Gray Wolves Return To Washington

SAP…standard operating procedure. Lie, cover it up, Lie, cover it up, ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

howlcolorado Says:
June 7, 2010 at 5:01 PM

This site is operated by people who are merely anti-government conspiracy theorists who are fully behind Jim Beers’ anti-wolf campaign.

This is, due to the fact that apparantly a news article was printed in 1992 saying there were wolves in Washington state, evidence of some conspiracy.

It is a combination of old news, conspiracy theory and no real effort to explain the original mystery through any form of research. Were their wolves in 92? if so, where did they go? Who cares! It’s a government conspiracy. *sigh*

howlcolorado sounds more than familiar, especially with his/her “sigh”……or “yawn”……

The cop out way out, no investigation into documented material, just scoff and call names. These people have the government they deserve.

I have started calling them coincidence theorists, science theorists, arm chair theorists.. Howl is out of colorado yet they like to theorize about Idaho wolves, elk, deer, and Idaho residents from way down yonder in colorado.. As well looking around the maughan site i see their starting to theorize that the Gulf of Mexico mess is more than what it appears on the surface.. Those people of that blog just amaze me at how ignorant they can be about topics.. And they cheap shot some one, like the unhived blog per say, who has a blog with 114 pages and hundreds of links on the Gulf Topic alone, articles from around the world.. Good grief man, the oil chaos is intentional..

This is how you fight them gentlemen, you expose them, you bare the roots, and starve the tree..

Maurice Strong, a Canadian oil billionaire, was also the Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro where the unveiling of Agenda 21 occurred. He said,

“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class—involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing—are not sustainable. A shift is necessary towards lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.” (1992 Rio Earth Summit — Knight of Malta Maurice Strong— The author of Agenda 21..

Well, the Washington plan is interesting. With the number of detached lunatics from Seattle and Olympia they are openly admitting in there plan that much of it isn’t even based on science but community desire. So now we have moved into the basic democracy of wolf management. Funny they want no part of that in Idaho though. It’s simply a recipe for another disaster.

But, they are more open about the end of hunting in this one by making it clear that ungulates must be managed to the benefit of wolves first. The theft of more land by admitting they need to restrict more areas and acquire some private property. They want to end the feeding program and give that money to pro wolf property owners that will grow elk for their wolves to eat, simply amazing. Another state bites the dust. It’s pretty easy to see the writing on the wall.

Here is another ridiculous fabrication on the Bear Blog, which is a hunting organization that benefits its profits. What you hunters do not realize is that just because back in 1992 they spotted 6 breeding packs in the Washington territory does not mean they set permenant territories in the state. As further mentioned, more may migrate into Washington’s protected forest, which means Wolves who migrated to Washington did not permenantly reside there, hence the term “migrate”. It means they went back and forth between the two countries in search for food, mating, etc, not permenant residency which is why they were not spotted after 1992 and before 2006 or so. Can you hunters now see how you take small information and rearrange it to fit your agenda?

Phil…Once again you show your ignorance in attempting to rewrite reality. This is a fact, Idaho had over 100 documented, resident wolves in the state before introduction. This program destroyed that native population, a violation of the esa, yet I don’t hear you wanting Ed’s head on a stick for that one.

the opinions of the masses who are as ignorant as you are about nature and the realities of nature is meaningless. Idaho is a sovereign state and we’ll manage it anyway we like….you have an issue with that you Marxist little minion?

So, go somewhere else that will accept your cherry picking.

I’m waiting for Barry to cherry pick some more and state that wolves have never been known to cross the border even though it’s documented and proven with the help of radio collars. Accuse others of cherry picking while you do the same thing yourself Barry. Now that isn’t right, is it?

“Most Likely” is that the best you have Phil, again you make assumptions.

Thank you for proving my point, there is no documented proof these wolves migrated, just assumptions. The documented wolves were a distinct subspecies, as you well know, although ‘now’ deny. A trout is a trout is a trout, a deer is a deer is a deer, yada yada yada, rewritten science to support a failed and illegal program.

The fact remains, these wolves were never and have never been endangered. The native population was destroyed, a violation of the ESA. This entire wolf program was about government control and anti hunting agendas. the amount of junk science it has created is almost laughable and now, finally, the wheels are coming off the wagon of propaganda.

You right, I have never been a proponent of planting non native species, including those we hunt. This wolf is no different.

Oh Phil, sweetheart, take a deep breath before you get an aneurysm…
I believe Barry is saying that ‘native wolves’ survived the Fed extermination. They lived in small pockets here and there. Whether they roamed in or survived, they were ALREADY there when reintroduction was executed.
What remains a question in most people’s minds, those that LIVE there, is that, where did these smaller, native if you will, wolves go to after the reintroduction because Phil, they ain’t there no more.
People heard, saw, knew there were wolves there in a manageable number and the elk herds seemed to be doing just fine. It was noted that the elk herds took a decline AFTER reintroduction thus, any logical mind would link it to the REINTRODUCTION of wolves. Perhaps there is more to it. No one is 100% sure but I think certain logical conclusions can be made.
And no Phil, I do not live there. I don’t go out and count the animals there, but I believe those that do live there, that post here. Ya know why? I take the time to get to know them. A lot of them come off as wanting to get ride of wolves, predators, completely. But that isn’t the case. They are smart enough to know that no predators is just as bad as too many. But they sure do get defensive when people start accusing them of ulterior motives and they have a tendency to let their emotions run high.

I really hope you aren’t that person who’s been calling people up and threatening them. I have a few connections with our local law enforcement. They happen to be rather protective, just saying…

I am sure Phil probably knows less about guns thant he does about wolves. I have yet to see any hunting, from a plane or otherwise using ‘machine guns”. You see when urbanites like Phil become indoctrinated they buy the whole salami. You know the drill, hunting is bad, guns are bad, humans are bad, gov’t owes you and wufs are goooood. Phil is a sheep that idolizes an animal.

Hey Phil, I think that documentation that states their continued existence on the landscape from the time folks sett;ed here, until Ed dumped his dogs would pretty much pass the smell test of them being natives. If you look around hard enough, you will find stories that pretty much do exactly that.

You keep clinging to your denial. But that dog doesn’t hunt anymore

Great conversation! I find it funny that people that love wolves are usually democrats. People that generally don’t like wolves are usually republicans. Interesting!! Well how about let’s manage wolves through proven science not politically motivated science! If wolves are over populated lets hunt em and trap em keep em in check so the don’t harm other important animal species. Furthermore if a state does’nt want wolves within their borders they have Constitutional authority to back that up. They are soverign and do not have to listen to the federal government when it comes to the issue of wild animals. I’m not saying let them wipe out the exsisting populations in states that already have them. I’m saying states like Colorado that don’t have em should be able to say if wolves croos into our state they are no welcome. After all it has’nt worked out very well for Idaho Montana and wyoming. They are really hurting the deer and elk herds in certain areas of those states. Those states need the money they bring in from license sales that comes from hunting.

She, Phil-Annie was also run off the Maughan blog for being in error according to those posters over there.

Thanks Jes. Our neighbors saw a wolf today around lunchtime not far from us. People who live in the city and get food in little boxes have no idea what its like to try and protect the critters that feed us from the critters that want to eat them. I happen to like our critters and do not want them to become wolf food! We took in a mare that had been hamstrung by wolves. Took a year to get her back on her feet, and she will always be lame. Funny – I heard from a wolf expert that there has never been a “documented” attack on horses by wolves in Idaho! I see the “evidence” every day. We sure get tired of being lied to!

And wolves don’t have the brains to stay out of a mans livestock or his rifle sights. Quit whining because they can’t dodge a bullet.

In this country, a mans private property is subject to the right of defending it. If you don’t like that, perhaps another country would better suit you.