The wheels greased for its acceptance by the Bush Administration, the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission met in Thermopolis, Wyoming and passed the much criticized Wyoming state wolf management plan, which is bad for wolves in almost every way.

Only two conservationists testified, Franz Camenzind of the Jackson Hole Alliance and Lisa Upson of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

One who was there wrote by email: “This was really a pretty grim meeting. Virulent and ugly group of antiwolfers, with derogatory and threatening comments directed at Franz, who was essentially the only pro wolf participant. GYC, the imitation conservation group, didn’t bother to have anyone testify; Franz took a lot of abuse. On the other hand it was ugly enough [it] sounds like [it] may have even embarrassed some of the commissioners.”

Story in the Jackson Hole News and Guide. By Cory Hatch and AP.

Note: it looks like the person who emailed (quoted above) did not hear or forgot to mention Lisa Upton.

Update 11-20-07: By telephone, I received what I thought was probably a good explanation why the GYC did not publicly testify. 

Tagged with:
 
avatar
About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is President of the Western Watersheds Project.

69 Responses to Wyoming Game and Fish passes final wolf plan

  1. ” The state has a reputation for being able to manage it’s wildlife, and manage it well.” Said F&G commissioner Pres. Bill Williams.

    The Nat’l Elk Refuge is proof of that….
    Are they really that stupid, or are they paid to act stupid?

  2. avatar Mack P. Bray says:

    d. Bailey Hill wrote: “Are they really that stupid, or are they paid to act stupid?” d. Bailey Hill, I think they’re both stupid AND paid to act even more stupid than they actually are.

    Wyoming’s Fish & Game commissioners are appointed by the governor and approved by the senate. I’m not sure there’s ever been a known conservationist appointed, although I’m sure many of the present and past appointed ranchers would consider themselves conservationists (yeah, right). In other words, where the hell’s the representation of Wyoming’s conservationists? It doesn’t exist. We are NOT being represented at the state level.

    Here’s a concept regarding wildlife watchers, who are not represented in any state’s wildlife management agencies, that I’m aware of:

    http://wildlifewatchers.jottit.com/

    From the article: “Camenzind also called the plan “fiscally irresponsible,” pointing out that, under the state’s plan, management will cost over $2 million a year when the federal government only spends about $500,000 a year right now.”

    Let’s see, over $2 million a year to manage 15 breeding pairs of wolves, with some 300 wolves currently in Wyoming, before the oncoming slaughter. That’s over $6,666.66 per wolf; more per wolf after the slaughter, er, ah, “management” actions. What kind of stinking economics is this? All to supposedly protect livestock producers.

    Livestock producers need to get their cows and sheep off AMERICA’S public lands.

    Don’t forget that with Wyoming’s wolf slaughter, er, ah, “management” plan, wolves outside of the “Trophy Game Area” can be killed by anyone, at any time, by any means whatsoever – no license necessary, because they’re classified as predators, which can be killed by anyone, at any time, by any means whatsoever.

    That means that wolves, including pups, can be killed by ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, including:

    trapping or snaring them, then cutting their leg tenons and allowing dogs to shred them alive

    suspending shark hooks with meat, hooking wolves in the mouths, forcing a slow, painful death

    hooking live pups out of their dens and stomping them to death or burning them up with gasoline

    And so on…

    Sorry to be so graphic, but you get the picture. And it ain’t a pretty one.

  3. avatar Lynne Stone says:

    Re. the ugly tone of the meeting. Why weren’t there ground rules that anyone disrupting, interrupting, or showing rude behavior would be escorted out?

    “One who was there wrote by email: “This was really a pretty grim meeting. Virulent and ugly group of antiwolfers, with derogatory and threatening comments…”

    If delisting occurs, then the Wyoming antiwolfers and those here in Idaho will have free rein to repeat what their ancestors did to wolves. Is anyone at USFWS listening?

    Why didn’t GYC testify at this hearing?

  4. avatar Jeff says:

    The WY Game and Fish doesn’t operate the National Elk Refuge. The USFWS does. Game and Fish and the Feds have been at odds over various aspects of management for years. Game and Fish does however operate 22 feedgrounds in various Western Wyoming locations.

  5. avatar Mike says:

    I wish the events of that meeting were caught on video or audio.

    The people of Wyoming should be embarrassed.

  6. Mike,

    I think in the future they may well be. Then there will be real embarrassment — a macaca moment of sorts. The world is getting pretty small.

  7. I think, for the first time ever I will play my “tourist” card in earnest, cancel plans for a few trips to the West over the next years and announce this in writing to the Wyoming Gouvernor. Surely this decision does not impress anybody in Wyoming very much and will not have much impact anyway but it´s something one can do easily. While my contribution to the overall economy with these trips is surely not as impressive as the contribution of the hunting community (we had this discussion already several times on this blog), we are nevertheless talking of about $10 000 to 15 000 (flights, car, lodging, dining, gas, tip, bookshops etc. etc etc etc) we will simply spend elsewhere. M wife and me will closely watch the scene (as always) and aim for a return in 2010 at the moment, my health permitting!

  8. avatar jerry black says:

    “only one conservationist testified”……
    What’s happened to the other groups…Defenders etc???
    Have they “thrown in the towel” or are they waiting for the inevitable lawsuits to follow before they get involved?
    Anyone care to speculate?

  9. Jerry,

    There is a good explanation why other wolf conservation groups were not there to testify, although I can’t explain the silence by GYC. I can’t publicly mention why other groups weren’t there.
    – – – –
    Everyone knows that the process is rigged in Wyoming — totally corrupt yet backed by the top at USFWS. . . .

    In Wyoming, outside the small wolf “conservation” area they will apparently even be able to lay out baits and poison wolves like they did in 1900 – 1940.

  10. avatar Tim Z. says:

    The GYC is a joke. Freudenthal was a featured speaker at their annual meeting last summer. I e-mailed the chairman and asked “what, Gail Norton couldn’t make it?” He sent me some lame response about how great Freudenthal was, with the exception of his stance on wolves.

  11. avatar Craig Kenworthy says:

    While I don’t usually find debate by blog comment to be effective, out of respect for Ralph’s long time work, I am going to respond to the attacks on GYC. We commented on the Wy plan throughout the process.If you read the comments that people submitted, you’ll see that a large number of them quote our alert and would not have happened but for our efforts. We are also the only conservation group that I am aware of that is working on the ground on how to protect the Idaho GYE wolves and on how to reduce predator conflicts around Cody. We are also engaged on such work in the Madison Valley.
    Craig Kenworthy
    Conservation Director
    GYC

  12. avatar Don Riley says:

    Mr. Bray,

    Where is there more information on wildlifewatchers? All I can find on the URL you gave is the mission statement. Sounds like a novel Idea & one worth pursuing.

    Don Riley

  13. avatar Mack P. Bray says:

    Don, are you asking where you can find more information on wildlife watching in general or do you want more information on Wildlife Watchers of Wyoming (or Idaho, or Montana, or Utah, or Colorado, or New Mexico, or Arizona, etc.)?

    There is no more information on Wildlife Watchers (of whatever state) as what I’ve offered is a concept that wildlife watchers could use to gain representation in the management of the wildlife of their respective state.

    I agree with you; it’s a great idea and could very possibly be revolutionary. It’s time we took control of our wildlife from livestock producers and uninformed hunters. 🙂

  14. avatar Don Riley says:

    Mack,
    Send me an e-mail so we don’t plug up this thread with this stuff. i’ll e-mail you tonight

    driley@dteworld.com

  15. To Craig Kentworthy,

    Actually you are quite mistaken about this blog. There are many educated persons who contribute to the content. Not only is this a great place to keep updated on issues, because many local “newspapers” do not bother to report about articles discussed here, but this site is very effective in presenting a wide range of topics that many people may be unable to discuss in their particular geographical location. Many people can find clarification on various issues they do not fully understand and gain new perspective not only for their own views, but also those who are in opposition.

    Perhaps Mr. Tim Z could have reworded his response, however I believe his point was quite clear. In my own opinion people look to organization’s such as yours and expect consistant action and representation. Those expectations may be right or wrong. I can only speak for myself and I was disappointed by the absence of the GYE. I am sure you understand that an organization such as the GYE, people are very anxious to see and hear about the work it is doing. Wolf conservation is such a hot topic and maybe folks are looking for reassurance that action is being taken.
    d.Bailey Hill

  16. avatar Tim Z. says:

    “Perhaps Mr. Tim Z could have reworded his response”
    d Bailey Hill, you might be right but based on my e-mails and written correspondence with the GYC I didn’t know how else to say it. I finally ended up speaking with my checkbook and quit giving them money.

  17. avatar Kevin (WA) says:

    Don,
    Well said. That was my first response to reading Tim’s post about the GYC not being present at the meeting. “Why, weren’t they?” After I read Tim’s post I went and looked at their website and found this:

    “The Greater Yellowstone Coalition is working to ensure that Idaho and Montana’s management plans are not weakened and maintain adequate protections for wolves; and that Wyoming develops a plan that allows for a sustainable population of wolves in Greater Yellowstone.”

    Then I found and read Wyoming’s plan. It doesn’t appear to me that “predatory” status in a majority of the state is going to protect even the wolves in the Greater Yellowstone area. I am not up on all the wanderings of the Greater Yellowstone Wolf packs. But I have to imagine that some of them do and will wander, be driven or even lured into the “predatory” area. Then they to will be open game.

    Tim
    I think your take is the best idea. I was going to email the GYC and ask them why they weren’t present. But even in his post here, Mr. Kenworthy didn’t answer the question. I won’t argue that they have probably done a lot for the wolves in the GYE, but it still begs the question why they didn’t attend the meeting.

  18. avatar Robert Hoskins says:

    I need to respond to Jeff’s comment above about who runs the National Elk Refuge. While the US Fish & Wildlife Service is ostensibly and legally in charge, various events in the past has significantly increased the control that the Wyoming Game & Fish Department exerts over elk and bison management on the Refuge.

    The main event was Wyoming’s vaccination lawsuit against the feds. In the late 90s, G&F was determined to extend its fraudulent and ineffective elk vaccination program for brucellosis to the Refuge, but the Refuge manager, Barry Reiswig, refused. The state sued in federal court for force Reiswig to allow vaccination, and lost, since the authority of the federal government over its wildlife refuges is so clear in the legislation that governs the national wildlife refuge system.

    The state appealed to the 10th Circuit, and lost on 3 of four counts; the fourth count was remanded to Wyoming federal district court for trial on various factual issues (the original decision was a summary judgment on the legal issues only, and I don’t want to get into that right now because it’s too complicated). However, there’s no doubt that the feds would have won on the fourth count because the facts as well as the law were clearly on the feds’ side.

    Unfortunately, at the same time, King George II was elected, and as soon as he gained office, he appointed a political hack lawyer from Cheyenne, Tom Sansonetti, to be Asst. AG for the Environment at the Dept. of Injustice. Sansonetti engineered a settlement with the State that allowed the State to extend vaccination to the NER.

    The environmental groups that had intervened in the lawsuit on the side of the feds, including our favorite non-conservation group, the GYC, refused to challenge the settlement. The judge in the case, a well known pro-livestock judge, Clarence Brimmer, approved the settlement. The nature of the settlement was that the FWS would do an EA on vaccination, and then issue a FONSI. That violated NEPA, but it appears that no one cared enough to challenge it.

    In other words, to placate the state and satisfy his own pro-livestock biases, a federal judge deliberately allowed an illegal settlement to go forward.

    Part of the requirements for the national wildlife refuge system is that all proposed uses must also be evaluated by a “compatibility determination” and approved or disapproved through that determination. That’s because conservation is considered to be the primary mission of the refuge system, with only “compatible” uses allowed. (This is a much superior approach to “multiple use.”)

    Despite the settlement and orders from above, Reiswig courageously refused to find that vaccination was a compatible use of the NER for some very good legal and biological reasons. Consequently, the FWS regional director in Denver, Ralph Morgenweck, pulled Reiswig’s authority to issue the compatibility determination and then issued it under his own authority.

    I have a number of documents in my possession, including emails, that Meredith Taylor, formally of the Wyoming Outdoor Council, got through a FOIA that makes it clear how much control the WGFD exercised over the EA process and in determining how vaccination would procede on the NER.

    It’s clear from those documents that the WGFD exercised, and still exercises, considerable de facto control over the NER, regardless of the de jure situation.

    In other words, since the livestock industry controls the WGFD lock stock and barrel, that means that the livestock industry essentially controls much of what happens on the NER.

    This intolerable situation should make the blood of all good conservationists boil.

  19. avatar Izabela says:

    This is awful!!!
    Am I so naive that I can’t even imgine how they can do this to live animal. The described means of ‘wolf managment’ made me sick.
    So,what happened to Defenders..I am supporting them with my donations. Maybe I should switch the bucket I am putting my money in. I know they try to fight the sick wolf managment in Alaska. Who can win with the ‘witch’ Sarah Palin?

    Now, we have same sick plans in WY?
    Well, definately no more money from me…
    Good bye Wyoming. No more Jackosn Hole for me.

    How about the Humane Society. Don’t they have anything to say?
    Is there anything, we, people who care can do?

  20. avatar catbestland says:

    Robert Haskins, this IS intolorable. What can we do? Please post some suggestions. I’m sure there are many of us that will follow through.

  21. avatar brock says:

    I think the idea of a boycott is very reasonable, but would need to be instigated by a national group – obviously locals couldn’t afford to have their names associated with this. A strategy that did work well in Alaska. The idea of mass aerial gunning of wolves is simply repulsive to most Americans.

    Silly to expect any conservation support from GYC. They were among the first to jump all over NREPA, for ridiculous reasons, even beating the ATVers to it. They have no credibility with any of the conservationists I know, although obviously they keep shovelling in money with their “don’t offend anyone but environmentalists “tactics

  22. avatar Lisa Upson, NRDC says:

    I was at the Thermopolis hearing Friday on behalf of Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and I testified against WY’s plan. Two conservationists testified — Franz and myself.

  23. avatar skyrim says:

    Wouldn’t this be a reasonable time for Defenders to stop the compensation program? I gave up on GYC years ago. More appropriate in my view would be the LYC. (Lesser Yellowstone Coalition………..
    I don’t know Ralph, I’m not feelin’ too good about spending money in Teton County either………….
    – – – – – –

    Oh, I feel very good about spending money in Teton County. It’s mostly Park County, Wyoming, the country around Cody. There’s the problem, and it’s not just an attitude toward the wolf restoration. Cody area livestock and business has been a thorn in the side of conserving the splendor of Yellowstone in perpetuity for all Americans for many years now. Many citizens of Cody have the right values, but they clearly don’t have any political power. My observation is that they kind of just hunker down.

    Whether it is grizzly bears, wolves, elk, outrageous public expenditures to keep the East Entrance open for a handful of snowmobiles, this large town, which isn’t even all that close to the Park, is a place that doesn’t deserve a dime, in my opinion. Spend your money in Gardiner, West Yellowstone, Jackson, Red Lodge, Bozeman, Livingston, Ashton, St. Anthony. Avoid Cody. Ralph

  24. avatar Tim Z. says:

    Robert Hoskins, you never cease to amaze with your knowledge on these issues!

  25. Lisa,

    Thank you. I didn’t know that.

    Was my information about the tone of the audience correct or should there additions and changes?

  26. avatar Tim Z. says:

    Donating to conservation groups is hard because you never really know where all the money goes. For years I gave to World Wildlife fund, until last year when I saw a large ad in there magazine promoting tourism in Alaska. I e-mailed the director and asked “why all this touting of Alaska tourism and not a word agianst their aerial gunning of wolves?” The response I got was “that’s not a fight we wish to be involved in.” My response was “no more money from me”.
    SO far I can still donate to Def OF WL because they have good people like Lynn Stone ;).

  27. avatar Tim Z. says:

    Sorry I left of the ‘e’ in your name Lynn.

  28. avatar Tim Z. says:

    twice

  29. avatar Lisa Upson, NRDC says:

    It was a rough scene in Thermop, and, Ralph, I would say your characterization of the hearing as virulent, derogatory, grim and threatening is accurate. There were a few commenters who specifically referred to us “greenies” in the back of the room in an derogatory manner and, as usual, we (Franz and I, in this case) were quickly surrounded and challenged by some of our opponents after the hearing. I got lucky — I spoke with three moderate SFW guys and had a meaningful discussion, whereas Franz was threatened by an angry wolf-hater. I have to take issue with the fact the Commissioners may have been embarrassed by the tone of the meeting. It was truly like a good ‘ole boys’ get-together — the commenters and the Commissioners joked with one another throughout. One commenter even paused from his anti-wolf rant at one point and said to the Commissioners, “Sorry — I know I’m preaching to the choir.”

  30. avatar Robert Hoskins says:

    The tone of the meeting in Thermopolis, as described above, is pretty much the tone of all public meetings in Wyoming that deal with explosive issues, regardless of the issue. It is one reason that public participation is so meager in this state: people are afraid, intimidated, by the stormtroopers who show up, and believe you me, it’s all orchestrated–by the Stockgrowers, the Woolgrowers, the Farm Bureau, the outfitters, and the Sportsmen for Feeding and Whining, which is nothing more than a front for the others. These people are a minority, but they’re a violent minority.

    What’s sad and intolerable is that the agencies–in this case the Wyoming Game & Fish Commission– do absolutely nothing to prevent it, and in fact encourage it. That speaks to the degree of cowardship that you find in G&F, both on the Commission and in the Department, but of course, it’s the same degree of cowardship that you find in all the agencies, and quite frankly, the majority of the so-called major enviro groups.

    Have any of the groups protested the conduct of the stormtroopers at the Commission meeting, or brought it to the attention of the press? I don’t recall any reference to the ugliness of the meeting in any of the press reports. Why do we permit the press to ignore this sort of thing?

    People have said, what do we do? The first thing is to realize that trying to negotiate with these people would be like the leaders of the civil rights movement trying to negotiate with George Wallace and all the other segregationists. It won’t work. But fundamental challenges to the status quo take courage. It also means pursuing a number of political, economic, legal, and informational strategies and tactics by the few people and organizations out there that refuse to compromise. I think of the Buffalo Field Campaign, for example.

    People who care need to support courage, not cowardice. Support financially and morally the groups and people who refuse to compromise.

    As a native born southerner old enough to remember the civil rights struggles of the 1960s, when I was a young boy, I can tell you that what brought success to the civil rights movement, more than anything else, was the images on national television of violence perpetrated against civil rights marchers and activists. Having the venerable Walter Cronkeit reporting these events didn’t hurt either.

    The civil rights movement may have pursued a strategy of non-violence, but the non-violence elicited violence from segregationists and that’s what went on national TV. It was an ugly time, but the civil rights movement in effect took control of the public debate and the press to take their message to the American people, bolstered by the terrible violence perpetrated against them, and the movement prevailed. The American people were deeply ashamed of what they saw.

    The press is different today, more fragmented, more ephemeral, and is more mistrusted by the public, but that doesn’t mean we can’t find innovative ways to get our message across.

    And it also means returning to the grass roots, which today’s so-called environmental groups have abandoned.

  31. avatar sal says:

    Yikes, sounds just like Idaho.

  32. avatar Mack P. Bray says:

    We conservationists need our own damn media outlets. We’ve got Ralph’s blog here and we need video coverage at hearings, meetings, etc. that could be posted on the ‘net for all the world to see the filthy underbelly of the livestock oligarchy in the mountainous west.

    http://wildlifewatchers.jottit.com/

  33. Robert,

    Too bad the Johnson County War wasn’t a little more decisive for the small farmers — “the Rustlers”

  34. avatar be says:

    sorry i couldn’t be there for this one … future meetings will be taped.

    here are some shots from the past

    http://youtube.com/profile_videos?user=WesternWatersheds&p=r

  35. Tim Z,
    You definitly do not need to reword your response. That is why I added, “however I beleive his point is quite clear”. I removed a few sentences because I was very very irritated when I wrote that this morning. I think I edited too much as that sentence was meant to be sarcastic. It can be difficult to get the tone in a written comment. { that is not an excuse}, Maybe I should have left it alone. Always go with the gut feeling….like you did.
    It seems to be protocol for the GYC to not answer questions. I learned a while ago to just not bother. It is very frustrating that so many groups “sit on the fence”. I feel that people/groups need to be committed to making a difference or not. There is no in between. I wish I knew the answer to get progress in the right direction.
    Be it a conservation coalition, or whatever, there is a certain responsibility to report plans and actions to the folks who support and trust them; to put our money where their mouth is.
    Tim, I hope this clarifies my comment earlier today. And if I offended you, by using your name, please accept my sincere apology.

  36. avatar Brad says:

    If people want to boycott, an entire state is too hard. However, a bad place like Cody is entirely feasible. The word could spread fast. It would not even require organizations leading the charge.

    Just spread the word! Post to other blogs. Individual action,the most democratic method.

  37. Mack P Bray- You make an excellent point! So many people are unaware and it’s hard for them to imagine some of things going on are actually happening.
    I have heard people say the Bald Eagle is protected and because it is illegal to kill them, it can’t possibly be going on. Folks say that all the time, even though people engage in illegal activities everyday. For some reason they don’t carry that over wildlife, destroying resources, etc. And some knowingly hang on to disbelief.

  38. avatar catbestland says:

    I wonder if we could find some newspapers that would be willing to carry a weekly blurb by a group of concerned wildlife enthusiasts, that would award certain environmental or wildlife organizations with a carrot for their possitive efforts and others a stick for bad performance. This would be a way to inform citizens which groups were actually acting in the best interest of wildlife, and which ones don’t deserve donations. It could serve as a consumer protection and newspapers like to run that sort of thing. If we could just get it in some papers at first, others might pick up on it.

    What does anyone think?

  39. avatar Tim Z. says:

    d. Bailey Hill, no need to apologize, I was not at all offended by your comments.

  40. avatar Robert Hoskins says:

    Ralph

    Funny you should bring up the Johnson County War; it was the defining moment of Wyoming livestock politics, and even though the Stockgrowers Association doesn’t murder people anymore, it still functions in the same way, using threats, intimidation, and retaliation (mostly economic) against those who challenge the stranglehold that the cowboy oligarchy holds over land use and wildlife management in Wyoming, not to mention democracy in Wyoming, which simply does not exist.

    For those who are not familiar with it, Wyoming’s Johnson County War occurred in 1893; it was part of the great range wars that occurred throughout the West in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, wherein the livestock barons, rooted in Eastern and British capital, undertook to take control of the range from small ranchers, cowboys, and farmers through intimidation and murder.

    The Johnson County War consisted in the following: The Wyoming Stockgrowers Association recruited, equipped, and deployed a small mercenary army to invade Johnson County, on the east slope of the Bighorn Mountains, to kill settlers, small ranchers, cowboys, and even the county sheriff who were challenging the Stockgrowers’ control of the range merely by their presence, and probably through a little rustling on the side. The mercenaries’ operational security was poor however; the targets of the invasion got word of it, and organized themselves for defense. The mercenaries were eventually cornered in the main ranch building of the TA Ranch near Kaycee, but it took the settlers a while to figure out how to deal with the “army.” Just as they were ready to send burning wagons up against the ranch-house to force the mercenaries out of the building so that they could be shot down, the cavalry literally showed up in the nick of time and took the mercenaries into custody, moving them to Cheyenne. Turns out Wyoming’s congressional delegation and Governor were in on the planning for the invasion, and when it was clear that it was going to fail, the Governor called on the US government to send troops to quell an “uprising,” by which he meant the determination of Johnson County residents to defend themselves.

    Members of the mercenary army were released in Cheyenne on their own recognizance and they all slipped away, most back to Texas where they came from. No one was ever prosecuted for the invasion or for the two murders they did commit.

    In the end, of course, the big ranchers won out, as they did all over the West; they took control of the Wyoming legislature and passed many laws designed to benefit themselves politically and economically, and to hell with everyone else, even the small ranchers and the real cowboys. That’s how it still is today.

    For those interested in the history of how the big ranchers took over, I recommend the chapter on “violence” in The Oxford History of the American West. A more general description of how big capital took control over democratic process in the United States is Alan Trachtenberg’s The Incorporation of American. The big ranchers simply “incorporated” the West.

    And for a book dealing specifically with the livestock industry, I highly recommend Debra L. Donahue’s The Western Range Revisited: Removing Livestock from Public Lands to Conserve Native Biodiversity, published by the Un. of Oklahama Press. Deb is a professor of law at the University of Wyoming,and also holds a MA in wildlife ecology. She’s worked for the BLM. When the book was published in 1999, it caused such an uproar, since her arguments were deadly, that the president of the Wyoming Senate, Robert Grieve, introduced a bill to abolish the UW Law School. It was lucky for Deb that she already had tenure. She had no support from anyone in the UW adminstration except the Dean of the Law School; the university president, Phil Dubois, even sent emails around to various department heads to drum up opposition to Deb’s book. The whole thing was a perfect example of how much control the cowboy oligarchy has over how things done in Wyoming. For Deb to publish the book took a great deal of courage, but she’s a gutsy lady.

    Regarding catbestland’s comments above, I think it is a good idea for true conservationists to challenge in the media the brown “conservation” groups who have sold their integrity and souls for the collaboration and consensus approach, under the direction of their rich board members who’ve bought up big spreads in the west to play cowboy.

    Robert

  41. avatar Denise Johnson says:

    Robert Hoskins,
    You have a way of putting things in perspective.
    Your analogy of wolf protections and the plight in over a decade (13 yrs.), to the Civil Rights movement hit me to my core and dropped my jaw. I too was raised in the segreated South and remember all to well the sacrafices that brought about change.
    The time has come for people to ban together, there are enough naturalist, conservationists, what term you feel describes your passion for the protections of our natural world and wildlife.
    There is a term for it “radical decent”! That’s how the Civil Rights movement, and the Vietnam conflict were brought to an end.
    We need to get all the organiztions under one umbrella, Defenders, WWF, Nature Conservancy, these orgs have lots of capital., even land, etc. The only person that has more land than the Nature Conservancy is Ted Turner.
    Organize, and quit playing in there ballpark. We’re giving them all the power.
    I commend Liza, and Franz for their tenacity.
    The WORLD IS WATCHING and we need to let the world know what is going on!!
    PROTEST, Boycott…we are losing our rights.
    I also question how they can include YNP or GYES in their state plan. How can they control how many packs in YNP???

  42. avatar elkhunter says:

    I think we might be going a little too far comparing wolves to the persecutions that african americans went through during the civil war. I understand you guys are very dedicated to the wolves and all the issues involved, but I feel that trying to draw comparisons to the civil movement is not right. Go read http://www.heartofthewolf.org and read how crazy he is, he talks about the same thing, giving wolves human attributes etc. I might be taking those comments wrong, but if I was african american and people were comparing what my ancestors went through, to an animals experiences. Thats just my opinion though, and I could be taking those comments in the wrong way.
    Elkhunter

  43. avatar Mack P. Bray says:

    As usual, elkhunter doesn’t get it.

    Nobody’s comparing the wolf issues with anything related to the civil war. Nobody’s talking about giving human attributes to wolves.

    What is being described is the strategy and effectiveness of the civil rights movement. That’s all.

  44. avatar Denise Johnson says:

    Thanks Mack for understanding the disscussion and putting it back on track!
    Your mission statement is a SWEET idea how to get it implemented???? I really feel it would work on so many levels. I sent a link to a couple of friends with the USFSW.

  45. avatar TH says:

    Hmm….”Stormtroopers”. “Intimidation”, “cowardice”, “violent minority”…….sounds like the definition of a terrorist to me!

  46. avatar catbestland says:

    I too grew up in the Civil Rights era south and see the corelation to environmental rights. I have used this analagy often. I’m sure the heros of the Civil Rights movement would be pleased to be held up as examples of what can be accomplished when oppresion is met by determined perseverance and equality as a goal. The same would apply in our fight to secure an equal voice in policy governing our environment and wildlife and in fact the health of the planet.

  47. avatar Rick Hammel says:

    I have read most of these comments, and i am also very concerned about the WG&F plan. I remember the draft plan that came out a few years ago. No one liked it either, except a couple of peer reviewers.

    Let me look into the future for a moment. What if FWS delist the wolf and after the court challenges, the wolf remains delisted. Wyoming and Idaho have open season on the wolf. Ranchers and hunters decimate the populations and start to kill the core populations, 15 breeding pairs and the 100 wolves. FWS declares an emergancy listing. The only listing catagory under an emergancy is endangered. The process from here is to come up with a final listing catagory, ie, threatened oe endangered.

    I do not see the possibility of returning to the 10(j) status. If this be the case. all of the flexibility that the ranchers have fought for, goes out the window. And under such a scenario, FWS would be very reluctant to list other than endangered, where the possibility to have a “take” would be somewhat remote.

  48. avatar Mack P. Bray says:

    Thanks, Denise.

    Wildlife Watchers of (Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.) needs organizers in every state in the union. This concept could be revolutionary.

    TH, yep, there’s MANY environmental terrorists in the world, including livestock producers.

    http://wildlifewatchers.jottit.com/

  49. avatar Don Riley says:

    It appears, at least with those who comment on this thread, that control of Wyoming’s wildlife “management” practices is pretty much in the hands of the ranching and extractive interests in the state. Those interests are not going to go away nor will their influence wain in the foreseeable future.

    In the short term the people on the ground, like Lynne and the organizations they represent will be at the forefront of local and targeted conservation efforts such as the Stanley, ID wolf watching that appears to be growing as a result of this forum.

    To those of you planning on going to Idaho, take your children, if you don’t have any, take a girl scout group, a 6th grade class, take along a young person. To reach the ultimate goal is generations down the road. Be it race relations or the use of seat belts, attitude change is not over night.

    Mr. Bray’s wildlife watchers stamp is a great idea but I have not figured out if is is just a mission statement or it has gone beyond that. What needs to be done.

    The Alaska Zoo in Anchorage is trying a very interesting experiment those of us who love the wolves need to watch.
    Alaska Fish & Game gave the zoo 6 or 7 newly born wolf pups taken from a den in a wolf management area (where the chances of they nad their parents survival were very low).

    The wolves are now being raised in the zoo just as a puppy would be. They have human handlers, one for each pup, the group has a professional dog trainer, they are taught to walk at heel, etc., etc., etc. They are being used as the “official greeters” at the Alaska Zoo. The ultimate goal is to use these wolves as ambassadors of the zoo, go out into the public, schools, rotary meetings and so on in order to teach people about wolves. Programs are now being developed to include the history of wolves, how they survive, how they kill for survival, reasons, methods and means of controlling wild populations, living with wolves……

    Alaskans live with bears all of the time. On the Alaska Daily News website, http://www.adn.com/, there is a section for people to send in their bear pictures. Most of them are bear visits to subdivisions and homes and no one is calling for elimination of the bears in their neighborhood. There is not send in your wolf picture site because if a wolf shows up the call goes out to get it out of here and save my kids.

    Generations have been taught to hate the wolf. Generations need to be taught to respect and understand the wolf.

    The Alaskan Zoo is embarking upon a program that might just do that over time. It is still and experiment, but there is hope.

    I wonder if USF&W would allow one of the big bucks conservation groups to follow on with a program such as that at the Alaska Zoo. Lynne, what do you think?

    Don

  50. avatar kim kaiser says:

    Frankly, few people outside of the states in question, really know or care of the plight here. I still have a home in the MS and one in Gardiner. I encourage my friends to come visit MT. I try to explain to some the way life is out here, all of the good stuff we int he south never get. moutains, snow, a respect int eh woods of bears and stuff. most, are hunters, outdoors people, landowners in the south. Some are on the nature conservancy boards in MS and LA. They know nothing of the livestock interest, sheep or cow and there influence. Its just too far off for many of them to care, i dont care how many photographs of grizzlies, wolves that I show them. They think its fun to see, but have no idea of what its like…I explain them that the issues we see in the south everyday, and still in the newspapers, race, bias, hangings in jails, are usually exploited and continue to give the south a bad and undeserved reputation. Its just not as bad as jesse and al say it is. In the WY, ID and MT area, NEVER see a newpaper article about race, maybe an occasion dispute over how a native american is treated, but you will never see jesse or al in MT, ID or WY over the plight of an American Indian, they call it rainbow, but only one color exist in there rainbow, but your race war, if i can describe it that way, is your sheep/livestock/wolves/bears/public land debate. I try to explain that to my friends, that is what you read in the papers out here.

    It seems these movements have no cash or clout, as someone earlier wrote that WWF doesnt want the fight. The movements consist of people are interest and motivated to make the cause an issue, but the saying of money talks, and BS walks completely applies. It seems to me, that enlisting someone such as T Turner in such an endeavor would be the type of move that gets attention, has clout and has money, and more important, has access to money and politicians ears, and media outlet..People will listen sometimes listen to Ted, way before they will listen to some joe blow, hollerin over a bull horn at a mall or office with ketchup on his shirt to represnet blood. Just my opinion, but a person chaining himself to a door being drug off for a cause makes me think they are crazy and unreasonable. I ignore them and there cause. These things need tempered, educated, level headed, paid commentary coverage, big coverage media wise. IF its paid for, then its YOUR message to send. If its someone chained to a door like at an abortion clinic, then the reporting media covering the cause, can put it in any light that that media outlet wants to portray it. So if they have lots of paid advertising from livestock interest, they are more likely to portray this as a fanatic group and turn off people who may be interested in the cause, but see such fanatical behavior, may be detrimental.

    i dont know what media time cost for good solid informative 30sec to 1 min “infomercials” about either public lands, wolves or bears or what ever the case, so here you have an option.

    Hey Ralph, how many subscribers do you have here 50, 100, 1000, i would guess from the post, 99% are pro wolf, bear, free bison, no grazing on public lands type of supporters,,
    contributing time is one thing, but time wont buy targeted coverage that puts out the message YOU want out,, are the 99% of the people here willing to put up a 100.oo to buy time and advertising to inform,, thats 100,000.00 so that before these meetings are held, air and print time could be used to put out the proper message.

    Kim. This blog gets about 3000 visits a day. It has grown about 35% since I started moderating it more carefully or the comments got more interesting or something. It is read by a lot of the people who have at least some clout on these issues ON BOTH SIDES. Anti-wolf folks are reading this, so are folks in conservation organizations. Ralph

    I would, and would challenge others,, if Ralph has a 100 members,, thats still 10k, should buy some time or print,,,

    If someone would like to use my photography, to raise money, I would donate some prints for raffle, etc. I have a gallery in Gardiner, and easily sold 20×30 or grizzlys and wovles and bison, for at least a 100.00, to help in a cause to raise money for media coverage. My website is kimkaiser.com.

    i havent updated it from this summers work, but I have some good griz, and wolf an bison stuff.. so if anyone has the time or inclination to orgainize someting like that, i will put my money where my mouth is for at least a 100.00 and or prints valued to a 100.00.. anyone else,?? remember,, money talks,, BS walks,,,and if you have money to get out the message you want to get out, its way better than the message that the media group wants to put out in the light they want to make it,,

    or get Ted or a similar in on the game,,,then you would have a walking the walk voice,, just my 5 cents

  51. avatar SAP says:

    WOW – the two preceding comments by Don & Kim are excellent! I think the two broad strategies they describe are probably the most promising way forward:

    Don makes the case for investing our efforts in particular places to try and influence attitudes and values on a manageable scale — as in, a zoo in a particular urban area, or coexistence in a place like the Sawtooth-Stanley area where Lynne Stone bravely and inspiringly soldiers on. That makes way more sense than dissipating our energies by trying to stomp out little “brush fires” all over the Intermountain West.

    And Kim makes an extremely good (and vivid!! point — love the part about a guy with ketchup on his shirt!!) about getting out messages that are exactly the message you want, instead of allowing it to be passed through the filter of some brain-dead journalist.

    I think those two strategies make for an excellent “meta-strategy” — working from the ground up to create tangible successes, and working on a mass culture scale to publicize those successes and get effective messages out there.

    To me, those strategies are what we ought to focus on.

    I admire the courage of those who would trek all the way to Thermop to rub elbows with people right out of the grimmest Annie Proulx stories. But I’ve come to regard events like that as an empty political ritual, and maybe it’s time to deprive those forums of any legitimacy by just staying away.

  52. avatar Cindy Knight says:

    I am embarrassed to be from and born in Wyoming, but I’m also embarrassed to be from the U.S. at all. I do not understand the outrage about wildlife as it is our greatest treasure. I have been a wolf watcher since 1997 and have introduced as many people from around the world as possible to the Yellowstone and Jackson area wolves. The conversation about the conservation groups in enlightening and I will also plan my giving around the input. I also wanted to say that Wyoming is very conflicted and much of it is unrealistic. I refer you to a book called “Pushed off the Mountain, Sold Down the River about the real economic picture. I believe that agriculture involves only 5% of our economy with the top two being Oil and Gas and Tourism.
    Thank you Franz and Lisa. If I can be of any assistance, please let me know.

  53. avatar catbestland says:

    I agree with Kim that we need to raise some money to purchase some media coverage. Some print at least. I have noticed that there are several artist and photographers and creative people of all sorts that participate in this blog. Maybe we could all donate something creative to an auction to raise money to this endeavor. I will donate some of my woodcarving if others will do the same with their work. We could do a fund raiser on line or have an actual event with someone like Ted Turner as a speaker. What does anyone think?

  54. avatar catbestland says:

    OOPS, I forgot to post my website as a sample of what I would be contributing. masterpiececarveddoors.com

  55. avatar jerry b says:

    We need the press, we need $$, and we need to educate.
    Here’s an idea…..
    How about a fundraiser, seminar, conference or whatever we want to call it. Hold in in a place like Chico Hot Springs and invite celebs like Turner, Carole King, Jack Hanna etc. and also invite speakers who are experts in carnivore conservation and especially wolf ecology.
    I’m sure we’d receive support from groups like Western Watersheds, Sinapu, Forest Guardians etc.
    It would be an opportunity to jump start Mack’s concept of WildLife Watchers and also an opportunity to raise money for a PR campaign.
    What do you think, Mack…others?

  56. avatar JB says:

    “I think it is a good idea for true conservationists to challenge in the media the brown “conservation” groups who have sold their integrity and souls for the collaboration and consensus approach, under the direction of their rich board members who’ve bought up big spreads in the west to play cowboy.”

    Hmm…imagine that, another lawyer for polarization…to be followed, of course, by more litigation. I’m sorry, but I wholeheartedly disagree. When you adopt extreme positions you allow other people who might otherwise be convinced by your arguments to easily dismiss them as the ravings of a fanatic. If anything, you should be happy that organizations such as DOW spend money (yours and mine) on fighting battles they can realistically win, not taking ideological stances that only serve to further polarize the issue. “Sold their souls”… come on?! Be green, but be sensible!

    JB

  57. avatar Izabela says:

    Ted Turner is on the board of GYC. Should be helpful.
    And what happened to Defenders of Wildlife???? Doyou think any of their people read your blogs?
    I sent them money every month.(Defenders)
    And when I asked them the question regarding some Alaska issue, I did not even receive any response. It was why are they allowing for unethical hunting of the bears in Katmai area)
    Defenders spent tons of money on the Alska issue of aearial gunning of the wolves, maybe they can spare some
    some cash for the the protection of the wolves in WY, ID, MT.
    I have shared the Ralph’s site with many of my friends.
    I noticed that some of the people are not going to voice any opinions..they just go to YSNP to watch wolves, bisons and animals but…they will not say anything to stand up for them.
    How about about sigining petitions? My husband signed a petition to reintroduce wolves in YSNP during his visit in 1994 or 1995. And he was so happy to see the wolves first time in his life, in his multiple visit to YSNP ,this November…yeah..Mollies pack….imagine. he was happy as 5 years old.
    I got pictures of Haydens..
    And had tears in my eyes reading posts on this site after killings of Haydens.

    Why do we humas have to kill everything?

    I know, I am not helping here.
    But I will do my best the spread the word!!!
    I live in Utah….and my husband already had some talks with some of his cooworkers…reaction was …kill them all…
    Some of them are waiting for the free kill in Idaho. They are going to run for licenses…

    New elections are coming. How about petitioning to our senators. Some reuls need to come from the top and lets hope that the new TOP will have a heart……

    Because I have had correspondence with them today, I know that folks at Defenders and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition have read this blog today. Ralph Maughan

  58. avatar catbestland says:

    JB,
    I think Robert Hoskins is suggesting that it might be a good idea to run an ongoing article in some newspapers comparing environmental groups and exposing exposing bad actions of certain agencies and that sort of thing, as a consumer advocate type thing. It was in response to a suggestion I had made a little earlier in the thread. I don’t think he is suggestion any frivolous litigation.

  59. avatar Robert Hoskins says:

    JB

    You can disagree all you like. It makes no difference to me. My conclusions have nothing to do with ideology, and everything to do with a clear and rational assessment of the political and ecological situation and the obstacles placed in the path of conservation by various oligarchies that have subverted democracy in the West for their own benefit. The livestock oligarchy is at the top of the list.

    The “brown” conservation groups have simply decided to go along to get along, moving along the path of least resistance for their funding and their professional careers. (We were better off when everyone was an amateur). There’s been no conservation benefit from their compromises, although they toot their horns in every mailing asking for money. I haven’t sent them money in years. I haven’t adopted a wolf either. What nonsense. I’m spending my time protecting real wolves here where I live.

    There can be no doubt that the future of wildlife both globally, continentally, regionally, and locally, is at greater risk than anytime in the past, and that future is getting dimmer and dimmer. Compromise from the brown groups is a contributing factor.

    I just read a biography of Winston Churchill. It might be instructive for you to do the same. You’ll see that all during the 1930s, when Churchill alone in England was warning of the growing threat of Hitler and the Nazis to European and world peace, his own party (Conservatives) and Prime Ministers were ridiculing him for his “extremism” and refusal to compromise while at the same time doing all it could to appease Hitler as he took the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia and imposed Nazi brutality upon them. It finally took Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939 to wake England up. By then it was too late, and it took a world war–and Churchill’s leadership as British Prime Minister–to bring Hitler down.

    That old extremist and non-compromiser Winston Churchill was right. What’s different now for conservation?

    Robert Hoskins

  60. I don’t think going after those conservation groups that some consider to be “brown” is a productive channel for energy.

    The flat out enemy of wildlife are the livestock organizations, the real estate developers, the oil and gas companies, the off-road vehicle groups, and certain “hunting” organizations that don’t value wildlife, only the kill, and who don’t value non-game at all.

  61. People interested in Watchable Wildlife need to have a meeting or two, agree on goals, draw up articles of incorporation and with the help of an attorney, file for incorporation as a non-profit organization in some state. Then draw up by-laws and select the initial officers.

  62. avatar kim kaiser says:

    wow Robert, you just made the case for the invasion of iraq and iran,, !!!! the non compromiser! Bush,

    that aside, as i am not making any adovcation of running wwf, or whatever established group down,, MY POINT IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE MONEY TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN!!!!,, look at Ralphs just posted llist of groups that you are talking about taking on,, oil&gas, livestock, etc… standing int he street and protesting and letting media interpret the cause is how i would want my interest shown, do i have a real answer, no, not really, but small advertising or time could certainly be a start especially before these meetings if there are anymore planned,

  63. avatar kim kaiser says:

    error in above,
    haveing the media interpret the cause is NOT how i would want my interest shown,,

  64. avatar JB says:

    Robert:

    I’m sorry, but did you just compare the livestock industry to Adolf Hitler and yourself to Winston Churchill in the same post? Adolf Hitler, WHO ORDERED THE MURDER OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE? I believe you just made my point! I can’t think of any comparison that you could’ve made that would’ve been more polarizing, or made your opinion easier to dismiss.

    Ah…but look, you’ve succeeded! You’ve managed to separate me from the true, green preservationists! Congratulations! Another person without “integrity” or a “soul” that you can add to your list!

    Charge on! Charge on, Winston Churchill…Don Quixote…er…whatever your name is.

    JB

  65. avatar catbestland says:

    Jerry B.

    That’s what I’m talking about!!!

  66. avatar be says:

    “wow Robert, you just made the case for the invasion of iraq and iran”

    and for an effective resistance to it.

    IMO, it is not wise to confuse passion, integrity, and resolve with irrationality or extremism.

    why is it that the only responses that i have noticed for the calls to stand up and demonstrate integrity behind a process involving reason are a call to sit down, remain dispassionate ~ don’t rock the boat ~ ‘they’ll call us extremist’. attempted marginalization.

    calling/suggesting the likes of advocate folk extremist or ‘ideological’, or fearing that the extractive interests or media will do so is not the recipe to have a meaningful narrative heard ~ to demonstrate the salience from advocates’ side. i’m not prone to censor myself before anyone else has the opportunity ~ at least i’d like to think i’m not.

    it also isn’t a demonstration of reasonable retort to the ideas or merit of what those of us critical of consensus/collaboration are saying. try being responsive to the rationale ~

    “you’re an outlier !” that’s enough to suggest that the reason is not sound? no.

    if what robert has to say is legitimately ‘rabid’ or whatever ~ we’re screwed ~ Livestock has already won. nobody has shaken a stick at his reason.

    IMO ~ there are groups who feel so invested in the collaboration front, that they either believe that folk willing to speak the truth as they see it are outliers ~ or they’re willing to posture such that they believe it to maintain a seat at the crooked table. either way ~ if you’re reading this ~ i make a humble request :

    be as willing to collaborate with those orgs willing to take a stand as you are willing to collaborate with extractive interests. and don’t take it personally ~ folk willing to call it as they see it could be the greatest of assets.

    we don’t need time in front of the camera as we need the time in front of the camera that we do have to be spent interested with truth ~ ungagged by consensus and industrial characterization.

  67. avatar Jim Rosenberg says:

    Kim and JB,

    I think what Robert is pointing out is analogy that people in Wyoming are not recognizing the big picture and what is going on in regards to the effects and threats the cattle, oil, gas industries, etc. are placing on the survival to wolves as well as other species, the environment, biodiversity, conservation, etc and if we don’t do something about it that we will all lose out – big time!! No one recognized the Nazi threat until it became the ultimate crisis situation – do we have to let it get to a total crisis as the cattle industry, etc. destroy evrything good about the west and wolves, etc.??? As for the invasion of Iraq, anybody with a brain knows why we are there. They sit on some of the biggest oil reserves in the world! Iraq is a selfish quest by Bush and his cronies who are profitting from our occupation and the spread of “democracy” and the so called “war on terror!” I suppose, Iraq also falls into the same analogy to the cattle industry to mislead the people of the west to make wolves look like their enemy because of their own “special interest” in the matter!!….. So maybe two of the best things we can do as a country is get out of Iraq and all STOP EATING BEEF!!!!

  68. avatar kim kaiser says:

    All i can say is to it all is this, I simply made a suggestion in my first post up there somewhere it find some money, and target your message. Guess what, did you see any republican standing on a car, beating drums, pouring blood on themsevles claiming Kerry was a fraud, when the republican party completely dismantled John Kerry,, hell no!! they ran ads, pointed them at the people that were on a fence and guess what, flip/flop was on the defensive the entire rest of the campaign,,, They SUCCESSFULLY got the thinking to there point of view. It works, No one has to like it, or approve of it. I dont really care, but if i have a choice of donating my resources, money or otherwise, i am going to the thinking, targeted effort to get out the information that I want heard. One of you said that you dont think the pople of Wy dont know whats going on with oil, ranching, wolves, etc. I would tend to agree partially, they dont know the WHOLE story, but they arent stupid, they do read papers and watch news, and I would bet, what they read, is what “the other side” pays to have put in there. And you know what, the people who own and print papers, like people to pay for there print. So they will more than likely be more symathetic to the paying customer. And more likely make the fools who strap themselves to doors look just like that to the viewing public, fanatics,, crazies. Dont think for a minute the citizens of WY wont think that as well, and so why in HELL would anyone support that. you want to strap to doors, fine, holler and scream, fine, you will get your tv, radio and print time, but in my opinion and i am just an outlier,(wht ever the hell that is), the wrong type of time which only serves as a detriment, therefore, as I stated above somewhere, my suggestion was to get together some cash, and BUY the message you want to send at the times that they can be used most effectively. Someone ck the cost of an ad in the bozeman chronicle, or billings or cody paper, see what a half page cost to formally educate those who havent had the time or resource to follow forums on a daily basis, but do see the newspaper at the coffee shope or watch the afternoon tv. You may not win your cause, but you have at least given people the information to educate themselves to make there own opinion. which one do you want them to see,,,,,,idiots tying them selves to doors and getting drug off by law enforcment or a well thought out explanation with backup data and appealing to peoples more reasonable side.

    i will give you one more example, i was in the coffee shop in gardiner, we were discussing the bison thing,,,one of the residents said they were in support of stopping the slaughters. i just listened, he talked, but he then went on to say he actully went to one of the meetings in gardiner that one of the bison groups was putting on to discuss it, but some idiot got ot hollering and poured blood on the floor or some such foolishness. He said he just didnt approve of that sort of method and somewhat thought the organizers of this were overzealous. he lost interest in that particular cause for a while. oh your right, that he was just one person, but just like in business, one bad person who talks bad about food is WAY WAY worse than one good one!!

  69. Trying to draw this back, I suggest that everyone interested in joining with Mack Bray and others in pursuing the Watchable Wildlife organization, email him.

Calendar

November 2007
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: