RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

When playing football in Florida many years ago, we had a saying on the locker room wall saying, "the best defense is a 20 point lead". ***** footin around with the animal rights wacko's is just getting father behind in the contest. If you havn't been involved actively in a battle with these nuts, I have. A few years ago they were steam rolling their way through the country like a hot knife through butter. California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Mass. ect. all took the "kid gloves approach and went down like a "one egg pudding" when the votes were counted". Then they came to Idaho with prop #2 to stop bear hunting with dogs. The early polls showed that Idaho would be their next victim by a good margin. We took off the gloves and shoved their lies and perverted animal worshipping doctrine in their face. We had booths at the fairs, sent letters to the editors of all the newspapers, called radio talk shows, flooded the neighborhoods with fliers. We exposed their views on animal supremacy, fairs, ranching, pets, eating animal products, wearing leather and fur. No punches were pulled for the sake of those who were undecided. When the votes were tallied, the bunny huggers were soundly defeated and havn't got up the nerve to try it again but I am sure they will regroup in time and be back. One of their main tactics is to devide and conquer and they are using the wolf issue to the fullest. If we are to preserve our hunting heritage we will have to fight to win. Pull a gun on me and I am not going to worry about what someone else thinks, it will be do unto them as they seek to do to you- only do it to them first! I will worry about what some bystander thinks after the smoke clears.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I agree with you on those tactics. I hadn't heard how Idaho had protected the bear hunts. ANd it is good to see hunters pull together and turn the tide. But hunters as a rule are pretty passive, we are all individualists. You seldom see hunters rise up in large numbers to defend our pastime. Percentage wise I bet it's not very high as to how many actually step forward and fight back. It is evident on some of the hunting forums. You see the same ones speaking out on controversial issues, such as George Taulman and wolves.

I read the USF&W report that the total number of license sales nation wide was down on the last count by 1 million, but still at over 17 million. Can you imagine what 17 million speaking as one could do???? But it will never happen.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

The sad thing about most sportsmen is they can't see the forest for the trees. The bunny huggers are out to stop ALL hunting and fishing along with and use of animals by humans for ANY reason. We are guilty of rejoiceing when another group, who hunts in a different style or manner than we, loses their opportunity to engage in the sport in the manner of choice. The houndsman rejoices because the trapper can't set traps in HIS woods. The archer rejoices because the houndsman can no longer free case his hounds in HIS forest. The black powder man rejoices because the archer no longer spooks the game from HIS honey hole. The rifleman rejoices because the primitive weapsons man no longer gets the first opportunity at His trophy. Any time any group loses any priviledge, we have all lost!! The bunny huggers can then move on to their next battle with a new victory under their belt and more determination than ever before. Do we think that those who have made fox hunting in jolly old England illegal are not connected to those who have filed lawsuits to stop the bass tournaments, outlaw trapping, stop hound hunting of bear, spring bear hunts, ect. here in the US? Sportsman MUST fight together reqardless of the petty issue or we will all become the losers! The bunny huggers have infiltrated the school system, taken over the cartoon and kids channels ect, and are bombarding our children with their propaganda daily. There must be a strong voice crying in opposition if we are to stand a chance to survive. Silence may be golden BUT it can also be cowardice.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I think you make some very good points Snooky. If hunters feel that they are correct about controversial issues, like wolves, then they should fight adamantly for what they believe in. The undecided masses will be much more persuaded by a clear, unambiguous message than hunters who, as a group, are undecided themselves. Also, in this day and age of short attention spans, the general population is more likely to react favorably to messages that are put in their face and repeated over and over---just like with local elections, uninformed or undecided voters may cast their ballot for the politician because of name recognition from all of his dam signs along the road.

Unfortunately, as you pointed out, it is terribly hard to get hunters to make organized efforts in the political arena, unless most are sure that it is a do or die situation because they are individualists. I think that if the entire hunting community would mobilize to fight for the causes they believe in, the undecided masses would be needed less than what many suspect.

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

Here was a letter that was in the casper paper today. Very interesting as you look and see who the guy used to work for.

Wolf tourism a fantasy





Editor:

Shelley Ridenour's fantasy piece, "Wolf expert sees need for better methods," cries out for a common-sense response.

Saying wolf effects on livestock are not completely known "because the best ways to measure those effects haven't been determined" is absurd. U.S. and Canadian hunters, ranchers and rural people have been living with wolves for 200 years. Wildlife managers and university professors have studied wolves for 100 years. The suggestion that there is some a+b=c equation for wolves either by area or sex or pack numbers or population densities is ridiculous. Can we predict what "a" or "a typical" domestic dog will do if it gets loose? No, and wolves are just as adaptable and unpredictable as any domestic dog. Who is silly enough to believe that wolves that haven't killed but a few calves or elk or dogs, when hungry or in snow or with young to feed, won't kill a whole lot of such critters at one time given the opportunity?

Who can say they won't kill kids at a winter bus stop or and old lady walking from a barn under any circumstance? The best anyone dares say is "they haven't." Wolves can seriously damage a rancher's herds and flocks. They can seriously depress big game populations. They kill pets and farm dogs and they are a real threat to rural residents.

Hidden agendas as shutting down public land grazing, eliminating hunting, vacating rural countryside, imposing animal rights and environmental radicalism are what are behind the wolf program.

The rest of this piece was just nonsense. Why would the state (or the feds for that matter) not recognize the increasingly prohibitive cost of "catching" or tranplanting or killing every wolf that does something bothersome? So what happens when wolf populations explode and harm is rampant and the federal government will once again (as in America 100 years ago) have to spend the equivalent of millions annually to kill a few of many harmful wolves?

Colorado "wildlife managers" say there are 100,000 too many elk in Colorado. Could Colorado use the economic benefits from selling 200,000 to 300,000 more elk tags to kill the 100,000 "too many" elk? What do the wolves eat after they eat the old and sick and the 100,000? The wolves kill what they can, they may eat all of it or some of it. When their numbers reach a maximum and the food is mostly gone or reduced, what do they eat then?

Wolf tourism is as likely as tourism for spotted owls. What is natural or appealing about wolves managed like free-ranging dogs?

JIM BEERS, Centerville, Va.

Retired wildlife biologist, special agent and refuge manager

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

RE: Two Wolf Stories
 

I had to check this Jim Beers out. He is quite the outdoors person. A real deal and an old school USF&W! Do a search on his name and you will see. I was shocked, as I thought all USF&W people were like the pompous ass, Ed Bangs!

Jim Beers
Jim Beers, 60, a Virginia Sportsman, is the man that blew the whistle on USFWS headquarters' Pittman-Robertson Program financial mismanagement in 1998-99. He is also a former police officer who spent 30 years working for the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Beers is federal programs coordinator for the National Trappers Association.

Jim retired from the US Fish and Wildlife Service after 30 years. He served as a wildlife biologist, wetlands biologist, special agent, and refuge manager. After working for the Utah Fish & Game and spending four years as a Reserve Officer in the US Navy, he joined the US Fish & Wildlife Service and was stationed in Devils Lake, North Dakota; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Grand Island, Nebraska; New York City; and Washington, DC.


While in Washington Jim was a Congressional Fellow, the Chief of Operations for the National Wildlife Refuge System, the Program Coordinator for the Animal Damage Control Program, and for his final seven years he was the wildlife biologist in the Central Office who served as Project Officer on nearly all national wildlife projects funded with Pittman-Robertson money.


Appointees of the Clinton Administration cleansed the US Fish and Wildlife Service of many wildlife management biologists like Jim to replace them with new age employees who supported eliminating the management of plants and animals for sustainable uses as spelled out in laws. Jim resisted and eventually testified before Congress about how the Service was misusing millions of dollars intended for state wildlife management programs to do things prohibited by Congress. This was being done in secret collusion with animal rights and environmental organizations. After spending ten months at home with full pay and no work assignment, Jim Beers accepted a cash settlement and retired in 1999. He holds a Bachelors in Wildlife Resources from Utah State University and a Masters in Public Administration from the University of Northern Colorado.


Articles