January 21, 2019

From Wyoming to the Alaskan Peninsula and Minnesota to Finland

A Ph.D Wildlife Ecologist Colleague in Utah just sent the following:


Subject: WY Guide and outfitters Association official publication

For some unknown reason WYOGA sent me a copy of their fall 2018 publication, which is mostly advertising by their members. What I found most interesting was that some outfitters were selling the fact that their areas contained neither wolves or grizzlies !!!!!!!!!!!!!!——–recall that this past fall  a guide in Jackson Hole was killed by a grizzly when he and a client tried to retrieve a downed elk—-the hunter also was mauled——–Charles

As telling and interesting as this is concerning the real effects of wolves and grizzly bears that are both ignored and denied by bureaucrats, “scientists”, politicians, the media and other “Ne’er do wells”: it caused me to think about moose.

I live in Minnesota.  For many decades Minnesota had the only robust moose population in the North Central Lower 48 States.  Northern Minnesota woodlands, bogs and lakes are contiguous with the Manitoba/Ontario woodlands with moose and caribou that extend to James Bay.  Our neighbors are essentially moose-free: North Dakota is a plowed landscape, Wisconsin and Michigan are not sufficiently marshy woodlands for moose with one exception.  Isle Royale, a Michigan island about 15 miles from the Minnesota mainland on the North Shore of Lake Superior.  Moose that have found the island to be particularly hospitable were introduced onto Isle Royale over a century ago when native caribou were declining precipitously.

Wolves were probably clandestinely introduced or swam to Isle Royale about 70 years ago, shortly after (what a coincidence!) the rich owners took a tax break and “donated” it to the government as a National Park.  Since hunting was no longer allowed, moose over-populated the island and the arriving wolves ate lots of moose meat and made lots of puppies since moose are particularly vulnerable to wolves in forested areas and are agreatly preferred high-energy food by wolves.  Soon, the moose population crashed, and the wolves inter-bred and could not find sufficient caloric replacement for the moose in their diet.  So, the Park Service began importing wolves (their idea of “natural” ecosystem “management”) as moose began to increase after the wolf population crash. The non-native moose on the island and the non-native wolves have become characters in a federal government fantasy media favorite about “Nature”.

Up until the 1980’s, Minnesota maintained a reduced wolf population consistent with a robust moose population, profitable livestock operations, a safe environment for hunting dogs, and levels of public safety found comfortable by rural Minnesotans.  In the 1980’s Minnesota’s wolves were declared federal wards under Endangered Species Act provisions.  The state government and its residents no longer had any say in where, how many or what management provisions (actually none, no matter what the wolf is doing short of carrying off a child with tooth imprints already breaking the child’s skin) would apply.

Long story short; wolf populations and wolf range exploded and (among many other bad things) the statewide moose population plummeted.  Hunting for moose (a once-in-a-lifetime permit with tens of thousands applying for expensive permits that were an annual bonanza for the state wildlife agency) was eliminated never to return.  State bureaucrats and their allies like radical organizations and subsidized “scientists” blamed the moose disappearance on “climate change”, ticks and unknown maladies for which only “more” money and personnel was the answer.  Thus moose numbers in Minnesota have declined never to return without drastic wolf reductions that are about as likely as reducing house cats to increase bird populations that manage to avoid power windmills.  The urban populace still reveres the state and federal “bureaucrats” that caused and justified this wolf debacle here, in the West, in Canada and in Europe.

Gone are all the Minnesota children’s books about moose.  Gone are the sightings of moose on Northern highways or in cabin yards or from a canoe along the shore.  Wait a minute; it is true that no one ever sees them anymore but the books, knickknacks, pictures, coffee mugs, Travel signs, stationery, sweatshirts, t-shirts, caps, etc. are all still marketed with the “iconic” male moose logos are everywhere.  Other than a few old fogeys that once hoped to get a moose permit – no one cares that moose are a remnant on the verge of extinction in the state!  Try explaining the role of wolves in all this and you will be lucky if you get off with a silent stare or someone’s back as they walk away.

Simultaneously; wolves have killed all 450 caribou on Michipicoten Island, about 10 miles off the Ontario mainland in NE Lake Superior, in only 4 years.  Manitoba is reporting declining moose populations Province-wide.  Moose are all but extinct in Yellowstone Park for more than a decade since the wolves were introduced over 30 years ago and the elk herd plummeted from 20,000+ to less than 4,000.  Alaska has, despite fierce pressure from radicals and government extremists, conducted periodic and thorough aerial shooting of wolves to protect moose populations that Alaskans prize for winter meat in addition to seeing them.

Wolves are pushing moose in Minnesota into oblivion.  Moose in Manitoba are declining because they have too many wolves and there is little wolf control anymore either by government or (as was the case for centuries in the US) young hunters, trappers and other rural residents exercising their sensible right to minimize wolf numbers for their own benefits like protecting family members, dogs, livestock and their right to “domestic Tranquility”.

However, like the clear dog whistle about how rural America is being changed for the worse by the subtle selling point for hunters that, “some outfitters were selling the fact that their areas contained neither wolves or grizzlies !” who seems to care?  Who will say, “enough is enough”?  How can we reverse these travesties?  I do not know.

Jim Beers

16 December 2018

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.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

If you no longer wish to receive these articles notify:  jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Disease: For the Love of Predators?

Here we go with one more “study” that “suggests” that a reduction in the presence of foxes and perhaps other smaller predators who feast on mice is causing an increase in those rodents/mice that carry and spread diseases such as Lyme Disease.

For at least 6 years there have been ample studies suggesting the same thing. However, one of the problems associated with these so-called “studies” is that in one form or another all causes not desired by the individual or group of individuals seeking desired results, are blamed on “Climate Change,” i.e. Global Warming.

When reading the latest report about predators and the spread of disease, I recalled that I had read not that long ago about Joh Lund, publisher of the Maine Sportsman Magazine stating that he tended to agree that a reduction in the number of foxes could be the root cause of an increase in Lyme and other diseases carried and spread by small rodents like the white-footed mouse that carries Lyme. Lund’s hypothesis is that the reduction of foxes is caused by direct competition from coyotes. With Maine and other states experiencing ample growth in the number of coyotes, wolves, and coywolves, the result is a sharp reduction in foxes and other smaller prey responsible for keeping in check the rodents that carry disease.

Perhaps we can just as easily blame the increased spread of diseases, such as Lyme disease, on a misguided approach to wildlife management. So long as wildlife managers insist that the crux of their decision making will be based upon social demands, i.e. the protection of large predators, then we cannot expect any changes that might result in the reduction of disease-carrying rodents.

To go along with this misguided approach to wildlife management, there are ample groups and individuals with pet projects aimed at protecting one species of animal over the other with all the fabricated excuses for doing so. The larger and wealthier the animal protection group is the more pressure they can put on wildlife managers who insist on making their decisions based on social demands. 

Most state wildlife managing departments openly invite this kind of pressure to be brought on themselves by publicly announcing that they will cave into social demands regardless of any scientific knowledge.

At work, we have those who believe that killing off large numbers of deer will reduce the presence and spread of Lyme Disease. We also have those who love coyotes, wolves, coywolves, and all other breeds and mixed breeds of wild dogs who refuse to allow any managers to necessarily go about killing those animals in order to find some kind of balance that should be desired for a healthy ecosystem and thus creating an atmosphere where people are less likely to get sick.

Perhaps lost in all this modern-day Voodoo Science and Romance Biology is the fact that animals are nasty and spread diseases. I don’t personally believe that this creation was intended to live in our homes or that we should be demanding that disease-spreading animals of any kind should be protected. This misguided hogwash about Nature’s Balance is causing all kinds of problems, the majority of which are not being talked about and people refuse to listen. It’s easier to blame all problems on Climate Change than to address these issues responsibly.

If wildlife biologists and managers, who aren’t completely brainwashed into this modern wildlife management hocus-pocus, were allowed to manage wildlife from a real scientific perspective and an understanding that many of these animals are a resource intended for the people, and void of perverted social demands, perhaps then and only then will be able to do a better job. Until that happens – and I’m not holding my breath, – we can expect more disease problems and safety threats to the people who want to pursue Life, Liberty, and Happiness. 

Share

Very “Intelligent” Wolves…When It’s Convenient

Recently I received what appears to be some kind of newsletter and I’m not exactly sure where the newsletter came from – Perhaps the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation?

Regardless, in that newsletter was written the following: “Dr. Dan Stahler, Yellowstone’s Wolf Program Biologist, gave an interesting talk on the origins of black wolves. There is strong evidence of dog gene introgression into wolves in the last 7,000 years on this continent, causing the black pigmentation. There is evidence that black wolves pick grey wolves for mates and this provides other genetic benefits…”

So what is it going to be? This scientism nonsense is getting way out of hand. Jim Beers described this action of Voodoo Science and Romance Biology as “Pagan.” In the sense that this form of paganism is attributed to the practice of Scientism (i.e. making it up to fit a convoluted theory) then certainly paganistic it is.

The environmentalist pagans tell the world of the benefits of wolves on the landscape, that these diseased, killing machines are intelligent enough to kill only the lame, diseased, or unwanted (by man’s assessment) of their chosen prey species. How brilliant these animals must be.

But when science suggests from boots on the ground evidence that wolves are intelligent enough to recognize a pregnant elk (a succulent fetus is preferred dining for wolves), environmentalists scoff at any such nonsense that wolves are capable of doing that.

And now we have someone who is saying that there is “evidence” that black wolves (by definition a mongrel, hybridized mutt) deliberately select grey wolves to breed with. Seriously? The way the newsletter is worded it makes it sound as though the wolves are intelligently and deliberately making this selection in order to provide genetic diversity. Let’s be serious shall we?

Maybe black wolves have some sort of fetish for things grey…or not. Either way, and whether or not you want to believe whatever it is you are programmed to believe, there is no agreement on the amount of intelligence a wolf has. Mostly because perverted individuals try to project their human emotions onto the animals they are in love with.

Comparatively, wolves are a smart animal. Somehow us delusional and insane humans want them to be as smart as whatever fits our political or perverted agendas.

But in all seriousness, I have little doubt that a black wolf picks a grey wolf for a mate because it benefits the species by providing genetic diversity. 

COME ON MAN!

Share

“When, how…and by whom?”

I recently wrote some colleagues that”:

“Bad laws” not only “ensure bad results”: they are like the bushel baskets full of oysters (and salt water) that some East Coast bay man totes in the bed of his pickup from boat to market 5 days a week.  Pretty soon the bed and then the truck shows evidence of rusty corrosion but by then it is too late.  The rust spreads, the value of the truck plummets to nothing, and he just keeps driving it until it falls apart.

These bad laws are like that salt water dripping from those baskets and we are noticing more and more corrosion while we try to tell ourselves that it isn’t too bad and we should get more years from the truck.  But we are just fooling ourselves. Rural America (and urban America as well but no one dares mention it) is the truck and we not only no longer care for it but we abuse it (and the people that live there and use it) because we accept lies from government on behalf of the rich and powerful about what a good thing it is to protect large, deadly and destructive predators that eradicate game animals, ranchers, and rural communities on behalf of pagan claptrap about biology and more hidden agendas than termites in an African termite mound.

A colleague responded that:

No need to explain why something needs to be done about this ever-increasing problem, the next line of questions, when, how…and by whom?”

——————————————————————————————————————-

My response-

THE problem is (unjust, un-Constitutional, tyrannical, etc.) absolute power given to central government bureaucrats in federal legislation like the ESA, Animal Welfare Act and similar Acts “enforced”, administered and regulated by US Fish & Wildlife Service, National Park Service, EPA, US Forest Service and BLM.  In a word, it is Political.

Regarding wolves; federal bureaucracies, and especially USFWS, have stolen money from state wildlife agencies, introduced and protected wolves and with few exceptions converted the State Wildlife Agencies and environmental scientists, Universities and “science” into little more than paid subcontractors for federal agendas.  Federal politicians and bureaucrats are rewarded with money, votes (mostly urban) and fame for doing what rich individuals and rich and radical environmental organizations want for a host of hidden agendas from eliminating hunting and private property in vast swaths of America to reducing the human population and stripping most of the human benefits created in the past century.

Both federal Legislatures and the Presidency benefit from happy environmental radicals and the “Deep State”, “Swamp”, (whatever you want to call it) that manages ESA, wolves, grizz, etc. for them.  Federal judges are nominated and ratified by those folks and this accounts for the increasing national divide in courtrooms reflected in whether “your” judge emerged under Democrat or Republican reigns.

The naked truth is that, like abortion, the Democrat Party is 100% behind this environmentalism and anyone deviating from that absolute support is marginalized and either silenced or removed.  The Republican Party has many members that talk a good game about “doing something” about these matters depending on the temper of those that elect them, but it is only talk.  Given the declining rural voting numbers, electing and expecting a good person to be able to fight to limit the power of the bureaucracy in these matters is wistful, to say the least.

All through this the federal bureaucracy gets increasing budgets, more higher-grade positions (and retirements), bigger bonuses, and a publicly unchallengeable authority no matter the basis or outcomes.

The current Administration boasts it is “de-regulating” and it is but “de-regulating” is only a temporary fix because it only reflects the authority of the current President and his appointees.  What they do can (and will) be undone done in a New York nanosecond by the next President who, if the last fifty years tell us anything, will be a “Deep State” or ”Swamp” enabler to his or her bones as will their successor for a long time.  The Mueller Probe alone tells us that but don’t forget the IRS, FBI and DOJ’s recent history as political weapons that appear to only be growing bolder and stronger about controlling us on behalf of our rulers. Consider getting political support for things like wolves and grizzlies in this climate.  A Yukon trapper just killed a grizzly near his cabin and then discovered his 10-month-old baby and its mother ripped apart where they had tried to flee the same grizzly.  Do we hear even one peep from rural Americans in the Lower 48 about the insanity of spreading and protecting grizzly bears by the federal government in the Lower 48?  From any of “our” NGO’s or state governments?

The current Administration tells us they are “purging” environmental radical bureaucrats.  I watched the current federal natural resource bureaucrats pop up out of the mud in the 1980’s and 90’s, often in high positions immediately.  Using the new race and sex preferences that financially benefitted cooperating top managers quite handsomely; common sense and scientifically educated bureaucrats were steadily replaced by extremist activists with actual animus toward the agencies and their historic missions FOR THE BENEFIT OF PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY THOSE LIVING WITH AND/OR UTILIZING THOSE RESOURCES.  Not only 20+years of such “purging” and hiring (I was terminated in 2000) but more importantly how they each replicated each other when hiring, promoting and awarding bonuses like wolves and grizzlies being imposed into settled landscapes has created a federal (and most state) radical workforce that if not reduced by 75% each year and then kept below 25% of current levels while Universities and science are reformed, will defy any controls by whatever it takes.

Unless we amend this top-down, federal mandate approach to wildlife management, all the “de-regulation” and personnel changes will be temporary at best.  So, one might ask, “what can we do”?  We must change the authority and jurisdictions that has been given to federal bureaucrats and replace it with a restoration of state authority over wildlife in the State excepting those species covered by ratified Treaties.  Federal concerns about “endangered” species (not sub sp., races, populations, etc.) should be proposed to the State with rationale, objective and federal funding for however long proposed.  State acceptance should allow amendments and require both legislative and Governor acceptance.  This is where rural residents of the state need to restructure the state ratification of such proposals to give rural residents increased ratification weight in the approval process.

So how do we get there in the present political “climate”? 

I live in a very liberal, Democrat state.  The only Republican elected last month was a dogcatcher in some rural norther County and has since been forced to flee when Antifa arrived in town. (That is a joke.)

About 4 hours ago I put out my flag and picked up my Saturday edition of the Minneapolis Star Tribune in the driveway.  When I opened it, the front page had an article, “Students get charged up about climate change”.  Here are some excerpts:

  • “When it comes to confronting climate change” “Some adults get struck on certain things” and “No is not acceptable.”
  • “Youthful advocates are leading rallies, gathering petitions and taking daring climate resolutions to City Halls and County Boardrooms”.
  • “But they’ve also studied their own backyards – from the urban core to the suburbs and small towns.”
  • “So iMatter (sic note the little ‘you’ in the name of one of this little-known enviro front organization) studies the energy behind other movements, including the fight for civil rights and same sex marriage.”
  • “Emotions make movements.”
  • “Young people can personalize this, can reach people at an emotional level.”
  • “Cities can make a big difference.”  “You get an enough grass roots action happening… it can force the state and federal government to move.”
  • “The city (sic Grand Marais, an expensive, elite enclave on the North Shore of Lake Superior) has even hired a climate change Coordinator, a position funded by a McKnight Foundation Grant.”
  • “It’s a very individualistic place”, said Craig Feist, 17, of Finlayson, about 100 miles north of the Twin Cities.  “People have their land, and they consider that their domain and do kind of whatever they want to do on it.”

Now I could call this a Socialist/Communist approach to brainwashing young minds and setting the stage for a government takeover because it is the reverse of Mao Tse Tung’s Cultural Revolution wherein the rural peasants occupied and purged the cities and the elites.  It is a rare glimpse into how these liberal bastions gain, keep and control political power.  Here we have the privileged elites using their children to lay the groundwork for purging the countryside and those yokels that oppose any of their agendas. However, I ask you to consider how “our side” in this environmental confrontation has behaved and can be expected to continue to behave:

  • Do we energize young rural students to dismiss adults with whom they disagree?
  • Do we send kids into the cities to explain what wolves and grizzlies and many other GI (Government Issue) animals are doing to our communities?
  • Do we send kids forth to defend property rights to property-less urbanites?
  • Do we condemn urbanites for being herd-animals (versus “individualistic”)?
  • Do we presume to brag that we have “studied” our home places and therefore have the right to lecture and abjure urban know-nothings?
  • Do we send forth youthful missionaries to cities to explain why it is so important to “Keep and Bear Arms”?
  • Would we rightly expect rural youth to be listened to in almost any city if they extolled such things publicly without fearing of violent reactions?

Until we can put the environmental genie of unjust federal power back in the bottle I cannot imagine how anything really changes.  We are forced to maneuver outside the walls of government about controlling wolves; limiting future areas to be infested; how controls will be effected; who will do the controlling; how long will controls be effected; and how will it all be paid for?  Traps are nasty and inhumane.  Snares are icky and unacceptable non-target species.  Planes are illegal and uncontrollable over property.  Can controls be forced in private properties or government landholdings?  When can control be exercised?  When killing livestock or pets?  When in a yard?  When appearing sick?  Who is responsible for rabid wolves or human infection outbreaks like tapeworms, etc.?  Can wolf population target levels be based on big game numbers, livestock depredations, human attacks or imagined threats like hanging around school bus stops?  Can hides be sold for trophies or home decorations?  Can any County or State say, “We don’t want any wolves here and we want to be able to kill any wolf here year-around”?

It is only realistic to see a hodgepodge of temporary and conflicting results emerging and being challenged (until the next President is elected).

Jim Beers

8 December 2018

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.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

If you no longer wish to receive these articles notify:  jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Chernobyl Wolves Might Grow Women-Like Breasts and Large Penises

This kind of reporting should be banned. In an attempt to mislead and embellish nonsensical, scientismic, propaganda, The Sun has published a story about how wolves “infected” with radiation from the radiation “accident” (wink-wink) at Chernobyl, might spread “mutant genes” to wolves in the surrounding regions: “The news has sparked concerns among some in the scientific community that the animals may mate and spread mutant genes to other packs… It now seems that the lack of human interference at the disaster site has allowed the wolves to thrive in the 1,000 sq mile exclusion zone.”

So, get this from these mental midgets. The piece states that: “They [the wolves] began to take over the eerie site in 2016 and the pack’s population is now thought to be seven-times larger than usual.”

The “nuclear accident” occurred in 1986. Thirty years later – let me restate that – thirty years later, when people cleared out and left the entire “exclusion zone” vacant, wolves began to move in. Researchers don’t even know if any of the wolves in question have any radiation poisoning and certainly not any “mutant genes” caused by radiation.

As a matter of fact, one scientist said, “We have no evidence to support that this is happening. No wolves there were glowing – they all have four legs, two eyes and one tail.”

These clowns could have just as easily copied my headline at the top. It would have just as much meaning.

Share

Animal Perversion, Wicked Lies, and Filth About a Wolf

The Daily Mail epitomizes how a perverse society projects human emotions and characteristics on animals. In this case a wolf…or what these folks choose to call the wild or semi-wild dog.

Prior to presenting their vomit and regurgitated extremely terrible misinformation, lies, emotional claptrap, and perversion, the author also reveals their hatred toward man while emoting their aberration concerning wolves they blindly, ignorantly, and with intended anger and hatred decide to mislead readers by calling the person who LEGALLY shot and killed a wolf, a “trophy hunter.” Probably this “trophy hunter” is also a “climate denier,” a “racist,” a “bigot,” a “Republican,” and of “white privilege” who deserves nothing less than huge fines, jail time, and with the suggestion of millions, even death. Damn, are we a sick society?

Not only do these delusional deviants get to decide whether a man or an animal should die or be afforded any resemblance of rights, i.e. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, their empty, programmed, automatonic, paralyzed minds mandate that any hunter, regardless of what species they are hunting and for what purpose, are “trophy” hunters.

Therefore, using the same absence of rational reasoning powers, anyone who likes animals is a pervert and should be institutionalized.

Two can play this game.

Share

Science Doesn’t Lie, but “Scientists” Publish

Science Doesn’t Lie, but “Scientists” Publish *

*A shameless modification of something my grandmother once told me that, “Figures don’t lie, but liars figure!”

Below my 30 November email to select colleagues, there is a List of historical wolf attacks almost entirely from Europe and Asia.  My comments and the List will, hopefully, prove of interest and value to you that read them.

Jim Beers

30 November 2018

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.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

If you no longer wish to receive these articles notify:  jimbeers7@comcast.net

Guys,

What a wonderful place Christopher Columbus found!  Who knew? I feel like bursting forth in stanzas of “My Country Tis of Thee”!  Now I really know why all our forbearers left “the Old Country”.

There has (according to this List) only been but ONE wolf attack and death in North America for that matter in recorded history.  It was in 1989 in Forest lake, Minnesota (“where all the children are above average” per Garrison Keillor of Prairie Home Companion and for other unmentioned incidents’ fame) about 20 miles from where I am sitting at the moment AND that was from a CAPTIVE WOLF!  It must have been imported from those other countries far away and it only goes to prove that only North American wolves, unsullied by those dastardly Euro-Asian oppressors, are “natural” and “beneficial”.  Obviously, our wolves are like angels placed here for the virgin forests and wild grazing animals to live in loving harmony with “native” people and this List proves it.  Once invaded (there was no wall) by these European immigrants “seeking asylum” sure enough they brought in this “captive wolf” that couldn’t help killing his “caretaker”.

My point here is to take this list for what it is.  It is a PARTIAL European/civilized Asian List (i.e. where they kept records that endured and where such things were noted, much less recorded).  There were lots more and the historic references back to the Ancient Greeks are chilling to say the least.

Enter North America.  Consider that Norwegian Canadian trapper the other day that killed a grizz a hundred yards from his cabin only to find his “partner” and their 10-month old baby dead and “mauled” (i.e. ripped apart) where they had tried to get back to the cabin by “apparently the same bear”.  How often did frontier families and settlers experience the same horrific deaths from wolves and bears and mountain lions?  Who “Knew”?  Who “Investigated”?  Who “Reported”?  Who Publicized”?  Who “Recorded”?  Who “Kept Records”? 

Despite all that, Stanley Young in Wolves of North America mentions a lot of word-of-mouth incidents passed down and still mentioned when he was “controlling” (only they didn’t have qualms then and spoke in real words like “killing”) predators.  Today the same necessary activity (predator control) is verboten to even (like Oscar Wilde’s “love” that “you dared not speak its name” and got him imprisoned and ruined his life) speak its name or necessity.

This very valuable List is but the tip of an historical iceberg.  There were undoubtedly many more deaths and survival-with-injuries in Europe and Asia in these years and a similar ratio of wolf attacks and wolf-caused deaths based on rural expanses and wolf-to-human ratios undoubtedly occurred under “Native” occupation and European occupancy in North America.

The real horror and scandal is the government functionaries, quack “perfessors”, teachers, over-educated influential elites, immoral NGO’s and many others with all manner of anti-rural hidden agendas that have not only sold the re-imposition of deadly predators by government force and finance but also buried this history (like Holocaust-Deniers) and created Socialist automatons that will not only deny but actively suppress these horrific facts and put them on the “Mention at Your Own Peril” List.

A Grant to some fearless person who is neither afraid of the truth nor squeamish about what must be done (“Yo Demosthenes, are you out there?  We need you.”) should set about recording what took place in North America as best we can reconstruct it and then attempt an ordered and supportable synthesis (like the incomplete Euro/Asian records) to extrapolate what most likely took place.  Should I go to the University of Minnesota or the University of California or where?  Decisions, Decisions.

Should I look for funding at the Animal Rights NGO’s or the federal bureaucracies or the spineless hunting NGO’s or the “hiding-under-their-desks” State agencies?

I leave all that to you dear reader.

Jim Beers

————————————————————————————–

On Nov 29, 2018, at 5:08 PM,     XXXXX    wrote:

YYYY and I were talking today about recent wolf attacks on Humans.  I started to search in the internet and found this.   Wow.  There are many more attacks than I had known about!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wolf_attacks#2010s.

Share

SCI Says, Wolf De-Listing Bill a Win for Hunters

A Press Release from the Safari Club International:

The U.S. House of Representatives today approved a bill that returns wolf management to states and is a step toward fixing flaws in the Endangered Species Act – something Safari Club International, on behalf of all hunters, has championed for years.
H.R. 6784, the Manage Our Wolves Act, was introduced in September by Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI).  The bill was approved 196-180 and secured bipartisan support from nine Democrats and 187 Republicans.
Passage of the Manage Our Wolves Act will return management of the Western Great Lakes gray wolf population to the states of Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.  The bill will also ensure that Wyoming’s gray wolf management remains under state authority and will direct the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to delist the remaining gray wolves of the lower 48 states, with the exception of Mexican wolves.
SCI President Paul Babaz was quick to praise the win on the House floor.
“First, thanks to Rep. Sean Duffy and so many other supportive Members of Congress for highlighting the critical need to recognize that recovery must lead to de-listing,” SCI President Babaz said.  “Second, this is a tremendous victory for hunters, wildlife conservation in general, and State wildlife managers.  All of them have played significant roles recovering gray wolf populations.”
While wolf recovery successes have been continually thwarted or ignored by courts acting on the many ambiguities or flaws in the wording of the ESA, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service states on its website: “the gray wolf has rebounded from the brink of extinction to exceed population targets by as much as 300 percent.  Today, there are estimated to be 5,691 gray wolves in the contiguous United States.  Wolf numbers continue to be robust, stable and self-sustaining.”
The recovery of the gray wolf is a success story and H.R. 6784 will help correctly transfer their management to the professionals at the state wildlife management agencies—the primary managers of our nation’s fish and wildlife resources.
“I’m very proud SCI has been a leader in ESA litigation efforts over so many years to help support wolf delisting,” SCI President Babaz added.  “Today’s win in Congress is an opportunity for federal legislators to clear away ESA’s roadblocks and enact laws to recognize easily documentable recovery efforts and restore State wildlife management authority.”
Share

Delisting Wolves: Going Down the Rabbit Hole

Going Down the Rabbit Hole

By James Beers:

My Inbox this morning had 5 separate copies of the news article, House of Representatives to vote on gray wolf delisting Friday from the Spokane newspaper.  Two of the senders asked what I thought, while the other three sent it for my information.  My following comments and the news article that follows them are provided for your consideration.)

Re: Wolf De Listing

This is only a temporary fix for everyone.  The basic authority for the US Fish and Wildlife Service, under the ESA, to relist and reintroduce wolves is not limited by this. 

So “they” (a temporarily benevolent Congress) make a law that wolves either in the Lower 48 or in certain States are not Endangered or Threatened and even that full management and authority over wolves (it cannot do this as long as the ESA authorizes federal bureaucrats and “scientists” to inform us that wolves are once again on the cusp of extinction in … and that the ESA “directs” and authorizes them to “save” the wolves.  Thank you, President Hillary or Alexandria Cortez or Jeff Flake or whoever wins the next electoral recounts.  Thank you as well to the next simultaneous House and Senate bursting with Dems, Socialists (but I repeat myself) and “get along” RINOS.  Do I believe that the Dems in the incoming or even current House will pass this?  Who, in Washington, will push this in the most toxic national political climate since 1860? What Dems or Republicans will fight for something Trump (think WALL, Ryan and OBAMACARE here) might possibly get any credit for?  The only thing really going for it is a blip in rural support for Washington mischief in the future (before reality is reintroduced about federal authority in such matters).

Imagine, that Wyoming (or NC or NM or ID, etc.) says “whoopie” now we can eliminate wolves in 21 0f our 23 counties (or even that they might think they could exterminate all their wolves).  Under a spineless governing class and with every rural resident back asleep because “wolves are delisted”, do you really think USFWS and that pack of hyenas they employ and even all those closet tinker belles now working in state “wildlife” agencies wouldn’t scare all the urban women and kids about the imminent demise of wolves everywhere and how they need to intervene quickly to “save” them under the provisions of the ESA?

Raise your hands if you really believe that Washington politicians would come out from under their desks to straighten things out.  What would stop it?  Some judge whose wife and daughter “love animals”? Some “scientist saying it’s all humbug” (how many of them have you seen lately)?  The same old line of XY&%# would be resurrected and plugged into the ESA’s un-Constitutional, unjust and destructive blather (but very real federal authority/jurisdiction/power grab that it wrought) about how federal bureaucrats and “scientists” trump (a great word) any delay or argument about private property rights, human health & safety, economics, liberty, domestic Tranquility, etc. etc.

States will try to respect federal and environmental demands using the rationale that “we can all get along, but that has never worked because the wolves are doing what they are supposed to do from wrecking ranching, shrinking hunting and destroying animal ownership like dogs.  Nearly all state agencies realize their bread is buttered by federal bureaucrats and national NGO’s, so challenging the status quo results in only a temporary respite much like “De-Regulation” enthusiasm.  They all know that any attempt to manage wolves as the people of the state want or most particularly the desires of those LIVING WITH WOLVES want will eventually meet with disaster for those attempting such impertinence.

The same goes for the Animal Welfare Act as a secondary tool of rural tyranny.  For instance, say North Carolina finds (as most states will) that you can neither count or “control” wolves satisfactorily and that:

  • Trapping.
  • Denning (the killing of wolf pups).
  • Year-around taking by a few shooters and young guys that enjoy shooting, hunting, etc. (exactly the young men and boys most affected by teachers, public pressure, recent laws, etc. feminizing American males).
  • Running dogs bred to run and kill wolves (in the Lower 48 States with a hodgepodge of private property?) as was the case centuries ago when the British, Scots and Irish invented and ran Wolfhounds to extirpate wolves when other methods were found to be inadequate.
  • Aerial control in certain areas.

Are the only methods that would really work but that no one dares even suggest for fear of reprisal.

Then when it sinks in that it is necessary to routinely use effective methods to maintain “tolerable” wolf levels and that whether on a local, state or Regional basis it is prohibitively expensive if attempted by government employees, and somewhat less expensive if done even by license-purchasing hunters given all the lawsuits, controversies and demands meant only to make any control impossible: enter the Animal Welfare Act as backup.

“Welfare” (as in “Animal”) folks, in collusion with the “environmental” folks will go to court; make arrests; charge; fine; and incarcerate those using “IN-humane” methods as decided by a judge or some Washington bureaucrats paid to enforce the AWA.  Grants and research will flourish and provide fodder for prohibitions.  “The ammunition is lead and eagles are dying.”  “Wolves are being wounded by inadequately trained gun owners”.  “Traps and dogs are ruled IN-humane and are prohibited”.  “Shooters are killing too many immature wolves because …”.  “Trapping during calving season is causing suffering to wolf pups still in the den”.  “There is insufficient ‘data’ to allow indiscriminate shooting of wolves’ impact on the family structure of packs in crowded habitats or in packs that roam vast areas”.  “Aerial control is cruel and unusual”. Etcetera, Etcetera.

All the while the wolves will increase, habituate, and continue to learn how to exist in the settled and artificial landscapes of the Lower 48 States. Expansion into ever-broader landscapes will occur as harassment increases, livestock is somewhat better protected, and wolf densities make roaming more and expanding their range to where wildlife, livestock and dogs are more available a likely outcome.

It is a much bigger mess than anyone admits or realizes.  These ramifications and problems are only increasing with time as wolf advocates imagine a success thus far, and wolf realists and Constitutionalists look to “De-Listing” as a solution for something that is only being covered up and kept out of site until favorable conditions return.

Pardon me if my unmentionables aren’t wadded up and my eyes all teary.

Jim Beers

16 November 2018

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.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

If you no longer wish to receive these articles notify:  jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Panic-Stricken “Left” Sleepless Over Thought of Removing Wolves From ESA

The Echo Chambers across America are doing the bidding for Environmental groups, looking to raise more money for their wages and retirement plans. The Media is echoing that the Republican-led House is trying to pass a bill that would remove federal protections from wolves in the Lower 48 states. And of course, WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE if that happens.

What’s interesting with these “fake” media outlet echo chambers is they talk a big talk but NEVER do they provide their readers, and I mean NEVER, with a link to the actual bill proposal. Why is that? Is that because they don’t want anybody to read the words of these proposals and thus discover their BS lies they use to rob money from animal-loving ignorant people? I think so.

One outlet perhaps committed a “Freudian” slip when they wrote: “Republicans are furiously pushing legislation that would remove gray wolves in the 48 contiguous U.S. states from the list of threatened and endangered animals protected under the Environmental Species Act…” (emboldening added) I contend that this title is more exact in the practice than using the Endangered Species Act. Because it is money hungry, rabid environmental groups who “sue and settle” and are in cahoots with the Federal Government, calling it the Environmental Species Act is tell-tale.

For those who care, which I know are very few, here is the link to H.R. 6784, Manage Our Wolves Act.

From my perspective, this bill will not pass. And if it does pass, over the long haul doing so will be a big mistake because of the precedence it will set. Remember policy and precedence become the law of the land. What’s good for one group is good for another…just saying.

But then again, the Feds dumped their toxic, disease-ridden, hybrid dogs on us and now it appears the only reason the House Committee wants the bill passed is so the Feds won’t have to pay to continue protections and management of the canine mongrels.

And as I’ve said countless times:

DON’T GO LOOK!

Share