|
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 |
GovTrack.us is an independent tool to help the public research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting government transparency and civic education through novel uses of technology.
Somewhere Between a Prairie Home
Companion & Fargo
"Teachable moments" should be taken advantage of whenever
they present
themselves. Therefore the following Minnesota chronology from one newspaper
is both typical of the nation as a whole and a clear example of the results
of decades of public school and media propaganda coupled with the loss of
state fish and wildlife agencies to federal bureaucracies and the
international environmental and animal rights agendas that control them
today.
Hunters, ranchers, and rural dog owners in the West are learning that wolves
kill lots of sheep, cattle, foals, and other domestic animals. Additionally
they have become keenly aware of all the dogs (watchdogs, herding dogs, bear
and lion dogs, bird dogs, rabbit dogs, pet dogs, and retrievers) that wolves
increasingly kill annually. They are learning that wolves will hang around
rural bus stops (some rural parents even construct "cages" for the kids to
wait in); wolves will follow walking kids to and from rural bus stops;
wolves have harassed women checking rural boxes and walking into their homes
through snowed-in driveways: today, more and more rural westerners realize
wolves are routinely hanging around homes and towns as large ungulates (elk,
moose, and deer) disappear and remaining animals vainly seek refuge near
human habitations in winter and when giving birth. Big game hunting (a
financial staple of western communities for decades) is disappearing as big
game herds disappear due mainly to wolf predation on calves and fawns both
torn from their mother's wombs and run down as they try to escape wolves.
The financial loss to western states and local communities is staggering and
the mere fact that this is perpetrated by a federal government that was
specifically charged to "insure domestic Tranquility" and to "promote the
general Welfare" is nothing short of hideous.
That this same government was created by men that fought, died, and lost
families and fortunes in a Revolutionary War based on a Declaration that
stated:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable (sic, that
means they cannot be revoked or denied by any man or government) Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. ---- That
to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their
just (sic, how is endangering human lives and private property 'just'?)
powers from the consent of the governed" (sic, note it does not say the
consent of the majority or the consent of urban voting blocs or the consent
of the rich and powerful)",
is truly a travesty.
Enter Minnesota.
Today Minnesota is divided between urban environmentalists and animal rights
radicals on the one hand; and farmers, trappers, hunters, fishermen,
tree-cutters, and dog owners (not guardians) on the other. In other words
the same urban/rural split we see on those red/blue political maps after
every national election.
Minnesotans are descended from a strong and proud heritage of lumberjacks,
farmers, dog users, hunters, trappers, fishermen, and robust towns founded
to mine the ground and nurture the renewable natural resources on the land
for future generations. However, like today's New Zealand children and
grandchildren of whalers that currently condemn whaling of certain abundant
whale species, Minnesotans have increasingly swallowed environmental and
animal rights prattling about wolves. Just as New Zealanders now condemn
whaling and then turn around and lament the disappearance of commercial
fisheries (they say) caused by "over-fishing", so too are Minnesotans
currently blaming the disappearance of moose on "global warming" while both
denying facts and burying comments or claims to the contrary. Similarly, as
deadly attacks on dogs, wildlife, and livestock increase and rural residents
are increasingly threatened by "habituated" wolves' as their numbers and
distribution grows; lies about wolves dominate reports and claims from state
bureaucrats and the media.
The fact is that over the past decade, as wolf numbers have grown and any
wolf harassment has been forbidden - moose numbers have steadily declined in
Minnesota just like Yellowstone, Montana, and Idaho moose and elk have
declined with wolf introductions and increases. It is a fact that (just as
was proved since the 1970's by "protected" California cougars that soon made
Sierra Bighorn Sheep Endangered by simply killing the females and young as
they gave birth and/or killing the young calves and lambs as they struggle
in their early days) once wolves or other big predators discover the easy
where and how of killing females and young they do it over and over until
they no longer find them in certain wetlands or mountain meadows in early
spring. It doesn't take very long before wolves can no longer find those
easy pickings and that generally coincides with rural questions about "where
have all the (fill-in-the-blank) gone", closed hunting seasons or "cutting
the number of permits in half" as is happening with Minnesota wolves.
Minnesota was the only Lower 48 state acknowledged to have a resident wolf
population in the late 1960's when the first Endangered SPECIES Act was
passed and the "Minnesota" wolf was among the first federally "Listed"
"SPECIES (?)". The population at that time was estimated, in so far as any
wolf "estimate" can be verified or proven, to be only a few hundred or less.
They were happily maintained by Minnesotans at this tolerable level and
distribution by state support of hunting, trapping, and killing of wolves
that were killing livestock, dogs, or wintering deer, threatening humans, or
to make into a decorative "rug" or winter blanket for the kids.
Subsequent Wolf "targets" in Minnesota grew steadily to 1600 wolves where
this meaningless court number remains as this is being written. Today the
state Dept. of Natural Resources "estimates" 3,500 but if other state fish
and wildlife agencies' wolf "estimates" are any indication, the numbers of
wolves in Minnesota is probably between 4 and 5,000. Early and consistent
"cooperation" with federal demands over 40 years by Minnesota government
reflected a state political temper that has seldom found any federal program
problematic. All of the foregoing has given rise to a local perspective and
public school curriculums that perpetrate wolf fancies like they never
attack (much less kill and eat) humans or that they "balance" nature (i.e.
big game animals once hunters are removed) and "people kill more dogs than
wolves." Indeed our "Wolf Center" in northern Minnesota is often quoted and
pictured in its bucolic setting amid lakes and woodlands.
One week ago, the Minneapolis (our biggest urban center) paper published two
separate items. One cited the rise in deadly wolf attacks on livestock and
dogs throughout the state. No mention of any wildlife losses were mentioned
in the state. There was an almost "throw-away" mention of a "reported" (as
if such a "report" was automatically to be disbelieved) that a Minnesota
woman had been "threatened" by wolves. The second report was that moose (a
recent wildlife restoration success story before wolf numbers began
climbing) herds were declining such that moose permits (only for residents
and only once-in-a-lifetime by drawing) were to be halved. I wrote the
following Letter to the Editor of The Minneapolis Star Tribune:
"What a coincidence! On the same day you report that Minnesota moose
numbers are declining precipitously and that moose hunting permits are to be
halved; you report about the dramatic upswing in Minnesota and Wisconsin
wolves killing livestock, dogs, and beginning to attack people.
Of course the "experts" tell us (and you) that "wolves don't attack people"
and moose are disappearing because of global warming and all those dogs and
livestock don't "belong" out "there" anyway. The associated fact that grouse
hunters and rabbit hunters (they use dogs) are also disappearing because of
video games and obesity is another favorite canard of the University and
government types as well.
Adding insult to injury you report this propaganda as "fact" and then cap it
off with the biggest lie of all; that "delisting" will return authority over
wolves to the state and the current state wildlife "non-managers" that will
miraculously make everything better.
The truth is that "delisting" is a wispy dream. The feds will step back in
at a moment's notice for reasons only they understand. The courts will
reinstitute federal control when the next environmental lawsuit gets into
the "right" (or left as the case may be) court. The state will go along
with the desires of the feds and their cohorts as they have for 40 years.
Nothing short of a serious amendment of the Endangered Species Act will ever
restore State (and Local) authority over these very dangerous and
destructive animals.
The only real danger you failed to mention is the future and real danger to
sheep. That is the sheep in wolf country that read this drivel and believe
it!"
Not surprisingly, the Minneapolis paper did not publish my uncompromisingly
harsh Letter (I find it so hard to compromise and not be mean-spirited).
However what they did publish in the center of the Sunday Op-Ed page below a
demeaning political cartoon about our ex-Governor and one of our finest
Congresspersons was a beautiful photo of a reclining wolf that was so
gosh-darned cute you just wanted to go up to it and scratch it behind the
ears. Accompanying this wolf picture was a lone wolf Letter to the Editor
that said:
"Have wolf attacks increased or has the reporting of those attacks
increased? How many pets are lost to eagles, hawks, and raccoons?
If the issue is really the loss of pets, let me direct attention to the No.
1 predator: humans. According to Animal Ark, the Humane Society and many
other sources, 4 million dogs and cats are euthanized annually in this
country. Of those, 3.6 million are killed for no reason other than they
have no home.
A puppy-mill bill (HF388) has been introduced in the Legislature again this
year. Once again it has dim hopes of passing. If you are unaware, puppy
mills exist for no other reason than to crank out puppies and kittens for
profit. Puppy mill owners differ from respected breeders in significant
ways such as how they care for their animals. If the concern is about
animals, then write about animals."
Well, take that! What else is there to say about wolves?
What passes for public dialogue and truth anymore has nothing to do with
either. Do we blame the schools? The media? Government? Ourselves? I
vote for the last one on the list because only we can change the others.
As we do this, remember how in the movie Fargo (produced by Minnesotans
about Minnesota) everyone thought of the son-in-law of the car dealer as a
harmless nerd and how someone viewed as harmless was responsible for the
horrific deaths of so many people. When we think of these environmentalist
extremists and animal rights radicals as harmless we are making the same
mistake. Government-Protected Wolves killing livestock, dogs, desirable
wildlife, hunting, and threatening rural residents are the exact opposite of
the charge to a federal government authorized by "We the People" in the US
Constitution to protect rural "domestic Tranquility" and the "general
Welfare". When Minnesota wolves pose a deadly threat to rural property,
rural animals, rural children at bus stops, rural childhood activities, and
routine rural chores and lifestyles; and Minnesota government allows the
problem to grow, it is a violation of the Minnesota Constitution Article I,
Section1 - "Government is instituted for the security, benefit and
protection of the people, in whom all political power is inherent, together
with the right to alter, modify or reform government whenever required by
the public good.
Not to be overdone in dark tragedy, the Minneapolis paper has unwittingly
provided some levity in the midst of growing tragedy that is reminiscent of
that famous Minnesota humor of Garrison Keillor on his unforgettable radio
show, A Prairie Home Companion.
The Sunday Sports Pages of the Minneapolis paper reports the following:
- The DNR is requesting Hunting and Fishing License cost increases
across-the-board from a few dollars to $40/year.
Note: This even as they downplay decreasing hunting opportunities for
species like grouse where dogs (often family pets) are in danger from
wolves, wolf numbers and wolf impacts. When I wrote of this about the wolf
threat to bird dogs and rabbit dogs in northern woods I was told that it was
no problem. However, Wisconsin provides hunters that use dogs an 800# to
call to get information about wolf activity hotspots at the moment. State
employees are like old sailors that will promise you anything to get what
they want: in this case our quiet acquiescence until they retire.
- "Reports of dogs chasing deer have become common lately. Dog owners
are subject to a $500 penalty, and dogs chasing big game may be legally
killed."
Note: What about wolves chasing big game? What if I shoot a wolf, thinking
it was a German shepherd or a coyote? So I'm a good guy if I save "big
game" from a dog and a bad guy if I save the same animal from a wolf?
- "A DNR conservation officer reported that wolves chased a
3,000-pound bull through two fences recently near Carlton, where it then got
stuck in a swamp and died."
Note: That is a lot of bull. Someone should tell the owner (or is it
"guardian"?) of the bull about puppy mills and "HF whatever it was". Maybe
they should send him a picture of one of those wolves resting in a pen? I
am sure that if anyone, even the owner, shot one the wolves that drove the
bull through two fences and then into a slough to die he would be liable for
prosecution resulting in a large fine, jail, imprisonment, a felony
conviction, loss of voting rights, and loss of gun rights; but is that
enough? What about registering them? Shouldn't we demand that convicted
wolf harassers register so that their neighbors know? I think we need a new
law. I mean, if bothering the poor wolves were to catch on, why the poor
wolves might be forced to abandon chasing and eating both dead and alive
"3,000-pound bulls". It could then force them to begin (we know they "never"
do such a thing now) killing baby moose and mommy deer giving birth or even
leaving the mommy moose with her hind end torn out and still alive as they
devour her offspring just like they do elsewhere around the world. Why it
might even make them mad (with or without rabies) and they might "threaten"
some rural resident or even kill them as they have done since time
immemorial everywhere else all around the world.
In case you haven't quite grasped the humor in all this, the Sunday
Minneapolis paper "B" Section headline offers us a glimpse of how the same
old "Carny" tricks keep working over and over wherever you go. Just like
every other state, Minnesotans feel they have nothing to learn from repeated
national scams and their hidden agendas.
Two years ago Minnesotans approved an earmarked sales tax increase that
would increase hunting and fishing among several other things. The
publicity for it (that almost, but not quite, got me worked up to support
it) featured baby ducks in muddy dragline tracks (someone had just drained
the duckling's marsh) and pheasant roosters scooting through grass and corn.
It was enough to make you want to impose an even bigger tax increase on
yourself!
I remained skeptical however. The environmental extremists and animal rights
radicals had been justifying their national and state activities for too
long like this. For instance, today rural Florida hunters and fishermen are
all sporting really neat license plates on their pickups of deer and fish
nice enogh to have been lifted off some 1920's sporting calendars: trouble
is the plates were sponsored by and help fund the likes of HSUS,DOW and
other such ANTI-hunting and ANTI-fishing organizations! Like Lenin
mistakenly believed, they think they can hang us with our own rope.
Last years' disbursement of funding from the "earmarked" Minnesota sales tax
funds went to hunting and fishing projects but also to urban paths and
"doggie parks". This year, according to our Sunday paper, several Board
Members are being challenged to resign because they volunteer for some of
the hunter organizations getting funds like Pheasants Forever and a "Refuge
Trust". Thus will the hunting and management advocates on the Board be let
go one after another to be replaced by () ?
I know, how about the lady that thinks we need stiffer laws restricting dog
and cat ownership to take our minds off wolves? How about the state
employees that are advocating higher license fees for diminishing products?
How about the editors and outdoors writers of the big urban newspapers
grinding out articles on "hybrid ducks" or how to catch perch? How about
someone from Field & Stream, I was told they recently proclaimed themselves
as "pro-wolf"? How about all those ever-so quiet University professors
studying the global warming that is changing the plant life and starving (?)
the moose? I think the only requirement for disbursing millions annually
for hunting and fishing should be that the Board Member live in the large
urban area (where all knowledge resides) and that whatever else it not be
anyone that lives with wolves, is harmed by wolves, hunts, traps, fishes
(sorry Minnesotans but we all know fish hooks hurt and fish are, well,
disappearing) farms, cuts wood for any purpose, and who is acceptable to the
urban elites that think they should run everyone else's lives and determine
where and how the rest of us may live.
To think, all this in one newspaper in less than one week; it is nothing
short of amazing. Remember however that this is simply a microcosm of what
is happening in every other state as I write this.
Like I say, right now in these traditional matters, we (and the rest of the
nation) are Somewhere Between A Prairie Home Companion and Fargo.
Jim Beers
28 February 2011
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.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting at jimbeers7@comcast.net
themselves. Therefore the following Minnesota chronology from one newspaper
is both typical of the nation as a whole and a clear example of the results
of decades of public school and media propaganda coupled with the loss of
state fish and wildlife agencies to federal bureaucracies and the
international environmental and animal rights agendas that control them
today.
Hunters, ranchers, and rural dog owners in the West are learning that wolves
kill lots of sheep, cattle, foals, and other domestic animals. Additionally
they have become keenly aware of all the dogs (watchdogs, herding dogs, bear
and lion dogs, bird dogs, rabbit dogs, pet dogs, and retrievers) that wolves
increasingly kill annually. They are learning that wolves will hang around
rural bus stops (some rural parents even construct "cages" for the kids to
wait in); wolves will follow walking kids to and from rural bus stops;
wolves have harassed women checking rural boxes and walking into their homes
through snowed-in driveways: today, more and more rural westerners realize
wolves are routinely hanging around homes and towns as large ungulates (elk,
moose, and deer) disappear and remaining animals vainly seek refuge near
human habitations in winter and when giving birth. Big game hunting (a
financial staple of western communities for decades) is disappearing as big
game herds disappear due mainly to wolf predation on calves and fawns both
torn from their mother's wombs and run down as they try to escape wolves.
The financial loss to western states and local communities is staggering and
the mere fact that this is perpetrated by a federal government that was
specifically charged to "insure domestic Tranquility" and to "promote the
general Welfare" is nothing short of hideous.
That this same government was created by men that fought, died, and lost
families and fortunes in a Revolutionary War based on a Declaration that
stated:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable (sic, that
means they cannot be revoked or denied by any man or government) Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. ---- That
to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their
just (sic, how is endangering human lives and private property 'just'?)
powers from the consent of the governed" (sic, note it does not say the
consent of the majority or the consent of urban voting blocs or the consent
of the rich and powerful)",
is truly a travesty.
Enter Minnesota.
Today Minnesota is divided between urban environmentalists and animal rights
radicals on the one hand; and farmers, trappers, hunters, fishermen,
tree-cutters, and dog owners (not guardians) on the other. In other words
the same urban/rural split we see on those red/blue political maps after
every national election.
Minnesotans are descended from a strong and proud heritage of lumberjacks,
farmers, dog users, hunters, trappers, fishermen, and robust towns founded
to mine the ground and nurture the renewable natural resources on the land
for future generations. However, like today's New Zealand children and
grandchildren of whalers that currently condemn whaling of certain abundant
whale species, Minnesotans have increasingly swallowed environmental and
animal rights prattling about wolves. Just as New Zealanders now condemn
whaling and then turn around and lament the disappearance of commercial
fisheries (they say) caused by "over-fishing", so too are Minnesotans
currently blaming the disappearance of moose on "global warming" while both
denying facts and burying comments or claims to the contrary. Similarly, as
deadly attacks on dogs, wildlife, and livestock increase and rural residents
are increasingly threatened by "habituated" wolves' as their numbers and
distribution grows; lies about wolves dominate reports and claims from state
bureaucrats and the media.
The fact is that over the past decade, as wolf numbers have grown and any
wolf harassment has been forbidden - moose numbers have steadily declined in
Minnesota just like Yellowstone, Montana, and Idaho moose and elk have
declined with wolf introductions and increases. It is a fact that (just as
was proved since the 1970's by "protected" California cougars that soon made
Sierra Bighorn Sheep Endangered by simply killing the females and young as
they gave birth and/or killing the young calves and lambs as they struggle
in their early days) once wolves or other big predators discover the easy
where and how of killing females and young they do it over and over until
they no longer find them in certain wetlands or mountain meadows in early
spring. It doesn't take very long before wolves can no longer find those
easy pickings and that generally coincides with rural questions about "where
have all the (fill-in-the-blank) gone", closed hunting seasons or "cutting
the number of permits in half" as is happening with Minnesota wolves.
Minnesota was the only Lower 48 state acknowledged to have a resident wolf
population in the late 1960's when the first Endangered SPECIES Act was
passed and the "Minnesota" wolf was among the first federally "Listed"
"SPECIES (?)". The population at that time was estimated, in so far as any
wolf "estimate" can be verified or proven, to be only a few hundred or less.
They were happily maintained by Minnesotans at this tolerable level and
distribution by state support of hunting, trapping, and killing of wolves
that were killing livestock, dogs, or wintering deer, threatening humans, or
to make into a decorative "rug" or winter blanket for the kids.
Subsequent Wolf "targets" in Minnesota grew steadily to 1600 wolves where
this meaningless court number remains as this is being written. Today the
state Dept. of Natural Resources "estimates" 3,500 but if other state fish
and wildlife agencies' wolf "estimates" are any indication, the numbers of
wolves in Minnesota is probably between 4 and 5,000. Early and consistent
"cooperation" with federal demands over 40 years by Minnesota government
reflected a state political temper that has seldom found any federal program
problematic. All of the foregoing has given rise to a local perspective and
public school curriculums that perpetrate wolf fancies like they never
attack (much less kill and eat) humans or that they "balance" nature (i.e.
big game animals once hunters are removed) and "people kill more dogs than
wolves." Indeed our "Wolf Center" in northern Minnesota is often quoted and
pictured in its bucolic setting amid lakes and woodlands.
One week ago, the Minneapolis (our biggest urban center) paper published two
separate items. One cited the rise in deadly wolf attacks on livestock and
dogs throughout the state. No mention of any wildlife losses were mentioned
in the state. There was an almost "throw-away" mention of a "reported" (as
if such a "report" was automatically to be disbelieved) that a Minnesota
woman had been "threatened" by wolves. The second report was that moose (a
recent wildlife restoration success story before wolf numbers began
climbing) herds were declining such that moose permits (only for residents
and only once-in-a-lifetime by drawing) were to be halved. I wrote the
following Letter to the Editor of The Minneapolis Star Tribune:
"What a coincidence! On the same day you report that Minnesota moose
numbers are declining precipitously and that moose hunting permits are to be
halved; you report about the dramatic upswing in Minnesota and Wisconsin
wolves killing livestock, dogs, and beginning to attack people.
Of course the "experts" tell us (and you) that "wolves don't attack people"
and moose are disappearing because of global warming and all those dogs and
livestock don't "belong" out "there" anyway. The associated fact that grouse
hunters and rabbit hunters (they use dogs) are also disappearing because of
video games and obesity is another favorite canard of the University and
government types as well.
Adding insult to injury you report this propaganda as "fact" and then cap it
off with the biggest lie of all; that "delisting" will return authority over
wolves to the state and the current state wildlife "non-managers" that will
miraculously make everything better.
The truth is that "delisting" is a wispy dream. The feds will step back in
at a moment's notice for reasons only they understand. The courts will
reinstitute federal control when the next environmental lawsuit gets into
the "right" (or left as the case may be) court. The state will go along
with the desires of the feds and their cohorts as they have for 40 years.
Nothing short of a serious amendment of the Endangered Species Act will ever
restore State (and Local) authority over these very dangerous and
destructive animals.
The only real danger you failed to mention is the future and real danger to
sheep. That is the sheep in wolf country that read this drivel and believe
it!"
Not surprisingly, the Minneapolis paper did not publish my uncompromisingly
harsh Letter (I find it so hard to compromise and not be mean-spirited).
However what they did publish in the center of the Sunday Op-Ed page below a
demeaning political cartoon about our ex-Governor and one of our finest
Congresspersons was a beautiful photo of a reclining wolf that was so
gosh-darned cute you just wanted to go up to it and scratch it behind the
ears. Accompanying this wolf picture was a lone wolf Letter to the Editor
that said:
"Have wolf attacks increased or has the reporting of those attacks
increased? How many pets are lost to eagles, hawks, and raccoons?
If the issue is really the loss of pets, let me direct attention to the No.
1 predator: humans. According to Animal Ark, the Humane Society and many
other sources, 4 million dogs and cats are euthanized annually in this
country. Of those, 3.6 million are killed for no reason other than they
have no home.
A puppy-mill bill (HF388) has been introduced in the Legislature again this
year. Once again it has dim hopes of passing. If you are unaware, puppy
mills exist for no other reason than to crank out puppies and kittens for
profit. Puppy mill owners differ from respected breeders in significant
ways such as how they care for their animals. If the concern is about
animals, then write about animals."
Well, take that! What else is there to say about wolves?
What passes for public dialogue and truth anymore has nothing to do with
either. Do we blame the schools? The media? Government? Ourselves? I
vote for the last one on the list because only we can change the others.
As we do this, remember how in the movie Fargo (produced by Minnesotans
about Minnesota) everyone thought of the son-in-law of the car dealer as a
harmless nerd and how someone viewed as harmless was responsible for the
horrific deaths of so many people. When we think of these environmentalist
extremists and animal rights radicals as harmless we are making the same
mistake. Government-Protected Wolves killing livestock, dogs, desirable
wildlife, hunting, and threatening rural residents are the exact opposite of
the charge to a federal government authorized by "We the People" in the US
Constitution to protect rural "domestic Tranquility" and the "general
Welfare". When Minnesota wolves pose a deadly threat to rural property,
rural animals, rural children at bus stops, rural childhood activities, and
routine rural chores and lifestyles; and Minnesota government allows the
problem to grow, it is a violation of the Minnesota Constitution Article I,
Section1 - "Government is instituted for the security, benefit and
protection of the people, in whom all political power is inherent, together
with the right to alter, modify or reform government whenever required by
the public good.
Not to be overdone in dark tragedy, the Minneapolis paper has unwittingly
provided some levity in the midst of growing tragedy that is reminiscent of
that famous Minnesota humor of Garrison Keillor on his unforgettable radio
show, A Prairie Home Companion.
The Sunday Sports Pages of the Minneapolis paper reports the following:
- The DNR is requesting Hunting and Fishing License cost increases
across-the-board from a few dollars to $40/year.
Note: This even as they downplay decreasing hunting opportunities for
species like grouse where dogs (often family pets) are in danger from
wolves, wolf numbers and wolf impacts. When I wrote of this about the wolf
threat to bird dogs and rabbit dogs in northern woods I was told that it was
no problem. However, Wisconsin provides hunters that use dogs an 800# to
call to get information about wolf activity hotspots at the moment. State
employees are like old sailors that will promise you anything to get what
they want: in this case our quiet acquiescence until they retire.
- "Reports of dogs chasing deer have become common lately. Dog owners
are subject to a $500 penalty, and dogs chasing big game may be legally
killed."
Note: What about wolves chasing big game? What if I shoot a wolf, thinking
it was a German shepherd or a coyote? So I'm a good guy if I save "big
game" from a dog and a bad guy if I save the same animal from a wolf?
- "A DNR conservation officer reported that wolves chased a
3,000-pound bull through two fences recently near Carlton, where it then got
stuck in a swamp and died."
Note: That is a lot of bull. Someone should tell the owner (or is it
"guardian"?) of the bull about puppy mills and "HF whatever it was". Maybe
they should send him a picture of one of those wolves resting in a pen? I
am sure that if anyone, even the owner, shot one the wolves that drove the
bull through two fences and then into a slough to die he would be liable for
prosecution resulting in a large fine, jail, imprisonment, a felony
conviction, loss of voting rights, and loss of gun rights; but is that
enough? What about registering them? Shouldn't we demand that convicted
wolf harassers register so that their neighbors know? I think we need a new
law. I mean, if bothering the poor wolves were to catch on, why the poor
wolves might be forced to abandon chasing and eating both dead and alive
"3,000-pound bulls". It could then force them to begin (we know they "never"
do such a thing now) killing baby moose and mommy deer giving birth or even
leaving the mommy moose with her hind end torn out and still alive as they
devour her offspring just like they do elsewhere around the world. Why it
might even make them mad (with or without rabies) and they might "threaten"
some rural resident or even kill them as they have done since time
immemorial everywhere else all around the world.
In case you haven't quite grasped the humor in all this, the Sunday
Minneapolis paper "B" Section headline offers us a glimpse of how the same
old "Carny" tricks keep working over and over wherever you go. Just like
every other state, Minnesotans feel they have nothing to learn from repeated
national scams and their hidden agendas.
Two years ago Minnesotans approved an earmarked sales tax increase that
would increase hunting and fishing among several other things. The
publicity for it (that almost, but not quite, got me worked up to support
it) featured baby ducks in muddy dragline tracks (someone had just drained
the duckling's marsh) and pheasant roosters scooting through grass and corn.
It was enough to make you want to impose an even bigger tax increase on
yourself!
I remained skeptical however. The environmental extremists and animal rights
radicals had been justifying their national and state activities for too
long like this. For instance, today rural Florida hunters and fishermen are
all sporting really neat license plates on their pickups of deer and fish
nice enogh to have been lifted off some 1920's sporting calendars: trouble
is the plates were sponsored by and help fund the likes of HSUS,DOW and
other such ANTI-hunting and ANTI-fishing organizations! Like Lenin
mistakenly believed, they think they can hang us with our own rope.
Last years' disbursement of funding from the "earmarked" Minnesota sales tax
funds went to hunting and fishing projects but also to urban paths and
"doggie parks". This year, according to our Sunday paper, several Board
Members are being challenged to resign because they volunteer for some of
the hunter organizations getting funds like Pheasants Forever and a "Refuge
Trust". Thus will the hunting and management advocates on the Board be let
go one after another to be replaced by () ?
I know, how about the lady that thinks we need stiffer laws restricting dog
and cat ownership to take our minds off wolves? How about the state
employees that are advocating higher license fees for diminishing products?
How about the editors and outdoors writers of the big urban newspapers
grinding out articles on "hybrid ducks" or how to catch perch? How about
someone from Field & Stream, I was told they recently proclaimed themselves
as "pro-wolf"? How about all those ever-so quiet University professors
studying the global warming that is changing the plant life and starving (?)
the moose? I think the only requirement for disbursing millions annually
for hunting and fishing should be that the Board Member live in the large
urban area (where all knowledge resides) and that whatever else it not be
anyone that lives with wolves, is harmed by wolves, hunts, traps, fishes
(sorry Minnesotans but we all know fish hooks hurt and fish are, well,
disappearing) farms, cuts wood for any purpose, and who is acceptable to the
urban elites that think they should run everyone else's lives and determine
where and how the rest of us may live.
To think, all this in one newspaper in less than one week; it is nothing
short of amazing. Remember however that this is simply a microcosm of what
is happening in every other state as I write this.
Like I say, right now in these traditional matters, we (and the rest of the
nation) are Somewhere Between A Prairie Home Companion and Fargo.
Jim Beers
28 February 2011
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.
Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting at jimbeers7@comcast.net