August 21, 2019

Michael Finley: Recipient of the Golden Horse Excrement Award

horsepoopsmallMichael Finley, chair of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission, and former superintendent of Yellowstone National Park when illegal “GI” wolves were dumped there, receives my never coveted Golden Horse Excrement Award for the following statements.

“No one took any joy in this action,” said Finley, who retired from the National Park Service in 2001 and moved back to Medford, Ore., where he grew up.

“No one I know on the commission or on the professional staff wants to see wolves killed, period,” Finley said. “There are just places wolves can’t be and times they can’t be there. It’s a simple fact of wolf management.”

Aside from the utter nonsense printed in an online media outlet about “Trophic Cascades” I call out Finley on making such BS statements. It’s very easy, now that wolves were criminally introduced in the Greater Yellowstone Area, of which he was a part of, to state that “no one took any joy” killing wolves that were destroying private property, as well as making statements he doesn’t believe in that, “There are just places wolves can’t be,” calling it a “simple fact of wolf management.”

When you consider the pages and pages of lies fed to the public in the Environmental Impact Statement and the repeated lies given to the public at meetings and spread through fervent propaganda blitzes, by this criminal act, THEY got their damned wolves. They promised everybody that there would be no more than 300 wolves and/or 30 breeding pairs and with that number of wolves there would be no impact on game, i.e. elk, deer, and moose. And we mustn’t forget the complicit Congress told the wolf pimps that there can be no impact on ranchers, residents, etc.

Now they have thousands of them and they know that not only have they got their wolves but they also own everything about wolf reintroduction and the ongoing protection of them – including the USFWS, environmentalist groups, Congress and the media. They now are comfortable in the fact that nothing is going to harm their precious, nasty, diseased wild dogs and so, it takes a very brave man to step up to the press and say, “no one took any joy” in killing four wolves and that it’s a “simple fact of wolf management.” HS!!

Incorrectly stated at the beginning of the article, Finley don’t know squat about wolves. All he knows is how to play the political environmentalist game of power control over people.

The entire act of wolf introduction was criminal….PERIOD. Anyone involved in the act were criminals…PERIOD. They should be charged for the criminal actions. Wolf introduction has been nothing short of a disaster, regardless of the lies fed to us by environmentalists and the media they own and control. Now that they got away with it, the lying bastards are presenting themselves as some kind of heroes.

Share

Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?

I saw the vacant animal trails furrowing down the ridge from the horizon worn from the elk streaming single file in jagged rows, shrouded in a cloud of steam and spreading out across Deckard Flats like ants from a hill. My friend, Robert T. Fanning, Founder of Friends of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd, described how it was twenty years ago. Horsemen decked with orange riding in as the minute of pre-dawn came and the first shots of the season brought down the first bull elk of a hunting culture passed down since the earliest days of the western frontier. We were alone, except for a Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MTFWP) Warden, there as a matter of bureaucratic habit to make sure no shots were fired before thirty minutes before sunrise-his presence unnecessary. There were no elk to harvest, no swarms of hunters to fire.

When MTFWP announced the closure of Deckard Flats to hunting a few days later, it was the most drastic bureaucratic admission yet of the failure of the experimental introduction a non-native species of wolf into the Northern Rocky Mountain ecosystem done by a public/private partnership twenty years ago. The recent question asked by Russian President Vladimir Putin crossed my mind. “Do you realize now what you have done?”

Source: Do You Realize Now What You Have Done?

Share

Wolves Up Yours: Why USFWS (U.S. Government) Is Fascist

We learned yesterday that the Department of Interior (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) was going to release mongrel, semi-wild dogs onto National Forest land in New Mexico even though the State of New Mexico has denied the fascists permits to do so.

I took the liberty to embolden part of the original letter sent to Director Sandoval from the Department of Interior that states that New Mexico has not responded to permit requests “FAVORABLY,” in other words, the Government didn’t get their cake and eat it too.

When laws are written and forced upon the American people without their knowledge, that is wrong. Why do we have laws? Our own government either ignores those laws or simply craft new laws, by cover of darkness, to circumvent existing laws in order to run roughshod over the people. Why do we have an Endangered Species Act? The Act, like all laws written pertaining to the Department of Interior, including the Endangered Species Act, were deliberately crafted in a way that gives the director dictatorial power to do just about anything he/she damned will pleases. Yes, it’s a rigged system.

In this specific case, the letter sent to Director Sandoval, invokes rule 43CFR 24.4(i)(5)(i), which lists those circumstances in which the Service can ignore rules and regulations as they pertain to cooperation with states – (5) Consult with the States and comply with State permit requirements in connection with the activities listed below, except in instances where the Secretary of the Interior determines that such compliance would prevent him from carrying out his statutory responsibilities:(emphasis added)

(i) In carrying out research programs involving the taking or possession of fish and wildlife or programs involving reintroduction of fish and wildlife;

I might ask how many readers participated in the drafting and passage of 43CFR 24.4? I thought so. How many had knowledge of this “exemption?” I thought so. How many, who did have knowledge of this exemption, understood its real meaning? I thought so. How many of you will turn right around and go vote for the same fascists that will go to Washington and do the same thing? I thought so. How many of you like living under fascist rule, headed toward totalitarian socialism? I thought so.

Now maybe the question comes back to who actually has the ultimate authority in this instance. Once, we thought that the Constitution, particularly the Tenth Amendment, provided the sovereignty to the states in order to limit the power and overreach of the the Federal Government, i.e. Tyranny. We know this is a useless amendment, as are most all the rest.

What should New Mexico do? Yesterday, with tongue in cheek, sort of, I suggested that the State of New Mexico should notify the Department of Interior that all wolves released in that state without proper permits, would be killed.

If we are going to live in a lawless land, within a rigged system, should we give the fascists a taste of their own?

As is always the case, the Federal Government will get its way and the people will lose. Very little of anything that the Feds have done, as it pertains to wolf introduction nationwide, has been legal. Evidently that doesn’t matter. The Government makes their own rules, plays by their own rules and if they don’t have a rabbit to pull out of their hat, i.e. 43CFR 24.4 then they simply disregard laws and claim a new interpretation. Haven’t we seen this before of late?

So what’s the use?

End of RANT!

The original letter sent to Director Sandoval from the Department of the Interior.

“In 2015, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) applied for permits from the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (Department) to import Mexican wolves into the state and release Mexican wolves onto National Forest Service lands in New Mexico. The Department has not responded favorably to our permit requests, delaying determination or denying our import permit requests and denying our applications to release Mexican wolves onto National Forest Service lands in New Mexico. On September 29, 2015, in response to the Service’s appeal of the Director’s denial of release permits, the New Mexico State Game Commission, upheld the Director’s decision.”(emphasis added) <<<Read More>>>

Share

New Mexico says no to wolves, creating quandary for federal officials

*Editor’s Note* – The author of this article states that the Feds “can go over the state’s head” but questions whether or not the Feds will do that. The answer is simple: Of course they will. They have a history of breaking laws and doing just as they damned please anyway. So, why act as though you don’t know?

When one considers all the corruption that has existed from the very beginning, from dishonestly crafting environmental impact statements to conform with the desired narrative of forcing wolf introduction, to illegally releasing cross-bred, mongrel, semi-wild dogs on private land in North Carolina, why would anyone suspect they don’t know what the Feds will do?

In North Carolina, state authorities demanded the Feds remove fake red wolves they planted on private land and still they refuse, even though the Fed’s actions are clearly illegal.

Not unlike North Carolina, the fake “Mexican” wolves of the Desert Southwest are almost as mongrel. And these clowns say it is necessary for genetic diversity. BS

The Feds have always hidden behind the claim that the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires them to “recover” wolves. Odd, as well as corrupt, that the Feds wish to adhere closely to the ESA laws – actually, their own interpretation of them, and yet thumb their fascist noses at those calling them out when they have deliberately broken the other laws from the same ESA.

No, there shouldn’t be any questions about what the Feds are going to do in New Mexico or anywhere else they decide to force people to live with wolves. If it destroys the American Heritage, including the freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness, these fascists have and will continue to carry on with business as usual.

We have created it, now we must live with it.

WHILE WE SNORE!

State officials have said they are unwilling to approve new releases until FWS updates its recovery plan for the wolf, which was written in 1982. Concerned about impacts to ranchers and elk hunters, they’ve pressed FWS for the total number of wolves it aims to restore to the landscape in the long-term. But the agency doesn’t have that number yet, and though it is updating the recovery plan, the process is likely to take at least 2 years.

Now, the federal agency must decide whether to release the wolves against the state’s wishes. Federal policy requires FWS to consult state agencies and comply with their permitting processes when releasing endangered animals from captivity, even when releases are made on federal land. But there’s one exception: If a state agency prevents the service from fulfilling its statutory responsibilities, the feds can go over the state’s head.

Source: New Mexico says no to wolves, creating quandary for federal officials | Science/AAAS | News

Share

Pair of Mexican wolves released into the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests

Press Release from the USFWS and Arizona Game and Fish:

PHOENIX — The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD) released a pair of Mexican wolves into the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests yesterday.

The Mexican Wolf Interagency Field Team (IFT) conducted a “soft release” of wolves M1130 and F1305 (F indicates female and M indicates male), meaning the wolves will be held in an enclosure until the animals chew through the fencing and self-release.

The female is the Rim Pack breeding female that was taken into captivity in January to be paired with M1130, a more genetically diverse male. M1130 was whelped at the California Wolf Center in 2008 and eventually moved to the Service’s Sevilleta Wolf Management Facility in New Mexico.

The wolf pair was observed breeding and biologists believe the female is pregnant. The pair was released near the Rim Pack’s old territory in Arizona on the Alpine Ranger District.

“The release of this genetically-diverse pair of Mexican wolves will help us build on our recent success of reaching a population milestone of more than 100 wolves in the American Southwest,” said Mike Rabe, nongame wildlife branch chief for Arizona Game and Fish Department. “The methods used for their release help ensure that these wolves acclimate and behave as wild wolves”

Both wolves underwent an acclimation process at Sevilleta to determine that they are suitable release candidates.

“Improving the genetics of the wild Mexican wolf population continues to be our priority,” said Benjamin Tuggle, Fish and Wildlife Service Southwest regional director. “Together this pair will improve the genetic profile of the current Mexican wolf population, ensuring long-term viability. The female, F1505, has experience living in the wild increasing the success rate for the pair’s survival.”

The “soft release” allows the pair to acclimate to their surroundings, and the IFT anticipates the wolves will begin utilizing the area around the release site. The IFT will provide supplemental food while the wolves learn to catch and kill native prey, such as deer and elk, on their own. The supplemental feeding will assist in anchoring the wolves to the area.

The 2014 Mexican wolf population survey results announced in February showed a minimum of 109 in the wild, up from 83 the previous year.

The Reintroduction Project partners are the Service, AZGFD, White Mountain Apache Tribe, USDA Forest Service and USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service – Wildlife Services, several participating counties in Arizona and the Eastern Arizona Counties Organization. For more information on Mexican wolves, visit www.azgfd.gov/wolf.

Share

Agenda New Mexico State Game Commission

Farmington Civic Center 200 West Arrington Farmington, NM 87401
Thursday, May 7, 2015 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Items of interest:

AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Request from Turner Endangered Species Fund to Import and Possess Mexican Gray Wolves. Presented by Mike Phillips – The Turner Endangered Species Fund will present a request to bring Mexican gray wolves into New Mexico to be placed at the Ladder Ranch (a private property) as part of an endangered species recovery program.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 15: Bear and Cougar Rule Development – 19.31.11 NMAC for the 2016-2020 Seasons. Presented by Elise Goldstein – The Department will present proposed changes to the Bear and Cougar rule (19.31.11 NMAC) based on public comment, harvest data, population status, and other impacts.

Share

Wolf Canards and Other Agendas

A Letter to the Editor of the Wall Street Journal – by James Beers

The “Wolf’s Return is Big and, for Some, Bad” has one major prevarication and a humbug paradox intended to keep the wolf issue cloudy while advancing other agendas. The wolves introduced into The Lower 48 states by federal fiat are only good for Non-Government Organizations, urban readers and bureaucracies; while being “Bad” for rural economies and residents from children, ranchers, and the elderly to hunters, dog owners and campers.

First, it is a prevarication to say, “In 1995 and 1996 federal biologists at Congress’s direction shipped wolves (from Canada) to central Idaho and Yellowstone National Park”. The US House of Representatives had previously denied a federal Budget Request for funds to do that. Under President Clinton and without Congressional knowledge, the US Fish and Wildlife Service “diverted” (or stole or misappropriated) $45 to 60 Million from Excise Taxes; that could only be used by state agencies for state wildlife programs; to trap, transfer and release those wolves on an Indian Reservation and in an Exclusive federal enclave (YNP) where state permission was not necessary. When this was revealed in 1999 by a GAO Audit Report to the US House of Representatives’ Resource Committee under Chairman Young of Alaska, the wolves were long “out of the bag” and state agencies had become so dependent on federal funds and federal career opportunities that they quietly refrained from asking for Congress to replace the funds. Hardly the honorable “federal ecological experiment” described in your article.

Second, it is a humbug and a paradox to continue this myth that “the US in 2011 and 2012 stripped wolves in Idaho and several other states in the region of protection by the Endangered Species Act”. In the very next paragraph you note how Idaho must be careful “to avoid a potential relisting under the Endangered Species Act”. Thus the feds release and spread the wolves and tell the State residents to pick up the tab for all the destruction and losses and to keep X amount or the feds will step back in and take over. Today, the urban enthusiasts and NGO’s go into federal courts to stop controls, forbid methods, and seek land closures while the fiction of “state management” drains state coffers. Actual state jurisdiction would include the authority to exclude or even exterminate wolves in line with state resident’s desires: no such authority exists today. This is like telling rural Americans that they have a “right” to freedom of speech but only insofar as federal bureaucrats and urban speech police allow.

Just as we are witnessing federal erosion of 2nd Amendment (gun) rights and 5th Amendment private property rights: so too is this wolf fiasco a glimpse of what is happening to the 10th Amendment rights of “States” and “the people” to all those powers “not delegated to the United States by the Constitution”.

James Beers
22 March 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

What To Do About Isle Royale Wolves

An article at Pioneer Press, TwinCities.com, has blubbering about what is to be done about wolves, if anything, on Isle Royale. Here’s the link.

I’ll make a brief comment and then lastly will be followed by Jim Beer’s perspective on what the article actually is saying.

From this bit of information found in the article:

A debate is raging in the scientific community, the public and among Park Service officials on whether humans should intervene to rescue an isolated wolf population that some experts say appears doomed due to genetic inbreeding that’s causing physical deformities that are affecting wolves’ life expectancy.

Others say climate change might have a major impact on the island’s wolves, and the Park Service has formed panels of experts to look at genetics and a warming climate to evaluate their effects on wolf numbers.

Park Service officials have said they have three basic options: doing nothing; waiting for the wolves to die off and then reintroduce new wolves; or introducing new wolves soon while some wolves still are present.

I think other options are not listed and I think the options should be based on what the brain trust decides to finger as the reason wolves have disappeared on Isle Royal and not on the mainland and moose have increased on Isle Royale but decreased on the mainland. For example, climate change. If the special interest “scientists” on the panel that will decide the cause, opt for climate change, not only will they have some explaining to do for their decision but there is little reason to do anything about wolves until they have solved, as gods, the climate change issue. Let me explain further.

If it is decided climate change is the reason, or at least a substantial contributing factor, by their own fake standards, then the same people need to explain why, then, the moose population on Isle Royale has exploded to 1,000, as the wolf population has disappeared, while at the same time climate change has been fingered as the cause of the reduction of moose in Minnesota (Isle Royale is part of Michigan but the island is closer to the Arrowhead of Minnesota than any part of Michigan mainland including the Upper Penninsula.)

Using the same logic and faux science as those thinking climate change is the major factor in a dwindling moose population, and now wolves, why rush into wasting taxpayer money to introduce more wolves if an unresolved, man-caused, climate change issue has not been resolved?

I am of the opinion that the reason that we have not seen more wolves “crossing on the ice” (like they did in 1949 – wink, wink) to repopulate the island is because too many people are watching too closely.

My opinion: Don’t waste my dime on fake science that contributes nothing to the realities of wildlife management outside of a rare closed, incomplete ecosystem.

Jim Beers Perspective:

WHAT IS REALLY BEING SAID by Jim Beers

1. “A debate is raging in the scientific community, the public and among Park Service officials on whether humans should intervene to rescue an isolated wolf population”

The “public” and the “Park Service” are what they are but consider that “the scientific community” is supposedly pure and composed of incontrovertible facts and experts that justify every manner of government intervention. If a “debate” “rages” there: on what basis does it revolve? The answer here as elsewhere in government plant and animal machinations is that “science” and “scientists” are ideologues and advocates every bit as much as the urban animal “rescue” lady or the lawyer working for The Defenders of Wildlife. They are as worthy of the deference shown them in court or their argument-settling role as some Conscientious Objector wearing his Dad’s Service uniform and medals is worthy of consideration in setting Defense Policy in the Pentagon.

2. “Others say climate change might have a major impact on the island’s wolves”.

Minnesota DNR bureaucrats and “scientists” have told docile Minnesotans that “climate change” was the leading factor on the steady demise of the moose population in the State. Twice each year in prominent newspaper articles the State bureaucrats and scientists asked for more money to investigate how “climate change” explained why moose were disappearing. Every such article characterizes those who say, “If moose are disappearing as wolves have been and continue to increase, what about predation of wolves on moose?” as red-necked, jack pine savages that probably flunked out of grade school and lead an alcoholic existence in some trailer back in the North Woods somewhere. So how can “climate change” decrease wolves on Isle Royal while wolves increase on the mainland? How can “climate change” be responsible for the decline of moose throughout Minnesota while their numbers are exploding on Isle Royal? Is there a scientist in the house?

3. “Allow public discussion on wolf management on the island, a designated federal wilderness area.”

This is a “two-fer”. First, I wish to humbly thank the Park Service for their kind offer to “allow public discussion”. For such august bureaucrats to deign to “allow” the rest of us to publicly discuss such matters is so benevolent that I for one can merely express my eternal gratitude. Think about that folks, think about how low the American citizen vis-a-vis his government has sunk. Second, I thought NOTHING could be “managed” in a “federal wilderness area”? Does this mean that downed timber or fire-hazard brush can be removed or burned safely? Can firewood be cut with a chain saw or water scooped from a stream to fight a fire or uses like logging, grazing, vehicle travel, be considered on the (formerly?) precious “Wilderness Areas” at the sufferance of federal bureaucrats? Inquiring minds would like to know.

4. “Isle Royale has a long-standing history of broad ecosystem management,”.

This is gobbledygook. They aren’t even supposed to “manage” wilderness. Ecosystem is a maligned term that has been perversely mangled over the past 45+ years into a meaningless word alone and a word that can mean everything in the ear of the listener or the eyes of the reader. That these insular bureaucrats claim, and the media validate, that their personal work to pander to powerful radical organizations for their own benefit is “broad” ecosystem management is simply ludicrous.

5. “It’s believed that moose first swam to the island in the early 1900s and for decades thrived with no predators. Wolves are relatively new to the 45-mile-long, 143,000-acre island complex, having crossed Lake Superior ice to get there in 1949.”

And wolves that have been somewhere only for 61 years are what: “endangered”, “vital”, “native”, “keystone sp.”, what? Why aren’t they (bureaucrats and scientists and their financier-enablers) treating these moose and wolves that are such recent arrivals (radicals call them “Invaders”) to Isle Royal like they treat pheasants, Hungarian Partridge, Brown Trout, Great lakes Salmon, and all the other dreaded “non-natives” and “introduced” species they want to eradicate, that is to say with contempt? The vast majority of these desirable “non-natives” (radicals call them “Invasives”) have been in place and benefitting human society far longer than these moose and wolves on this Island.

6. “Wolves are no longer performing their function as predator on the island,” “There just aren’t enough to have any real impact on moose.”

So, let me get this straight: wolves on Isle Royal “perform a function as predator” on moose on which they are expected to have a “real impact”. Simultaneously, in the rest of Minnesota (yes Isle Royal was once widely considered to be part of Minnesota until federal controls and hegemony became so powerful that everyone believes the federal estate to simply be separate and distinct from States and Local Communities despite their window-dressing “allowing” of “public discussion”) moose decline as wolves increase and we are instructed to not listen to those fools that say there is a connection between the two. This stuff belongs on Prairie Home Companion.

7. “The situation is so unusual that it’s affecting other species on the island”.

Oh my word! Attention, “species” are being “affected” somewhere. You mean like elk and moose disappearing when wolves are forced into rural enclaves that do not want them? Aren’t “ecosystems” supposed to be like “climate” in that any (well not quite any) change is an emergency that only more government, more spending, more laws and more regulations can control before we all die? Actually, if bureaucrats and radicals want wolves or grizzlies somewhere they haven’t been for a century that is OK: if the same suspects want to eradicate wild species or domestic animals from somewhere that is OK: only if you or I want a landscape and rural environment safe and productive in which to live comfortably and safely raise our families and this is at odds with an all-powerful government acting as a shill for radical organizations –that is NOT OK! My God, “species” go up and down from moment to moment and saying that it is government’s job to intervene with no more cause than that things will be different is an abuse of government power for an unachievable purpose that could drain the world’s debt and GDP’s combined.

8. “It will be up to the National Park Service to decide”.

Unless you are one of the few that think of the Park Service or Fish and Wildlife Service or Forest Service (curious that word “Service” as in who or what do they “SERVE?”) as in your pocket, such common words these days should send a chill up your spine and heartburn down your throat.

9. “With wolf numbers so low, moose numbers on the island have exploded, more than doubling in recent years to more than 1,000. That’s the opposite trend from moose in Minnesota, where numbers have plummeted in recent years to the lowest levels in decades. While moose in Minnesota face bears, humans and deer-related diseases as predators, moose on Isle Royale have only wolves as threats”.

Finally, the piece de resistance! Like the President and his minions explaining what he “really” meant when he said we could keep our doctors and our insurance policies; these bureaucrats, scientists, and their media enablers are faced with a dilemma. How to explain how wolves decimate moose on Isle Royal and not on mainland Minnesota and why when the wolves are about to disappear moose populations are exploding on Isle Royal? If we knocked down dramatically the wolves on mainland Minnesota would moose recover? (The answer is YES.) Yet the Park Service will milk the federal Treasury for more money and people for this mysterious “situation” just like the Minnesota DNR bureaucrats and the University “scientists” have and are milking the State Treasury for more and more money and people to conduct “research on this mystery. Like the explanation of the President’s repeated use of the word “period”; these government con artists add “bears, humans and deer-related diseases” to the growing and irrelevant reasons for the mainland moose declines.

Oh well, it sell papers and garners urban votes to keep in power State pols maintaining unemployment with handouts and building stadiums (Romans called it “Bread and Circuses) and Federal pols signing UN Treaties to sell our sovereignty while taking away our property and our Rights. You couldn’t make this up if you tried to.

Jim Beers
7 November 2013

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

Movie Trailer: Ghosts of the Rockies by Rockholm Media Group

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

Share