July 25, 2017

Risky Business…or You’ve Proven My Point

*Editor’s Note* – Below is an article written by James Beers in which he expresses his point quite well. Those with understanding will agree, the rest don’t want to and thus, to them, he is wrong. I would, however, like to take a moment to further comment on, not what Beers wrote, but what I read that was, evidently, a letter/email the chancellor of the University of Wisconsin – Stout, sent to his students about why he removed two paintings from a heavily traveled hallway, and hid them is more difficult to find locations within the university.

Before I do, let me remind readers of an article I wrote only a few days ago called, “Why Blind Ignorance Persists…Blindly.” What the chancellor wrote, proves my point, exactly. Here’s why.

The letter states that he decided to move the two paintings because, “their current uncontrolled access poses a risk of having a harmful effect on our students and other viewers.” (emboldening added) Hold that thought for a moment.

The chancellor then attempts to explain what he was thinking (I use this term very loosely), “it was never my intent to “censor” these paintings or remove them from public view. I simply wanted to get them into situations where we had some control over who would view them.” (emboldening added)

The chancellor uses the the word “censor” as a verb, and thus the definition of “censor,” as a verb, is: “examine (a book, movie, [painting] etc.) officially and suppress unacceptable parts of it.” He says he did not intend to censor the paintings and yet, because from his perspective as being the sole holder of truth and all others are wrong, he exactly censored the paintings, then pulled a typical politicians move to deny he did it.

Once the chancellor described the previous location of the paintings an “uncontrolled access” the mere term describes the lack of being able to censor. Once the paintings were moved, the chancellor eagerly admits that he wanted to get the paintings to a location where he had “control over who would view them.” Isn’t that precisely the definition of censorship?

But, I’m sure from the chancellor’s perspective, because any dialect these days is only right and left, and regardless of the false paradigm team you are on, your side is the only one that holds the “truth,” he has done nothing wrong and is justified in deciding which history is remembered and who gets to discover that history. 

To be so ignorant to deny censorship while exactly describing an act of censorship, I believe is a perfect example of the product of post-normal thinking, which is the result of propagandizing and indoctrination from Communitarianism’s control over what we casually in this country call education. Communitarianism, the creator of Common Core produces non thinking robots willing to subject their rights and independence to the authority of the common good.

If a person actually knew the difference, why would they want to spend the thousands of dollars at a university in which the result of your investment would be blind ignorance?

Risky Business

By James Beers

WARNING GRAPHIC INFORMATION, Definitely NOT Suitable for All Ages or Persons.  (BE WARNED!)

Welcome to the Upper Midwest; actually welcome to the Great Lakes States.

This is the part of the country (WI, MN, MI) where we all “love” wolves.  Where we all must (or we are disinvited from all ludafisk festivals and ice fishing contests) argue that the disappearance of moose; the loss of moose hunting; the decline in deer; the decline in deer hunting; the deaths of all manner of dogs from beagles and hounds and pets and bird dogs; the losses of cattle, calves, sheep, lambs, etc.; and the attack on a Minnesota camper and the death of a Wisconsin lady…. all of these things and many more; like over 30 diseases and infections of great and mortal danger to humans, wild animals and domestic animals; and the constant danger to children in rural yards, going to and from and waiting at rural bus stops or elderly rural residents checking mailboxes or mistakenly going “out back to get the neighbor’s dog” that turns out to be a wolf — all either do not exist or are the result of ticks, global “warming/climate change/whatever”, “tough” winters, or criminal “jack pine savage” (i.e. redneck) poachers that should be “cleared” from the land and imprisoned or banished back to whatever non-Muslim (of course) country they or their ancestors came from.  Future immigrants to these states should be “vetted” by federal “vetters” for any such “poaching” or “animal’s aren’t equal to humans” tendencies and if observed to have such tendencies forbidden to enter or obtain a visa.  Future illegal immigrants with any connections to harvesting, controlling or in any way harming wild animals should be sent to Guantanamo Bay and held there indefinitely and sterilized so that they will no longer “pollute” the USA gene pool we are building thanks to Progressive thinkers and their “partners” and “cooperators” in government and especially the UNIVERSITIES!

Think that is hyperbole, pilgrim?  Nationwide, the Universities are the main education/propaganda/justification hotbeds that:

–          Justify politician’s, both state and federal, unjustified pandering to and profiting from ignorant urban voters and radical environmental/animal “rights” activist’s interest in forcing their fellow Americans to submit to and endure all of the unjust laws (Endangered Species, Wilderness, etc.) and unjust takings (Critical Habitat, Access closures, rural economic elimination, Local government submission, etc.) that build their hegemony and that are destroying this once-great nation.

–          “Cooperate” with and “partner” with federal and state bureaucracies by creating faux biology and romance biology disguised as “science” to get grants, publicity, tenured teachers, increased staffs and funding, etc. to supply the propaganda demands of politicians running for re-election and bureaucrats larding their empires and careers.

–          “Educate” the teachers who get more power over our children every year.  Teachers that indoctrinate our children to accept what we know to be morally reprehensible or entirely false while turning out more and more academically-challenged “graduates” every year to bolster arguments for the need for more and more foreign students to fill the “technology gap”.

–          Create the whole aura of a “scientific elite” that increasingly must rule the rest of us ignorant boobs for our own good because the world is getting more complex and we are getting dumber.

Now the University of Wisconsin has, ever since the Vietnam War/”free”-love/drugs-for-all days been rightly known as “the Berkley of the Midwest”.  This title applies equally to their subsidiaries like UW-Stout from whose “Chancellor” the following Wall Street Journal tidbit emanates.

Note the titles of the paintings “French Trappers on the Red Cedar” and “Perraults Trading Fort”.  The Catholic priests like Father Marquette and Father Hennepin explored and worked to convert the native people of these states in the 1600’s. It is arguable that since the above-mentioned 1960’s the practice of the Catholic faith has dwindled in the Upper Midwest due to the same societal and cultural factors affecting trapping, hunting, wolves, rural clearances and the growth of amoral government and laws.

Fur trappers from Montreal were among the first Europeans that, simultaneously with those priests, explored the country, traded with the native people, and provided the basic foundation and transition for the inevitable change from a hunter/gatherer, use-of-natural-resources society to the settled and more-beneficial (to human society) landscapes that were the pride of these states up until the infamous 1960’s.  The sanctification of wolves, the total demolishment of major sport fisheries, explosion of harmful and injurious plants and animals, and the diminution of hunting and trapping have accompanied the complete and ongoing vilification of trapping, trappers and the worldwide fur market.

What you are about to read is merely the latest move by those destroying this nation.  If a state, like Wisconsin, can and will bamboozle a gullible public about history while justifying wolves and their effects why not just make the Great Lakes States like New Jersey and ban even the possession in your own home of a trap?  If New Jersey can ban even the possession of a trap on your wall; why not the art on your wall just like on some University “Hall wall”?  Are the state “educater-educators” teaching their “graduates” to do the same in the schools and perhaps even support encouraging children to inform on parents having “sensitive” or “banned” art on the walls of their homes?  Evidently, there is no extreme these pandering ninnies will not go to.  Why not just have a big bonfire of books and art objected to by these tax-paid propagandizers at the next UW-Stout Homecoming?  Joseph Goebbels would be proud!

Just read the following article.  My disgust for these bozoes and their incessant “it was never my intent to ‘censor’ these paintings or remove them from public view” and “the concerns Native Americans have expressed about how they are portrayed in the paintings” excuses about how, like guns and hunting, grazing and logging, private property rights, and state and local government eradication; it is never about doing-in those things; it is always about some higher good as, in this case rewriting history to please an interest group or denigrating both trapping and the arrival of a much more advanced society that we are dismantling as we simultaneously deny we are doing so.

Jim Beers

19 August 2016

If you no longer wish to receive these articles notify:  jimbeers7@comcast.net   

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.

This is a copy of the email/letter sent to students:

Bob Meyer, chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Stout, in an Aug. 5 email to students, faculty and staff:

I am providing an update on the status of the two paintings in Harvey Hall that I have decided should be removed from two hallways in that building because their current uncontrolled access poses a risk of having a harmful effect on our students and other viewers. . . .

“French Trappers on the Red Cedar” on the second floor will be relocated to the Dean’s Conference Room on the first floor of Harvey Hall. “Perrault’s Trading Fort” on the first floor of Harvey Hall will be relocated to room 504A in the Robert S. Swanson Library and Learning Center, the future location of University Archives. . . .

I also want to emphasize that, despite opinions to the contrary, it was never my intent to “censor” these paintings or remove them from public view. I simply wanted to get them into situations where we had some control over who would view them. These relocations will achieve that objective. . . .

. . .[T]hey will be made available for public viewing, along with a document that explains their historical significance and the concerns Native Americans have expressed about how they are portrayed in the paintings. After all, a university needs to encourage a free flow of ideas, even if those ideas make some people uncomfortable, as long as we don’t foist those ideas on unaware or unwilling recipients.

 

 

Share

Argue the Premise

By James Beers:

I am in agreement with those that say we are living in a “Dictatorship of Relativism”.

Relativism refers to the lack of agreement in any one truth and the embrace of unlimited alternatives that conflict with each other in any and all matters of the day.  Consider all the deeply held and conflicting beliefs surrounding such matters as:

–       Hunting is and should remain legal.

–       Grazing and logging on private and public property is beneficial and sustainable.

–       Private ownership of animals is a legal and beneficial tradition.

–       Prosecution and punishment of criminals should be the same for all races and sexes.

–       Churches should be subservient to government controls.

–       Gun ownership is a valuable right of all Americans interested in protecting themselves, their families and their community from criminals, terrorists and government factions determined to establish a dictatorship.

–       Government should never discriminate based on sex or race for any purpose.

–       Central government should be grown and lower levels made subservient to it.

–       Government should control sermons, healthcare, native/non-native species, water, land uses, life support decisions, etc.

–       Fetal (in the womb) humans should receive the total legal protection afforded federally-protected migratory birds.

–       Central government bureaucrats should decide bathroom use, education priorities, endangered species’ decrees, dam construction, energy development matters, whether to cooperate or not with State or Local officials, access roads and Local decisions affecting Local communities and their economies, etc.

*Note that I do not mention the Endangered Species Act or the US Forest Service or government regulations or some politician’s latest distraction disguised as some all-good proposal to solve some big problem he concocted in the first place.  What appear above are the PREMISES claimed to justify government allowing or prohibiting everything government controls or aims to control, as believed and supported by the most powerful among us.

dic-ta-tor-ship, n. 1. a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator.  2. absolute, imperious, or overbearing power or control.

“Dictatorship of relativism” means the emergence of a ruling class with absolute power simply declaring under the auspices of what is in THEIR best interest what is right; what is wrong; what will be allowed; and what will be forbidden.  There is no “right” or “wrong” beyond what the dictator decrees.  There are no “rights” beyond what government allows or prohibits.  Regarding the PREMISES examples list; what government allows today, they may well prohibit tomorrow.  In other words, there is no truth or consistency guaranteed by government and the powerful that control it: there are only their individual interests served by such uncontrolled and unresponsive government.  It has always been so.

I must constantly remind myself of this.  While the day-to-day confrontation of the latest US Fish and Wildlife Service lies about government-imposed large predators; or the public refutation of the latest land closures to grazing or logging or hunting or trapping or access or beaches by government; etc., etc. are each and totally necessary: too often we limit ourselves to the minutiae of the problem at hand.  By that I mean we refute and argue the “study” or the “regulation” or the court precedent or the bureaucrat’s lie or the scientists misleading humbug and collapse in a heap either as winners emboldened to keep fighting or as losers mumbling “what’s the use, it is hopeless”.

Whether we are hunters, trappers, fishermen, wood cutters, ranchers, animal owners, small businessmen, rural residents, beach-goers, property owners, Local governments, State governments, or the foregoing’s Non-Government Organizations; we all are guilty of not arguing the PREMISES.  When we have numerous disagreements among ourselves we are like armies without discipline or any agreement about what we are fighting for.  Thus we avoid the conflict associated with taking on the PREMISES with government and those controlling them to savage our rights, our families, our culture, our traditions and our way of life.  As long as this persists, we will steadily diminish and ultimately vanish into the maw of a dictatorship like plankton disappearing into the gullet of a whale shark.

For instance, arguing about wolf/coyote hybrids and their “protection” is like arguing about how many angels can coexist on the head of a pin.  It is meaningless trivia to avoid reaching agreement that angels exist or not; just like the hybrid question avoids the resolution of the question that government either has or does not have the authority to introduce, protect, take property, reduce rural economies, or endanger rural residents on behalf of any animal not accepted or welcomed by those forced to accommodate them.

Is it “just” (i.e. “actuated by truth, justice, and lack of bias – to be just in one’s dealings”) for government to “prefer” certain “races” and “sexual designations” for everything from jobs and college admissions to housing and financial assistance?  What is the Constitutional and “just” role of US government?  What is the truth?

All of PREMISES underlying these matters are hidden and distorted by government and media propaganda as well as the schoolroom nonsense disguised as “education”.  Rationales from growing government power and the implementation of so many hidden agendas from gun control to elimination of hunting, ranching and timber management are all driving these “do-good” laws, regulations and policies.  We are reduced to arguing about these immediate issues based on things like:

–       Hunters and trappers are mean persons.

–       Ranchers destroy rural habitats.

–       Loggers kill animals, habitats, and precious vistas.

–       Federal experts are smarter than State or other “experts”.

–       “Scientists” (in the employ of or hoping to be favored by government fund administrators) say…

In short, we and “our” (mostly cowardly) organizations need to Argue the Premises of our interests loud and clear.  We need to stand firm about defending what we hold dear.  All the last 45 years of getting along, pretending to see the “wisdom” of radical government policies, and worrying about how neighbors or voters will see us and our interests has gotten us only deeper into the hole they are digging to bury us.  If the Founding Fathers had behaved like we do; we would have just had to vote about whether or not “we” (i.e. Great Britain) would leave the EU (BREXIT)?  If Britain was full of folks like us for that vote, they would probably still be in the EU and the papers would be full of pictures of boats full of refugees from not only Islamic war-torn lands but also from Terrorist-infested lands like Norway and Sweden.

Argue the Premise.  To do otherwise is like the Founding Fathers sending a Committee to London in 1776 to “appeal” tax and military policies of the King.  Lots of luck with that, just like our luck with all this arguing about meaningless things has been and will remain, all bad.  If we cannot agree on a common truth (the role of government; the responsibility for our surroundings; the very nature of our humanity; etc.) our fate will be dictatorship by a default we brought upon ourselves.

Jim Beers

10 August 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

Share

Letter to the Wall Street Journal

by James Beers

*A Letter to the Wall Street Journal and to Shawn Regan (PERC, Bozeman, Montana) about his 25 April Opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal titled, National Parks: Lost in the Wilds of Neglect.

Tick, Tick*

Shawn Regan is to be commended for his description of the irresolvable and increasing maintenance backlog throughout the National Park System.  The same is true of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the National Forests and the Bureau of Land Management real estate.  His recommendations of stopping acquisition; selling land to generate revenue for maintenance backlogs; keeping park revenues locally; turning to the private economy to tackle infrastructure and operations problems; and creating a franchising system for new parks are each and all sound and needed actions for all four large federal land ownerships.

We must keep in mind one hidden cost however; the cost hidden by the federal bureaucrats from the public for decades.  Concessionaires on these federal estates are mostly long-established and entrenched businesses operating under government agreements and contracts.  Over time, Concession improvements, facilities and other real property have been provided by the concessionaires.  Such real property remains the property of the concessionaires that use that as a reason to remain the concession operators although the illusion has been that of federal bureaucracy providing them.

Close the Park (or Refuge or Forest et al) and the concessionaire can sue for return of or reimbursement of the property and values “donated” over the years.  The costs of this on these federal properties subject to Mr. Regan’s badly needed (for more reasons than maintenance) prescriptions will present the Congress with an enormous bill and lawsuits that will significantly diminish the hoped-for revenue to “tackle” maintenance and operations on remaining landholdings.

Jim Beers

Former Chief of Refuge Operations, USFWS, Washington, DC

25 April 2016

Share

WOLVES – How Much? How Long?

By James Beers:

I receive many requests to “write something” or “support” some federal wolf legislative proposal or some State fish and wildlife Budget Request for a “special” appropriation to “manage” wolves that are killing livestock.  I regret to say that, like other requests to get behind a “special” federal regulation modification to “return wolf management” to certain states; I more often than not spend my time on other things that I believe to be more useful.

Why do I not actively support such “important” and “necessary” government actions?  Let me count the ways.

  1. As long as the Endangered Species Act remains on the books, all of these things are like a hologram in one of those Star Wars movies; that is to say merely illusions controlled from some far off location.  They can be made dormant when convenient and activated immediately when opportune to bureaucrats and their “partners”.
  2. As we hum like busy bees over the need for more dollars for the state guys and gals that put the wolves in our midst and that look away as they spread and multiply killing livestock and dogs and big game while lying to us about the wolves and when pinned to the wall whine that their “Plan” (dictated, approved and overseen by federal bureaucrats) is all they can go by.
  3. Federal bureaucrats, utilizing federal law and the regulations they (the bureaucrats) write and modify with pro-wolf non-government organizations) to constantly “push and probe” the American public like ISIS terrorists as to how to keep the states “in line” with federal goals as the wolves spread and multiply from valley to plain and state to state.
  4. State and federal wildlife bureaucrats that were once (decades ago) the most highly respected bureaucrats in government have come to be known as liars (the right word) and connivers that, without hesitation or reluctance, ignore legislative review mandates and public input, use groundless figures like puppet-government bureaucrats in an occupied country, and operate and enlarge a lawless shadow government for their own benefit utilizing clandestine NGO “partners” with more lawless hidden agendas than the American Communist Party or the latest Moslem lobbying organization.
  5. I have come to view all those things I admit to not supporting as simply delay and distraction tactics by bureaucrats, politicians and NGO’s that are destroying rural America and the national rule of law.

As I write this, March 2016, the bureaucrats are all being “so nice” and “listening to our “needs”.  Why?  Because there is a Presidential election underway and all those wildlife bureaucrats and their political hacks appointed to run them know where this gravy train is buttered.  They all want a President, Congress, Supreme Court, State Legislature and Governor of either Party that will “support” “sound conservation biology”.  “Sound conservation biology’’ is translated as “bigger budgets”, “more land ownership and control”, “more bureaucrats”, “more government authority and jurisdiction”, and any other things the bureaucrats want that will get and keep votes for the politicians in power.  Thus, bureaucrats will “push and probe” (see 1 through 5 above) in ways that get those politicians most in the bureaucrat’s pockets (yes they are just like lobbyists) elected and reelected.

There are two kinds of politicians that bureaucrats do not want to see elected: one they can live with and one they despise.  They can live with the “can’t we all just get along” politicians.  Those guys will just leave everything (see 1 through 5 above) in place and occasionally throw crumbs like a new Wilderness or Marine Sanctuary to urban voters or suburban women, or support the latest “management return” to a State (under conditions of an “approved” Plan and with the clear bureaucrat understanding that it can all be reclaimed with a lawsuit or regulatory maneuver by federal bureaucrats when opportune in the future).  An example of this was President GW Bush keeping a politician (in charge of the +/-$60 Million missing from the Pittman Robertson Excise Taxes for state agencies’ wildlife programs to introduce wolves in the mid 1990’s into the Upper Rocky Mountain States) in a non-job until the his Party came back into power and made him Director of the US Fish and Wildlife Service.  Like so many other transformative Progressive actions, they push and push relentlessly until there appears to be a developing pushback (today?) and then we are all supposed to sing Kumbaya around the fire and let it all stay in place until they seize total power again (like 2009-2010) at which time they resume right where they left off with a vengeance.

The politician the bureaucrats despise the most though is the one that comes in saying and actually intending to amend unjust laws, reduce government and reorient federal intrusions into state and local authorities and jurisdictions.  I saw this first-hand when Ronald Reagan was elected and while he served two terms.  I had been working for the federal government for over a decade by then.  I was in Washington when President Reagan was elected and when he left.  Those were the days (1970’s-1990’s) when the US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Forest Service, BLM and other federal natural resource/land-owning bureaucracies were beginning to marginalize wildlife-managers/foresters/range managers and hiring, promoting and transferring anti-resource management employees with growing minority and female employees largely under EEO Preferences for which bonuses were paid and accepting political appointees with more and more of those anti-management, pro-environmental-sanctification values and agendas.  The result is what we deal with today. The nasty and hateful things commonly said about President Reagan and his appointees (i.e. the “menacing” Manny Lujan, the “dangerous” Jim Watt, et al) in bureaucratic privacy were both stunning and appalling.  The bureaucrat’s propaganda machine did everything it could to make him look stupid and his appointees to look like morons.  It never let up and it was disgraceful to say the least.  Ask yourselves Mr. & Mrs. America, how is any reform even possible without a strong confrontation?

So you ask, what has all this to do with “Wolves”?  What do you mean by “How Much?” by “How Long?”

Never forget or doubt that the Defenders of Wildlife, HSUS, Animal Welfare Institute, Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, Wildlife Federation, NRDC, Center for Biological Diversity, PETA, et al agree that the end game is no hunting, no trapping, no animal management, no animal control, no animal ownership, no animal use, no animal commerce and no unregulated activity by any citizen even remotely involved with any wild or domestic animal.  These groups have annual get-togethers with state and federal bureaucrats, they lobby federal and state politicians and they serve as an employee-pool for federal and state agencies.  They work with and serve as a bookend for federal and state wildlife agencies when paired with the increasingly get-along hunting/fishing/ranching/land owner Non-Government Organizations originally formed to advocate for their namesakes (Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, American Cattlemen, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, et al).  These latter have, like many accuse the Republican “Establishment” in Washington of becoming, evolved into “get-along partners” with the very bureaucracies and Non-Government bureaucracies they were founded to either support or oppose.  Add in the big sporting goods businesses (selling smuggled – no Excise Tax – Chinese fishing tackle, supporting federal “Invasive Species Authority while displaying pheasants and brown trout on the walls of their stores, etc.) and you have plenty of blame to go around.

But, the big 800# gorilla in the room described in the foregoing paragraph is which ones (or one), take your time here, would really fight to keep the federal animal control function when (not if) all of the above dandies advocate or go AWOL when Wildlife Services is finally dumped into the bureaucratic junkyard or moved and renamed the Office of Interpretive Human Management or some such concoction?  That is going to happen.

Wildlife Services was the first federal foray into federal wildlife authority and jurisdiction way back in the 19th century.  Wildlife Services has had many names and up until the environmental Armageddon in the 1970’s many USFWS Managers came from the Wildlife Services workforce.  The Avant Garde, Nouveau employees and political appointees of the 1990’s led the charge to abolish Wildlife Services but powerful advocates came to its defense and everyone cheered when the despised Wildlife Services was transferred from USFWS to the USDA under President Clinton.  Make no mistake there are increasingly powerful bureaucrat and NGO forces that will cut funding to and move to abolish the Wildlife Services under the next tyrannical reign (like Roman Emperors’ changes often were) and opportunity.

So, the question is, “How Long will Wildlife Services be around to:

–       Act as a placebo (i.e. “kill a wolf when 2 / 3 whatever ‘verified’ livestock losses take place) while wolves are continuing to spread?

–       Verify, “Yes it was wolves” or “no it was dogs” honestly?

–       Be the only state-wide or national data point for dog losses to wolves?

–       Be the only state-wide or national data point for what is REALLY happening to big game animals due to predation by wolves?

–       Be the only entity capable of actually catching/capturing/trapping/snaring/ etc. offending wolves quickly and efficiently?

–       Be the one remaining entity with a few employees willing and able to kill offending dangerous and destructive animals?

–       Be the only remaining government entity recognizing the destructiveness of both wild and domestic animals and the need to be equipped to take concrete and effective action.

–       Be the only repository of government employees that (while in the field and away from political-hack handlers) can advise and describe wolf problems and solutions to American citizens.

The point being, when Wildlife Services is gone or converted into some sort of environmental seminary for new employees, HOW WILL OR WHO WILL CONTROL WOLVES AND THEIR DESTRUCTION?  The federal and most state governments are committed to not let the “management by the state”, or faux concern for predation, or eased control for rural residents go on long.  That may be when the wolves are irreversible (perhaps in another 4 or 5 states) or when numbers in the settled landscapes of The Lower 48 states are in the tens of thousands and the next arrogant President and “his” or “her” Congress takes control and Wildlife Services is teaching macramé; will any of us look back and say (or will out kids and grandkids say?), “how stupid were we (they) to think that there would be:

–       Eternal wolf-counting to monitor adherence to “plans”?

–       Never-ending selective wolf control based on actual damages?

–       Obligatory government protection of rural property and rural lives from government wolves?

–       Ever any management of wolf damage and destruction levels or wolf densities by the bureaucrats and politicians that put the wolves there.

–       Government wolf control in a world of no rural rights to control any animals that was always a lie that once realized it is too late to ever put the wolves back in the bottle or punish the liars that profited and are long gone to some gated-golf community in a sunny climate.

The second question is, “How Much State and Federal Tax Dollars is all this, and Future, Wolf Bay-Sitting Going to Take?”

 

Take Washington State’s latest maneuver to hire a “conflict specialist” or Oregon’s request for more money to control wolves depredating on livestock: where does such money come from?

–       When fewer folks buy hunting licenses because of lack of game and human safety concerns, wildlife program funding declines.

–       When government gun control and ammunition bans make purchases more difficult, more expensive and (except for self-protection) gun sales decrease; Excise Tax Revenue from the sale of Arms and Ammunition for state wildlife programs decreases.

–       Hunting License Revenue and Excise Tax Revenue are the two major sources of funding for state wildlife programs.

–       Baby-sitting wolves (counting, researching, enforcing, public relations, hearings, investigating depredations, etc.) not only comes (from the federal government) with NO FUNDING OF ANY PERMANENCE, IT ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTES TO THE DECLINE OF ALL WILDLIFE PROGRAM FUNDING!  Why it’s enough to make you a “black helicopter conspiracy” guy. Who could let this happen?  Why doesn’t someone say something?

–       So with a federal government +/-$20 Trillion in debt and state governments wondering where their next year’s tax revenue will come from, does anyone in rural America really believe that there will be money from either the state or federal politicians to do all this predation “verification”/compensation-payment/control of offending animals/public relations/censussing/federal compliance/etc. wolf babysitting ad infinitum?

Yeah, the New England environmental voters will support keeping ranching and big game hunting safe from wolves Out West with federal dollars. Federal and State bureaucrats will request budget increases to “study” alternatives like contracting it out to Defenders of Wildlife like wolf compensation was farmed out when wolves were first dumped and forced into states that were too “nice” to object. The Seattle/Portland/San Francisco/Los Angeles voters will enthusiastically vote eternal big ticket state funding to minimize cattle depredation, big game losses and rural dog deaths from wolves in rural parts of their states.  Just like I am sure Minneapolis and Milwaukee voters will gladly spring for more and more millions every year to bring back Minnesota moose or Wisconsin elk being eliminated by wolves.  Especially when the ONLY REAL ANSWER is killing 70% of the wolves every year for a decade and then killing the amount required annually to keep them at about 25% of current numbers or (in a just world) exterminating them from Counties that do not want wolves and then KEEPING them extinct in such environs.  Heck, I’d bet that Chicago voters and Philadelphia/New York voters would be the first ones to step up to the plate to save the state wildlife agencies of other states if they were asked to do so with federal funds.  Who can believe any of this?

We are just like those passengers on the Titanic, so secure in our belief that we and our vessel are indestructible that we ignore the iceberg before us while rearranging the deck chairs.

Jim Beers

30 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

Share

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

Share

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

Share

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

Share

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

Share

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

Share

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

Share