I’ve spoken of this before. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation has proven itself a very reliable and effective means of responsible wildlife management in this country. As a matter of fact it is the envy of the planet. This model ensures that when properly administered all wildlife species will be managed in a way that promises healthy populations.

This Model utilizes hunting, fishing and trapping as one means of not only allowing the people the opportunity to harvest the resource but to control populations. Science and data collection are the basis for a plan for that management in which, once again if administered properly, will use harvest as a means of sustaining, lowering or increasing a population depending upon need. As I have said, historically this has been a very successful model.

When environmentalists, which include animal rights groups and anti-hunting groups, jump into the fray, they care little of science, history and the Model. Their goals are to end hunting, fishing and trapping and will do anything to accomplish that including lying, cheating and stealing.

Their childish behavior is not unlike the bratty little kid who, when not getting his way, throws himself/herself onto the floor in a fit of rage, often banging their heads on the floor hoping such an act will give them results.

When wildlife managers, at least those that still find accuracy in the North American Model of Wildlife Management, begin talk of creating a hunt for a particular species, the environmentalists will always jump in with their pseudo scientific claims that hunting a species creates more problems than not.

One example of this is the debate over predators and in particular wolves and coyotes. How often have we heard from these unruly jackanapes that if hunters and trappers kill wolves and/or coyotes these animals will simply run out and produce even more than were killed and this action will result in more problems.

In discussions of problem predators, environmentalists, when the action seems to call for it, will attempt to convince people that a general hunt of wolves and coyotes will do nothing to cure the problem wolf or coyote around a home or ranch, etc. When wildlife managers and animal damage control personnel begin talking about targeting only those destructive critters that feast on livestock, a different elucidation of canine behavior is brought to the table by environmentalists; a clear contradiction of previous statements.

Such is the case in Wisconsin. A bill in that state would allow for a wolf hunt, an event that has long been awaited by the citizens. Now that the wolf has been removed from the Endangered Species Act list and wolves are more than double in numbers the management targeted goals, wildlife managers want a wolf hunt. Not surprising, the environmentalists and wolfaboos are lining up to oppose such an action.

One University of Wisconsin environmental studies professor, Adrian Treves, says that hunting the wolves will result in having to place the wolf back on the endangered list because too many wolves will be killed.

This is just one example of demanding it both ways. Hunters are always blamed for the extirpation of a species. They were blamed, at times solely, as the culprits behind the extinction of the gray wolf in the United States 80-100 years ago. And yet, if a well-managed hunt is ever suggested of a predator such as the wolf or coyote, out come the killing-wolves-only-causes-a-population-increase card. Which is it? Either hunting creates population increases or it causes reductions. It can’t do both at the same time.

If this claim by the environmentalists were something they really believed in, they would be actively promoting more wolf and coyote hunting. They claim their desire is to have wolves in every state in the Union, then maybe it’s time to put their supposed scientific theories to the test. Let the hunting begin and according to them, the population of this species will grow at an even greater rate than it is now.

Oh, but that isn’t what’s behind all of this now is it? It’s all about control and manipulation. Environmentalists throwing themselves on the floor and demanding their way has become an effective tool for them. Couple that with lawsuits that bring them in millions of dollars, they now have money to pay any moron they can find who will come up with some lame scientific theory that gets tossed around as though it were actually a fact and people buy it.

EnvironMENTALism is a mental illness.

Tom Remington

What some consider the world’s most difficult puzzles to solve, are those where large written documents are essentially shredded and the participants must put all the shredded pieces back together again. The Department of Interior’s third stab at removing gray wolves in the Western Great Lakes (WGL) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) from federal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), while not capable of standing up to the world’s most complicated puzzles, appears to be much more complicated than it needs to be, leaving me wondering if this is the intent in order to leave room for costly and time consuming lawsuits. Sigh!

During the last attempt to delist wolves, a lawsuit, Humane Society of the United States v. Kempthorne, was awarded to the plaintiffs that failed at removing gray wolves from federal protection. Judge Paul Friedman ruled that he was going to place protection of the wolves back under the ESA until such time as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), i.e. Department of Interior, could show how they had the legal authority to create a Distinct Population Segment of gray wolves, or any other species, for the purpose of delisting that same species.

Shortly after that ruling, I wrote that Friedman’s decision was not at all based on scientific evidence and that the Judge had no legitimate reason to return wolves to protection other than the fact that as a judge, he could.

For what it’s worth, the Solicitor for the Department of Interior, on December 12, 2008, issued an official opinion as to how the USFWS has authority under the ESA to create a DPS in order to delist a species.

In the most recent proposal to delist wolves, the USFWS briefly explains their authority:

Our authority to make these determinations and to revise the list accordingly is a reasonable interpretation of the language of the Act, and our ability to do so is an important component of the Service’s program for the conservation of threatened and endangered species. Our authority to revise the existing listing of a species (the gray wolf in Minnesota and the gray wolf in the lower 48 States and Mexico, excluding Minnesota) to identify a Western Great Lakes DPS and determine that it is healthy enough that it no longer needs the Act’s protections is found in the precise language of the Act. Moreover, even if that authority were not clear, our interpretation of this authority to make determinations under section 4(a)(1) and to revise the endangered and threatened species list to reflect those determinations under section 4(c)(1) is reasonable and fully consistent with the Act’s text, structure, legislative history, relevant judicial interpretations, and policy objectives.

The information presented to support the USFWS’ authority to create a DPS for the purpose of delisting a species within that DPS is not new information. The same information existed in 2008 and yet somehow the USFWS in Humane Society of the United States v. Kempthorne, couldn’t sufficiently explain to Judge Paul Friedman where it got it’s authority; another example of ineptitude or corruption in representing the people in the court of law.

This is but one issue that could possibly derail an attempt to delist gray wolves. If lawsuits, which are as sure to happen as the sun rising in the morning, are intended to stop the delisting, will the explanations given in this proposal satisfy Judge Friedman’s query as to where USFWS gets its authority?

Unfortunately, this proposal to delist is further complicated by adding to it a determination by the USFWS not to recognize another species of wolf cohabiting in the same DPS. Why was it necessary to do this? Why couldn’t the USFWS made a separate announcement or proposal that it did not feel that sufficient scientific evidence existed to determine the existence of another species of wolf(eastern wolf)?

As complex as proposals to delist a species can get, why would the USFWS choose to clutter up this delisting with information pertaining to separate petitions? Efforts like this leave people like me wondering if the real intention of the USFWS is to derail the delisting for personal agendas, etc.

While I and others place our attention of things like whether the USFWS has sufficiently satisfied the courts to explain their authority to create DPS’s for delisting, and whether or not a proposal cluttered with explanations aimed at nefarious petitions and claims of the existence of a brand new species of wolf, in the end all that will matter is what one judge thinks.

Sportsmen in the WGL region shouldn’t spend too much time just yet honing their wolf hunting and trapping skills.

Tom Remington

According to this article, the federal program that used trapping of nuisance wolves, resulting in their much deserved deaths, will end at the end of this month. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone living with their eyes open. You can read the article to find out what people are saying about the program – who’s for it and against it, etc.

I would like to point something out that very few people know about. In this news article is says:

But with a moratorium on earmarks in Washington, there’s no money assigned to the program after fiscal 2011 ends Friday, when wolf trappers will cease operations.

I find it quite odd, to say the least, that because there is supposedly no funding to trap and kill wolves and as such the program must end, and yet, the administration of the Endangered Species Act has not been funded for several decades and yet it seems to be still in operation.

Do we have some kind of a double standard going on here? What, in our Federal Government? Come on, man!

Tom Remington

Here we go again! The Humane Society of the United States and their not quite so honest leader, Wayne Pacelle, are always up to their unethical tricks. And as is usual, they need to be exposed.

In a Huffington Post rag, Pacelle chastises hunters for not fawning all over him and his organization for helping out Wisconsin in a campaign to protect newborn wildlife.

I’ll let you read his unsubstantiated bile, but Pacelle does make this statement:

My advice is these outfits [hunting groups] just stay out of the way when other groups, including the HSUS, choose to step in to address those issues and to protect wildlife.

Hey! Here’s some advice for Mr. “I’m god” Pacelle. Why don’t you crawl back into your badger hole and mind your own business. I think the fine people of Wisconsin can manage their affairs just fine without your deceitful help. Long before your disgraceful organization came along, hunters were forking over money and doing more to conserve wildlife than your money-pocketing organization will ever do.

And if you’re not interested in some good advice, perhaps you can show us how balanced and rational your organization is by making rebuttal to a comment left after your article that says:

Gary DiNardo
1 Fans
12:45 PM on 5/26/2010
I’m a terrorist.
One of my goals in life is to cause Proctor & Gamble to go out of business if they don’t stop ‘testing’ their products on live animals. I have informatio­n on my page that shows visitors which products to boycott. According to the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, I can be prosecuted and jailed for doing
just that. It has happened.
The Government considers corporatio­ns like BP to have the same rights as individual­s, but do they also have the same responsibi­lities? BP is negatively impacting the income of animal-exp­loiting businesses all along the Gulf coast, but will BP or any of its executives be hauled into Federal court for violating the AETA?

I think birds of a feather flock together.

Tom Remington

Activism posing as wildlife science is setting the proverbial table, that once adorned with the finest of china and exquisite appointments will result in a giant leap toward ending most trapping in large portions of the United States. How can this be?

Environmentalists in this country, spurred on by the powers behind the United Nations and Agenda 21, want you off the land. They don’t want you to own land. One of the ways they intend to make that happen is to eliminate all the reasons you would want to own land and/or take advantage of the natural resources the land has to offer, as well as your preferred means of making a living. These delirious individuals think that you and I have no right to these resources and they would rather they rot than for humans to consume any of them.

Endangered species and implementation of the tyrannical Endangered Species Act is a tool used by these environmentalist groups to accomplish their goals. The agendas vary at prescribed levels but as it pertains to animals, their ambition is to end hunting, trapping, fishing, ranching, livestock ownership, pet ownership, use of any animal for any purpose. Ultimately the mission is to get you off your land.

Drover’s Cattle Network tells us that at the Taking Action for Animals Conference in Washington, D.C. on July 15-18, and Farm Animal Rights Movement’s Animal Rights 2011 Conference (AR 2011) two weeks later on July 21-25 in Los Angeles, attendees were encouraged to work toward the goal of ending ranching and other things.

Securing rights for farm animals and the promotion of a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle to the mainstream public were hot topics at both meetings. Attendees were given tips on how to utilize social media, create “undercover” videos and craft effective messages to share their views with others. Speakers and exhibitors also encouraged aspiring activists to hold demonstrations, signature drives for ballot initiatives and leafleting campaigns.

The largest activist groups attended and sponsored both meetings, although messaging differed between audiences. Nathan Runkle, Executive Director of Mercy For Animals, Erica Meier, Executive Director of Compassion Over Killing, and Gene Baur, President of Farm Sanctuary, spoke at both meetings. They encouraged a more aggressive, physical approach to eliminating animal agriculture at AR 2011. (Emphasis added)

But this is only one method of achieving dictatorial Marxism as it pertains to our rights and privileges. I have learned that the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) has given the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, as well as the New Mexico State Game Commission, notice that intends to file a lawsuit to ban the use of leg-hold traps in that state in order to protect the Mexican gray wolf, an introduced, Non-Essential Experimental population of a subspecies of gray wolf. CBD declares that the allowance of such traps violates the “take” provision of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

CBD would like for all of us to focus our attention on not only whether use of the traps is a violation of the ESA, but also on whether on not any Mexican gray wolves that incidentally get caught in trappers’ traps is limiting efforts to restore the wolf. Trust me. This is all a distraction from the ultimate goals. Assuredly CBD is playing the games they have learned to manage in order to steal taxpayers money through the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) and pad their coffers, but their agenda runs much deeper than a handful of gray wolves in New Mexico.

In Maine, environmentalists were successful in banning the size of leg-hold traps in designated critical habitat for Canada lynx. Lynx are another animal that is readily abundant in Northern North America but environmentalists have seized on the opportunity to promote their agendas by using the lynx as a tool to limit or ban trapping in Maine. The size reduction of traps was a result of a settlement reached between the state and the environmentalist groups. A lawsuit had demanded the end to all trapping in Maine to protect the lynx.

We are witness to several attempts nationwide by animal rights activists and environmentalists to limit or end trapping and hunting, and that march will continue. However, several moves recently by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) plays directly into the hands of these Marxist organizations.

Few outdoor sportsmen anymore believe that the USFWS is looking out for their interests at all. As a matter of fact many believe they are bought and paid for by the environmentalists and readily submit to their evil ways.

If the CBD is successful in banning leg-hold traps in New Mexico, consider the precedent this will set and the possible domino effect that may result. Before we can examine the domino effect, please understand the following.

The USFWS is currently attempting for the second time to get gray wolves in the Western Great Lakes (WGL) region removed from the Endangered Species Act list. Aside from the fact that nothing has been done to change the reasons why Judge Paul Friedman denied the delisting, the USFWS is plowing ahead with a second attempt. Why would they do that? It’s anybody’s guess how this will turn out. The problem stems from the USFWS buckling to the agenda driven environmentalists spreading propaganda masquerading as science and they are considering the declaration of a brand new subspecies of gray wolf, calling it the eastern wolf. On top of that, they say both species are sharing the same habitat. Think about that for a moment but in the meantime…….

Magically as well as illegally, the USFWS decided that gray wolves didn’t inhabit much of the eastern United States. Instead it was the “eastern” wolf, now a subspecies of the gray wolf.

I say magically, because many actual scientists don’t buy into the trumped up BS that there is another species of wolf. It’s all political and a great and powerful tool ready at the hand of the environmentalists. One would swear that this is exactly as the USFWS intended it to be. (Attempting to delist the gray wolf while discovering a new species of wolf would effectively render the delisting a moot effort.)

I say illegally because the courts had ordered the USFWS to return to the 1973 maps that determined that gray wolves were officially listed as an endangered species in 47 of 48 lower states, excepting Minnesota, whose population of existing wolves were declared “threatened”. Two judges have told us that the USFWS does not have the authority to draw boundary lines to create a “Distinct Population Segment” of any species in order that that species be removed from the ESA list. That was Judge Paul Friedman and Judge Donald Molloy. Judge Donald Molloy returned gray wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming back to the ESA list because he determined that species don’t recognize boundaries and therefore you couldn’t delist wolves in Idaho and Montana and leave Wyoming out.

Never determined in any of this is that if both judges are correct then how can there be anything different than all 48 states have endangered wolves or no states have endangered wolves? On the same level, if the USFWS doesn’t have authority to create boundaries to determine “Distinct Population Segments” then how can the USFWS then randomly decide to remove the gray wolf from the ESA in the eastern third of the nation and then decide to create another “Distinct Population Segment” of endangered eastern wolves? Inquiring minds want to know. Is the USFWS selectively heeding some court rulings while turning a blind eye to others?

(Note: The USFWS also declared mountain lions “extinct” in much of the eastern half of the country. How can they legally do this? Judge Molloy and Friedman say they can’t.)

But, I am getting off subject. Imagine if you will that the USFWS is successful in their continued effort to fabricate a new species of wolf and then is successful in placing that wolf on the ESA list within that portion of the U.S. so designated as critical habitat.

Consider also that the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) wins their lawsuit to ban leg-hold traps in New Mexico citing it as a violation of the “take” provision of the ESA. Is there a better than even chance that same success in court would be sought after for all of the “eastern wolf” habitat? Why not?

The state of Maine has already buckled under the pressures from the environmentalists to ban snaring, a very effective way to control coyotes that are destroying the deer herd. In addition they settled a compromise effort to reduce the size of the leg-hold traps to no larger jaw spread than 5 3/8 inches in hopes to reduce “incidental takes” of Canada lynx. Now, imagine what will become of what’s left of the deer herd and other important ecosystem creatures, if environmentalists can ban all leg-hold traps in order to protect a wolf. And before someone makes the absurd statement that hunters can hunt coyotes, then tell me how does a hunter differentiate between an “eastern wolf”, of which nobody has ever seen before and an eastern coyote, proven to be a hybrid of coyote, domestic dog and gray wolf?

Tom Remington

While visiting with my brother this summer, he was forever waving one hand in front of my face and saying, “Watch the hand! Watch the hand!”, intending to convey that while the other hand was behind his back doing something sinister, all my attention was on his waving hand.

Government politicians, along with slimy judges and corrupt fish and game departments are constantly waving a hand in front of your face while preparing the other hand to stab you in the back or kick you in the groin. This is what’s going on with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services’s double-dealing hand waving about the proposal to delist gray wolves in the Western Great Lakes.

Watch the hand! Watch the hand!

Isn’t the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) special? They care about the citizens’ desires in that region to help offer some relief from overblown gray wolf populations that they are saying they intend to delist (remove from federal protection of the Endangered Species Act) the gray wolves because they have fully recovered. I emboldened that last bit to draw your attention as I will follow up on this momentarily.

While you’re watching the one hand of USFWS the other is cheating and scheming on two fronts…. at least. Perhaps you are unaware of one or both of these.

Appearing to give a rats left ear about you, the USFWS says they want to delist wolves, while at the same time, with a hand behind their backs, they magically produce a second species of wolf, i.e. the eastern wolf. Before I go any further, let me ask readers this question. For as long as the corrupt USFWS has been trying to delist wolves in the Northern Rockies, why did it take an illegal act of Congress to achieve that goal? Continue!

Any fool knows that not even experts can look at a wolf and tell you what kind it is. Heck, most can’t even tell the difference between a wolf and a coyote. So, to cover the back end of the USFWS, who are trying to be friends with sane people and not lose the financial support of their environmentalist insane friends, they whipped up a new wolf species, knowing full well doing such would not allow for any kind of population control of Western Great Lakes gray wolves. This is the plan, in case you are not aware.

Employment of the gray wolf as a destructive tool of the environmentalist, progressive movement hasn’t run its useful course as of yet. The rules change constantly.

With this blackhearted chess move by the USFWS, nothing will change. What can change? How are fish and game biologists and authorities, let alone hunters and trappers, going to be able to go about “managing” delisted gray wolves when they are sharing space with the Disneyesque eastern wolf?

To refresh your memories, this maneuver also came about right after there was the serious threat of Congressional legislation that would remove “gray” wolves from administration efforts of the Endangered Species Act. What better way to counter a law targeted for “gray” wolves than to change the species and give it a different name.

If this isn’t enough, consider the fact that this kind of deceitful crap has been going on in politics since the first time the word ever appeared in the English language. There once was a day when these criminals did a better job of hiding their evil ways. Today, either people have gotten smarter or the crooks in Washington have gotten dumber (I’ll accept somewhere in the middle).

The USFWS says that the gray wolves have recovered. According to the U.S. Sportman’s Alliance, the same USFWS claims they don’t know how many gray wolves there are or eastern wolves living in shared quarters in the Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment region.

The FWS has issued proposed regulations (for a third time) to remove the WGL population of gray wolves from the endangered species list. Since the WGL wolf numbers exceed recovery goals by 600 to 1,000 percent, delisting is fully warranted. But the proposed delisting rule includes a nasty surprise: it says there are two separate wolf species in the WGL region – gray wolves (Canis lupus) and eastern wolves (Canis lycaon). The FWS does not know how many of each roam the region, but still believes gray wolves are recovered.

Can you not see the shell game going on here. This is intellectual, as well as, scientific rubbish and an insult on the intelligence of some of the dumbest people around (please take this as a light-hearted joke to make a point).

I’m reminded of a true story about my nephew when he was just about 3-4 years old. He was having a difficult day and didn’t want to eat his lunch. His father instructed him that he was not going to get down from the table until he had finished his lunch. I was visiting at the time, so my brother and I removed ourselves from the kitchen and went to sit in the living room. In a short bit, my nephew enters the room with wide eyes and childlike dishonesty and exclaims, “Dad! I’m all done eating my lunch……but don’t go look, Okay?”

We are supposed to think and act like the 3-4 year old children the U.S. Government thinks we are. Okay, okay! I’ll ask the question. If the USFWS doesn’t know how many gray wolves there are and how many eastern wolves there are, how in the hell do they know whether the gray wolves have recovered?

Oh, wait. Follow me on this. That’s their backup plan. Knowing that the environmentalists will file lawsuits, this will give them perhaps enough ammunition to win their case that wolves can’t be recovered if USFWS doesn’t know how many there are. Get it?

(Note: And we haven’t even begun to discuss how this will all play out in Judge Paul Freidman’s court. Remember, he was the judge that last ruled in the WGL wolf delisting lawsuit, stating that the USFWS didn’t have the authority to create Distinct Population Segments.)

Bill Horn, who is U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (USSA) Director of Federal Affairs, and is a former Assistant Secretary of the Interior in charge of the USFWS and Endangered Species Act, calls this move by the USFWS as a “treat deal”. USSA also makes this statement: “Why the FWS has taken this two species proposal step, contrary to the best scientific evidence, remains unknown.”

And within the very same paragraph, their own Bill Horn answers it.

“This trick deal allows the Administration to tell the Western Great Lakes states and hunters that it favors delisting, while winking and nodding to its activist pals that delisting is set up to fail,” said Horn.

It shouldn’t be a surprise to the USSA as to why the USFWS took this approach. What hasn’t made itself clear yet, at least in my mind, is what the USFWS is up to when it declared the mountain lion extinct in the East followed up immediately by its announcement that there now exists an “eastern wolf” species.

Stay tuned and wake up!

Tom Remington

From the U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance:

(Columbus, OH) – The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF) and a group of state sportsmen’s organizations have submitted comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for returning recovered wolf populations in the Western Great Lakes region to state management. Western Great Lakes wolves are currently on the Endangered Species List (ESA). This is the latest in the long-running saga of the USSAF’s support of scientific wildlife management.

In April, the Service announced a proposal to remove Western Great Lakes region wolves from ESA protection. This move would allow wolves in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin to be controlled by state wildlife managers.

USSAF’s comments to the Service highlight two major reasons for delisting this population.

First, the comments point out that wolves in the region have far exceeded recovery goals. Second, USSAF’s comments address a critical scientific issue created by the Service when it also announced that it may recognize a second species of wolves in the Western Great Lakes region. An incorrect finding that two species of wolves exist in the region would open the delisting to a challenge by the anti-hunting lobby seeking to prevent the return of wolves in the region to state management.

USSAF’s comments are supported by the affidavit of wildlife and wolf genetics expert Dr. Lisette Waits. Dr. Waits’ comments highlight wolf genetic studies and other scientific facts showing there are not two separate wolf species in the Western Great Lakes region and thus, the Service should not recognize a second species.

Joining USSAF in its comments are the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association, Dairyland Committee of Safari Club International Chapters of Wisconsin, Whitetails of Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Firearms Owners, Rangers, Clubs, and Educators, Inc.

“For years, science has shown that these wolves have far exceeded recovery goals,” said Rob Sexton, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance vice president of government affairs. “Additionally, we hope that the Service will look at the prevailing scientific facts that show only one wolf population exists within the Western Great Lakes region and it will avoid letting the antis use this unsupported claim as another roadblock to rightfully returning wolves to state management.”

Previous efforts to delist recovered wolf populations have been reversed as a result of lawsuits filed by animal rights groups. In those cases, the reversals dealt with technical issues and did not question or overturn findings that wolves have met recovery goals.

Click here to view a complete copy of USSAF’s comments.

MISSOULA, Mont.–Relocating elk and improving habitat in the Clam Lake area, plus sponsoring numerous youth education initiatives across Wisconsin, are the main themes in a list of 2011 grants for Wisconsin from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

All together, the new RMEF grants total $ $52,111 and affect 24 counties: Ashland, Barron, Bayfield, Burnett, Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Douglas, Fond du Lac, Forest, Green Lake, Iowa, Kewaunee, La Crosse, Lafayette, Marathon, Milwaukee, Portage, Price, Sawyer, St. Croix, Washburn, Waukesha and Wood counties.

“The ‘assisted dispersal’ of the Clam Lake elk herd is making news in Wisconsin, and we’re pleased to help with that relocation project. We expect it to help the herd grow by moving elk to new areas with good habitat and reducing elk mortality from wolves and highway accidents,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO.

Allen said about 120 acres of habitat will be enhanced with 2011 grants in Wisconsin.

Nationally, RMEF hopes to impact about 100,000 acres in 2011 to reach the 6 million-acre lifetime mark in lands conserved or enhanced for elk and other wildlife.

Allen thanked RMEF volunteers and fundraiser attendees for building the organization’s conservation impact in Wisconsin and across elk country, saying, “Because of their amazing passion and generous support, we’re doing some great things locally and a national conservation milestone is within reach.”

RMEF grants will help fund the following 2011 projects, listed by county:

Ashland County–Improve forage for elk on the decommissioned Navy ELF corridor by applying herbicide on 20 acres and bio-controls (insects) on 2 acres, mowing 58 acres, hand-cutting trees and shrubs on 30 acres and prescribe burning 12 acres in the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest (also affects Sawyer County); provide funding for radio telemetry equipment operated by students from Glidden High School to research elk habitat use and movement patterns in the Clam Lake area (also affects Price County); sponsor Clam Lake Elk Visitor Center costs associated with an informational kiosk.

Barron County–Provide sponsorship for Coyland Creek 2011 Youth in the Outdoors Day to introduce youths to outdoor recreation and conservation (also affects Polk, Burnett and Washburn counties).

Columbia County–Provide sponsorship for Fall River School District National Archery in the Schools Program to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Dane County–Provide sponsorship for Blackhawk Bowhunters Archery Club programs to introduce youths to outdoor recreation and conservation; sponsor Lake Marion 2011 Family Fishing Day.

Dodge County–Provide sponsorship for Wisconsin Outdoor Alliance Foundation 2011 Outdoor Education Expo to introduce youths from across the state to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Douglas County–Provide sponsorship for Superior High School National Archery in the Schools Program to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Forest County–Provide sponsorship for Laona School District National Archery in the Schools Program to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Green Lake County–Provide sponsorship for the Berlin Conservation Club’s 2011 Youth Outdoor Skills Day to introduce youths to outdoor recreation and conservation (also affects Fond du Lac County).

Iowa County–Provide sponsorship for Friends of West Park 2011 Youth Fishing Day to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Kewaunee County–Provide sponsorship for St. Paul’s Lutheran School National Archery in the Schools Program to introduce students to outdoor education and conservation.

La Crosse County–Provide sponsorship for La Crosse Rifle Club hunter safety program to educate youths on proper use of firearms and archery equipment; sponsor West Salem Rod and Gun Club 2011 youth event.

Lafayette County–Provide sponsorship for Lafayette County 4-H Club archery program to introduce youths to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Marathon County–Provide sponsorship for Marathon County 2011 Sporting Heritage Day to introduce youth to outdoor recreation and conservation; sponsor Wausau West High School National Archery in the Schools Program (NASP); sponsor Rib Mountain Bowmen Club House NASP; sponsor Weston Hunter Safety Group hunter safety classes; sponsor Stratford Sharp Shooters and Stratford Public Schools NASP.

Portage County–Provide sponsorship for Antler Archers 2011 Youth Archery Program to introduce youths to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Price County–Provide sponsorship for the Phillips School District Outdoor Activity Group which works to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation; sponsor Phillips Sportsman’s Club 2011 Youth Field Day to introduce Phillips area youth to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Sawyer County–Relocate 12-15 elk from the Clam Lake herd to unoccupied habitat expected to enhance elk survival and expansion rates (also affects Ashland, Bayfield and Price counties); provide sponsorship for Hayward RMEF 2011 Outdoor Youth Day to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Statewide–Provide sponsorship for Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) production of a hunting regulations informational packet; sponsor WDNR Sandhill Outdoor Skills Center 2011 Learn to Hunt Workshops; sponsor WDNR biologist attendance at Eastern Elk Management Workshop in preparation for Wisconsin’s first elk hunt in 2012.

St. Croix County–Provide sponsorship for Baldwin Christian School National Archery in the Schools Program to introduce students to outdoor recreation and conservation.

Waukesha County–Provide sponsorship for Wisconsin House Outdoorsmen hunter education programs to instruct students on hunting and firearms (also affects Milwaukee County).

Wood County–Provide sponsorship for Wisconsin Rapids Kiwanis Club 2011 Youth Outdoor Day to introduce youths from across the state to outdoor recreation and conservation; sponsor West Central Wisconsin 2011 Intro to the Outdoors Youth Education Day.

Conservation projects are selected for grants using science-based criteria and a committee of RMEF volunteers and staff along with representatives from partnering agencies and universities. RMEF staff and volunteers select education projects to receive grants.

Partners for 2011 projects in Wisconsin include U.S. Forest Service, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, sportsmen clubs and many other organizations.

Since 1985, RMEF and its partners have completed 211 different conservation and education projects in Wisconsin with a combined value of more than $5.9 million.

*Editor’s Note:* Upon a request from Mrs. Bartell, I am posting the following synopsis of what transpired at a recent community meeting in Challis, Idaho. The meeting featured representatives of the Western Predator Control Association, who spoke about a tape worm, Echinococcus Granulosus, which causes hydatid disease, a very serious cystic disease that is difficult and expensive to treat and can be fatal to humans. There is reference in the below article about a woman who recently had hydatid cysts removed from her liver. While I have no reason to doubt the information provided by the woman’s husband at this meeting, efforts are underway as I write to pull together as much official information in this case as this is extremely serious. There is little need to spread panic among the citizenry, however, now that it appears that humans are beginning to contract this disease, serious steps will need to be taken. This is a sobering public safety issue.

Dear Mrs. Bartell,

Here belatedly is a brief synopsis you requested of the presentation given in Challis Idaho, by the Western Predator Control Association. I seem to always sit straighter in my chair when I know I am writing something for a retired school teacher, but please bear with my faults as I try my best to give you an overview of the meeting. On April 30th Dr. Clay Dethlefsen and Dr. Jack Ward , both representing the Montana based Western Predator Control Association (WPCA) gave the residents of Custer County an update of their research on the canine strain tapeworm Echincoccus granulosus and the resulting complications of Hydatid Disease that results from cysts that form around the parasite as it invades different organs of the ungulate or human body. The disease is dangerous to the host for many reasons, organ function can be impaired, cysts may burst causing lethal shock, and rapid growth of cysts can displace organs causing physical complications. The surgical remedies for removing the cysts are extremely dangerous and costly. Dr. Dethlefsen, President and Executive director of the Association, gave the majority of the presentation with Dr. Jack Ward the Medical Director of the Association being called upon to share his expertise from a long career in the field of Ungulate Pathology. From the opening of the meeting on, Dr. Dethlefsen made it very clear that the focus of their presentation was not about eliminating wolves but was totally focused on their research attempts to produce data that would give Counties in the western states a real handle on the extent of the Echincoccus granulosus infestation geographically, and the level of infestation of all species that may have contracted this parasite from the Canadian Gray Wolf. Several disease vectors were discussed, including canine fecal contamination, mechanical spread of the disease by birds such as magpies, ravens and eagles, and new to most of us, the spread of the disease by insects such as wasps. Dr. Dethlefsen indicated that fecal contamination of our water systems from spring time sheet flow (runoff) through canine fecal material would be a major health issue for us to consider. Health officials in both the countries of Turkey and Romania claim a large percentage of cases of Hydatid Disease infections in their human populations comes from contaminated water supplies. A four phase Eradication Program was discussed that was presented very simply as an effort that would be carried out at a county level until the threat of Hydatid Disease was removed. The plan seemed to have its origination from several countries where the effort was successful in controlling the disease. Those countries were Tasmania, Australia, and Turkey . The Plan followed this order:
1. Preparation Phase
2. Attack Phase
3. Consolidation Phase
4. Maintenance Phase

Dr. Dethlefsen repeated again that the focus of Western Predator Control was to produce Data that would enable Western States to accurately determine the degree of contamination of their ecosystems at the county level and at three demographic interfaces, those being Wilderness, Urban, and Residential. The point was clearly made that the Eradication Plan would be carried out most stringently at the Urban and Residential interfaces and that the “Protocols” were VERY EXPENSIVE!!!!!

At this juncture ,the rather disturbing issue of “Pet Protocols” was brought up. Since the country of Turkey was most advanced in designing regulations for treatment of domestic animals including cats and dogs, in this aspect, Dr. Dethlefsen reviewed what was required for our cats and dogs. The animals must be kenneled during the duration of the Protocol, their feces would need to be collected and destroyed to prevent re-infestation and the kennel area would need to be properly sanitized upon completion of the drug treatments. The drug Praziquantel was used and administered three times at two week intervals at an estimated cost of fifty to sixty dollars per treatment per animal (This is what Ed Bangs SHOULD have done with his wolves but did nothing!!!!!) This would put the cost of the drug treatment alone at over $150.00 per animal with the added expense of the kenneling. In Turkey the disease is considered so dangerous both health wise and economically that the treatments are funded by the government. The meeting then turned to the issue of the Scope of the Eradication Program. At this point both Dr. Ward and Dr. Dethlefsen concurred that all “sister” counties MUST be involved in the same control efforts if there is to be a successful elimination of Echincoccus granulosus. This would include sister counties across state lines. Dr. Dethlesen covered some aspects of sampling of canines, ungulates, and avian species that volunteers could do in lieu of training that WPCA would be giving for those people in each county that were interested in helping out with sampling. A very interesting issue came up at this point , Dr. Dethlefsen made the statement that it was just as important to find out with the sampling effort what areas had NOT been infested YET as it was those areas that were infested. He reiterated that by finding “clean areas” we could determine where the parasite was being carried from and we could put great emphasis on keeping those areas “clean” and pursuing the infestation where it was occurring.

Sadly another case of “deliberate incompetence” on the part of Ed Bangs came up when a question was fielded regarding the types of “care” given the Canadian Gray Wolves before they were released into our states. Dr. Dethlefsen stated that NO significance was given to the Echincoccus issue as a health threat to humans in the introduction areas and as a consequence the only treatments given the wolves for both the hard and soft releases were for THE HEALTH OF THE WOLVES!!!!! Everyone in the audience realized instantly that we had been allowed to believe that the wolves had been screened and treated for any threat to humans from diseases they were carrying , but in reality NOTHING had been done in this regard!!! The audience at this point was very visibly angered!! At this time a man from the audience stood up and faced the room and remarked that to Ed Bangs and Company the tapeworm was a non-issue, but to his family it was an extremely devastating disease, since his wife had just had a Hydatid cyst removed from her liver. He stated that the family was hoping and praying that there were no more cysts that the doctors had missed. The gentleman remarked that his part of the cost for his wife’s surgery was 63,000 dollars!
Question and answer time came next, with both Drs. Dethlefsen and Ward fielding the questions. An outfitter asked why Canada was not having a problem with Hydatid disease and if cougars and bears were also carriers? Dr. Dethlefsen responded that Canada was having a problem with Hydatid Disease at the present but that it was hard to extract the data from them because there was a lockdown on Canadian medical stats and he was not sure why. He responded to the second question that bear and cougar did not appear to be a significant carrier of the disease and that indeed in Asia there was a porcine strain of Echincoccus that bears carried but that it was not an issue here in North America. The conclusion of that question and answer was that the sampling being done would be very revealing as to which species in our ecosystems were the greatest carriers of the tapeworm and that when the data was in, Western States could take appropriate actions, but the actions must be science driven. An overhead was used during this time that showed the sampling data that WPCA had generated so far in testing Wolves from Ravalli County , Montana, from Lemhi and Custer Counties in Idaho, and from areas in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. The level of infestation was from 62% to 84% with the samples generally well distributed over the sampling areas. Clearly our counties in Idaho have a very serious problem to deal with since a 2006 report on Echincoccus in the north central part of Idaho showed over 60% of wolves as carriers of this tapeworm. Senator Jeff Siddoway asked some very pertinent questions, and then concluded that Dr. Dethlefsen was telling us that the only way to deal with wolves as the main carrier of Echincoccus granulosus was for Idaho to kill ALL the Canadian Gray Wolves. Again Dr. Dethlefsen was very firm in replying that he did not tell us that, but was showing us that we had a POTENTIAL health disaster to get prepared for and that WPCA could help by revealing to the counties where the carriers were and had come from. At this point Mrs. Bartell, yours truly, asked a question I had been waiting a long time to ask of somebody with the background to give us an authoritative answer. I asked Dr. Clay how the Echincoccus tapeworm traveled thru the hosts body and if could become systemic to a point that the tissues or meat of the carcass was contaminated. I think his shocking answer finally got through to our local cattle producers who have had their heads in the sand. He answered that upon ingestion of shed eggs from the gravid section of the tapeworm, the eggs hatch and mature and some migrate thru the intestinal wall and usually get into the blood stream. From the blood stream the worm can end up in several organs, such as the liver,lungs, or brain. Other viable worms can end up in the capillary buds thus contaminating the tissues of the carcass!!!!! Dr. Dethlefsen stopped for a few seconds to let the impact of this sink in. He then continued by stating that if the Hydatid Disease is found in either wild or domestic ungulates the days of asking , “How do you want your steak done?” are over!!!!!! The meat if eaten MUST be WELL COOKED!!! That was as close to a rancher’s wakeup call as I ever think I will ever hear!

In closing, Dr. Dethlefsen advised us to look into designing local ordinances, to study our State C Constitutions and local ordinances that are already in place for controlling infectious diseases. Also briefly discussed at the meetings end was the abuse of NEPA mandates which dictate by law that “HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY BE CONSIDERED AS WELL AS ECONOMIC IMPACTS BEFORE A SPECIES IS PROTECTED OR RELEASED IN AN AREA OF CONCERN”.

Mrs Bartell, I know I am leaving something out but this will give you an idea of what was covered at this informative meeting. I believe we are going to start up a WPCA chapter in Custer County and I know that Lemhi County already has. We hopefully will start to sample as soon as possible. Tell folks they can Google up Western Predator Control Association or WPCA to check out this group for themselves.

Tim Kemery

It wasn’t even 2 months into Barack Obama’s presidency when he declared, “Today, I’ve signed a memorandum that will help restore the scientific process to its rightful place at the heart of the Endangered Species Act, a process undermined by past administrations,”. The U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance (USSA) today is beginning to think Obama’s “restored” scientific process has conjured up a fictitious new specie of wolf.

The USSA was one of the organizations spending valuable money attempting to force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to once again make an attempt to delist wolves in Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. Their hopes heightened when they learned the Feds planned to publish a Final Rule declaring the wolf recovered, only to be crushed to hear in the same press release that a new specie of wolf was discovered.

Bill Horn, Director of Federal Affairs for USSA, writes:

Consultations with wolf experts persuades us that the convenient discovery of this new “species” is scientifically bogus. Finding this new species of wolves is like declaring that different races of humans are different species. We’re all Homo sapiens and the wolves in the Great Lakes (and adjacent Canada) are Canis lupus.

Last September I warned that wolves would never be delisted in the Western Great Lakes area. What’s laughable in many respects is that I figured it would just end up back in court with still no solution to a problem that has no solution. It may still end up in court but for now the Feds have found a new and mysterious wolf that should tie this up for at least 10 more years.

To the USSA and all the other sportsman’s groups, I say, put your money away and spend it on something that stands a snowball’s chance in hell of doing something good for outdoor sportsmen.

Tom Remington