The wolf agenda is about land control, all over the united states! And you might think I'm nuts, but the more you study on this and the deeper you dig, it all keeps coming back to the enviromentalist and their ideas of what it should be.. You mention this to some of the real enviromentalist, and see how quik they get real nasty. There are alot of people who are pro-wolf that don't know about this, they are blinded my the headlights. If they new that perhaps in the end they could lose their home for these wolves, then they wouldn't be for the wolves. It has to hit in their back yard before they will look at both sides. You think that we have it bad, you need to check out what is going on down in Arizona and New Mexico, now they have a bad wolf problem. And their wolves aren't even pure bred, they are a pen raise cross breed that is getting dumped in their back yards. Their wolves can kill three times before the feds will move them, its called the 3-strikes rule. I .
http://www.wmicentral.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=2264&dept_id=505965&newsid=17108302 )
http://www.prosts.com/Documentary-Undue-Burden.htm This dvd tells it all, same thing is what the Northwest states are going through.
With the hunting shut off, it makes things all the more easier.
The illusion of the endangered wolf has gone on for 26 years. This is in spite of the fact that there is much information available to show that wolves are far from being an endangered species. Other information shows that wolves are not needed in the ecology of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan and that the three states are better off ecologically and economically without wolves. The benefactors of the wolf situation we have are the bureaucrats of the USFWS and the state DNRs as they spend the taxpayer's money on their very counterproductive wolf restoring activities. Support from misguided animal rights, anti hunting, environmental organizations together with not enough people getting informed and involved makes this possible.
http://home.centurytel.net/PAW/illusion.htmWe all sit back in the brush and argue about who, and how come, and what about,, which is just what they want us to do. They dam sure don't want anyone to find out the real reason for the wolves till its to late. I think that we need to form our own club, that includes, all the people we can find that enjoy outdoor activities. From the amount of people out there that enjoy the outdoors as much as we do, we should be able to come up with a plan. This won't be solved by shootin every wolf we see, Idaho already tried that.
Congress didn't want this wolf reintrodution, thats why they didn't set enough money aside for it to go through, I think they allowed $65000.00, so the enviromantalist raised the rest of the money to go get the wolves and start reintroducing them. And the USFWS pushed it through illegally. And now with it all going to hell they can't delist because the enviromentalist sue and get them relisted.. The feds were thinking of $, the enviromentalist had a plan of their own.
The fact that FWS allowed the state game agencies
to provide unrealistic impacts based on inaccurate data
does not excuse Bangs’ failure to correct that
misinformation once he knew it was false. On that same
day, September 24, 1993, I provided Bangs with three
pages of testimony, with exhibits documenting the gross
exaggerations in the central Idaho ungulate prey base.
Because Idaho’s Wolf Oversight Committee
approved communications from Conley to Bangs, I urged
them to correct the misinformation contained in the EIS
and in Conley’s draft letter. Instead they simply directed
Conley to substitute the words “reasonable estimate” for
“realistic picture” in the final version of his letter dated
October 12, 1993 – thereby allowing F&G’s false
information and erroneous predictions to remain in the EIS.
“Nothing Wrong With Lying to the Public”
In a February 17 1994 meeting with Sandy Donley
and me, Oversight Committee member Don Clower told us
the Committee knew the prey population figures were
highly inflated when they were given to FWS but said that
was necessary to support the rapid build-up of wolves that
would occur in the Nonessential Experimental recovery
option. Then he said he saw nothing wrong with lying to
the public to accomplish that goal.
In a March 9, 1994 letter to Bangs signed by its
Co-Chairman Jack Lavin, the Idaho Wolf Oversight
Committee formally supported the “Nonessential
Experimental” recovery option over the “No Wolf
Introduction” option. Although three of the seven voting
Committee members, including Co-Chairman George
Bennett, withdrew their support for that option in a letter to
Bangs dated October 17, 1994, their letter was ignored.
The IDFG 1993 and, later, the 1994 big game
census information I provided to Bangs indicated there
were only about 40,000 total post-hunting-season ungulates
in the central Idaho primary analysis area instead of the
241,400 claimed in the Wolf EIS. In a private conversation
with me Bangs admitted that the claimed populations were
“probably exaggerated” yet in the August 16, 1994 Federal
Register he wrote, “Millions of acres of public lands
contain hundreds of thousands of wild ungulates (Service
1994) and currently provide more than enough habitat to
support a recovered wolf population in central Idaho.”
(emphasis added).
Oversight Committee Bias
But even if FWS and IDFG were willing to lie
about the declining prey base in central Idaho, the Wolf
Oversight Committee was formed by the Legislature in
1993 to protect Idaho’s interests in the formation of a wolf
plan. Why did that Committee fail to do its job?
One answer is that four of the seven voting
members on the Oversight Committee supported the
FWS/IDFG plan to import Canadian wolves and protect
and manage them as a new big game species. Jack Lavin
and Don Clower were hand-picked by IDFG to support its
agenda and both Resource Committee chairmen had a
history of supporting IDFG agendas that were unpopular
with grassroots sportsmen and other natural resource users.
Senate Resources Committee Chairman. Laird Noh
was also actively involved in The Nature Conservancy
whose goal to restore wolves and grizzly bears in a
network of core roadless areas was already being
implemented. But regardless of its members’ personal
agendas, the Oversight Committee was required by law to
develop a plan that included consideration of local
economies, custom, culture and private property rights.
Instead it virtually copied the FWS Plan and
several of its members publicly ridiculed county
government efforts to include protection of domestic
livestock and pets on private property. The October 17,
1994 letter signed by Bennett, Ted Hoffman, Stan Boyd
and non-voting member Lois Van Hoover, listed multiple
violations of the ESA in the proposed FWS Rule and
declared those members’ intent to recommend the Idaho
Legislature refuse to approve the wolf plan approved by
the Committee.
F&G Illegally Agreed To Canadian Transplants
I.C. Sec. 36-715(2) expressly prohibited IDFG
from entering into any agreement with any entity of the
U.S. Government concerning wolves unless expressly
authorized by state statute but that law had already been
brazenly violated by IDFG Director Jerry Conley. On
September 27, 1994, without authorization from the
Legislature or even the full Oversight Committee, Conley
signed a letter to Bangs supporting the FWS Experimental
Rule and agreeing to work with FWS to reintroduce wolves
from British Columbia and Alberta into the Idaho
experimental population area.
On that same day, Conley also delivered a Special
Permit to Bangs in Boise, signed by IDFG Wildlife Bureau
Chief Tom Reinecker, authorizing FWS to “release a
maximum of 15 Canadian wolves in Central Idaho for up
to five years or until 2 breeding pairs are each documented
to produce 2 or more pups that survive until 31 December
for two consecutive years.” The permit stated that the wolf
releases would be conducted in accordance with the Idaho
wolf management plan.
Idaho AG, Congress Ignore False EIS Info
Although the plan was soundly rejected by the
Legislature, Bangs and FWS went ahead and conducted the
wolf release – legally from their standpoint – with the
signed agreement endorsing the Nonessential Experimental
Option and Rules and the signed Wolf Release Permit both
in their possession. On January 25, 1995, Idaho Attorney
General Alan Lance was provided with documentation of
the misinformation and Code violations but no action was
taken against Conley or any of the Oversight Committee
members who authorized illegal issuance of the
agreements.
www.saveelk.comhttp://wolfcrossing.org/2009/05/26/wild-earth-guardians-launches-rural-cleansing-campaign-against-gila-residents-and-ranching/ Wild Earth Guardians launches rural cleansing campaign against Gila residents and ranching
Protecting the Gila
WildEarth Guardians wants to secure lasting and landmark protection for the endangered wildlands and wildlife of the Gila Bioregion in southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona. Our vision is a healthy population of wolves surrounded by millions of acres of newly designated wilderness. Eventually we believe that America’s first Wilderness Area should become its next great National Park or National Monument. How could such a bold vision come to fruition? Come find out about WildEarth Guardians’ strategy to lead the way in protecting the Gila. We look forward to a great conversation! Please RSVP to Carol Norton, 505-988-9126, ext. 1150 or cnorton@wildearthguardians.org.
You really want to know whats, what. well this is it, and its been happening for along time. So what do we do?
http://www.takingliberty.us/TLHome.html
