December 13, 2019

Save a Tree. Eat a Beaver…..or Something

Stupidity and common sense hves run so amok that now nobody seems to know what to do with a problem beaver – kill it, trap it, trap and move it, adore it, invite it to stay and bring in more or simply marry one of the dang things. Beavers are always a problem when they decide to build a damn in the culvert that runs next to your house or along one of the roads Maine’s towns must maintain.

Beavers are a stupid creature that knows nothing but chewing up trees and stopping the sound of running water. Water runs through a culvert and often when it comes out the outlet end of the culvert, rushing water can be heard. This is like smelling Spinney’s fried clams out at the end of Fort Popham for the tourist looking to clog their arteries with some deep fried clams.

But as things go these days, people who think animals, even those that are too numerous and present too many problems, have rights and deserve to live to build a dam another day, want the creatures spared the death sentence. Makes little sense but then again what does in this day and age?


Picture editorial by Richard Paradis

I suppose being that much of today has been the focus on ignorance, idiocy and the vacancy of common sense, it is time one again to bring out the famous letter of the guy trying to deal with nuisance beavers and his inept government.

Subject: Go Figure

This is a copy of an actual letter sent to Ryan DeVries, from the
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, State of Michigan. Wait
till you read this guy’s response – but read the entire letter before
you get to the response.

Mr. Ryan DeVries
2088 Dagget
Pierson, MI 49339
SUBJECT: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20;

Site Location: Montcalm County

Dear Mr. DeVries:

It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality
that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced
parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner
and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity:

Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet
stream of Spring Pond.

A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A
review of the Department’s files shows that no permits have been issued.

Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in
violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource
and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994,
being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws
annotated.

The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially
failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at
downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently
hazardous and cannot be permitted.

The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all activities
at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by
removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the stream channel.
All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 2002.

Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so
that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure
to comply with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the
site may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement
action.

We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter.
Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
David L. Price
District Representative
Land and Water Management Division
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RESPONSE:

Dear Mr. Price,

Re: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20;
Montcalm County

Reference your certified letter dated 12/17/2000 has been referred to me
to respond to. First of all, Mr. Ryan De Vries is not the legal
landowner and/or contractor at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan.

I am the legal owner and a couple of beavers are in the (State
unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood “debris”
dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond.

While I did not pay for, authorize, nor supervise their dam project, I
think they would be highly offended that you call their skillful use of
natural building materials “debris.” I would like to challenge your
department to attempt to emulate their dam project any time and/or any
place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no way you could
ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam
ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their
dam work ethic.

As to your request, I do not think the beavers are aware that they must
first fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam
activity. My first dam question to you is:
(1) Are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers? or,
(2) do you require all beavers throughout this State to conform to said
dam request?

If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, through
the Freedom of Information Act I request completed copies of all those
other applicable beaver dam permits that have been issued. Perhaps we
will see if there really is a dam violation of P! art 301, Inland Lakes
and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act,
Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.3010,1 to
324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, annotated. I have several
concerns. My first concern is aren’t the beavers entitled to legal
representation?

The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay
for said representation – so the State will have to provide them with a
lawyer.

The Department’s dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed
during a recent rain event causing flooding is proof that this is a
natural occurrence, which the Department is required to protect. In
other words, we should leave the Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than
harrass them and call their dam names. If you want the stream “restored”
to a dam free-flow condition – please contact the beavers – but if you
are going to arrest them they obviously did not pay any attention to
your dam letter (being unable to read English).

In my humble ! opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build
their unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green
and water flows downstream. They have more dam right than I do to live
and enjoy Spring Pond. If the Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection lives up to its name, it should protect the
natural resources
(Beavers) and the environment (Beavers’ Dams).

So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case can be
referred for more elevated enforcement action right now. Why wait until
1/31/2002 The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then, and
there will be no way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them
then.

In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention a real
environmental quality (health) problem in the area. It is the bears.
Bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you
should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the beavers alone.

If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! (The
bears are not careful where they dump!)

Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to
contact you on your answering machine, I am sending this response to
your office via another government organization – the USPS. Maybe,
someday, it will get there.

Sincerely,
Stephen L. Tvedten
The University of Texas at: Austin
Office Community Relations/Accounting unit
P.O. Box 7367
Austin, TX 78713

Share

Was Justice Roberts Threatened With His Life and Voted For the Mandate?

Been outside working to finish up some things around the campsite before the weekend. It’s been a few hours now since I heard of the Supreme Court’s decision to urinate on what’s left of the Constitution, while Elana Kagan, Obama’s Marxist/Socialist attorney general, who created the arguments for Obamacare and voted on her own case and here’s what I’ve decided to write in comment of that decision.

Obviously somebody got to Justice Roberts. He appears as an idiot who has sold out to justice and the U.S. Supreme Court. However, somebody got to him and probably threatened him with his life or someone in his family. That’s how Obama and his band of thugs operate.

It’s a sad, a very sad damned day in Amerika today! What hope that some had that we might be able to turn Obama on his ear and rid him of his Marxist ways, was flushed down the toilet by an idiot and chicken shit for a Supreme Court Justice.

Beginning today, I am considering ceasing all work and getting in the Welfare lines. I certainly can make more money and won’t have to do a goddamn thing to get it. It’s time you communist bastards took care of me for a change!

America is gone! Gone for good! And the U.S. Supreme Court just turned off the water, locked the door and said goodbye.

Share

Who’s Interested in Adopting a $51,000 Wild Kitty Cat?

There were once 59 feral cats, of the house cat variety, that lived on a government-owned island near Southern California. $3 million plus was spent to trap and remove all 59 cats making the felines now worth about $51,000 each. We are told that once the captured kitties are acclimated to humans, they will be put up for adoption. I wonder if you’ll have to pay the capture fees in addition to shots, etc.

Have we lost our minds?

Share

Michigan Declares Farmed Pigs “Invasive Species”. Man Forced to Shoot All His Pigs

In a story one might expect to read in Nazi Germany or Stalin-ruled Russia, a Michigan farmer who raises pigs for a living, was forced to either shoot all his pigs or be arrested. While the Michigan Department of Natural Resources used “a bizarre new “Invasive Species Order” (ISO) that has suddenly declared traditional livestock to be an invasive species.”, lied to a judge to get a search warrant and even after being told by the pig owner he had killed all his pigs, invaded his property anyway. And this is America?

Coming to the city or town you live in soon. Keep burying your head and denying it’s existence. Prop up your government and soon they will be coming for you.

Share

Special Court For Pets. What Possibly Could Go Wrong?

Hat tip to reader “James” for the link.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Please read and consider. The city of San Antonio, Texas has created a special court just to deal with pet cases. This is a function of the state’s court system, not a separate judicial entity. The special court has been functioning for 10 months and has collected $250,000 in fines.

Here is one example of a recent court case. A six-year-old boy went to school and told the school nurse that his dad’s chihuahua had bit him. The boys father was brought up on charges and a guilty finding resulted in a fine of $269.

Some probably will find not only the charge and fine ridiculous but the entire concept of the state creating a special court just to deal with pet issues beyond the scope of sensibility. Others will complain that animals are being either singled out for special treatment or singled out for special prosecution, along with the owners.

However, fear not! The city is considering creating special and crime-specific courts in order that judges can become “specialized” in a certain field of judicial expertise.

But the 10-month-old court is part of a larger trend in which cities are forming specialized tribunals to deal with distinct populations, such as drug addicts or the mentally ill. The goal is to allow judges to develop a deeper understanding of certain kinds of offenses, and better fashion appropriate punishments for those who commit them.

I repeat! What possibly could go wrong?

Share

Whacked Out Animal Rights Activist Arrested Trying to Hire Hit Man to Kill Random Fur Wearing Person

Expose these freaks for who they are.

Share

Two Psychotic Actions Don’t Equal Rational Justice

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a fringe, psychotic group that uses fraud and other unethical means to raise money to pay overblown salaries and fund programs not geared to saving or protecting animals, attempted to file a lawsuit on behalf of 5 California whales demanding the same constitutional rights as humans. PETA vs. Sea World was subsequently thrown out of court because the judge ruled animals don’t have the same rights as people.

As perverse as this kind of behavior is, it is not a position shared only by whacked-out PETA members. Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s pick to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, has stated publicly that he believes lawsuits should be brought on behalf of animals.

The United Nations and most animal rights groups fully support the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights which claims that animals and humans all share in the same rights.

Understandably a psychotic behavior on the part of those who support such rights equity with animals, we now learn that the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) is considering filing a lawsuit against PETA that would, “represent the 25,000-plus dogs and cats that PETA has killed since 1998 whose “rights” have been violated under the 5th and 8th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution”.

While the notion in and of itself is totally asinine, those who understand the differences between rights for humans and welfare for animals, get their point. I am only assuming the announcement of consideration to sue is for the purpose of making a statement and not actually an attempt at using two wrongs to somehow come up with anything that resembles truth.

Similar to the actions of the Humane Society of the United States, these two groups solicit money from anyone from small individual donors to very wealthy celebrities. In 2009 Carrie Underwood gave $200,000 to HSUS.

Unfortunately for all the donors, they are not made aware of the fact of the tens of thousands of family pets these two groups routinely euthanize, sometimes without giving any effort to find them homes.

It is very important for individuals and organizations like the Center for Consumer Freedom to recognize and expose fraud and hypocrisy as is the case here with PETA. What is not acceptable is to use PETA’s own crack-brained ideas to allow animals to have legal representation of any kind in our courts.

We get your point. Now let’s move on.

Tom Remington

Share