October 26, 2014

Fascist Government, Wild Mongrel Dogs, Lies, And Using Humans as Guinea Pigs

“Officials with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will decide this fall whether a 27-year program aimed at returning the red wolf to the wild in the isolated swampland of eastern North Carolina will go forward.”

“Now they have letters from more than 500 landowners asking them to remove wolves from their property. It is what they promised they would do when all this began. We intend to hold them to it, even if they don’t want to do it.”

“Wildlife officials assured landowners the wolves would not be likely to stray onto their land. If they did, a call to the recovery center would bring a trained officer, who would trap the animal and take it back to the reserve.”

“If the animal was troublesome, a remote-control “capture collar” equipped with a tranquilizer would be detonated, knocking the canine out.”

“In addition, large parts of the protected land were flooded for waterfowl habitation. That forced the wolves to seek different hunting land.”

“Wildlife officials contend that the wolf population has a minimal impact on private land and that they rely on the cooperation of private landowners for the repopulation effort to succeed.”

“We would not leave them behind,” Miranda said. “Whatever the case, we still have our captive population to populate a new area.”<<<Read More>>>

Sneak Preview III – Wolf: What’s to Misunderstand?

Cover290Here’s another glimpse into “Wolf: What’s to Misunderstand?” This portion is found in Chapter II, dedicated to understanding the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

“It is vitally important that readers fully understand the power of the Endangered Species Act. For without that understanding, future discussions about wolves in the United States, or any other “threatened” or “endangered” species, can make little sense. What once began and was sold to the American people as a law that would guarantee the protection and preservation of species that might unnecessarily be destroyed due mostly to man’s efforts at growth, has morphed into a mammoth, crippling law that by some standards is the most powerful and destructive law in the world.

It took years of research and study of this law, reaching far beyond the crafted words of the law itself, to discover that the Endangered Species Act is only one small part of a global effort to cede rights, destroy sovereignty, individual and collective, control land and the resources within that land; to breed scarcity and economic strife. The ESA is not a law simply to save an animal or a plant.

Whether we like the law or not, whether we disagree or agree, whether anything I write will have an effect on you, matters not. We have the law of the Endangered Species Act and it is what we must deal with, but please, approach the Act with correct and complete knowledge of what the Act can and will do when abused and administered corruptly.”

Angry Washington Ranchers

“This is absolutely a government taking and theft of our private property,” McIrvin said. “My civil rights are definitely being violated. My rights are just as important right here as the whole voting bloc of Seattle and their rights.”<<<Read More>>>

Colville, Wash Residents “Fed-Up” With Wolves

And the totalitarian socialist government has no plans to do anything about it.

“COLVILLE, Wash.—The Department of Fish and Wildlife discussed concerns over the growing wolf population with hundreds of residents of eastern Washington Tuesday night in Colville.

The department invited members of the public to share their views on wolf management after wolves killed livestock in Stevens and Ferry Counties. More than 200 people crammed into the Colville Ag Trade Center to share their opinions. While a few served as advocates for the wolves, most of the comments came from ranchers and others who are frustrated with how the state is managing the wolves.

“This county is fed-up,”<<<Read More>>>

Wyoming Considers Delisting Wolves the Way Idaho and Montana Got Theirs Done

Yes, the precedent was set when certain members of Congress attached a “rider” bill to a Congressional budget bill in 2011 that put wolves in Idaho and Montana off the Endangered Species Act List, also providing a clause that disallowed any legal challenges. Was it the right thing to do? Was it the best thing to do? You decide.

But because it appeared at the time that it was the only way anybody was going to get beyond unrelenting, oppressive lawsuits to get some kind of control over a rapidly growing wolf population, the action of attaching a rider to a budget bill resulted in “delisted” wolves and something that sort of resembles wolf control.

At the time of the rider bill fiasco, Idaho and Montana tossed Wyoming under the proverbial bus leaving them to fend for themselves to gain management over wolves. Wyoming was successful in time but only for awhile, until a Washington, D.C. judge ruled in a recent lawsuit that Wyoming’s wolf management plan was inadequate for further and sufficient protection of the gray wolf. Now Wyoming’s gray wolf population is back under federal protection and Wyoming government and citizens are frustrated because they did everything necessary to gain approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Now it appears that some legislators in Wyoming are considering taking the route Idaho and Montana did in 2011, and getting wolves delisted for good and to put a stop, once and for all, to the rash of continued, money-making lawsuits.

“I think we have to consider legislative action now. I don’t see any other recourse,” said U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis. “We have done everything the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service asked of us and more.”

In revealing some of her frustration, Lummis said that it seems that no matter what Wyoming has done, it’s never enough.

“The fact is that no matter what we do and no matter how successful we are at recovering the wolf, certain groups remain unsatisfied and unwilling to accept victory,” Lummis said. “Now it is time to pursue a legislative solution.”

Whether you agree or disagree that attaching a bill to a larger congressional bill, or creating stand-alone legislation, is the right way to go, one has to consider the corner that environmental and animal rights groups have put the rest of citizenry in. Historically, the majority of outdoor sportsmen, landowners, ranchers, etc. are not the protesting sort of people, looking to take every person who looks at them funny, to court and/or insisting the rest of the world live like they do. Environmentalists and their ilk are. Maybe the environmentalists should reconsider where to draw their dictatorial lines in the sand.

A lawyer for Earthjustice doesn’t like the idea of congressional action to stop the lawsuits.

“There are always situations where people in specific areas want to get exceptions from the act for their own localized interests,” Preso said. “But that doesn’t serve the interest of the nation as a whole, which is blessed with an incredible wildlife heritage that still exists today largely as a result of the Endangered Species Act.”

Perhaps Preso should have considered that before running to the activist judges for help making money. Serious argument could be made as to any actions his organization has done has proven to “serve the interest of the nation as a whole.”

Preso also states that we enjoy “incredible wildlife” because of the Endangered Species Act. I, and I know there are thousands more, who would rightfully say that we enjoy this wildlife despite the ESA, but more importantly in spite of fascists organizations like his.

E. Multilocularis Spreading Rapidly – Humans Threatened With Alveolar Echinococcosis

“Animal health researchers are watching what appears to be mounting evidence of the spread of a potentially dangerous parasite in coyotes, foxes and other animals in Canada.

That’s a concern, they suggest, because the parasite, a tapeworm, can on occasion spill over from its wild animal hosts to infect dogs and humans.

And while people aren’t the tapeworm’s preferred hosts, a growing number of human cases are being seen in Europe and parts of the world where the parasite is more established.”<<<Read More>>>

Sneak Preview: Wolf: What’s to Understand

Cover290Progress is coming alone with my new book Wolf: What’s to Understand. I wanted to provide a few sneak previews into what readers might look forward to. I thought that a most recent court ruling concerning wolves in Wyoming, by Judge Amy Berman Jackson, involved, in part, some discussion of the term “genetic connectivity.”

I will continue to provide readers with an occasional preview of the book. I don’t have a firm date yet for release but as soon as I am fairly confident of that date, I will make available for those interested to be able to pre-order early for a signed copy at a discounted price.

In part, here is what I have included in the upcoming book about the creation of the term “genetic connectivity” by activist Judge, Donald Molloy.

Sneak Peek:

In order for Judge Donald Molloy to allow an injunction to stand as part of a lawsuit to keep wolves under federal protection, he must find just cause. The plaintiffs in this case, Defenders of Wildlife, lay claim that the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Northern Rocky Mountain wolf (re)introduction, “specifically conditions the delisting decision on a Finding of Subpopulation Genetic Exchange.” Judge Molloy finds in agreement with the plaintiffs in his 40-page ruling.1

Molloy’s 40-page ruling to grant a temporary injunction to place the wolf back under protection of the Endangered Species Act is a laughable document. The judge manipulates the science and goes so far as to make up definitions.

Molloy bases his entire decision on two aspects. One, is that the agreement the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had with the state of Wyoming on managing the wolf after delisting was “arbitrary and capricious”. The second is that “genetic exchange” must occur before delisting can be considered and further goes on to claim that the USFWS cannot prove that this “exchange” took place.

Did USFWS state in their 1994 Environmental Impact Statement, as Judge Molloy refers, that genetic exchange has to take place?

What is interesting as well as disturbing, is that in Molloy’s 40-page ruling, he uses the term “genetic exchange” 49 times and actually creates his own term, “genetic connectivity” and uses it 2 times. In the 1994 Environmental Impact Statement, the term genetic exchange is used once and that came in an appendix to the original document and the EIS never once used “genetic connectivity” to describe anything.

Molloy insists over and over again that the USFWS’ EIS demands this genetic exchange, all the while the USFWS claims it never said that.

Probably in much the same way as Ed Bangs and his band of scientists randomly selected the idea that 10 breeding pairs and 100 wolves in each of the three recovery areas, so too was the mention of at some future date the need for “genetic exchange.” While many a person has spent countless hours discussing both viable wolf populations and “genetic connectivity,” what shouldn’t get lost during any of this is the fact that of all the issues sold to the American people about wolf (re)introduction, none of it was true.

Even if hind site has perfect vision, it would be impossible to (re)introduce wolves and end up with 30 pairs and 300 wolves before delisting. The system within which we all must work is rigged. Judge Molloy’s ruling here about genetic exchange is but one example of how the system has and continues to fail honest people because it is rigged.

We see in this ruling of Defenders of Wildlife v. H. Dale Hall (USFWS), that a judge, hand picked by the plaintiffs because of his activist rulings and staunch support to protect wolves, can destroy the real science and seriously obstruct the proper administration of the Endangered Species Act. In addition, when we are subjected to one man or a team of like-minded people, intent on wolf (re)introduction, the power and authority granted them in determining “best available science” makes for a very powerful and rigged system.

RMEF: Silver Linings in Wyoming Wolf Management Ruling

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.-The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation maintains a ruling that restores federal protections to wolves in Wyoming is basically a technicality that can easily be fixed on Wyoming’s end. The State of Wyoming is in the process of adopting an emergency rule to do so.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled out of her Washington D.C. courtroom that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) was wrong to rely on Wyoming’s non-binding promises to maintain a buffer above the FWS minimum of 10 breeding pair and at least 100 wolves outside of Yellowstone Park and the Wind River Indian Reservation. Montana and Idaho initially had the 10 breeding pair and 100 wolf minimum, but a 50 percent “buffer” of 15 breeding pairs and 150 wolves was implemented for those two states.

The plaintiffs argued the following four points about the Wyoming wolf population, and they were denied a favorable ruling by Judge Jackson relative to the first three:

1. Wolves have not recovered.
2. Wolves are at risk because of a lack of genetic connectivity.
3. Wyoming allowing wolves to be treated as a predator in some areas does not meet the Endangered Species Act requirements of protections over a significant part of the species’ range.
4. Wyoming’s current regulatory mechanism to insure a population of more than 10 breeding pair and 100 wolves is inadequate and represents a non-binding promise.

“There are some silver linings within this ruling handed down from Judge Jackson as she ruled against three claims made by the plaintiffs including confirmation of the fact that Wyoming’s wolf population has recovered and is not endangered,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “We anticipate Wyoming will be able to fix the issue with how its wolf management plan is written to satisfy the court.”

“She held that Wyoming’s plan was not sufficiently formalized to support the Fish and Wildlife Service’s 2012 rule allowing limited take of gray wolves. We believe an emergency rule can remedy this, and I have instructed the Wyoming Game and Fish Department and the Attorney General to proceed accordingly,” said Wyoming Governor Matt Mead.

The State of Wyoming already asked the court to reverse the ruling. Mead also began the process to make the state’s minimum wolf population pledge legally enforceable by signing and filing an emergency rule. In the meantime, it suspended wolf hunting in the northwest part of Wyoming scheduled to begin in October. The judge’s decision also impacts year-round hunting in the rest of the state as well as landowners protecting livestock and pets.

The latest wolf count indicates a minimum of 320 packs and 1,691 wolves in the Northern Rockies as of December 31, 2013, including at least 306 wolves in 43 packs in Wyoming.

“The real shame of this continuing litigation and legal maneuvering by HSUS, Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity and others is the amount of American taxpayer money the judge may award them for their legal fees, all in the name of the Equal Access to Justice Act. This is a continued misuse of taxpayer dollars for an ideological agenda that has little to do with wolves. This is not conservation work,” added Allen.

Mexican Wolf Game Change: To Hiss and Boo or Stand and Cheer?

ArizonaWolfPlanRecently I wrote a book about my life as an Innkeeper/Hotel/Motel/Manager. Included in that book in the last chapter was something that I shared as a means of finding fault with myself in that it took me far too long to understand the mistake I was making in thinking I could remain in the hospitality business that I disliked.

Chapter One
I walk down the street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I fall in.
I am lost …. I am helpless.
It isn’t my fault.
It takes forever to find a way out.

Chapter Two
I walk down the street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I pretend that I don’t see it.
I fall in again.
I can’t believe I am in this same place.
But it isn’t my fault.
It still takes a long time to get out.

Chapter Three
I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I see it is there.
I still fall in … it’s a habit … but, my eyes are open.
I know where I am.
It is my fault.
I get out immediately.

Chapter Four
I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I walk around it.

Chapter Five
I walk down another street.

Earlier this summer, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decided it was going to change up the rules to their rigged game about trying to establish a population of hybrid wolves in the Southwest Region of the U.S. As is required by law, a Draft Environmental Impact pack of lies Statement was released and now a comment period is allowed, in which anyone wishing may offer comments, scientific studies, proof, facts, or maybe just tell a funny story. It really doesn’t matter because the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has already decided what they are going to do and they are just going through the motions to make themselves look good or that they actually care. History proves this point. (Please see street analogy above.)

You see, within the rigged system, much the same way as our rigged Courts use “Arbitrary and Capricious” to justify decisions made, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service uses “Best Available Science.” Best available science is a farce and works well within the rigged system. That’s why it is there. It can mean anything and in the crafting of the rigged Endangered Species Act, the Secretary is granted his “deference” and therefore can utilize, by hand selecting, the “Best Available Science” that best fits an agenda. History proves this point. (Please see street analogy above.)

I am in the process of writing a book. In that book is a great deal of information that comes from the dissecting of the Final Environmental Impact pack of lies Statement. There is not one single bit of information in that FEIS, now 20 years later, that resulted in truth. Not one thing. Everything in that FEIS was based on the fraud of 30 breeding pairs of wolves and 300 wolves, within 3 wolf recovery areas; a “recovered” wolf population.

Dr. Charles Kay sought the “scientific evidence” that supported this fraudulent claim and there exists none – therefore the claim of fraud.

In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, of their own will, chose to completely disregard 15 issues of concern pertaining to wolf (re)introduction. To show how rigged and either corrupt or inept the entire episode of wolf (re)introduction was, as I said, not one promise made by the Feds was upheld and nearly all of the 15 items they deemed to be “insignificant” have now proven to be very significant. Can our wildlife managers be that inept? Evidently because the most recent Draft Environmental Impact Statement, corrects very little of it.

In the Southwest, perhaps a standing ovation should be order for the Arizona fish and game and their supporters, who are trying to hammer out changes, specifics and agreements, that will carry consequences, to be included in a final impact statement.

Some of the specifics include a limit of no more than 300-325 total wolves divided between Arizona and New Mexico and a percentage cap on reductions in elk populations due to wolf predation. I think I read as well that proof of those numbers will fall into the hands of the state fish and game departments and not the “Best Available Science” of the Feds.

On the other hand please stand and offer boos and hisses because there is absolutely no reason to believe that the Feds will adhere to their agreement, as they seldom do and we know for a fact that none of it will stand up in a rigged court system, in which environmentalists can use taxpayer money, hand select an activist judge, who advocates for “arbitrary and capricious,” and force Arizona and New Mexico to watch a seriously depleted elk and deer population turn to ruin. Instead of facing a maximum of 300-325 wolves and a 15% impact on wild ungulates, like the Northern Rockies, there will be 3,000 to 6,000 wolves, disease, unsustainable ungulate herds in places, and ranchers run out of business and it will be business as usual.

I see that there are two issues that might make a difference. Arizona’s plan calls for the state’s withdrawal from the wolf program with all their assets if the Feds violate the agreement. The second is perhaps a half of a difference maker. If Arizona can get what they want in this impact statement, they will at least have a signed agreement. However, it will not matter because the Courts will change the entire plans. They always have and always will. History proves this point! (Please see street analogy above.)

That is why we are slaves within a rigged system. Maybe it’s time to walk a different street but I am not sure I know what street that is.

In 1937 Wolf Shot in Montana. Some Believed it a Hybrid

I’m no wolf identifier expert, but it’s pretty easy to see from the shape of this animal’s head and ears, this ain’t no hybrid. And look at the size of those paws. Of course the long legs totally give it away.

Rumor has it that this same subspecies of wolf dominates the landscape in much of Europe and that the Large Carnivore Initiative of Europe is working feverishly to make sure this rare, pure wolf (brainus loopy) is properly protected.

Grasshopper