I’m glad we answered that question.

Wolves brucellosis-free. By Angus M. Thuermer Jr. Jackson Hole News and Guide

Tagged with:
About The Author

Ken Cole

Ken Cole is a 5th generation Idahoan, an avid fly fisherman, wildlife enthusiast, and photographer. He is the interim Idaho Director for Western Watersheds Project. We do not accept unsolicited “guest” authors or advertising.

36 Responses to Wolves brucellosis-free

  1. I’m glad Jimenez tested them because this scare tactic rumor has been slowly spreading for about 7-8 years.

  2. John d. says:

    Sweet relief.

  3. mikarooni says:

    Now we need to test everyone in the Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming Republican parties, as well as Ken Salazar. They all look a bit pale and sallow and act a bit feverish.

  4. Save bears says:

    Nice smart ass answer Mikarooni,

    Rolling my eyes…no wonder we never get anywhere!

    • mikarooni says:

      What do you mean WE never get anywhere? My track record is four for four and the only reason that it isn’t even better is because I have stayed quiet over the past decade after being told to let the “collaborators” have a chance to work things out and the “collaborators” don’t like to be litigious. Well, isn’t that special? Hasn’t that worked out just dandy? We got to see the GYC in action, on wolves and bison, didn’t we? CUT sure enjoyed it! We’re getting to see the MWA take a polite and courteous stand for wilderness. How are you liking that? YOU never get anywhere because YOU don’t understand how THEY play and don’t have the stomach to play the way THEY play; I assure YOU that YOUR lack of progress has nothing to do with me.

      • Save bears says:

        Hey Miki,

        After working for THEM, I can assure you I know how they work, and I can assure you, I know exactly where the lack of progress comes from…

        Hey Miki, your so fine!….cripes…

        And I get blasted…If your going to resort to calling people and parties names, then your as bad as those you hate..

  5. Cobra says:

    What goes around comes around. Maybe if you and some others on here like you would come down off the pedistol and quit thinking that everyone from Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are somehow beneath you, like SB said, we could get more accomplished.

    • Save bears says:


      We could get a lot accomplished without the bullshit, but at times neither side seems to want to solve anything, they just want to keep bitching..

      • Brian Ertz says:

        Bitching about the truth while everyone else is content to invest in the lie has more to do with bringing opportunity for meaningful solutions than anything else.

        I’m from Idaho, I don’t take offense at miki-‘you so fine’-rooni’s characterization half so much as I take offense at the naive, ignorant suggestion that collaborating with the Idaho/Montana/Wyoming enfranchised Livestock Political Culture of Death is simply a matter of two farcically contrived “sides” finding some fairytale “middle ground”. That’s the BS, SB. Get real.

  6. Save bears says:

    I will add..

    “Here we go around the Mulberry bush, the Mulberry bust, the Mulberry bush…”

    Simply amazing!

  7. Save bears says:

    I was working for FWP 7 years ago, and told them, it is not a threat that wolves will or can transmit brucellosis, that report got buried, and I figured out, what would happen if I continued with them, it is not possible, unless your in a laboratory setting, now we have PROOF from a sanctioned government employee and WE still have slight of hand comments from the peanut gallery…

    This actually was a STEP forward in coming to a just and fair solution to the two sides of this issue..

    Amazing…simply Amazing..

    • Jeff N. says:

      Fair solution my ass…. Your idea of a fair solution makes room for roughly 1000 – 1500 wolves throuout the northern rockies and has accounted for a stagnant if not declining Mexican Gray Wolf population in the SW. Not to mention the “fair solution” our bison seem to be beneficiaries of…….as you say “simply amazing” and pathetic.

      • Save bears says:


        What the hell are you talking about? I have not advocated getting rid of wolves and I have tirelessly worked on getting more range for bison, with the “proof” that wolves don’t carry brucellosis, it takes one more reason away for justification to kill wolves.

        I am an advocate of wolves as well as bison…

        So again, what the hell are you talking about?????

  8. Save bears says:


    I am very real, whether you want to believe it or not makes no never mind to me, I will keep on my path and you keep on yours, and hopefully we will shake hands at the end and both can say we accomplished something..

    • jerry b says:

      Save Bears…
      Will you please explain what “path” you’re on. I’m quite sure I know where Brian is coming from, but I’m confused as to where you are and what you’re doing.

      • Save bears says:


        I have mentioned several times on here, where I am currently located and what I am working on, but again, I am in Idaho working on a privately funded feasibility study that has to do with Bison and their historic range..

        In the past I worked for FWP in the area of brucellosis transmission and eradication of brucellosis.

        I am not passive in my efforts to get ranchers off public lands.

        But I do take issue when people start calling their opponents by childishs name no matter what side of the issue your on..but hey that’s just me..I don’t find it a productive path, but yet anytime I mention something about it here, I am labeled either passive or on their side, against wolves or what ever the species topic may be..but believe me I work in the conservation side of things…

  9. Save bears says:

    I will add the only way, we are going to accomplish something is to find the middle ground, because if it is one side or the other that dominates, then there are always going to be a misinformed pissed off group of people…

    • Ken Cole says:

      Currently, the middle ground seams to mean giving up irreplaceable resources like entire species from vast landscapes.

      And, I might add, it means that you have to start from a compromised position to begin with because, as with the case of the Owyhee Initiative and bighorn/domestic sheep collaboration, the interests of the livestock industry come first which means that nothing can be gained on behalf of wildlife from the get go. It’s a dead end for wildlife figuratively and literally.

      • Save bears says:

        well Ken,

        I don’t believe I work from a compromised position because I take the time and effort to understand those I oppose…when I was active in the military, we gathered as much intelligence on the enemy that would could to ensure a complete victory…

  10. ProWolf in WY says:

    Glad to know wolves are brucellosis free. 🙂

  11. Aaron Clausman says:

    Yeah, i do not know what was with the wolf brucellosis suspicion. They must be trying to find any way they can kill wolves. Its a messy situation, the people who hate wolves want them to be vicious man-eaters and disease absorbers. They keep a close watch to see if wolves will ‘slip up’ so they can exaggerate it.

  12. Jeff N. says:

    Save Bears,

    (I am repeating my statement from the above post because I find your statement quite unrealistic and irrational.)

    Fair solution my ass…. Your idea of a fair solution gives an enormous amount power to a small minority of cattle growers in regard to the management decisions of our public lands and wildlife, making room for roughly 1000 – 1500 wolves throughout the northern rockies. The concept of your “fair solution” has accounted for a stagnant if not declining Mexican Gray Wolf population in the SW. Not to mention the “fair solution” our bison seem to be beneficiaries of…….as you say “simply amazing” and pathetic.

    The “fair solution” would take a major pendulum swing to the other side in order to approach anything close to fair. Your naivete concerning “middle ground” is stunning in its stupidity.

  13. Save bears says:


    I am naive because I advocate for wolves, and I advocate for more bison range?

    I will tell you all something right now, I work for wildlife, I may take a different approach than many of the knee jerk reactions I see on this blog, but rest assure, I am on the side of wildlife, If you don’t like my approach, then all I can say, tough..

    I love it, childishly calling people who actually work in the field stupid..or their approach to finding a solution stupid, you guys don’t realize, it will eventually come down to bullets and Bullshit if we don’t find a way to solve the problems that exist between to VERY polarized sides on wildlife and land issues…

  14. Save bears says:

    I will also add, I presented several studies that I and my associates prepared to the upper management of FWP and the USFWS 7 years ago, the presented facts that in the wild Wolves don’t carry brucellosis, well I can tell you right now, they were buried and it took 1.5 years before I left the agency…I have spoke about leaving FWP before due to the fact I would not doctor reports to fulfill a certain agenda.

    There was a major effort in 2001 to prove that wolves needed to be limited in range because they carried brucellosis and my reports showed it was not true…now I gave a career up over this point, I lost any benefits I had as a state employee as well as troubles with my military benefits because of it….so to be called or have my ideas called stupid reflects on how far apart the uniformed many are on both sides of these issues…

    Don’t bother to try and track the information down, it was buried and I was ordered to write new reports reflecting basically what they wanted to hear…

    • Save Bears,

      This certainly was the ethical thing to do — step down. Most people, I think, would not to that. Kudos to you.
      – – – –
      I do think some of the antagonism that happens in threads has to do with a failure to recognize jokes, slips, or just reading too quickly.

      I am not immune to this problem

  15. Jeff N. says:

    Save Bears,

    I also advocate for wolves, bison, and other wildlife and the “fair solution” tactics you propose have gotten us where we find ourselves today. Far short of where we should be. I don’t feel the need to grab my ankles in order to placate the status quo.

    BTW, I have spent 20 + years in a certain industry and I would never profess to have all the answers, as opposed to your constant reminder that because you work in the field…you “know”…and we couldn’t possibly “know”.

    • Please give Save Bears some credit . . . my view.

      • Save bears says:

        Thank you Ralph, I know that my views and methods are not mainstream at this time, but the goal is the same…

      • JEFF E says:

        so i wonder how many of the oft quoted 10 wolf biologists re the plan, that was brought up again today, were in the same position as SB but took the other path?

  16. Save bears says:


    I did not say I “Know all” but I do know about this subject, I have been waiting years for someone to write reports saying the same thing I did several years ago..

    I WORKED in the field, now I am a disgraced wildlife biologist because I took a stand against what I knew to be a lie..I bucked the powers and I lost…

    Currently I work with private groups on various studies, because I could never get a mainstream position again, because I told those in charge to stick it up their ass and I would not propagate lies and deception.. I could not get a paper peer reviewed at this time if I paid someone to do it!

    LOL, so at this point in time, I have nothing to loose by telling the truth, there is not much more they can do to me!

    You may not like my approach, but I can assure you I am not bending over and taking it…I am quite freely telling them what I think..

  17. Save Bears,

    Your manner is gruff.

    • Save bears says:

      Yes Ralph,

      I agree, I can and am gruff at times, I apologize for that…

      • Save bears says:

        My gruff nature probably comes from my military service, I expected when I retired I would be able to pursue my wildlife career with not much controversy, unfortunately, I got my eyes opened up!

  18. Now I hope some unnecessarily ruffled feathers are straightened out.

  19. Jeff N. says:

    In fairness I am guilty of going overboard here also. Not agreeing with Save Bears does not give me the right to insult. For that I also apologize.

  20. Virginia says:

    I see the passions that our bloggers have on both sides and it is one of the reasons I read this blog first thing every day! If you have no passion for anything, you might as well be dead. We all disagree with one another throughout this blog, but I think the tone of the disagreement needs to be more amenable. We do not need to personally attack each other but rather respect the other viewpoints, however difficult it might be. I have been guilty of attacking Kim, elkchaser, save bears maybe, but I realize that being passionate about something sometimes takes away civility. I hope you all agree! This is the only blog I have ever written on and I feel that my opinions have been respected. For that, I thank everyone.


March 2009


‎"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