September 23, 2020

Alaskan Romance Biology

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Guest post by James Beers:

Regarding the following drivel presented as a quasi-book review/interview by Emily Schwing about Marybeth Holleman and wolves:

Wolves howl for “joy” like anthropomorphic biologists confuse the very human question (“How many and how much impacts of wolves can or will WE tolerate”) with the very judgmental ideology that somehow wolves are above, or superior to any human concerns.

While it is a testament to a free and prosperous nation that folks like Dr. Haber and Ms. Holleman can somehow spend (actually get paid for) a “lifelong effort to chronicle the lives of wolves”; too often the results are not HOW WE might better live with or manage said wolves, instead it becomes a social infection around which coalesces fevered movements to protect and sanctify the wolves in spite of human needs and desires where wolves exist. Invariably this modern saga is painted as below wherein the villains, i.e. the “old timers” and the “Board of Game” are fomenting a “dark future” for wolves and all that lies between them and Armageddon is the memory of a beloved Doctor, “environmental groups” and a lady’s paean to that memory. All that is missing is the interviewer closing with “Go Girl Go.”

The reality of the presence of wolves; what that means; and what must humans do if they are to live with them is an important matter in constant need of research and (public) dialogue. This romance biology, that is also common in locations like Minnesota and the West Coast States, only quashes dialogue in the ooze of feelings and emotions intended to substitute fantasies in the minds of the widest and most far-away voting blocs to use raw government might on those living with and directly affected by not only wolves but bears and cougars and every other fish, fowl and critter that will:

1. Generate election donations and votes for accommodating politicians.

2. Generate donations for radical organizations and their subsidiaries from lawyers to “specialists.”

3. Generate budget and personnel increases, promotions, autonomy from control, bonuses and increased power to federal bureaucrats.

4. Generate #3 for State bureaucrats.

5. Generate greater and steadier cash flows from government to Universities.

My lifelong passion concerns those affected by wolves and what works and doesn’t work. So I will pass on a book about details concerning wolves and why WE should avoid affecting them despite what those humans being affected believe and experience.

The subject of either people manage wolves or wolves manage people is like the “question” of is a human fetus a “person” or a blob of tissue. Any sentient person know the answer to each question but persons with other agendas bob, weave and deny the answer so often and with such vehemence and threat of government retribution that too many of us stay quiet and watch our children come to believe the unbelievable as we smile and avoid comment. The only thing worse than this romance biology about wolves is the Quisling government “biologist” or the traitorous “hunter’ or “rancher” warbling about how WE should forego any management of wolves because of everything from “they belong or were here first” or “they only eat the old and infirm” to “fladry works” and when their “old and sick” food supply dwindles, they will too.

Take a stand or eventually be run over by these “concerned” romantic’s et al.

Jim Beers
22 July 2014

Share