Isle Royale’s “Pristine Wilderness?”

I guess it’s time to roll out another story about the insanity that seems to have infected so many concerning wolves and moose on Michigan’s Isle Royale. I’ll spare readers much of the details of the history but in a brief remark state that scientists have been “studying” the relationship between wolves and moose on the island for many years. At issue now is that the inbred wolves are all dying off and the cult of wolf worshipers are near flogging themselves over what to do; let “nature” take it’s course or bring in more wolves?

Perhaps the most important aspect of this so-called study, is the belief by those conducting the studies and the hundreds of thousands of brain dead followers, that somehow, wolves and moose isolated on an island in the midst of Lake Superior, resembles an “ecosystem” found just about anywhere else in the world. But then again, it is impossible to try to convince “The True Believers” that any of this matters.

Dr. Charles Kay, wildlife ecologist at Utah State University, in an email exchange, had this to say about Isle Royale and the wolf and moose studies.

The entire study has been a waste of time because it is a unique situation and the results are NOT APPLICABLE ANY PLACE ELSE IN NORTH AMERICA——and anyone who says it is applicable to other areas, is committing scientific fraud!

This is much like Dr. Valerius Geist’s title he bestows upon the believers of “balance of nature.” He calls it “intellectual garbage.”

To give you an example of the insanity behind Isle Royale, and all the clap trap that gets repeated and perpetuated, you are welcome to read a fairly recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education (snicker), written by Paul Voosen.

There’s little worth repeating and bringing up in the article but I would like to point out a couple of things that were written, which I think is a reflection of the entire article’s inaccuracies and unbelievable commentary. The author writes:

The service [National Park Service] debated what to do [about an outbreak of parvovirus] then, as it wrangled with fears about interfering in a pristine wilderness. But given global warming, it’s hard today to see any wilderness as pristine. (emboldening added)

Pristine wilderness? Are you kidding me? And is this author intimating, or perhaps he’s just coming straight out and saying so, that there are no longer any “pristine wildernesses” because of global warming? When anyone writes this sort of stuff, doesn’t it give cause to question everything else written? It should!

It is fraud to claim Isle Royale as a “pristine wilderness”, in the 1980s or much of anytime prior to nearly 6,000 years ago. If you knew the history of the island and called it “pristine” that’s fraud. If you don’t know about the history then that’s a reflection of lazy ignorance and poor journalism. Perhaps I should blame that on global warming; something environmentalists can relate to.

Here’s what Wikipedia, that source even lazy people use for reference, has to say about the history of Isle Royale.

In prehistoric times, large quantities of copper were mined on Isle Royale and the nearby Keweenaw Peninsula. The region is scarred by ancient mine pits and trenches up to 20 feet deep. Carbon-14 testing of wood remains found in sockets of copper artifacts indicates that they are at least 5700 years old. In Prehistoric Copper Mining in the Lake Superior Region, published in 1961, Drier and Du Temple estimated that over 1.5 billion pounds of copper had been mined from the region. However, David Johnson and Susan Martin contend that their estimate was based on exaggerated and inaccurate assumptions……….

In the mid-1840s, a report by Douglass Houghton, Michigan’s first state geologist, set off a copper boom in the state, and the first modern copper mines were opened on the island.[9] Evidence of the earlier mining efforts was everywhere, in the form of many stone hammers, some copper artifacts, and places where copper had been partially worked out of the rock but left in place. The ancient pits and trenches led to the discovery of many of the copper deposits that were mined in the 19th century.[7] The remoteness of the island, combined with the small veins of copper, caused most of the 19th century mines to fail quickly.[citation needed] Between the miners and commercial loggers, much of the island was deforested during the late 19th century.

I think any idiot can plainly see that Isle Royale was no “pristine wilderness” nor was the reason for that caused by global warming.

In addition to the false claim that Isle Royale is or once was a “pristine wilderness”, according to Dr. Charles Kay, there were never any wolves or moose on the island.

…before Whites, Native Americans ran the entire island—-and there were NO MOOSE OR WOLVES only a few caribou.

The important thing to remember about the years of studies conducted on wolves and moose on Isle Royale; this information and knowledge gathered can then be used on all the other islands in North America that have wolves and moose on them, exactly like Isle Royale. Now that’s important stuff right there!

Movie Trailer: Ghosts of the Rockies by Rockholm Media Group

This movie trailer introduces a movie that is scheduled to be released in the Fall of 2013. We are told it will contain information to prove that the effort, from the beginning, to introduce Canadian wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho, was a criminal enterprise – criminal based on fraud, deception, theft and illegal acts. This should be be good.

Background Checks for Scientists

Guest post by Jim Beers

(An article written recently for The Pen, the newsletter of Common Sense Coalition Talk Radio program out of California, Missouri.)

As the debate on requiring background checks for gun sales rages, I submit that background checks should be mandatory for scientists that sell their research to government bureaucracies.

A recent news article in The Washington Post (of all places) describes a former scientist at Johns Hopkins University that became embroiled in the controversy over growing scientific research retractions coinciding with the competition for available government grant dollars.

The tainted and slanted research that was going increasingly unquestioned, concerned cancer drugs and genetic relationships. The scientist found that questioning results based on incomplete testing and ignoring applicable factual references resulted in his being disciplined, his eventually being fired and the suicide of a colleague asked to verify the unverifiable science purported to be reliable.

The number of research articles retracted in the field of biomedical research has increased “tenfold since 1975”. Two thousand of these retracted scientific papers were reviewed and it was determined that “67% were attributable to misconduct, mainly fraud or suspected fraud”. While government grant availability has increased since the 1960’s, when 2 out of 3 requests were funded: today only one out of 5 requests are funded. Because jobs and funding for the researchers are really what is on the line today, shoddy and cheap “science” to give government grant administrators what they want is the only guarantor of future funding preferences.

If potentially human life-threatening aspects of cancer drugs relative to the genetics of those afflicted with cancer can be misrepresented, what is sacred anymore? Eventual lawsuits by wealthy families suspecting misuse of drugs or malpractice as the cause of losing a loved one might well punish these “scientists” publishing misleading and self-serving results. Yet these charlatans are evidently not deterred. If this is so, what about all the environmental/animal “rights” “science” purchased by government since “the 1960’s”?

When “science” tells us that logging “must” be stopped; or grazing is “bad”; or hunting “unbalances the environment”; or predators “balance” the environment; or “native” species “belong” everywhere; or dams “must” be removed; or roads “disturb” grizzly bears; or fatal attacks by predators are the “fault” of those killed; or lethal control of predators is “ineffective”; or pipelines “disturb” species X; or sage grouse are “in danger”; or bats are “disappearing”; or wildfires are “good”; or Sanctuaries and Wilderness are “beneficial”; or that only more federal jurisdiction over water or more federal land ownership or easement control of private property will do X, Y, and Z: other than pandering for more federal funding, what possible down side is there for unscrupulous ”scientists”?

When federally-protected grizzly bears kill hikers, no scientist or bureaucrat is responsible. Ditto when wolves decimate big game herds and force ranchers out of business and diminish the quality of rural life. Ditto when logging communities are decimated and unmanaged forests result in fewer and fewer of the critters supposedly saved by eliminating logging. Ditto when federal lands are closed to use and roads and access only to burn down and kill neighbors while their homes and belonging are destroyed. All the faulty environmental/animal “rights” “science” since “the 1960’s” has bred a national nightmare to rival the corruption of human life-saving biomedical research that has become less and less reliable.

Until and unless the federal-influence spigot to Universities and research organizations is turned way down or off, corruption is inevitable. The spigot won’t be turned off until the US Congress stops funding and writing laws that imagine laws and regulations that are triggered by or act only upon “science”. Think Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Animal Welfare Act, Wilderness Act, and other such laws that absolve all involved humans of any responsibility while pointing always to “science” as the reason and trigger for un-Constitutional and anti-human actions by a government of men supposedly bounded by a Constitution. This is an especially important matter for rural Americans today.

The federal laws will not be amended or repealed until we elect federal legislators that respect the Constitution and have our best interests at heart. Federal Legislators will not do the right thing until State Legislators and Governors stand their ground (think Wyoming and wolves as a role model here). State Legislators and Governors with our best interests at heart come from Local elected officials like Commissioners, Supervisors and Sheriffs. The time to get this food chain going is right now. I won’t repeat that old Chicago canard about “voting early and often” but I will say we have to vote and vote for this aspect of our lives and liberty. Letting bureaucrats and “scientists” rule us is akin to letting Druid priests read bones or Shamans stare into smoke as a basis for national decisions. As Dirty Harry once remarked about his boss’s breath mint “it ‘ain’t’ cutting it”

Jim Beers

13 March 2013
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

David Mech’s Damage Has Been Done – Too Late to Attempt Reconciliation

It seems some readers are agog today over an article discovered to have been published at Daily Kos, discussing supposed errors made in attempts to understand wolf and wildlife science, balance of nature and trophic cascades. At the center of this article is David Mech, father of the Wolf Wars; the man who identifies with wolf studies and the introduction or reintroduction, depending on one’s perspective, of wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

It’s always vengeful bliss to say, “I told you so,” but it’s just as important to understand that Mech’s seeming admission that some things might not have been right, is really no victory for anyone accept David Mech and the environmental hijackers; those destroyers of people’s rights, property destruction and confiscation, and the subjection of citizens to reduced levels of public health and safety.

On examination of certain statements made by Mech, on the surface I can see him saying the things that I have been writing about for several years on the myths of balance of nature and self regulation of the ecosystems.

…..at the very least, scientists now disagree about whether wolf related behaviorally mediated trophic cascades in Yellowstone are really occurring………. At most, that well-publicized claim may not be correct at all.

…..ecologists (and particularly conservation biologists) do seem obsessed to the point of blindness with predator-induced trophic cascades.

Two decades later after observing wolves and moose and whitetail in Minnesota, Mech denounced the “balance of nature” writing in (National Wildlife 23(1):54-59) he said nature “far from always being ‘balanced,’ ratios of wolves and prey animals can fluctuate wildly – and sometimes catastrophically”.

Consider, if you will, what Mech said and the comment made by the author of this piece.

In an interview Mech states that scientific conclusions may “vary from outright dishonesty to not even knowing your bias is getting in the way,”. Because the meme of a trophic cascade in Yellowstone is so embedded in textbooks and popular media, it may never die, even if untrue.(Emboldening added)

It has taken how many decades of wolf study, combined with the numerous “scientific” papers written and distributed by Mech, perhaps walking around with a very large chip on his shoulder, swelling in his pride as being perceived as the wolf expert, approaching godliness in some people’s eyes, to decide to consult other scientists about wolves, or in general, balance of nature and trophic cascades?

It may appear that Mech has reached some scientific epiphany or maybe even remorse, complete with crocodile tears, so why should we be so thrilled at his comments about the dishonesty and corruption of money-starved, agenda-driven scientists who, “vary from outright dishonesty to not even knowing your bias is getting in the way?”

I would have to agree with the author of the article who states that this meme, that is the false idea that has spread throughout the scientific community full of wolf loving, money hungry faux scientists, may never die, is, in fact, the outcome that Mech intended from the beginning.

It’s a bit easier to put up a front indicating wrongdoing when the damage has been done and you’ve achieved the goals intended. Are we then to forgive and forget? I think not. The actions of Mech and many others, those being the products of his own work, i.e. his following, his own “outright dishonesty” and what I believe to be him knowing his own bias, have caused such extreme damage, to not only the scientific community but the loss of other wildlife, the spread of disease and the destruction caused to humanity through his deceitful work to cause division and strife among the people. How does one measure that value and establish accountability? Should we just dismiss it because this man is sticking his big toe in contriteness?

The damage has been done and it probably never will get corrected. The lessons learned here will also not be all good. One would like to think that the scientific community would take a deep breath and reassess this evil approach toward political ends shrouded in spurious science, but unfortunately it will stand as a proving ground in how to make money while lying and cheating the American public, regardless of the potential of damage that can be done. After all, the love of money is the root of all evil.

The U.S. Government, specifically the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, should never have given one man so much power and authority to carry out his work. To do wrong, the result of work going unchecked and unchallenged, some because Mech had the power to disregard information from others, for over 2 decades and THEN step forward indicating that things may have been wrong, isn’t something the American citizens should be so easily willing to accept. There is far more to Mech’s and other’s behavior over the years that goes a bit beyond “oops” and can rightly be described as a criminal enterprise.

As Christians we are taught to forgive, but that doesn’t mean we need forget. We must correct the wrong and seek rightful justice for the actions that go beyond scientific error. The American people will never get back into the scientific literature the truth about wildlife science, balance of nature and trophic cascades. It is my opinion that this “damage” was intentionally planned. It is also my opinion that as David Mech ages, he’s now, without much fear of punitive actions against him, willing to say what he may deem appropriate to save his own skin and play to the side of science and citizens who believed him wrong and corrupt from the beginning. We shouldn’t fall for it.

We should take his words and attach those words to the years of his work and then the task at hand for the activists is to begin a long and difficult task of reeducation. How do you counter the brainwashing being done by the most powerful?

When Will Editorial Writers Know They’ve Written Enough?

I was completely weirded out after reading the first letter to the editor in the Bangor Daily News from one Joshua O’Donnell, claiming residence in Brunswick, Maine. In that self-exposition, O’Donnell came across more of a candle-burning, Gaia worshiping, stalker than anyone concerned about the welfare of coyotes. Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!

How does anybody respond to such nonsense? Perhaps a better man that I, Gerry Lavigne, former Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) deer biologist and now member of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, did rebut O’Donnell’s blather. You can read that here.

Today, it appears that Mr. O’Donnell (assuming it’s the same Joshua O’Donnell) tried a different tactic and decided to pass himself off as an expert on the coyote and game management in general. It should be noted here that this recent letter to the editor more than suffices to demonstrate that the writer is ignorant of coyotes, wildlife management and history.

O’Donnell fails miserably in defining what constitutes a “poorly studied species without any core or long-term understanding of their ecological role within a changing ecosystem.” Somehow I think this is a cautious attempt at claiming the new-science science of ecosystem self-regulation and the importance of predators, like the coyote or wolf as being necessary to “balance” our conglomeration of animal and plant life found in our forests. All a myth.

Then there’s this.

Maine’s coyote hunt exists as the continuance of an inhumane, unethical and violent tradition that historically escalates and has culminated in the complete extinction of keystone predators such as the Eastern cougar and gray wolf.

Are we talking about coyotes, cougars, wolves or asses? (That’s what Jesus called them.) Obviously the only history Mr. O’Donnell has about hunting traditions and history is what he learn in third grade……last year. If we are talking about coyotes, I would like to request from Mr. O’Donnell the facts that show the last time coyotes were exterminated from anywhere on the planet. It is a display of dishonesty, if nothing else, to somehow extrapolate Maine’s coyote control program into the extermination of “keystone predators”.

The rest of what he writes is just fill-in words of garbage and emotional drool. Perhaps if Mr. O’Donnell spent a bit more time learning before speaking, he might discover the truth about what was really in our fields and forests before settlers came here from Europe. In addition, if he were to study and seek a truthful understanding of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, he may not wish to excoriate the hunting community that, through implementation of the world’s most sought after wildlife management plan, made it possible that he can see wild game and wild animals as he travels about the state of Maine; that is if he goes outside. Because of this plan and the real conservation efforts of hunters, America has perhaps the most wildlife present ever in its history.

I might concur on one point O’Donnell brings up and that is about how extensively the animal has been studied. I suppose it’s mostly in the eye of the beholder, but it is my opinion that more studies should be done. However, there are currently several studies underway and preliminary results are blowing holes in the theories that the environmentalists and animal lovers have worn out. Just the other day I was reading about someone working with another town in Maine to help to “learn to coexist” with coyotes. This person wrongfully stated that if you kill coyotes, they will produce twice as many offspring the following reproduction cycle. That is one giant lie that has perpetuated in the ranks of the uninformed for decades now.

I wonder if Mr. O’Donnell would accept the results of studies if they didn’t fit his narrative.

Another point to make and one that seldom gets passed on in mainstream media reports. Sportsmen in Maine are not all that interested in exterminating (as if they could) coyotes in Maine, but here’s the problem. The majority of Maine stands on the precipice of losing a much cherished whitetail deer population. Maine’s coyotes, technically a cross hybrid between an eastern coyote, wolf and yes, domestic dog, kill deer and moose, along with many other animals such as the Canada lynx, a protected species. In parts of the country where deer are too numerous, the coyote is mostly a welcome critter to help in keeping the deer population in check. But it’s not that simple. Some of these states are now seeing repercussions from the same over protection of the coyote.

Maine hunters want to see an effort to reduce predators, even black bears, in order to give the state’s deer herd a chance to rebuild and not disappear. Take note that the state is not focusing on coyote reductions in parts of the state where the deer are plentiful, along with the coyote/wolf.

It would be beneficial to Mr. O’Donnell and other readers to learn about predator pits; what causes them, why they are dangerous to the entire ecosystem and how to get out of them.

From Dr. Charles Kay Predator-Mediated Competition
Previous article: Maine: Spiraling Toward A Predator Pit

Cost to Hunt Rising Presence of Game Shrinking

*Editor’s Note* Below is an article, republished here by permission, from George Doval, editor of The Outdoorsman. While the focus of his article is on the state of Idaho, please read the piece and simply inject your state, your game, your license fees, your opportunities, etc., and you will soon discover that much of what Dovel writes, he could just as easily be writing about your state.

More Examples of State Officials Ignoring the Destruction of Our Rural Livelihood and Lifestyles

By George Doval (republished with permission)

Author and great-granddaughter, Tiana, returning from a ride observing antelope in the foothills above the Jerusalem Valley in September 2012.

When my great-granddaughter Tiana, now a multi-talented senior at Vallivue High School in Caldwell, turned 12, she was an enthusiastic graduate of IDFG Hunter Ed. Her mother gave me a call and asked if I would take her hunting on the mountain where most of my sons grew up and killed their mule deer on opening day.

I explained to her that my wife and I had recently hunted mule deer there, both on horseback – and afoot as my sons had. But the influx of wolves plus hordes of hunters cruising the mountainside on four-wheelers, prohibited the chance to enjoy a pleasant hunt – with a possibility of a standing shot on a mule deer at a reasonable range for a first time deer hunter.

Instead, I suggested she hunt with one of her uncles in a unit where taking her first deer would be easier. But as happens with most youngsters in Idaho, despite her abilities and desire, and hunting several years with experienced hunters, she has only shot one small yearling buck in Owyhee County three years ago.

On our recent ride, she described seeing the antelope up close as a really neat experience. Yet the odds of her applying for and receiving a coveted permit allowing her to hunt before experienced archery or rifle hunters have scattered the spooky mule deer are very remote.

How North American Model of Wildlife Conservation Was Quietly Destroyed by State Wildlife Managers

The three large Owyhee County units where IDFG offers 15 days of October general season mule deer hunting for two-point bucks only, had an estimated 2011 harvest of 928 two-points, plus 168 females by youth hunters*. With 28.5% hunter success, it required an average of 10.8 days of hunting for each two-point buck or female mule deer killed. (* youth general season for females ended in 2011)

Although these units are touted by IDFG as being one of the better opportunities for juveniles to harvest a mule deer, they are actually proof of the lousy odds for the average juvenile hunter. How does a youngster manage to miss school for up to 10 days in mid-October for three years in order to hunt the average of 11 days each year for the chance to kill just one small buck in 3-1/2 years?

When I pointed this out to an IDFG official, he responded that the real value of hunting these units was the special draw hunt for “big” bucks during the November rut. If you entered the lottery drawing for the 195 Unit 40 buck permits in 2005, there were 2,690 applicants and the odds of drawing were 1-in-14 (the average wait was 14 years before you drew a permit).

But seven years later, in 2012, there were 4,299 applicants for the same 195 permits and the average wait has increased to 22 years. If you started drawing in 1994 when Conley implemented the special late buck hunt in Unit 40, the odds are you probably won’t draw a permit until 2016.

But by 2016, as bucks become increasingly scarce, the drawing odds will be much higher and the only group that benefits from this will be IDFG. Discouraged young hunters, and others who do not support the IDFG scheme to charge still more money to harvest even fewer animals, will simply quit hunting.

In his widely circulated September 7, 2012 op-ed response to the Wildlife Summit criticisms published in the Idaho State Journal, F&G Commission Chairman Randy Budge wrote; “The purpose of the Wildlife Summit was not to change the (North) American Model of Wildlife Management (Conservation)…” Of course it wasn’t.

Wildlife Becoming “Playthings for the Wealthy”

Budge and his fellow Commissioners, including those who preceded them in recent years, have already destroyed several of the seven provisions of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. As Canadian big game expert Dr. Valerius Geist so eloquently explained in a “Bugle” interview a decade ago:
“The miracle of North American conservation is that it is basically a blue-collar system, grounded in the political and financial support and the active participation of large numbers of middle-class citizens who bring their basic honesty and decency to bear on important issues. This is just the opposite of the elitist system that has existed throughout Europe for centuries and is spreading like cancer around the world today, even right here at home.

“There is a tendency afoot today in North America to follow the European pattern, where wildlife become playthings for the wealthy and powerful. Under such a system, game is protected from the public in favor of the privileged few.

“I personally can’t stomach the idea that my grandchildren might not be able to buy a license and go hunting on public land and enjoy the great privilege of putting wild meat on the table, as we have always done.”

“Liberal” Harvest Regulations Destroyed Idaho Deer

Although my grandchildren and their children can still buy a license and go hunting on public land in Idaho, putting wild meat on the table is no longer an option unless they are either wealthy or lucky. When IDFG changed to what I&E Chief Martel Morache called “liberal” harvest regulations in 1988 – F&G included multiple antlerless mule deer harvests – and hunters were told it was because there were too many deer for their natural food supply.

Yet six years later, general season antlerless mule deer hunting had been replaced with limited special draw antlerless permits, which continued to harvest fewer deer but generated several hundred thousand more dollars in extra application and license revenue. In 2001, juvenile hunters were given the opportunity to kill mule deer does or fawns during the general buck season in all but the outfitter units and that remains in most units today.

But hunting scarce deer that have been pursued by archery hunters for 32 days and by hordes of rifle hunters in the same October season, rarely offers a decent chance for a one-shot kill. Most youngsters with no experience at hunting small game or “varmints”, either miss a running or long range shot, or hit the animal outside of its vital areas.

IDFG’s Michele Beucler Objects to Widespread Recruitment and Retention of Hunters

In her presentation titled “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall; Reflections from a Non-hunter,” IDFG Human Dimensions Specialist Michele Beucler cites statistics from 2001 when only 57% of hunter ed. graduates bought a hunting license. And after that first year, the number who bought a license steadily declined.
Beucler cited a 2007 national study showing that declines in hunter recruitment or retention between 1990 and 2005 occurred only in the nearly half of Idaho households where family income was below $40,000. Some of the youths and parents she questioned said that IDFG should change seasons that intimidated them, and also make hunting cheaper.

But instead of recommending IDFG return to obeying Idaho Wildlife Policy in I.C. Sec. 36-103 (i.e. to provide continued supplies of wildlife for hunting, fishing and trapping) Beucler brazenly ignored the law and insisted this Policy had destroyed nongame species, damaged ecosystems and undermined Idaho’s Public Trust Doctrine.

“We think that some degree of recruiting citizens into hunting is good business. However, we also feel that it has become misdirected and overemphasized. As a result, recruitment and retention efforts may be ineffective and may be distracting state wildlife agencies from engaging non-hunters and broadening wildlife conservation.”

Her False Claim That Wildlife Values Have Shifted

Beucler then said that states should reduce recruitment and retention efforts because they are a symptom of the need for wildlife managers to adapt to changing public attitudes. She insisted wildlife values have shifted from wildlife use to wildlife protection.

That may be true in Washington, D.C. but it’s certainly not true in Idaho. After more than a dozen years of IDFG using one underhanded trick after another to stop the legislature from allowing Idaho citizens to vote on making it a Constitutional right to hunt, fish and trap, it was finally approved by both houses and placed on the ballot in 2012.

Despite environmental activist Rocky Barker’s Idaho Statesman article, quoting a retired IDFG employee falsely claiming that our right to hunt is not threatened, Idaho citizens passed it by an overwhelming 77% of those who voted! Following Barker’s effort, “Right to Hunt…” still received 66% of the vote in Ada County, and passed by 77% of the vote in neighboring Canyon County – the second highest county population in the state!

Predictably, the only Idaho County where it failed to pass was the wealthy population in Blaine County where it only received 47% of the vote. A media campaign to defeat it because it also protected trapping may have contributed to its defeat by the small margin.

Her False Claim That Hunters Are Declining

Beucler and her bedfellows in state fish and game agencies ignored recent industry surveys showing an increase in the number of hunters nationwide. After presenting her “Mirror, Mirror” attack on hunting to the Wildlife Management Institute Annual Workshop in Phoenix in 2008, and the Idaho Chapter of the Wildlife Society meeting in Moscow in 2009, Beucler authored an article in the Spring 2010 issue of Management Tracks titled, “The Death of Wildlife Management?”

Published by the Organization of Wildlife Planners with Beucler serving as its President, her article states:
“For some time now, I’ve heard the siren call of ‘declining participation in hunting and fishing’ and what it might mean to the future of fish and wildlife management. Yet, despite a plethora of recruitment and retention efforts, annual participation rates continue to decline across much of the nation, and state fish and wildlife agencies are struggling to address 21st century conservation challenges such as rapid growth and development in key habitats, climate change, and nature-deficit disorder.

“Hunting and fishing will remain important threads of the American tapestry regardless of how many people participate – it is too much a part of human DNA, too much a symbol of American freedom, bounty, and wildness to fade away. Are we courageous enough to say that traditional fish and wildlife management must die?

“…we can choose to consider this death as part of a natural evolutionary cycle, as transformation, and not something that disappears forever. Ultimately, state fish and wildlife agencies may not have a choice—the risk of inaction is death by ballot initiatives, lawsuits, and irrelevance.”

IDFG Project Manager for Idaho Wildlife Summit Michele Beucler wears many hats, claims managing wildlife to provide continued supplies of game for hunters, fishermen and trappers undermines the Idaho Public Trust Doctrine (Facebook photo).

IDFG leadership has been working closely with Michele Beucler for several years and Director Moore quietly appointed her as Project Manager for the recent Idaho Wildlife Summit. She and her co-conspirators have worked behind the scenes for years while reasonable harvest opportunity was removed from grassroots hunting families and given to wealthy hunters.

Wealthy Hunters versus “Second Class Hunters”

One of the schemes IDFG uses is selling lottery chances for what it calls “superhunts”, which permit the “lucky” few who draw the permits to hunt in any open hunt for that species in Idaho. When my three oldest sons began hunting, all they needed to hunt small game, upland birds, predators and deer anywhere in Idaho was a hunting license and a deer tag – total cost $5. If they also wanted an elk it cost $3 more.

IDFG presently charges both adults and youngsters $117.25 for a “Sportsman’s Package” to hunt the same animals they could hunt for $8 in 1969. That is more than double the total inflation since then and still does not allow the hunters to participate in hunts with better odds of harvesting. Instead, IDFG encourages big game hunters to buy multiple chances for the superhunt permits so the rich hunter can buy dozens or even several hundred chances to improve his odds of drawing a permit.

He can also afford to pay people to locate a trophy animal, monitor its movements with fixed-wing or helicopter, and pay the guide who arranges the opportunity to shoot it. If the antler score is high enough, he may pay tens of thousands of dollars total to the state F&G agency and all the people who helped him kill the illegal “trophy”.

And like the auction tags, sometimes referred to as “Governor’s Tags”, establishing such extreme values requires that the “second class” general season hunters be limited to mid-October seasons. Even for an experienced hunter, the “Indian Summer” seasons are usually the most difficult time to locate and outsmart an older male animal.

Trophy Hunts Cause Overcrowded Hunters

But even if you beat the superhunt lottery odds of up to 1-in-2000 and receive a permit, it is no guarantee that you will harvest an elk or a mule deer with a large rack – much less a bona fide trophy. Although the IDFG website shows elaborate color photos of two bucks and two bulls taken by hunters with superhunt tags in recent years, none of them scored high enough for listing in the Boone & Crockett “Records of North American Big Game.”

The move throughout Idaho to further restrict the ability to harvest an animal in general season hunts, and then add so-called late-season “trophy” hunts in one or more units in each region, is forcing thousands of hunters who don’t draw a permit to either move to other already overcrowded general season units – or else give up hunting. No wonder these exploited license buyers are referred to as “second class hunters.”

The 2012 Panhandle Region Crisis

For the first time in its history, predation has reduced elk calf survival in the Panhandle Region so much that the Region’s wildlife managers have eliminated all general season cow elk hunts. Shortening the “any elk” seasons dramatically did not stop the decline for the 18,880 A and B tag purchasers in 2011, so in 2012 it offered them the chance to compete for 900 either-sex elk tags in units 1, 2, 3 and 5, plus 50 late antlerless tags in a part of Unit 5.

That meant that only five percent of hunters who had some opportunity to kill antlerless elk in the Panhandle in 2011 had a similar chance this year. Each of the four units now include a limited-participation 25-day Sept. archery season, followed by a 15-day mid-Oct. rifle season, plus a Dec. cow/calf season for the portion of Unit 5.

Unlike the southern Idaho F&G employees who travel to the Panhandle to hunt either-sex elk and/or either-sex whitetails, my great-granddaughter Tiana and her cousins lack the wherewithal to make that trip. Yet by offering a reasonable chance to harvest in an area close to home only to those hunters who pay them extra money, F&G forces the youngsters to forget harvesting game.

The “Sacred Cow” in the State Sage Grouse Plans

Every legitimate scientific study of the multiple causes of sage grouse declines has implicated predation as a major factor causing the decline. Yet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sample Sage Grouse Plan does not include Predation as a direct cause of grouse decline and the plans approved by the various state governors do not address predator control.

Instead they blame human activity such as building roads, fences, windmills, transmission lines or other potential predator perches, operating landfills and clearing sagebrush to grow crops for the decline. Outdoorsman readers may remember when FWS Rocky Mountain Wolf Project Leader Ed Bangs published the claim in the Federal Register that wolves and other predators are never the primary cause of prey declines.

The article on Pages 13-14 of this issue titled, “The Introduction of Agriculture and its Impact on Sage Grouse,” is the second article I have published by Nevada Assemblyman Ira Hansen. It provides historical facts to counteract the unsupported claim by FWS and non-governmental groups that water development and livestock grazing are destroying sage grouse populations.

The article was provided to Reno Gazette-Journal reporter Jeff DeLong, who, in a July 18, 2012 article, said that some (people) insist ravens are causing sage grouse declines. He said the experts at Nevada Department of Wildlife admit ravens are an issue – but not a big one.

NDOW Sage Grouse expert Shawn Espinosa admitted the 500-600 percent increase in raven numbers throughout the West has created a problem but said the raven increase is caused by human activity. Wildlife Services is removing 2,000 ravens each year But Asm. Hansen reportedly said that is not enough to reverse the damage.

NDOW Director Ken Mayer was critical of Hansen, saying the Service (USFWS) has not identified predation as a threat and said, “Focusing on the predator issue now could be dangerous when attention must focus on the key issues such as the impact of wildfire and invading vegetation on habitat. Those issues are generally recognized as the most important ones when it comes to loss and fragmentation of sagebrush landscape in Nevada.

“The Carpenters of the world could actually facilitate the listing of the bird. We don’t have the time and the resources to focus on things that are not driving the listing process for the Fish and Wildlife Service.”

(Back when Idaho’s wolf oversight committee ignored reality and approved IDFG copying the FWS Wolf Plan without addressing predator control, Idaho Legislators refused to consider their plan for another 10 years. But now that the governors have adopted the FWS Sage Grouse Plan, which also fails to address predator control, the state legislators are silent and appropriate millions of dollars to implement a plan that will not restore sage grouse.-ED)

Quality Deer Management? Maine Needs QUANTITY Deer Management

It has taken awhile for me to finally get around to responding to George Smith’s article that appeared on GeorgeSmithMaine.com on 12/11/2012 about some sportsmen in Northern Maine looking to implement Quality Deer Management for Aroostook County. It appears they would like the help and approval of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) but are running into strong opposition. I think those same sportsmen are going to run into mostly opposition from me on this one. (Smiling)It pains me greatly to agree with MDIFW for the most part on this issue.

In reading the article, one might get the impression that Quality Deer Management is about antler restrictions. This is only one aspect of a complete program that is designed around doing what the name of the program suggests; creating a “quality” deer herd.

Not to take me wrong, as I admire the passion to make hunting better, but I did guffaw a time or two in reading that some Northern Maine deer hunters want to create a quality deer herd. The reason for my snickering is that I was talking with a former Olympic ski coach once about problems I was having sustaining a “quality” ski team, year in and year out. His response to me, again not intended to offend simply to state the obvious, “Tom, you can’t make a good tossed salad if all you have to work with is a head of lettuce!”

Before I take the time below to post information and links (I’ve done this several years in a row) let me say that I am not necessarily opposed to Quality Deer Management, although I certainly believe it has its problems. However, I’m not sure that Northern Maine even has anything that resembles a head of lettuce. I just don’t see how “quality deer management” can rebuild a deer herd.

In Smith’s article, he quotes Gerry Lavigne, former MDIFW deer biologist and now works for the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, as saying:

“I am still opposed to antler point restrictions, especially in northern Maine. Selectively removing bucks will not lead to deer recovery. Improving doe and fawn survival will.”

“Increase the deer population from 2 to 10/sq. mi. and we’ll have an abundance of mature bucks again,” said the always-outspoken Lavigne. “Any other strategy is just a smokescreen. Hunters deserve better than that.”

Doe and fawn survival is key. Deer herd management is complex and I don’t pretend to be an expert on it, but during my years of writing I have attempted numerous times to seriously explain to hunters that doe to buck ratios cannot be 100 does to 1 buck. Failing to grasp this concept makes it that much harder to educate hunters on how Quality Deer Management works and what the results will be and the purpose for seeking to implement it.

As I said, not everyone is a fan of QDM. Petersen’s Hunting magazine ran an article over a year ago asking, “Is Quality Deer Management Ruining Hunting?” Check it out.

And there’s always the debate that not only can be heard in coffee shops in deer country, but get published in national magazines, that trophy hunting ruins the gene pool. Nearly 4 years ago, Newsweek Magazine ran an article, “Survival of the Weak and Scrawny.” The tragedy of this publication was the authors, not only had no idea what they were talking about, they never sought out the hoard of scientists who refuted the claims of this study. It just made for good sales and a bit of controversy.

Dr. Valerius Geist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science, The University of Calgary, Canada, provided me with the information to better explain what transpired during that study. If you are serious about understanding deer herd management, and as it might pertain to how selective breeding for “quality” deer might work, I strongly urge readers to follow all of these links and do a bit of studying. It’s fascinating stuff.

I also took the time to post another piece to explain about “trophy” (by definition) hunting and the results of that. In this article is a grocery list of information that I was able to compile from a host of qualified scientists who speak freely about trophy hunting, genes and breeding; all related information.

I have yet to find a wildlife scientist, even a new-science scientist, who would agree that implementing Quality Deer Management would aid in rebuilding a deer herd. I don’t think Maine is ready for “quality” deer management. What is really needed is “quantity” deer management. Let’s put our efforts and resources together to figure out how to increase the deer fawn recruitment and THEN work on quality.

Note: Pro Quality Deer Management sportsmen, even then, may run into opposition from wildlife managers.

Maine IFW’s Kantar on Review Board for Wildlife Society About Management of Large Carnivores

I thought readers might be interested in having the link to a “technical review” done by an ad hoc committee of the Wildlife Society called, “Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America“, in which the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s former head deer biologist and now head moose biologist was a member of.

Please feel free to read and study this, for what it’s worth, while I do the same. I may or may not offer some comments or information to the contents of this review.

New-Science Wildlife Scientists: Creations of Wellington House – Part VII

In 1914, a place called Wellington House opened for secret business in London. World War I had just commenced and Great Britain realized right away it could not compete with Germany’s propaganda machine. Wellington House was devised as the headquarters for Britain’s mass population brainwashing machine in order to influence public opinion in support of the war.

While the House may have officially opened on September 2, 1914, many of the brainwashing tactics and techniques already existed. It was only a matter of bringing together a group of people who could master the right kinds of propaganda that had the best effect on manipulating the minds of the people.

In August of that same year, Wellington House invited 25 of Britain’s leading writers to participate and swore them to secrecy. Why the need for secrecy? Some of the more prominent writers invited were, William Archer, Arthur Conan Doyle, Arnold Bennett, John Masefield, Ford Madox Ford, G. K. Chesterton, Henry Newbolt, John Galsworthy, Thomas Hardy, Rudyard Kipling, Gilbert Parker, G. M. Trevelyan and H. G. Wells. Working with Wellington House at a top level was American Edward Bernays; nephew of Sigmund Freud.

Anyone interested can research the real accounts that transpired during World War I – and all the rest of the wars – and discover some of the more sinister lies perpetrated by Wellington House.

War is hell as they say and mine is not to discuss the ethics of war but only to point out the methods and madness of mass propaganda brainwashing and the incredible results of this effort, as well as explain how it has continued and now plays a vital role in the destruction of what once made America the greatest nation on earth.

Wellington House was not to live forever and by 1946 the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations absorbed some of the people and many of the brainwashing tactics and methods to eventually become the world’s leader in everything brainwashing.

Through much of what I have already written, you may have become tired of being bombarded with, “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.”

The reason I continued to make that statement prominent in what I was writing was to hopefully embed it into readers minds (brainwashing?) that this statement exemplifies the goal of Tavistock.

One of the early leaders of Tavistock was Dr. Kurt Lewin. If you will recall, Dr. Lewin was one of the founders of the National Training Laboratories. He was kicked out of Germany because his work had transformed into using his newly discovered techniques of helping mentally ill people better to a perverted reversal of making well people mentally ill. Nearly all of what Tavistock did and does today is based much on the baneful work of Dr. Kurt Lewin. In short, Tavistock has grown worldwide and controls effectively every facet of our life that we are exposed to: news, entertainment, education, politics, technology, religion, heritage, culture, science, environment, etc. They decide what you will see and hear; what you will eat and drink; who you will vote for; your television programming, cell phones, video games, computers, etc.

There exists an organization today called “The Committee of 300″; made up of the world leaders in wealth, power and a vision to be the leaders of the world at the expense of all others. The Committee of 300 controls virtually every aspect of our lives and the scary part is none of us know about it and the very shameful part few of us are interested in learning about it. I suppose it’s easier to cast it off as tin foil hat stuff and muddle along as usual. (recall the 8 veils)

I’ll not spend much time on The Committee of 300 only to provide a very brief list of some of the entities, organizations, think thanks and secret societies the Committee of 300 has control over that directly effect Americans, (in no particular order):

1.)American Civil Liberties Union
2.)American Council of Race Relations
3.)Aspen Institute
4.)Atlantic Richfield
5.)Bilderberg Group
6.)British Petroleum
7.)Cathedral of St. John the Divine (New York)
8.)CIA
9.)Club of Rome
10.)Council on Foreign Relations
11.)Fabian Society
12.)DeBeers Consolidated Mines
13.)Ford Foundation
14.)Fox News
15.)Harvard University
16.)Hewlett Packard
17.)Hudson Institute
18.)Knights of Malta
19.)MIT
20.)NAACP
21.)National Council of Churches
22.)National Training Laboratories
23.)NATO
24.)Order of St. John of Jerusalem
25.)Princeton University
26.)RCA
27.)Royal Institute of International Affairs
28.)Stanford Research Institute
29.)Tavistock Institute of Human Relations
30.)The London Times
31.)TIME
32.)Trilateral Commission
33.)Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania
34.)James P. Warburg and Family
35.)Warner Brothers
36.)World Council of Churches
37.)Oddfellows
38.)Rand Research
39.)Federal Reserve Bank
40.)International Monetary Fund
41.)Freemasonry

And many, many more.

In the United States alone, the major institutions controlled by Tavistock for the purpose of brainwashing, that is “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.” , are:
1.)Aspen Institute
2.)Brookings Institute
3.)Institute for Policy Studies
4.)MIT
5.)National Training Laboratories
6.)Rand Research
7.)Stanford Research Institute
8.)Wharton School at Univ. of Pennsylvania

Here is a partial list of some interesting names who are current or past members of the Committee of 300.
1.)Astor, Waldorf successor
2.)William Bingham (worked with Baring Bros to help finance the Louisiana Purchase, as well as a monetary connection to NTL.)
3.)Warren Buffet
4.)George H.W. Bush
5.)John Cabot (family of)
6.)Winston Churchill
7.)Delano (Franklin “Delano” Roosevelt family)
8.)Aldous Huxley
9.)John Keynes
10.)Henry Kissinger
11.)Dr. Kurt Lewin
12.)John P. Morgan
13.)Price Waterhouse
14.)Joseph Rettinger (Pope Benedict XVI)
15.)Cecil John Rhodes (Rhodes Scholarship)
16.)David Rockfeller
17.)Rothschild
18.)George Schulz
19.)Alfred P. Sloan
20.)Maurice Strong
21.)Ted Turner
22.)Cyrus Vance
23.)S. C. Warburg
24.)Earl Warren
25.)Casper Weinberger
26.)H.G. Wells
27.)Olympia Snowe (Maine Senator)
28.)Arlen Spector
29.)George Soros
30.)Ben Bernanke
31.)Tony Blair
32.)Michael Bloomberg
33.)David Cameron
34.)Wesley Clark
35.)Bill Gates
36.)Al Gore
37.)Allen Gotlieb
38.)Alan Greenspan
39.)John Kerry
40.)Paul Krugman
41.)Joe Lieberman
42.)Rupert Murdoch
43.)Shimon Peres
44.)Susan Rice (will Obama nominate her for Secretary of State?)
45.)Nicholas Sarkozy
46.)Paul Volcker

Any surprises there?

I must point out for your own knowledge, the Aspen Institute here in the United States is the American headquarters for Tavistock. It is important to know that as we hear regularly of events taking place at the Aspen Institute.

We have learned that institutes such as Second Nature are determined to “change society”. National Training Laboratories function is “Creation and dissemination of new knowledge and practice.” In other words NTL will craft their own “knowledge” and pass it off as fact to the masses of people. We have been molded, much like clay, to accept this. Through techniques in indoctrination, humans no longer think for themselves nor do they, as a whole, question doctrine. If one dare question it they are immediately demonized and scoffed for doing so; also part of the brainwashing.

With a robotic mass of flesh, feeding the blank mostly non functioning brains of the people, becomes an easy task. For those paying attention, the results of this work are present everyday in this country. In the context of these articles, examples of such would be the creation of new knowledge like, manufacturing wildlife species in order to control and manipulate land use, private property, hunting, fishing, trapping, destruction of American heritage, etc.; promotion of intellectual rubbish like nature balances itself.

Movements like environmentalism, animal rights, anti-hunting, etc. are not necessarily a happenstance but a planned event to destroy the heritage of what made America great.

Global warming, the man-made variety, is a classic example of how badly people have been brainwashed from all directions begetting a mass of people eager to hate on man to save Mother Earth. Even after the people have been shown that the supposed data to support man-made global warming is fake, they have been trained to disregard that information. How do we open eyes to this? The only hope of reversing this death spiral is to reverse this action; to expose every person and entity for what they are doing. That’s a start.

In a recent exchange of comments on Facebook, I played a bit of a devil’s advocate and pot stirrer. A known liberal thinking person made a comment lamenting why people didn’t just go spend some time to research and discover the “truth”. I asked how one can tell what the truth is. I was led then to several establishments (Factchecker, Huffington Post, etc.), all of which are controlled by Tavistock, along with government websites to substantiate certain claims. I asked how they are to know whether this information was truthful or not. Who was checking the fact checkers? They had no idea what I was talking about. And therein lies the problem.

The point of all this is that we have all become products of the same propaganda and brainwashing machine. One side, meaning right or left, republican or democrat, conservative or liberal, is more right than the other we perceive. There exists brainwashing propaganda for both sides, arming each with false talking points, much for the purpose of ensuring disunity as a nation, creating fear, hatred and distrust. This accomplishes the decline of the United States of America. This is NOT to be confused with “finding common ground” in order to believe something is being accomplished. It is one of the biggest mind altering and destructive things bred into Americans today that we need to “find common ground”. Shouldn’t we all be seeking truth?

I’m not suggesting here that people should stop believing what they believe and follow me. Far from it. I’m asking that people somehow make an attempt to break this vicious complacency, this robotic and non thinking characteristic that has been bred into us; to stop believing that just because something sounds good to us, it is truth. But how can that be done?

It first requires that a person at least be willing to admit that maybe some or all of everything they have been taught is wrong; a lie. There’s a reason why young people today have less respect for older people and fail to listen to their words of wisdom. This kind of behavior is detrimental to the plans of the wicked in high places. With each successive generation the list of things that made this country the best changes and the list takes on a completely different look; all by design. One of the reasons being that there is no longer a solid moral foundation in our society to measure changes against for what is right and wrong. What was once wrong is now right because we have been brainwashed to accept it as so, instead of measuring it against what is morally right and morally wrong.

There must exist a measuring stick. Seeking truth in knowledge is a fruitless effort if there is nothing of actual value to compare it to. I believe it was James Madison who said that in order for our Constitution to work and remain effective was that there always had to remain a strong moral make up in this nation. How’s America’s moral make up treating us these days? If you think it is wonderful, you are a victim of brainwashing. If you think it is getting bad, there is hope.

I challenge readers to make that list. Go ahead. It may be the best thing you’ve ever done in your life. Try to go back to the very beginning and decide what made America great. If you struggle that’s okay. Try to make a simple list of what you honestly think is right and wrong. It requires honesty and thinking. Take that list based on the past and compare it to today to determine how much that list has changed and been destroyed. From that point then apply what I have shared and see if it makes sense. If you can see a tiny bit, there is hope.

For the more spiritual readers, perhaps all of this can be explained Biblically. We know from reading our Bibles that Satan was cast out of Heaven for the evil that he did. God basically gave him dominion over the earth for a time and all that was in it. While the Bible doesn’t specifically say this, at no time did Jesus deny it. For example, when Jesus went to the wilderness to be tempted by Satan, from a mountaintop Satan promised everything on earth, as far as could be seen, and more, if Jesus would just worship Satan. Jesus didn’t tell Satan he didn’t control the earth or that it wasn’t his to give.

If that be the case, then when we read Ephesians 6:12 – For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places].”, and apply it to the rulers of this world, i.e. The Committee of 300, Tavistock and all, we can logically conclude that Satan has promised them all the earth and everything in it if they will just worship him.

From that perspective, for the Christian believer, all of this that I’ve shared makes a lot more sense.

Regardless of your personal beliefs, our world cannot function without a decent and solid moral foundation; it just cannot.

I began these articles in hopes of explaining to readers why, such simple things like wildlife science, has been hijacked and replaced with something unrecognizable, i.e. newly crafted “knowledge”. I hope I have helped to some degree. I challenge readers to explore the 8 veils and search for something outside of the spoon-fed comforts of the first veil.

Things are not as they appear. Those who you think are your leaders are not. It’s much larger, much more sinister. These powerful world leaders that take from you for themselves are the powers and principalities that we are really fighting each day, all for the purpose of a New World Order within a One World Government, headed by a dictator. This is necessary to ensure that you and I can never have more than the elites of this world who want it all and to control it all, at your expense. I wish you could believe that.

Ironically, everything that is good in this world, powers and principalities want to destroy. Yet they are so blinded they cannot see for themselves that they are destroying the essence of what they see as something worth controlling. How dark and sinister is that?

Addendum: Bring Low Class Element of Society Under Total Control

This addendum was actually supposed to be a part of my original work but got by me. Please consider reading this addendum as it shows the intent of the real world leaders, their perversion of the sanctity of life and that the United States of America accepted this premise as U.S. Policy under President Jimmy Carter.

New-Science Wildlife Scientists: Creations of Wellington House – Part IV

What transpired recently in Idaho is a prime example of the product of “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.” Idaho, like many other states, cannot find funding enough to carry out their non fish and game, environmentalist-dictated programs. In a ruse to find “alternative” means of funding, the Department of Fish and Game cobbled together a symposium, of sorts, structured entirely from the knowledge gained from outcome based education. In other words, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) knew what they wanted to achieve from such a gathering and thus designed the meetings to achieve the desired outcome.

The brainwashed leaders believed and/or convinced themselves, while at the same time mounting a propaganda campaign to additionally alter public opinion, that filling the room with operatives trained in new-science science and new-education education, was a fair representation of stakeholders and the only thing they had been taught to do. (Forgive them Father for they know not what they do.)

A small group of not so easily influenced holdouts, who have enough of an understanding to see that this sort of thing is not right, did their best to stop the symposium or change it to something resembling sanity. The result was that the majority, which is a reflection of American Society, are victims of the sinister brainwashing that exists in our schools and throughout every aspect of our society. I believe those putting on the meetings, and the majority of those in attendance, actually believe they are doing the right thing.

The key here is to gain an understanding that this “changing” or mindset alterations is not some natural phenomenon. It is not merely explained away as a “progressive” lifestyle. It may appear that way but is this progression a voluntary one? It’s an orchestrated effort as we shall learn. Readers must open their eyes to this fact.

Who is responsible for the brainwashing? I choose to call it brainwashing because that’s really what it is. When anyone or any organization sets out to change the rational way of thinking in a mass of people, that’s brainwashing. When I write that those responsible for this action believe that, “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America”, the only way this can be done is through mind manipulation; to devise a way in which to completely alter the way that people think; to convince those masses that what was white is now black, that what was right is now wrong. This is brainwashing.

As I said, this program did not start yesterday. It has been implemented to varying degrees for a very long time and what some of us are seeing in our society is a product of that work.

In Part III, I shared a tiny bit of how the United Nations has implemented programs in education that have an influence on our everyday lives. What I didn’t write much about is who is responsible for the programs and what’s behind those plans to brainwash our people.

This conversion of thought, or the destruction of all thought, comes from seemingly countless entities but all with a common factor. To grow such a large sphere of influence is a monumental task that must begin with finding the right leaders of nations around the world and “training” them to take their new-found knowledge back to their homes and businesses with them to share with others and to train new “change agents”. In time, there becomes hundreds, then thousands and tens of thousands of change agents all freshly brainwashed carrying out the mission of the “enlightened” elites of the world “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.”

One of those training facilitators is known as the National Training Laboratories (NTL). I have personal knowledge and experience with this organization because NTL was founded in my hometown of Bethel, Maine. As a high school student I worked for this company and later as an adult actually attended some of their seminars and “T-Groups” (training groups), as well as visited the homes of some of the founders.

Bethel, Maine is a micro New England village where the population in the village proper is approximately 1,100 people. In a town that tiny, it’s difficult to not know what is going on; the same could be said for the activities of NTL.

Founded in Bethel, Maine in 1947 by Dr. Kurt Lewin, main offices were eventually set up in Washington, D.C. and during the summers, “training” took place at the NTL Center, as well as the facilities of Gould Academy and the Bethel Inn; all located in Bethel, Maine. In addition to Lewin, Ron Lippett, Lee Bradford and others helped found NTL and after Lewin’s early death, it was mostly Lippett and Bradford that continued on with NTL.

Lewin was a freak show really; a German native trained in psychology and kicked out of his native country because of the controversial work he did. In short, he discovered that through his work he believed he could make mentally ill people well. While that is a readily acceptable practice all across America, Lewin carried it to an antithetical extreme. He believed he could make mentally well people ill. His findings became the basis for sinister plans to extract information from people and brainwash masses to achieve desired public opinion. This was used initially for military tactics but later was found to be helpful in influencing the people, anywhere and in any numbers.

With Lewin’s evil notions grounding the foundation of NTL, he, Ron Lippett (an OSS, now CIA, operative) and Bradford set out “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.”

In the tiny town of Bethel, Maine, corporate and educational leaders from all over the world came for their special “training”. I was most exposed to some of their tactics when I worked as an audio/visual technician. In that capacity, I would have to make sure each classroom was set up with the desired tools, i.e. easels, markers, paper, tape recorders and sometimes movie cameras and projectors. There were times when I was requested to remain in the room and run tape recorders, movie projectors and cameras. Things that I saw at age 16, I knew somehow were really wrong at all levels but at 16 I had no idea exactly as to why. In addition, I was clueless as to what was actually going on and why and to what degree this “training” was and did have that greatly influenced this nation and the destruction of our society.

The use of mind-altering drugs, human mental abuse and sex where quite common, especially in what NTL called their “sensitivity training” sessions. It was often described as a means of “emotionally tearing somebody down in order to build them back up.” And build them back up as what, I might ask?

The National Training Laboratories‘ website gives us a mission statement and a list of values. I would like, for the purposes of the context of this multi-part series to point out one specific bulleted “value”. “Creation and dissemination of new knowledge and practice.” It amazes me that anyone can believe they can “create” new knowledge and “create” practice of that knowledge. This again, should give readers a better understanding of “new-science scientists” and where they get their garbage faux “knowledge” that they bring with them into the field.

NTL has worked hand in hand for years with the National Education Association (NEA), which is the largest teachers union today. In addition, Lippett and Bradford founded and ran the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), where one of its objectives was the promotion of illicit drugs into our culture. SPRU trained what today are known as “New-Science Scientists”. The purpose of their training was to implement “Future Shocks”, a tactic where crises are created for the purpose of “shocking” the masses into submission. What easier way to control and train the masses than through fear. We see it everyday…..well, at least those who can see.

Try to imagine how many new NTL trainees have infiltrated our society in the past 65 years. Scary isn’t it and again, NTL is only one small part of the big picture in the planned decline of the United States. I contend that probably by now every university and perhaps every school district in this country, along with local, state and federal governments have NTL, United Nations and other operatives working diligently to complete the change. Hundreds of thousands of “change agents” and we wonder what has happened to our wildlife biologists. Maybe it’s time to look around and ask what has happened to our lives, our heritage and our culture.

Part V will look at what one agency here in America is probably responsible for making sure our schools, television, entertainment, music, politics, etc. are carrying out their brainwashing schemes.

Next Page »