Attitudes & Platitudes

Recently a State Fish and Wildlife veterinarian was asked if wolves transmit
foot and mouth disease, a deadly killer of cloven-hoofed animals.  He
answered that foot and does not exist in North America .  When asked if they
(wolves) transmit brucellosis (a deadly killer of both livestock and humans)
he answered that they are "unimportant" vectors.  When asked about one of
the many intestinal parasites that wolves carry that infect both humans and
a wide range of other mammals (think about all the "shots" your dog "must
have" and then consider a 150 lb. wild dog of the same species and just
imagine what they "carry" and "transmit"), the esteemed vet's answer was "we
are currently running a long-term surveillance for this parasite".

Now the "best science available" or as it used to be called, "the truth" is:
1.) wolves are significant vectors (transmitters) of foot and mouth disease
which has occurred numerous times throughout North America and will again,
2.) wolves ARE vectors of brucellosis and in any outbreak they may indeed be
"serious" or "significant" or might I say, "important" transmitters of this
rightfully feared disease, and 3.) yes, wolves carry ALL the parasites
endemic to domestic dogs (with whom they mate productively when not killing
them).  So how would we characterize this "expert's" response?  Lies?  Dumb?
Purposely misleading?  Self-serving? Politically correct?  All of the above?

(Ask yourself why after years of serious disagreement about wolves, there
has been no mention, much less discussion, about his very important aspect
of the presence of wolves?  Read Will Graves', WOLVES IN RUSSIA for a real
eye-opener about this.  Go to www.wolvesinrussia.com for more information.)

This sort of gobbledygook is common in Russia and China and Zimbabwe and in
many "Middle Eastern" countries.  It was a high art form in Nazi Germany.
As that paragon of the big lie for self-serving purposes, Joseph Goebbels,
said, "tell a lie often enough and people will soon believe it".  In the US
it has become the basis for future national policies and the transfer of all
our rights and freedoms to a government that will rule us as we used to rule
government.

This state bureaucrat is one of many.  Many what?  Why many bureaucrats,
politicians, professors, and ideologues that are committed to the
destruction of this nation.  These are the people that give lip service to
"rights" and the "Constitution" and "freedom" while working to deny others
their "rights" and forming a government that is and was the antithesis of
what the Founding Fathers feared most - a strong central government
dictatorship. They are every bit as much a danger to our nation as the
current "terrorists".  Unlike the "terrorists" that are committed to social
and human mayhem as the means to conquer and rule us, these ideologues and
their public minions are committed to a very different American society
where government dictates every thing you may or may not do, from where you
live and what you eat to how you must behave.  Where terrorists scheme to do
this as they plotted to conquer Europe a thousand years ago, today's
internal radicals move steadily and incrementally to close "public" lands;
to ban hunting, fishing, logging, animal husbandry, fish and wildlife
management, dog ownership, rural living, economical travel, farming, private
property, animal use, stop energy development, stop road construction, and
many other things.

This is to be accomplished by new laws based on the "testimony" and
"recommendations of these "experts".  Expanded laws based on lawsuits again
based on the "expert testimony" of the same people.  Regulation
proliferation by bureaucrats aimed at justifying "more" employees and
"bigger budgets".  Public land closures, public land purchases and "bans"
(of everything from trapping and the use of hunting dogs to airboats and
fireplaces) used by politicians to either garner support from ideologues or
to divert us from unpopular things like wars or the encouragement of sexual
license.  That was the case in the late 1960's and early 1970's and it is so
today as the political environment mimics those times.

So our state vet misleads us, so what?  Is he any different than the Indiana
bat "expert" that told us that this ubiquitous bat was "endangered"?  Or how
about the "forester" that tells us "no-management" really results in
something other than no hunting and fierce fires on public lands?  Or how
about the "biologist" who says we "shouldn't" drill for oil in the Arctic or
that polar bears may become "endangered"?  Or how about the State Governor
(Richardson of New Mexico) that signs a bill to ban cockfighting in a state
that has many cockfighters as he announces his bid for the Presidency?  Or
how about the veterinarian that says we should ban cockfighting and the
slaughter (and therefore use) of horses.  Or how about the politician
proposing a ban on the use of fur, or the eating of "trans-fats", or
smoking?  Or how about the Non-Government Organizations suing to stop
logging, or hunting, or grazing, or road construction, or the use of
"non-native species", etc?

What they all have in common is their onerous and dangerous concept that
others have no "rights" except that which government grants or denies.  They
see this concept as justification for taking from others (from pet ownership
and hunting to rural living and guns) that which they abhor AND WHICH THEY
NEITHER PRACTICE OR ARE AFFECTED BY.

We should all be up in arms about this.  The idea that some "expert"
dictates national policy and the conditions under which others may live is
dictatorship.  It matters not whether it is Putin calling himself a
"democrat" or Hitler ranting from a podium or Mugabe threatening from the
bowels of some fortress or some Chinese "Congress", they are all the same as
this rule of an unfettered elite forcing wolves on rural people while
keeping much needed energy in the ground and closing public lands.

Veterinarians should speak about animal care.  Biologists should speak about
biology.  We (including them) can then make decisions in line with the
freedom, rights, and guarantees embedded in our Constitution.  We do not bow
to them or acquiesce to their demands to eliminate property rights or to
sell our birthrights to foreign powers or agreements (think the UN and
Kyoto ) because of the "recommendations" of these citizens.  THEY BRING ALL
THEIR OWN PRECONCEIVED IDEAS AND EMOTIONS AND PERSONAL AGENDAS TO THEIR WORK.  LIKE CHILDREN GIVEN ALL THEY DEMAND, THEY SIMPLY DEMAND MORE UNTIL THE PARENTS GO BROKE BASED ON UNREASONABLE AND UNATTAINABLE DEMANDS.

Unless and until we pull back from this outrageous concept that has spawned
all of the abuses of Acts like The Endangered Species Act and The Animal
Welfare Act and The Wilderness Act and The Marine Mammal Protection Act we
will continue to careen toward destruction as surely as we will if we allow
terrorism to gain momentum nationally and internationally.

Jim Beers
5 June 2007

- If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

- This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://jimbeers.blogster.com   (Jim Beers Common Sense)

- Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak.  Contact:
jimbeers7@verizon.net

- 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 Centreville ,
Virginia with his wife of many decades.