RSS

Monthly Archives: May 2014

Accountability and Transparency: Wild Horses and America’s Government

murderers creek wild horses injured

“When the people become involved in their government, government becomes more accountable, and our society is stronger, more compassionate, and better prepared for the challenges of the future.” — Thomas Jefferson

Part Two – 29 Wild Horses Killed by Bureau of Land Management And the U.S. Forest Service; to establish an Open-Debate Platform for the Public, to take part in improvement of our Government Agencies and their conduct, by demanding accountability and transparency and making Public honest and truthful information on how our taxpayer money is spent.

There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that our current government needs to have more transparency, more accountability. Not the political type, as that is contrary to reality and fraught with falsity, distasteful and hate-directed propaganda mostly. Discussed here is the responsibility aspect of accountability, and nothing more can exemplify the necessity for this than the Wild Horse Herd Roundups.

Within this aspect we have not only the Bureau of Land Management (BLM); we also pay, with taxpayer dollars, for the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) completing horse roundups as well, rounding horses up off of Forest Service Lands – which is Public Lands. This government agency also guilty of false information to complete horse roundups . . . Gone, in total, is honesty and integrity within, specifically, both government agencies mentioned.

Yes, the best example is the Transparency and Accountability in Government Contracting Act of 2007 – passed in the Senate, but ignored in the Congress to this day. There is no doubt our government agencies remain within a quagmire of incompetence, and thus lack integrity and responsibility to actually manage American taxpayer dollars appropriately. Sadly, the accountability and transparency act above had to even be mentioned, none the less ignored and demonstrating an overwhelming lack of integrity by our government officials . . . but moving onward. . .

What do we mean by integrity in the context of government? Or the circumstances of governance today that does nothing more than weaken its meaning. Few disagree that integrity is one of the qualities most to be valued in public officials. We use the notion of integrity expansively as a general, all-purpose yardstick against which to measure public conduct. Yet it is an elusive concept, especially in relation to government and government officials.

Accountability and Wild Horses on Public Lands

Over the past few years and within the western United States, for false reasons (the reasons well referenced and established as fact to be false) America’s Heritage of Wild Horses are being rounded up as if some type of disposable rubbish, and by BLM and USFS agencies. Their misinformation for conducting such roundups is quite lethal, not only a cause for destruction of America’s Heritage — our Wild Horses, but our wilderness areas as well.

In an attempt for accountability, when speaking with a BLM representative, this journalist was given nothing more than lies in regard to the death of twenty-nine wild horses rounded up at Murderer’s Creek, Oregon. Noticeable was the fact this BLM employee did not feel compelled toward not only any type of responsibility or accountability in the matter of being truthful, but was not intimidated by the lack of integrity obvious when answering straight forward questions in regard to transparency issues for public and tax payer information purposes.

The roundup took place not only on BLM Public Lands (25%), but Forest Service Lands also (75%). Apparently, the BLM representative and the individual In-Charge of overseeing the roundup did not realize, or knew — but did not care, that their inventory system from the roundup, detailed spreadsheets, were quite telling-in-detail of the occasion (also backed by payroll vouchers). The spreadsheets listed the outright death of these twenty-nine Wild Horses, and under the categories’ of Capture Date – Capture Herd Place – Disposition, et al . . .

Accountability and Responsibility Displaced

Then we get to the Department of the Interior (DOI) — BLM/USFS vouchers. For this discussion we will not get into the fact, but acknowledge existence of hiring people who live within the area, as Private Contractors (relatives?), or Forest Service neighbors and friends?

Obviously these people were unqualified to accomplish a reasonable and responsible roundup — i.e. just by objective reasoning and due to the certainly questionable and highly suspect killing of twenty-nine wild horses, and many more horses simply disappeared — as facts do not lie — the paperwork obvious – or is it? Is there something else they are covering up even worse than twenty-nine Wild Horses killed, and if caught doing so?

So we read from the DOI voucher (keeping in mind this is one payment voucher of 24 similar paid vouchers, but different payment amounts given, but all approximate similar amounts) disposition that taxpayer’s paid the amount of $21,000 to roundup 20 Wild Horses (as listed on voucher Transaction #20 (Delivery Order), AG04M3C090050/AG04M3D100007/0) and the roundup, must we not forget was and remains unnecessary and generated by misinformation from both the BLM and Forestry.

Then we go to yet another voucher and another $20,000, but this time there is no amount of Wild Horses shown that were rounded up, so who knows what tax payers paid for here? Perhaps 20 more Wild Horses rounded up? And on it goes, until . . .

Keep in mind that the maximum amount of Wild Horses to be roundup within this HMA, i.e. Murderer’s Creek area, was not to exceed 200 horses. The BLM Inventory sheets already show, and paid for by the way, 258 Wild Horses rounded up. Also, we as taxpayer’s for this travesty, are not shown anywhere within the USFS paperwork where an estimated 328 Wild Horses were sent, nor their disposition, as also paid by taxpayer’s. Did they go to slaughter, and Kill Buyer’s collect the profit — so taxpayer’s paid for the roundups and the Kill Buyer’s obtain the profits? It has certainly been done before by BLM and Forestry personnel! Did they go to other reservations or rescues, or holding facilities?

Then there is transaction #7, in the amount of $107,615, apparently paid to the roundup Private Contractors’ – Delivery Order #INL12PC00123/INL13PD00798/0. Is this yet another 100 horses rounded up?

Or yet another, Transaction #10 in the amount of $214,000, apparently to the Burns BLM, Delivery Order #INL12PC00123/INL12PDO1580/0 and for the Murderer’s Creek Roundup. . . Is this yet another 220 horses rounded up, or a distinct payment for something else, yet designated as going to the Murderer’s Creek roundup? Who knows, as there exists no transparency or explanation to the taxpaying public!

And on it goes, folks, and as already mentioned, a situation contrived by falsified information, lies, innuendo, and above all well referenced misleading Environmental Statements and bad science.

A government investigation is in order, you say – we all say? By who, our government that often defends this type of obvious criminal behavior, and passing it off as nothing more than information from mis-aligned advocates? Nope, this is from government documents, from the source – it is obvious horses have disappeared, in vast numbers. It is obvious there is criminal behavior within the Murderer’s Creek Roundups! Accountability? Transparency?

The overwhelming truth is, yes, taxpayer’s do pay for bad decisions brought about by bad science, make no doubt of this as being a matter of fact! Those Administrators who neglect good science simply want their budgets enhanced and their payroll increased, that’s all – to hell with America’s wildlife, and our proud heritage as well – such as the Wild Horses roaming free on our Public Lands, and within the beauty of our environment!

Integrity and America’s Public Lands

The least that integrity requires of a public official is that he or she not be corrupt in obvious ways: soliciting or accepting a bribe, or accepting a gift or favor in return for official action. Such conduct is generally criminal; so the added fact that it displays a lack of integrity is beside the point. So also, integrity requires that one not take some action or fail to take some action because of a perceived benefit to oneself, even if the benefit is incidental and not a reward. But again, profiting from a conflict of interest also is generally subject to criminal or regulatory sanctions.

Although we sometimes have to draw painful distinctions between what is and what is not within bounds, the principle is reasonably clear. Formal mechanisms for preserving integrity in government go no further than corruption and near corruption of this kind. There is also much conduct for which official sanctions are out of the question and which we should hesitate to call corrupt, but which nevertheless raises issues of integrity. It is also in this area that we are most in need of a better understanding.

Conclusion

Within the FOIA material received here last week, questions abound upon each perusal of the same material. A little integrity, add to that an amount of responsibility toward the American taxpayer’s, and thoughts toward humane treatment toward animals given, then sprinkle with a little transparency, and all of this goes away. Sometimes the simple things in life are so bewildering to those whose shroud of dishonesty has become common-place. How sad.

But if transparency does exist one day, then things would have to operate within a non-questionable and honest methodology – management and honest science would have to prevail. Bad decisions would then be just that, a bad decision. Relief from unnecessary expenditure’s would happen as attrition, and taxpayer’s would have to pay less taxes.

Humanity benefits, because there is nothing hidden, no ugly secrets that may escape for public scrutiny – Yes, life much easier with transparency and accountability – those who are responsible for the crime, are those that go to jail for the crime!

Whether or not official government policy is at stake, such conduct has become routine, simply the way public officials behave and are expected to behave. It is not, I think, because public officials individually have less integrity today than in the past. I do think, however, that what passes for integrity in government and public life is diminished. There is less expectation of honest, forthright, committed behavior, and so we take less notice when it is absent. We are used to spin, to handlers, to glib phrases and euphemisms as part of government. The likely consequences for a democratic society are not encouraging.

The Department of the Interior has become in truth, simply phrased, a corporate puppet. Money rather than our wildlife or environment becomes their decision maker – it is quite obvious good science is no longer a part of this government agency.

The saddest of all parts of this conclusion, is the fact that BLM and the U.S. Forest Service, and other government agencies, have become nothing more than part of a corporate criminal empire within our government of today. For this Veteran, and others who have fought for the stability and laws and Heritage of this country, this is a sad day for this writer to have to write this obvious circumstance onto paper. Very sad and is a let-down, our government today.

Advertisements
 
 

29 Dead Wild Horses in Murderer’s Creek Capture Report, BLM Cover Up, Again

murderers creek wild horses injured

“Corrupt influence is itself the perennial spring of all prodigality, and of all disorder; it loads us more than millions of debt; takes away vigor from our arms, wisdom from our councils, and every shadow of authority and credit from the most venerable parts of our constitution.” –Edmund Burke

It is now time within our society to open a Public Debate Platform, on whether government agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) should have open-expenditure on America’s tax payer money. . . Especially when considered — is the fact that BLM’s operations always controversial, most often incompetent, and within many occasions criminal activity involved — The Wild Horse Herd Roundups’ an excellent example of all of the previous, and should, under all intents and purpose, be shut down immediately!

Wild Horse Herd Theft – Interview with a government private contractor (from 1992 BLM Investigation)

The illegal activity continues to this day, just as at that time. Below is one of many questions answered by an informant, questioned by one of a few honest BLM Agents. This particular discussion outlines how the BLM’s Private Contractors steal horses, in this portion the Agent asks the informant who is involved in the illegal activity:

“Agent: Is this a pretty good organization? This sounds like something that’s pretty well planned out, it’s a big organization.

Informant: Well, its very well set up, you know. There’s nobody that participates in it that isn’t well known and don’t know what’s going on.

Agent: Do you feel like there’s people inside the BLM that know about this practice, that are a part of this practice?

Informant: Sure. We can’t operate unless they’re standing there.”

(For the entire informative packet and interview see Horses Led To Slaughter, Anatomy of a Cover Up in the Wild Horse and Burro Program, PEER White Paper, Number 14, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Washington D.C. 20009-1125.)

Today’s BLM the same as Yesterday’s BLM

Recently a series of FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) BLM documents arrived, to include Bureau of Land Management documents. Upon perusal, there exists far more to these documents, a scenario of events unfold. So here is a first installment of a few — and make no doubt, the number here is twenty-nine Wild Horses died at Murderer’s Creek or within the Burn’s Corral!

If we are correct in our assumptions, than the figures of horses killed at other roundups, the true numbers are far more than we estimated or even assumed. More perusal of BLM documents needed of other roundups as well. What we have accomplished is uncovering the technique done by BLM / Forestry pipeline and methods to actually “Hide” the death of wild horses or shipping horses to slaughter, e.g. to different corrals or areas, the more remote the better . . .

This also points, sadly, to the ever-present liquidation process of America’s Wild Horses from America’s Public Lands, and at Taxpayer Expense! I state this as fact, because the taxpayer’s, despite the millions upon millions of taxpayer money spent for these roundups, receive nothing – corporations receive all the benefits, and many of those are not American corporations or pay very little in taxes each year.

So our American Heritage, America’s Wild Horse Herds are being wiped out as I write this – and using “Our” tax money to do so, which amounts to Taxation Without Representation! Time for Change!

Deductive Reasoning and Conclusive Methods

These documents enabled us to not only track a Wild Horse Herd Roundup using Bait and Trap techniques, but they also developed quite a story (scenario) of a BLM / Forestry Cover Up in regard to Wild Horse Herd Roundups . . .

Within the confines of this article we will explore just the documentation. Sadly these documents outline clearly a tale of death for “twenty-nine Wild Horses” from the Murderer’s Creek (i.e. BLM document designation OR0019) area.

Why or how in regard to the death of these Wild Horses, who knows, as a BLM employee had blacked-out or erased that information from the spreadsheet made available via the FOIA. Ironically, neither was it Confidential or Secret information of any type, nor would harm the Security of the United States military or government. So one must ask, why is the information blacked-out? This question answered when we perused the Inventory, Statement of Work, Horse Count Records (partial), and Vouchers associated with Murderer’s Creek Bait and Trap Operations.

The Bait and Trap Capture of Wild Horses

This particular roundup within the contract was to “. . . capture and removal of up to 200 horses . . .” (i.e. STATEMENT OF WORK, Murderer’s Creek Territory Bait Trap-Oregon, #5. Capture / Removal Numbers . . .

From September 15, 2012 (authorized start date) through April 31, 2013 – “. . . up to 95 horses . . .” “The remaining 105 horses shall be captured and removed from October 1, 2012 through April 31, 2013. . .” (i.e. ibid, from Statement of Work #5).

Clearly from another document received, there were 268 Inventoried Wild Horses Captured, this according to actual Inventory Numbers given to the Wild Horses rounded up from Murderer’s Creek (designation — OR0019), between the contract period of September 15, 2012 to April 31, 2013. This particular document creates many more questions that need answered.

Further, other documents attest to a total of 623 wild horses captured (Forestry vouchers, et al.). This is another 355 wild horses also taken from the Murderer’s Creek area, supposedly; OR, are taxpayers paying for stolen horses or wild horses taken in excess from other HMA’s in a criminal fashion, and designated as Murderer’s Creek inventory?

Keep in mind out of the way areas do promote this situation, as a less than average detection rate of criminal activity can and often accomplished, and is very popular with BLM employees and criminals, as previous undercover operations attest to in the years 1990 to 1994, et al. . .

This situation does have a finger-print so to speak, as designated on the “Paid Vouchers” under category – Feed / Care for Captured Horses, with Invoice Numbers – L12PD01580-01, L12PD01580-2, and L12PD01580-3R . . . All three vouchers are designated as “Murderer’s Creek Bait Trap” Contract Number L12PCO0123, and Delivery/ Task Order L12PDO1580 . . .

These vouchers attest to the fact a total of 623 horses were fed and transported somewhere – or were they? Could this be a False Report, or outright Fraud? Or, if true, where did the horses come from? Where did the Wild Horses go to? We can track only 258 —

If not Wild Horses, then stolen, or displaced from other HMA’s? And taxpayer’s supplemented the transportation of stolen horses to slaughter? Well, we have before, many times and within the BLM and now the Forestry, so why would this be any different, when the obvious is, well, obvious.

Witnesses within the area do attest to the fact, within that time-frame, well known Kill Buyer trucks out of California and a smaller one out of Nevada, who transports horses to slaughter, were seen on occasion. But no witness knows for sure where they may have stopped.

Dead Horses On Record (i.e. BLM Documentation)

Examples of recorded data on Spreadsheet is available here (1st two only, the remainder the same throughout the spreadsheet 1 thru 258 (twenty-nine listed as Dead) for total recorded captures, all similar inventory numbers and all designated from Murderer’s Creek area appropriately.

The brand is labeled with the HG or HM series, as inventory would dictate. The other categories, other than Dead, were “Eligible for Adoption” or “Adopted”, but we have no idea if this is true as they do not check . . . The “Capture Dates are recorded as 10/10/2012 to 12/19/2013 on this particular document.

10/10/2012 OR0019 Murderer’s Creek Food Trap HG1AAAAAC DEAD
10/10/2012 OIR019 Murderer’s Creek Food Trap HM1ACAEBD DEAD

According to this document, the end destination via travel voucher was Burns, Oregon BLM corrals, all twenty-nine Wild Horses listed as “Dead”, and as designated by the BLM’s Statement of Work details and mileage vouchers (i.e. Statement of Work, #12 Destination of Transported Horses, et al.).

Journalist: “There is a list of twenty-nine horses from Murderer’s Creek that died over there, or at your facility.”

Rob Stark (COR): “Well, we’ve only had three die at the Burns Corral.”

Journalist: “Then you are saying the horses in question died at the Trap Site? If that is the case then why did taxpayer’s pay the $1200 per horse for the capture and transport of dead horse’s?”

Rob Stark (COR): “I didn’t say they died at the trap site.”

Journalist: “But you just said you had only three die at the Burns corral in the past couple of years — but there are twenty-nine listed as “Dead” here, all designated in your Inventory, and assigned a Murderer’s Creek Capture Number. Then where did they die?”

Rob Stark (COR): “We have people out at the Trap Sites, myself included, that monitor if the trapped horses healthy enough to be transported.”

Journalist: “Then you’ve taken horses to the Burns Corrals and euthanized them, because they were sickly, or crippled? Or, you did not?”

Rob Stark (COR): “We would not bring them back to the corrals at Burns if sick.”

Journalist: “So you paid transport fees and Capture payments for supposedly trapped horses that were not transported, but Euthanized at the Trap Sites?”

Conclusion

Your guess is as good as mine on resolving this situation, especially the way our government agencies work, or do not work at all. BLM employees do not answer questions very well, and become vague at best (i.e. BLM Speak). One thing for sure is they always seem to be hiding something . . . But the vouchers and travel mileage clear, and when combined with the short Inventory of Wild Horses Captured, 258, and the Forestry’s vague but readable vouchers.

The numbers left out from a few Forestry vouchers, make no doubt we are discussing more, rather than less, horses captured. Because of these vouchers, and the overwhelming speculation that many Murderer’s Creek Wild Horses were sent to slaughter from the Forestry side, would make sense after reading their vouchers.

It becomes more than obvious that something needs to happen, and it needs to happen fast out at Murderer’s Creek. We can no longer depend on the honesty of either of these government agencies, or if there is and it exists, we simply have not found it yet –-

Sadly, for the Wild Horses . . . and it continues to break all of our hearts. The Investigation continues . . .

 
 

BULLITIN: Confirmed — Bureau of Land Management’s Bait and Trap Roundup Kills 29 Wild Horses, as their Paperwork Shows Clearly! A $29,000 SCAM TO RECEIVE TAXPAYER MONEY

burns horse 2

29 WILD HORSES DIE — COVERUP IN THE BLM PAPERWORK OBVIOUS

At Murderer’s Creek, yes, we have “all” concluded that 29 Deaths were completed, if not directly then indirectly, from this particular, supposedly bait and trapping roundup –- the fact is also the use of Dead-Horses to assimilate increase in private contractor voucher’s and payments . . .

Administered by the Forestry – 75% and BLM – 25%.

I have just received confirmation from three-other sources, in regard to how the BLM insists upon minimal death rates, their number is 1% only and from all roundups — of wild horses from their administered roundups. Their fatality numbers, and reasons why, remain a travesty and highly untrue! The use of their paperwork, and wild horse movement from corral to corral is corrupt, falsified, but easily traceable — essentially creates the COVERUP and the misuse of taxpayer money toward Over-payments to private contractor’s.

This will be further discussed within another article, rather than this particular Bulletin — and on the details how we come up with this paradigm, of abuse not only of wild horses but taxpayer money as well ($29,000 in this case and presently, but that number may increase when receiving further paperwork from the Forestry…

We have also found that an attempt to Cover-up this situation and such large numbers of death of wild horses, was accomplished directly by BLM.

Explanation: The BLM’s ideology of simply moving a captured horse to sites out of Oregon (for example), will appear to those upon light perusal that the horses potential of dyeing within one of their corral situations, due to injury from natural occurrence or age, or handicap already present of some sort, etc., — and BLM Management endorsing such lies, often works for the general public.

Here’s the thing of interest: The Murderer’s Creek Roundup paid $1,000 per horse; 29 horses dyed directly relating to the Murderer’s Creek Roundup; the contractors were paid for these dead horses (blanks within the paperwork for these inventoried and numbered horses blacked-out, and do not show arrival at corrals, cause of death, rather, simply marked “Dead”) in the amount of $29,000, shown on inventory from both Gather/Capture, Voucher, and Final Payment!

This situation would also verify the cruelty of a Roundup, whether helicopter or Bait and Trap, to be highly unethical and unnecessary. . . This staggering number of death’s develops causation, as the BLM’s roundup fatality rates, which they state is only 1% in both Helicopter and Bait and Trap methodologies, can now be placed into direct contention.

All Advocates with paperwork from the BLM, please track from original roundup paperwork and dates, then to corrals, then to fatality and adoption sheets, then to vouchers and payment to private contractor’s – you will then observe the same thing we are observing here. . .

Criminality at every bend! America has to DEMAND the TRUTH here, and STOP the ROUNDUPS IMMEDIATELY!

 
 

IS IT NECESSARY TO COMPLETE WILD HORSE HERD ROUNDUPS — To Those Who have Knowledge About Such Things, Absolutely Not

john_babe_pond_side

“Blame it or praise it, there is no denying the wild horse in us.” ― Virginia Woolf, Jacob’s Room

This is an Editorial (a Freedom of Speech outlet), on something very troubling that exists today within our government agencies. Here I use the Bureau of Land Management as an example, as there is such an abundance of misinformation and lies coming from them constantly within the media, as well as placed over the Internet.

Today it is government agencies that use their capacity as a government entity to pass misinformation off to the Public as being truthful. Often it is easily acknowledged by those who, in this case, know horses and are well informed about Public Lands, that it is viewed as misinformation.

It is the duplicity of false information in an attempt to authenticate a government agencies, BLM, existence; their platform being that of Special Interests rather than the general public and taxpayer’s = money. . .

I conduct this not as a theory, but as a reality, the reality of oh so many decision’s today based on a false premise or acknowledged misinformation in order to manipulate or coerce. Ultimately, since it is troubling or misinformed information, and management, in this case America’s Public Lands, is simply being destroyed – well referenced within good science and recent developments in regard to America’s Public Lands. . .

The Problem

Here is one example (make no doubt many more exist and ongoing):

“Tom Gorey, a BLM spokesman, said, “the opponents of our horse gathers face a daunting question of ethics. On one hand, they imply that if Mother Nature kills off the horses from thirst or starvation, that’s OK. But if we intervene to save these horses, that’s unacceptable.”

But what happened in Nevada awhile back is a strong reminder that it’s the roundups themselves, and not Mother Nature, that present the greatest threat to wild horses:

•One mare was killed because she was blind in one eye and the BLM said that “it was dangerous for processing.” She was 15.

•A second mare was kicked by another horse while in temporary holding, and suffered a broken leg, so the BLM killed her. She was 8.

•A third mare suffered the broken neck from ramming a gate while in the trap after the roundup. She was 9.”

The Resolution

The fact is Mr. Gorey is wrong on many different levels here. Over time, the ultimate judgment of bad decision making established on false or misinformed information, in this case what has been shown wrong by not only good science, but results between what Horse Advocate state as sound management, and the reality of what transpired relating directly to BLM’s decisions – the BLM’s decisions quite costly to taxpayer’s in the millions of dollars, as well as outright cripples and kills America’s Wild Horses, America’s Heritage.

The fact is no Horse Advocate had made the statement Mr. Gorey eluded toward. In reality it was his condescension, basically to belittle other American’s, in order to generate hatred and animosity toward Horse Advocates.

The reality, no Horse Advocate would allow Wild Horses to die because of no water or food available – that’s ridiculous and childish to even assume such a remark to be ethical what so ever coming from a government employee, but does establish the types of employee’s that indeed work at the BLM.

What is stated, by many Horse Advocates, is the fact that the Wild Horse Management Areas (i.e. Taxpayer support program and Public Lands for the Wild Horses to roam freely — HMA’s) are neglectfully being over-run by cattle. These cattle I speak of are far and above the amount truly manageable and the guidelines ignored of that are within the Public Land Permit Grazing Allowance. This ultimately devastates (as good science and research in these given areas show time and again) entire Ecological Biospheres destroyed by over-grazing of cattle, which in turn destroys the available food and water for all wildlife in that given area.

From Mr. Gorey’s statement above, and the quick rebuttal showing the statement false, you have read what transpired at that time. And yet, like a spoiled child, BLM employees continue to do similar tactics and within an oddly arrogant manner. This equates to even more taxpayer money spent!

But their information is vastly in error, as what they do not mention is the fact of their supposed “Good Science research and data gather for their decisions” – very important here – have not worked out what so ever. The other ironic fact here is that BLM Management and Department of the Interior Director demanded the elimination of cattle being mentioned within any further science research, grassland studies, or technical reports. This has been accomplished over the past five years, and decisions have been made on these reports and studies. Taxpayer money spent on frivolous situations and consequences escalated tremendously, due to these manipulated technical studies and reports!

Now we get into the Wild Horse Herd Roundups that never need to occur. The BLM’s explanation for the Roundup, and to spend millions upon millions more of taxpayer money – The Population of the Horse Herds too many for the HMA’s and must be taken off Public Lands –

THE REALITY? Fewer cattle, and not less wild horses, would resolve the problem nicely and correctly. This common-sense rebuttal simply demands that BLM manage the cattle on Public Lands appropriately and in accord with the Grazing Permits and the laws stup by legislative action! Yes, that simple – but more simplicity follows! Interesting, isn’t it – the fact of not needing to spend taxpayer money at all.

Yes, this is where not only experience, knowledge, good science, sound observation, and appropriate data gathering from many, rather than just a few who all have only special interests in mind, ironically remains ignored by not only BLM management, but by the Board at the Wild Horse and Burro Program.

True Horse Herd Management

Case in point: Many horse people, to include myself, have observed wild horses in the wilds. We have also studied the wild horses, and over the years keep up with knowledgeable facts, especially how wild horses breed and their herding tendencies and characteristics.

Many knowledgeable wild horse observer’s, horsemen and horsewomen alike, observe the natural progression of herd development, mentality, communication, and control, which creates a natural pattern of minimal impact on the culture and behavior of the various Wild Horse Herds on Public Lands.

One of the most obvious, and for this matter the most enlightening here, is that young bachelor stallions are culled, or chased away by the alpha-male or main stallion — while attempting to recruit mares for themselves. Hence, the herd dynamics allowed for a stable population with long term pair bonding between alpha males and females.

Reproductive rates, it is shown through these techniques of a “natural controlled and progression of herd stability” from many herd’s studied, were estimated between 4-5 percent. We then compare, for this example and taken from a 1979-80 study, and within these same herds, after BLM random gate cuts were implemented, were estimated at 10 -12 percent and rising. This increase in reproductive rates most likely was due to the fact that stable pairs of alpha females and males had been removed leaving many mares open for recruitment from bachelor stallions previously not allowed into the herd.

In reality, this causation, or BLM’s lack of knowledge and abilities, created an incompetent interruption into the natural progression of wild horse herd dynamics, which created increased horse populations.
Which in turn and not to be overlooked created a much more expensive budget for Wild Horse Herd Management? Yes, the taxpayers paid once again for incompetence in total!

Then we start talking about the extremely vast budgets, in the millions of dollars, to roundup these horses due to over-population that BLM and their management situations (or lack of) had caused! (Horse Herd Management Principles here taken from “Standing in the Field Where the Wild Horses Whisper in Silence – https://prophoto7journal.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/standing-in-the-field-where-the-wild-horses-whisper-in-silence/

Conclusion

But then, it’s as simple as this – The Taxpayer’s, American’s and owners of Public Lands, should demand TRUTH from our government agency employees as well as our Legislator’s. Stop making decisions on false, misleading, manipulated for special interests, or misinformed information! That is simply not too much to ask for at all, don’t you think?

 
 

Wild Horses versus Welfare Ranchers — Let’s Start Talking Truth

1451975_624318974291466_885969319_n

Americanism means the virtues of courage, honor, justice, truth, sincerity, and the virtues that made America. The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life. –Theodore Roosevelt

America is at a crossroads with our Public Lands. We hear a lot recently from Welfare Rancher’s about their “rights being violated” and ironically, many of them do not accept our American style of government. Just as Ironic, Welfare Rancher’s use our Public Lands for grazing their cattle; and ironic again, these same Welfare Rancher’s receive or have received enormous amounts of subsidies from our taxpayer money (i.e. $ in the billions currently—see references from a 2005 GAO Report below).

But these same Welfare Rancher’s now “demand” our government to liquidate, Wild Horses from America’s Public lands — America’s Wild Horse Herds — America’s Heritage!

Their reasoning simple, at least to those unaware of the facts: to place more cattle onto Public Lands to graze – OUR Public Lands, Not Theirs!

This is important to keep in mind, as we can lose it under unscrupulous manipulations, lies, misinformation, and criminal methods. Because Welfare Rancher’s Lease under the guise of Permits our Public Land, does not and never will give them ownership and outright decision making capacity on that same land.

Decision making is left entirely to the American Public and handed down to those who are Stewarts of our land – in this case the BLM. An inter-change, between the true owner’s and a government agency managing our lands does not exist, though it should. We can take a look at BLM and their decision making process, which demonstrates why an inter-change of decision making should exist, for example:

One Roundup of 150 Wild Horses cost the taxpaying public $4.2 million dollars (over all assumptive costs via BLM documents)– wild horses shot and killed, or dead in traps, were still paid for by taxpayer money as well, $1,000 per horse, and placed into BLM inventory as live animals so payment could be received by government contractors –-

The BLM, in their wisdom, sold these same 150 Wild Horses to a slaughter plant in Canada for $6,140. . . Quite frankly, America cannot afford this type of incompetence! Combine that with the unnecessary reasoning for the roundup, and we start seeing consistency in incompetence, followed by a lot of questionable management situations with this government agency and Welfare Rancher’s alike. . .

The figure I will repeat occasionally through this article, their 2011 domestic sales receipts, only amounted to less than 1% of overall commercial beef sales. Yes, less than 1% of domestic sales, and this is due to several reasons – Yet you and I, as taxpayer’s paid these same rancher’s, $ Billons of dollars – and continue to do so under the guise of a BLM Land Grazing Program!

To put it appropriately, if we were to purchase their hamburger (i.e. Welfare Rancher’s only), when assumptive (2005-2012 available subsidy-by taxpayer figures via GAO) overall costs articulated properly, we pay, in reality, approximately $938.00 per pound for hamburger. Oh, it gets much worse. . .

Taxpayer’s and American’s Say “Enough is Enough”

Welfare Rancher’s, in truth, are simply taking advantage of antiquated government programs no longer financially feasible. There exists no reason for this type of government subsidy, or for the program to exist any longer. The programs established in 1928 and 1932 to assist in feeding America during the Depression Era. These programs antiquated decades ago, and are now a waste of taxpayer money!

Cattle Grazing Destroys Public Lands

Mismanaged by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), our Public Lands, in truth, are being destroyed by the ignorance of these same BLM employees and Welfare Rancher’s alike – this glaring truth referenced with good data gathering and facts; but often confused when combined with government misinformation and “special interest only” data gathering – The other awkward truth: it is in order to keep spending taxpayer money frivolously – yes, control by confusion.

There is an ironic truth here, believe it or not, in the Welfare Ranching Program, and what can only be explained as an ignorance that oddly has become a perspective; then combined with a narrow self-oriented need of a few. . . Many call this a recipe toward disaster and destruction of our Public Lands and eventually America; make no doubt of this situation.

Currently, we — the American Taxpayer’s — are not only subsidizing Welfare Ranching and receiving nothing for the money ( as stated before — 2011/2012/2013 sales receipts of beef from Public Land Grazing programs less than 1% of total commercial beef sales domestically), but now Welfare Rancher’s want to demand, ignorantly, by claiming their falsified information as litigable (BLM misinformation and outright lies).

Basically one can truthfully state, these Welfare Ranchers receive subsidies which pay for their planes, their swimming pools, their new trucks, their mansions, and pay their lobby groups very well, with Our money — Tax payer money: Oh, and let’s not neglect the fact they purchase more cattle to place on Our Public Lands (illegally and beyond their Grazing Permit ratios), and with Our tax money as subsidies — for their less than 1% domestic sales in America — No, they do not compete with commercial ranchers at all, i.e. to incompetent — And No, Americans receive no benefits what so ever other than our Public Lands being destroyed and America’s Wild Horses being Rounded Up Abusively, and many being killed.

Yes, they want to spent time in Federal Courts wasting more of America’s Taxpayer Dollars by demanding the liquidation of America’s Heritage, our Wild Horse Herds! These Welfare Rancher’s want taxpayers to cover the cost of everything they do, or can’t do, the take our Public Lands as well — Oh, at the cost of millions of dollars to taxpayers once again, labeled as subsidies!

Ironically, we unnecessarily, and unknowingly over a vast amount of time, paid them the money to accumulate and do so by subsidizing their, well, useless activity and ranching operations – all because they hold a grazing permit to lease Public Lands.

Oh Darn – The Real Fact of the Matter

Let’s look at the real facts from the Government Accountability Office, and about the Welfare Ranching Disease cluttering our Public Lands with unnecessary cattle (again, 2011 sales receipts less than 1% of total commercial beef sales domestically – their beef is simply not that good, nor will it ever be while grazing Public Lands, and all the while using GMO products to enhance the beef itself):

• The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported (in 2005) the federal government spends at least $144 million each year managing private livestock grazing on federal public lands, but collects only $21 million in grazing fees—for a net loss of at least $123 million per year (for 2005 – increased 18% per year).
• The GAO reported that ten federal departments and agencies operate grazing programs on federal public lands: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), USDA-Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Energy, Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers, the Army, Air Force, and Navy.
• The GAO admits its report is incomplete because several agencies, including the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Environmental Protection Agency, which spend millions of dollars mitigating for grazing damage such as non-point source water pollution, did not provide estimates of their grazing related costs to the GAO.
• Other programs that benefit both private and public lands ranchers, such as the “Livestock Compensation Program,” were also not included in the total subsidy to public lands ranchers.
• Considering the additional direct and indirect costs not included in the GAO report, economists have estimated that the federal public lands grazing on only BLM and Forest Service lands may cost as much as $500 million to $1 billion annually.
• The majority of BLM and Forest Service grazing fees are not deposited to the U.S. Treasury, but instead are diverted to the “Range Betterment Fund” to pay for fencing, water developments, and related infrastructure to support continued livestock grazing
• No report has ever fully analyzed the incredible environmental costs of livestock grazing on federal public lands.

Federal Grazing Permit Loans

While taxpayers pay millions of dollars to subsidize livestock grazing on public lands, federal grazing permittees and lessees are also allowed under dubious federal policy to collateralize their grazing permits/leases to finance their public lands grazing operations. Both the Forest Service4 and the BLM5 sanction the use of publicly owned federal grazing permits and leases as collateral for private bank loans (again 2005 figures — attritional rates increase within this situation nearly 28% yearly. . .).

• The BLM has documented more than $1.1 billion in liens on BLM grazing permits/leases in the eleven western states.
• Approximately 300 ranch operations have taken more than $450 million in loans on Forest Service grazing permits.
• In Supreme Court documents, the State Bank of Southern Utah confirmed that financial institutions hold an estimated $10 billion in loans and related credit transactions to the public land ranching industry, with the grazing privileges alone worth approximately $1billion.

Predator Control to Protect Livestock

Of the millions of dollars that taxpayers spend annually to subsidize public lands grazing, perhaps $5 – $8
million is dedicated to killing “predators” to protect livestock grazing on federal lands.9 Native wildlife killed to protect livestock include coyotes, bobcats, wolves, mountain lions, and bears.

• Number of predators Wildlife Services killed in sixteen western states (FY 2007): 71,196.
• Wildlife Services spent more than $61 million of federal funds to control wildlife in FY 2007; more than $18 million was spent to protect “agriculture” (including livestock) from animal damage; of that amount, $10,303,903 was spent in the eleven western states with the most federal public land and federal public lands grazing.
• Percent of Wildlife Services predator control budget spent to protect livestock on public lands: 75 percent.
• Percent of predator control budget paid by ranchers: 1 percent.
• Percent of cattle and calf losses attributed to predation (including dogs) (2005): 4.7 percent.
• Percent of cattle and calf losses attributed to digestive problems, respiratory difficulties, calving complications, weather and other causes (2005): 95.3 percent. (all bullet information: Fiscal Costs of Federal Public Lands Livestock Grazing, Wild Earth Guardians)

America and the Facts

After a review of the reality of Welfare Rancher’s grazing on America’s Public Lands, one can only shake their head in astonishment. How did things get to this point? How was such a program allowed to go on without some type of supervision or even adjustments and oversight?. Why was this program not discontinued decades ago, when it served its usefulness, then obviously become a “suck-hole” for taxpayer money?

Well, the answer to this is simple. Many legislators and large corporations are also involved in the Welfare Ranching industry. Some are paid vast amounts of money, ironically for grazing cattle on Public Lands, but have no cattle on their lands to graze; yet other’s, as aforementioned, simply sub-lease their Leased Public Land (i.e. illegal at best), often cheaper for a nearby commercial beef rancher to use than the standard commercial rates in any given area.

The fact is, programs such as this eventually worn out and useless, become a haven for criminal activity and criminal use. This is because of the tremendous amount of dollars given to the program, all taxpayer money and used by both private and government agencies, and with virtually no oversight or responsibility factors involved. . . In another words there is no one person or group of people answerable to this Welfare Ranching Program – it is a grab-all-you-can-and-run methodology, and has worked, pretty much criminal in nature — as school lunches are cut for kids, some do not eat dinner, due to government cut-backs – Disgusted enough to finally say something?

Many of these same rancher’s also collect subsidies and rental from water rights – Yes, as a Lessee they can become owners of all water-wells on the Public Land they lease – then rent or lease back to the government — yes-your taxpayer money at work!

Conclusion

In the past Welfare Rancher’s, in Oregon, attempted to blame the Wild Horse Herds in that location and within Federal Court, of Steelhead and Salmon stream-bed destruction – as odd as this sounds. The Federal Court situation cost taxpayer’s in excess of $24 million dollars, for the court to say what was quite obvious to most who observed the location, that it was the Stout’s cattle that caused the problem along the Murderer’s Creek stream-beds, and not the Wild Horses.

“The Stout’s (Welfare Rancher’s) bid to rid the Malheur Forest of mustangs was dealt a major setback when the National Marine Fisheries Services issued a Biological Opinion earlier this year, finding that, based on the best available scientific evidence, “wild horses are unlikely to cause measurable impacts to [the steelhead’s] tributary habitat within the action area” and impacts due to wild horses “are likely to be small and have minimal impacts on steelhead, [or] their habitat.”

“By contrast, in previous litigation, the Stout’s cattle were found to be directly impacting the steelhead. A federal court in Oregon ordered a reduction in grazing levels, a move that prompted the Stouts to file their own case to eliminate horses from the area.”

The Federal Court demanded a settlement, as further stated, one reason being the fact of questionable government information given to the Court as scientific information. This made the Judge in this matter not only skeptical, but demanded settlement.

Often it is interesting to know, and then acknowledge the details of a situation. It’s a fact the more an individual knows about such programs as Welfare Ranching and cattle grazing upon Public Lands, the more one understands the criminality and the unnecessary spending of taxpayer money for such programs.

As history shows as well, within this program, the criminality and ongoing frivolous government spending of subsidies to Welfare Rancher’s remains nothing more than a glut of money, with no return to the taxpayer what so ever. And that is an element of criminality within itself!

 
 

Wild Horse Herds – A Little Law – Who Owns Them?

eye of Babe

“Connecting with the wilderness allows us to live in the flow of a meaningful, joyful life. Embracing this state of connectedness or oneness with other living beings including animals, as opposed to feeling an “otherness” or “separateness” brings a sense of harmony and enables us to be at peace with oneself and the world.” — Sylvia Dolson, Joy of Bears

The constant destruction from prolific human obnoxiousness toward America’s wildlife and environment somehow has become acceptable conduct. Similar is the term, Acceptable Animal Abuse, which relates to economic profits? How odd such a vial and disgusting situation as this has also become a sign, a signature if you will, of our times.

Humane treatment of animals, and people for that matter, is for all intents and purposes, thrown out the window by today’s politicians and business people! What had caught my eye the other day was a powerful statement, ironically, how true it is – “When did ignorance become a Perspective?”

Here is examined the Legality of Ownership of America’s Wildlife. These explanations and Legislative Laws are what is not only being ignored today, but new actions set in place that allow criminal conduct to take place, as you will read below, contradict directly Constitutional Guidelines to do so!

Yes, our government is in contempt, with no checks-an-Balance System in place to stop them! Especially in regard to America’s Wild Horse Herds and the outright destruction of America’s Heritage – the American Wild Mustang! That is, unless – Unless honest folks are elected into legislative office that are responsible enough to represent the Voters, the Taxpayers, the American’s of this land of ours.

FEDERAL POWER

Federal actions must be authorized by a constitutional clause (Maltz 1981, McGinley). For wildlife legislation, the main clauses are the treaty clause (U.S. Const. Art. I, sec. 10), property clause (U.S. Const. Art. IV, sec. 3), and commerce clause (U.S. Const. Art. I, sec. 8). In addition Congress can direct federal agencies to modify agency actions to protect wildlife — TO PROTECT WILDLIFE!

For Congress to pass legislation, a constitutional clause must exist justifying its action. For example, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. ? 703) and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. ?? 1531-1543) use the treaty clause as a partial justification. Statutes created under the treaty power can control any wildlife species as long as individual rights and liberties are not contravened (Coggins 1980). The property clause is also important. Under it the federal government has the power to control its own land. Also, the federal government can control activities that take place elsewhere if they have an impact on federal land.

For example, Devil’s Hole National Monument was created to protect the Devil’s Hole pupfish (Cyprinodon diabolis). A Nevada rancher drilled wells on private land nearby as authorized by a state water permit. When pumping began and the water in Devil’s Hole began to drop, the rancher was required to reduce his pumping rate so that federal property was not harmed. This preserved the habitat and the pupfish (United States v. Cappaert, 426 U.S. 256 [1976]).

WILD HORSES ON PUBLIC LANDS

Kleppe v. New Mexico (426 U.S. 529 [1976]), which upheld the Wild Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act (16 U.S.C. ?? 1331-1340), was also a significant decision. New Mexico had a law (N.M. Stat. Ann. ?? 47-14-1 et seq.) that allowed feral horses and burros to be rounded up and sold at auction. In accordance with this state law, some wild burros were rounded up because a rancher claimed they were molesting his cows. The land involved was federal land with the rancher possessing a grazing permit. The U.S. Supreme Court held that the burros were federal property, just like the land.

Since activities off federal property can be controlled, animals that touch federal land at some time during their life may be federal property no matter where they go. A better argument limits this concept to animals that use federal land as an essential part of their habitat. In this view, land and animal are part of the same ecological system. Harm to one can cause harm to the other.

The commerce clause is perhaps the most far reaching of the 3 clauses. “The scope of the commerce power has become virtually unlimited” (Coggins 1980:327) with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hughes v. Oklahoma (441 U.S. 322 [1979]). Horse Advocates are caught in this realm of expanded legislative power, generic attributes, and unsettled discrepancies’ harmful to wildlife . . . a point for another article. . .

The final extension of constitutional power was taken in this case, and wildlife species were declared articles of commerce. Species that are valuable for hide, hair, meat, or oil are obviously articles of commerce because these commodities can be sold. Species that cross state boundaries or are found in “navigable” waters are also articles of commerce under traditional constitutional interpretations. The same is true for species that might attract out-of-state visitors. “In short, while a few species may appear to be sedentary, lacking in economic value, and uninteresting, the overwhelming majority of American fauna clearly are (sic) in or affect interstate commerce and are thus subject to federal regulation” (Coggins 1980:328).

THE COURT AND THE LEGISLATURE

The real question is not who owns wildlife but who has the power to manage it. According to the U.S. Supreme Court the state ownership doctrine has always been a myth (Hughes v. Oklahoma [1979]). Interesting is the fact, to say the least, when one acknowledges states giving up their non-private Land Rights, in reality to be accepted within the Union of the United States, when each had become a state – well referenced.

In the past few years the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to determine which level of government has the power to manage wildlife. Because wildlife is not considered individual private property until reduced to possession, the status of wildlife changes when an individual captures or kills it legitimately and legally, and unless protected — Until that point, wildlife is considered the common property of all the people.

Article 5 of the Constitution can also be implemented here; constructively and figuratively, via enough signatures upon a petition – which represents each state involved where Federal Land / Public Land is located and under controversy – definitely intimidating to legislators of today (Open Platform Debate rears its head again here), scrutiny.

When wildlife does cross state boundaries, they are then considered legally, and legislatively, common property of all the citizens of the United States. One has to wonder if the Supreme Court Justice’s read this material, especially when compounded by the obvious absence of a humane-deduction toward Wildlife apparently excluded from their process.

Often the actual Legislative Law becomes void, within a non-legislative action. This is beyond the scope of the Supreme Court, in accord with the Constitution, as to actually generate legislation — to set Legislative Law — is the act to be accomplished by those Voted by American’s to do so!

Although, the fact is Congress has asserted federal power over some migratory species, and other species in danger of extinction. American’s interests in this circumstance are clear. National interest is also clear on federal land which is the common property of all the people of the United States, not just people in the states where the land is found.

The flawed aspect — In the past decade, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution to justify existing federal legislation. In doing so, it has made federal power over wildlife unlimited. But, even though the power exists, Congress does not have to exercise it.

CONCLUSION

The political process – and not law — balances state and federal wildlife issues within Congress. If there is national interest in a wildlife issue, the issue should be debated at the national level and not relegated to state resolution.

The process of a state, for example, using coercion toward a Federal Agency to promote the Wild Horses be vacated from Federal Lands / Public Lands, can and should become a Constitutional Violation, and an issue whereas the American people decide definitely through adequate representation by the Senate and Congress! Note — I state adequate representation of the American Public, no special interest or lobby groups involved!

The political process works, in most instances, to do this when an honest political process is in office and representing American’s appropriately, and within a responsible manner and degree of Law combined with truthful information to make proper decisions adequately.

With wildlife management, it is politics and not “law” that controls which level of government is the manager. Although the federal government has power, the Constitution also allows state control if the federal government has not acted in an appropriate manner. It also allows, under Article 5, jurisprudence within the capacity of the general American Public – via holding a Special Convention to do so (see Article 5 of the Constitution).

A shared and diverse management paradigm was intended in the Constitution — a kind of cooperative federalism enhanced by taxpayer and the general public’s involvement (again not lobby groups and special interests only). The states must accept federal power and develop management plans that consider the federal role. Failure to cooperate may allow political forces to increase the federal role through additional legislation.

Although the current administration emphasizes a reduction in the federal role, the federal influence continues in opposition to any type of reduction what so ever. This will likely remain, and truthfully, unless the federal environmental laws of the 1970s are all repealed and all federal land is sold, the legality of control remains legally defined, but most often ignored.
__________________________________________

ANONYMOUS. 1971. Vanishing wildlife and federal protective efforts. Ecol. Law Q. 1:520-560.

COGGINS, G. C. 1980. Wildlife and the Constitution: the walls come tumbling down. Washington Law Rev. 55:294-358.

AND D. L. SMITH. ___________. 1975. The emerging law of wildlife: a narrative bibliography. Environ. L aw 6:583-618.

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INSTITUTE, 1977. The evolution of national wildlife law. Council on Environ. Quality, Washington, D.C. 485pp.

EULE, J. N. 1982. Laying the dormant commerce clause to rest. Yale Law J. 91:425-485.

FIELD, M. E. 1984. The evolution of the wildlife taking concept from its beginning to its culmi-nation in the Endangered Species Act. Houston Law Rev. 21:457-503.

LUND, T. A. 1975. British wildlife law before the American Revolution: le ssons from the past. Mich. Law Rev. 74:49-74.
___________. 1976. Early American wildlife law. New York Univ. Law Rev. 51:703-730.

___________. 1980. American wildlife law. Univ. Califor-nia Press, Berkeley, Calif. 179pp.

LUNDBERG, C. 1978. Birds, bunnies and the furbish lousewart-wildlife and mining on the public lands. Rocky Mt. Mineral Law Inst. 24:93-137.

MALTZ, E. M. 1981. How much regulation is too much-an examination of commerce clause juris-prudence. George Washington Law Rev. 50:47- 89.

MATTHIESSEN, P. 1964. Wildlife in America. Viking Press, New York, N.Y. 304pp.

MCGINLEY, P. C. 1983. Federalism lives! Reflections on the vitality of the federal system in the context of natural resource regulation. Kan. Law Rev. 32: 147-163.

PALMER, T. S. 1912. Chronology and index of the more important events in American game protec-tion. U.S. Biol. Surv. Bull. 41. 62pp.

TARLOCK, A. D. 1983. National power, state resource sovereignty and federalism in the 1980’s: scaling America’s magic mountain. Kan. Law Rev. 32: 111-145.

TREFETHEN, J. B. 1961. Crusade for wildlife-high-lights in conservation progress. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pa. 377pp.

TUSHNET, M. 1979. Rethinking the dormant com-merce clause. Wis. Law Rev. 1979:125-165.

VARAT, J. D. 1981. State citizenship and interstate equality. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 48:487-572.