April 2, 2015

Who Shot That Mongrel Red Wolf?

By James Beers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jim Beers
29 March 2015

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks,
Jett

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInEmailShare

Bear Lovers’ Undies Sure To Get Bunched Up Over This Movie

Field and Stream is reporting about a “wilderness survival thriller” movie based on a true story of a man and a woman who become victims of a black bear attack.But, but, but……there’s never been a black bear attack on humans before….I thought…or maybe not so much?

The idea that cute and cuddly black bears are portrayed as they really can be is sure to bunch a bunch of fudged undies.

Anecdotal Wolf Stories

Presented by James Beers:

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

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

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

XXXX

————————————————————–
XXXX,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

————————————————-

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

XXXX
—————————————————————

XXXX,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jim Beers
28 March 2015

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

Dingoes = Wolves = Coyotes = Dogs

By James Beers:

Dingoes, wolves, coyotes and dogs are all Canids. The name Canid comes from the Genus name Canis. All four of these animals are called species within the Genus Canis: Dingoes (Canis dingo); Wolves (Canis lupus); Coyotes (Canis latrans); and Dogs (Canis familiaris) but that identification of these as four “species” is misleading.

Species is a term that historically referred to animals with similar characteristics and the ability to freely interbreed and produce viable offspring. For instance, horses and mules are similar and do interbreed but their offspring are infertile and thus horses and mules are separate species. Our four “species” however (dingoes, wolves, coyotes and dogs) share similar characteristics, interbreed freely, and produce viable offspring. A dingo (despite their absence outside Australia) breeding with a wolf or a coyote or a dog will birth or sire pups with shared genes and behavioral tendencies of the parents. Theses pups will grow to adulthood and similarly have viable offspring from breeding with any of the other “species”. They will be as recognizable as to parentage of say a Lab crossed with a Golden retriever or a Staffordshire terrier (AKA Pit Bull) crossed with a Doberman. In addition to these outward similarities, behavioral tendencies like the unpredictability of Chows or the aggressiveness of Dobermans will likewise occur in the offspring of say a wolf crossed with a dog or a dingo crossed with a coyote.

Dingoes are Canids that were probably introduced to Australia by aboriginal immigrants many centuries ago. Question: Ask your favorite “Native Ecosystem” enthusiast, if dingoes were brought to Australia by aborigines; are they – the dingoes and the aborigines – “Native”???). But I digress. Dingoes are yellowish-brown “dogs” or “Canids” that are the size of a medium to small German shepherd. When covered in a semi thick coat of fur they appear like a lean Shepherd-type dog, and when covered in a short hair they look like a lean pointy-faced hound dog with upright ears like wolves and coyotes. Dingoes travel in groups and behave very much like wolves. They are bold and very dangerous predators that (in Australia) kill many sheep, “rabbits, kangaroos and emus” as well as children and elderly people. Anyone doubting this last need look no further than the somewhat recent case of the camping Australian family whose little boy disappeared and the mother was charged and found guilty of (killing?, abandoning? I am unsure) the child and sent to prison. Only after an appeal and thorough investigation was it clearly determined that dingoes or a dingo in the campground had killed and carried off the child to be devoured in some remote location. Just like wolves in India and coyotes and cougars attacking a child for food, it is not at all uncommon for the predator to lunge at the child after approaching quietly as close as possible and then seizing them by the neck to crush or break their neck and asphyxiate them, if still necessary: it is also not uncommon for a child so attacked to make no sound.

The news article below concerns a 5600 kilometer (3,480 mile) long fence that has for decades represented an attempt to seal off the SE ¼ of Australia FROM DINGOES. Like Europeans and North Americans of times past, Australians have sought to eradicate or at least minimize the dangers and costs of having to live with these dangerous and destructive “Canids” or predators in the settled or being-settled landscapes of Australia. Anyone denying the facts as understood by those LIVING WITH THESE ANIMALS DAY TO DAY is seriously and ignorantly meddling in the lives of others instead of respecting their fellow-citizens’ rights to what Americans refer to as “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. Dingoes, like wolves, do not belong in settled landscapes for many reasons.

European history back to and beyond the days of Sparta and Athens were centuries of necessary and persistent wolf control until wolves were little more than occasional wandering remnants. Islands like Britain and Ireland finally exterminated wolves much to the delight of the rich, the poor and their rural economies.

North American is replete with the dangers and destruction that wolves presented to aboriginal Americans as well as European settlers and American and Canadian farmers, ranchers and other rural residents. With one or two minor exceptions, wolves were exterminated throughout the Lower 48 USA States by World War I and were being kept at tolerable levels or exterminated by government and private control in much of Canada that bordered the Lower 48 States and certain Maritime Island Provinces where farms, ranches and villages prevailed.

Russia and most of Asia have hosted the largest concentrations of wolves in the world from sweltering Indian villages across Central Asian scrublands to the forests of Siberia. To this day, wolves kill many people every year as well as destroy precious reindeer and other livestock and the dogs used as watchdogs for people and flocks. Dramatic controls like this Australian fence and techniques like killer dogs, poisons, shooting, traps, posses and other innovations have always been in short supply in these countries where weapons were banned; dictators Religious rulers and Czars kept rural people in helpless societies; and where effective, large-scale wolf controls have always been short-lived and susceptible to quick replacement of controlled wolf areas by the constant influx of wolves from robust wolf populations in surrounding areas.

Until recently, Europe, Asia and North Americans were in complete agreement with Australians about the undesirable nature of these large Canid predators in settled landscapes, especially where men and women are forced to go about unarmed. While Russians and Central Asians agree with these views to this day, when told of European and North American actions to introduce and protect wolves they are as stunned as if they were told that Americans were foregoing oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power in favor of windmills or that Europeans were happy with and celebrating the steady increase in livestock deaths, dog deaths and mental instability of European grazers (that support rural economies, reduce fire dangers, and manage European plant communities for many purposes like erosion control and suppression of undesirable plants by grazing their flocks) resulting from wolf increases in both population and habitats across Europe.

This recent wolf worship (the correct word) has spawned a fantasy/science library of articles by grant and publicity-seeking “scientists” claiming “discoveries” of wolf benefits like “wolves change rivers” by killing big game animals and dispersing remaining animals from river banks thus causing trees and shrubs to proliferate as well as “Native” fish, animals like frogs and plants like Indian paintbrush. I call this pseudo-“science” Romance Biology. Unmentioned in these writings are always:

* The loss of big game hunting and the revenue it once provided to conservation programs by wolf activities.

* The dangers to human safety from the recent wolf attack in a Minnesota campground to the deaths of a schoolteacher on the Alaskan Peninsula and a young Canadian man in Saskatchewan. The impact on children, the elderly and families is enormous.

* The loss of livestock and ranches to wolf predation.

* The huge loss of dogs of all stripes to wolf attacks.

* The financial losses to rural communities, rural businesses, rural families and rural government revenue and authority.

As an American, I am always fascinated (less and less of late) by American innovations copied by others. Europeans are grinding out Romance Biology lies as more and more justifications are needed both in the popular media and as justification for more and continued wolf protection in the face of increasing death and destruction from the wolves.

Now, I can add the Australians as copying this propaganda technique that I call Romance Biology. Note the last three paragraphs of the following short article replete with pictures. A professor at the University of Sydney claims that “reintroduced and existing dingo populations” will “restore the balance of nature” (a meaningless term).

The final picture below is a cleverly (just like in the US and now Europe) worded bit of anti-human society propaganda. The composer (very likely an environmental or animal “rights’” radical group) would have us believe that dingoes (or wolves or coyotes or feral dogs or cougars, etc.) killing all manner of wildlife and livestock is both good and offsets any destruction, mayhem or human pain or death otherwise inflicted by these Canids.

Whenever you see this dingoes increase “the biodiversity of small mammals, lizards, and grasses’ or wolves “change rivers” Romance Biology, ask yourself and anyone believing this, “And your point is?”

Any area can have more or less biodiversity and that is to be expected where man lives and raises his family. The priority should always be the welfare and benefit of man, saying that man must abandon places or community supports simply for the sake of more “small mammals, lizards and grasses” is both silly and a declaration that man and his needs are inferior to any and every mix of plants and animals desired by the rich and powerful. Our challenge is to create and maintain a high standard of living for all persons while simultaneously providing for the endurance of all species and a rich biodiversity of plants and animals WHEREVER POSSIBLE. The dingo/wolf et al enthusiast refutes the “simultaneously” part of the equation and ultimately substitutes “primarily” thereby making their “Native”, “Ecosystem”, “Ecology first” mantra superior to man and his society. That is not only nature “worship” it is the rule if tyrants based on their visions of “nature.

For instance, if riverbank diversity was so valuable (assuming wolves, dingoes et al really do what they say, an assumption akin to climate change justifying population control, and the justification on one world government without any checks or balances) why weren’t hunters simply told to kill more grazing wild animals over the years and then manage the remainder in consonance with human activities and “biodiversity” targets? Anyone that thinks unregulated predation that cyclically varies wildly as do the prey, the predators and the resulting “biodiversity” is in any sense comparable to continuous wildlife management of all species is incapable of grasping the issue in any understandable manner. The real answer is that the dingo/wolf et al protection is meant to ultimately vacate the rural landscape and convert it to closed-to-the-public real estate run by bureaucrats and managed for the benefit of powerful interest groups, the rich and politicians.

I am reminded of a luncheon I attended almost 20 years ago in Brussels. I was sitting next to a Russian (actually a western Siberian with the look of a Greenlander or Northern Alaskan) wildlife expert. He was from Magadan on the Pacific coast near the Kamchatka Peninsula. He leaned over and said to me in a low voice, “Beers, can I ask you a question?” I said sure, and he said, “Is it true that you are putting wolves back into areas where they were exterminated years ago and protecting them?” Somewhat embarrassingly I answered, “Yes that is true.” He shook his head and mumbled to me. “How did you ever win the Cold War?”

What a world when a guy from Siberia tells a guy from Illinois that our people are nuts; and the Illinois guy could do no more than nod and shrug his shoulders in agreement.

That Siberian and I have more in common with those that built the Australian fence than all the expert Romance Biology “experts that invent diversions and lies about things that do not matter, be they “scientific papers” or “signs”. Unless and until the autonomy of Local communities to determine what plants and what animals in what mixes are to exist in THEIR community and how that mix is to be maintained; this rule of far-off dictators, interest groups and bureaucracies will only sit and grow like mushrooms after a rain. Local authority like this has only existed intermittently for millenniums in Europe and Asia: it has only existed in Australia and North America for a few centuries and it is disappearing right before our eyes as you read this. The real trick is to enable the humans that live with these animals to manage them for their own good and to permanently abolish the ability of far-off governments to rule the rural people, in their broadest sense, on behalf of the fantasies and imaginings of rich and powerful blocs with both obvious and hidden agendas.

Jim Beers
23 March 2015

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

Wolves: Those Who Have and Those Who Have Not

It would appear that people are blind when they want to be. Here are two distinct differences between how people who don’t have to live with wolves and romanticize about them and those that have, for centuries, lived with and dealt with wolves.

Some in Scotland want to have wolves “reintroduced” saying wolves are, “gentle and very loyal creatures.” And that, “I think getting wolves back into the wild cannot harm anyone.”

In Russia, where people have, for centuries, learned of the reality of living with wolves and have come to understand that the ONLY way to deal with the animal is through strict controls – meaning a killing of thousands of them when conditions dictate.

RT.com has an article and a video showing the problems Russia is facing with wolves and the call for killing about 3,500 wolves, as well as rewards being offered for help in getting the job done.

Like Scotland, here in America, the romanticists think we should cuddle up with the nasty, disease infested killers, much because neither place has much history, or any that wants to be remembered, in living with wolves. And yet we refuse to take a lesson from places like Russia to see the realities of wolves.

Willful blindness.

Chasing Your Blues Coyotes Away

Don’t like those coyotes hanging around your town? One Illinois town has devised a, “high-intensity hazing techniques by trained personnel.” Once it was suggested that people be allowed to shoot paint balls at the wild dogs, but that, I guess, would be deemed unruly and probably inhumane.

Hazing is the term they are using, a form of animal harassment or abuse if you will.<<<Read More>>>

GenevaIllinois

Send Wolves to Seattle

“SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) – Wolves are thriving in Washington, primarily on the eastern side of the Cascade Range.

That has sparked conflict because much of the support to bolster the wolf population comes from urban and liberal western Washington, but the negative impacts strike eastern Washington. One solution is for wolves to disperse across the state more quickly, wildlife officials said.

“With the densities of wolves in northeastern Washington, we would like to see the Cascades get more wolves and more wolf packs,” said Dave Ware, a wolf recovery expert with the state Department of Fish and Wildlife.”<<<Read More>>>

Some in Washington Want Wolf Plan Now

OLYMPIA — A Senate hearing Thursday on a bill that might change Washington wolf policy in two years turned to a more immediate issue — the upcoming grazing season.

Sen. Brian Dansel pressed the state’s wolf policy coordinator, Dave Ware, on whether the Department of Fish and Wildlife was content to wait until 2017 to do more to protect livestock from wolves.

“Are we good to wait two years to do anything?”<<<Read More>>>

Feds Start Killing Wolves Killing Livestock

“A federal program to remove problem wolves from Minnesota farms has resumed operation after the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the state came up with the necessary funds.

Federal trappers began responding to depredation complaints this week. They can trap and kill wolves they believe have killed or attacked livestock.”<<<Read More>>>

To Kill Minnesota Wolves Killing Livestock

More damned insanity! We spend gobs of money on efforts to protect an animal that doesn’t need protecting, and then we spend gobs of money to kill an animal that’s killing livestock. This makes about as much sense as everything that the damned government creates. Maybe the solution would be to make government extinct!

WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., announced a cooperative effort Wednesday between the U.S. and Minnesota ag departments to fund an effort to help livestock producers in northern Minnesota who have been losing sheep and cattle to wolves.

The predator-control program has often run out of money over the years. Under the effort, the federal government carries out the trappings and provides technical expertise through its Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service office in Grand Rapids.

The trappings will take place in problem areas where farmers or ranchers have been losing their livestock.<<<Read More>>>