, Law – take your pick) has NO authority, right or business imposing wolves (or grizzlies or mountain lions for that matter) on ANY Community that is not willing to accept or tolerate them!

So, “so the Feds won’t approve their plan”, by what authority do “the Feds” “approve” any State’s wolf “plan”?  Wolves cause great and irresolvable harm to residents and those residents elect state and local officials with the demand that they call wolves “predators” and that they should control the numbers, densities and distribution of wolves.  They tell local officials that they want wolves kept out of their County and that any entering their County should be dispatched by ballistic vaccination or traps or snares or however.  Do citizens have this right?

Further, if the states continue taking their homework (i.e. Plans) to federal overseers for “approval” they will NEVER regain the authority and jurisdiction stolen from them by the un-Constitutional Endangered Species Act and the lawless and tyrannical bureaucratic behavior it has spawned to the great detriment of rural America.  The ESA needs either a severe rewrite or better yet complete repeal.  The ESA is a Law; that is a lesser matter than a Constitutional Amendment.  When the 18th Amendment (the Volstead Act, i.e. Prohibition) was similarly passed and then ratified as a Constitutional Amendment in a comparable orgy of do-goodism, it took only 14 years for Americans to see the corruption and death it manufactured such that they Repealed that Amendment.  The ESA is similarly creating corruption and destruction far beyond this narrow portion of its reach and should be Repealed and that sound goal is only shoved further down the road when a State like Wyoming (most others have behaved like ladies of the evening for the federal favors “getting along” brings) humbly begs federal bureaucrats to “approve” what they do or don’t do with a Resident Predator that does not belong in settled landscapes and is no more in short supply (i.e. “endangered”, “threatened” or “of special concern”) in the United States (Alaska, Montana and Minnesota were doing just fine before the ESA) than are sparrows or starlings.

Consider the irony of someone telling you that they will only let you manage (?) your (?) wolves if they “approve” what you will or will not do!  In other words your employees and your operational dollars will do what the feds tell you to do or not do or they will simply “step back in”.  Then we can all warble about how “getting along” is the Only way to go.  Otherwise you are a “what”?  There must be an “ist” or “phobe” word for anyone adhering to a Constitutional view of wolves and State’s Rights.

There is so much else swirling about these wolves than all the simplistic chatter about “only killing what they eat” and how ignorant some states are about their subservience to federal masters.  This attempted answer actually reveals the egregious violations of the Preamble to the Constitution birthed by the ESA and exposes the current idea that the one sentence comprising the 10th Amendment is being ignored as the final word in the relationship between the States and the federal government!

Now that we have come to this point; the question I have is “where do we all go from here?”

Jim Beers

28 March 2016

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. 

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

The Cover-Up of Wolves and What They DO!

By James Beers

Please note the picture below.  It is a late-March of 2016 picture from Wyoming and you will probably never see it again nor even hear of it.  You see:

–       Wolves don’t do such things.

–       Elk, like Minnesota moose, are disappearing due to global warming and ticks and definitely not wolf predation.

–       It is a Myth (like the time Kermit the Frog yelled, “it’s a Myth, Myth” and Miss Piggy comes on stage saying, “Yeth, Yeth”) that wolves eradicate game animals and hunting.

–       Protecting livestock like sheep and cattle from wolves means simply exerting a Little Effort like 24/27 shepherds and guard dogs and electric fences and fladry and noise makers and taste aversion and tank traps (I just made that one up) –none of which work more than temporarily.

–       Wolves are good for “the ecosystem” (which is whatever you want to make of “it” from the ecosystem in your yard to the North American Continent).

–       Wolves are wonderful to hear howling, it is a sign of “wilderness”.  (Please note, everywhere wolves now occur in the Lower 48 States, coyotes were or are present.  Coyotes once howled and yipped in the evenings but in the presence of wolves they quickly learn to remain silent because when wolves hear them they zero in on them and kill them at every opportunity.)

All of the above are lies believed by an urban general public that: A.) Does not live with nor is not affected by wolves, B.) Feels guilty about European settlement of North America or the presence of plants and animals not present here before 1492 when Columbus set foot on a Caribbean beach, or C.) Desires to eliminate all human use or ownership of animals from hunting and animal husbandry to animal control and the right to bear arms.

Organizations that raise millions from such folks will do whatever they must to keep reporting of and especially such pictures of wolf carnage from being published or circulated.

Federal politicians that passed the unjust laws that began the wolf introductions and protections do not want such publicity to unmask the perfidy of what they have done.

Current federal politicians that ignore this issue and refuse to give any more than lip service (tsk, tsk, etc.) to solving what their predecessors wrought do not want such publicity about their ongoing cowardly betrayal of rural Americans.

Federal bureaucrats utilizing the wolf carnage and the un-Constitutional laws that give them powers superior to states and the Constitution simply lie, shrug and blame others like a professional boxer jokingly “sparring” with amateurs.  The increased power and salary and retirement this gives them; makes them ruthless in suppressing photos and reporting about such carnage.

State bureaucrats, likewise bob and weave with a “me-too” alibi that mimics their federal “partners” malarkey about “wolves never”, “wolves always”, “global warming”, phony “counts”, etc.  Like the drivers of the “getaway car” they are complicit up to their ears in the whole scam for their own benefit camouflaged as “ecosystem beneficence”.

The media (TV News, Newspapers, Documentaries, Magazines, etc.) have all bought in to the kindly wolf myths for reasons as diverse as; “it sells”, “we get money to do so”, “our staffs are all urban ideologues”, “our political ideology/Party supports this for votes”, to “our teachers filled our heads with so much mush in school that we are incapable of seeing the truth of the matter.”

A few facts you won’t hear elsewhere:

–       Wolves frequently kill wintering deer or elk in large numbers without eating them just like a pack of domestic dogs that get loose will kill chickens or sheep they encounter for what we mistakenly call “fun” but is in reality the same thing Indians did when they drove buffalo over cliffs in numbers far exceeding what they could or ever eat or otherwise utilize.

–       A couple of years ago on the Wyoming/Idaho border a wolf pack killed a hundred and some sheep for “fun” one dark night.

–       Wolves have destroyed Minnesota moose hunting by depleting Minnesota moose.

–       Wolves have all but destroyed the once 20,000 elk in the Northern Yellowstone elk herd just as they are doing to moose, elk and deer in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, and will do in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado and Texas if the federal government forces them into those states.

–       It is not at all uncommon that wolves hamstring (tear the tendons in the rear legs thus causing the animal to collapse helplessly) pregnant elk, moose, cows, ewes, does, etc. with developed fetuses and then immediately while the adult female lives to begin tearing out the anal area to make a big enough hole to pull out and devour the fetus and then leave the cow, doe, ewe, etc. to die a horrible, lingering and painful (for all you animal rights/wolf advocates) death.

–       As big game goes in the West, so goes ranching and rural communities.

–       Wolves are spreading down through Illinois and Indiana and Missouri to infest Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee from which they are expected to “hook up with” (to coin a modern expression) government wolves and coyotes and dogs (making puppies along the way) in the Carolinas and in Oklahoma and Texas rolling Eastward from New Mexico.

The same things are happening in Europe.  As Europeans do their minuets with Islamic terrorists, wolves are all over now for the first time in a few hundred years and they are increasing in numbers and densities.  Formerly efficient use of suburban/rural forage by sheep and shepherds has been and is being violently and terminally (?) ended as wolf predation, mostly unarmed shepherds, and insane wolf protections combines to kill thousands of sheep annually and put many shepherds “on the dole”.  Rural life is, as in US “wolf country”, less profitable and more dangerous for unarmed citizens, children and the elderly.  When the Lufthansa pilot flew his airplane into the Alps, one of the policemen guarding the site for several days opined, “Our biggest worry was ALL THE WOLVES scavenging the site and consuming human body parts!”  Ask yourself; where else have you heard or will you hear any of this?

Jim Beers

25 March 2016

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. 

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

18DeadElk

Wolf “Sensitivity” on the Great Plains

By James Beers

The above [please follow this link] was sent to me by a friend in Florida.  While he is embroiled in “dealing” with the USFWS and the State of Florida regarding Florida “Panthers”: he recognized immediately 1.what is going on in Iowa; 2. its similarities to how Florida “Panthers” have bollixed up Florida and its wildlife; and 3.the fact that others from MT, WA & CA to AZ & North Carolina should be aware of it.

For those that have not been following this environmental/government soap opera about clearing rural America under the pretext of “concern” about wolves and the “science” about their absolute “necessity” in every “ecosystem” (actually they are simply a tool to destroy rural America and extend the power of government and evil – the right word – Non-Government Organizations over all Americans and their governance by elites); the following news release should bring you up to date so that you will understand future episodes of the soap opera.

The following simple news release has all the ingredients to start this new “thread” in our saga:

–       “We understand this is a sensitive topic” says the State Wildlife Agency Director about two wolves that were shot by Iowa hunters who thought they were shooting coyotes.  “Sensitive?”  Why? Because we don’t want to have out-of-state environmental/animal rights protesters invading the state in between disrupting Presidential Election Events and disrupting life and traffic in some city to obtain preferences for a racial group or downtrodden women?  Because they don’t want to anger federal bureaucrats in the USFWS that they depend on for largesse like grants and for tolerance in covering up misuse of Excise Taxes in the State?  Because they are getting money behind the scenes from national/international NGO’s to push banning lead ammunition like California has done and Minnesota is doing?  Inquiring minds want to know!

–       “Our decision not to charge will be unpopular with some,” says the Director.  Let that sink in.  We are not mentioning justice and unjust laws here.  The federal government is forcing wolves everywhere (MT, ID, WY, WA. OR, CA, AZ, NM, SC, NC, MN, MI, WI) and the states roll over on their back and urinate into the air and then as the wolves spread outward to other states more state governments are afraid to do what their residents want, i.e. keep wolves (and protesters) out and control 24/7 those that get in.  They treat the wolves like returning Passenger Pigeons and Great Auks.  Topping this off, the wolves look so much like coyotes that it takes an AUTOPSY for the government to determine if the critter is A. a wolf, B. a coyote, C. a dog or D. a hybrid of A, B and/or C in some mysterious percentage and for some mysterious reason.  The mysterious reason is that coyotes can be shot as can free-ranging dogs on private property that threaten persons or property but wolves (the most dangerous and destructive of A, B, C and D) for political reasons are to be “protected”!  Let that sink in and now read once again the Director’s statement that begins “Our decision not to charge”.  Aside from the fact that he must have had a frog in his pocket to use the word “our”, ask yourself – is this a matter of political largesse to actually forgive an Iowa resident for shooting an animal that must be autopsied first before anyone knows what it is?  Do these politicians and bureaucrats that pass these laws and allow these unjust impositions on rural Americans really think they “could” prosecute these hunters if they desired or that if they don’t “we” (the peasants, proletariat, serfs, unwashed, ignorant –choose one) should be grateful that despite it being “unpopular with some” they have made a “decision” not to charge us once they had an autopsy in hand?  “Oh, thank you M’Lord, thank you; here let me polish your shoes with my tears of gratitude.”  Am I the only one that sees the injustice and un-Constitutional insanity going on here??

–       “DNR officials said the wolves likely came from Michigan, Minnesota, or Wisconsin”, well, if an “official” says so it must be true.  As though whether it came from Minnesota or from Wyoming through South Dakota or Nebraska or from Saskatchewan through North Dakota is relevant.  The origin (the Yukon?, Alberta?, Saskatchewan?, British Columbia? NWT?, ??) of the wolves forced into the Upper Rocky Mountain States has never been revealed; yet only the sacred “Mexican” wolf “must” live in Arizona and New Mexico and only the sacred “Red” wolf “must” live in the Carolinas.  This Discovery Channel, Romance Biology is merely diversions meant to confound us as the illusionists continue performing their tricks.

–       “Going forward, hunters need to know the difference between the species” says the Director.  This is the same guy that needed an AUTOPSY to “decide” whether to charge (fine, imprison, rescind voting rights [that one seems less important given the Party stranglehold on who can run for election anymore] and loss of gun rights [another “right” government is trying hard to make irrelevant]) an Iowan a. abiding by Iowa law, b. ensnared by unjust federal and state laws, c. a victim of clever laws meant to entrap rural folks like game poachers on medieval estates for a host of hidden reasons from gun/weapon control to erosion of property rights and our right to protect our families.

–       “The DNR is asking anyone who encounters a wolf to contact their local conservation officer or wildlife biologist” advises our erstwhile public official.  Right.  The next “wolf” or whatever found shot or poisoned or run over under “suspicious circumstances” that kicks off an “investigation” of mammoth proportions to rival the Bundy affair in Nevada or the “occupation” of the Malheur Refuge Headquarters will immediately cough up, “this guy Beers called in last week that he thought he saw a wolf over on County 12 near Wolfville.  You know he sounded like an educated guy but he might have been a hayseed gun-nut terrorist trying to sound smart.  Run a background on him and you Sherlock and you Holmes, see what you can dig up and go over there and be careful.”

–       “Wolves are 5-6 feet long from nose to tail, 27-33 inches at the shoulder and weigh 50-100 pounds. Coyotes are 3 1/2 to 4 1/2 feet long, 20-22 inches at the shoulder and weigh 35-40 pounds”except, he forgot to add,  A. when they are young, B. when they have coyote or dog blood (DNA) in them, C. when they are simply “larger or smaller”, D. when they are 225 yards away and you are looking through a 6X scope on an overcast day, E. when you are unwilling to risk your freedom and rights for the imagined pleasure of urban environmental/animal rights donors, NGO’s, politicians lusting for re-election, bureaucrats lusting for money and power and all living and working far, far away.  Besides, do you think if you shot a 49 lb. wolf (they go up to 150+ lbs) in your yard killing your dog that your lawyer could defend you by quoting this guy?  The largest coyote I ever saw was one snowy morning as I drove into the Hartford, Connecticut airport, it had just been hit and was dead alongside the road and went at least 60+ lbs: it must have been a wolf according to these “experts”.

–       “They were killed in Osceola County and Van Buren County.”  When I first read this I assumed that these two Counties were in the NE corner of Iowa where Mississippi River bluffs and woodlands form a contiguous pathway for wolves to move South into Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi (where they might eventually find true love with “Red” Wolves one day and begin a new series in this saga, we could call it “The Return of the Southern Red Timber Wolf to the Lower Mississippi River Valley”).  We could end that episode with wolf mommies and daddies going up the Missouri and Red Rivers with their :puppies” to the West in search of their “Mexican” and “Gray” Wolf cousins that they heard still lived “wild and free”.  I was wrong however about where these wolves were shot.

Buchanan County is indeed in NE Iowa, but it is about 45 miles W of the Mississippi River and about 60 S of the Minnesota border.  (Note here – Minnesota wolves are responsible for the elimination of all Minnesota moose hunting because the remaining moose are too few to offer hunting opportunities anymore. Additionally, Iowa has been a very popular hunting destination for deer hunters in search of BIG bucks for decades now.  When the sacred wolves take up residence, what will they eat?  The NGO’s and bureaucrat/officials/scientists assure us it isn’t cattle or calves or sheep or moose or deer (they will all thrive when wolves arrive according to the “experts”.)  Could it be hogs or dogs that will sustain them?  What else is there?  Can they live on disappearing pheasants or run down increasingly rare rabbits that take more calories to catch than they offer?  Think about that the next time the state government warbles about how lucky you are to get wolves.

Osceola County is clear across Iowa in the NW corner of the state right on the Minnesota border about 45 miles E of South Dakota.  I really feel sorry for that wolf, yet how lucky he was.  That corner of Iowa and Minnesota is an ocean of plowed ground as I write this in March.  The last time I was there at this time of year I saw a town I was driving to 15 miles away with nary an hedgerow, farmhouse or blade of grass for that matter to break my line of sight.  (“Where have all those pheasants gone to??”)  Just North of there in Minnesota a few winters ago a Minnesota farmer killed a mountain lion in a culvert by his house where his kids played and his horses were stabled.  He was fined and almost imprisoned and the media treated him like the Dentist that shot poor “Cecil” in Zimbabwe (where since Zimbabwe big game revenue has dried up, lions are now killed by natives at a high rate and the esteemed Director of USFWS is warbling his appeal for US Airlines to refuse to carry hunting trophies).  PS This is the same guy that when he was hired politically under President Clinton assured everyone he was a “hunter” and “supported hunting”.  What in God’s green earth would or could these large predators find to eat there in NE Iowa or SE Minnesota or Iowa at all, kibble at feeding stations?  Don’t ask, you won’t like the answer.

So wolves are now “invading” Iowa like Moslems invaded Europe in the Medieval times and Middle Ages; a two-pronged attack, first up through Spain and later through the Balkans and into Austria.  The question is will Iowans hunker down and take whatever comes: or will Iowans be like Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours (France) in 732 and John Sobieski in 1683 at the Battle of Vienna (Austria) defeating the invaders and send them packing back where they came from just like Don Juan did to the Moslem Fleet in 1571 at the Battle of Lepanto.  Future episodes will investigate this question.

“Wolves endangered” in Iowa?  The one thing Charles Martel, John Sobieski and Don Juan had in common is they had kings, laws and people supporting them and not these far away bums encouraging the very demise of the civilization that pays them and “elects” them.  Can any American communities survive under these circumstances?  Only time will tell.

Jim Beers

5 March 2016

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. 

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

Conservation Biology II

By James Beers

More on the Term “Conservation Biology”

Two days ago I wrote an article titled “The Etymology of ‘Conservation Biology’”.  The transmittal e-mail was titled “Word Games”.  In that article I attempted to explain the origin of the term “Conservation Biology” 100 years ago as a description of the American effort to describe practical fish and wildlife research and management to be used to guide federal and state government programs to conserve and manage fish and wildlife resources of the United States.

I explained in the article that the reason the term was important was that the inevitable advent of laws and property set-asides were to be justified and explained as the result of “scientific” facts obtained from “biological research” conducted in wild places on wild animals.

Further, I described how the modifier, “Conservation” was meant to describe a particular branch or mode of biology that attended specifically to the management of fish and wildlife resources amidst the Constitutional government, capitalism, and life styles of the USA.

Finally, I described how, until the emergence of the environmental/animal rights takeover of federal and state wildlife agencies in the 1960’s, “Conservation” was synonymous with the proactive management of a diversity of fish and wildlife to (among other things):

–       Maintain sustainable levels of sport fish and wild game to generate license revenue to fund wildlife programs of all sorts,

–       Cooperate with businesses, Local communities and Local governments to provide compatible fish and wildlife populations,

–       Minimize wildlife depredations, damage and threats to citizens,

–       Manage ALL fish and wildlife and their habitats on government lands for societal benefit,

–       Influence, as requested, the presence of fish and wildlife on private lands and the continued availability of fish and wildlife throughout the state and the nation.

The foregoing was accomplished for about 60 years (1900-1960’s) to the great satisfaction and benefit of the citizenry. Yet, when the environmental/animal rights interest groups emerged to condemn “Conservation Biology”, a term they found synonymous with hunting (i.e. “killing animals”), trapping (i.e. “wearing skins), logging (cutting trees) and grazing (“raping the land”); the term fell into disrepute and was dropped from the lexicons of US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management and, finally, the State wildlife agencies whose new employees and political bosses were establishing a “New Age” of “ecosystem/native/benign/oligarchy autocracy” of managing people and human rights for the supposed purposes of the animals themselves.

A reader has recently informed me of their umbrage at me being so cavalier as to say that “Conservation” was a term used to describe wildlife management only for people, or that it was a term used 100 years ago to describe wildlife programs that differ from today.  The reader is mistaken.

1.) Anyone with the interest should review the writings and speeches of Teddy Roosevelt, Aldo Leopold, Gifford Pinchot and even the semi-poetry of John Muir and John Burroughs.  The word “Conservation” is as common as desert flowers after a rain.  Indeed, on the flyleaf of my copy of Aldo Leopold’s nature classic, A Sand County Almanac appears the following, “He died in 1948 while fighting a brush fire on his neighbor’s farm. His death cut short an assignment as an adviser on conservation to the United Nation.

2.) It is not far-fetched to say that the term fell into disrepute with the advent of the current wildlife philosophy ruling government and our Universities that the killing of wildlife is wrong, the use of wildlife is wrong, the management of wildlife is wrong, and human conflicts with wildlife from death and injuries to loss of property and rights should always be decided in favor of wildlife and the human element in the equation be eliminated as a last resort.

3.) From the 1930’s to the 1960’s most state wildlife agencies adopted names as “Conservation Departments” or “Fish and Game Departments”.  At the same time many state wildlife agencies changed the title of their “Game Wardens” to Conservation Officers.  Both names denoted organizational and personal titling to suggest the origin of the applied science of “Conservation Biology”.  This was the period so despised by environmental/animal rights ideologues: it was the period of big game management and restoration or[of] deer and elk and moose.  It was the period of introduction of chukars and the proliferation of introduced game species like brown trout and pheasants.  It was the period of stocking striped bass in the West, and rainbow trout below dams, and muskies in Southern waters, and salmon in the Great Lakes – all for sport and human enjoyment and enrichment.  In short it was everything the new philosophy detested and the new employees hated.  As they gained control from the 1960’s on, is it any wonder that the term “Conservation Biology” and the word “Conservation” was rejected and ignored?

4.) Finally, I consulted my complete 1960’s-era collection of state (and Provincial) Wildlife Uniform Shoulder Patches.  In 1960, 21 states still either called themselves “Conservation” Departments or had the word “Conservation” in their title, or called their Game Wardens – “Conservation” Officers.

5.) Today, in our politically correct world of Orwellian terms where “war is peace” the wildlife rulers are no different than their education peers or their global warming “scientists.”  Words matter and we need look no farther than that state leader of idiocy, California.  The state that bans any management of cougars and ignores human dangers and property destruction from coyotes and wolves, has removed any vestige of the old “Conservation Biology”/managing wild animals for state residents crowd.  As a final touch, I offer the following news item:

“Call them words of war between hunters and wildlife activists: Starting Jan. 1, California’s Department of Fish and Game will become Department of Fish and Wildlife.

The change, hunters say, reflects a move away from traditional hunting and fishing values and is part of a bigger push by the Humane Society of the United States to eliminate hunting across the nation.

Environmentalists and animal activists say it reflects a move to manage all wildlife in the state, not just “game” for hunters.

California’s change will leave just 12 states using “game” in the name of the agency overseeing wildlife, according to the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. (Those are: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia and Wyoming.)

Eighteen states use “wildlife,” while the others use “natural resources” or “conservation.”

Moreover, data from the association and the National Conference of State Legislatures indicates the shift away from “game” is accelerating, the Associated Press reported.”

What’s in a word?  The question arose because those affected by growing federal abuse using wildlife “needs” as an excuse have seen “Conservation Biology” cropping up in news items, Federal Register Notices, government-generated “reports and papers”, and even in court transcripts.

To repeat what I said in the earlier article:

–       There is an election coming up and the feds want to set minds at ease and quell any negative news about what they are doing.  It is all “Conservation Biology” don’t you know?

–       They are keeping the great unwashed (that’s you Mr.  & Mrs. Rural America) off balance. The more they baffle you and the courts, the more you think them good guys just like grandpa’s old Conservation Department and all those legendary Conservation Officers he used to talk about.  The more you stay docile and forego challenging them; the deeper their hold on you.

–       Remember it is their game and their rules and your money paying for it.

We have been like Austrians during the March 1938 Anschluss; welcoming the Nazis in to take over their country without firing a shot.  The Austrians threw flowers in the street and cheered as the Nazis absorbed them into their foul nest; just like the environmentalists and animal rights bureaucrats are taking over rural America, one community at a time and often in league with compliant state governments.  Whether we think of it as a “Fatherland” or as a bygone world where “conservation” was a good word; it is only a diversion and lie by those that represent nothing good for us or our descendants.

Jim Beers

24 February

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. 

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

The Etymology of “Conservation Biology”

By James Beers: (Part II)

etymology, (et-e-mol-oji), n. The study of historical linguistic change, especially as applied to individual words.

conservation, (kon-ser-va-shun), n.  1. The act of conserving; preservation.  2. Official supervision of rivers, forests, wildlife, etc.  3.  A District under such supervision.

biology, (bi-ol-oji), n.  The science of life or living matter in all its forms and phenomena; often especially with reference to origin, growth, reproduction, structure, etc.

I have been asked to explain the origin (i.e. etymology) of the term “conservation biology”.

The term “conservation biology” has a very interesting history in the USA that is fraught with hidden agendas, stolen credibility and its use as a means to grow government and increase bureaucratic power while disguised as both a harmless and beneficial means of “saving” renewable natural resources.

The mid to late 1800’s and early 1900’s were a chaotic period in American history: the West was settled, farms sprung up everywhere, Americans killed wildlife for personal food and to sell to others for food; buffalo herds dwindled and then were extirpated and large predators were eliminated or greatly reduced to make homesteads, farming and animal husbandry possible; and some wild animals like Passenger Pigeons and North American Parrots were recognized as having become extinct.  Large swaths of forestlands were cut to build homes, railroads, mines and infrastructure like bridges and tunnels.  Grazing on “open range” was intense as a result of government reluctance to transfer public lands in the West to private ownership after The Civil War thus leading to the historic abuse of “the commons” as seen in Europe for centuries.

Not all of the reckless abuse of renewable (forests, forage and fish/wildlife) natural resources was attributable to European settlers.  Native people were generally nomadic and abandoned sites as they became polluted, relatively devoid of food for a host of reasons, or increasingly dangerous due to human factors and/or the presence/behavior of dangerous wild animals. Native people used fires to drive herd animals off cliffs and for other purposes: these fires had both positive and negative effects on wildlife, trees and habitats including human dwellings.  Native people carried on lively trading for centuries in animal parts such as the bills of the now-extinct Ivory-billed Woodpecker whose value outside its range up to and into present-day Canada was immense in terms of the economy of the day.

Mention of the impacts of natural phenomenon on North American species and the landscape are seldom noted when describing the American concern about the impact of European settlement on “rivers, forests and wildlife”.  For centuries the impacts of glaciers and low temperatures (Ice Ages) made many species extinct from dinosaurs to mastodons that are still being dug up and in some instances eaten and exploited for ivory in Northern parts of our globe.  Earthquakes such as the New Madrid Earthquakes (1811-1812) that rang church bells 1,000 miles away, rechanneled the Mississippi River and even caused it to run backwards for a period of time, caused great damage and desolation to “rivers, forests and wildlife”.  Add into this mix periodic overgrazing by wild animal herds; predator population highs and lows due to everything from food availability, disease, weather, human purges and competition with other predators; plus learned behaviors of predators as some like saber-toothed tigers became extinct and wolves, cougars and grizzly bears came and went with the factors mentioned earlier in this paragraph and you have a picture of a dramatically changing North American environment which was affected by European (“developed?”, “advanced?”, “technological?”, “industrial?” take your pick) rearrangement of the landscape, governance and human activities.

The early 1900’s saw a great awakening of the national conscience about what was seen to be the extirpation of renewable national resources everywhere you looked.  The speeches, writing and actions of the like of Teddy Roosevelt, his forester pal Gifford Pinchot, wildlife aesthete Aldo Leopold and semi-philosophers such as John Muir and John Burroughs all called for dramatic action by government to “save” Yosemite/Yellowstone/ Forests/Buffalo/Birds/”Wilderness”/etc.

America was growing rich and powerful at the time as railroads, steel mills, jobs and an immigrant work force combined to create a national vision that we could do whatever we set our mind to.  The 19th century idea of Manifest Destiny (the idea in the middle 19th century, that it “was the destiny of the U.S. to expand its territory over the whole of North America and to extend and enhance its political, social, and economic influences”) came to be viewed in an international sense in that we (the US) were becoming so much more powerful and rich than any other nation in the world that we would “lead the way” into the future.

Federal lands being withheld in the late 19th and early 20th century by an increasingly powerful federal government (thanks to the perception that the Civil War not only destroyed “States ‘Rights’” but also indicated things would be better if the federal government remained in charge of things rather than giving State governments too much jurisdiction) remained in federal “ownership’.  Some of these lands were classified as Refuges for Wildlife and others were added to the Yellowstone concept of being “National Parks”.  Other such lands were declared “National Forests” and still others (an enormous acreage) were classified as grazing or “public lands” to be “managed” for public benefit.  Suffice to say, thus were born the US Fish and Wildlife Service (formerly the Bureau of Biological Survey), the National Park Service, the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.

Gradually, each bureaucracy began writing regulations and “working” with a compliant (even then) Congress to buy private lands and expand current landholdings and declare new units everywhere.  As in the last 50 years of the passage of the ESA, Antiquities Act, Wilderness Act, et al; Congressmen and Senators quickly saw the benefits to their re-election of a refuge/park/forest in every District and State (like the “chicken in every pot”).  Bureaucracies called for “research” activities, “education” activities, operations funding, maintenance funding, etc. and each year – “more laws”, “more” employees and “more” funding.

Let us return to that late 19th and early 20 century period.  As citizens in polluted cities and rural families developed an agreement with government that indeed human activities were causing too much devastation to “rivers, forests and wildlife”, an understandable accord arose between the governed and the governed that government action was needed.  Now let us concentrate on the “wildlife” aspects (in the broadest sense of all wild animals and their supportive landscapes and plant habitats).

The Bureau of Biological Survey (the precursor of the US Fish and Wildlife) was the lead government wildlife agency as the US Forest Service was the lead “forest” agency and today’s BLM is generally recognized as the lead (off Forest Service and Wildlife Refuge lands) agency for grazing and mineral development.

The Bureau of Biological Survey offered three nostrums to reverse the concerns of the American public about the future of wildlife in America:

  1. A robust federal Animal Damage Control Program nationwide to both reduce and eliminate the loss of valued wildlife like deer, elk and moose; and to reduce and eliminate damage by wildlife (mostly predators) to private property like livestock, dogs agricultural activities and to reduce and eliminate any dangers to human health and safety.
  2. A Wildlife “Research” Program to determine the Life Histories of “wildlife” and thus to make “scientific” recommendations regarding their survival needs and ways to minimize any threats to their continued survival or methods to control them.
  3. A “System” of Wildlife Refuges where practical wildlife management processes resulting from “scientific research” would be applied both to test their effectiveness and to provide exemplary models for management of State and Private lands where wildlife considerations might show benefits to the Nation.

Note that all three were to be based on “science” guiding “research”.  This was the age of American inventions and “applied science”.  Henry Ford, Cyrus McCormick, Thomas Edison, Tesla, Orville and Wilbur Wright, and Albert Einstein made “science” almost biblical as the last word in whatever field you were interested in.  In the field of wildlife, the “science” of Biologywas clearly the basis for the promise of government deliverance of wildlife from what ailed us at that time.

But, biology alone was a somewhat disconcerting idea.  Would these government “scientists” sit around in laboratories looking into microscopes and puffing on pipes in some seminar in conference rooms?  Would they publish papers in Latin and require listeners to either have advanced degrees or simply take “their word” about what was needed?  No, the noun “biology” needed a modifier and adjective to set the public and politicians minds at ease.

The word “Conservation” fit the bill perfectly.  This was long before the concept of “renewable natural resources” (wildlife, timber, forage) as opposed “non-renewable natural resources” (oil, coal, natural gas) was used so the notion that “conserving” these precious resources (while continuing to USE them) was the goal that was understandable and supported by citizen and politician alike.  Conservation Biology was thought to have a “good ring to it”.

Now, before proceeding further with the term “Conservation Biology”, any discussion must consider a very important factor.  At no time was there any public intention or statement that this “Conservation Biology” would be the basis for:

–       introducing and protecting wolves;

–       introducing rattlesnakes into settled states like Massachusetts;

–       arresting persons for protecting their families and property from grizzly bears or cougars;

–       wrecking the economies and social structures of Counties on behalf of owls or woodpeckers;

–       federal/state “partnering” to introduce and protect free-roaming buffalo in the midst of settled rural communities and agricultural/livestock operations;

–       federal spending of Billions of dollars per year by the federal government to force state governments into a federal subcontractor status and to bribe Universities to become publishing houses for “science” that is little more than alchemy notes copied from medieval wizards;

–       etc., etc.

Had any of those early wildlife philosophers, bureaucrats or political leaders inferred that “Conservation Biology” would be used to:

–       close public lands,

–       condemn private property,

–       eliminate hunting,

–       eliminate fishing,

–       eliminate trapping,

–       justify using predators to shut down ranching,

–       justify closing grazing lands,

–       justify increasing lead ammunition and fishing tackle costs,

–       forcing rural families to live with uncontrolled deadly and destructive predators,

–       eliminate highly desirable wildlife like brown trout, pheasants, chukars, etc. while undesirable and destructive wildlife like pythons, boa constrictors and Asian carp are imported and allowed to escape into settled landscapes,

–       justify tearing down irrigation/power dams,

–       finance buying private property and easing private property and expanding federal authorities until the entire nation is under federal control,

–       etc., etc.

Not only would anyone making such a claim have been thought daffy, if there was even the slightest chance that such unimaginable things would result – the very existence of these four agencies, their funding and their budgets would have been in great jeopardy if not eliminated all-together.

Make no mistake: “Conservation Biology” existed and grew NOT because it was thought necessary to impede or destroy American rights or the American Way of Life.

“Conservation Biology” existed and grew because the American People (i.e. We the People…”)wanted to make every reasonable and affordable effort to sustain wildlife in the midst of the settled American landscape and the American Way of Life so generously provided by our Constitutional society and our protected human activities as described in the Declaration of Independence as “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”.

Thus, once the bureaucratic wildlife ball got rolling during WWI, the federal government signed a Treaty with Britain to protect 212 bird species thereby seizing state jurisdiction over those birds.  Subsequent Treaties expanded the number of federal birds.  A federal law was passed to outlaw the interstate transportation of contraband wildlife.  Refuges were bought, “rounded-out”, and proposed annually.  Federal conniving (the correct word) with UN staffs and faux “Treaties” led to all manner of “necessary” land control and land set-aside maneuvers as well as all manner of import controls that have all but killed the sustainable international commerce in wildlife from big game hunting to commercial uses of wildlife parts.

States began to professionalize their own wildlife agencies made up at first of mostly game wardens and then with “managers” with titles like Upland Game “Biologist”, Big Game “Biologist”.  Universities began teaching courses and then forming Departments and then even Colleges granting degrees up to and including PhD’s in “Wildlife Biology” and “Wildlife Management” and “Wildlife Resources”; all based on or derived from “Conservation Biology”.

Simultaneously, the US Fish and Wildlife Service:

–       grew annually,

–       hired “more” biologists, refuge managers and enforcers,

–       lobbied and got an Excise Tax on fishing equipment, arms and ammunition to assist the states to “professionalize” under federal oversight (i.e. be more like their federal cousins),

–       joined with radicals in the 1960’s to lobby and obtain the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Animal Welfare Act, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Wilderness Act, etc.

The end result being a “Great Robbery” of State Jurisdictions and Authorities by federal bureaucracies based on fuzzy “science” claims of federal “experts” and romance “Biology” ground out by Universities kenneling sub Rosa federal subcontractors with initials after their names.

While “Conservation Biology” started all this, the term fell into disuse from the 1970’s forward.  The reason “Conservation Biology” fell into disuse was because of the steady takeover of the US Fish and Wildlife Service by environmental/animal rights activists and interest groups.  These radicals absolutely hated (the correct word) hunting, fishing, trapping, grazing, timber management, fur products, and all the trappings of European settlement and the American system of government.  They advocated an all-powerful central government enacting Rural Clearances and abolishing every human activity and things like guns that they did not favor.

In the US Fish and Wildlife Service they transferred the timeless and beneficial animal damage control program to the Agriculture Department where they could roundly condemn it and advocate its elimination.  They imposed ammunition restrictions for wildlife under federal jurisdiction.  They shifted refuges from models of wildlife “management” to sealed enclaves where non-management led to worthless and overgrown disasters.  They shifted enforcers from wildlife protectors to human regulators and overseers as happened in the BLM and US Forest Service.  They began lying like National Park Service employees (“the elk are in the back country”, “don’t believe people that say that wolves kill and eliminate elk”, etc.) and State employees (“global warming has killed most of the elk and moose”, “don’t believe anyone that tells you that wolves killing moose calves has eliminated most of the moose”, and the whopper “wolves don’t attack and are not a danger to people”).

Many of the activist employees came in under the shadow of Equal Employment Opportunity.  That is the federal program giving women and minorities preferences over white males.  This was done by eliminating requirements and standards for hiring, transferring and promoting much like Apartheid in South Africa.  Other activists began infiltrating the US Fish and Wildlife Service politically like the current Director of the US Fish and Wildlife Service and many lesser “appointments” not accurately publicized.

Beginning in the 1990’s these activists shared one sterling attribute.  They did not hesitate to say they “hunt and fish”.  Although in most cases this was a plain lie, it was used as a mask over their real agenda, the elimination of wildlife management for humans and the advent of strict human management by government justified where possible on claimed benefits for wildlife from the proclaimed “endangered’ mega-critter to the lowliest and unseen critter that provided a “necessary” niche in some contrived ecosystem and was in great need of yet another land purchase, regulation or arrest.

During this period (1990 – 2014) the term Conservation Biology was, to US Fish and Wildlife Service and its New Age cooperators and employees, much like the term “untermenschen” (A Nazi term for Jews and other inferior – to the Nazis –  races) is in Jewish and Eastern European conservations; that is a despicable word from the past.  However, as opposition to all the federal abuses of citizens in the name of wildlife grows and the “science” it is based on is seen to be bogus and as we approach a Presidential election wherein the biggest “citizen abuse by wildlife” political support Party (both Parties support all of this wildlife abuse of the citizenry, one only slightly less than the other) worries that they may not only lose “more” power but that anti-establishment candidates might actually get elected and reverse things: illusions and diversions are called for.

Reigniting the widespread use of the benign and fondly-remembered term “Conservation Biology” is one such illusion.  It is like wolf puppies in the tender arms of a young lady employee in a government uniform.  Who could be against this except for some pervert that tore the wings off flies as a youth and grew up into a misogynist?  It is like federal attempts to “List” the Sage Grouse and then suddenly realizing that the Sage Grouse were doing better than anyone could expect (“but it’s the thought that counts”).  Why “they” are once again using “Conservation Biology” as they (fill-in-the-blank).  Who could be against that?

So as I write, “Conservation Biology” is everywhere.  Like releasing thousands of criminals from prison or prattling on about how Planned Parenthood sale of fetal tissue rivals the Salk vaccine for Polio, don’t be misled by this restoration of an antiquated term like some quaint term in a Shakespeare Play.  It is simply one more ploy to keep you playing the federal carnival game of “which shell is the pea under?”  It is “their” rules and “your money”.

Like the once-greatest walleye lake in Minnesota, Mille Lacs, that Indians netted so much they crashed the walleye fishery and then began buying up the resorts and cabins on the shores at rock bottom prices with the millions Minnesotans pour into the Indian casinos; America is similarly being destroyed and bought up by the taxes we render to Washington and the debt we allow Washington to ring up.  Americans, like Minnesotans have “met the enemy and he is us”.

Jim Beers

22 February 2016

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

A Wolf Letter to the Denver Post

(Kept to 151 words)

As a 32 year Biologist/Refuge Manager/Special Agent employee of USFWS:

  1. Wolf presence or absence is not and should not be a decision for persons outside Colorado.
  2. Wolves kill livestock; reduce big game herds, hunting opportunities and licenses,; and they kill dogs.
  3. Wolves are extremely effective vectors of over 30 diseases and infections of great danger to humans, wildlife and domestic animals.
  4. Wolves are deadly threats to rural children, elderly (women in particular) and adults as when rabid.  Asian, European and North American history and current events confirm this routinely.
  5. If Colorado residents choose to introduce or tolerate wolves, Counties should retain the final decision for Local elected officials to decide whether or how wolves are to be controlled, tolerated or exterminated in their County.  Local officials are the most responsive to those local residents that would live with wolves and their very many social, biological and economic ill effects.

 

Jim Beers

15 February 2016

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting.  You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

Beware of Professors

The following is a Letter sent to the Editor of the Spokane, Washington Spokesman Review.  It answers an article “Kick cows off refuge lands” by a Professor at Eastern Washington University that appeared in the paper. The article appears after the Letter..   Jim Beers

“Once proud” is a term overused in today’s dwindling newspaper publishing business.  A significant factor contributing to the demise of many “once proud” newspapers is their yielding to the temptation to pander to the imaginary boogeymen of uninformed readers with myths from reputedly informed writers.  Sad to say, you have entirely succumbed to this disgusting temptation by publishing, Professor Lindholdt’s “Kick cows off refuge lands” a composition worthy of some “Occupy Wall Street” handbill passed around during a demonstration.

The following refutations apply to the main assertions in your (i.e. Lindholdt’s) diatribe.

1.)  The Bundy’s and other occupiers of Malheur have very legitimate grievances with the USFWS, the BLM and the US Forest Service.  That they picked Malheur to give attention to their grievances is as logical as any other USDI or USDA facility.  The wildlife resources of Malheur Refuge are as healthy as ever.  One of those ranchers is dead and the other fathers and husbands face imprisonment.  Given the Professor’s animus toward ranchers, is it futile to ask him to “give it a rest?”

2.)  The Professor’s liking of the vegetarian diet is as relevant to the article’s title as is my preferences for snow goose cassoulet or walleye filets parmesaned.

3.)  Ranches are indeed corporations and as such they provide immense fuel for Local communities’ economies such as jobs, support businesses and revenue for Local governments to protect Local communities from both the federal government and uncaring interlopers like Professor Lindholdt.  Furthermore, when these refuges were founded like Little Pend Oreille in 1939; you can bet your bippy that the Local community was asked to welcome the refuge and their once benign efforts to benefit wildlife and by extension the Local citizenry.  Like the majority of refuges in the system, the Congressional Authorizing Legislation paid homage to Local communities and their governments and stressed (now slowly being eradicated like Jewish achievements under German National Socialism) that waterfowl and other Treaty species like songbirds were of primary consideration.

4.)  Speaking of the Professor’s fawning homage to two recent lady refuge managers that “ousted” the cows from Turnblull NWR (“ more than 3,000 acres of wetlands of the last quality breeding habitat available in eastern Washington

for waterfowl”), and Little Pend Oreille NWR’s; his enthusiasm is offset by the negative impacts the waterfowl production very likely suffered.  Regulated (by time, intensity and grazing species) grazing by livestock is an important tool in managing wetlands and associated nesting cover for desirable waterfowl species’ nesting success.  Like timber management (another modern boogeyman) as a regulated tool also provides benefits to desirable plant and animals species and their abundance is vilified, so too is livestock grazing besmirched as inherently harmful.  Both beliefs are false.

5.)  I see the Professor also accuses opponents of the ESA as involved in a “coalition” within the agriculture industry that sponsor “illegal measures” to punish “whistleblowers”.  I could write several books (I have written over a thousand such articles) about why the ESA should be “defeated”.  As a Utah State Wildlife graduate; a Utah Fish and Game former employee; a USFWS wetlands biologist in North Dakota; a US Game Management Agent in Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City and Washington, DC; a USFWS Animal Damage Control Program Coordinator in Washington, DC; Chief of the Branch of Refuge Operations in Washington, DC; wildlife biologist administering Pittman-Robertson Excise Tax funding to state wildlife departments from Washington, DC; member of both a State Department team and US Trade Representative Team battling unjust fur regulations in the European Union; and as a Congressional Fellow I oppose the ESA: that neither makes me a bad person or one in need of “re-education”.

6.)  As a “whistleblower” myself, I was amused by the Professor’s concern about suppressing “whistleblowers” he supports.  When I testified twice before a packed US House of Representatives Committee about the theft of $45 to 60 Million in state wildlife funds by USFWS managers to trap Canadian wolves, release said wolves in Yellowstone, and open an office in California – all 3 of which Congress had refused to either authorize or fund) – I became a “whistleblower”. I was threatened with loss of my health care and my pension after 32 years with USFWS and 4 years as an officer in the US Navy and I spent ten months at home with full pay and then was offered and accepted a large cash settlement  (thank you Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer) on condition I would not speak or write about the circumstances of my “retirement” for 3 years (so much for “transparency”.)  By the way this was all perpetrated by the same folks administering these Refuges and that the good Professor lauds while ranchers are imprisoned and shot.  Ooohh, the ranchers copied down his license plate?  Poor baby.

In closing, cattle should not be banned from refuges.  Refuges were created and remain funded to care for wildlife and the people that use and enjoy them.  Camping is a “secondary” use of refuges as it is these days for National Forests and National Parks, both of which were founded to provide camping but today are increasingly becoming closed federal enclaves that ignore Local communities, Local governments and any activity not favored by political bosses back in Washington, DC.  I suggest the Professor look for Parks and Forests the next time and that if he continues to attend rancher meetings he exert the sort of discretion one might at a Black Lives Matter Meeting and not provoke the Local folks or belittle their concerns.

Oh and one more thing, I am often asked when I speak and when I write, “Mr. Beers, how did these bureaucrats ever get like they have become?”  My new answer from now on will be. “Because they all studied wildlife under English Professors like Mr. Lindholdt at Eastern Washington University that not only are ignorant and biased about wildlife but that also harbor a deep dislike for rural Americans and the rural America that made (and makes) America great.

Jim Beers

7 February 2016

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting.  You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

Who Shot That Mongrel Red Wolf?

By James Beers

I just received this attachment and the e-mail that follows my note here from the men in North Carolina who are giving their all to rid North Carolina of the “red” wolves that have always been no more than hybrid dog/coyote/wolf mongrels. The name “red” is about as biologically significant as is “red” Doberman.

These hybrids were forced into South Carolina and then North Carolina with all the “experimental”, “only on federal lands” crapola, secrecy and federal bureaucracy acting as occupying force as is happening in the Great Lakes States, the Southwestern US and the Northwestern US. Today these hybrids are mostly (they wander a lot) in North Carolina where the feds want no coyote hunting at night (when control is most effective); where these protected hybrids interfere with dogs of all uses and stripes; and where they generally cause great distress to rural residents and landowners.

These hybrids were ONLY supposed to be released on federal land but, as is common, the government kicked them loose on private lands for all the usual, arrogant reasons. When called on it; the himming and hawing, the deniability, the broken promises about “providing information”, etc. made all the recent scandals in Washington look like case studies in model transparent government for Civics Textbooks.

This man (Jett Ferebee) and his associates have led a coalition of concerned North Carolinians composed of federal and State politicians, rural residents and the state wildlife bureaucracy that is a credit to American grit. Their record and tactics are something we can all learn from. It is with this in mind that I am doing something I have never done before in forwarding a donation request. If he says this is a significant matter as he describes it, it may spur some federal reform legislation.

I recently sent a video of the Secretary of the Interior being called to account about these hybrids by US Congressman Cynthia Lummis at a Hearing of the US House of Representatives’ Resource Committee. Rural America and especially those with forced wolves and grizzlies have no better friend in the US House than Congressman Lummis. Her resume tells it all:

She was raised on her family ranch in Laramie County and graduated from the University of Wyoming with bachelor degrees in Animal Science and Biology. In 1979, Cynthia became the youngest woman ever elected to the Wyoming Legislature. She returned to the University of Wyoming for a law degree, which she received in 1985.

So I ask you to consider at least writing an e-mail of support to Mr. Ferebee. He hopes to get the same level of publicity as given to others that posture with their faux concern about wildlife and make great waves about how concerned they are to protect wildlife from all human presence and human activity. Simply a strong show of support will make it more feasible to give the Cynthia Lummises of the Nation (yes there are others) what they need to take concrete action in the US House to support rural North Carolinians in ways that may well be applicable to all of the land from the Great Lakes to Texas and westward to those “great Pacific shores”.

If Jett is right about who did this, then that knowledge and the open, equal treatment of American jurisprudence will have far-reaching precedence for all of rural America.

Jim Beers
29 March 2015

Subject: Jim – It was an USFWS employee that shot this wolf! They’ve not come clean yet!
(See Attachment)
RedWolfNews
Guys,

We, landowners and sportsmen, are offering a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person who killed the Sept. 30th wolf. We have a good idea who killed this wolf and it will be worth the reward for this to go public.
Please go to the red wolf scandal thread and add to the reward:

http://www.nchuntandfish.com/forums/showthread.php?95624-quot-Red-Wolf-quot-restoration-scandal&p=1511705&viewfull=1#post1511705

Small amounts are fine. If you do not want to go online to do this, just email me your offer amount. We really just want to go public with a large reward offered by hunters for this particular kill. USFWS will be forced to publicize the reward offer as they did for DOW, RWC, etc. USFWS will likely have to a answer as to why hunters are offering the reward. The answer will be devastating to them.

Hunters are always blamed for these kills. This is the kill to turn the tables on USFWS!

Thanks,
Jett

Anecdotal Wolf Stories

Presented by James Beers:

I recently changed dentists and last week had my first appointment. The dentist asked me if I was the same person who writes about wolves in the Wisconsin Outdoor News. I said, yes, I am, and he proceeded to tell me how much he hates wolves and how frustrated he is with wolf-lovers. He said that he and friends had deer hunted in northern Wisconsin for years but they recently started hunting in central Wisconsin because the wolves have decimated the northern deer population (this confirms what I have heard and read from other sources). He said that the motel (Comfort Inn) where they stayed when deer hunting in the north was always full during deer season but now is down to 20% capacity due to the lack of hunters. He also said that another group of friends who traditionally hunted in a national forest in the north have not seen a single deer in the past five years.

The dentist told of an incident with a wolf when he was bird hunting with his dog. The wolf charged his dog and he shot the wolf at point-blank range. Fortunately for his dog, he was close enough to defend it from the wolf. This incident took place before wolves were put back on protected status.

Nothing like a real encounter to convince one of lethal wolf behavior.

XXXX

————————————————————–
XXXX,

Clearly, the N Wisconsin deer herd is seeking its “New Normal”, wherein global warming and climate change effects on plants; and those as yet unspecified diseases, fleas and ticks that Minnesota DNR “biologists” and University of Minnesota “perfessers” have yet to identify but are sure are causing the demise of N Minnesota deer and moose are spreading to our Eastern neighbors. All we can do in the meantime is give them more money and just hope they find the answers in time. Otherwise, soon the Central Wisconsin deer herd will similarly disappear as far as any hunting and what is left, Illinois???

Actually, a few more years of this lying and subterfuge from all these government experts and the possible political reaction from Wisconsin progressives that aren’t still hiding in Illinois and Indiana motels will give the Madison/Milwaukee/U of W wolf folks control of the State government (like Anthony Eden and Labour replaced Winston Churchill and the Conservatives in 1945 as soon as the War was over) and with Wisconsin deer hunters historical anomalies (like loggers and trappers); and rural Wisconsin dog owners filing out of the woods with their hands over their heads crying, “Comrade” like Italians surrendering in N Africa in 1942 or Germans surrendering at Stalingrad in 1943 – they can:

– Make the wolf the State Icon, State Mammal, State Predator, and place a 30’ high statue of a wolf in the Capitol Rotunda.

– Make dog ownership illegal since the opposition from remaining rural dog owners (those that actually derive other than emotional benefits from their dogs) will be about the size of the Hmong lobby.

– Revoke Concealed Carry and make the possession of rifles, shotguns and ammunition illegal without a permit issued by some young lady in Madison since deer hunters and rural residents that actually imagine hunting or defending themselves and their property from wolves and human predators will be moving to cities and leaving the rural precincts to federal and state realtors who will help the Local governments box up their records for the State Archivist and the State Historian since Local government revenue will dry up like speakeasies in 1933.

– Seize the fish and game agency revenues and authority for:

– “Protection” and “research” of all plant and animal species (not just the “hook and bullet” species).

– Extermination of all “NON-Native” plants and animals not documented as occurring in the State before 1492 AD.

– Restoration of all “Native” (as defined in Legislation) species of plants and animals throughout the state.

– When the old hunting and fishing revenue runs out quickly since there is no more hunting and fishing, the State Legislature and the US Congress will receive demands from the urban voters to spend tax dollars from all to make the State a Secular Nature Worship Cathedral as a model for other progressives elsewhere or else who will employ all those DNR worthies and “perfessers” that caused all this without a scintilla of responsibility or one qualm of a guilty conscience.

This sarcasm has more than a kernel of truth in it. I am saddened as I hear about your deer hunters as I hear about similar situations across this great country almost every day and, as they say, if you didn’t laugh you would have to cry once you understand what is happening.

————————————————-

Jim: There was a recent letter to the editor in WON written by a bird hunter/bird dog owner in NE WI. He complained to the DNR folks that he can’t/won’t bird hunt because the presence of wolves is too much of a threat to the safety of his dogs. So the ever-adaptive DNR told him to hunt in areas where there are fewer or no wolves (the DNR handily has a map of wolf territories on its website). The hunter pointed out two distinct and DNR-ignored facts: Wolves traverse a large territory and the packs are not always where the DNR says they should be, and, this DNR “advice” has effectively made areas of WI no-hunting zones. So here we go – exactly what the U.S. Humane Society wants – the death of hunting.

XXXX
—————————————————————

XXXX,

When I moved back to Minnesota 6 years ago, the St. Paul Pioneer Press was publishing unbelievable DNR/U of M drivel about wolves bi-weekly with front page stuff every few months about moose, and how ticks and global warming (I kid you not) were responsible for the disappearance of moose. Almost without fail, wolves were never mentioned and when mentioned they were just a throwaway reference to some people saying that predation was a factor. Those that were so noted were usually pictured as redneck, flat-earthers that were too dumb to accept global warming and were probably racists on top of it.

I wrote letter to the editor after letter to the editor trying in a few words and in measured tones (to get it accepted as a letter) to point out the lies in the articles but to no avail.

So I wrote the Outdoor Writer about it and tried to send him information but he dismissed me like a petulant child that didn’t like spinach.

My last e-mail to him concerned how in the short time (2 years?) since I returned I had met two Minnesota ruffed grouse hunters (one at Church and one while fishing in central Minnesota) that told me they no longer hunted grouse because they had had encounters with wolves that they drove off with their shotguns. Both said they hunted with the family dog and if they ever brought the dog home dead or all chewed up they didn’t think grouse were worth the reaction from their wives or kids. The outdoor writer said I was just making it up. He had lived in Minnesota all his life and never heard of such nonsense. He asked me to quit bothering him. About 6 months later he went to work as a Public Relations flak for the Minnesota DNR where so far as I know he labors away today.

His replacement was a young, urban enviro whose claim to fame, per himself, was he hadn’t hunted or fished before but he loved nature. He took up where his predecessor left off. I kept writing letters to the editor and when the outdoor guy wrote drivel about wolves I wrote him a measured e-mail which he quickly dismissed me with the words, we would just have to agree to disagree. He replied also that I was nuts for implying that I knew it was hard for him to be objective about such things and still maintain the DNR as a story source for articles or as a recommendation for keeping his job if he was too far off the wolf, et al, reservation. He clearly expected to hear from that old crank that had just moved to the state and was just a waste of time if you didn’t turn him off right away.

You are absolutely right about the perfidy of wolf “maps”: they are just like wolf depredation “compensation” that never materializes either fully or for an extended period. They are both placebos administered for temporary gain by neophytes that couldn’t even qualify as midwifes, and whose hidden agendas are despicable and responsible for much of the ongoing loss of rural American culture, communities, government and economies.

Jim Beers
28 March 2015

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

How Long Can a University Go?

By James Beers

Cornell U – From University to Disgraceful Nursery for Radicals

The first (#1) article below is a current report of Cornell University’s latest and most shameful bid for notoriety. It is self–explanatory. Anyone sending any children to this disgraceful den of academic iniquity masquerading as a center of “learning” should seriously reconsider such action.

This is not the first time I have encountered this University. The second (#2) article below was written by me last fall and it mentions Cornell’s recent deer sterilization fiasco that is followed by another news report of “Cornellian” wildlife buffoonery. In my article about the deer I recall a previous encounter 10 years ago with Cornell graduates and professors regarding their disgraceful participation in the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s clandestine request for and expenditure of $14 million dollars to “find” Ivory-billed Woodpeckers that had and have been extinct in the USA for over 70 years. The certainly extinct (there are lots of folks in the Southern US woodlands that would have mentioned seeing or hearing these very large woodpeckers despite their lack of University credentials from Cornell) Ivory-bills were merely surrogates for other agendas:

* Ivory bills, per historic reports, “look like pintail ducks” as they fly through and near Southern woodlands. Thus if you were a Southern duck hunter, what do you think USFWS and all their enviro/animal rights partners had in mind for duck hunting?

* Ivory-bills were historically found in wooded swamps from North Carolina to Texas. So as this erstwhile environmental posse of federal bureaucrats and the Cornell worthies were seeking the long-lost Ivory-bills in these wooded southern swamps; they delineated, purchased and took easements on available remaining Southern woodlands in case any Ivory-bills were found and were in need of new and expansive habi –tat/tats (a humorous woodpecker play on words). Federal ownership and control plus justifications for future federal actions “just in case” while certainly in “our” best interests; did not bode well for Local communities, local government and local residents living in or near these new federal environmental target areas.

So relax and read about the descent of a once respected University; but even more importantly think about how ANY institution that is insinuated into the environmental radical movement can get twisted into lies, fantasies, righteousness, buffoonery, and corruption about their perverted view of “nature”; and then finally find itself enabling treasonous actions with all the self-assurance of some Islamic State executioner, that was once an American or British college student, executing captives horrifically on “Social media” simply because they are Christians or their parents couldn’t come up with millions in a couple of days.

Cornell, ”we hardly knew ye”. (Paraphrased from an old Irish song.)

Jim Beers
25 March 2015

#1.
CAMPUS WELCOMES TERRORISTS: Cornell Dean Is Cool With ISIS Club On Campus [VIDEO]
Posted on March 25, 2015
This administrator at Cornell University thinks it’d be a great idea to start an ISIS club and bring in an ISIS member to speak, among other things.

In the latest undercover sting operation from investigative filmmaker James O’Keefe, an assistant dean at Cornell University has advised a journalist posing as a Moroccan student all about how to launch a campus club with the express intent of supporting ISIS.

The Ivy League administrator, Joseph Scaffido, also provides counsel on how to fund the pro-Islamist militant club so it can send “care packages, whether it be food, water, electronics” to ISIS and Hamas — both terrorist organizations, according to the State Department.
Read more: The Daily Caller

#2.
Wildlife “Science”- From Human Benefit to Buffoonery

Fifty-five years ago when I was searching for the best University wildlife biology School I could afford, Cornel’ was right near the top of high quality education schools and right near the bottom (actually not even on the list) of the list of schools I could afford. I chose Utah State University and have never regretted that decision for a moment. Thank you, Utah, for making that school available for me in those years. But back to Cornell.

Over the years, I met numerous Cornell graduates and found them to generally (I know I am stereotyping here) exude attitudes of superiority commonly seen in many Harvard and MIT graduates I have met.

During the 1980’s and 1990’s, Cornell research and notoriety in the wildlife area steadily mimicked the U of Wisconsin and Berkley publications and reports touting environmental extremism and animal rights nonsense. By the time of my retirement I no longer gave Cornell any thought other than to dismiss what they published or reports about what they were doing.

In 2005, five years after my retirement, I once again encountered Cornell and was astonished at how “far off the tracks” their snobbery and integration with federal bureaucrats had taken them. It seems the USFWS had obtained a “secret” fund of millions of dollars from Congress to “find and document” remaining Ivory-billed Woodpeckers that had recently been seen by “reliable” Southern birdwatchers. It was “secret” (oh how bureaucrats and politicians love such harmless intrigue as they seek to perfect our world in spite of our ignorance and stubbornness) because there was a chance that some ignorant redneck might find and destroy the “last” Ivory-billed Woodpecker (they are still extinct for over 75 years as I write) before federal protection and force could “save” them. Cornell was part of the (publicly-funded but ”secret”) “search and save” expeditions all over the South where their guesses as to where these “ancient” birds that “looked like pintails” (take note Southern woodland duck hunters) as they flew through southern swamps might find suitable habitat for planned federal woodpecker enhancements. Land was bought, land was eased and wooded wetland owners from N. Carolina and Florida to E. Texas were warned that they might one day harbor federally-designated Critical Habitat (yikes) for a bird once thought to be extinct!

When I wrote about this lunacy (if no hunter, trapper, farmer, or rural resident had seen or reported a “giant” woodpecker in 60+ years, the likelihood of federal bureaucrats or Cornell worthies finding even one were nil) I happened to mention how old-timers said the best habitat and draw for those big woodpeckers was a stand of trees purposely girdled and dying as swamps were being cleared for drainage and eventual farming. These trees were infested with insects in and under the bark (thereby drawing in lots of all sorts of woodpeckers from far and wide). I suggested (tongue-in-cheek) they try this old trick to see if there were any Ivory-bills in the neighborhood.

What I got in return from an Ivory-billed Woodpecker “Team Leader” who if memory serves was some sort of Cornell Grad student or Assistant Wildlife Professor was one of the nastier e-mails I ever received and that is saying something. The one “academic and scientific” comment I remember to this day from this person was something to the effect that if I “and my pig-farmer buddies” (oooohhh!) wanted to ruin the world he and science would stop us.

It has been 9 years since that little contretemps with Cornell. This morning, the following news report (below) about Cornell, their campus and deer crossed my desk. Read it and enjoy the humor but consider the sadness of a once great wildlife school and how far it has fallen. It is as if an award winning actor like Laurence Olivier had taken to drink and late one Saturday night years later you turn on the TV and there he is stumbling through a Saturday Night Live skit mumbling his lines to the great amusement of the audience.

Cornell displays the fruits of environmental extremism and animal rights radicalism, and where they lead those that fall for their false values and agenda.

Jim Beers
21 October 2014

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

Cornell gives deer tubal ligations, everything goes wrong (hilarious liberal lunacy alert)