December 10, 2018

Maine Gov. “Invasive Species” Portal Evidently Intended to Keep Environmentalists and Animal Righters Happy

The State of Maine has evidently developed, or is developing, a website portal geared at addressing concerns over invasive species. It appears there is concern about invasive fish and marine wildlife, along with invasive plants, diseases and parasites that might effect plants including agricultural crops, but there appears to be something missing from this portal. Where is the section about invasive animals? Surely there are invasive animals that pose just as a big a threat to Maine’s ecosystems than odd fish and the spreading of some plants.

If I were to pick just one invasive wild animal that is very destructive to Maine, I would have to pick the coyote. It’s easy for most, including employees at the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), to address only the obvious about coyotes, i.e. killing deer, lynx, livestock, turkeys, grouse, etc. but it is exceptionally inconvenient to discuss the more than 30 diseases and parasites the mixed breed canine spreads throughout the state.

We already know, and the MDIFW has done a superb job of covering up the disease, that moose are now victims of what the department prefers to call “lungworm.” Lungworm is a common man’s term for Hytadid disease from the parasite Echinococcus granulosus. The diseases cause the growth of tumors in the lungs, liver, heart, and other places hindering the moose from having the best physical conditioning to escape predator danger. Because moose are known to be infected, it’s only a matter of time before deer will become so and any and all other wildlife ungulates and livestock, including sheep, cows, and pigs.

The Echinococcus granulosus (E.g.) parasite is carried and spread by coyotes, along with as many, if not more, than thirty other diseases. Oh, and did I mention that E.g. can be deadly to humans?

As populations of coyotes persist and grow across Maine, livestock, pets, and humans will be at risk from these diseases.

But we mustn’t talk about this because we are talking about an animal that some mentally ill people prefer to protect and perpetuate than insure the health of our people and the health and proper management of our wildlife and ecosystems in general.

However, consider the following information. It was brought to my attention a short time ago when a colleague asked how any species can be invasive. The answer was more or less simple. The species must come from outside of the Firmament, i.e. the earth, and the “waters above” and the “waters below.”

Man evidently has made the decision that starting at some random point in history, species that existed and where they were found would be how things must be kept. Odd and ironic that environmentalists love their wolves and other wild canines. They love to tell people how that millions of years ago “it is believed” that wolves/coyotes came to North America over that infamous “ice bright” somewhere around the Bering Straits. Beginning at that time, and moving forward, evidently everything else might be an invasive species. It would seem to me that if the wolf/coyote migrated here over an “ice bridge” during a period of “global cooling” (was that NOT a natural event?) then it was either an invasive species or there are no such things as invasive species.

Evidently an invasive species is some kind of plant or animal life that upsets the environmental narrative. If it’s on this “planet” how can it be invasive? And who left which man to be in charge of deciding at what point of time in history a line is drawn and any movement of plant or animal after that point is considered invasive and therefore not wanted. It would appear that using this same kind of thinking, or lack there of, that a strong argument could be made that the United States of America corporation is made up almost entirely by “invasive species” of humans.

The hypocrisy in all this is that the environmentalists want to control everything about our environment and ecosystems, but only to the point of which they want it. All else is wrong. Management of wildlife as a resource for food and products (hunting, fishing and trapping) evidently is unacceptable manipulation but playing gODs and deciding what stays and what goes is alright.

Doesn’t make much sense at all, but H.L. Menken, reminded us, that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

Share

It All Begins With the Fake Term “Ecosystem”

*Editor’s Note* – “Everyone” does NOT know and not everyone is interested in swallowing this BS  about balancing a fake ecosystem. Nor are we interested in wasting our time with outcome-based new-science scientism of “maybes,” and “indications” – hoping for another fake excuse to love the animals and hate the people.

Everyone knows that keeping our forests and grasslands full of wolves, bald eagles and honeybees is good for the environment. But could protecting animals and preserving ecosystems also help people not catch Lyme disease or West Nile virus?

Source: Save Wildlife, Save Yourself? | Maine Public Broadcasting

Share

List of Diseases Spread by Deer Tick Grows, Along With Their Range

Public Release – November 12, 2012

ATLANTA (November 12, 2012)–An emerging tick-borne disease that causes symptoms similar to malaria is expanding its range in areas of the northeast where it has become well-established, according to new research presented today at the annual meeting of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH).

Researchers from the Yale School of Public Health reported that from 2000 to 2008, cases of babesiosis–which invades red blood cells and is carried by the same tick that causes Lyme disease–expanded from 30 to 85 towns in Connecticut. Cases of the disease in Connecticut, where it was first reported in 1991, also have risen from 3 to about 100 cases per year.

The findings on babesiosis presented at the ASTMH annual meeting were accompanied by discussions of a range of other investigations into newly emerging tick-borne diseases, which include afflictions that can cause fatal encephalitis, an inflammation of the brain.

“Today’s findings underscore the shifting landscape of tick-borne diseases, whose rapid emergence can challenge the best efforts of science and medicine to diagnose, treat, and prevent their occurrence,” said Peter Krause, MD, a researcher at the Yale School of Public Health in New Haven, Connecticut.

ASTMH President James W. Kazura, MD, FASTMH, said: “This is a real-time illustration of the inter-connectedness of human and animal health that many people don’t often think about. Ticks are a major carrier for many human diseases and efforts like this offer timely information that is of regional and clinical importance.”

Lyme disease–with 20,000-30,000 cases reported each year in the United States–is still the best known example of a recently emerged tick-borne disease. But research points to a growing number of pathogens carried by the deer tick, all of which are expanding their range.

Malaria look-alike in United States

A prime example is babesiosis, which is caused by the parasite Babesia microti. It has similarities to malaria in that it invades and destroys red blood cells. In the United States, this parasite is the most common pathogen transmitted through blood transfusions.

Acute cases are commonly associated with fever, fatigue, chills, headache, sweats and muscle pain. Infection can be asymptomatic or severe, causing death in about 6 to 9 percent of patients hospitalized with the illness. If transmitted through a blood transfusion, the mortality rate is about 20 percent. However, if properly diagnosed, babesiosis generally is promptly cured with antibiotics.

Its range is expanding:

Krause’s colleague at Yale, Maria Diuk-Wasser, PhD, said that as Babesia has expanded its range. In some northern Connecticut towns the current rate of deer tick infection is now similar or even higher than in coastal Connecticut or the highly-endemic Nantucket Island, where about 10 percent of deer ticks are carrying the B. microti parasite.
The expansion of Babesia’s range in Connecticut follows a similar explosion of the parasite in New York’s Lower Hudson Valley, where the number of cases diagnosed in residents increased 20-fold from 2001 to 2008, from 6 cases to 119 cases per year during 2001 to 2008.
Babesiosis is now considered endemic in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin. And cases have turned up in at least 8 other states, from Washington to northern California in the West and from Maine to Maryland in the East.
In a separate study, Krause, Diuk-Wasser, Durland Fish, MD, and colleagues found evidence that Lyme disease and babesiosis parasite co-infection in mice appears to increase the transmission of Babesia microti and enhance its ability to become established in new areas.

They studied mice that had been deliberately infected with either one of the parasites that cause the diseases–B. microti in the case of babesiosis and B. burgdorferi for Lyme–or both at the same time. They allowed ticks to feed on the mice, and then each week over a six-week period they measured the percentage of ticks infected with each pathogen. They found ticks that fed on the mice infected with both the Lyme and babesiosis parasites were more likely to be carrying Babesia–and at higher concentrations–than ticks that fed on the mice infected only with the babesiosis parasite.

“This suggests that Lyme disease is somehow intensifying transmission of babesiosis,” Krause said.

Encephalitis-causing Ticks Emerging in Northeast

Marc El Khoury, MD, with New York Medical College in Valhalla, New York, reported on two related diseases: deer tick virus, which, as its name suggests, is carried by the hard-bodied deer tick, and Powassan virus (POWV), which is carried by a soft-bodied tick that feeds on groundhogs and woodchucks. But the two diseases share a common ancestor and are difficult to tell apart in standard antibody tests.

Until recently, however, deer tick virus was not considered a threat to human health. The first clue that deer tick virus could cause human disease came in 2001 when deer tick virus RNA, taken from the brain of a man who died in 1997 shortly after a presumed Powassan encephalitis infection, was sequenced.

Now, El Khoury reports that, in Lyme-endemic areas, many, if not all, cases previously diagnosed as POWV are likely deer tick virus. Furthermore, the number of cases appears to be rising rapidly. Between 1958 and 2003–a span of 45 years–only about 40 cases of POWV were reported in the United States and Canada. Then, in four years, from 2008 to 2012, 21 cases were reported from Wisconsin and Minnesota, and 12 cases from New York State.

“Almost all of these cases are in Lyme country, where humans are much more likely to be preyed upon by deer ticks carrying deer tick virus than ticks carrying Powassan virus,” El Khoury said. “Now it appears that in Lyme-endemic areas, people can not only get Lyme disease or babesiosis, but also a deer tick virus-related meningoencephalitis.”

Many infections are probably mild or asymptomatic. But more severe infections can progress to encephalitis, which can have a case fatality rate of up to 15 percent and cause permanent nerve or brain damage in about 50 percent of diagnosed cases. Powassan virus infections (that may in fact be deer tick virus) have been reported in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.

There’s Nothing Like Family

And that’s not all. Deer ticks also are known to transmit a bacterial disease known as HGA (human granulocytic anaplasmosis) Also known as ehrlichiosis, HGA has become the third most frequent vector-borne disease in North America and Europe, and is now emerging in Asia, according to J. Stephen Dumler, MD, at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland.

HGA attacks white blood cells, and while milder forms cause fever and muscle pain, it can also cause serious disease and immune system malfunction that can lead to opportunistic infections. It is related to Rocky Mountain spotted fever (transmitted by another tick species) and typhus (transmitted by lice.)

HGA’s rapid spread has been abetted by an expanded family of deer tick relatives, with different, closely related tick species carrying the disease in the Western United States, Europe and Asia, Dumler said. But as in the case of POWV and deer tick virus, limited information can sometimes lead to incorrect conclusions when it comes to the growing menagerie of tick-borne pathogens.

Dumler reported on an unusual outbreak of life-threatening HGA in China between 2007 and 2010 that affected hundreds of patients. But when scientists looked more closely, scrutinizing patients’ blood for foreign DNA and sequencing whatever they found, the culprit was identified not as HGA but as a novel tick-borne virus–one that had a 30 percent case fatality rate. And just this summer, a novel, closely-related and dangerous tick-borne virus infected two Missouri men.

Sam Telford, SD, MS, of Tufts University in Massachusetts noted that one of the biggest challenges posed by the emergence of new tick-borne diseases is the ability to match surveillance capabilities with the discovery of new diseases.

“We increasingly need to apply the most sophisticated genetic tools to identify the numerous new tick-borne microbes that have the theoretical capacity to infect humans,” Telford said. “Only by raising awareness among health professionals of what to look for, publishing case reports with good laboratory details, and doing good epidemiology will we be able to truly understand and appropriately respond to emerging disease threats.”

Share

Is IDFG Placating Idaho Sportsmen?

It’s disgusting that I even need to ask such a question, but how are sportsmen supposed to feel and react when they’ve been lied to, abused verbally, demonized, ignored, laughed at, had tax money stolen from them and basically treated like a piece of worm-infested porcupine scat?

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) is sending out “kits” to moose hunters and asking them to:

1. Take a blood sample,
2. Saw off a slab of moose liver, and
3. Pluck some hair.
BTW – In looking at this letter (posted below), I don’t see anywhere in that letter any instructions on safety precautions needed for when hunters do IDFG’s dirty work. Perhaps it is contained in the kit itself somewhere. If there are readers privy to this information, could you please let me and readers know? It is very important.)

Each hunter then must make a mandatory stop at an IDFG office where each hunter will complete a “MANDATORY” check of the moose. This in addition to the request sent out recently to Idaho sportsmen asking that they report wolf and grizzly bear activity. Really? Why not report polar bear movements or those of penguins? Why now? Why are fish and game officials all of a sudden interested, or seemingly so, in what sportsmen think, see or do?

According to what is written on a letter sent to moose hunters by IDFG, the reason for this action is to: “improve moose management through a better understanding of disease in wildlife populations.

Isn’t it just a little bit too late? Where were these concerned wildlife managers when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) were lying to the American people telling them that wolves would have no significant impact on game herds or the spread of disease? (Please find this in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the (re)introduction of wolves to the Northern Rockies.)

The wolf recovery team decided that it would not even bother to offer any kind of investigation into diseases that are carried and spread by wolves because any existing information was: “limited,” “poorly documented” and “can never be scientifically confirmed or denied.” These claims came at a time when there existed no fewer than 300 scientific studies worldwide just about the tapeworm Echinococcus granulosus.

And today the World Health Organization includes on the “Fact Page” that: “More than 1 million people are affected with echinococcosis at any one time.”

When an individual, at least one who has the capacity to think independently, considers how government officials lied to them, and then how they have been treated before, during and after this crime of wolf (re)introduction was forced down their throats, why would they be eager to help these isolated by choice from the global scientific community elites with their fake task of “improve[ing] moose management through a better understanding of disease in wildlife populations”? It sure stinks of mollification to me.

For years these clowns were offered technical and scientific evident to help them “better understand wildlife diseases” and they plugged their ears, closed their eyes and shouted out loud, like a small child.

For crying out loud, back in 1971 wildlife biologists in Minnesota didn’t “discover” that Echinococcus granulosus tapeworms existed. They were out LOOKING FOR IT in moose.

That 1971 study result showed some of us, but evidently nobody at IDFG or USFWS, two distinct things:
1. “The incidence of E. granulosus and Taenia spp. in the northeast is evidence of a higher timber wolf (Canis lupus) population in this part of the state.”
2. “Data from the aerial census and classification counts indicate a net productivity of 30-35% in the northwest and 9-15% in the northeast. This indicates a difference is occurring in the survival rate of calves in their first six months of life between the two areas. Area differences in nutrition, predation and parasitism may be responsible for these observed differences in net productivity.”

Patrick Karns, in 1971, had a “better understanding” of wildlife diseases. It’s 2014, time for some TRUTH for a change!

This and the 600-plus studies in existence in 2001, when the World Health Organization published their latest scientific data on Echinococcus granulosis and Echinococcus multilocularis, evidently isn’t good enough for Idaho wildlife officials, or any others in this here United States of America. But NOW they want to ask Idaho moose hunters for help in better understanding wildlife diseases.

I’m not a resident of Idaho, nor do I buy a hunting license there, but if I did, my inclination would be to tell IDFG to STICK IT! You didn’t listen then and you won’t listen now. You are just trying to pacify the hunters and cover your own asses. No thanks!
IdahoMooseLetter

A tip of the hat to reader “Chandie” for sending me a copy of the letter.

Share

The Stupidity of Animal Perversion

The society of the United States has grown to become one of animal perversion. People are obsessed with, if that even accurately describes the mental affliction, animals to a point where humans come in at least second in the grand scheme of priorities.

There is such a thing as having a “healthy” respect for all animals and even enjoying them at many levels but living with them, eating with them, sleeping with them, exploiting them for profit and even using them for psychological therapy, brings the human into a world of perversion as well as a distorted view of reality and the way life is intended to be lived.

One small example of this happened at Washington University where a woman, with a “traveling zoo” brought a bear cub on campus as a, “stress reliever during exam season.” Believed to help student relieve stress, one has to wonder how getting bitten by a bear putting humans at risk of contracting rabies and a myriad of other not so cool diseases can relieve stress. I suppose if you are just plain ignorant of things and believe the false claims made by other perverse animal lovers, nothing of importance much matters.

The owner of the traveling freak show says she is defending her “business practices.”

Share

James Beers: Wolves – 2014

*Editor’s Note* – The below writing perhaps reflects the greatest knowledge and understanding of the effects of forcing wild wolves into human-settled landscapes. Such a writing should give readers the opportunity to fully grasp the entire scope of how romance animal fantasy should never mix with the scientific realities of protecting a dangerous-in-so-many-ways creature where humans live.

However, while one must applaud Mr. Beer’s effort at searching for a solution and his correct analysis of a top-down dictatorial control over everything plant and animal, his proposed solution, while should it actually come to fruition may possibly work and work well, this will not be accomplished solely at the ballot box, if there at all.

The top-down dictatorship of global powers has infiltrated so deeply into our lives for so many years, ballot boxes, while they shouldn’t be eliminated, will not work alone until a miraculous return to self-determination and independence, through a strong foundation of moral principles and values and a return a fear and love of our Creator, has transformed this nation and globe.

Thank you to Jim Beers for caring enough to take the time and lay out the facts for all and for offering a solution.

Guest posting by James Beers:

As Americans and Europeans awaken to the ancient realities of cohabiting with wolves in settled landscapes from which they were extirpated 50 to hundreds of years ago, all manner of heated discussions, questions and coalitions are emerging.

While wolves have persisted for eons in undeveloped landscapes from the wilds of Canada and Alaska to the vast primitive-societal landscapes of Asia; the re-introduction, protection and spread of wolves in Europe and The Lower 48 States of the US in recent decades has precipitated disagreements and political chaos of enormous proportions. National politicians in Europe and the US have partnered with environmental and animal rights organizations representing mainly urban voters and environmental specialist-scientists to enact laws and regulations responsible for the current situation. Opponents of such laws and programs are mainly rural livestock producers, dog owners, hunters, parents, grandparents, the rural poor and an assortment of rural recreationists and rural amateur naturalists from mushroom and berry pickers to plant and rock collectors.

According to the IUCN, wolves currently inhabit 4 continents. They occur in contiguous populations from the uncounted hundreds of thousands (to millions?) in Asia to the Canada/Alaska population estimated to be approaching one hundred thousand. While these populations “spill” into Europe and The Lower 48 US states naturally and periodically; national (federal) US government laws and European (Union) government laws have been passed to forcibly reintroduce and protect wolves throughout their (the wolves) “original” range regardless of the adverse impacts. The rationale for this is that “native” species “belong” wherever they once existed. It is inconceivable to say with a straight face that wolves are “endangered”. Until this very recent change in American and European governance and human/animal legal concepts, such a decision would have been based primarily on the interests of humans and been the sole concern of the governments of individual European Countries or individual American States. This is no longer the case: as wolves demonstrate the growing political construct that human interests are secondary to the animal/environmental statements and beliefs of those controlling increasingly powerful central governments. European Countries and US States have become subservient to Washington, Brussels and the UN. It goes without saying that this phenomenon is steadily incorporating more and more animal and plant species under the international/central government umbrellas and that this has, in turn, made the redress of problems (safety, livestock losses, loss of hunting opportunity, dog losses, property losses, human health, etc.) of rural people associated with mandated and protected species such as wolves, exponentially more difficult to obtain from far-away governments that are more beholden to far-away political factions, a multitude of hidden agendas, and financial support from environmental radicals than to the redress of the concerns of rural communities.

Wolves are members of an animal group called Canids. Canids include wolves, coyotes, domestic dogs, jackals and dingos. All of these animals can and do interbreed to produce viable (fully reproducing-capable) offspring the same as humans of different races, different physiology, and different social habits; or dogs of different breeds. Additionally, wolves, like other mammals, are larger in Northern latitudes; lighter-colored in desert habitats; omnivorous in that they eat any meat (wild or domestic); capable of very different behavior in uninhabited areas or settled landscapes, or when hunted, or even close to human habitations like outer suburbs near St. Petersburg or Moscow. In truth, wolf behaviors, wolf sizes and colors, wolf DNA and the many documented dangers and harms they present to humans are varied just like their fellow Canids as seen in smaller western US coyotes v. larger Eastern US coyotes or in the varieties of dog sizes, colors, and behavior differences (i.e. pit bull v. basset hound or Chinese hairless v. Irish Wolfhound) with which most people are familiar. Dingos and jackals tend to be far more uniform in size, color and behavior in large part due to their long-standing isolation from wolves, coyotes and free-roaming dogs. Within this group (Canids) of mammals, it is fair to ask and debate just what is a species, and what is it that is so unique or special that government intervention is called for or warranted for an animal that could be identified as a wolf or a coyote/wolf hybrid or a wolf/dog hybrid or a wolf/coyote/dog hybrid depending of the hubris of government law enforcers and the responsiveness of their DNA-Analyst contractors that make such determinations depending on who has specified the DNA Standards? The very real possibility that wolf protection and spread into settled landscapes where coyotes and especially dogs are abundant and ubiquitous may be resulting in the genetic extinction of wolves as we have known them and that we are witnessing the evolution of a sort-of semi-wild coyote/wolf wild dog that capitalizes on all the settled landscape’ adaptive habits of the three to the even greater detriment to rural human society: this subject is never mentioned, broached or respected. What is a hybrid? What do hybrids portend?

Wolves have been and are a documented danger to humans, especially when they become habituated to human communities and particularly regarding children and the elderly. Written accounts of these dangers extend all the way back to Greek and Roman writers before the time of Christ. European and North American history have copious reports of deaths and injuries to humans despite poor record-keeping, spotty reporting and unsolved disappearances in sparsely-settled landscapes of early European and early American settlement and development periods. Russian current events still mention a steady stream of wolf attacks on humans causing deaths and serious injuries and infections of victims from rabid wolves (one such wolf just seriously injured six Indian villagers in the Panchmahal District as I am writing this) and recent attacks on old Russian lady shepherds; and even a Russian sawyer actually running his chainsaw and over 20 others bitten by one rabid wolf in recent years are typical!. An Alaskan report of a recent 32-year period regarding wolf attacks, called human/wolf interactions, described 80 such incidents in Alaska and Canada. In the past decade a healthy young man going for a walk near a rural mining community was killed by wolves in Saskatchewan, a young woman (teacher while jogging) was killed by wolves in Alaska and a young woman hiker was killed by several coyotes in an Eastern Canadian Park in just the past decade. Only last summer a young camper was attacked during the night by a wolf in a federal Minnesota campground only weeks after I was fishing right near that campground. When a wolf was killed, it was said to be the one that attacked but that he only attacked because he was “suffering from a deformed brain”. Most likely it was primarily because public awareness and understanding of similar human dangers from wolves in bygone times that so much time, wealth and effort was diverted from other vital functions by Europeans in the last millennium and European settlers in North America to exterminate wolves in areas that were being settled or were intended to be settled by farmers, shepherds, ranchers and others interested primarily in safe and productive communities, and peaceful home environments for their families. When livestock losses, big game animal losses, dog losses and disease dangers were also considered; evidently no effort was considered too great by our forefathers and their families.

Wolves transmit diseases and infections that are deadly or debilitating to people, cattle, sheep, dogs and other wild and domestic animals. These include but are not limited to Rabies, Brucellosis, Encephalitis, Anthrax, Smallpox, Mad Cow Disease, Chronic Wasting Disease, Distemper, Neospora caninum (causes abortions), 2 types of Mange, GID (a disease of wild and domestic sheep), Foot-and-Mouth, Heartworm and Parvo. Wolves carry a wide range of Ticks and Fleas that they pick up as they wander far and wide encountering all manner of other animals with wide varieties of ticks and fleas. The Ticks they carry can transmit; Anemia, Dermatosis, Tick Paralysis, Babesiosis, Anaplasmosis, Erlichia, E. Coast Fever, Relapsing Fever, Rocky Mtn. Spotted Fever and Lyme Disease. The Fleas they carry can transmit; Plague, Bubonic Plague. Pneumonic Plague and Flea-Borne Typhus. Additionally, wolves carry and spread the infectious and dangerous eggs of Tapeworms (Echinococcus granulosis and multilocularis) that they deposit in the area around their feces in parks, campgrounds, rural yards, playgrounds, trails and other areas where the eggs remain viable for months to be picked up by grazing animals feeding on plants, curious dogs, and children and adults on fingers, paws, tongues dropped food and shoes to be brought into homes where they reside for small children to pick up from rugs and floors. The resulting cysts in vital organs can kill or debilitate humans while also debilitating other animals like moose, elk and livestock, thereby making them less agile and strong and thus even more vulnerable to wolf predation.

Wolves kill and eat coyotes and dogs (herding, hunting, watchdogs, pets; i.e. all dogs) routinely. They will also mate with or be mated by coyotes or dogs when estrus and opportunity present themselves, leaving the female to whelp the mixed litter either back at some barn or in a den at some remote location.

Wolves kill and eat calves, cows, steers, lambs, sheep, and other livestock. They harass the herds and flocks such that the livestock loses weight, fails to put on weight, reduces reproduction and behave in ways that increase problems, time investments and costs for owners and their employees as well as consumers. The results are evident in the US in herd reductions, grazing allotment closures, ranch sales and local community losses of taxes and economic activity. In Europe the losses of sheep and shepherding activity continues to grow while the loss of grazing land utilization and the costs to owners reportedly are not only economic but also include harms to their mental health and their families.

Wolves reduce big game herds and thereby hunting opportunity; and thereby hunting revenue for wildlife conservation and management; and thereby government management and protection of the fish and wildlife resources for people of growing areas of The Lower 48 States and European Countries where wolves are becoming more numerous and their populations more dense. World-famous elk and moose populations in Idaho and Montana have seen steep declines. Moose in Minnesota have declined as wolves have increased such that they are no longer numerous enough to be hunted. Elk, moose and deer all decline and often most precipitously in a few short years of the arrival of uncontrolled wolves. Fawns and calves of these species along with pregnant females are particularly vulnerable and highly preferred by wolves. Not only do wolves learn quickly how and where to find them, like pregnant cows and newborn young, wolves often disable the female only to eat out her rear-end to pull out and eat the highly-desired fawn or calf she is carrying, leaving her to die a lingering death. It does not take many years of this to notice severe declines in numbers of these animals just as any countries’ human population that falls below replacement and necessary reproduction/morbidity numbers and ratios can attest. Unlike the various wildlife studies based on remote areas and uninhabited islands that infer a reputed balance between wolves and their prey such that wolves decrease after they reduce their prey animals and then plants like willows increase as wolf prey are reduced and then the prey species once again increase due to increased food and reduced wolf numbers to be followed by an increase in wolves as the prey increase in numbers and availability: the realities are that in a settled landscape when the prey (elk, deer, moose, etc.) decrease (and animal owners pen up smaller herds) the wolves adopt new techniques and determination to get at the livestock plus they shift to killing more pets and like North American coyotes learn to eat garbage and other items in yards and suburbs during the night. Confrontations between kids taking out garbage, moms walking the family pet dog or elderly folks walking to mailboxes will naturally increase and the probability of fateful encounters will increase accordingly. No one asks, discusses or defends a certain death or injury rate or numbers to humans that is “worth” living with wolves. Wolves, dogs (domestic and free-roaming) and coyotes are all smart and adaptive omnivores and the expectation that when they reduce their wild prey base they will quietly decline in numbers when other options are available, is foolish. Public comments about this particular phenomenon in recent years reveal a widespread reveling and exuberant celebrations by environmental/animal rights persons and their organization that the wolves are steadily eliminating hunting, grazing by domestic animals and rural economic health as goals to be applauded far more than the reputed shifts in wild animal presence and numbers associated with wolves. Some consider this the true or primary hidden agenda driving wolf spreading and protection by government fiats.

Wolves, more than free-roaming dogs or coyotes are notoriously hard to hunt. They quickly turn nocturnal and secretive when pressed. They do not come to bait or calls consistently. Historically, when severe controls were desired, guns, traps, snares, M-44’s (scented ball that triggers a poison shell into the animal’s mouth), poisons, denning (killing pups in the den), dogs, aerial gunning (especially on snow) and many more things were employed. When it was agreed that extermination was necessary, all of these were used and even possees (local militias of law-abiding citizens enlisted to hunt down and catch dangerous criminals and, yes, even wolves) were formed where men rode for weeks hunting down the last wolves over large areas or in the case of an island like Ireland, special, large and fierce dogs were bred and maintained to run down and kill remaining wolves.

Since wolves move stealthily over large areas in a non-routine, haphazard manner; consistent and accurate censuses year after year for comparisons or trend analyses are impossible. This fact combined with self-serving government agendas that quite often excuse game disappearances as climate change, behavioral anomalies or undiagnosed diseases often create year-to-year wolf population estimates apparently driven more by the political and public relations agendas of bureaucrats, lobbyists and politicians than reality.

Wolf supporters and bureaucrats are largely determined to oppose not only methods (trapping, snares, dogs, poisons, aerial gunning, denning, etc.) of wolf control: they are constantly seeking donations, suing and lobbying to prevent any controls. While initial hunting programs, at best, have taken no more than 10-15% of wolf populations annually, such annual takes have negligible effects on either wolf population growth or on wolf behavior. Ironically, it is actually the sort of game harvest percentages meant to spur production in both birds and mammals as fewer animals are sent into the winter to share available food and thus guaranteeing healthier and more numerous reaching spring more capable of raising more and larger litters. To reduce a dense wolf population usually requires a 45-70% or more per year reduction for 5-7 years or more and then a 30% reduction or more per year ever-after. This necessarily ignores the lessened impacts of such controls when conducted in a patchwork fashion considering CLOSED private property, restricted government enclaves and neighboring jurisdictions where controls are prohibited and are thus continually providing a constant inflow from burgeoning wolf populations in such nearby unmanaged (for wolves) areas. Effective control harvests are impossible today in both The Lower 48 US States and European wolf areas due to fierce opposition, government indifference and lack of an understood public rationale for such harvests because the inevitable public outcry for such controls is only beginning to grow and it must overcome decades of lies and propaganda. As public realization and understanding of the intolerable harms caused by wolves in settled landscapes grows, the same human/wolf incidents as were documented in our ancestors’ communities caused by historic wolf problems and that spurred our forefathers to expend the scarce time and treasure to take drastic, long-term measures to the point of exterminating wolves are sure to result even in our modern technology-masters-all society as human casualties and damages mount and are no longer deniable..

All of the foregoing wolf reality is arrayed against:

-Scientists that claim that wolves do not reduce game populations or livestock and only reproduce slowly due to a reluctance to breed by submissive wolves, a phenomenon that curiously does not exist in either dogs or coyotes.

-School teachers repeatedly telling young students those wolves are necessary, good and of no danger to anyone who behaves correctly.

-Media agendas that ignore wolf harms, publish wolf public-relations articles as “science”, and marginalize negative wolf reports and people that live with and are affected by wolves.

-Bureaucrats that promise ranchers and sheep herders compensation, then call depredation losses everything but wolf-caused and quickly run out of scarce dollars as the wolves get established and compensation for wolf damage is shown to have the priority and support of government research into plastic surgery for animals for governments awash in debt and crumbling infrastructure.

-Bureaucrats and politicians that tell the Countries and States under them that once the wolves are established be central government fiat, the Countries, States and Local Communities are responsible for maintaining certain numbers (despite their being difficult to accurately count) or else the higher government will step back in and be ruthless about reaching and maintaining those levels.

-A fantasy being presented worldwide as fact, that what plants and animals were once on this or that piece of ground 200, 500, 1,000, 2,000 years ago should or must be on that ground once again. No matter that human settlement, development and change of the landscape, weather, and present-day human activities in all their changing and beneficial complexity have made that piece of ground no more hospitable to or suitable for uncontrolled species like wolves than for free-ranging elephants or bison (wisent) or grizzly bears. NOTE, just this morning I read in The India Times that free-roaming bison (Asian Water Buffalo) have killed seven rural Indians in separate incidents in just the past 12 months; and only last week a lady In Montana asked me to provide her comments regarding a UWS federal/state proposal to establish free-roaming buffalo (bison) herds in the farmland/pasturelands of central Montana. A similar federal program to forcibly protect and spread grizzly bears that are killing livestock as well as killing and injuring people in the NW US is also underway as I write.

-A gaggle of hidden agendas from bureaucrats seeking more authority, budget, and personnel; and scientists seeking more grants, tenure, and recognition: to organizations working to eliminate hunting, eliminate grazing, and rural populations; and groups seeking rights for animals, significantly reduced human populations worldwide and an end to all animal utilization by humans.

The airwaves, newspapers and classrooms are crowded today with stories of:

-The importance of apex predators.

-The need to restore the rural environment.

-The need for and legitimacy of forcible clearance of rural precincts.

-The importance of the native ecosystem and native species.

-The harmful environmental effects of rural people, rural practices and excess humans.

-The need for Washington, Brussels and the UN to have more money and more authority.

– Hunters, grazers, loggers, and most rural residents being both ignorant and bent on destroying the environment, the ecosystem and life as we know it unless ruled minutely and ruthlessly.

All this goes on as:

– Wolves are having growing impacts on European sheep flocks, shepherds, rural areas and rural residents as wolf numbers and densities grow in Italy, Germany, France, and Spain.

– Expanding wolf populations in Finland, Sweden and Norway are decreasing big game numbers and creating all manner of livestock and human safety concerns.

– British and Scottish environmentalists, politicians and University biologists are working to introduce wolves into Scotland.

– Dense and uncontrolled wolf populations in Russia and many former Eastern Bloc Countries supply an endless flow of wolves into Eastern and Central European Countries from Lithuania and Finland to Hungary, Slovenia and Italy.

– European Union politicians, bureaucrats and environmental/animal rights’ lobbyists resist authorizing any actions by shepherds, rural residents concerned about safety and health threats, hunters, dog owners and other rural Europeans to control wolves or to employ active protections for their families, livelihoods and property being killed and threatened by wolves.

– European Union administrators are basically opposed to authorizing any increased gun use by rural Europeans and use of devices like traps and snares.

– Likewise, EU administrators resist bear depredation controls in places like Finland where robust bear populations, supplemented by Russian bears that expand into Finland from uncontrolled and constantly expanding and scattering bear populations.

– All of the above are either ignored by or supported by urban Europeans that, like their urban American and Canadian cousins, are evolving to be indifferent to rural harms and problems.

– More federal kennel-raised wolves are being released in Arizona despite strong local objections.

– Minnesota wolves that have decimated the state’s moose population (and hunting) and are currently decreasing the deer population are the subject of a lawsuit to bar any hunting or trapping of wolves (ironically, despite the stimulative effect of the small potential harvest on the very dense and robust wolf population.)

– Idaho is trying to fund a statewide initiative with tax dollars to reduce the wolves that have decimated moose and elk hunting (and numbers, license revenue and associated dollars generated by big game hunting). What the long-term controls and funding sources portend is anyone’s guess.

– As Washington State and Oregon State have begun hosting resident wolf packs from neighboring Idaho, ranchers have been cajoled into accepting “compensation” for livestock losses to wolves that is underfunded and as likely to continue being available as is are liquor allowances for a legislature. Simultaneously the state bureaucrats tell the public wolf numbers are curiously steady in this new food-rich habitat and that decreasing elk and moose harvests and licenses are only temporary and due to everything imaginable Except Wolves.

– Wolves from Great Lakes States are scattering into Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri and Ohio where federal and state laws jeopardize any hunter or control agent that kills what he thought was a coyote or free-roaming dog and some post-facto government DNA Analyst declares is a wolf. Similarly in the West, Rocky Mountain States’ Wolves from introduced stock are scattering into California, Nevada, Utah, Nebraska, and the Dakotas to hospitable habitats.

– As Texas refused vigorously to accept federal wolves (like Wyoming did successfully), federal thugs have “worked with” (i.e. funded) wolf releases in N Mexico just S of the Rio Grande River across from Texas.

– US federal bureaucrats have made much of “Returning Management of (Restored) ‘Endangered’ Wolves to State Governments” in states like Minnesota, Idaho and Montana. First, wolves were never “endangered” other than under the Endangered Species Act’s politically-driven agendas. Second, this fictional “Return” is in reality a move to make states finance all the wolf problems with both state wildlife funds (to divert them from hunting programs) and from state tax dollars where their future looks like the future of continued state funding for free barbershops for politicians. The kicker is that, if the state lets the wolf numbers go below some set level (how do you know, how to prove, especially in court?), the federal government will step back in and seize protection of the wolves. All the while those opposed to wolf control or hunting or trapping or snaring or aerial shooting, etc. of wolves go into federal courts and help federal bureaucrats modify regulations to obtain key federal court rulings to expand and solidify federal authorities and jurisdictions over the wolves “Under State Authority”.

– US State fish and wildlife bureaucrats increasingly view themselves as extensions of federal bureaucrats, federal programs and federal funding while they increasingly disregard any responsibility to the state residents that employ them. This makes redress of rural complaints and problems more difficult as the federal bureaucrats set the rules for all actions by co-opting state bureaucrats and manipulating federal courts by working with select “partners and stakeholders” by designation of friendly federal courts and federal judges presented with jointly-designed (by bureaucrats and radicals) lawsuits. The flow of all federal US tax dollars makes many state politicians and big city politicians (and their employees) behave the same as the fish and wildlife bureaucrats, thus further marginalizing rural people and their concerns.

– Gun control is a large aspect of living with wolves that is exacerbating problems. European and Canadian laws and habits opposed to handguns make consistent availability of a gun for unexpected wolf confrontations from dog walkers encountering wolves and wolves encountered in close quarters like barns or fenced yards, to shepherds encountering wolves depredating at unexpected times and in unexpected places; difficult to say the least. European laws and customs extend to areas where, as in Russia, any gun possession or ammunition availability is only made by special and narrow government dispensation. US federal politicians, although they take an oath to uphold the US Constitution stating “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” are on an undisguised rampage to violate the Constitution in this regard and regulate and then ban over time handguns, military-looking rifles, all rifles, clips, magazines and shotguns to the cheers of urban politicians that blame all of the US’ urban woes on guns. This, like wolf protection and spread is applauded by urban voters and political donors. The bottom line here is that real wolf control, real and consistent wolf management, control of wolf depredations, dealing with dangerous wolf habituations (homes, schools, bus stops, etc.), and protection in the case of wolf incidents from rabies to an outright attack is both disappearing and increasingly only done by government officials, if at all. This not only is after-the-fact and expensive, actual wolf control is made unachievable and impractical over time and the future of rural people doomed to live with wolves is steadily becoming neither pretty nor bright.

Scientific papers, lawsuit arguments, media propaganda and government pronouncements are rife with statements and questions like:

– When is a wolf a coyote? Who established DNA Standards?

– Is the wolf trapped far away and released by government THE actual wolf that once inhabited (fill-in-the-blank)?

– Any wolf attack on a human is “abnormal”.

– People must learn to “live” with wolves.

– Maybe the cattle and/or sheep don’t “belong” out there.

– Wolves were here first.

– Wolves control prey species while regulated hunting doesn’t.

– Wolves are good and beneficial. Hunting is bad and harmful.

– Hunting should be outlawed just like grazing and logging.

– People should keep their pets and kids inside and watch them closely when they are outside.

– Rural areas are too heavily populated and their natural resource uses and demands are destroying the ecosystem.

– Wolf hunting destroys the wolves’ social structure and their reproductive capabilities.

– Only alpha wolves mate.

– Wolves don’t decimate big game populations and wolf depredations on livestock are vastly overrated by rural people looking for government handouts.

– Plant communities blossom, like semi-arid valleys after a thunderstorm, when wolves kill ungulates and also cause them to “behave” differently.

– Wolves are the “apex” predators that are leading the way to the total restoration of native species in a native ecosystem.

– Wolves should be maintained with hunting program funds but they should not be hunted, trapped or controlled.

– Those that do not understand “ecosystems”, “trophic cascades” and “natural processes and cycles” are like climate change deniers and should be similarly marginalized and denied any part in things they do not grasp.

So what? It is the Law! What do you want to do, kill all the wolves? All these statements and more are constantly thrown at anyone addressing this issue. So here is what must be done.

First a word of caution. Speaking candidly about this is like talking to many of my relatives that have grown indifferent to or rabidly opposed to the religion of our forefathers, while I have not. I say this not to compare you to any of my relatives but to note that ANY discussion of any topic involving moral dimensions or basic values is quickly treated by such a relative as a disguised attempt on my part to “bring them back” or “convert them”. As I describe the following solution, some will be hearing me trying to tell you how to vote or how to think. I apologize beforehand but YOU must think through that and consider what I am about to say if you are to have ANY hope of resolving the wolf issue before us.

THE BASIC PROBLEM is that very powerful central governments and international “Bodies” now control all wild plants and animals. Don’t try to argue,”oh our state still manages fishing”, or birds or oak trees. The facts are that what Brussels and Washington have done with wolves and what they plus Toronto have done with United Nations’ Treaties and Conventions is to set precedents and a roadmap to seizing any and all wild plant and animal jurisdiction and authority when it suits their purposes. Conventions on Trade in Wildlife, Wetlands of International Significance, Marine Mammal Compacts, Endangered claims in courts, Native Species claims in courts, Invasive Species claims in courts, Animal Welfare claims in court and Central Government Legislation and UN Treaty Negotiations that would have been unbelievable 50 years ago have all been incremental moves giving these central authorities all of the jurisdiction and authority over the wolf debacle we are faced with today.

While we bemoan the injustice and perfidy of government wolf actions; as I write the US government is trying to similarly force free-roaming buffalo herds into Montana (where the federal wolves were first released) and into the Arizona/Utah borderlands N of the Grand Canyon on a mix of federal and Indian lands from which they would spread much like the federal wolf release on an Idaho Indian Reservation. This morning’s news featured the arrest of a Nevada rancher for taking pictures from a state road of federal resource enforcers seizing his cattle herd while dressed as snipers with sniper scopes on their rifles and police dogs that attacked the rancher when he failed to get back in his legally parked vehicle. These are the “idealistic” “environmental workers” you deal with concerning wolves and will be dealing with when buffalo once again “roam, where the deer and the antelope play.”

Now the following is all-US oriented, although I think I have a good grasp of Canadian and European governments I hesitate to write as if I do for the certainty that some innocent mistake on my part would create a world of misunderstanding. Therefore the following applies equally to Europeans and Canadians in large and small measure and are presented only as ideas about how to fix what we agree is wrong.

Whether you believe that all wild plants band animals were once under the authority of lesser levels of governments or if you believe that wild plants have never been under lesser levels of governments: JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY OVER ALL WILD PLANTS AND ANIMALS, should always be, first and foremost and permanently if at all possible UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE LOWEST AND MOST RESPONSIVE (to human needs) LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT. This is called the principle of subsidiarity. It sets limits on state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies and tends toward the establishment of true international order. There is no argument that the current “top-down”, “central government rules-all” system divides rural and urban societies and establishes an international order that is little more than a process whereby dictatorial (the proper word) governments issue orders to be obeyed by all at the behest of whatever faction controls such government or is financing it.

Think of all the “is it a hybrid”, or “we really have two thousand, six hundred and seventy-two wolves”, or “see the wolves REALLY DID kill all the moose”, or the “video camera shows that the young boy caused the attack by his improper behavior in trying to run away” arguments in courts or in newspaper articles or in Letters and meetings with Legislators and Bureaucrats as simply blows back and forth during a boxing match wherein the judges are relatives of the guy you are up against. As long as the REAL POWER remains at the central or HIGHEST level of government, they can simply change the rules or the law and even when you feel you “won” something, the next time your opponents get “their” guys elected they can – and will – pass a new law or write a new regulation that either delegitimizes your “victory” or makes it worthless as they simply check it and move into other items like restoring “Pre-Roman” plants and animals or releasing lions or hyenas since they “once inhabited” (have YOUR archeologist fill-in this blank.)

In the US, this means positioning or re-positioning all authority and jurisdiction over wild plants and animals at the COUNTY (and not even the State) level. Certainly species like Marine Mammals and Certain Migratory Birds could be placed at the federal level for reasons of Interstate Commerce, Hunting and Management of movable stocks and flocks and legitimate common interests with foreign powers who share in the benefits and presence of such animals. Likewise, an effective federal authority should be established to prevent harmful plants and animals from being imported into the US as contrasted with the current system wherein the federal law enforcers are equipped and trained as military fighters to raid guitar stores and farmyards while ignoring the importation of Asian carp that destroy our rivers and pythons and boa constrictors that are only beginning to wreak untold havoc in southern states.

County politicians and County employees are closest to, neighbors of, and liable to voter wrath of ANY (State, City, and Federal) level of government. The US government was conceived to authorize a federal government with very specific powers to protect state governments that represented and protected the County governments THAT REPRESENTED AND PROTECTED THE COMMUNITIES AND FAMILIES THAT MADE UP THE NATION. This lowest level, the County, and NOT the highest level, the federal, is where the rubber meets the road regarding whether some or how many wolves should prey on domestic animals or kill dogs or eliminate hunting or eliminate big game, or spread disease, or pay “compensation” for some or any of the property that wolves destroy. This is why what is perhaps our most important County official, OUR Sheriff, is most often the official on the citizen’s side when federal snipers, attack dogs, numbers and lawlessness are employed to evict an old woman from her home that a Park bureaucrats wants, or when federal enforcers seize livestock and other property from those they want to intimidate or take from.

Many US States, like US Senators (2 from each state) have assumed this urban-preference/rural-dismissal bias as a result of powerful urban donors and numerous voters that keep them in office. Issues like wolves are simply “throw-away” crumbs to urban voters for continued or increased support. It is for reasons like that, that I recommend that state governments be re-oriented to protecting what Local (County) governments and their residents want for their own County. If they want more elk and moose, then state government works in that regards and if they want wolves and no hunting or livestock or dogs, so be it. If neighboring jurisdictions refuse to control wolves, let those that would have no wolves set the fate of any wolf seen anywhere in the County at any moment. Counties would be more cautious about spending money and therefore County Ordinances that employed landowners and residents with leeway to take action, orders to landowners refusing to control wolves on their land with charges and liens for the County to employ a contractor to take needed action. County governments with teeth would make these federal/state buffalo ventures a thing of the past in any settled-landscape County where residents agreed “not-in-my County.” As part and parcel of this repositioning of jurisdiction and authority is a resurrection of the abandoned legal notion that somehow when federal agents with federal tax dollars buy or ease property IN ANY COUNTY, that somehow transforms the property into some fairyland as far from the County as the Falkland Islands. This pernicious notion has fostered the arrogance of federal land managers that they have NO responsibility toward local communities or local governments as well as their bureaucrat overseers in Washington in the regulations they write or the laws they help Congressional staff personnel write for their bosses to support the court cases they help the environmentalists to file in certain courts known to provide reliable (to them) decisions and precedents for the future.

So, what do I mean when I say “re-orient” government jurisdiction and authority?

– Elect strong and committed County officials.

– Support County officials in what they do.

– Choose strong County officials to support for State offices.

– Choose strong and proven State officials for federal offices.

– Return selection of US Senators to state legislatures.

– Elect Governors that think, act and make your state their foremost concern.

– Repeal and amend the federal laws that underpin wolf/grizzly bear/buffalo tyranny.

– Enact local animal control and management programs for local communities.

– Reduce federal and state tax rates (reflecting reduced responsibilities) and enact local tax structures to cover LOCAL actions approved by LOCAL taxpayers that can and will vote the likes of current state and federal politicians out of office when they abuse citizens by buying votes and oppressing rural residents as they are doing as I write this.

If this or something like it isn’t adopted, there are only two choices I see ahead. Either we just suck it up and tell our kids and grandkids to move to the city and look for work because rural living is only going to get more inhospitable and less possible, or we change the government structure however we can. If wolves and all this environmental tyranny is really important, it is like Finland deciding to reject the overtures of a foreign power in the 1940’s or Ukraine deciding that recently rejecting EU or NATO overtures was not where they wanted to go, or Americans deciding that Prohibition (of alcohol) was neither tolerable or American. This environmental animal tyranny is no different in the settled landscapes of Europe or Canada or The Lower 48 States. There is no solution for such an effort run by far-off, all-powerful governments beholden to political factions committed to the destruction of rural people, their culture, their traditions, their families, and their very ways of life: no solution but one, put the power to create these situations with THOSE AFFECTED by the actions.

Anything else is either a placebo or a sleeping pill meant to put you to sleep until it is all over.

Jim Beers
8 April 2014

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Minnesota Found E.G. in Moose in 1971 Knew Then Recruitment Non Sustainable

Image3290I must commend our good friend and ever vigilante researcher, Will Graves, for digging up a report containing data and other information from a report filed after the conclusion of a Minnesota moose hunt in 1971. It was reported that this moose hunt was the first allowed in 49 years in that state. The full report can be found at this link.

I suppose the first thing to note is the simple fact Echinococcus granulosus was found in the lungs of moose. As is a terrific way for biologists to collect data, mandatory check-ins by hunters provided opportunity for biologists to retrieve samples for testing. In addition to the taking of samples at the check stations, hunters were required to reveal the location of their moose kills in order that scientists could visit the site and retrieve more information from gut piles.

Over the past 6 or 8 years, there has been much discussion, at least in certain corners of the country, about the fact that wild canines, specifically being discussed are wolves, are the host species of the tapeworm Echinococcus granulosus. Tiny eggs embedded in and deposited all over the landscape through wolf scat, presents a situation in which wild ungulates, such as deer, elk and moose, while grazing, ingest these eggs. As part of the cycle, hydatid cysts can form in organs throughout the body. Perhaps the most common being the lungs, but also found in the liver, heart and brain. This is what was found in Minnesota.

Humans can also ingest these eggs, the result of which could be fatal. Hydatid cysts in humans is difficult, at best to detect, and perhaps even more so to treat. The greatest threat of humans contracting this disease is probably through contact with the domestic dogs, particularly those that live indoor and outdoor. While outdoors, family dogs can eat infected carrion and/or get the eggs onto their fur and in and around the mouths. Family dogs can be part of the cycle and if not properly de-wormed, can pose a very serious threat to members of the family who live with the dog. Imagine what is happening to you or your child, in the home, when the dog licks your hand or your child’s face.

The point of all this is to state that when some of us, being led by Will Graves, researcher and author of Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages and co-author of The Real Wolf, along with George Dovel, editor of the Outdoorsman, Dr. Valerius Geist, professor emeritus University of Calgary, Dr. Delane Kritsky, noted parasitologist at Idaho State University, et. al., took to cyberspace and beyond to get the message out about Echinococcus granulosus, we were all told it didn’t exist and any talk of threats to humans was exaggerated and nothing to be concern with.

And now we discover that biologists in Minnesota over 40 years ago had discovered the presence of E.g. in moose in Minnesota. However, there is much more to this report that Will Graves has unearthed for us.

The moose hunt in Minnesota in 1971 took place in two regions of the state. (Please see map in linked-to report.) The two zones were separated by perhaps 100 miles. One zone located in and identified in the report as the Northeast and one zone in the Northwest. It is here stated that Echinocossus granulosus was “common in the northeast” and not so much in the northwest.

Fascioloides magna was the parasite in the northwest, while Taenia spp. and Echinococcus granulosus were common in the northeast.

I also find it interesting that with today’s prevalence of denial of the presence or risk of threat from Echinococcus granulosus, that biologists in 1971 were, along with other parasites, looking for Echinococcus granulosus. If it was something not of interest, why were they looking for it? Do you suppose over 40 years ago, scientists suspected, with the presence of wolves, moose might be infected?

Field crews investigated as many kill sites as possible. Lungs were examined for the presence of Hydatid cysts (Echinococcus granulosus) and lungworms (Dictyocaulus app.).

The biologists at the time where making the same examinations and taking the same samples from moose harvested in both the Northwest and Northeast hunting zones. What they found when comparing data between the two zones is tell-tale.

The Northeast zone, “carried larger loads of Echinococcus granulosus.” As a matter of fact, a considerably larger load. In the Northeast zone it was found that 60% of the moose carried Echinococcus granulosus. In the Northwest zone, only 10%. There must be an explanation.

The incidence of E. granulosus and Taenia spp. in the northeast is evidence of a higher timber wolf (Canis lupus) population in this part of the state.

43 years ago, wildlife biologists in Minnesota were willing to acknowledge that the higher the concentrations of wolves produced a higher incidence of Echinococcus granulosus in moose. It’s remarkable in a way, when we consider the deliberate roadblocks being constructed by some to prohibit any serious discussions and the educating of the public about this issue of Echinococcus granulosus and the potential threat it can have on humans.

But this isn’t all.

Most of us know that Minnesota is claiming that they don’t have understanding as to why the moose herd in that state is on a serious decline. Some want to blame it all on climate change, the collect-all excuse for everything these days, and a convenient means of covering up incompetence and political agendas. While the distractions and excuses continue to mount, it is my belief that officials in Minnesota pretty much have a distinct reasons and the proof of the beginnings of what has become, or soon will be, a predator pit and an unsustainable moose herd.

This report of 1971 clearly tells anybody interested in truth and facts that in the Northeast zone, where wolves were highly prevalent, the moose recruitment rate stood at such low levels, it would be only a matter of time before the moose would be gone.

Data from the aerial census and classification counts indicate a net productivity of 30-35% in the northwest and 9-15% in the northeast. This indicates a difference is occurring in the survival rate of calves in their first six months of life between the two areas. Area differences in nutrition, predation and parasitism may be responsible for these observed differences in net productivity.

If memory serves me correctly, in 1971 the United States was at the beginning stages of the fake “global cooling” flim-flam, but there was no talk and presentation of excuses as to how a planet, that was going to crumble and crack into millions of pieces due to cold, was responsible for a moose calf recruitment rate in Northeast Minnesota that anyone knew to be unsustainable.

With the environmentalists, which include the ignorant predator protectors and animal rights totalitarians, who want to create what they are attempting to coin as a “new understanding and a paradigm shift” about wolves and other predators, no longer to them are facts, history, real science or common sense anything worth considering. And that is the bottom line truth of what we are dealing with.

Tried and proven wildlife management, even the very basics, tells us that if there is not a high enough survival rate among the new born of any creature, to replace all other mortality, the species will not survive, at least in any sense of healthfulness. Instead, hidden behind other agendas, people want to replace this with “new understandings” and “shifting paradigms.”

Searching for “new understandings and paradigms” Minnesota is looking everywhere for the answer that stares them in the face. Wolves spread disease and devastate games herds and all wildlife and yet the “new understanding” is trying to tell us about trophic cascades and how the wolf creates nirvana.

Oh my God! We’ve actually come to this?

Share

Tapeworms: Echinococcus Multilocularis and Alveolar Echinococcosis From Foxes to Dogs to People

Tiny tapeworms on the rise: Are you and your pets infected or at risk?

Echinococcus multilocularis is a tiny tapeworm – an intestinal parasite of arctic foxes and red foxes that can also infest the intestines of coyotes and other canids, including domestic dogs.

In humans, the tapeworm causes a disease known as alveolar echinococcosis – but infection is very rare. Recently, however, a combination of factors has made this diagnosis more common, especially in Europe, and vets are concerned.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Fewer Deer Produces More Lyme Disease or Something

In Fairfield County, Connecticut, members of the Friends of Animals are making claims, based on what they say are the “latest” scientific evidences that killing deer to reduce the number of ticks and thus Lyme disease is having the opposite effect……or something. Read the opinion piece and figure it out for yourself.

While perhaps the majority of what is contained in this opinion piece might be garbage, it is clear that the motives of Friends of Animals isn’t so much about Lyme disease or even automobile/deer collisions, i.e. public safety. It’s about not allowing hunting. In addition, why are we to believe what this person writes when they espouse to self-regulation of ecosystems? So who’s using the latest scientific evidence?

Until Devil’s Den operates like a nature preserve, allowing nature to take its course, and prohibits these deer hunts, Friends of Animals encourages people to stop donating to the Nature Conservancy,(emboldening added)

I might suggest that people stop donating to the Nature Conservancy for a number of reasons but to “let nature take it’s course” might not prove to be the best option here. However, who are we to really believe?

For many years now, we have been told that the reported incidences of Lyme disease increases proportionately with the number of deer. But now, we are being told that instead of there being 30,000 new cases of reported Lyme disease in the United States each year, there are 300,000 cases. Sound odd to you?

Perhaps not so much if you consider what is behind the supposed ten-fold increase in reported disease cases.

On a recent “Your Own Health and Fitness” show about Lyme disease on KPFA radio in Berkeley, Calif., host Layna Berman observed that the announcement of increased rates coincides with a financial interest in releasing the new Baxter Lyme vaccine:

“With this announcement of the increased number of cases, we might imagine that an economic opportunity has presented itself. . . .The treatment favored by doctors who treat chronic Lyme . . . is long courses of antibiotics . . . But these treatments aren’t money makers. So what inspired the CDC after so many decades of ignoring and denying chronic Lyme to release these new statistics? The promise of a new vaccine.”

In this article I will not debate the conspiracy to kill Americans, and people world wide through vaccination. What I will point out is that this is just another reason that there is no reason to believe anything from anybody, especially government or government sponsored and supported agencies and/or any pharmaceutical whose purpose is large profits by following the plans of the ruling establishment, i.e. killing people. These people are rooted in corruption.

In the meantime, the ignorant masses are left with one lie after another, each utilizing each and every lie to promote their own narratives and agendas for political and/or religious reasons.

Once again I am reminded of this Bible verse – 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.”

Share

“Time to Cry Wolf” and Predator Disease Warnings

hydatidcystsonelklungs

The other day I was sent an article and the link to that article found at “Western Cowman.” The article, “Time to Cry Wolf – Damaging Impacts of Predator Diseases on Wildlife, Livestock and Humans.”, was written by Heather Smith Thomas. It contains valuable information and is a good piece that helps to sum up the difficulties being realized now here in the United States about diseases carried by and perpetuated by wild canines, i.e. mostly coyotes and wolves. I have also provided on this website, under “Wildlife Diseases”, both Echinococcus granulosus and Neospora Caninum, a link to this article.

I read the article and then reread the article. I left it for a day or two and then reread it a third time and studied it a bit closer. In it I discovered some information that has come up before and has been the cause of a bit of controversy and confusion. It shouldn’t be. As part of my research into this, I contacted Dr. Delane Kritsky, a parasitologist at Idaho State University. I sent him the article and highlighted the part that bothered me. Here is that part:

Check the vital organs of big game, looking closely for small white or reddish balloon-shapes that might be cysts. If there are any, be careful not to puncture them. The fluid from one of these cysts can be dangerous, especially if the gunshot wound penetrated an infected organ. Ingestion of Hydatid cyst fluid can cause development of these cysts in humans.(emboldening added as I did in the copy I sent to Dr. Kritsky.)

Dr. Kritsky’s response to this was: “Again, I don’t know of any reports of persons becoming infected from ingesting or handling cysts (or their contents).”

I had previously, in February of 2013, sent Dr. Kritsky a copy of a report I had received from Clay Dethlefson of the Western Predator Control Association. That report is made available on this website.

In that report, Dethlefson states:

Fact–Humans get secondary Hydatid Cyst from internally located bursting and/or seeping Cysts.

Too, in the case of humans (hunters, butchers, etc.) it is not only feasible but it is truly possible for people to get Hydatid Cysts from an ungulate’s exposed Hydatid Cysts. This occurs when Hydatid Sand from a Cyst that has burst and/or is seeping comes into contacted with a human’s transmission means, and thereafter, this Hydatid Cyst Fluid (with viable Protoscolices) enters external body orifices. Transmission by hands or by having Sand surge or gush in some other manner into external orifices of the body are such means; hence, Cysts do not occur just from direct involvement with E.g. Eggs.

At that time Dr. Kritsky responded that the information was true that this can happen but emphasized that, “there is no danger in becoming infected just by handling (or eating) a cyst that might have been present in a harvested animal.”

As a confirmation, is the reason I once again contacted Dr. Kritsky about any dangers. The object here is not to dispute anyone’s claims or find fault with reports and statements. The goal is to pass on to the many hunters, trappers, fishermen and outdoor enthusiasts as much fact about disease dangers as can be assessed.

As part of my email to Dr. Kritsky, I asked a couple more questions. Here are those questions and Dr. Kritsky’s answers are within quotes.

Question One: How dangerous is rupturing a cyst in a deer, moose or elk to humans?
Answer: “I wouldn’t hesitate to handle a cyst (ruptured or not).”

Question Two: As far as eating the meat, cooking should take care of any threats, shouldn’t it?
Answer: “Two cysts, adults and eggs, are easily killed with heat.”

It appears that we are dealing with possibilities and probabilities. According to both of these sources, Dethlefson and Kritsky, it is possible that a ruptured hydatid cyst found in a human and a wild ungulate (deer, moose, elk, etc.) can result in secondary hydatid cysts occurring. However it appears as though the probability is quite low. The individual must weigh the risks based on factual information.

In this regard I queried Dr. Kritsky about taking precautions. His answer was, “I suppose it doesn’t hurt to take precautions–after all, nothing is definitively correct in science–we are always disproving ideas(and never prove them).

It has always been my content that outdoor sportsmen, before they can make responsible decisions on what risks they are willing to take, have to have the facts and understand them in order to do that. While this discussion has been mostly about the threat of contracting Hydatid disease from a ruptured, exciting cyst, sportsmen need to understand that the greatest danger comes from the risk of ingesting the tiny eggs found in canine feces, a product that dots the landscape by the millions, perhaps billions.

There are warnings published in the “Time to Cry Wolf” article and the precautions all of us should take when living in and being in the outdoors where Echinococcus granulosus exists. For your own safety, I recommend following those recommendations.

Share