RSS

Wild Horses, Welfare Ranching, and Government Corruption

public lands and cattle

White Paper by John Cox

The objective of a conservation program for non-game wild life should be exactly parallel [to that of game management]: to retain for the average citizen the opportunity to see, admire, and enjoy, and the challenge to understand, the varied forms of birds and mammals indigenous to his state. It implies   each community.  – Aldo Leopold

Time for the truth about Welfare Ranching.  The superficial nonsense of not discussing such a situation involves continued scams for taxpayer money, continued complacency toward the difference of what is wrong and what is right, and the issues of incompetent government combined with special interest groups forcing themselves into large subsidies of taxpayer money – for unnecessary situations.

Our natural surroundings, our environment, is in danger today.  It is in danger and involves, specifically, Welfare Ranching (ranchers who graze their cattle on Public Lands) on America’s Public lands. The ranchers ignore truth and good conservation land management; which is replaced by arrogant and ignorant government agencies and Welfare Ranchers, who falsify their information to the taxpayer’s and general public.  Make no doubt, America’s Public Lands is mismanaged, but mostly out of sight to the average person or taxpayer, so it continues unchecked, unregulated, and undeniably criminal within many aspects . . .

The fact is laws were created to protect our Public Lands from these ongoing situations, and discussed here.  Unfortunately, the people the laws were to protect the Public Lands from, the welfare ranchers and large corporations, actually populate the Bureau of Land Management and other Oversight Boards and Committees – the actual lands management situation is simply not there at all, and mismanagement, misinformation to the public, and bad science the norm.  For those of us who see this daily, we wonder constantly why there is not an investigative situation exploring such obvious and criminal conduct.

There is a lot the Welfare Ranching community would like us Not to See . . . As they certainly will not mention the following, or want especially American Taxpayers to know the true facts . . .

But what are we talking about?  Well, Welfare Ranching, ranchers who run their cattle on Public Lands, America’s Lands, via Grazing Permit from the Bureau of Land Management, are a big problem.  BLM does not manage them appropriately what so ever.  Corruption and criminal conduct abundant by both.

Welfare Ranching, or cattle run on Public Lands, do not have a good record:

  1. Commercial Domestic Beef from Public Lands sales receipts (GAO, Comm. Spec. Stats, DOI Reports, et al.) show less than 1% in commercial domestic sales from 2009 to 2015;
  2. Welfare Rancher’s numbers are merely 2.7% of overall commercial cattle ranchers domestically;
  3. Due to Welfare Rancher paranoia and demands for more cattle on Public Lands, America’s wildlife is being eradicated at 1.2 million wildlife-animals per year to 5.8 million wildlife-animals per year (i.e. Wildlife Services a subordinate of USDA, continues eradication of animals from 2000 to 2014 and mostly from Public Lands at the request of Welfare Ranchers) in the pretense of protecting cattle and sheep – but remain unchecked by regulatory situations, as they violate regulations and laws as well, constantly;
  4. Public Lands is mismanaged by the BLM, and the amount of cattle and sheep on Public Lands is far too many, an overabundance, and destruction of Public Lands ongoing, but hidden by “bad-science” as conducted by the BLM (i.e. Rangeland Reports do not contain information of cattle presence on Public Lands, thereby, left unobserved by legislators and they assume everything is okay – but it is not);
  5. Unnecessary wild horse herd roundups, demanded by the Welfare Ranching community, are predicated on falsified wild horse overpopulation counts done by BLM, on falsified competition factors with cattle and sheep, costing taxpayers $75.4 million yearly – rounding up and storage (i.e. per government and private contractor invoice, vouchers, receipts, and government Procurement Process authorizations and payments)
  6. Wild Horses, as well as other wildlife, are killed or driven from Public Lands, to place more cattle and sheep onto Public Lands – and at the demands of Welfare Ranchers, who indeed remain coercive and threaten BLM consistently, on a constant basis;
  7. American Taxpayer’s support this situation unknowingly, and kept very quiet, at an abundant amount of overall subsidies and other situations noted below at $1.2 Billion yearly;
  8. Welfare Ranching is unneeded in America (we simply want them to compete in the open-market and not subsidized any longer), but a lot of fraud, a lot of criminal conduct, wild horse theft, many $150,000 water tanks which are nothing more than 55 gal. oil drums with a garden hose on top, and the list is vast;
  9. Disposal/throw-away situation from beef markets remains at 28% -plus domestically (i.e. USDA Statistics 2005 to 2015), gives an even more unbiased and confirmed fact that the amount of beef being produced in America, on our Public Lands right now is unnecessary, and Public Lands do not need to be sacrificed for common sense and obvious reasoning;
  10. Much of Public Lands beef is shipped to Japan, China, and Russia at a reduced cost – and why not, because American Taxpayer’s are paying the price to raise it – Welfare Rancher beef at an average cost to Taxpayer’s, via Subsidies, are from a low of $145,000 to $375,000 per year to $2.8 million dollars yearly – ironically, many welfare ranching situations are corporate owned or filed as a Trust Ownership (info via Gov. and Commercial Receipts, Procurement Invoices, Subsidy Procurement . . . et al. ;
  11. The fact stands out that Welfare Ranching is unneeded in America, and not of heritage, nor do taxpayers receive any benefits what so ever from their presence on Public Lands, and a way over abundant amount of cattle per acre.

Welfare Rancher entitlements from Heritage?

One might ask about western ranching heritage?  Well, when we peruse deeds and family ownership, within the Welfare Ranching (those who qualified for Public Lands Grazing Permits, who have not enough private land/graze for the amount of cattle owned – yet another conflict in common sense) community, we discover a majority of ownership to be corporate, or Trusts with assured tax write-offs.

Something else we found rare, interesting to say the least, was no family-owned ranches have existed over a 40-year time period, and ironically, the 2% that did there is nothing to show (family relationships, et al.) beyond the 1950’s.  So heritage?  Not really, although some families will state heritage, but it simply does not exist – at least in accord to property deeds and titles.

So why do many Welfare Rancher’s today feel entitled, when in reality no entitlement deserved . . .  One can suppose, and be correct, that their entitled mentality to taxpayer money and Federal Lands be given them is “illusory superiority perceptions” at best.  Because they have gotten away with corruption on Public Lands, and break laws that anyone else would go to jail for, is not an appropriate qualification toward entitlement and thousands of dollars of taxpayer money yearly.  And this one of so many reason they would like to take-over Public Lands – Money!  And a lot of it!

One can say in truth that Welfare Ranching is a taxpayer supported industry, subsidy-driven, even though undocumented and unknown to many American taxpayers.  Subsidies, within Welfare Ranching, abound with other questionable situations; which, almost all are illegal situations.  The Problem here?  Often all of this is ignored or left unenforced by the oversight and regulating government agencies.

So where do we go from here?

BLM Indulges Welfare Ranchers

Here exists one example of many, how the BLM backs down form what is nothing more than a Welfare Ranching epidemic that should be discontinued – and more recent examples abound of Welfare Ranching conduct, and over the years costing taxpayers vast fortunes – so yes, they want Public lands for themselves, and supported by taxpayer money to continue.

But remember, in no way is this unique, as a book could be written about Welfare Ranching improprieties, dishonesty, and criminality.  BLM, because it is family-religious-oriented in their hiring practices, and a government agency packed with rancher-connections (i.e. family and neighbors alike, et sl.), the illegal activities are allowed, so to speak.  Federal and state laws apparently do not apply to neither Welfare Ranchers or BLM employees, with many simply ignored, or bought-off (i.e. the history of BLM and wild horses going to slaughter only one of many examples).

And keep in mind, the Taylor Grazing Act was designed to “Protect” Public Lands from rancher impropriety and misuse and overabundance of cattle placed on Public Lands, as it was perceived, and foreseen even then – yet ignored in total.

Welfare Ranching Scam (one of many)

One can say in truth that Welfare Ranching is a taxpayer supported industry, subside-driven, even though an unknown to many American taxpayers.  Subsidies abound with other questionable situations.  Undeniable that almost all are illegal situations, and also ignored or left unenforced by government agencies.

Here is an example of collecting money by Scam (excerpt from Newspaper Article). 

So why the anti-government rebellion?  Nothing more than a smoke-screen, and the rebels will leave you with a lack-of-facts – because if you knew of these facts, they would appear very much as petty criminals, or some state like little children trying to pull a fast one on their parents.

____________________________

Collecting drought money and stating no drought . . .

“In June, tough-talking ranchers in remote Battle Mountain, Nevada, defied the federal government, herding cattle onto public rangeland that had been closed to grazing to protect it during the West’s scorching drought.

That act of defiance capped two years of protest against grazing restrictions imposed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, which manages thousands of square miles of arid federal land in Nevada.

In the end, the federal government backed down from the confrontation in Battle Mountain. The BLM canceled the drought closures and opened the range, just as the cattlemen wanted.

By denying the severity of the drought – and by claiming that “rogue” federal bureaucrats threatened them with economic ruin – the ranchers won the day. But even as the conflict played out, some of these same ranchers were collecting drought subsidies from the federal government.

On one hand, they denied the drought. On the other hand, they embraced it.

According to records obtained by Reveal, two ranching families at the center of the Battle Mountain protests received $2.2 million from a federal drought disaster relief program.

Don Filippini, the protest leader who turned hundreds of cattle loose on the closed range, was paid $338,000 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Livestock Forage Disaster Program in 2014, records show.

Another $750,000 federal payout went to a trust and corporation associated with the Filippini family, which long has been active in ranching in Nevada.

Meanwhile, significant payments also went to the family of Battle Mountain cattleman Peter Tomera, who with his wife and sons rode on the Grass March Cowboy Express, a 2014 horseback ride to Washington, D.C., to protest the government drought restrictions. The records show that the government paid $250,000 to a Tomera family trust and another $360,000 to a family corporation.

An additional $540,000 was paid to other members of the extended Tomera family and to a related corporation, records show . . .

. . . Rather than moving against Dan Filippini for trespassing – and risking a prolonged Bundy-style confrontation – the BLM quickly negotiated a settlement. Under its terms, the closed range was reopened to grazing. In exchange, the Filippinis agreed to drop further appeals of the prior closure orders.

Environmentalists complained that the BLM rewarded the ranchers for violating the law, allowing them to run cattle on a drought-stressed range that they said already was battered by decades of overgrazing.

“The livestock industry enjoys heavily subsidized grazing privileges,” said Kirsten Stade of the Washington-based group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. “But (it) acts as if it has an entitlement to the public’s lands.”

In all, the USDA’s livestock disaster program paid out more than $204 million to Nevada cattle and sheep ranchers in 2014, records show. The payments were for losses claimed in 2012, 2013 and 2014.

To get relief, ranchers were required to fill out applications reporting the size of their herds and verifying they were pastured in a county where the U.S. Drought Monitor declared that drought conditions prevail.” — Credit: Sandra Chereb/Associated Press”

Conclusion

This inclusion, which many more similar situations exist, shows us these are not the honest ranchers of decades past, and part of America’s Heritage – Nope, these people are a different situation entirely, and money, not ranching or heritage, is their motive, their priority, and they really do not care how they get it, but they want it – and deception is their game . . .

Frankly, between the taxpayer money and other wildlife and wild horses, for example, that are killed yearly, and among the criminality involved and other questionable conduct – the sacrifice to America, and American’s, is simply to great – especially for a situation that is totally unnecessary.  The fact is we can do without welfare ranching, and not even notice it has been discontinued.

Yes, we could then go out to our Public Lands, enjoy not only the healthy environment, but seeing Wild Horses and other wildlife, and drink the water from the creeks in the areas we visit.  Right now Public Lands is being destroyed, and American Taxpayer’s have no idea they are paying for the destruction and killing of wildlife.  And that’s the bottom line entirely!

 
5 Comments

Posted by on January 15, 2016 in Uncategorized

 

The Wild Horses: Today questions must be answered before extinction

be-still1

In the matters of so much evidence, that wild horses are indeed Indigenous to North America, it becomes an imperative that roundups stop. As well, the cattle-only paradigm is an insufficient excuse to allow further roundups, as we potentially are speaking about an Indigenous Species to North America, which due to recent information, may be significant in events toward our natural environment. The actual reduction of populations of wild horses, in order to place more and more cattle on public lands, is of questionable standards and ecology, which equates to no Conservation or Ecological efforts what so ever, made toward America’s Public Lands.

The extinction of particular species, by human’s and climate, have been the topic of much scientific debate today. Ironically, the Ice Age may not have been as devastating to many mammals as we were led to believe. There is a majority of evidence, and more accumulating almost weekly right now, that supports the hypothesis of “Pleistocene Overkill” (Martin and Wright 1967, Flannery 2001), or events similar to this same situation, perhaps not as dramatic within a population-kill context.

Wildlife Overkill Events

If not in total, it then becomes a significant link to a combination of Ice Age and Pleistocene Overkill – which leads many of us to believe that wild horses did survive, and current overlooked evidence, from the past attests to this situation. The fact is many archeologists and paleontologists of the past, simply took the non-debatable route (career oriented) of non-inclusive animals from Ice Age survival.

The fact is questions are easily answered, in the matters of so many wild horse bones being found along side — of and with – Dwarf Woolly Mammoth bones, as both fed on similar vegetation, and existed pre-ice age as well as post ice-age – as shown at many modern-day archeological sites.

This hypothesis of Pleistocene-Overkill suggested that as humans spread across the two continents, they preyed upon the large herbivores, such as mammoths, ground sloths, etc. Such large animals are more vulnerable to extinction than smaller ones because they cannot hide as easily, and because their lower reproductive rates cannot compensate for the losses due to hunting. Horses are within this categorical situation as well, but being smaller at that time, the question does arise, were all wild horses killed, or were there many left to breed, that is, once the larger prey-animals become extinct?

Before humans entered the picture, North America had an impressive assortment of large mammals and birds. The herbivores of this megafauna included 3 species of elephants (woolly mammoths, giant mammoths, and mastodons), horses, camels, giant bison, giant ground sloths, giant armadillos, tapirs, giant beaver, giant tortoises (roughly the size of Volkswagen bugs), and a peccary as large as the wild boars of Europe.

They also may have had a fearlessness of humans, somewhat like the dodo bird, because these animals evolved without human presence. When the large herbivores disappeared, their natural predators, such as saber-toothed tigers and short-nosed bears, became extinct as well. The large scavenger bird species, adapted to eating the remains of large animals, then followed into extinction. The California condor may have held on because it had access to the carcasses of marine mammals, which did not suffer high extinction rates at that time.

Questions Abound in Realistic Horse Extinctions

Some researchers propose that North American caballine horses did not become extinct, and instead persisted until historical times (Clutton-Brock 1981). This hypothesis has not been previously generally accepted because: (1) No horse bones from the late pre-Columbian era have been found to support the idea, and (2) no indisputable images of horses have been found in late pre-Colombian American Indian “art” — That is, until the Nevada find, the Oregon finds, the New Mexico finds, numerous Alaska finds, the substantial Northwestern Canada finds, etc. All of these archeological finds reported not only late pre-Columbian horse bones, but images on horses within nearby caves, some were considered overlooked in the past, and some misidentified as other than late pre-Columbian America Indian “art.”

Furthermore, when the Spanish arrived with their horses to Mexico in the 16th century, the Aztecs and other educated peoples of that region did not initially understand what horses were. All horses found today in North America are thus believed to be descended from horses brought to the New World from the Old World after the year 1492. Misidentification had plagued proper identification of the horse throughout history, many times, which only now is being questioned as well.

After over 55 million years of evolution and residence in North America, horses became extinct, supposedly. This extinction occurred either in the late Pleistocene or early Holocene. (The Holocene is the period of time we live in now. It began after the Wisconsonian glaciers melted, roughly 10,000 years ago.) But in reality, were they simply left unseen, or around so much perhaps taken for granted? Well, we remain unsure – for example even in the old west, even though not mentioned in many history books or records, we know horses played a part in not only transport, but farming, ranching, building of cities, trail building, surveys, roadwork, et al.

Were the hunters/gatherer’s distracted by other wildlife, more palatable, so the horse neglected in total, or shoved aside? Because explanation still needs to be developed in horse bones next to the Dwarf Woolly Mammoth bones, late pre-Columbian era, that are currently being found at archeological sites throughout the western United States.

Horse Species Survival

When horses became extinct in the New World, some species of Equus still survived in the Old World (e.g. zebras, wild asses and caballines) that portray a hypothesis that wild horses from the Pleistocene era more than likely survived as well. Their ancestors had dispersed there years earlier via the Bering Land Bridge, which connected Alaska to Siberia during periods when sea levels were lower. Many of these horse species are still living, however most surviving species are now endangered. But one significant problem — we have no sense of confirmation, acceptability of how many species were at that time or remain alive today —

The Bering Land Bridge, also known as the central part of Beringia, is thought to have been up to 600 miles wide. Based on evidence from sediment cores drilled into the now submerged landscape, it seems that here and in some adjacent regions of Alaska and Siberia the landscape at the height of the last glaciation 21,000 years ago was shrub tundra – as found in Arctic Alaska today.

And the mystery becomes much more, well, let’s just say either short-sighted or confused, as some questions are answered — The vegetation, i.e. throughout Beringia, was first believed would not have supported the large, grazing animals – woolly mammoth, woolly rhino, Pleistocene horses, camels, and bison.

These animals lived on the vegetation of the steppe-tundra which dominated the interior of Alaska and the Yukon, as well as interior regions of northeast Siberia. Although, the shrub tundra, found up to this point, would have supported elk, perhaps some bighorn sheep, and small mammals. But problems with both the finding of Woolly Mammoths as well as Dwarf Woolly Mammoths later, and throughout the western United States, places this information into serious questions categorically.

“Permafrost horses and what they tell us —- Horses depicted in cave art are generally stocky, mostly tan or yellowish with a white belly, and usually shown with a stiff, dark mane*. They thus resemble Przewalski’s horse of modern Mongolia. Corroboratory evidence that Ice Age horses of some populations looked like this comes not only from living wild caballoids but also from the Selerikan horse (or Selerikan pony), a Pleistocene stallion preserved in Siberian permafrost, discovered in 1968, and extensively described in works largely unknown in the west (Guthrie 1990, Ukraintseva 2013). * It should be noted that not all ancient horses were like this – we have evidence that some Pleistocene horses in North America (and maybe elsewhere) had long, flowing manes.”

Throughout the Holocene, wild caballine horses continued to range across the grasslands of Europe and Asia. Approximately 5,000 years ago, wild caballines were captured at numerous locations in this vast geographic area and domesticated by diverse peoples, as the knowledge and technology for capturing, taming and riding horses spread (Vilà et al. 2001; Bendrey 2012).

Horse’s Today Perhaps Misidentified?

Thus, the domestic horse of today originated not from one local population of wild horses, but from numerous populations spread across Eurasia (Vilà et al. 2001; Bendrey 2012). Only one of these original wild caballine populations still exists. It is known as Przewalski’s Horse – or is it simply the only one we want to accept, because it is the easiest to explain? The fact is we are also finding, through DNA as well as Bloodlines, Pleistocene era attributes . . . in horses across the United States, Spain, and other European areas, i.e. France as well . . .

The supposed extinction of North America’s horses occurred during a time period when many other large mammals throughout the world also became extinct. Was it more comfortable to simply attest to the extinction of wild horses to be included, as a fact; or, just comfort because no explanation available, and who cared about this upstart country called America?

But yes, more problems — It is hard to find agreement in the literature about terminal dates. Kurtén and Anderson (1980) reported a dating of 8,000 years ago for horse fossils from Alberta, Canada, but MacFadden (2005) writes that North American horses became extinct roughly 10,000 years ago. Oh, there is so much more confusion, and this just the tip of the iceberg (pardon the pun) so to speak.

In Alaska, stilt-legged horses became extinct about 31,000 years ago, while caballine horses became extinct about 12,500 years ago (Guthrie 2003). Interestingly, Alaskan caballines showed a precipitous decline in body size before extinction, and vanished 1,300 years before woolly mammoths (Mammuthus primigenius) became extinct in the same area (Guthrie 2003). But once again, the Dwarf Woolly Mammoths being found throughout the western United States, turns the theories above into highly questionable information – confused at best.

Because climate change often causes alterations in the abundance of many other organisms, such as food plants, disease vectors, predators and competitors, extinction scenarios involving climate change can be diverse and involve many different mechanisms.

Although still unproven, the “overkill hypothesis” is a plausible explanation and should be given serious consideration. However, the reader needs to be wary of the political agenda of both some of its supporters, and the dubious conclusions that they derive from it, as well as the detractors, and simply not wanting to toss confusion into the game of horse breeding or authenticating blood-lines.

Conclusion or A Beginning

The modern-day American, like humans everywhere, are passionate horse lovers. The fossil record’s revelation to us all, that our very own continent is the ancient motherland of horses, has deepened the already strong emotions that we all feel toward horses, and strengthens Our-Bonds, that we indeed have with these extraordinary animals.

One example is the recent interest we Americans show for saving various species of Old World horses from extinction. This is developed to authenticate and bring concerns that such species occurred in North America, are closely-related to horses that existed centuries ago.

Some people, such as myself, strongly suggest introducing these species back into America, and to set all the wild horses in captivity, back onto America’s Public Lands – and for legitimate reasoning of not only historical nature, supported via current fossil records, but of value to All American’s, and the Iconic principles that do exist, whether or not our government reaffirms such situations or not. It is indeed a controversial proposal that is being studied more closely and debated (Donlan 2005; Oliviera-Santos and Fernandez 2010; Cox 2014; Cox 2009; Simson-Cox 2008; Stenson 2006).

There is no doubt we see a soul mate, a natural symbol of our own love for freedom, with deep and ancient roots in our own America – We are the Owners of America and the Wild Horses, and not the government nor any others that represent our behalf, and certainly not just the ranchers.

At the same time, the older fossil records are sobering, make no doubt of this situation. They had created revelation of the horse’s extinction in North America eight thousand years ago, and certainly reminded us today of the vulnerability of all nature and the need to make environmental protection a high priority. Even though current fossil records are showing us something different, extinction did not take place, even more sobering is the fact of how misinformation played such a roll within the current attempted demise of the wild horses on Public Lands.

Currently, this priority still exists, but now the priority of not only Humane Conduct, but developing the truth out of current Fossil Records, in a time when our own government in America has turned against the very people they are supposedly representing, and pay them to do so – thereby, throwing legitimate science, fossil records, and truthfulness into the wind. True American’s will not allow this façade to happen much longer . . .

_________________________________

References and Readings:

Alberdi MT, Prado JL, Ortiz-Jaureguizar E (1995) Patterns of body size change in fossil and living Equini (Perissodactyla). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 54:349-370
Azzaroli A (1995) A synopsis of the Quaternary species of Equus in North America. Bollettino della Societa Paleontologica Italiana 34:205-221
Azzaroli A (1998) The genus Equus in North America. Palaeontographia Italica 85: 1-60
Azzaroli A, Voorhies MR (1993) The genus Equus in North America. The Blancan species. Palaeontographia Italica 80:175-198
Bauer IE, McMorrow J, Yalden DW (1994) The historic ranges of three Equid species in northeast Africa – a quantitative comparison of environmental tolerances. Journal of Biogeography 21: 169-182
Bendrey R (2012) From wild horses to domestic horses: a European perspective. World Archaeology 44: (Special Issue) 135-157
Benton MJ (1990) Vertebrate Palaeontology. Unwin Hyman, London
Camp CL, Smith N (1942) Phylogeny and functions of the digital ligaments of the horse. University of California Mem. 13: 69-124
De Stoppelaire GH, Gillespie TW, Brock JC, Tobin GA (2004) Use of remote sensing techniques to determine the effects of grazing on vegetation cover and dune elevation at Assateague Island National Seashore: impact of horses. Environmental Management 34: 642-649
Donlan J, Greene HW, Berger J, Bock CE, Bock JH, Burney DA, Estes JA, Foreman D, Martin PS, Roemer GW, Smith FA, Soulé ME (2005) Re-wilding North America. Nature 436: 913-914
Downs T, Miller GJ (1994) Late Cenozoic Equus from the Anza-Borrego Desert of California. Contributions in Science, Los Angeles County Museum 440:1-90
Duncan P (1992) Horses and Grasses. Springer-Verlag, Berlin
Eisenmann V (1992) Origins, dispersals, and migrations of Equus (Mammalia, Perissodactyla). In Mammalian migration and dispersal events in the European Quaternary. von Koenigswald W, Werdelin L (editors). Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, Frankfurt, Germany
Feranec RS, MacFadden BJ (2000) Evolution of the grazing niche in Pleistocene mammals from Florida: evidence from stable isotopes. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 162:155-169
Forsten A, Eisenmann V (1995) Equus (Plesippus) simplicidens (Cope), not Dolichohippus. Mammalia 59: 85-89
Fortelius M, Solounias N (2000) Functional characterization of ungulate molars using abrasion-attrition wear gradient: a new method of reconstructing paleodiets. American Museum Novitates 3301:1-36
Froehlich DJ (2002) Quo vadis eohippus? The systematics and taxonomy of the early Eocene equids (Perissodactyla). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 134: 141-256
Garcés M, Cabrera L, Agustí J, Parés JM (1997) Old World first appearance datum of “Hipparion” horses: late Miocene large-mammal dispersal and global events. Geology 25:19-22
Gingerich PD (1989) New earliest Wasatchian mammalian fauna from the Eocene of northwestern Wyoming: composition and diversity in a rarely sampled high-floodplain assemblage. University of Michigan Papers on Paleontology 28: 1-97
Gingerich PD (1989) Systematics and evolution of early Eocene Perissodactyla (Mammalia) in the Clark’s Fork Basin, Wyoming. Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, University of Michigan 28: 181-213
Guthrie RD (2003) Rapid body size decline in Alaskan Pleistocene horses before extinction. Nature 426: 169-171
Henry M (1947) Misty of Chincoteague. Simon & Schuster, New York
Hermanson JW, MacFadden BJ (1996) Evolutionary and functional morphology of the knee in fossil and extant horses (Equidae). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 16:349-357.
Hulbert RC (1993a) Late Miocene Nannippus (Mammalia, Perissodactyla) from Florida, with a description of the smallest hipparionine horse. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 13:350-366
Hulbert RC (1993b) Taxonomic evolution in North American Neogene horses (subfamily Equinae): the rise and fall of an adaptive radiation. Paleobiology 19:216-234
Hulbert RC, Harrington CR (1999) An early Pliocene hipparionine horse from the Canadian Arctic. Palaeontology 42:1017-1025
Janis CM, Colbert MW, Coombs MC, Lambert WD, MacFadden BJ, Maden BJ, Prothero DR, Schoch RM, Shoshani J, Wall W (1998) Part V: Perissodactyla and Proboscidea. Pp. 511-524 in Evolution of Tertiary Mammals of North America. Volume 1: Terrestrial carnivores, ungulates, and ungulatelike mammals. Janis CM, Scott KM, Jacobs LL (Editors). Cambridge University Press, UK
Janis CM, Damuth J, Theodor JM (2000) Miocene ungulates and terrestrial primary productivity: where have all the browsers gone? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97: 7899-7904
Janis CM, Damuth J, Theodor JM (2002) The origins and evolution of the North American grassland biome: the story from hoofed mammals. Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology 177: 183-198
Kurtén B (1988) Before the Indians. Colombia University Press, New York
Kurtén B, Anderson E (1980) Pleistocene Mammals of North America. Columbia University Press, New York
MacFadden BJ (1992) Fossil Horses: Systematics, Paleobiology, and Evolution of the Family Equidae. Cambridge University Press, UK
MacFadden BJ (2001) Three-toed browsing horse Anchitherium clarencei from the early Miocene (Hemingfordian) Farm, Florida. Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 43:79-109
MacFadden BJ (2005) Fossil horses: evidence for evolution. Science 307: 1728-1730
MacFadden BJ, Hulbert RC (1990) Body size estimates and size distribution of ungulate mammals from the Late Miocene Love Bone Bed of Florida. Pp. 337-363 in Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology. Cambridge University Press, UK
MacFadden BJ, Cerling TE (1996) Mammalian herbivore communities, ancient feeding ecology, and carbon isotopes: a 10 million-year sequence from the Neogene of Florida. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 16:103-115
MacFadden BJ, Solounias N, Cerling TE (1999) Ancient diets, ecology and extinction of 5-million-year-old horses from Florida. Science 283: 824-827
MacFadden BJ, Carranza-Castañeda O (2002) Cranium of Dinohippus mexicanus (Mammalia: Equidae) from the early Pliocene of Central Mexico, and the origin of Equus. Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 43: 163-185
Maguire KC, Stigall AL (2008) Paleobiogeography of Miocene Equinae of North America: A phylogenetic biogeographic analysis of the relative roles of climate, vicariance, and dispersal. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 267: 175-184
Maguire KC, Stigall AL (2009) Using ecological niche modeling for quantitative biogeographic analysis: a case study of Miocene and Pliocene Equinae in the Great Plains. Paleobiology 35: 587-611.
McNaughton SJ, Tarrants JL, McNaughton MM, Davis RH (1985) Silica as a defense against herbivory and a growth promoter in African grasses. Ecology 66: 528-535
Mihlbachler MC, Rivals F, Solounias N, Semprebon GM (2011) Dietary change and evolution of horses in North America. Science 331: 1178-1181
Nowak RN (1999) Walker’s Mammals of the World. Sixth Edition. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Oakenfull EA, Lim HN, Ryder OA (2000) A survey of Equid mitochondrial DNA: implications for the evolution, genetic diversity and conservation of Equus. Conservation Genetics 1: 341-355
Oliviera-Santos LGR, Fernandez FAS (2010). Pleistocene rewilding, Frankenstein ecosystems, and an alternative conservation agenda. Conservation Biology 24: 4–5
Repenning CA, Weasma TR, Scott GR (1995) The early Pleistocene (latest Blancan-earliest Irvingtonian) Froman Ferry fauna and history of the Glenns Ferry Formation, southwestern Idaho. US Geological Survey Bulletin 2105:1-86
Secord R, Bloch JI, Chester SGB, Boyer DM, Wood AR, Wing SL, Kraus MJ, McInerney FA, Krigbaum J (2012) Evolution of the earliest horses driven by climate change in the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum. Science 335: 959-962
Seliskar DM (2003) The response of Ammophila breviligulata and Spartina patens (Poaceae) to grazing by feral horses on a dynamic mid-Atlantic barrier island. American Journal of Botany 90: 1038-1044
Simpson GG (1951) Horses. Oxford University Press, New York
Skinner MF, Hibbard CW (1972) Early Pleistocene pre-glacial and glacial rocks and faunas of north-central Nebraska. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 148: 117-125
Solounias N, Semprebon G (2002) Advances in the reconstruction of ungulate ecomorphology with application to early fossil Equids. American Museum Novitates 3366: 1-49
Steiner CC, Ryder OA (2011) Molecular phylogeny and evolution of the Perissodactyla. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 163: 1289-1303
Turner A, Kirkpatrick JF (2002) Effects of immunocontraception on population, longevity and body condition in wild mares (Equus caballus). Reproduction Supplement 60: 187-195
Vilà C, Leonard J, Götherström A, Marklund S, Sandberg K, et al. (2001) Widespread origins of domestic horse lineages. Science 291: 474-477
Voorhies MR (1981) Dwarfing the St. Helens eruption: ancient ashfall creates a Pompeii of prehistoric animals. National Geographic 159: 66-75
Wang Y, Cerling TE, MacFadden BJ (1994) Fossil horses and carbon isotopes: New evidence for Cenozoic dietary, habitat, and ecosystem changes in North America. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 107:269-280
Weinstock J, Willerslev E, Sher A, Tong W, Ho SyW, Rubenstein D, Storer J, Burns J, Martin L, Bravi C, Prieto A, Froese D, Scott E, Xulong L, Cooper A (2005) Evolution, systematics, and phylogeography of Pleistocene horses in the New World: a molecular perspective. PLOS Biology 3: 1373-1379
Winans MC (1989) A quantitative study of North American fossil species of the genus Equus. Pp. 262-297 in The Evolution of Perissodactyls. Prothero DR, Schoch R (editors). Oxford Univeristy Press, UK.
Zimov SA (2005) Pleistocene Park: return of the mammoth’s ecosystem. Science 308: 796-798 Information about this Review The author is: Dr. Paul D. Haemig (PhD in Animal Ecology)

 
3 Comments

Posted by on December 29, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

America’s Wildlife: Cityward or Landward in 2016 – Have We Learned Nothing?

santafe caboose 3

“A cardinal whistling spring to a thaw but later finding himself mistaken, can retrieve his error by resuming his winter silence. A chipmunk, emerging for a sunbath but finding a blizzard, has only to go back to bed. But a migrating goose, staking two hundred miles of black night on a chance of finding a hole in a lake, has no easy chance for retreat. His arrival carries the conviction of a prophet who has burned his bridges.” – Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac . . .

Decades ago I worked at a paper-mill, located along the Columbia River in the Pacific Northwest. Unknown by me at the time, I was a craftsman, and as artisans often do, we learn from just about everything we come in contact with.  Whether or not it may become beneficial, no matter, as the objective is not of a contrived mind-set what so ever, but of unlimited curiosity.  But it was, within this instance, certainly beneficial and ideological.

I worked in a section called Magnifite. Trees had already been received in another section of the mill, chipped-up in yet another section, four to sixteen tons of chips at a time, and brought to one of four huge chip tanks, 4 to 5 stories-tall, and called Digesters – and myself watching the charts and gauges. Chemicals were then included such as bromides, sulfurs, etc., to break the woodchips down into processable fibers, or pulp, to eventually become a paper product – for example, butcher wrap paper, toilet paper, paper towels, grocery bags, etc. and all at the end of the process.

“It has come to the point we are outsmarting ourselves. Is education possibly the process of trading awareness for things of lesser worth? The goose who trades his, is soon a pile of feathers.” — Aldo Leopold

My job was to receive the pulp, which was sent to a wash, then to several different areas in the paper mill for further processing. The equipment in the mill was old. A couple of the Digesters, in raised relief steel lettering from that era, was “Built 1911” as seen on each side. Some of the measuring equipment for the holding tanks much newer, but not much. But at least the equipment I worked with, Foxboro Capacity Charts mostly, were very accurate for their age.

Often at the beginning of a shift I would make radical adjustments to the input and output of fiber product, or pulp. Of course, this upset the process entirely. But I was young, wanted things to run smoothly, and in my aggressive attempts to do so, in reality, it did not.

I learned over time that since the machinery old, it had a process-pattern all of its own. I simply had to find that acceptable process, then calmly and with all info available at the time, make minor adjustments suitable for different demands throughout that particular day; significant was the consideration toward each subordinate process, completion of the separate parts toward the whole system running smoothly, as it all was connected.

Yes, patients, with minor adjustments, then wait awhile, then another small adjustment if needed. This system worked, and it was a matter of definable patients. I could make life hard on myself, or much easier with forethought, knowing and acknowledging what I was seeing for necessity for the day, and patients – and the observation of others experience, as told to me.

Over Hunting and Persecution

Our previous North American continent had vast areas unsettled and many left unexplored. There existed cities and farms scattered everywhere and held together by an ever increasing network of railroads, roads, and telegraph wires. Also, the sudden settlement of the West Coast (catalyzed by the discovery of gold in California), the Civil War, the disappearance of eastern forests, an enormous influx of immigrants from Europe, Asia, and Africa, and the vast expansion of industry and technology, both growth and population exploded.

“From several references for that time passenger pigeons flew overhead in endless thundering flocks; salmon choked the rivers, to be pitch-forked out as fertilizer; huge herds of bison, antelope, and elk roamed the prairies; whales and seals yielded endless shiploads of oil to burn in lamps.” — Anon 1963

As a result, Americans assumed the supply of such creatures remained virtually infinite, a bounty to be harvested at any time for human use. Local depletion’s of wildlife were noted, but there was always more wildlife over the next range of hills; which, the thought pattern established at that time.

Even today, as odd as it sounds, yes ignorance prevails today, we find hunters, hobby-trappers, and ranchers making the statement that wolves, cougars, bears, and fox’s, wild horses and wildlife in general are “everywhere” — plentiful in the forests and mountains. That is, until we attempt to have them show us on a map, or show us in general where they are located or roam.  Wildlife today, in the forests and mountains — in facts and truthfully (those of us who are in the forests and mountains always see this), is becoming very limited, almost scarce —

But some towns and states in century’s-past did try to impose hunting seasons on selected animals to give the game an opportunity to reproduce, but such laws were rarely enforced. More common was the payment of bounties on predators, such as the bounties of one penny each given for wolves by the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1630. This was an era of local extinctions where forests were cleared and streams were dammed. (References numerous)

This increase in human population, combined with the technology of the early industrial era, and the demands of a market economy, caused wildlife populations to plummet from a combination of unchecked exploitation and environmental alteration. Some examples:

•The vast migratory herds of bison on the Great Plains were systematically slaughtered or died of cattle-borne diseases until only a few hundred individuals were left.

•The passenger pigeon, whose numbers were once reckoned to be in the billions, became extinct in the wild. Both adults and young were harvested commercially. The last bird died in captivity in 1914.

•Heron and egret populations were decimated by hunters shooting them in their breeding colonies for plumes for ladies’ hats.

•The ranges of large predators such as grizzly bears, mountain lions, and wolves became greatly reduced. Mountain lions and wolves were virtually eliminated from eastern North America, as were grizzly bears from California.

•White-tailed deer became extremely scarce in the eastern United States through a combination of habitat loss and over-hunting.

•Runs of salmon and shad disappeared from many eastern rivers, their runs blocked by mill dams or killed by factory wastes in combination with unlimited fishing.

The massive-killing of wildlife is not really surprising, considering the attitudes of most people living in that era, which were largely characteristic of the combined agricultural situations and early industrial society of the times. Nature was regarded as something that got in the way of civilization and “progress”, and a source of goods to sell on the market.

“At one time there existed an extraordinary amount of wildlife in the Midwestern section of the United States. This included many species of unique wildlife, as well as wild horses before the Spanish come to America, seemingly ignored by many Spanish and European historians. The amount exceeded Africa, even at that time. Many we will simply not know about, or of, as they were wiped out, Over-Kill to Extinction.” — Anon 1975 Over-Hunting and Persecution of America’s Wildlife (note i.e. wild horses, currently paleontologists and archaeologist site-digs are confirming this fact of wild horse presence, and indeed never left America’s wilds, discussed further in the following paper, part 2)

Conclusion — Historical Facts Undeniable

The agricultural mindset, not so much different than today, I have found, was often frightened, paranoid, by the abundant wild animals and uncontrolled wild ecosystems. And as today, yesterday and history, they thought nature had to be tamed and controlled. Many popular nature books of those times, and as today in the current media, were filled with drawings of animals doing nasty things to people or to each other – bears clawing hunters, eagles carrying off children, deer goring one another, land crabs attacking goats, wolves eating just about everything and everyone in sight, and much more ridiculous contrivance.

But need we not forget those times, when people also feared witches and burned them at the stake, or drowned them; legends of monsters in the mountains or woods abounded, within remote settlements; and basically what people at that time, as now, did not or do not understand, people fear. Fear is the driving force for wildlife extinction – nothing else, but people find excuses to promote their fears and often within very tragic methodology, or perceptive mind-sets.

To indeed acknowledge that rancher’s and hunters have not evolved into the 21st Century is getting to be an undeniable joke of jokes – a very destructive joke – and needs changed.

Is it possible to have progress with a healthy surviving ecological system, with healthy wildlife as well? I would state as fact, a healthy wildlife system a requirement!

The problem is we have a backward ranching culture; thereby, a backward wildlife management culture as well, and from State to State as well as Federal – for example, one government agency kills 1.5 to 5.8 million animals (wildlife), mostly from rancher’s fears and not based on any type of factual reality, in America currently.

“. . . during this era, attitudes that led to the uninhibited destruction of wildlife and wildlife habitat became established. Specifically, the cattle and sheep ranching and hunters view, that nature needed to be tamed and put to use, allowed the widespread destruction of wildlife seen in the next following centuries to come, and fit in well with the demands of the emerging industrial economy.” — Aldo Leopold

The rancher, hunter, game management lies remain abundant, as the public is simply not out there to see, for example, the coming and goings of wolves, beavers, cougars, bears or much of anything for that matter; whereas, the public is going to hear about it, but only one side of the story, that mostly favors the rancher and hunters 99% of the time, but exaggeration within amplification of detail or a vast amount of misinformation . . .

A typical cattle rancher of today is not knowledgeable of any wildlife, other than the wildlife they want killed, or kill for their barbecues. Ranchers nor hunters are, or ever have been, conservationists nor have they ever been environmentalists, and history is quite clear of this fact. As a matter of point within this paper, both groups have pointedly hated conservationists and environmentalists, for at least the past century or even two centuries.

The fact remains that money, comfort, and a special vented self-proclaimed interest of ranchers, hunters, and industry, do exceed Humane Principles destructively — today, yesterday, and centuries past.

Humans have not learned a thing within the history of wildlife and our presence in decimating wildlife – now we are reaching the end, extinction, of many critical wildlife domestically, and upon an international basis; and yes, this does and will have a proportional effect on our environment and on our very life on this planet. (continued in Part 2 – The Kill-off of Wild Horses and America’s Wildlife)
______________________________________________
1. An endangered species is one whose numbers are so small that it is at risk of extinction.

2. A species is defined as endangered or threatened when it is suffering from these factors: damage to its habitat for recreational, or entertainment purposes; disease or predation of the species; and hazards to the continued life of the species.

3. A species is declared extinct after many years of not being spotted. Because it takes so long to define an entire species as extinct, it is probable that there are many species already gone that we are unaware of.

4. Rangers are on the frontlines of conservation to protect some of the world’s most endangered species like tigers, elephants and rhinos. Send thank-you cards to those who protect endangered species. Sign up for Wildlife Cards!

5. Extinction is a natural phenomenon, it occurs at a natural “background” rate of about one to five species per year. Scientists estimate we’re now losing species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the “background” rate, with dozens going extinct every day.

6. As many as 30 to 50 percent of all species are possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century.

7. 99% of currently threatened species are at risk from human activities, primarily those driving habitat loss, introduction of exotic species, and global warming

8. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) protects registered endangered species by removing them from the “take” list, which makes it unlawful for a person to shoot, harm, capture, trap, or attempt any such actions to the species.

9. Ultimately, the ESA strives to recover species from the endangered list by restoring their ecological health until they no longer need protection.

10. The World Wildlife Organization focuses on saving certain species that help sustain other species. They protect wildlife such as pandas, whales, rhinos, marine turtles, primates, polar bears, and big cats.

11. Freshwater ecosystems are home to more than 100,000 known species of plants and animals, and are now one of the most endangered habitats in the world as a result of human development, pollution, and climate change.

Sources

1. Wildscreen Arkive. “Endangered species.” Wildscreen. Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Program. “Listing a Species as Threatened or Endangered: Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act” 2015. Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
3. Engber, Daniel. “When can you say an animal is extinct?” Slate Magazine, 2005. Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
4. World Wildlife Fund. “Thanking Our Heroes: Rangers Put Their Lives on the Line Every Day to Protect Wildlife.” 2014. Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
5. Center for Biological Diversity. “The Extinction Crisis.” Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
6. Center for Biological Diversity. “The Extinction Crisis.” Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
7. Center for Biological Diversity. “The Extinction Crisis” Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
8. Davison, Steven G. “Alteration Of Wildlife Habitat As A Prohibited Taking Under The Endangered Species Act.” The Florida State University College of Law. Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
9. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service . “Endangered Species Consultation Handbook.” 1998. Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
10. World Wildlife Fund. “About Us.” Web Accessed March 20, 2015.
11. World Wildlife Fund. “Habitats: Freshwaters.” Web Accessed March 20, 2015.

 
4 Comments

Posted by on December 28, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

A Christmas Story for Wild Horses

christmas_for_cowboys_by_robhas1left-d4k3hbo

Heaven is high and earth wide. If you ride three feet higher above the ground than other men, you will know what that means.

Story by — John Cox

CopyRight 2015

It wasn’t too long before Christmas, and sitting close to the campfire a good idea.  Yip, I was surrounded by snow, with a couple of icicles that hung from the highline where Babe tied-off.  The sky clear, stars bright.  It was cold.

Babe use to the weather.  Me, I could never get use to it. but no place I would rather be than in the wilds.  A person can do a lot with love, understanding, and knowing around every tree trunk, or hillside something different, something to learn; yes, even frozen toes and finger-tips sometimes.

So I got up and walked over to Babe.  Grabbed her blanket and put it on her.  That’s when I heard something odd.  Something I had never heard before out there.

Now, I had been out there many times, about 28 miles, as far as I thought, from anywhere or most anything.  The closest road was near 15 to 18 of those miles.  So when I heard a few horse-hooves clomp and stumble over tree branches, I listened close.

Babe’s head turned toward the sound.  Her look of curiosity, not a threatened-look in her eyes at all; how odd it was indeed.  So with my back to the saddlebags, my eyes riveted toward the stand of trees where the noise come from.  Without looking down, I pulled the old 1812 Winchester out, cocked the bullet into the chamber, and waited.

Ya know, the thing about nature is to wait . . . It’s always the moment in nature, in the wilds, and patients learned.  The gifts many, always, being patient and watching . . .

The brush rumbled a little beyond Babe.  I pulled-up the rifle.  I pulled the hammer back with my thumb, slow, deliberate.  Rifle butt tight to my shoulder.

Suddenly, the branches part and a big-ol horse’s snout peeks through.

My rifle down.  The black stallion, connected to that big ol’ snout of a nose — I was looking at nothing less than nature’s wonder.  It was beautiful.  It’s black, thick mane all the way down to its pastern’s.

Under my breath, “What the . . .” when out popped a little buckskin foal with a black mane, then a gorgeous buckskin mare, with her sparkling gold mane almost to the ground.

All three then turned and ran off, disappeared into the night.  I stood there . . .

“Those were some horses.  Do they range over here?”

I spun around, rifle up.

“Hold on!  We mean no harm,” come another voice.

I looked at three men, unarmed.  There was something about them, a glow or something . . .

“We just seen your fire, from the flat over on the basin,” as the first man spoke while getting off his horse.

“Thought we would come over, heat up a little coffee,” the third man said as he dismounted also.

I walked over and placed the rifle back into its scabbard, “Ya know, we’re some ways further than really anything else.  What the hell you doing over on the basin this time of night? Or morning?”

The last man got off his horse, followed the other two respectfully to the side of my camp, over to the highline.  One spoke while they finished hooking their horses up.  I did notice it was like they done it a few hundred times before.

“To be truthful, we’re searching,” while walking toward the fire.  “We come together a few days ago, started to talk, and we’re all looking for the same thing.”

The other finished with his horse, and come over to the fire as well.

The last man looked at me with the eyes, like someone I knew, but I just couldn’t put my finger on it.  It was uncomfortable, but oddly I felt in no danger at all.  As a matter of fact, I felt very safe.

“. . . so we joined up and rode through some of the most beautiful land in the Northwest.  These Cascades gorgeous, to say the least.  You’re a very lucky man, John.”

The other two come over and sat down.  I was caught off guard, “How did . . .”

“I’m Gabe, that’s Mike you’ve been talking to, and coming up is Leo.”

I sat on my ol’ rock next to the fire and warmth.  I have never felt so, well, once again safe, and in the middle of the woods, and surrounded by people I had no idea who they were or where they come from.  They seemed nice enough . . .

While they were fixin’ their coffee I took a minute to look at their horses.  Beautiful and so well kept they were remarkable; and yet, there was just something about . . . something different, but I found myself smiling . . . comfortable.

 

The still night broken.  Horse-hoof thunder — hundreds.  The sounds surrounded us.  I jumped up.  I looked at the others.  They were calm, as they glanced southward.  I ran over to grab Babe, and  . . .

“John, it’s okay,” Mike said.

The thunder grew intense, the ground shook.  Branches broke all around us.  It sounded like the very trees themselves would burst in half, any second.  I seen horses gathered in the trees, so thick, the horses heads bobbed, their manes swished side to side . . .

Then I saw the clearing over on the hillside beside us.  It started to fill with more horses, then even more yet.  God willing, I never seen so many horses rumble through the snow.  Why, they rolled over the other hills and into, well, right where I stood!

Clustered, as far as my eyes could see.  Everywhere.  Horses of all kinds and colors.  They just kept coming, and rolled across the hillsides, over the surrounding rocks, like a swarm of hundreds of . . . whatever swarms.

I could not believe my eyes.  Within a couple of minutes, which seemed like hours, we were surrounded, in total, by horses – I had never seen so many horses in one place, and as far as I could see, even though dark out, it was tremendous – we were at the very center of them all – surrounded indeed, an understated fact.

Babe?  Well, she just stood there beside me, and never was so calm and comfortable as she was right at that moment.  She knew something I did not.  I could just tell . . .

Then the horses on one side of my camp backed-off.  Clearly, they made a path, and in walked another man.  He was clad in armor, an extremely large broadsword hung off his hip, ready for battle, all in gold.  I had never seen such a bright-white horse, as he led it toward us, in the middle of . . .

“John, I want you to meet Samuel,” Mike said, while pointing toward Samuel’s outstretched hand, to shake in greeting.

I was speechless, and never seen anything like this before, the horses, the armor clad man, Samuel, shaking my hand, the other three and their horses.  To say I was overwhelmed would be an understatement.

“Greetings John, I am Samuel.  I wish I could stay longer, John, and get to know you better, as I understand . . .“

Gabe spoke up, fast, “. . . Not yet Sam, he doesn’t know.  We just got here ourselves.”

Samuel smiled at me, went over and shook the hands of the other three.

“. . . first-light is not far away, and I must go, Radueriel and Raguel wait,” Samuel said, in a command-voice.

He stopped to my front, stood to attention, raised his hand, palm forward, his other hand on the golden broadsword grip — as a salute to me and the others.  He spun, mounted his horse, and left.

 

I stood in such a humble state, as the horses surrounding us, cascaded by, and on both sides of my campsite.  They galloped, the snow-dust and mist rose up, their legs hidden; their bodies in confirmation, and heads swooped while high into the air, their manes swooshed and flew back as in flight.

There did not seem to be an end to them, as we watched the spectacle pass.  All of those horses, Wild Horses.  The thunder of their hooves — and with amazement I watched as they all followed Samuel into the valley then up onto the hillside itself; then leading the entire herd, broadsword out and raised, the white horse and he set aglow, soon disappeared over the hill.  The Wild Horses, there were so many, surged and rolled over the hill, a continuous flow that followed their leader . . .

As a matter of fact, we all stood and watched, still amazed at the site.  The last of the herd rolled over the hill.  At first the snow-dust and trailing mist disappeared; then eventually, the thunder of horse hooves, with the horses calling to one another, faded into the darkness toward the west; just as the first sparkle of sunlight started to come over the horizon eastward.

I looked over at Gabriel, Michael, and Leo and for a moment I understood, but just as much as I knew, I remained just as confused.

Gabriel and Leo were getting their horses off the highline, Michael’s as well.  Michael dumped the remainder of his cup of coffee on the ground, walked up to me, tipped his cowboy hat back, and looked me in the eyes.

“You know who we are, don’t you?”

“I think so, but a little confused . . .” I said.

“We’re going to make some Angels right here in your backyard.  And you know why?  Because it was you and the others that worked so hard to save them.  Samuel is meeting the Angel we call the Angel Maker . . . Radueriel,” Michael stated with a large smile, “. . . and ol’ Raguel, well, he’s the Angel that watches over us all.  He’s a pretty good Angel, very likeable.”

“You’re making Angel’s out of . . .?”

Michael throws his arm around my shoulders as we walked toward his horse and the others.

“Yip, John, you have it.  All those horses you seen?  We figured they needed protecting.  Those government people and the others with’em, they just don’t get it – and they’re killing some of the most Angelic things on the face of this earth.  They done that a few centuries ago as well!  And, by damn, as Angels, we’re going to put a stop to it, because no one else will.”

Michael slaps me on the back, grabs my hand and shakes it.  He turns toward Gabriel, who hands the reins to him, and he mounts his horse, while Gabriel and Leo wait.

I stood there in aw of the occasion, “. . . I don’t. . .”

Gabriel laughed, “. . . John, no words, it was all of your prayers’ were heard, and we also seen what was going on — evil.  We heard them, and we heard all the others who love horses as well and their prayers, brother; and these Wild Horse herds are saved because of you all . . . They’ll be here a long, long time . . .  Merry Christmas.”

I watched the Three Angels ride off, with snow-dust under their hooves.  I then heard a Merry Christmas from Gabriel and Leo as well . . . along with a laugh of a job well done.  – Merry Christmas To All with hope . . .   John

 

7d719953a6da725d92436515248d5e25

 
8 Comments

Posted by on December 17, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Wild Horses and Truth Will Save Them – Resolution

building bridges

“So much falsified information from the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of the Interior about America’s Truthful Heritage and Icon, the Wild Horses, one must be leery as to why the Wild Horses have to leave America’s Public Lands to begin with?  One day American’s, outraged, will hold these government agencies accountable!”  — John Cox

We live in a society fraught with conclusions.  You may ask, now what is he talking about?  I will answer.  We simply live in a society that conducts itself upon conclusion, with often misrepresented Subjective Reasoning, mostly based from illegitimate facts — such as those based upon fear, or misrepresentation of facts sometimes based on Heritage, or just outright lies.

Arrogance out of profound ignorance, or macho posturing, or the inability to pass into the realm of manhood or womanhood, are merely subordinate to this situation – although emotion often plays a dramatic and effective roll, it is merely yet another subordinate causation.

What I am discussing here is “Illusory Superiority” within our human day to day activities.  This is a proven human condition we all suffer from regarding our daily aptitude in all things.  For many of us, it is not just within the horse or wildlife subjects, but inclusive with all else – for example politics and religion, and an insurmountable amount of other subjects as well.

Reality versus Ideology

For example, in any given group we find, through investigation, observation, and study that 80% of individuals might typically think they know about, as well as understand, the subject of horses.  In discussion we find many people are adamant about the subject, both emotional and can sway factual evidence toward non-factual circumstances.  But when tested we discover perhaps 20% of them do know, the others not so much.

It is sometimes called the “Above Average Effect” and essentially it means that for much of our life we will personally value our self slightly better at things than those around us.  It’s this same effect that also makes you think you, in this case knowledgeable about horses and wild horses, are and remain the pyramid of reasoning or the Patron Saint of Horses (keep it light and laugh as well, as human traits are fun and can be enjoyed), and all others, well, they just fall into place much less than average.

Human Confronts Illusion

Interesting is the fact this also goes along with the situation of only 40% to 46% of those who own horses actually ride them – yes, it is estimated that 54% to an amazing 60% do not ride their horses.  True, the remainder might own all of the equipment and trailers, and an insurmountable tack display, but simply rode the horse a few times, or not at all, and really do not ride them – out of fear, emotion, or false subjective reasoning – the reality collides with the conflict of illusion.

Another good example to many, and seen daily now, is the supposition that makes you think you can take on anyone in a fight, whether mental or physical, or navigate your way out of a life-threatening situation, whether mental or physical, and actually win.  Well, once again and most often this is an “Illusory Superiority” effect, and can get you hurt, or worse – so there is, make no doubt, a specific danger in this as well.

But this danger also opens the door to scams, or as we experience currently, people can take advantage of this particular mind-set (scammers see this as a demographic) and obtain donations, or mislead people to obtain either benefits for themselves, or to complete their job task – i.e. roundups and horses to slaughter for example – not so ironic that their (BLM – DOI – Welfare Ranchers – Corporations) mind-set totally built on the “Above Average Effect” simply so they can develop the excuse of being right in what they do –

I think we’re starting to get a glimpse of how this all works out, and how many times people choose sides, and indeed there is a right side and a wrong side, make no doubt, even though built on an  illusionary causation of circumstance – because frankly, the situation should not have developed to such proportion anyway – and that is often such a mitigating truth, and sad in the matter of how humans can be so destructive toward nature and our wildlife . . .

Bias and Reasoning

This cognitive bias, first officially named in 1991, has now become a staple of modern psychology and has been tested across intelligence assessments, physical performance, and yes even social interaction.

It is closely tied to a similar effect called the Dunning-Kruger effect.  It claims the “Illusory Superiority” is more common than you might think, and goes on to call it “the anosognosia of everyday life” – allow me to clarify, simply put it is a lack of truthful-subjective self-awareness in your daily existence.

There are many reasons, both positive and negative, in the matters of why we do this, to include physical mechanisms as well.  But the more acceptable theories state it comes down to the ways, or manner, in which our brains process complicated information, into simpler, easier to manage estimates, usually in our own favor — bias.

On a more positive side this situation aids in motivation, giving us incentive to push forward in the knowledge we are doing well and it gives us confidence that we will, indeed, succeed.

However, and this is a vast however, is the downside of this situation.  Many people think they are proficient at things without any evidence to support the idea.  Once again we wander into the realm of Subjective Reasoning.  What are the benefits involved?  More often than not, ego; sometimes financial benefits within a manipulated process and we become victims from our own illusions (i.e. politics or religion, or accepting anyone else’s opinions), and on and on it goes . . .

Ultimately what this means is – we are simply not as good as we think.  Our knowledge combined with someone else’s knowledge, and under the same cognitive bias, Subjective Reasoning or “Illusory Superiority” complex, is destine toward destruction.

Accept and Understand Truth

Sadly, we can look at the realm of Wild Horses.  Through the benefit of sound reasoning, now that we understand “Illusory Superiority” — we can hopefully approach, within reality, how to resolve this situation – or at least place ourselves on the right-road toward a resolution.

It is because the count of 70,000-Plus Wild Horses rounded up in the past few years (yes a vast Gorilla in the room we are all acquainted with), and many went or going to slaughter, is a realistic number.  This number absolutely contradicts and conflicts with many illusions many people have in the matter of them stating, or attempts to persuade others they are actually saving Wild Horses!

As usual, and with the Wild Horses sacrificed, the current mind-set of saving them is, and remains, merely an illusion; whereas, only a few benefit, and the Wild Horses die – THIS IS THE REALITY!

This is not a matter of me suggesting routes to resolution within this paper.  Rather, it is a matter of seeing the truth and how to actually get to it, or obtain the freedom for Wild Horses, in a reality mind-set; because, only through the truth will a resolution be brought about that can be of benefit to the Wild Horses, and actually save them from so much Subjective Reasoning developed through so much “Illusory Superiority” within BLM, Welfare Ranching, Corporate maneuvering on Public Lands, large advocate groups who need to make money to support themselves, and on and on it goes, this supposed reasoning and self-gratification over all-else, to include Destruction of Our Wild Horses for nothing more than small short term profits . . .

Yes, we have a problem — we need to confront it, and stop ignoring it!

 
1 Comment

Posted by on November 28, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Horse’s Tale — The Future

Horse’s Tale

short story in The Future

John Cox

010

Jan gathered the food out of the car, placed it nicely on the picnic table.  Jim was walking up from the creek, fishing pole in hand, but nothing caught.

A scream in the distance.  Penny jumps up, turns and runs toward her father.  Jim tosses the pole aside, arms wide to catch his daughter running toward him.  He catches her, rises, with her in his arms.

“I seen it.  It was really big.  It snorted,” said Penny.

By this time Jan was near Jim, her hand atop Penny’s shoulder.

“What honey?  What did you see?”

“Like Grandma’s picture.  On her table, in the dining room.”

Jim looks at Jan, then sets the girl down.  Jan kneels beside her daughter.

Jim’s gaze toward the horizon . . . and under his breath, “Oh. My God.”

Jan looks up, then rises, “Oh, Jim.”

Not taking her eyes off the spectacle before them, “It’s a horse, Jim,” as Jan wipes a tear from her eye, her words breaking slightly, “A horse.”

“It’s like the one in Grandma’s picture.  Their real, dad.  They’re for real.”

Jim mumbles a slight wisp, not taking his eyes off the spectacle, “Yes.”

The Bay Stallion, now on a small knoll, stops, turns.  The Stallion looks at the family standing near the creek. Majestic in the sunlight, it’s left-leg, hoof, rises.  He sweeps the hoof three times, then sets it down; pounds the dirt; dust rises, underneath the hoof, three more times.

With a twist of its head, a rise and swoosh of its long Black Mane, he snorts, kicks-out, turns, gallops over the hillside, disappears.

“I didn’t know any were left out here,” Jim says, sadly, still watching the hillside.

Jan, wipes her tears from her cheeks, wordless, stares at the hillside.

“Mommy?  Can we go watch him some more?  I never seen a real, live horse.  Why are you crying?”

Jan kneels down, looks into her daughter’s eyes, “. . . Because we treated them badly.  There are no more.  He may be the only one left.  We treated a lot of wild animals badly years and years ago, even before I was even born – you may never, ever see this again . . . her voice fades out as she peers toward the hillside, “. . . you may never see a horse again, honey.”

“Jan. . .” Jim says, still looks toward the hillside, “. . .over there.”

Jim picks up Penny, Jan steps beside Jim.  They watch, as two hillsides over, the Bay Stallion stops in mid-slope, looks at the family again – suddenly, coming up to him from the valley below, a Bay Mare, with a young foal beside her, stops at his side.  The stallion looks across the hillside, once more.  Proudly, he looks toward his Mare and foal, then to Jim.

“Oh, my God,” Jan says while wiping the tears off her cheeks, and Penny, now.

“I understand,” Jim whispers.

The Stallion turns, along with the Mare and foal, and in a small tuft of dust, trot, then gallop over the hillside.  Soon the dust settles, where the horses were –   Copyright 11/15/2015

 
4 Comments

Posted by on November 16, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

America’s Wildlife — Killed Out of Ignorance and Fear Based Emotions

42 

Folks who ain’t got ideas of their own should be mighty careful whose they borrow …

It’s time to question the increase in wildlife-eradication, or to explain it plainly, stop killing America’s Wildlife out of ignorance and fear. Yes, it is a problem! As in right here, right now and in America, over 40% of our Wildlife in America has been killed – or eradicated. Worse yet, is the fact that within the past 15 years this has happened.

Is there anyone paying attention here? We have one animal protection agency who makes in excess of $240 million dollars a year (their 990 IRS Form to the Public). They claim to be a watch-dog group, a legal oversight agency so to speak. Their mission-statement gives people that perception as well. It is also inclusive within their advertising, and gives potential donators the perception their organization is watching over America’s wildlife and animals. One has got to ask, “Then where in the hell were you when wildlife was being unnecessarily killed, and still is?”

We also have a government agency, Wildlife Services, that kills anywhere from 2 million wildlife and animals yearly, up to 5.8 million a few years ago and within a one-year time frame as well. Ironically, this was accomplished within someone’s mind-set of acceptability, both in principle and standard of management ideologies, and (as awkward as this sounds), a conservation tool.

Many government employees, for example, eradication or killing animals, actually to them, a useful and quick way to dispose of problems within their jurisdiction toward a resolution and is used quite often.  Indeed, killing wolves and cougars in ranching areas remains a well-accepted practice. But does good science and actual proof, in another words real evidence show clearly this to be true, that wolves and cougars in these situations indeed the problem? Again, where are these non-profits, who take donations, in the millions of dollars’ worth, but apparently have done nothing to save America’s Wildlife, and worse, has not even acknowledged the same.

Truth Reality and Our Government – State and Federal

But once again the truth pops up, reality, and demonstrates through good science that eradication methodology is simply bad-science in disguise, if considered science at all. Most government science today is predicated upon commercial or special interest needs. This, in reality, means there is a lack of science that can be considered good science what so ever and within our government today. The Bureau of Land Management for example, leave cattle out of their rangeland and environmental ecological systems studies, data gathering and research – then blame wild horses for rangeland destruction, as an invasive and non-native species . . . So we can assume that cattle are an indigenous species in someone’s mind; which is based on no science anywhere.

Which leads to yet another problem. If the wild horses are not indigenous, yet BLM admits they existed here 5,000 years ago, were considered (loosely by snobbery science) to be killed off, then a couple thousand years later returned – “Oh Darn, lookie there, more horses just turned up” – then what was the time frame for horses to be taken from indigenous-status, to non-indigenous or invasive-species status? There is a lot wrong with idiotic science, and then explained within official government documents as real. But it is, in reality not science at all.

So we have an acceptable invasive-species, cattle, and to have them the wild horses, basically an indigenous-species when good science involved, has got to be eradicated for the invasive-species to exist on Public lands – actually taking over and destroying Public Lands – but within the BLM — observation, experience, and actual circumstance has no value – when compared to BLM employees having a Howdy-Doody smile while telling a taxpayer a tremendous lie.

Now we can begin to understand the governments’ scientific methodology, both state and federal. Soon we realize there is none. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, for another example of bad-science, leaves out Poaching statistics as well as attritional aspects of their eradication programs. The agency they use, Wildlife Services, remains well known for disregarding environmental assessments as well – so who knows, as no data exists. ODFW certainly doesn’t know.

But yes, ODFW uses Wildlife Services, a branch of the USDA. This is basically a situation where trappers, and other government groups/employees, will eradicate by supposedly a scientific choice (but no science would agree with it in reality, and none is ever found, nor an EA) of wildlife from the mountains, woods, or wherever, at the request of, for this example, a cattle rancher – a decision that was emotionally-based out of ignorance and fear, and nothing more.

In this single situation case — Beavers, where poison-pots, cyanide gas, and traps were set to kill them. One tally of attritional-only wildlife killed within a three-day time period, and kept track of by an observer keeping statistics of the Controlled-Eradication, assimilated: 26 Fox, 14 Beaver, 120 squirrels, two hunting dogs within the proximity of the cyanide, one small house dog/a pet died in a leg-trap, 2 house cats as well and in their own yard poisoned, all for 3 Beaver who damned a stream near a cow pasture near Murderer’s Creek, Oregon.

This particular rancher thinks anything but cattle on Public Lands, where he grazes his over-abundance of cattle per acre, is a waste and should be eradicated anyway. The extremely creepy part to this, most cattle ranchers who graze on or near Federal Lands believe this as fact – and as well, most over-graze on state or federal lands, destroying the ecological system present.

It has also been shown his cattle do create a destructive environmental impact on this area – as shown in Federal Court, and due to his mismanagement of the cattle, as well as too many cattle on that particular grazing area.

Killing of Wildlife Unnecessarily

killing wildlife is not, in truth, useful at all when based upon bad-science, on fear, on hate for particular wildlife, on lies, on profit margins, and quite often in today’s Public Lands situation, in order to place more cattle upon federal or public lands to eventually sell to foreign markets. One has got to ask about the actual sacrifice we make, here in America, in order for an overabundant amount of cattle to graze on Our Lands, America’s Lands! Is it worth swapping out most of our Wildlife for cattle? Insult to injury — we also subsidize ($ billions yearly) these ranchers for their overabundance of cattle, destruction of our environment, killing of our wildlife unnecessarily, and abuse of our supposed Federally Protected Lands – for what? Well, we receive nothing actually “0” . . .

Here reality speaks much louder about controlled-eradication. This mind-set that pointedly favors corporate and commercial entities — over the taxpayers, or the majority that actually owns Public Lands and the Wildlife – which a group our government and a few others have forgotten about – our group is called — Americans.

Currently government managers give significance to the term indigenous species; which is something very significant but conclusive of bad-science deduction (for example cattle are left out of all Range Management science conducted by the BLM for their Range Statistics – uh huh), then they replace indigenous species, actually calling them invaders and then the step-upward to invasive species. When termed Invasive Species, then many things happen almost automatically; suddenly we see indigenous species being eradicated, oddly killed as a matter of written policy. Two months ago this policy did not exist. This is the current nature of not only Federally managed lands and wildlife, but State managed lands and wildlife.

So we have, according to governing agencies, many species including horses, bear, cougar, elk, et al., who are then considered aggressive invaders doing harm through competition. Then along comes money-making opportunities as well, and the band-wagon is fraught with scammers and schemers crawling all over it – Yes, it is called or referred to as Breed-Control, and common today is the use of such not-noteworthy items at all, and created from bad science or incompetent science, such as PZP.

Why would an agency that is tasked with managing wildlife resources for the common good advocate for the controlled-eradication of several species of wild animals?

Perception government and incompetence

Alien invasive species means an alien species which becomes established in natural or semi-natural ecosystems or habitat, is an agent of change, and threatens native biological diversity.

Alien species (non-native, non-indigenous, foreign, exotic) means a species, subspecies, or lower taxon occurring outside of its natural range (past or present) and dispersal potential (i.e. outside the range it occupies naturally or could not occupy without direct or indirect introduction or care by humans) and includes any part, gametes, or propagule of such species that might survive and subsequently reproduce.”

A viewpoint switch is easy, just a matter of perception because when closely examined, “alien, native, aggressive, competition, invader and harm” are empirically hollow buzzwords that are constantly redefined at the whim of those who use inflammatory, arbitrary jargon to promote the war on weeds and wildlife.

“Science is the systematic enquiry into the nature of phenomena, and it cannot progress without serious dedication to the truth.”

Scientists who propose controlled-eradication should offer their proof, always, along with a well-documented and defined and thorough collection of good data – good science — .honesty – and truth that shows consistency over time the resolution enhances, rather than destroys, an ecological system.

Questions and More Questions

Unquestionably, biodiversity loss is a real problem but its root cause is anthropogenic – human impact – not ‘invasive aliens”. Yet, the constant alarm sounded by government employees for example, selling their “invasive species crisis” is that animals like wild horses, cougars, bears, wolves, burros and others “harm” biodiversity.

In truth, it is rancher’s, corporations and mining that destroy environments and ecological systems, then out of some type of psycho-pathetic moronic behavior, most often to cover up their mess of the environment, demand controlled-eradication’s of wildlife as well as many plants which pose some idiotic threat. The truth is, good science shows us most plant and animal “invasions” are nature trying to heal herself by restoring biodiversity to systems unbalanced by man. This healing of biodiversity is necessary for wildlife to recover.

If you are using subjective definitions for the terms “native,” “alien,” “harm,” “invader,” and “competition,” how will these concepts be adequate to formulate a scientific discipline of ecological principles, management decisions and public policy?

What are your criteria for ecological “harm?” The criteria needs to be measurable and objective, not just subjective speculation (e.g. ODFW on the delisting of Wolves). They should apply to all species, irrespective of whether they are theoretically “native” or “alien.” In the absence of these criteria, on what basis are you determining which species to control or exterminate?

What are your objectives, ecological criteria of “alien” species? Of “invaders?” These need to be precise so any biologist or landowner can identify “non-native” or “invader” in any ecosystem by evaluating the criteria without being told in advance what the designation is for a specific plant or animal.

It must be possible to confirm this through double-blind experiments, which do not give away in advance the definition of the plant or animal tested. For example, how does the BLM distinguish between “native” and “alien” plant monocultures, between expanding “native” and “alien” populations, and the effects of “natives” and “aliens” on the ranges?

If government science can’t give these definitions, or develop them, then its conclusions about the effects of these plants and animals are entirely subjective and its procedures are not scientific. Without such objective criteria how do government employees justify actions against species they may call “alien?”

How can one distinguish harmless or helpful characteristics of a new species from “invasion” particularly at the early stages? The example that comes to mind is when BLM wiped out 100 burros that ranged on 500,000 acres of state and national parks with 100 miles of river frontage because the burros supposedly threatened water sources for bighorn sheep.

What protocol does government employees have, to determine the conservation value of new populations that have moved outside of historical ranges? Are all such population moves “invasions?” And if so will they be exterminated without regard to possible conservation value?

Who will make these decisions? Under what authority are those decisions made? If there is disagreement as to whether a species is harmful how will these be adjudicated? What measures have government agencies put in place to ensure that harmless species or species that serve useful conservation purposes are not the object of harmful control or eradication measures? We can look at both the wolf and the wild horses, and state without a doubt no measures exist currently.

If we abandon native/alien criteria in favor of invasive/non-invasive criteria or aggressive/non-aggressive criteria how will these terms be defined? Considering that population numbers of native animals swing widely, how do we justify any efforts to impose stability on these “exotic” populations?

How is the cause of “invasion” to be determined? If human impact is the only reason will the extermination of the species spreading as a result of this solve the “problem” or will this create a downward spiral of inappropriate interventions? Shouldn’t we be treating causes instead of symptoms?

How has government employees of all levels attempted to ensure against potential conflict of interest inherent in accepting money for research from sources that may have their own agendas?

Clearly Change is Required

Wild animal ‘management’ according to financial self-interest, authoritarian ignorance and superstitious pseudoscience is the worst thing ever to happen to wildlife, and what is being done to plants by the government invading biologists using little to no science, is even worse.

Big government and big business are two faces of one coin, which seeks subsidies, protection from competition, favorable regulations, support for (and from) politicians, agencies, universities and regulators. The larger the conglomerate grows the more ineffective its individual parts become. Eventually, as can be seen in industry-after-industry, agencies in these aggregations do things contrary to the purposes for which they were established

Take wildlife: conservation began in order to protect wild animals and plants from reckless destruction. Ironically, the truth here was changed to something of an abstract and destructible form of ignorance, with Apex Predators especially, and mostly built on fear.

America’s Wildlife needs protection not only from our government, but bad-science, and from those who assume all science is bad, which it is not, and we can see for ourselves, what is and what is not – experience and observation tells us also, what is and what is not good science. What is not good science is the mass genocide of America’s Wildlife – and there is no science, or common sense that backs up so much killing of wildlife that favors a type of positive resolution.

There is no resolution to be gained what so ever! The Wildlife loses – Americans lose – America loses . . .

Reference Material:

Gerstell, Richard. 1985. The Steel Trap in North America. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA. 352 pp.

Decker, D. J. and K.G. Purdy. 1988. Toward a concept of wildlife acceptance capacity in wildlife management. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 16:53-57.

Deblinger, R. D., D. W. Rimmer, J. J. Vaske, G. M. Vecellio, and M. P. Donnelly. 1993. Ecological benefits and hunter acceptance of a controlled deer hunt in coastal Massachusetts. Northeast Wildlife 50:11-21.

Ellingwood, M. R. and J. V. Spignesi. 1986. Management of an urban deer herd and the concept of cultural carrying capacity. Trans. Northeast Deer Tech. Comm., Vt. Fish Wildl. Dep. 22:42-45.

Organ, J. F. and M. R. Ellingwood. 2000. Wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for black bears, beavers, and other beasts in the east. Human Dimensions of Wildlife. 5:63-75.

Strickland, M. D., H. J. Harju, K. R. McCaffery, H. W. Miller, L. M. Smith, and R. J. Stoll. 1994. Harvest Management.

Pages 445-473 in T. A. Bookhout, ed., Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats.(5th ed.) The Wildlife Society. 740 pps.

Organ, J. F., R. F. Gotie, T. A. Decker, and G. R. Batcheller. 1998. A case study in the sustained use of wildlife: the management of beaver in the northeastern United States. Pages 125-139 in H.A. van der Linde and M.H. Danskin, eds., Enhancing sustainability – resources for our future. SUI Technical Series, Vol. I, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 178pp.

Kallman, Harmon., ed., Restoring America’s Wildlife 1937-1987. 1987. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 394 pp.

Hamilton, D.A., B. Roberts, G. Linscombe, N.R. Jotham, A. Noseworthy, and J.L. Stone. 1998. The European

Union’s wild fur regulation: a battle of politics, cultures, animal rights, international trade and North America’s wildlife policy. Trans. No. Am. Wildl. and Natur. Resour. Conf. 63:572-588.

Smith, H. R., R. J. Sloan, and G. S. Walton. 1981. Some management implications between harvest rate and

population resiliency of the muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus). Pages 425-442 in J.A. Chapman and D. Pursley, eds., Proc. Worldwide Furbearer Conf., Frostburg, Md. 2056 pp.

Brooks, R. P. 1980. A model of habitat selection and population estimation for muskrats (Ondatrazibethicus) in riverine environments in Massachusetts. Ph.D. Thesis. Univ. Massachusetts, Amherst. 113 pp.

Linscombe, G. R. 1995. U.S. fur harvest and fur value: statistics by state and region. International Assoc. of Fish & Wildlife Agencies.

Boggess, E. K., S. B. Linhart, G. R. Batcheller, D. W. Erickson, G. R. Linscombe, A. W. Todd, J. W. Greer, D. C. Juve, M. Novak, D. A. Wade. 1990. Traps, trapping, and furbearer management. Wildl. Soc. Tech. Rev. 90-1. 31 pp.

MacInnes, C. D. 1987. Rabies. Pages 910-928 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds., Wild Furbearer Management and Conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1150 pp.

Todd, A.W., J.R. Gunson, and W.M. Samuel. 1981. Sarcoptic mange: An important disease of coyotes and wolves of Alberta, Canada. Pages 706-729 in J.A. Chapman and D. Pursley, eds. Proc. Worldwide Furbearer Conf., Frostburg, Md. 2056 pp.

Voight, P. R. and R. L. Tinline. 1982. Fox rabies and trapping: a study of disease and fur harvest interaction. Pages 139-156 in G. C. Sanderson, ed., Midwest Furbearer Management. Proc. 43rd midwest Fish & Wildlife Conf., Wichita, Kans. 195 pp.

Rosatte, R. C., M. J. Pybus, and J. R. Gunson. 1986. Population reduction as a factor in the control of skunk rabies in Alberta. J. Wildl. Dis. 22:459-467.

Payne, N. F. 1980. Furbearer management and trapping. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 8:345-348.

Mammal Trapping within the National Wildlife Refuge System 1992-1996. USFWS, Division of Refuges, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203. June 1997 0

Todd, A. W. and E. K. Boggess. 1987. Characteristics, acitivities, lifestyles, and attitudes of trappers in North America. Pages 59-76 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds., Wild Furbearer Management and Conservation in North America, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1150 pp.

Wolfe, R. J. 1991. Trapping in Alaska communities with mixed subsistence-cash economies. Tech. Paper No. 217. Juneau, AK: Alaska Dept. Fish & Game.

Baker, O. E. South Carolina Dept. Natural Resources. Personal communication.

Decker, T. A. 1991. Trapping and furbearer management in Massachusetts. Mass. Wildl. 41:18-27.

Muth, R. M., J.J. Daigle, R.R.Zwick and R.J. Glass. 1996. Trappers and Trapping in Advanced Industrial Society: Economic and Sociocultural Values of Furbearer Utilization in the Northeastern United States. Sociological Spectrum 16:421-436.

Brown, T.L., D.J. Decker and J.W. Enck. 1995. Preliminary Insights about the Sociocultural Importance of Hunting and Trapping. HDRU Series No. 95-2. Ithaca, NY: Human Dimensions Research Unit, Cornell University. 90 pp.

Organ, J.F., R.M. Muth, J.E. Dizard, S.J. Williamson, and T.A. Decker. 1998. Fair chase and humane treatment: Balancing the ethics of hunting and trapping. Trans. No. Am. Wildl. and Natur. Resour. Conf. 63:528-543.

Wolfe, R.J. 1991. Trapping in Alaska Communities with Mixed, Subsistence-Cash Economies. Division of Subsistence, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, Technical Paper Number 217.

Todd, A.W., and E.K. Boggess. 1987. Characteristics, activities, lifestyles, and attitudes of trappers in North America. Pages 59-76 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds., Wild Furbearer Management and Conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1150 pp.

Mason, D. A. 1990. Vermont’s other economy: the economic and socio-cultural values of hunting, fishing, and trapping for rural households. M.S. Thesis. Burlington VT: Univ. of Vermont. 98 pp.

Kellert, S. R. 1981. Trappers and trapping in American society. Pages 1971-2003 in J.A. Chapman and D. Pursley, eds. Proc. Worldwide Furbearer Conf., Frostburg, Md. 2056 pp.

Batcheller, G. R., T.A. Decker, D.A. Hamilton and J. F. Organ. 2000. A vision for the future of furbearer management in the United States. Wild. Soc. Bull. 28 (4):833-840.

Bishop, P. G. 1991. Unpublished report. New York State Dept. of Environ. Cons.

Bishop, P. G. 1990. Traps, trapping and furbearer management in New York State. New York State Dept. of Environ. Cons. 12pp.

Slate, D., R. Owens, G. Connolly, G. Simmons. 1992. Decision making for wildlife damage management. Trans. N.A. Wildl. & Nat. Res. Conf. 57:51-62.

Green, J. S., and R. A. Woodruff. 1991. Livestock guarding dogs protect sheep from predators. U.S. Dept. Agric., Agric. Info. Bull. No. 588.

Green, J. S., ed., 1987. Protecting livestock from coyotes: a synopsis of the research of the Agricultural Research Service. Natl. Tech. Info. Serv. PB 88 133590/AS. 105 pp.

Meadows, L. E. and F. F. Knowlton. 2000. Efficacy of guard llamas to reduce canine predation on domestic sheep. Wild. Soc. Bull. 28 (3): 614-622.

D’Eon, R. G., R. LaPointe, N. Bosnick, J. C. Davies, B. MacLean, W. R. Watt and R. G. Wilson. 1995. The Beaver Handbook: A guide to understanding and coping with beaver activity. OMAR Northeast Science & Technology. FG-006. 76 pp.

Miller, J. E., 1983. Control of beaver damage. Proc. Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conf. 1:177-183.

Langlois, S.A. and T.A. Decker. 2001. The use of water flow devices in addressing flooding problems caused by beaver in Massachusetts. Massachusetts Div. Fisheries & Wildlife. 16pp.

Green, J. S., F. R. Henderson, and M. D. Collinge. 1994. Coyotes. Pages C-51 to C-76 in S. E. Hygnstrom, R. M. Timm, and G. E. Larson, eds., Prevention and control of wildlife damage. Univ. Neb. Coop. Ext. Serv.

Muller, L.I., R.J. Warren, and D.L. Evans. 1997. Theory and practice of immunocontraception in wild animals. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 25(2):504-515.

Rosatte, R., D. Donovan, M. Allan, L. Howes, A. Silver, K. Bennett, C. MacInnes, C. Davies, A. Wandeler, and B.

Radford. 2001. Emergency response to raccoon rabies introduction in Ontario. J. Wildl. Dis. 37(2):265-279.

Jacobs, W. W. 1994. Pesticides federally registered for control of terrestrial vertebrate pests. Pages G-1 to G-22 in S. E. Hygnstrom, R. M. Timm, and G. E. Larson, eds., Prevention and control of wildlife damage. Univ. Neb. Coop. Ext. Serv.

Siemer, W. F. and D. J. Decker. 1991. Human tolerance of wildlife damage: synthesis of research an management implications. Human Dimensions Res. Unit Publ. 91-7, Dep. Nat. Resources, N.Y.S. Coll. Agric. and Life Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY. 24pp.

Melquist, W. E., and M. G. Hornocker. 1983. Ecology of river otters in west central Idaho. Wild. Monogr. 83. 60pp.

Decker, T. A. Vermont Department of Fisheries and Wildlife. Personal communication.

Hamilton, D. 1999. Controversy in times of plenty. Missouri Cons. 8pp.

Herscovici, A. 1985. Second nature: the animal-rights controversy. CBC Enterprises, Toronto. 254 pp.

Francione, Gary L. 1996. Rain without thunder:the ideology of the animal rights movement. Temple Univ. Press,Philadelphia. 269pp.

Kellert, S. R. 1984. Urban American perceptions of animals and the natural environment. Urban Ecology. 8:209-228.

Thompson, T. R. and G. D. Lapointe. 1995. Learning from animal activists: a workshop approach. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 23:588-593.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on November 10, 2015 in Uncategorized

 
 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,357 other followers