Steven M. Busch: Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

By Steven M. Busch

February 15, 2006

Thanks Jim (Beers), for keeping the topic of wolf re-introduction alive, (Wolves. Wow, its Successful!

I think you hit on most of the main points, but there is a bit more to say. I've been writing on this and related topics for over 10 years. Please note: The radical environmentalists (greens) are not the enemy here. They are simply being used as a tool. The globalists are the ones who have marketed and forced the implementation of this strategy, which is designed to remove any last outpost (resource) for American independence/sovereignty. In regards to wolf reintro, there is no concern about the environment here, never has been. Like you said, it's all about people control.

As you know, historically, elk never Wintered in the high back-country regions of the Rocky Mountains, Bitterroots, etc., where deep snows and narrow hoof structure don't mix. These areas were Summer feeding territory only, and, historically, as soon as the snow fell, wolves dug dens, and the elk moved out onto the windswept plains, where they formed vast free roaming herds. Indeed, historically, with herds of buffalo numbering in the millions and herds of elk numbering in the hundreds of thousands, the plains areas surrounding our mountainous regions was described by early Americans as a sight akin to Africa's Serengeti. These areas, adjacent to and surrounding our mountainous regions, became our richest and most productive agricultural and ranch land (the corn/bread/beef belt). Elk feed stations, such as those set up in Jackson Hole, Central Idaho, etc., were developed to help elk survive, since their migration patterns had been interrupted due to agriculture and human development. Now, those same elk feed stations are convenient places for wolves to set up their dens. In Central Idaho, most of these feed stations are now devoid of elk.

The greens think elk migration patterns will be re-established once rural economies (the agriculture base, i.e. forestry, farming, and ranching) is crushed, and people are forced off the land. (See Wilderness Project.) They hope to use the wolf's destruction of limited-range ungulate populations to force the establishment of "historical migration patterns," and open up huge tracts of rural America as "migration corridors" and zones. But again, the globalists are simply using that vision for their own purposes. The power brokers aren't concerned about vast elk herds roaming about freely. No, their aim is control of people, which is only possible if all available resources are under their direct authority.

Bottom line: It is no coincidence that our most patriotic, conservative Americans tend to live in the more rural "red states," or as in my case, in the more conservative (rural) Eastern side of a very blue Washington State. The re-introduction of wolves will certainly curtail, then eliminate, hunting as an option for the most independent minded rural Americans. The elimination of an independent food source removes a resource and way of life that could hinder the implementation of a totalitarian globalist regime. The elimination of the small cattle and sheep rancher, the small farmer, the forest product worker, indeed, the elimination of any kind of business that allows people to live in rural areas, is an essential part of the plan.

And, don't forget to thank George W. for a huge expansion in the Federal Fish and Wildlife Services law enforcement budget. That act is designed to insure that folks who have their eyes open don't take things into their own hands. In my book, Bush is just another globalist dupe.