September 20, 2018

Why Did Maine’s Head Deer Biologist Walk Away From His Job?

*Editor’s Note* – Is there a bad atmosphere at the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife? If so, how will this effect who gets hired as the new guy?

Kyle, who had only been at his position a few years, apparently decided it was no longer for him. Although there has been no official acknowledgment of this from the department, his departure was, insofar as I can tell, abrupt and unexpected. There were no press releases. I stumbled upon the information that he had left his job more than three months after he left his post.<<<Read More>>>

 

Share

Legendary Guide Award: DIFW Never Issued a Press Release or Photo

What is not so wonderful is the seeming impression that the powers that be at the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife have allowed this important award to take a back seat to other priorities.

This April, during the MPGA’s spring banquet in Brewer, the IF&W Commissioner Chandler Woodcock was on-hand to present this year’s Legendary Guide Award to another deserving veteran, Don Helstrom, from Turnpike Ridge Outfitters in Millinocket. Trouble is, the news of Helstrom’s recognition apparently never got beyond the doors of the guide’s banquet. MDIF&W never issued a press release or a photo, which has always been the custom.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Like It’s The First Time a Governor Has Asked His Department Heads to Cut the Budget

In a recent article by outdoor writer George Smith, he writes: You have to feel kind of sorry for DIF&W Commissioner Chandler Woodcock, who told the IFW Committee “I’m not here today to support changes to the budget. I am not able to do that.” He said it is the “Chief Executive’s budget” and he must support it. He’s talking about Governor Paul LePage, who ordered the agency to reduce the budget to the 2015 spending level.

I really felt bad for Chandler as he tried, for 2 ½ hours, to defend the budget cuts, most of which are indefensible.”

Smith makes it sound like this is the first time ever that a department head, who is, after all, appointed BY THE GOVERNOR to that position, had to present and defend a proposed budget that wasn’t his dream wish for his department.

It’s difficult to know from Smith’s words how much he is embellishing reality in order to promote his own cause of taking as much money from the citizens of Maine as possible and throwing at anything that moves at the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), but, if what Smith writes about what supposedly the Commissioner of MDIFW, Chandler Woodcock, was willing to verbally state his lack of support for the Governor’s proposed budget, then perhaps the Governor should consider whether or not he has the continued trust and confidence of the commissioner.

I’m going to guess that I am not as thick-skinned as Governor LePage, when you consider the abuse he has taken over his tenure as Governor, but if I were in his shoes, I would be asking for some explanations, from the commissioner, as to why the show of disapproval to the committee of the Governor’s proposal.

However, in the society of which we have created today, respect might as well be taken out of the dictionary, for there is none left. There once was a day when any department head would never have pissed on his bosses shoes and told him it was raining. And just the same, no executive leader would have tolerated such public display of mutiny.

 

Share

Maine Wardens and Fish & Wildlife to Cut Budgets

Some appear to be “alarmed” that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) commissioner is proposing a budget that will cut Warden Service (MWS) employees, reduce mileage allotments, as well as the reduction of other positions within the Fish and Wildlife department. I see this as a good thing.

At least some people think that throwing money at anything makes it better. I’m not one of them. While the potential exists that these cuts could be an advantage to better management and administration at MDIFW and the MWS, there appears to be one thing lacking that would have gone a long way in generating public support for a cut or an increase – a deep forensic audit of the departments in question so that the public is readily made aware of where every penny of revenue comes from and specifically where all expenses go.

It was suggested in an article by George Smith, an outdoor writer and political activist, that the cuts to the Warden Service was some kind of retribution to the controversial actions of an undercover agent in northern Maine awhile back. Perhaps that is the only reason that Gov. LePage told Commissioner Woodcock to cut the MWS budget. It appears from information provided, that one of those positions that would be cut is in northern Maine.

Is this really a bad thing? It depends on how you look at it. Perhaps the governor feels that if the MWS has the time and resources to send an agent undercover, to carry out tactics that go far beyond anything that should be considered ethical, then maybe the MWS has too much time, too many resources, the results offering little but controversy and a disturbed public. Heroes?

Within the MDIFW, I see cuts as a good thing. At age 65, having hunted and fished since I was about old enough to walk, I have seen many changes to the landscape and the administering of the MDIFW and MWS. Especially in the past couple of decades, I have watched as hunting opportunities for deer have steadily declined in many locations in Maine. Listening to the echo-chamber of fake global warming is doing nothing to help the situation. In most recent times, moose hunting opportunities have declined significantly. And, what is being done to mitigate these losses? Maybe the revenue to MDIFW isn’t being appropriated in the best way to seal up a leaky ship.

This is where some think that more money is needed to throw at the problem. Perhaps not. Perhaps what is really needed is a restructuring of the MDIFW. Along with that restructuring, we might like to see real changes in deer and moose management. It only makes sense that in order to keep the revenue stream flowing, you have to keep the license buyers happy. Forcing the general public to pay for sportsman’s activities would only exacerbate the problems that exist now, i.e. the lack of actual deer and moose management. With a public paying for hunting, trapping and fishing opportunities, it won’t take long before they will be demanding and end to these activities in favor of protecting coyotes, counting bats, growing more loons that will continue killing the fisheries – and let’s not forget those infamous piping plovers.

Some might say that MDIFW is doing their managerial jobs with the ongoing studies of moose and deer. I doubt it. Such studies end up being mostly money grabbing events that keeps employees working. As anyone with any sense at all should realize by now, that finding solutions to problems dries up the income flow.

The end of the world isn’t going to come because the governor is asking the MDIFW and the MWS to makes some cuts, as all government agencies should be making cuts. I’ve had to pay more in taxes in the past 8 years anyway, while not seeing my income go about one red cent. I would, therefore, expect state and federal governments to do some cutting of their own. I would, however, would have liked to see that audit, along with an opportunity for public comment, before the budget was proposed.

But that’s NEVER going to happen. So we will keep on wishing in one hand and piling garbage in the other and see which one fills up first.

Regardless of what you might think about this whole issue, one thing is certain. Nothing will change.

Share

Press Banding Together on “North Woods Lawless”

After the dog and pony show in Maine of an act of government investigating government, members of the media appear to be sticking together. After all, loss of right to know information, renders their occupations a bit more centrally controlled by government. Perhaps that is what is intended when we are witness to the actions of the Maine Government using smoke and mirrors to make people think they got everything under control, while continuing to stall all efforts to release documents about events that took place during undercover raids and in conjunction with the reality television show, “North Woods Law.”

Rooks: Denials won’t solve undercover issues at Maine Warden Service

Editorial: North Woods Lawless

Share

Maine Newspaper Continues Attack on Maine Warden Service Undercover Tactics

Once again the Portland Press Herald has published an article describing others who were targets of the Maine Warden Service (MWS) undercover investigations, claiming they were wrongfully treated. Why is there no real focus on a more serious situation in which it appears the MWS stonewalled and refused to send information to the Press Herald requested through FOIA laws?

Whether Maine citizens like it or not, in all of these cases being written about in the news, the undercover investigations and the subsequent charges leveled against many people, have all gone through the Court System. We know of one case where the judge made a statement that the tactics were questionable, but, they were within the laws.

This week a dog and pony show will likely begin to “investigate” the accusations being made by the Press Herald against the MWS and the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) – a case of government investigating government. Governments are incapable of self-policing.

If what has come out in the Press about the tactics being used by undercover agents is remotely accurate, it is my opinion that legal tactics need to be changed. If any citizen has a “predisposition” (to give or furnish a tendency or inclination) to commit a crime – a term used to describe a precursor to actually formulating an undercover sting – why is there a need to bait them into doing it? Whatever happened to the simple infiltration of a gang only to observe and record behavior for later prosecution? Isn’t it worth it? Is there no fame, glory and money in this? Because it is “legal” (as recognized by the Court) is it right? Did the people of Maine and/or the Maine Legislature approve the “legal” guidelines to be employed during undercover operations? Do other branches of law enforcement follow the same guidelines or do they craft their own?

If Maine people don’t like the use of the tactics being described to them via the Press, it’s time to change those laws. It’s somewhat silly to keep harping about tactics, seemingly allowed by the Courts, without offering any solutions. We are told we are a government by and of the people. Is this not true?

So, is the Press Herald head hunting? Makes you wonder, although we do know they have created a hot topic and hot topics sell copies and puts money in the coffers. The governor thinks his administration is being targeted.

Why then, isn’t the Press Herald more heavily pursuing their own accusations that the MWS and MDIFW withheld and is still withholding information available to the public? We know what the law says about our supposed right to access public information. Perhaps they are pursuing that as I write. If the Press Herald is head hunting the LePage Administration, isn’t non compliance of an FOIA law a better opportunity than chasing butterflies?

It would seem to me that any investigation should be focused on FOIA actions and that if the Press and the people have issues with how law enforcement carries out their mission, they should work to get it changed.

The people have created themselves a tightrope to walk. After 9/11, Law Enforcement seemingly can do no wrong and even when they do, they are still glorified for doing it. The people cannot allow any government or law enforcement to trample on their rights, out of fear for any reason. When we fear government, including law enforcement, what then is there of value in any of our perceived rights given by God or men?

Share

Media and IFW Deflecting Attention Away From More Serious Problems with FOAA

As anyone involved in the corruption of governments, politics and media in general should easily recognize, focusing on one issue to deflect attention away from a more serious issue, is a common event. Such may be the case in Maine where officials of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), the Maine Warden Service (MWS), the newspaper conglomerate which involves the Portland Press Herald (PPH), and media in general, appear to be focusing on the accuracy of one newspaper investigation of a sting operation that took place and concluded a couple of years ago.

The undercover operation, which is the topic of great discussion after the PPH released its own investigation, has concluded in the Courts. Disputing what actually took place generally becomes a practice in futility unless serious enough evidence can be uncovered that might warrant a revisiting of the case. Perhaps that was the intent of the PPH reporter.

Arguing the accuracy of the investigation between PPH and the MWS, draws attention away from what I see as a far more serious problem. Today’s media deluge still focuses on the “he-said-he-said” between PPH and MWS/IFW.

After the MWS released an official presser yesterday in response to PPH’s investigation, the Maine Governor’s Office also weighed in on the event by focusing sharply on whose information about the undercover operation was accurate – or perhaps more precisely, who lied. By taking the opportunity to thoroughly trash Maine Media as being biased, Governor LePage doesn’t mince words in personally attacking Colin Woodard, the author of the PPH investigative piece. “Let’s be perfectly clear: Colin Woodard is not a journalist; he is an activist and a novelist who never lets the facts get in the way of his fictionalized stories.”

The Bangor Daily News offers an article that only seems interested in keeping it’s focus on whether the facts of the case are accurate by MWS/IFW reports or those of the PPH.

The Kennebec Journal/Morning Sentinal online media, offers a blow by blow rebuttal to claims made by the MWS in their official response to the PPH investigation. What is missing from all of these reports, with the slight exception found in this report, involves the charade that is taking place over the PPH’s attempts to access email documents from IFW/MWS.

The Kennebec Journal/Morning Sentinal rebuttal responds specifically to claims made by the MWS that they had sent PPH 232 documents. “Only 35 emails have been released in response to the Press Herald’s public records request for communications with “North Woods, Law,” despite more than six months of effort.” The author of this piece provides MWS/IFW some wiggle room out of its statement about releasing 232 documents by saying: “In a separate request for the warden service’s policy for undercover investigations, the newspaper received a single, highly redacted, 16-page document with 15 pages mostly blacked out. The wardens may be conflating the Press Herald request with documents produced for the Kennebec Journal in 2015 in connection with a separate August 2014 public records request. Those were not the documents that the Press Herald requested.”

Additionally, the MWS’ official response claims that they were, “compliant with Maine’s Freedom of Access Act.” The PPH says they were not and offers instead what they claim is a complete publication of all emails exchanged between PPH, the MWS, IFW, Maine Attorney Generals Office, and other lawyers, seeking information about the undercover case and how Engel Entertainment, a video production service that produces the television show North Woods Law, was involved.

If we leave behind the undercover operation that took place in Allagash, Maine, and forget about whether the undercover warden service officer acted properly and within the law and policies of the IFW/MWS, and stop arguing about it, and then focus on the farce and deliberate stonewalling by IFW/MWS in fulfilling their obligation to provide documents through FOAA, we may have a condition worth getting worked up over. However, I don’t think anybody in government wants any attention brought to this event.

I have read every single email provided by the PPH in their attempt at getting documents. I see this as nothing more than a deliberate attempt to stonewall. The reasons for such stonewalling is unclear at this time. Perhaps it is nothing more than some perverted sense of retribution toward the PPH. If, as is exemplified by Governor Paul LePage’s disdain toward Maine Media, this same feeling of contempt and disrespect is prevalent throughout his administration, the actions of IFW/MWS can be explained, although not justifiably. At the least, to those who have taken the time to read and understand, it comes across as hiding evidence. And, when people suspect that, then they want to know what is there to hide?

I came to the conclusion, after reading all the emails, that collectively, not that many people can be so stupid. Third Graders could have worked this out in short order.

I think one has to go back to the beginning and examine the FOAA request from the PPH to IFW/MWS. In that request, PPH asked specifically for all email exchanges, for a specified date range of one year, and provided the search term of “@engelentertainment.com” – this being the domain name used by Engel Entertainment as part of their email address. PPH asked that this search be refined to exchanges involving events of the undercover operation in “Aroostook” County, where the sting took place.

Throughout the entire email exchange, it is easily clear that any use of the term “@engelentertainment.com” was omitted from any emails originating from the IFW, MWS, AGs office and representatives. It was so obvious to me, that this was beyond incompetence. It was deliberate avoidance of addressing the real issue.

Several times in the emails, Colin Woodard of the PPH, takes the time to explain to IFW/MWS/AG that he was requesting, from the onset, emails involving Engel Entertainment, and yet, that subject was ignored – repeatedly.

At best IFW/MWS attempted to turn the event back on PPH saying that if they wanted emails from “@engelentertainment.com” it would qualify as a separate request, involving more money and time to get the job done. In attempting to point out to IFW/MWS/AG officials that that search term was included in the original FOAA request, it fell on deaf ears. I could not see how Mr. Woodard could have been more clear on what he wanted.

While these actions come as no surprise to me – I’ve been witness to these government corruption actions before and experienced them first hand – the intent of the FOAA law, or at least what the American people were told, should, in no way, be representative of this action of government or any other government. Unfortunately, it is and short of some highly skilled lawyers and an unending supply of money, there is little hope that when real information is needed, anyone will ever get it. Is this not just a reflection of what we see on a continual basis in Washington? How has that FOAA been working out in getting to the bottom of Hillary Clinton’s email scandal? And how many lawyers and how much money is involved.

Government knows how to take care of government. They know that PPH isn’t going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to get information that government intends not to release. And so, the game is played.

BUT, DON’T GO LOOK!

Share

HSUS’ Hansberry Named to Bear Management Subcommittee

More proof that fish and game management is going the way of the Environmentalists and Animal Rights extremists – Katie Hansberry, head of the Maine division of the Humane Society of the United States has been named to sit on a black bear management subcommittee for 2016. This committee is at least partly responsible for devising a 15-year management plan for black bears in Maine.

For those not exactly familiar with the name, Hansberry has headed up efforts to end bear hunting, trapping and baiting. And Maine has elected to place her on a committee that will influence the 15-year management plan for black bears, which will include recommendations in that plan for establishing bear hunting, trapping and baiting rules and regulations?

Does this make any sense?

Of course not, but Maine is also filled with fake “sportsmen” who think that we should hold hands with people like Hansberry and “work with them” in order to “compromise” on game management and natural resource uses.

Why does it make any sense that an animal pervert, who gets paid handsomely to be an animal pervert, that despises hunting, trapping, baiting and fishing, and works continuously to end it all, be placed on a committee that would not exist if not for the efforts and taxes paid by outdoor sportsmen who understand wildlife conservation? Why are and why should sportsmen agree to this? Why don’t they speak up and voice their disapproval? They must approve, don’t care, or don’t know.

I have written in the past about how all plans, nationwide in America, are geared toward the destruction of game management, including hunting, trapping and fishing. I have explained about the ongoing efforts and influences of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, who conned Congress into stealing funds from Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson, to operate their anti hunting, trapping and fishing campaigns, disguised as wildlife management. This, combined with the brain-rot garbage being taught to wildlife managers and biologists in our colleges, is the formula the Environmentalists have been waiting for in order to end hunting, trapping and fishing and lay the groundwork to shut down the forests and fields – an effort that will lead to their own destruction and yet they cannot see it.

Rome burns and idiots sleep!

I have expressed concern that Maine is going in the same direction as all the other brainwashed environmentally controlled wildlife agencies. Here is the proof.

Found HERE:

BearSubcommittee

 

Share

Does Maine Fish and Game Dept. Really Need a Marketing Program?

George Smith has his undies in a bunch over one of his apparently failed bill proposals that would have forced the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) to establish a marketing position. Why? Is it really the responsibility of MDIFW to “market” its programs? Is the idea to market MDIFW so as to generate income from increased license sales and fees? Another question, if ever asked, is seldom examined to understand what it means – who is the marketing director going to target?

I could spend a great deal of time discussing the business end of a marketing approach, and talk about what point is there is marketing to draw deer hunters to Maine, for example, when the market is poor at best. But, as would generally be the case, I would be accused of being a downer, instead of burying my head in the sand and pretending all was great with deer management.

Instead, I want to focus on one aspect of what Smith mentioned in his article.

In 2003 and 2004, The Management Assistance Team of the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies examined the various divisions of Maine’s Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and issued a very detailed report with many recommendations….these recommendations were never implemented. In fact, not long after the recommendations were received, DIF&W abolished its marketing position!

I would like to give MDIFW, and/or the governor, and/or the Legislature, credit for making sure these recommendations were never implemented. Anything that comes from the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) is usually designed as a destructive mechanism to anything that once resembled normal fish and game heritage.

I’ve written often about AFWA before and they are a fraudulent group that was successful in convincing Congress to let them have a percentage of the Pittman-Robertson and Johnson-Dingell, excise tax money so that they can promote their anti hunting, fishing and trapping agendas.

I’ve also written about the outcome-based efforts of the most recent survey foisted on unsuspecting Maine sportsmen about hunting and fishing. Like the AFWA, these programs are designed by environmentalists for environmentalists whose goals are to end consumptive use of natural resources and eventually to put an end to the event itself. Odd isn’t it, or it would be if people would open their eyes, that sportsmen pay all the money, have it taken away from us by political, non-governmental agencies and used against us. If more sportsmen could see this, perhaps more than a small handful would begin asking what the hell is going to happen when the money dries up because there are no more sportsmen to take advantage of?

Which brings me back to the question of who is a marketing director going to target. Most will think a marketing director would be targeting other hunters and fisherman. On the surface, it might even appear that way. However, the real target will be those most susceptible to the propaganda created by Environmentalism. Most Maine sportsmen understand conservation of fish and game. Some are conned by Environmentalism, such as wanting for everyone to release all the fish they catch to save the planet. We play right into their hands when we do this sort of thing. What will the fishermen be saying when, after the forcing of catch and release, a perverted act in and of itself, the catch aspect is also done away with. Won’t happen? Just wait. It’s nearer than you think.

Environmentalism is no friend of the traditional hunter, trapper and fisherman…no friend at all. Our fish and game agencies have almost unanimously become fish and wildlife, or departments of natural resources, and along with it, imitate the environmentalists way of how fish and wildlife are discussed. This has been done by design and that design is such to destroy traditional hunting, fishing and trapping.

Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife doesn’t need a marketing director. I’ve spent a number of years writing about hunting, trapping and fishing and the outdoor business in general. In a previous life, I was quite extensively involved in the hospitality trade and tourism industry. One of the most important things I learned in those years was the simple truth that you have to have something that is marketable – that people want or you can convince that they want. The raw truth in that is that if you market something and the clientele discover the product stinks, you are in big trouble. So, you better have a good product first.

Another aspect I discovered, which caught me by surprise, was to learn that a large percentage – perhaps a majority – of Maine sportsmen, do not want to market hunting and fishing to “outsiders.” They want what limited product they have for themselves. And, for that you cannot blame them.

If we focus on deer hunting as an example, we know that from the deer harvest highs of many years ago – 35,000+ – to the lows of the latest years – less or near 20,000 – marketing a limited product to out-of-state interests might somehow generate a tiny bit more revenue, but most of that would end up being offset by the loss of locals who will give up hunting because the hunting is so poor and they have to share it with out-of-state hunters. And of course, if the product remains poor, what few hunters that were captured with a marketing scheme, upon discovery of false advertisement, would return home and never come back.

Consider marketing Maine fishing. Now, the push is to promote non-consumptive use of brook trout fishing – one of Maine’s more prized natural resources. This would mean a marketing campaign, aimed at convincing the “catch and release” brook trout fishermen to fish Maine waters. This means marketing to promote Environmentalism. That would result in a bigger push to force catch and release fishing, i.e. to end fishing altogether. But I know most don’t want to believe my words. We’ll see.

I don’t think MDIFW is the place that should be directing its resources and energy to market a product. Maybe the saying of “if you build it, they will come” comes into play here. And if the State of Maine believes they have a marketable product now, big enough to share with “those from away,” then the effort should come from the Office of Tourism, not the Department on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Tourism is the specialty of the Office of Tourism, not MDIFW.

Thank you to the Appropriations Committee for giving a 7-6 ought not to pass. Let’s hope the Legislature sees fit to drop this proposal and if necessary get a governor’s veto.

 

Share

Has MDIFW Lost It’s Collective Minds?

JackNicholsonI didn’t attend this meeting of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) in Orono, Maine to discuss “big” game. However, I make reference to what Bangor Daily News reporter, John Holyoke, reported as a comment by Matt Latti of MDIFW:

Mark Latti of the DIF&W hinted at things to come after a mild winter, saying hunters who want to harvest a doe will likely have a better chance to do so this year.

“You’re going to see a substantial increase in any-deer permits this year,” Latti said, suggesting that the final tally might be 50 percent higher than last year’s permit total.

Even though MDIFW will not post the 2015 deer hunting harvest data on its website (something to hide while they have their meetings?), I received information from a handout that came from MDIFW showing that in 2015, 20,348 deer were taken. That’s the lowest number in three years and the fourth lowest number in 7 years. And, it’s near one-half the harvest of 2002. During this time, Any-Deer Permit allocations have dropped substantially. Little good it has done. Are we to thank “Climate Change” for a sudden and miraculous regrowth of deer, so much so that we need to increase our permits by 50%? HELP!

MDIFW has always touted that their prized “Any-Deer” permitting system was the major tool to grow, sustain or shrink a deer population within each of the Wildlife Management Districts.

Perhaps Maine has decided already, before and without the input they are getting from forums and meetings (placation?), that they are going to scrap the management goal for deer of 300,000 – 350,000 (statewide) and pare that down to around 150,000 – 175,000 deer.

While it is true that in some zones (areas where land is heavily posted) there are too many deer, but the majority of the state has few deer. How is increasing Any-Deer Permits by 50% going to accomplish growing and rebuilding a deer population statewide? Maybe it is no longer desired by MDIFW?

However, it seems that, according to rigged surveys, MDIFW has been give carte blanche because an overwhelming majority of hunters think MDIFW walks on water and do a terrific job. Go figure!

Perhaps it’s time to get rid of the deer (after all, climate change is killing everything), get rid of the moose, which it seems we are well on our way, and let’s promote and grow more turkeys, continue to spend every waking moment fighting with environmentalist mental-midgets more concerned with making out with an animal than scientific wildlife management. When this is complete, let’s import some wild hogs. They will be good for the ecosystem (a fabricated word by Environmentalists that influences thought). Once the hogs are well-established and have destroyed about everything, including pissing off enough farmers and residents, whose pristine lawns have been rooted by pigs, the Idiots can introduce hybrid, farm raised dogs and call them wolves – because wolves have more power than gOD, where in today’s mindless society wolves can do things that they have never done in recorded history. Amazing isn’t it.

I wonder if someone has convinced MDIFW that killing more deer will cause fast growth. Many brain-dead fools think that baiting bears make them fat causing them to magically produce more offspring, which is the cause of Maine’s bear growth. They believe and repeat the same nonsense about coyotes, but not wolves. No, no. Wolves are smart enough to take their birth control pills as they are expected to do. According to the environmentalist, when convenient, killing causes increase and when convenient, killing by hunters causes scarcity and extirpation of species.

What a magical world we live in. I think I need to get some of what they are smoking.

 

Share