JIM BEERS: WOLVES & THE 2ND AMENDMENT

From: Jim Beers
Sent: 3/29/2008 8:09:12 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Subject: Wolves & the 2nd Amendment


Wolves & the 2nd Amendment

Folks,

This is a copy of something I just sent to Charles Kay, a great biologist
and friend. Since I just remembered that Charles is probably in Africa, I
thought I would send this around.

Remember that the Director of the US Fish and Wildlife Service under Clinton
oversaw the theft of $45 to 60 Million from the hunting and fishing excise
taxes. Those funds that were intended by law FOR STATE FISH AND WILDLIFE
PROGRAMS were NEVER REPLACED AND OUR STATE AGENCIES NEVER REQUESTED THAT THEY BE REPLACED (don't want to offend the boys and girls passing out all those federal grants). The stolen funds were used to pay for the capture,
transportation, conditioning, and release of WOLVES IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL
PARK to 'seed' wolves in the Upper Rockies. That Director established The
Defenders of Wildlife as the erstwhile federal "partner" responsible for
"paying" for wolf depredations. This was and is merely a smokescreen to
fend off complaints of the harm of wolves, only a small amount of livestock
loss was ever remunerated and dogs and game herds and other losses were
simply unavoidable casualties of this "war". That ex-FWS Director went to
work in a top job with The Defenders of Wildlife as soon as the law
permitted (The National Wildlife Federation paid her a big salary while she
had to cool her heels after resigning when the Republicans won the
Presidential election). As you read the e-mails below, remember she still
directs this wolf business for The "Defenders", lobbies her former
associates in FWS, and, I would guess, is a player in the upcoming election
where if she is lucky (and we are not) she will be reincarnated in some
other position in a "high place".

Hopefully you may find this worthwhile. FYI

Jim Beers


----- Original Message -----

From: Jim Beers

To: Charles Kay ;

Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 3:54 PM

Subject: Re: Wolfs and The 2nd Amendment

Charles,

I believe the entire predator "push" from grizzly increases in range and
numbers; to limiting methods of take of cougars (dogs, on-sight as
depredating, seasons); to federal requirements (in the works as grant
requirements) to make cougars invading places like Iowa, Kansas, etc.
Protected Native Species and not classified as unprotected so that any take
is difficult; to keeping black bears on the Threatened List in LA and FL
(and adding other states opportunistically) and claiming large tracts of
Florida as "Florida Panther" Critical Habitat --- all are seriously
jeopardizing the future of our 2nd Amendment Rights.

Not only will game numbers (and hence seasons and harvest and license
revenue and ancillary expenditures) decrease: areas open to hunting will
decrease and hunter partcicpation will necessarily decrease. Then there is
the SAFETY EFFECT. Hunters that leave a kill to get equipment to haul it
out or to get help will increasingly return to a predator on the kill.
Hunters using bows for big game or turkey hunters or predator callers, all
sit still and watch INTO the wind. There will be more run-ins with
un-harassed grizzlies and cougars and black bears as food dwindles or as
rabies or other disease outbreaks ravage the increasing predator population.
What hunter will dare to sit and call after hearing how some guy was
attacked FROM BEHIND by a grizzly or jumped by a wolf (a wolf once jumped a
Russian lumberjack from behind WHILE HE WAS RUNNING THE CHAINSAW!)? What
parent will let their kid go our after school to hunt alone after reading
these accounts of attacks?

All of this will shrink the number of hunters and urban hunters especially.
While the rural residents (both hunters and non-hunters) will increasingly
want, need, and use guns - the anti-gunners will have a big leg-up as fewer
and fewer urban folks hunt and become less vociferous in challenging the
take-away activities of anti-gunners and urban mayors. Bottom line is a
shrinking contingent of gun users and gun defenders with a concomitant
increase in the need for guns in a shrinking rural American population that
is more and more subject to the imaginary whims of urban voting blocs.
Result? More rural residents from families and retirees to
resource-dependent businesses and other entrepeneurs leaving rural environs.

As an old bureaucrat it looks good for federal growth and bureaucrats that
will have less opposition to buying more and more of rural America for
everything from re-establishing Native Pre-Columbian Ecosystems to
establishing "Corridors" and "Roadless" "Wildernesses" as more rural areas
are evacuated. The only "winners" will be bureaucrats, politicians, and the
modern rich land-buying aristocrats. The environmentalists and the animal
rights radicals never "win" because they will never be "happy" until they
are the only ones left and that will never happen.

I am reminded of that great line by Eli Wallach as the Mexican bandit chief
in The Magnificent Seven. As Yul Brynner invites Wallach to move on and
leave the villagers alone, Wallach snarls "If God did not want them sheared,
he would not have made them sheep!". For too long we have been sheep.

Jim Beers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Subject: Wolfs and The 2nd Amendment

No question that you are on to the real intent behind rocky mountain wolf
introduction. The real objective by the pro-wolf groups is to reduce and
eventually take away hunting opportunities, thus paving the way for
diminishing our second amendment right to bear arms. Thanks for informative
views and we will stay in touch.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Wolfs and The 2nd Ammendment

Hi Guys,

A friend forwarded me you URL today. My name is xxx I live in Powell, WY.
Like you over there, our elk herds are rapidly disappearing. I am working on
a freelance article commissioned by Predator Magazine. The subject of the
article is the politics of wolf reintroduction. In particular, the
connection between Defenders of Wildlife and Handgun Control, Inc, now known
as the Brady Campaign.

As you likely know, Defenders is one of the main players in this ongoing
circus. They have funded most of th ecourt cases that have kept and will
keep wolves listed for the forseeable future. in 2004 they won two key
decisions, one in Federal District Court in Oregon, on ein Vermont.
Basically these two judges found that so long as there are no wolves in
Oregon/Washington, they are still endangered in our area. These decisions
were based on the way the US F&W drew the wold management boundaries, and
the way that the Endangered Species Act spells out management requirements.

On the 28th of this month, the US Fish & Wildlife Service will "delist"
wolves. The day after that, DoW et al, will file a montion for injunction
which will likely be granted. In order for delisting to proceed, the
wildlife management groups in ID, MT, and WY fish &game will have to appeal
theses precendents in Federal Appellate court. If they are successful there,
DoW will appeal that decision. According to my sources inside th eWY F&G
they expect that will take 2-3 years. By then the damage will be done.
Unless the states can have the original decisions overturned in Appelate
court, wolves will remain protected far into th efuture. As you know, we are
already standing on the brink of "too late".

Wolves cannot be reintroduced in eastern Washignton, because DoW was able to
have the Mountain Caribou in that area listed as endangered. So, wolves
cannot be reintroduced there until the caribou populations have recovered.
That will never happen because caribou don't want to be there in the first
place.

So here's the Catch. The way that U&S F&G has drawn their boundaries between
elk species, if DoW can manage to get the Rocky Mountain subspecies listed
as only "threatened", they can stop sport hunting of that subspecies
throughout its entire range!!

What better way to cut the financial legs out from under both the NRA and
State fish and game organizations.

The connection between wolves and anti-gun groups comes in th eform of one
Charles J. Orasin. For more than 15 years he was the rabid VP of Operations
for Handgun Control, Inc. IN a flurry of Congressional hearings regarding
shady fund raising practices in 2000, he disappeared from HCI and reappeared
at Defenders of Wildlife as their VP of Operations. Should we believe that
he just abandoned his life's work to kill the 2nd Ammendment to go save
wolves and sea turtles?

If you look at the string of Federal Court rulings they won after he got to
DoW you see and alarming parttern. Did you know that 10-12 years before the
wolf planting recovery programs were started, elk were transplanted into
areas that exactly match the original wolf reintroduction proposals?

Never make the mistake of thinking that reintroduction of wolves has
anything to do with "balancing" the ecosystem. For 6 years, the US Fish &
Wildlife Service fought Wyoming's management plan tooth and nail. Seemingly
over night, they reversed their position. Why?

In 2003, I read an article that said the National Park Service was
considering a study on the impact of wolves on ungulate populations. When
you call and ask them about it now, you get a lot of er....uh....well... we
..ah.. never did the study...."Why not?" er ...uh...well... we don't see an
impact high enough to warrant spending the money on it. Yet, The studies in
Wyoming and Idaho tell a different story altogether. I believe it is the
alarming results of state studies that flipped the US F&G literally over
night.

The 2007 study done by the WY G&F shows that 4 of Wyoming elk hers are close
to calf survival rates that will not support its population WITHOUT growing
predation from wolves/grizzlies/lions.

Predator Magazione is the only publication that has the hair to have a go at
putting out the news that the Endangered Species Act is being manipulated by
DoW and their ilk, not to save species, but to do away with the 2nd
Ammendment. MOSt folks think I'm just a crackpot, conspiracy nut. But, WHY
did MR. Gun Control go to work for DoW? Why did their strategy change so
suddenly upon his arrival. I can find but one answer.

I sent your URL to Ralph Lemeyer at Predator Magazine. He was asking me to
find some wolf kill photos for the article. I think you guys have that
covered! I hope we can get together sometime to compare notes.

Best Regards, and keep Hammerin 'em!

- 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.







This information and much more that you need to know about the ESA, the Klamath River Basin, and private property rights can be found at The Klamath Bucket Brigade's website - http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/ -- please visit today.