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
