|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
Lessons Learned in Colorado
I spoke recently at the first Good Neighbor Forum.
It was held in Greeley,
Colorado
Three things were brought to my attention as a result of attending this
meeting. In my opinion they are definitely worth sharing with you.
LESSON #1. "We the People" or "We the Government".
Fifty thousand rural Coloradoans in SE Colorado are threatened by the
condemnation and seizure of there homes, property, livelihoods, communities,
and way of life by the US Army expansion of Fort Carson by hundreds of
thousands of acres of private property. This takeover of nearly all of SE
Colorado by the US Army is based on its' similarity to Afghanistan and the
need for "training areas". This will destroy the largest county in the
state. It follows on the heels (1984) of another expansion of the Fort and
taking of private property. It follows broken US Army promises of "no more
expansion" and "no live-firing" at that time. SE Colorado already has a
large and problematic "National Grassland". Portions of the property taken
the last time by the Army was given to the US Forest Service (481,000 A.)
and to The Nature Conservancy (indeed the TNC has a mail address on the
Fort). Land proposed for taking now will be given partially (to be used as
environmental "bragging") to a "Wildlife Buffer" as other Federal agencies
like the US Fish and Wildlife Service will be "bellying up to the trough".
QUESTION: How can this be? Certainly there are legitimate defense needs
for training areas. As a Navy veteran I recognize that. When I attended
Utah State years ago, there were more Iranians there that any other
University. Why, because Utah is the state most like Iran in soils and
climate, irrigation, valleys, etc. in the United States. So setting aside
some western lands to train for Middle East service is smart and laudable.
But the real question is, why does the government "need" to take one square
foot of private property? They already own 50% of the west. I would like
anyone to debate me about the location of more than a dozen contiguous
pieces of western government property that are as good or better as training
sites for Middle East duty as any private property areas of comparable size
in the western states. Is government property MORE precious that private
property or citizens or rural communities, or state economies or rural
livelihoods or rural cemeteries or rural traditions? How does government
seize private property for defense needs and then parcel it out to favored
organizations like TNC or Federal agencies constantly buying, easing, and
condemning land in their own rights? With complete absence of emotion and
with every hope of being taken seriously, such abuse of power belongs in
Nazi Germany or Communist China or Russia and not in America.
Solution: Such expansion should ALWAYS be FROM the Federal Land estate. US
Forests, National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, Bureau of Land
Management, and other Federal estates (BOR, USACoE, etc.) should be
inventoried for such expansions. Those lands "EAST USED (Wilderness,
Roadless, and other such set-asides) should go to the top of the candidacy
list and the ones most like the current "STAN" with the best economics and
suitability should provide the "needed training areas". Period.
LESSON #2. "Is that funny?" or "what a coincidence".
The expansion of the US Army Fort in SE Colorado mentioned above is
practically identical to that area of the notorious (and pernicious) map of
the proposed SE Colorado portion of the "Wildlands Project". You know, the
national map that has caused everyone to smile and laugh for a decade now.
Imagine taking seriously a MOVEMENT that is proposing to make 70?, 80?, 90?
(or however much they can pull off) percent OF THE US off-limits to people
and government-controlled "ecosystems", "biomes", "native species",
"roadless", "wilderness", or whatever with you and me forced into urban
enclaves living in government apartments and riding on government
transportation. HAR, HAR, HAR!
Colorado
Three things were brought to my attention as a result of attending this
meeting. In my opinion they are definitely worth sharing with you.
LESSON #1. "We the People" or "We the Government".
Fifty thousand rural Coloradoans in SE Colorado are threatened by the
condemnation and seizure of there homes, property, livelihoods, communities,
and way of life by the US Army expansion of Fort Carson by hundreds of
thousands of acres of private property. This takeover of nearly all of SE
Colorado by the US Army is based on its' similarity to Afghanistan and the
need for "training areas". This will destroy the largest county in the
state. It follows on the heels (1984) of another expansion of the Fort and
taking of private property. It follows broken US Army promises of "no more
expansion" and "no live-firing" at that time. SE Colorado already has a
large and problematic "National Grassland". Portions of the property taken
the last time by the Army was given to the US Forest Service (481,000 A.)
and to The Nature Conservancy (indeed the TNC has a mail address on the
Fort). Land proposed for taking now will be given partially (to be used as
environmental "bragging") to a "Wildlife Buffer" as other Federal agencies
like the US Fish and Wildlife Service will be "bellying up to the trough".
QUESTION: How can this be? Certainly there are legitimate defense needs
for training areas. As a Navy veteran I recognize that. When I attended
Utah State years ago, there were more Iranians there that any other
University. Why, because Utah is the state most like Iran in soils and
climate, irrigation, valleys, etc. in the United States. So setting aside
some western lands to train for Middle East service is smart and laudable.
But the real question is, why does the government "need" to take one square
foot of private property? They already own 50% of the west. I would like
anyone to debate me about the location of more than a dozen contiguous
pieces of western government property that are as good or better as training
sites for Middle East duty as any private property areas of comparable size
in the western states. Is government property MORE precious that private
property or citizens or rural communities, or state economies or rural
livelihoods or rural cemeteries or rural traditions? How does government
seize private property for defense needs and then parcel it out to favored
organizations like TNC or Federal agencies constantly buying, easing, and
condemning land in their own rights? With complete absence of emotion and
with every hope of being taken seriously, such abuse of power belongs in
Nazi Germany or Communist China or Russia and not in America.
Solution: Such expansion should ALWAYS be FROM the Federal Land estate. US
Forests, National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, Bureau of Land
Management, and other Federal estates (BOR, USACoE, etc.) should be
inventoried for such expansions. Those lands "EAST USED (Wilderness,
Roadless, and other such set-asides) should go to the top of the candidacy
list and the ones most like the current "STAN" with the best economics and
suitability should provide the "needed training areas". Period.
LESSON #2. "Is that funny?" or "what a coincidence".
The expansion of the US Army Fort in SE Colorado mentioned above is
practically identical to that area of the notorious (and pernicious) map of
the proposed SE Colorado portion of the "Wildlands Project". You know, the
national map that has caused everyone to smile and laugh for a decade now.
Imagine taking seriously a MOVEMENT that is proposing to make 70?, 80?, 90?
(or however much they can pull off) percent OF THE US off-limits to people
and government-controlled "ecosystems", "biomes", "native species",
"roadless", "wilderness", or whatever with you and me forced into urban
enclaves living in government apartments and riding on government
transportation. HAR, HAR, HAR!
Only it isn't funny.
The "Wildlands" map in NE Colorado (much like "westriver" areas of the
Dakotas and western and central Nebraska and western Kansas and Oklahoma)
also shows the dark shading of "targeted" "Wildlands". Whether they get it
as a "defense expansion" or a "Grassland" or "Refuge" or "Park" or "Native
Ecosystem" or (endangered species) "Critical Habitat" is immaterial. Most
likely for these western Great Plains areas is land clearances under the
rubric of "The Buffalo Commons". This is an outrageous proposal to clear
families and homes and communities and the rural economy (ala spotted owl,
wolves, grizzly bear, et al) in order to "establish free-ranging buffalo
herds and wolves and prairie flowers (and teepees and Indians?) where today
towns and ranches and schools and America's heartland exist. HAR, HAR, HAR!
When I mentioned this, even here at ground zero for this land clearance to
rival what the English did to Ireland and Scotland, you immediately saw
smiles and elbow nudges and even some laughter. Bad sign.
Here is the way your humble servant (a figure of speech I assure you) sees
it happening. First will be the justification, second will be the bringing
together of all the supporters and the rest will be as the politicians will
say, "academic".
JUSTIFICATION: It may be a "hot" year; thereby "proving" that "man" and
"agriculture" "don't belong out there". It may be a "cold" year; thereby
"proving" that "agriculture" is "creating global warming". It may be a
"wet" year; thereby "proving" that soil erosion and pollution are being
"caused" by "agriculture". It may be a "dry" year; thereby "proving" that
"precious" water is "needed" in cities and "wasted" in "agriculture". It
may be an "election" year; thereby spawning all manners of "deals" and
hidden agendas in order to get someone elected It may be that all those
communists and Nazis were right; years of indoctrination and lies in schools
might create a generation of zombies that believe all the lies and
propaganda and look to government to run everyone's life (God, I hope that
is not true!).
SUPPORTERS: Who, in their right mind would support such a thing? Let me
count the ways, I mean support groups...
1.) Environmental organizations want the world to go this way.
2.) Animal Rights organizations see this as "the" way to eliminate all
manner of animal use and ownership.
3.) Federal politicians see this as generating (urban) votes and assuring
their hold on power.
4.) State politicians will be told that there are Federal dollars for them
(need I say more?).
5.) Federal bureaucrats will drool at the thought of the dollars and people
and power they will control.
6.) State bureaucrats will do as they have for 35 years now: snap to
attention, quietly salute, and ask in a whisper "what's in it for me?
7.) University professors will dream of "new wings" and "Department
Headships" and grants and tenure and pay raises and on and on.
8.) Urban politicians and "their" bureaucrats will covet the water no longer
"used" by farmers and plan all manner of luxuries for urban constituencies
and like all of the above dream about facilities and structures with their
name on a metal plaque "forever".
9.) The United Nations bureaucrats will toast each other. America will be
becoming "more like Europe" (under socialist control) and therefore more
amenable to UN influence (which will generate "more" $'s, people, etc. for
UN bureaucrats just as for our homegrown varieties).
10.) The Nature Conservancy, Audubon, et al will jump on this like a duck on
a June bug because they know they will have a big part in buying, easing,
managing, influencing, etc., etc.
11.) Population control crowds will see this as another restriction on human
population and the notion of American "rights' and "freedoms".
12.) Gun Controllers will rejoice at the elimination of areas for (and
therefore numbers of) hunting. That means weaker objections to national gun
control when hunting is but a shadow.
13.) Animal Rights extremists like ALF and Environmental radicals like ELF
will do their "best??" to undermine rural life that, like SUV's and rural
homes and agriculture should be eliminated in their mind.
14.) Urban folks who dislike "all that agriculture" and "all that logging"
and all those other "all that's" will write political checks from their
cubicles and apartments.
15.) All those who want to "control" agriculture (what's grown, what we can
buy to eat, trans-fats, meat, corn, etc.) will see this as making remaining
agriculture more amenable to "control.
16.) Urban residents daydreaming of possible future road trips and how
"nice" it would be to see buffalo bell-deep in wildflowers and wolves
playing with their puppies, etc
17.) All the "Friends of", "Societies", "Organizations", etc. of the
National Park Service, National Wildlife Refuges, National Forests, etc.
will all buzz like beehives.
18) Teachers will get "packets" galore and wax poetic through math and
science class time about writing letters and listening to speakers lifted
from the glossy pages of environmental media propaganda publications.
19.) Socialist everywhere will smile and support this "inevitable" march of
history toward rule of the proletariat by the knowledgeable elites (that
would be "them").
20.) World government types everywhere would rejoice at this upward motion
of American sovereignty from "owners" and "states" to a "federal"
government. Bureaucracies are often moribund but once motion is started (in
this case upward power concentration) maintaining it into "world" government
is merely bureaucratic child's play.
My fingers (the two I type with) are tired. I could easily double the list
but time and space and an old mans fingers are limited. Twenty, not bad: I
mean how could anybody take some thing like "Wildlands" or "Buffalo Commons"
seriously? I mean, who could believe such stuff?
HAR, HAR, HAR.
Lesson #3. Federal perfidy.
Driving from Virginia to Minnesota to Colorado and back to Virginia in late
February is an eye-opener. There are hawks everywhere you look along the
roads, in the fields, in the air and in the trees. Red-tails, Swainsons,
Peregrines, Sharp-shins, Coopers, Sparrow Hawks, etc. are everywhere.
(Note: what do Sparrow Hawks and Killer Whales have in common? Times up.
Both have had their names changed to be politically correct. Sparrow hawks
do indeed kill little birds just like Killer Whales do kill [among many
other things] whales. So in deference to all the other environmental mumbo
jumbo of the day, their names have been changed to "Kestrel" and "Orca".)
Hawks and owls were given Federal protection in 1972 (never mind the
tambourines). This has greatly increased their numbers to highly excessive
(regarding the environment) and highly destructive (regarding their effects
on human activities. However, like cormorants and marine mammals there is
no "research" or "expert" to tell us so I guess it doesn't exist.
These hawks and owls consume young birds and even adults of many species.
Why do we NEVER hear about "controlling their numbers in order to save
"endangered" birds like plovers and terns and dozens of other "endangered
species"? Why don't we have "more control" (i.e. trapping and hunting) of
mammalian predators to "save" these birds that we so readily use to take
away private property rights and state rights on behalf of?
The Federal government claims control of everything in the Platte River
Basin due in part to keep "endangered" sturgeons in the mouth area of a
prairie river that was even 150 years ago "a mile wide and an inch deep".
They importune Nebraskans and Coloradoans and Wyoming Cowboys to "save these
sturgeons. Gag me with a spoon!
For decades the Federal Government (USFWS, EPA, NMFS, NPS, USACoE,) and
Maryland and the District of Columbia have knowingly and jointly dumped tons
of sludge from the DC water treatment facility on the only spawning grounds
and year around habitat of the "endangered" shortnose sturgeon with
impunity. To add further insult to injury, all those fervent environmental
and animal rights NGO's refused to join in a lawsuit to stop the dumping.
All those high paid lobbyists rode in their carpools along with the
lobbyists for the state fish and wildlife agencies right by the dumping for
years while they all "tsk'ed, tsk'ed" about those awful farmers and ranchers
along the Platte that weren't giving up "enough" to have a few sturgeons
(that no one used and which existed in the Missouri River where they were
more suited anyway) in the mouth of the Platte River. To quote the American
Officer at Bastogne; "Nuts".
Finally there were the Canada geese. They were and are everywhere. Resident
and migratory, their numbers are in the millions and millions. The urban
geese are unmanaged and a threat to health (ours) and water and soil and
human activities. The migratory birds are a problem to agriculture and
human health and water and soil in the present numbers. We are told
continually that the number of hunters is declining and that hunters can't
help these wildlife problems. Oh yeah?
Goose hunting seasons (in addition to the snow goose extensions of recent
years) need to be expanded. Daily bag limits need to be increased. Hunting
methods need to be relaxed. But they aren't? Why.
There are two reasons. One is that the Federal overseers are now mostly
anti-management and anti-use zealots. Second, it threatens jobs and
salaries and retirements. Else why would I have read about the South Dakota
Federal Warden (they are called "Special Agents" because of all the training
and equipment they get and all the "conspirators" and "organized crime" they
"fight" that thereby qualifies them for the premium pay, early retirement,
etc. like the FBI Agents) who is in hot water for enforcing Canada goose
laws like a Special Forces detachment in Afghanistan? His abuse of hunters
and que4stionable methods are all over the papers but he is treated as a "hero"
"saving" the what? Canada geese? Are you kidding? The law is the law and
bad stuff is enforced until removed from the books but think about it. Here
we are in the midst of a "plague" (to quote a German sunbather I once
encountered while wood duck hunting) of Canada geese and we are paying one
Federal employee (actually there are several hundred) hundreds of thousands
annually (salary, retirement, equipment, support, etc.) to "protect" Canada
geese at this time. As that Russian comedian once observed, "is this a
great country or what?"
Jim Beers
27 February 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.
The "Wildlands" map in NE Colorado (much like "westriver" areas of the
Dakotas and western and central Nebraska and western Kansas and Oklahoma)
also shows the dark shading of "targeted" "Wildlands". Whether they get it
as a "defense expansion" or a "Grassland" or "Refuge" or "Park" or "Native
Ecosystem" or (endangered species) "Critical Habitat" is immaterial. Most
likely for these western Great Plains areas is land clearances under the
rubric of "The Buffalo Commons". This is an outrageous proposal to clear
families and homes and communities and the rural economy (ala spotted owl,
wolves, grizzly bear, et al) in order to "establish free-ranging buffalo
herds and wolves and prairie flowers (and teepees and Indians?) where today
towns and ranches and schools and America's heartland exist. HAR, HAR, HAR!
When I mentioned this, even here at ground zero for this land clearance to
rival what the English did to Ireland and Scotland, you immediately saw
smiles and elbow nudges and even some laughter. Bad sign.
Here is the way your humble servant (a figure of speech I assure you) sees
it happening. First will be the justification, second will be the bringing
together of all the supporters and the rest will be as the politicians will
say, "academic".
JUSTIFICATION: It may be a "hot" year; thereby "proving" that "man" and
"agriculture" "don't belong out there". It may be a "cold" year; thereby
"proving" that "agriculture" is "creating global warming". It may be a
"wet" year; thereby "proving" that soil erosion and pollution are being
"caused" by "agriculture". It may be a "dry" year; thereby "proving" that
"precious" water is "needed" in cities and "wasted" in "agriculture". It
may be an "election" year; thereby spawning all manners of "deals" and
hidden agendas in order to get someone elected It may be that all those
communists and Nazis were right; years of indoctrination and lies in schools
might create a generation of zombies that believe all the lies and
propaganda and look to government to run everyone's life (God, I hope that
is not true!).
SUPPORTERS: Who, in their right mind would support such a thing? Let me
count the ways, I mean support groups...
1.) Environmental organizations want the world to go this way.
2.) Animal Rights organizations see this as "the" way to eliminate all
manner of animal use and ownership.
3.) Federal politicians see this as generating (urban) votes and assuring
their hold on power.
4.) State politicians will be told that there are Federal dollars for them
(need I say more?).
5.) Federal bureaucrats will drool at the thought of the dollars and people
and power they will control.
6.) State bureaucrats will do as they have for 35 years now: snap to
attention, quietly salute, and ask in a whisper "what's in it for me?
7.) University professors will dream of "new wings" and "Department
Headships" and grants and tenure and pay raises and on and on.
8.) Urban politicians and "their" bureaucrats will covet the water no longer
"used" by farmers and plan all manner of luxuries for urban constituencies
and like all of the above dream about facilities and structures with their
name on a metal plaque "forever".
9.) The United Nations bureaucrats will toast each other. America will be
becoming "more like Europe" (under socialist control) and therefore more
amenable to UN influence (which will generate "more" $'s, people, etc. for
UN bureaucrats just as for our homegrown varieties).
10.) The Nature Conservancy, Audubon, et al will jump on this like a duck on
a June bug because they know they will have a big part in buying, easing,
managing, influencing, etc., etc.
11.) Population control crowds will see this as another restriction on human
population and the notion of American "rights' and "freedoms".
12.) Gun Controllers will rejoice at the elimination of areas for (and
therefore numbers of) hunting. That means weaker objections to national gun
control when hunting is but a shadow.
13.) Animal Rights extremists like ALF and Environmental radicals like ELF
will do their "best??" to undermine rural life that, like SUV's and rural
homes and agriculture should be eliminated in their mind.
14.) Urban folks who dislike "all that agriculture" and "all that logging"
and all those other "all that's" will write political checks from their
cubicles and apartments.
15.) All those who want to "control" agriculture (what's grown, what we can
buy to eat, trans-fats, meat, corn, etc.) will see this as making remaining
agriculture more amenable to "control.
16.) Urban residents daydreaming of possible future road trips and how
"nice" it would be to see buffalo bell-deep in wildflowers and wolves
playing with their puppies, etc
17.) All the "Friends of", "Societies", "Organizations", etc. of the
National Park Service, National Wildlife Refuges, National Forests, etc.
will all buzz like beehives.
18) Teachers will get "packets" galore and wax poetic through math and
science class time about writing letters and listening to speakers lifted
from the glossy pages of environmental media propaganda publications.
19.) Socialist everywhere will smile and support this "inevitable" march of
history toward rule of the proletariat by the knowledgeable elites (that
would be "them").
20.) World government types everywhere would rejoice at this upward motion
of American sovereignty from "owners" and "states" to a "federal"
government. Bureaucracies are often moribund but once motion is started (in
this case upward power concentration) maintaining it into "world" government
is merely bureaucratic child's play.
My fingers (the two I type with) are tired. I could easily double the list
but time and space and an old mans fingers are limited. Twenty, not bad: I
mean how could anybody take some thing like "Wildlands" or "Buffalo Commons"
seriously? I mean, who could believe such stuff?
HAR, HAR, HAR.
Lesson #3. Federal perfidy.
Driving from Virginia to Minnesota to Colorado and back to Virginia in late
February is an eye-opener. There are hawks everywhere you look along the
roads, in the fields, in the air and in the trees. Red-tails, Swainsons,
Peregrines, Sharp-shins, Coopers, Sparrow Hawks, etc. are everywhere.
(Note: what do Sparrow Hawks and Killer Whales have in common? Times up.
Both have had their names changed to be politically correct. Sparrow hawks
do indeed kill little birds just like Killer Whales do kill [among many
other things] whales. So in deference to all the other environmental mumbo
jumbo of the day, their names have been changed to "Kestrel" and "Orca".)
Hawks and owls were given Federal protection in 1972 (never mind the
tambourines). This has greatly increased their numbers to highly excessive
(regarding the environment) and highly destructive (regarding their effects
on human activities. However, like cormorants and marine mammals there is
no "research" or "expert" to tell us so I guess it doesn't exist.
These hawks and owls consume young birds and even adults of many species.
Why do we NEVER hear about "controlling their numbers in order to save
"endangered" birds like plovers and terns and dozens of other "endangered
species"? Why don't we have "more control" (i.e. trapping and hunting) of
mammalian predators to "save" these birds that we so readily use to take
away private property rights and state rights on behalf of?
The Federal government claims control of everything in the Platte River
Basin due in part to keep "endangered" sturgeons in the mouth area of a
prairie river that was even 150 years ago "a mile wide and an inch deep".
They importune Nebraskans and Coloradoans and Wyoming Cowboys to "save these
sturgeons. Gag me with a spoon!
For decades the Federal Government (USFWS, EPA, NMFS, NPS, USACoE,) and
Maryland and the District of Columbia have knowingly and jointly dumped tons
of sludge from the DC water treatment facility on the only spawning grounds
and year around habitat of the "endangered" shortnose sturgeon with
impunity. To add further insult to injury, all those fervent environmental
and animal rights NGO's refused to join in a lawsuit to stop the dumping.
All those high paid lobbyists rode in their carpools along with the
lobbyists for the state fish and wildlife agencies right by the dumping for
years while they all "tsk'ed, tsk'ed" about those awful farmers and ranchers
along the Platte that weren't giving up "enough" to have a few sturgeons
(that no one used and which existed in the Missouri River where they were
more suited anyway) in the mouth of the Platte River. To quote the American
Officer at Bastogne; "Nuts".
Finally there were the Canada geese. They were and are everywhere. Resident
and migratory, their numbers are in the millions and millions. The urban
geese are unmanaged and a threat to health (ours) and water and soil and
human activities. The migratory birds are a problem to agriculture and
human health and water and soil in the present numbers. We are told
continually that the number of hunters is declining and that hunters can't
help these wildlife problems. Oh yeah?
Goose hunting seasons (in addition to the snow goose extensions of recent
years) need to be expanded. Daily bag limits need to be increased. Hunting
methods need to be relaxed. But they aren't? Why.
There are two reasons. One is that the Federal overseers are now mostly
anti-management and anti-use zealots. Second, it threatens jobs and
salaries and retirements. Else why would I have read about the South Dakota
Federal Warden (they are called "Special Agents" because of all the training
and equipment they get and all the "conspirators" and "organized crime" they
"fight" that thereby qualifies them for the premium pay, early retirement,
etc. like the FBI Agents) who is in hot water for enforcing Canada goose
laws like a Special Forces detachment in Afghanistan? His abuse of hunters
and que4stionable methods are all over the papers but he is treated as a "hero"
"saving" the what? Canada geese? Are you kidding? The law is the law and
bad stuff is enforced until removed from the books but think about it. Here
we are in the midst of a "plague" (to quote a German sunbather I once
encountered while wood duck hunting) of Canada geese and we are paying one
Federal employee (actually there are several hundred) hundreds of thousands
annually (salary, retirement, equipment, support, etc.) to "protect" Canada
geese at this time. As that Russian comedian once observed, "is this a
great country or what?"
Jim Beers
27 February 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.