In spite of murder, the Mexican wolf population increases

The pro-Mexican wolf community is waxing on about the increase in wolf population as determined by the recent wolf count: The number is now up to 58.

That would be 58 wolves counted, of course - not the number that actually exists in the wild, which is a higher number than that. There are - and have been for years - an unknown but strongly existing uncollared wolf population, one that isn't constantly messed with by the wolf program just because the uncollared wolves can't be so easily located.

Recently Mexican wolf supporter Nancy Kaminski posted online "Through it all, the murders, natural disasters, deaths by vehicle, Game and Fish Departments running for the hills and a shortage of possible mates for dispersers, the population of Mexican wolves grew in 2011. "

Don't you just love the choice of words? Given that the definition of murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another, one wonders what human being Kaminski was referring to that was murdered, since unlawful wolf killings are just that: the killing of a wolf unlawfully. But how silly of me to expect pro-wolf people to use unbiased language, or have an unbiased, scientific approach, to their commentary.

Wouldn't it be ironic, though, if the reason for the increase in wolves might simply be because of Catron County and other efforts to get the wolf program to stop releasing habituated wolves, to remove habituated wolves from the wild instead of trap and transport elsewhere to be someone else's problem, and to get the State of New Mexico to withdraw from the program? Wouldn't it be a joke on Ms. Kaminski and other wolf lovers if maybe the reason that the Mexican wolf population this year has increased is simply because the wolf program people have been forced to stop screwing so much with the wolves, giving wolves a better chance to act like normal wild animals? After all, it is a fact of science that frequent handling of wild animals stresses them and ruins their chances for reproductive success and thriving in the wild.

But heaven forbid the Mexican wolf program should be based on science. Not when there's all that murder going on.

EnviroSpin

Copyright © 2011 C. R. Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com June 24, 2011

Spin is a term used to describe a process of twisting strands of fiber together to form thread, yarn, rope and such. It is also used to describe twisting information in a way so as to create a new description of reality, a new thread of thought so to speak. At its darkest, spin is a way of manipulating the thought of others as a means to an end that the others might not agree with if they were told the same story with all the facts unspun.

Let me give you a couple examples of this thing I call envirospin, taken from a pair of news releases put out just today by Wild Earth Guardians and Defenders of Wildlife. Both of them basically are some quick spinning of facts to “prove” that environmentalists aren’t to blame for the massive catastrophic wildfires now occurring around the US.

WEG’s envirospin is in the form of a kind of sleight of hand in their news release, “Lack of Logging Isn’t To Blame in Massive Forest Fires”. Here we have the statement that there have been “few lawsuits challenging sensible fuel reduction on the national forests in the last decade”. On the surface that’s of course true – but only because a) all the suing was done before the last decade, b) the definition of “sensible” fuel reduction is defined by the environmental groups themselves, and c) this decade’s “few lawsuits” doesn’t include all the habitat litigation that has the same effect, since endangered species lawsuits stop work in the forest just as effectively as logging lawsuits do.

Few lawsuits maybe, but to make sure everyone toes the line, the various environmental groups send a representative to every planning meeting to make sure that all understand the threat. It’s kind of like the mob sending a hit man to your restaurant for lunch to remind you how risky it would be to not pay your protection. So yes, not so many lawsuits about logging these days if you believe the envirospin – but that doesn’t mean that the lack of logging isn’t to blame.

DoW ‘s email news release this morning, “Wildlife Alert”, is another envirospin magic trick. DoW says that humanity is the root problem, because people cause climate change (note that environmentalists don’t use “global warming” any more - too many freezing people are dubious of that concept). DoW snuck wildfires into the news release, hoping that no one would notice their clumping of “forest health” with all the other natural-type stuff like droughts, storms and floods. This unbelievable spin would have the reader believe that human management of forests, particularly environmentalist dictated management practices, is not a factor of catastrophic wildfire. Oh yeah, humans are the cause – envirospin tells us that humans are the source of everything bad – but environmentalist humans are not the problem in any way.

Envirospin is interesting in how similar it is to other serial criminal activity. The perpetrators get more and more confident and less and less circumspect. They figure no one can catch them out. They begin to believe they’re invulnerable.

Oh, I don’t think so.

Mexican Wolf Impacts on Ranch Economy

“Adaptive management” has been a common phrase used for the Mexican wolf recovery program, presumably because scientific data would be used to guide management decisions.... However, there has been very little scientific research on the Mexican wolf since its release into the wild, and virtually none has been made available to local producers to help them manage their livestock in the presences of wolves.

From New Mexico State University's Range Improvement Task Force Report 80: Reestablishment of the Mexican Gray Wolf: The Economics of Depredation (PDF file)

The New Environmentalism

Environmental groups have learned a new tactic: Now they accept bribes get paid off work with potential defendants to not block projects via lawsuits. Brilliant. $22 million dollars buys a project two new environmental groups - more money for "environmentalism" and the project still goes through.

Does this look a little fishy to anyone else? Is there any environmental group left that actually does environmental improvement?

"Western Watersheds Project and the Oregon Natural Desert Association agreed not to challenge the El Paso pipeline project in exchange for establishing two new nonprofit funds… The Sagebrush Habitat Conservation Fund, established with Western Watersheds, got $15 million from El Paso. A fund set up with the Oregon Natural Desert Association got $7 million. The money will go for conservation easements and land purchases and to voluntarily retire grazing permits."

Read about it: www.idahostatesman.com/

Tadpole rescue

(Two days later) No, I did not rescue any tadpoles, but my rain gauge says I got about a quarter of an inch this afternoon - enough to fill up the main rut in the road to overflowing. Amazingly enough, at least some of those tadpoles made it to swim another day. What a beautiful demonstration of the resiliency of Mother Nature and spadefoot toads, as well as a lesson in the wisdom of evolution. Those survivors are truly tough, theirs are the genes that will contribute to species survival... if the rains keep coming.

When Frogs Go Wrong

Copyright © 2010 C. R. Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com

I got to my gate this afternoon and noticed that the muddy water in the biggest rut had just about dried up. In the few shallow pools left, tadpoles were wiggling around, struggling to survive and sure to fail because there’s no rain coming today or probably even tomorrow.

Some toadly mom made a bad choice.

OK, before I go any further, I know some of you are going to tell me that the tadpoles in the ruts and arroyos of my ranch aren’t going to grow up to be frogs, since they’re spadefoot toads. But guess what – spadefoot toads aren’t even true toads, but are a burrowing frog after all. Confused yet? That’s OK, so are the rest of us.

Back to Mrs. Spadefoot Toad, who made a bad choice for her tads. There were a bunch of those little critters, some frantically wiggling in the few piddling pools of water remaining, some already stranded in mud, their gold bellies exposed, their little mouths open and closing, gasping for air. Well, not air, I guess, but water to flow over their gills. A sad sight, I’ll tell you.

I confess yesterday I rescued three or four stranded tadpoles from another puddle. I felt monumentally stupid, but I was very pleased to see them right themselves and wiggle off, apparently no worse for the wear. I poked at the few desiccated-looking bodies left in the mud but there was no response. I don’t know how many froglets had been growing in that puddle, but it had been a lot more than just the few I’d rescued.

Who’d have thought that this morning's big water-filled rut, home to so many more tadpoles than yesterday’s puddle, would lose six inches of water in just the few hours since I’d left earlier?

I was formulating a plan of action: Operation Toadlift. I’d need something like a plastic cup to scoop them up – the soft tadpole bodies might stick to the sides of an aquarium fish net. I’d need a bucket. I’d need some mosquito repellent – the little bloodsuckers sure do breed when the monsoon rains come. I looked around for a suitable arroyo with plenty of water – after all, I didn’t want to be doing this over and over.

And then I stopped. What the heck was I doing, interfering with nature like this?

The spadefoot toad mom produces hundreds – even a thousand or more – eggs each mating season. The tadpoles in my arroyos and ruts have just a month to eat, grow and transform into little froglets. They eat plant stuff, bugs and other invertebrates - critters without spines - including each other (but interesting enough, apparently not their siblings). For all they look like squishy, spineless, fragile things, Mother Nature has made them pretty darned tough; still, most of any batch of eggs doesn’t make it to adult froghood.

Of course, if every one of those hundreds of spadefoot toad tads survived, walking around my ranch would be a pretty icky proposition, what with the ground being carpeted with hundreds of thousands of froglets hopping around. When Mrs. Spadefoot Toad lays that many eggs it’s her gamble that at least a few will make it – the more that do, the more the likelihood of her genes being passed on. It’s the way nature works with frogs and toads and pretty much everything that doesn’t take part in the raising of its offspring: You have loads of babies and some survive, or you have only a few - or even just one at a time - if you will be there to care for them till they can care for themselves.

I’m sure you know about the survival of the fittest thing –the weak are weeded out and the strong live to reproduce, ensuring (as sure as anything can be in the world) that the species survives.

Note that the species is the survivor – not the individual. Mother Nature didn’t intend for every tadpole to survive – only the strongest, the most fit for the environmental conditions. My saving four tadpoles might have made me feel a little better, but it probably wasn’t in the best interests of spadefoot toad species survival. Mother Nature always has the last say, though - not only did our Mrs. Spadefoot Toad, who laid her eggs in a shallow rut in a driveway, make a bad choice, but my Operation Toadlift came to nothing either. The second puddle will be dried up by now and all those tadpoles – include my “rescued” ones – will dry up, too. There won’t be any risk of passing on the kind of genes that makes for bad decisions about which body of water to lay eggs in, so that’s good for the species.

And maybe that’s a little lesson about environmentalism for a do-gooder, too.

Government Gone Whacko - USFS

Not that most of us need any more proof our US government has gone around the bend, but here's one for your consideration: USFS El Dorado National Forest, Georgetown District, has slapped a $4,230.53 "recovery fee" for processing the Gold Country Endurance Riders' permit application.

The USFS says they estimate it will take in excess of 50 hours to do that processing. Let's see - $4,230.53 fee for an application that has been processed by that same office for the past 17 years - same ride, same trails, same camp? Does this seem like padding the bill to you?

Has USFS gone whacko?

Mexican wolf lawsuit notice

AMERICANS FOR PRESERVATION OF WESTERN ENVIRONMENT
PO BOX 566
RESERVE NM 87830
Ed Wehrheim, Chairman

Contact: Ed Wehrheim, Chairman FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6687
Email: apwe01@gmail.com

ALLIANCE THREATENS TO SUE US FWS AND OTHERS OVER MEXICAN WOLF
Claims violation of NEPA provisions for Endangered Species Act

RESERVE, N.M. Americans for Preservation of the Western Environment, the Gila Livestock Growers Association, the Board of County Commissioners of Catron County, New Mexico and other plaintiffs have jointly sent notification of an intent to file suit against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of the Interior, and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, for management actions and policies that violate the provisions of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Plan and the Final Rule issued under Section 10(j) of the Endangered Species.

The letter states that instead of following the procedures and process set forth in the Final Rule issued under Section 10(j), the Fish & Wildlife Service, the Department of Interior and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish have embarked on a procedure of developing ad hoc management practices and procedures for dealing with depredations and removals, all of which have been put in place without following appropriate procedures under the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Additionally, the letter states that the agencies’ demonstrate intent to continue to violate the express findings in the FEIS and Final Rule.

“The point of this letter is to give the agencies the opportunity to come into compliance,” said Ed Wehrheim, Chairman of Americans for Preservation of Western Environment, a citizen-based group claiming overwhelming support throughout New Mexico.

“In a time when we’re cutting back on teachers, health care and other vital programs, the Mexican wolf program, which is now costing over $400,000 per wolf, is insane.”



# # #

Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation Turns Up Heat on Pro-Wolf Groups

Pro-wolf groups were admittedly “surprised and disappointed” when the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation publicly challenged their mischaracterizations of the real impacts of wolves in the northern Rockies and are feeling even more heat today. Their recent call for a truce has been met with a scathing letter from RMEF President and CEO David Allen, who says Defenders of Wildlife, Western Wildlife Conservancy and others are party to what may become “one of the worst wildlife management disasters since the destruction of bison herds in the 19th Century.”

Allen said, “These animal rights groups seem to think that every individual wolf is worth filing another lawsuit to protect, but the decimation of local elk herds is unimportant. What is truly ironic is these folks claim protection of the Canadian gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act. However these wolves are not endangered. There are thousands of them throughout North America. The ESA is being manipulated far beyond its intended purpose.” One can find the text of both letters here:

Letter from Defenders of Wildlife to RMEF

Letter from RMEF to Defenders of Wildlife

Factual examples cited in Allen’s recent letter:

• The Northern Yellowstone elk herd trend count has dropped from some 19,000 elk in 1995 before the introduction of the Canadian Gray wolf to just over 6,000 elk in 2008. At the same time the wolf numbers in this same area are on a steady increase.


• Yellowstone’s Madison Firehole elk herd trend count has fallen from 700 to 108.


• The Gallatin Canyon elk herd trend count between Bozeman and Big Sky, Mont., has declined from 1,048 to 338.


• Wolf numbers in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming have far exceeded the original goals of 30 breeding pairs and 300 total wolves. Population estimates now exceed 1,700 wolves. And yet and others want to push the total up to 2,000 to 5,000 wolves.
  
• Studies show that wolves kill up to 23 elk per wolf from November through April alone or up to 40,000 elk in just six months. A smaller but still significant number are killed from May through October; with total annual elk kills by wolves just for food potentially greater than 50,000 at the present level of wolf population. This accounts for only the elk needed for food, not surplus killing, which are elk killed by wolves and not eaten, which also occurs. The majority of all these kills are not elk that are sick or old.


• Elk calf survival rates where wolves (and bears) are present are extremely low in specific herds, resulting in a survival rate of 10 percent or less—too low to sustain the herd over the long-term. RMEF points out this is a major issue as elk numbers going into the future, where wolves are concentrated, will suffer even greater losses and replacement becomes out of balance.

“Pro-wolf groups like to cite statewide elk numbers because it glosses over the ongoing annihilation of local elk herds,” said Allen. “They like to say that elk and wolves evolved together and would coexist now if man would just leave them alone, which completely ignores the fact that this is no longer the Old West and millions of us live here now. Habitat is shrinking at a rapid pace and the wildlife that lives here must be carefully managed. Man must manage wildlife and we have done so very successfully for over a century. We’re long past the day when wolf populations can be left unchecked. Right now this is simply a wolf amnesty program and the results are becoming alarming.”

“Managing wildlife in the courts, as opposed to science and the proven expertise of state conservation agencies, is a recipe for continued disaster,” stated Allen “These groups do not want states to manage the wolves as they manage other wildlife including predators. Why? It is curious that Defenders of Wildlife and others now boast about the statewide elk management numbers, which are managed by the states; but they do not trust those same states to manage wolves. Again, one should ask why?”

In late February, Allen sent letters to legislators and newspapers across the West calling out Defenders of Wildlife, Western Wildlife Conservancy and others for misleading the public through disingenuous use of current data on wolves and elk. In late March, group representatives accused RMEF of polarizing sportsmen on the wolf issue, and, ironically, to ask for collaboration rather than conflict.

In his letter Allen challenged Defenders of Wildlife and the others to meet face to face. “ I invite you to come to my office and let’s personally resolve this issue for the sake of those responsible hunters and those responsible non-hunters. Enough of the legal maneuvering and posturing, let’s resolve this now,” Allen said in his letter.

“We will collaborate with those who believe in sound wildlife management, not promoting one species over others for what we believe are hidden agendas. There is no one proposing annihilation of the wolves, yet Defenders and others like to act as if such a threat exists. It helps their fundraising efforts but does little to solve the issue. Constantly moving the goal line and ignoring the future consequences are just two reasons we do not collaborate with such groups,” Allen added.

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is located at 5705 Grant Creek Rd, Missoula, MT 59808.

Global Warming or Global Hoax?

Professor Phil Jones, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that for the past 15 years there has been no "statistically significant" global warming.

Jones told the BBC that the recent warming trend that began in 1975 is not at all different than two other planetary warming phases since 1850, that there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995, and that it is possible the Medieval Warm Period was indeed a global phenomenon thereby making the temperatures seen in the latter part of the 20th century by no means unprecedented. He also said that the cooling trend since 2002 is also not statistically significant.

Given his core position in what global warming alarmists are now forced to refer to as "climage change" (it's hard to argue for global warming when everyone is freezing), you have to wonder when the whole scam will just fall apart. Maybe it's time for those environmental litigation groups to get sued themselves, for using false science to push their agendas. That would be after we all get done shoveling ourselves out of the snow.

Facts vs Advocacy

Check out the article at Western Institute for Study of the Environment for some facts on a recent editorial in an AZ newspaper on the Mexican wolf, as opposed to the rabid advocacy of the pro-wolf folks.

2nd Annual Cowboy Dinner and Dance

2nd annual Cowboy Dinner/Dance Feb 20, Cliff NM http://catroncounty.blogspot.com/

Climate Change - deja vu

Gee whiz - society has such short memory. You'd think that nothing happened in the world except what's in living memory. Check out this article for a reality check on "global warming". We've seen it before, gang - and not that long ago.

Global Warming Deja Vu

APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION

AMERICANS FOR PRESERVATION OF WESTERN ENVIRONMENT, INC.
PO BOX 612
RESERVE NM 87830
Ed Wehrheim, Chair

Contact: Ed Wehrheim FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6687
Email: info@amprowest.org


APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
Group Asks Is Mexican Wolf Really Worth The Cost

RESERVE, N.M. On August 11, 2009, the Tucson-based environmental litigation group, Center For Biological Diversity (CBD), filed a petition with Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

“The petition calls for taking the Mexican wolf off of its current experimental, non-essential” status and putting it on fully endangered status,” said Ed Wehrheim, Chair of Americans for Preservation of Western Environment (APWE), a citizen-based New Mexico non-profit corporation. APWE was formed in 2008 in response to the outrage of New Mexico and Arizona residents and business owners over the callous disregard for the welfare and safety of human beings by the Mexican Wolf Program.

“CBD also wants a critical habitat designation for the wolves,” Wehrheim said. “This means expansion of the existing designated Mexican wolf area, closure of our trails and roads, denying human access, and hunting and grazing restrictions. In other words, our public lands will be closed to the public. ”

The 22 page petition (with additional 10 pages of citations) claims that the Mexican wolf’s historic range is not precisely known, and that wolves can live anywhere that hosts an adequate prey base of ungulates, yet also claims that these wolves occur in an unusual and unique ecological setting.

“The only unusual and unique setting for the Mexican wolves is that this is a low human population area, so CBD figures that the people don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “Americans for Preservation of Western Environment intends to set CBD straight on that issue.”

APWE’s first annual meeting is being held in Reserve, NM on Saturday, October 10, 2009, at 10 a.m. at the Reserve Community Center. APWE’s board will present an accounting of its work on behalf of the people who live in the Mexican wolf recovery area over the past year, and talk about plans for future actions. Everyone is welcome to attend.

“It’s not as if humans weren’t here, as if humans don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “We’re citizens, we have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just like anyone else. We don’t intend to be run over by environmental litigation groups like CBD.”

"After ten years, more than $400,000 per wolf and untold damage to our communities, they’re trying to blame their own failure with the Mexican wolf program on us, the people who live here in the program area," Wehrheim said.


# # #

What's Truth Got To Do With It?

Defenders of Wildlife is using pity for three legged wolves to raise funds. They say in a "news" release: "Will you help us protect the Middle Fork wolves? Your tax-deductible donation today will help us."

Pay attention here folks! DoW is saying your deduction will help THEM, not the wolves. Those three legged wolves of the Middle Fork pack (that are not too lame to stop killing cattle)? One lost her leg because Fish & Wildlife Service amputated it after an elk kicked the wolf. The other probably was a FWS trapping, too. In fact, FWS has damaged a number of wolves in traps - and I bet you thought they used "have-a-hearts" when they trapped those wolves. Nope. Jaw traps. Your government in action.

Don't forget: The wolf program traps wolves routinely for all kinds of reasons - they just won't let the poor critters alone. They trap to vaccinate them, to change the batteries on their collars, and they trap them when they want to catch up the pups to raise them in captivity.

DoW would have you think that wolves need protecting from mean ranchers who hurt and trap them. But really, wolves need protection from the wolf program more than anything else.

And the public needs protecting from organizations like DoW, that take your money by appealing to your heartstrings. Not to be confused with presenting the facts.

Who’s The Terrorist?

copyright (c) 2009 CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
Also published in Glenwood Gazette Sept. 2009 (Gale Moore, pub., Silver City NM)

The other day I got thinking about terrorism. So much of our lives these days are dictated by the fight against terrorism. We’ve all come to accept the invasive tactics of the US Government everywhere around us in the name of security. We even have a branch of government, Homeland Security, that has in a short time secreted its tentacles into everything in order to keep us safe from terrorists. We have to accept wands and pat-downs and X-rays of our person and our belongings in airports and public buildings, we have travel restrictions and passports to visit neighboring friendly ally countries, phone taps, email taps, credit checks, security cameras on street corners, photo-traffic citations on and on, all in the name of public safety.

Of course, doesn’t this all assume terrorism is something external to the US, that it comes from bad guys from other countries who want to render the US helpless?

I got thinking about how a bunch of bad guys that were really organized and very well financed could most effectively pull the US or any country down. (I want to point out to Homeland Security that I read a lot of fiction and much of what I’m writing here is already in print don’t come busting my doors down while telling me free speech doesn’t count because of the Patriot Act). Anyway, it has become clear to me that, logically, terrorism really would be just a first step. A kind of softening up a country for the real blows that will bring it down. The KO, if you will.

What would weaken a country more than flying planes into landmark buildings? Homeland Security and/or the media would have us believe that it would be nuking a big city. But really, would that take down the US? Were a resilient bunch of citizens I think that wiping out LA (for instance) would just make us all really, really mad once we got over being really, really sad (think of how sad and mad - wed be at losing our Famous Faces in such an attack).

No, I think what would really work to weaken a country would be to literally weaken its people. And it seems to me that the traditional ways of weakening a people would be just as effective now as they have been throughout history: Starvation and disease and isolation.

Here’s the thing: People who eat well are healthy and they don’t get sick as easily. So, if you think about it, wouldn’t the smartest thing be, if you were terrorists and wanted to take down the US, to destroy the food supply, thereby make people dependent on bad food so they’ll get sick more easily?

My thinking goes like this: The US agricultural base is being destroyed by factory farming and by more and more restrictions on small farming (NAIS, anyone?). Our forests, the biomass from the thinning of which could probably replace the use of petroleum for transportation fuel in 10 years, are being burned up because of more and more restrictions on hazardous fuels reduction projects and a push to expand wilderness and create roadless areas on public lands.

Where are our environmental groups in this picture? Are they supporting local production of healthy foods, which is so much less destructive to Mother Earth than factory farming? No, they work hard to destroy small farmers and ranchers. Are they supporting forest restoration that would result in reduced carbon pollution of our atmosphere by reduction of forest fires? No, they work hard to suppress the cutting of any trees at all. Are they supporting use of biomass to create an alternative to petroleum based transportation fuels? No, they fight efforts to develop sustainable, renewable energy.

What do environmental groups do to make our planet a healthier place, where humans and all species can thrive?

Well, actually, when you add up what they are doing, the answer to that question is: Nothing. In fact, when you look at the big picture of environmental efforts by the Big Name Environmental Groups (whose board members are mostly attorneys, not scientists), what that picture really looks like is a series of well-coordinated actions that are aimed to weaken the citizens of this country through starvation, disease and isolation.

Its so plausible: Destroy the family farms and ranches in the name of endangered species. Further destroy local production of healthy foods in the name of pure water. Destroy the possibility of alternative energy sources by attacking wind farms and use of biomass from forests. Destroy the forests themselves by not allowing restoration work, thereby encouraging massive wildfires only one of which can in a few days or weeks dump as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as one big city does in a year. (Ironically, the supposedly endangered species' habitats are destroyed as well by wildfire). And when things go down the tubes on our planet because of the success of the above actions, blame it on small farmers and ranchers and you and me, average Joe and Jane US citizen, and file even more lawsuits in the name of environmentalism, because, don’t you know, they’ve got to save the planet.

And then… TKO?

Bias, propaganda and censorship

Using them says more about the user than about what is being said
Copyright © CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com

I received a copy of a post to the Gila Sustainable Community News, Calendar and Forum about the Mexican wolf. Because I wanted to rebut some of the statements by the author, Ms Nancy Kaminski, I properly joined the forum. After being accepted as a member, my rebuttal post was rejected.

Bias, propaganda and censorship are tools for those who cannot stand the light of truth. Those who resort to such do so because they have no truth to convey. Ms Kaminski’s forum post is chock full of inaccuracies and downright misinformation – is that all that pro-Mexican wolf people have in their arsenals?

What bias, propaganda and censorship say is that the message is suspect. What Ms Kaminski’s post and the Gila Forum are saying about themselves is the truth be damned - they want what they want and they’ll stoop to whatever it takes to get it. But heck – that’s what we have blogs for – I can say what I want to say anyway, right here.

So, here’s the reply I tried to submit:

In the interests of truth and accuracy, I would like to provide corrections and comments regarding Ms. Kaminski’s article about Mexican wolves.

“We brought these beautiful wolves to the very brink of extinction.”

I have asked many people – including those with the Mexican wolf program - to tell me how many Mexican wolves are in Mexico. No one has answered. I wonder if anyone knows? Without knowing, can anyone say truthfully that Mexican wolves were brought to the brink of extinction?

“There may have been thousands of them when we first drove cattle across the plains and into what would become New Mexico and Arizona.”

There may have been, but that is unlikely, given that the local wolves were Mogollon wolves. The Mexican wolf program will tell you, if directly asked, that the Mexican wolf recovery area is actually the extreme limit of the possible hunting (not denning) range of Mexican wolves (there is no definitive scientific evidence of Mexican wolf presence in the area). It is hard to imagine Mogollon wolves not protecting their territory. It’s more likely that there were occasional Mexican wolves here, and you bet they were being very, very careful about it.

“A trapper named McBride was sent to Mexico to find wolves there [in Mexico]. After several months he found only six, one pregnant female and five males”.

I have always thought how awful this history is for the Mexican wolf. Trapped and kidnapped from the place where they were born and lived wild, transported and kept in captivity in a non-native area, some dying, others bred and rebred in captivity (from one female!) so that their gene pool is extremely limited - how frightening for the original wolves. How miserable they must have been in captivity. What a horrible experience for those wolves and a shameful beginning for the Mexican wolf program.

“With these and others in zoos and wildlife centers across the US, which were genetically tested to be sure they were pure Mexican wolves, the captive breeding project began.”

Actually, from the information available on the Mexican wolf site and it would seem from Ms. Kaminski’s assertions just above, the original Mexican wolves captured in Mexico were the only Mexican wolves. There were none at that time in zoos and wildlife centers. Therefore, all Mexican wolves in captive breeding programs around the US are descended from the original prisoners. If I am incorrect about this, I would appreciate a link to documentation for such.

“Currently fifty-two of these roam freely in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area which is nearly 7000 square miles of public lands in Arizona and New Mexico. Every Mexican wolf alive today is in a stud book.”

Actually 52 collared wolves roam the area, and an unknown number of uncollared wolves are out there, too. The 7000 square miles of land includes private land as well, a fact that is conveniently overlooked so much of the time. Further, most of the uncollared wolves, if not all, are not in any stud book.

But heck, don’t believe me. Do the research yourself – just go to the source, don’t believe those Mexican wolf program supporters, who can’t be bothered with the truth.

Lawsuits Are Not Environmentalism

The truth about Center for Biological Diversity
Copyright © 2009 CR Edmunds

When the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) asks for donations, most people likely think they’re contributing to projects that will improve the environment. But it just ain’t so. CBD has become a money-making litigation machine. They aren’t out there with shovels and seeds, working on the environment, they’re paying lawyers, sneaking onto private property to spy on conditions and – if they don’t find the conditions sufficiently bad to claim the property owner is ruining the environment- they’re publishing phony photos of "environmental devastation". No actual environmental work going on that CBD is doing - just about everything they do these days is rather to support litigation.

Yeah, it may seem like CBD’s litigation is for the good of endangered plants and animals, but when you start looking at the results of what they do you start noticing the real cost to humans and environment alike. This is because CBD activities, particularly litigation, are not environment-driven, but rather CBD agenda-driven. They’re not shy about their plans to evict private property owners from their own land, to create Gardens of Eden in their Sky Islands. No matter that some of the species in the areas being touted as endangered aren’t endangered (or never even lived in the place – look at the weird Mexican wolf situation). No matter that so much of the litigation results in grinding the US Constitution into the dirt. When they win note that someone else always has to bear the burden of environmentalism – never CBD. No, CBD lawyers and CBD personnel are all living nice, safe, well-funded lives, while the rest of us pay and pay and pay – either by losing property, losing our rights, or by being scammed for the donations CBD says it needs to “protect the environment”. All that money, effort, suffering by property owners – and none of it for actual environmental work, just lawsuits. Paperwork, that’s all it is – but it’s not solving problems, it’s causing more.

Humans are a legitimate species on this planet, too – a fact that CBD and other radical, terrorist environmental groups ignore. None of their projects, their agendas or their litigation truly take into account the human right to live and thrive on this planet.

God created the Garden of Eden to have people in it. It was Satan who caused people to have to leave that Garden. Kinda makes you think about CBD, doesn’t it?

---

Here’s a list of articles about recent litigation by CBD. I might add to it over time – I can only look at this information for so long before it makes me sick. Not that the critters involved don’t need protecting, but CBD is doing nothing for them, only filing lawsuits. Lawsuits are not environmentalism!

Loggerhead turtles lawsuit with Oceana Inc. and Turtle Island Restoration Environmental Law360 - http://environmental.law360.com/

Two ocean species of turtles lawsuit with Oceana and the Turtle Island Restoration Network Twilight Earth - http://www.twilightearth.com/

Ocean acidification impacts lawsuit Switchboard, from NRDC - http://switchboard.nrdc.org/

Desert Lizard lawsuit http://www.yumasun.com/news/lizard-50356-habitat-yuma.html

Global warming impacts lawsuit against six (6) federal agencies. Global warming is a THEORY, people! http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/global-warming-01-15-2009.html

Coal-Fired Power Plants lawsuit www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/05/13-4

Improper jaguar killing lawsuit www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/jaguar-05-12-2009.html

Stop beach driving lawsuit www.rzrforums.net/public-lands-advocacy/11153-center-biological-diversity-lawsuit-oceano-dunes.html

Desert tortoise lawsuit with the Sierra Club, and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility www.globalclimatelaw.com/tags/center-for-biological-diversit/

Force the DOI consider listing the American pika as threatened or endangered lawsuit http://greenoptions.com/tag/center-for-biological-diversity

Snowy Plover http://bit.ly/pJWb1

California red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes; notice of intent to sue. http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/5035

Nevada water project lawsuit. http://www.lvrj.com/news/39421007.html

Protect wildlife and roadless areas in CA, with 6 other environmental groups. http://tinyurl.com/nodgau

Block thinning of trees in AZ lawsuit (note that because the thinning was stopped, the result was one of the largest forest fires in the US) http://www.forphoto.com/issues_info/local/thinning_lawsuit.php

North Fork Eel River lawsuit http://www.wildcalifornia.org/pressreleases/number-20

Raptor habitat (as compensation for wind turbine kills) lawsuit https://www.earthislandprojects.org/news/new_news.cfm?newsID=649

Bighorns lawsuit http://www.mydesert.com/article/20090325/NEWS01/903250314/1144/news01

Ely NV travel management appeal http://tinyurl.com/ccwdop

Freshwater turtle harvest lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/naorbl

Not enough land designated “critical habitat” lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/n4th92

Enough! I can’t stand to look at more of these.

Defenders of Wildlife... or irresponsible animal dumpers?

News release from Defenders of Wildlife today says: "Raised in South Salem, New York’s Wolf Conservation Center, she [a female Mexican wolf] was released with excitement into her native habitat in Arizona late last year."

Doesn't it occur to anyone at DoW how unfair it is to wolves to raise them among humans, in captivity where they never learn to hunt, in a very different (humid) climate and then release them to act "wild"?

If anyone did that to a dog, it would be a crime that could be prosecuted. What is different between the Mexican Wolf Program and any other irresponsible animal dumper?

Wolf News Release: WildEarth Guardians lawsuit setback

Contact: Ron Shortes, Catron County Attorney
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6265
Email: shortes2@gilanet.com
April 17, 2009

WILDEARTH GUARDIANS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST CATRON COUNTY DENIED
Environmentalist attempt to deny County the right to protect its own citizens stalled

RESERVE, N.M. Catron County, New Mexico has learned that a WildEarth Guardians’ lawsuit, which attempts to deny the County the right to protect its own citizens from imminent harm, has been stalled. A US District Court Judge in Santa Fe recently denied a bid by the environmental group for a summary judgment against the County.

WildEarth Guardians, a Santa Fe, NM based environmental group formed through the merger of Forest Guardians, Sinapu, and the Sagebrush Sea Campaign, filed a suit against Catron County last year. The group claimed that a 2007 County ordinance, providing for protection measures for Catron County Citizens in the event of problems with wolves, violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

In October of 2008, Judge Martha Vazquez issued a ruling stating that WildEarth Guardians’ claims were moot, as the County had amended the ordinance. Nevertheless, WildEarth Guardians continued to press the lawsuit, claiming that the Catron County Commission allegedly violated the ESA by setting traps for a pair of wolves. However, the Court has now denied a request for summary judgment against the County on this issue.

“It is the responsibility of government to protect its citizens,” said a Catron County spokesman. “We have a problem here with wolves and have had one since the beginning of the program. The incidents have escalated to the point where our people - particularly our children - are at risk.”

Catron County has submitted numerous requests to the Mexican wolf program to include realistic consideration for human safety - something that is currently lacking in the ESA’s 10j Rule regarding reintroduction of Mexican wolves.

“The Mexican wolf program people are well aware of our concerns for the safety of our children,” the County spokesman said. “All WildEarth Guardians is concerned about is wolves - they apparently don’t care if a child is at risk.”

“Our citizens rely on local government to protect them,” the spokesman said. “They demand that of us, and by law we are authorized to protect our citizens. We cannot, legally or morally, allow the threat from habituated wolves to reach the point where our children and families are in imminent danger. That is clear.”


# # #