Monthly Archives: August 2012

The Only Acceptable Option?

Posted on by
15

Make no mistake, not only is the mainstream media frequently full of shit, but also they distort the truth to fit their agenda. Case in point: the Spokane, Washington Spokesman Review ran an article on August 17th entitled, “Stevens County ranch reports new wolf attacks.” For one thing, the validity of the so-called “attacks” is still in question; and also, they didn’t happen on a ranch.

It turns out these alleged wolf attacks were on calves—not adult cows—yet the injuries were so minor some observers speculated that they could have been made by a strand of barbed wire. I’ve seen enough wolf kills to know that unless you arrive at the scene just when they were made, there wouldn’t be enough left on a calf-sized carcass to identify the cause of death. Wolves kill out of hunger and they eat what they bring down post haste, before the smell attracts a bear or any other scavengers.

Part way into the article, the “Inland Empire’s” largest newspaper revealed that the calves were not on the private Diamond M ranch, but on a Colville National Forest cattle grazing allotment, leased by the McIrvin family. That means the McIrvins (or their dogs or other guard animals) were not out with the cattle, so it’s highly unlikely anyone arrived on the scene of a fresh wolf kill.

I lived for many years in that part of Washington and worked in the Colville National Forest. I pity the cows, who are cruelly de-horned, trucked up to the ends of the logging roads and left to fend for themselves on some thistle-covered clear cut with only a dried up creek for water. My wife’s father “ran cattle” in the same way. It would be a big week if he checked on them twice. But he only had 30 “head” of cattle; the Diamond M ranch has over 400.

Rancher Len McIrvin has a state-issued wolf kill permit for depredation if wolves are caught in the act, but has said there’s little chance of meeting that requirement. The environmental organization Conservation Northwest released a statement questioning whether McIrvin made a “good faith effort” to reduce the risk of conflict between wolves and his livestock. “It’s unclear in this case whether the right livestock stewardship steps have first been tried to reduce conflict potential,” Mitch Friedman, Conservation Northwest executive director, said in the statement. “If we expect wolves to behave, ranchers need to meet them halfway.”

But Irvin told the Capital Press (a cattle industry tabloid posing as a newspaper) that the only compensation he’s interested in is a dead wolf for every dead calf. “This isn’t a wolf problem, we always could take care of our own problems,” he said, adding that the only acceptable option is trapping and poison.

Text and Wildlife Photos Copyright Jim Robertson

Posted on by
4

The cattle were probably on open range on our public National Forest land. Ranchers get practically free permits to run cows out into the forest. They de-horn the poor cows and leave there, unprotected, and don’t even bother checking on for weeks at a time. Then they complain when something happens to them (especially if it involves a natural predator). When wolves come across cows who are on National Forest land, far away from any house or sign of humanity, they logically assume the cows are part of the native wildlife.

Nabeki's avatarHowling For Justice

UPDATE:August 22, 2012

Great response everyone, keep calling and emailing.  Let’s try and save this pack! This is an outrage!

===

So much for Washington State being progressive on wolves. As soon as a wolf looks sideways at a cow the ranchers start squawking and fish and game comes running. No matter ranchers lose thousands and thousands of cows each year to non-predation.

In 2010 for example, 37, 300 cows keeled over or were stolen in Washington.  But of course ranchers don’t get reimbursed for any of the following conditions that regularly claim the lives of cattle and calves every year.

Digestive problems …………………………………………………..
Respiratory problems ………………………………………………..
Metabolic problems …………………………………………………..
Mastitis …………………………………………………………………..
Lameness/injury ……………………………………………………….
Other diseases ………………………………………………………..
Weather related ……………………………………………………….
Calving problems ……………………………………………………..
Poisoning ………………………………………………………………..
Theft ………………………………………………………………………
(NASS)

 “The “Wedge” pack was named for the wedge-shaped part of Stevens County between the Kettle River to the west and the…

View original post 331 more words

Ryan Choses Vegan as Speechwriter

Posted on by
17

Fair warning to voters: If you start hearing Paul Ryan waxing poetic about mercy and compassion, those aren’t his words but rather the words written for him by animal welfare author, vegan and former George W. Bush speechwriter, Mathew Scully.

According to an article in the Daily Caller, “Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan has tapped renowned speechwriter Matthew Scully to assist with campaign communications in the lead up to the GOP convention in Tampa, Florida. …

“He’s a Catholic vegan: Scully, who investigated meat-processing plants and factory farms during his stint in journalism, wrote a book arguing for the better treatment of animals called Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and The Call to Mercy. A Catholic like Ryan, Scully believes that the Bible’s injunction for man to “have dominion” over other species requires us to treat all living things with respect — and extends that philosophy to personally abstain from eating meat.”

Of course, diehard bowhunter, Paul Ryan is light years from abstaining from meat and must think men, including rapists, have “dominion” over women too (but not the respectful, merciful kind of dominion Scully suggests for animals). Ryan was also in the news today for having co-sponsored a legislation with the now infamous Todd Aiken aimed at redefining rape and forcing women to turn an unwanted pregnancy into an unwanted and possibly unloved child.

Paul Ryan is shown here indicating just how much compassion and mercy bowhunters like him really have for animals…

In the Name of Sport

Posted on by
12

It’s Monday morning, August 20th, and although autumn—the traditional season for hunting—is over a month away, I’m already hearing the echo of gunfire emanating from the hills around my place. If I weren’t so damned informed, I’d be thinking, “What the hell is someone shooting at this time of year?” But unfortunately I know all too well…

Judging by the intensity of the rifle report, it is not the sound of a kid with a .22 blasting at bottles or pigeons this time. Considering that the noise originated in an area where black bears and blackberries are numerous, there’s no doubt in my mind that the shooter is a bear hunter. The wild berries are just now ripening and, since bear hunting season begins on August 1st here in Washington, the loathsome scum who enjoy making sport of animal murder are out trying to end the life of a humble being whose only focus these days is filling up on fresh fruit.

Adding to my frustration, there’s no way I can hike up there and check out the situation. My right foot has been out of commission for about a week now, ever since a log rolled onto it while I was cutting firewood. Every time I try to walk on it, the pain and swelling gets worse so I’m stuck having to sit with my foot elevated, wondering whether one of my neighborhood bears has been shot to death or is now suffering from a painful gunshot wound.

Misfortune and misery are already all too common. The last thing this world needs is for a few selfish people to thoughtlessly cause suffering in the name of sport.

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson

 

Obama: “Ryan is a Decent Man”

Posted on by
4

In his first remarks on Paul Ryan, President Barack Obama said, “I know him. I welcome him to the race. Congressman Ryan is a decent man,” but has “wrong vision for America” (especially for our wildlife, I would add).

When I read that Obama gave Ryan the dubious distinction of being “a decent man,” I had to wonder if our Commander in Chief has been reading my blog—in particular, a post I made back in early June, entitled…

He Was a “Decent” Man

Posted on June 9, 2012

Nobody is all good or all bad all of the time. Like the universe, people are multi-dimensional. Some of the most “decent” people I know are hunters. [well, not including bowhunters].These folks, who are inarguably unkind to animals during hunting season, are often as friendly and neighborly as you please to their fellow people. I have to assume there was some major peer pressure involved in their decision to start hunting as kids. And they must be doing some heavy compartmentalizing to keep it up as adults.

One of the most memorable and symbolic scenes in the movie, The Silence of the Lambs, is when Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster’s character) tells Hannibal Lecter of a traumatic experience she had while staying at a relative’s sheep ranch in Montana. She was awakened before dawn by the screaming of the lambs her uncle was slaughtering. When Lecter questioned the rancher’s morality, she quickly replied, “He was a very decent man.” No doubt the sheep would not agree. Somehow people who are capable of extreme cruelty can also have a convincingly “decent” side.

Ordinarily well-thought-of people can turn ugly and unkind when taking part in unnaturally cruel activities, where cruelty is the norm rather than the exception. One of the known coping mechanisms for workers in slaughterhouses is to objectify and demean animals as unworthy of consideration. Not only can people in these situations become indifferent towards “lowly” animals, they frequently turn sadistic. They can come to be obsessed with cruelty, taking pleasure in causing animals increased suffering.

Ten years before Jack the Ripper, nineteenth century French serial killer, Eusebius Pieydagnelle, developed such an obsession while growing up across the street from a butcher shop. He told police, “The smell of fresh blood, and appetizing meat, the bloody lumps–all this fascinated me and I began to envy the butcher’s assistant, because he could work at the block, with his sleeves rolled-up and bloody hands.” [Interestingly, Paul Ryan boasted, “I butcher my own deer, grind the meat, stuff it in casings and then smoke it”—not to get high of course, that rush must come from the killing.]

In spite of his respectable parents’ opposition, young Eusebius became an apprentice at the butcher shop where he wounded cattle and drank their blood. But the greatest excitement for him came when he was allowed to kill an animal himself: “…the sweetest sensation is when you feel the animal trembling under your knife. The animal’s departing life creeps along the blade right up to your hand. The mighty blow that felled the bullocks sounded like sweet music to my ears.” Shocking words from someone who was always thought of as a “decent man.” …

The media depicts Paul Ryan’s chosen hobby, bowhunting, as “quaint,” “folksey” or “outdoorsy,” but if the animals—whose bodies his arrows tear in to—had anything to say about it, they’d ask him: “Where’s your sense of decency?”

Wildlife Photograhy Copyright Jim Robertson

Save the Wolves, Go Vegan!

Posted on by
16

If you really want to save the wolves, go vegan! And urge your friends and family and neighbors and co-workers to do the same. Tell it to the world: Eating meat is killing the planet, one wolf at a time; one species at a time; one ecosystem after another. Every time you order a steak or grill a hamburger, you legitimize wolf-culling for the sake of livestock growers. And every time you purchase a hunting license, you validate wolf trapping for the sake of elk hunters. To game managers, every action, right down to your purchase of ammo and cammo at Outdoor World is a show of support for their policies.

By now, you regular readers of this blog are probably thinking to yourself, “Well, duh…tell me something I don’t know.” But you might be surprised just how many people who advocated for the reintroduction of wolves eat meat like there’s no tomorrow. Comfortable in their justification, they reason that cows are “domesticated” or “dumb” and therefore bred for slaughter. This post is for them. Their beef comes from a feedlot (as far as they know) and not out on the open range, where wolves are being killed. Others pride themselves on eating only “grass-fed” beef, yet somehow they don’t see how their food choice helps lead to a policy of “controlling” wolves.

And how many hunters can honestly say that they don’t mind sharing their elk or deer with the likes of wolves, cougars or coyotes. Meanwhile, mainstream environmental groups and their members cling to the notion of “sustainable” beef (surely some of the ranchers and hunters out there can afford to look the other way when desperate wolves come around hoping for a quick meal to stave off their hunger pangs).

Rather than continually trying to revise your rationale, wouldn’t it be easier just to remove yourself from the equation and leave the predating to the predators? Human beings can live much healthier on a plant-based diet, like their primate cousins always have. True carnivores, such as wolves, coyotes, cougars, marine mammals or members of the weasel family have to eat meat to survive. If you’re not willing to go vegan for the sake of the animals you eat, maybe you should think of the other animals affected by your bill of fare.

Now, if Mitt Romney had chosen a vegan, instead of a diehard bowhunter like Ryan for a running mate, he might have gotten my vote.

Text and Wildlife Photography Copyright Jim Robertson

Wolf Hunters Prefer an Imbalance of Nature

Posted on by
32

First, a reminder to hunters who might happen upon this blog: please don’t bother commenting in support of your sport. Pro-hunting comments don’t get posted here. There are plenty of other forums for that sort of thing. Though your arguments may be “heartfelt” and well thought out, all pro-kill comments end up in the round file. Readers here have heard you sportsmen’s rationalizations ad nauseum and instinctively know the truth about hunting. Anyone wanting to hear hunter rationalizations can visit any number of sites dedicated to the disemination of hunter propaganda–this is not one of them.

__________________________________

Now back to today’s sermon:

In a recent discussion on wildlife issues with some longtime friends, I felt a little out of place to learn they were all against the reintroduction of wolves to places like Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. No, they weren’t a group of hunters selfishly seeking authority over nonhuman life; these good folks were understandably upset because the wolves are being killed in horrible ways, ever since their removal from the federal endangered species list left them at the mercy of state game department policy makers. While I share their outrage and the urge to end the suffering of wolves, I have to argue that at least the ones “that got away” will go on to fill a gap in biodiversity.

The point of recovering endangered species should be to bring back and/or protect enough diversity to allow nature to function apart from human intervention. The presence of predators like wolves can help to restore a sense of natural order and nullify the claims by hunters that their sport is necessary to keep ungulate populations in check.

Wolves in Yellowstone have been keeping elk on the move enough to allow willows to thrive once again in places like the Lamar Valley. Newly emerging willow thickets in turn provide food and shelter for an array of species, from beavers to songbirds. The loss of each thread of biodiversity brings us one step closer to a mass extinction spasm that would wreak more destruction and animal suffering than the Earth has seen in some 50 million years.

Hunters want their cake and eat it too. Out of one side of their mouth they declare that there are too many elk and that they do the animals a favor by killing them to prevent overgrazing. Yet when wolves spread out and successfully reclaim some of their former territories, hunters resent the competition and call for every brutal tactic imaginable to drive wolves back into the shadows, thereby restoring the imbalance that hunters depend on to justify their exploits.

Now more than ever we need to counter the hunter agenda at every turn, for the sake of a functioning planet. It’s high time to put an end to the notion that wildlife are “property” of the states, to be “managed” as they see fit. The animals of the Earth are autonomous, each having a necessary role in nature. Only human arrogance would suppose it any other way.

 

Ryan: Boy Scout or Dangerous Psychopath?

Posted on by
6

Today the Huffington Post covered Paul Ryan’s mixed record on the outdoors. Of course right-leaning bowhunters were thrilled about their candidate’s choice for a running mate (yes, the majority of hunters are red-state Republicans, but they do come in all political stripes.) It’s no surprise that the NRA gave him an ‘A’ rating. Hailed as “the last Boy Scout” by none other than Rush Limbaugh, Ryan must have earned his merit badges in cruelty to animals, pandering to weapons manufacturers and “virtuous” selfishness (one of the only two bills Ryan has ever ushered into law during his congressional career was a cap on excise tax on bowhunting equipment).

Sure, presidential candidates pandering to gun lobbies or seeking to secure the sportsmen’s vote is nothing new.  From the likes of Teddy Roosevelt with his head-hunting safaris here and in Africa, to John Kerry with his backfiring cammo-clad goose-hunt-media-stunt, to Dick Cheney blindly blasting at birds (spraying lead at anything or anyone that moves),  politicians have shamelessly courted the hunter vote while helping to promote the wise-use twaddle that “hunters are the best environmentalists.” For
his part, the great “varmint” hunter, George W. Bush, penned executive order 13443 on August 17, 2007, encouraging more hunting in parks and on national wildlife refuges.

Cleveland Amory, founder of The Fund for Animals, had this to say about President Roosevelt in his anti-hunting epic, Man Kind? Our Incredible War on Wildlife: “Theodore Roosevelt…could not be faulted for at least some efforts in the field of conservation. But here the praise must end. When it came to killing animals, he was close to psychopathic.” Dangerously close indeed (think: Ted Bundy). But don’t let on to a hunter what you think of their esteemed idol, because, as Mr. Amory put it, “…the least implication anywhere that hunters are not the worthiest souls since the apostles drives them into virtual paroxysms of self-pity.”

Amory goes on to write, “…the hunter, seeing there would soon be nothing left to kill, seized upon the new-fangled idea of ‘conservation’ with a vengeance. Soon they had such a stranglehold [think: Ted Nugent] on so much of the movement that the word itself was turned from the idea of protecting and saving the animals to the idea of raising and using them–for killing. The idea of wildlife ‘management’–for man, of course–was born.”

Though Roosevelt probably killed more trophy “game” animals than all our other presidents combined, in terms of a potential policy maker who could spell doom for wildlife and wilderness for generations to come, Ryan is even more dangerous. His budget plan calls for selling off public lands to private individuals, essentially turning the last of the wild places into high-end private game reserves for trophy hunting. Some of his ideas make the so-called “Sportsmen’s Heritage Act,” which would open our national parks and refuges to hunting (a bill Ryan enthusiastically supported) seem almost tame.

________________________________________________________

Portions of this post were excerpted from the book, Exposing the Big Game: Living Targets of a Dying Sport

Text and Wildlife Photography Copyright Jim Robertson

America Needs Compassionate Leaders, Not Bowhunters

Posted on by
11

Not one to miss an opportunity to weigh in whenever his favorite hobby—killing animals—is mentioned in the news, terrible Ted Nugent made this statement to Newsmax about Paul Ryan yesterday: “He’s an addicted bowhunter…just what America needs in leadership…”

Funny, that’s just the opposite of what I was about to say. The last thing any country needs is someone in a leadership position whose pastime is the “primal pursuit of game with a self-limiting weapon,” as Nugent put it. Anyone whose idea of entertainment is impaling animals with arrows has some serious issues.

While testing one’s skill at archery against a backdrop of straw bales can be meditative and rewarding, using an animal as your living target is nothing short of sadism. Bowhunters cripple just as many animals as they kill outright and victims who escape with an arrow stuck in them are bound to die a slow death from infection.

“Bowhunting is one of the most vicious and inaccurate ways to kill an animal,” according to a petition seeking to Abolish Bowhunting and end the brutality!!! Glenn Helgeland unwittingly backs this up, telling his “Fins and Feathers” readers: “The rule of thumb has long been that we should wait 30 to 45 minutes on heart and lung hits, an hour or more on a suspected liver hit, eight to 12 hours on paunch hits, and that we should follow up immediately on hindquarter and other muscle hits, ‘to keep the wound open and bleeding’.”

Neither Ryan nor Nugent are impoverished (at least monetarily), so any claims they might make of needing to hunt for the sake of sustenance border on the absurd. Instead, their acts are inspired purely by selfishness (a “virtue” according to Ryan’s idol, Ayn Rand).

Compassion, humaneness and altruism are the kind of characteristics we should expect from this country’s leaders, not cruelty, violence and self-centeredness.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/abolish-bowhunting-and-end-the-brutality/

Text and Wildlife Photography Copyright Jim Robertson

Pining for Palin

Posted on by
6

I never thought I’d be pining for the day when Sarah Palin was tapped as John McCain’s running mate Paul Ryan makes Sarah Palin look almost presidential. Both are extremist Tea Partyers, but Palin is more of a Tea Party-lite, compared to Ryan who must chug Morning Thunder by the gallon, straight from the keg.

Although Sarah Palin may have fit the nickname, “Caribou Barbie,” Paul Ryan is certainly no “Caribou Ken.” With his prominent widow’s peak he looks more like an evil, forty-two year-old version of Eddie Munster. While Sarah Palin appeared a bit vacant at times (both on the podium and posing with a dead animal’s head in her lap), Paul Ryan looks totally vacuous—vampire-ish even—squatting beside a freshly-killed deer or turkey. But a vampire only drinks a little blood and moves on, whereas Ryan revels in morbidity, personally dismembering the bodies of his victims. In Ryan’s own words, “I butcher my own deer, grind the meat, stuff it in casings and then smoke it.”

Sarah Palin probably hunts mainly for attention and photo ops, yet Paul Ryan actually enjoys hanging around in a tree stand (upside down like a bat, rumor has it) until an unsuspecting deer walks by. When the peace-loving animal gets within range, it’s time for Ryan to play his most coveted role—that of Vlad the Impaler—and run the innocent being through with an arrow.

Paul Ryan’s idol, Ayn Rand, espoused the “Virtue of Selfishness” and called altruism “evil” (talk about spin doctors). Well, you don’t get any more selfish and malevolent than bow-hunting. Over half of all animals shot with arrows are crippled rather than killed outright and escape with an arrow shaft painfully imbedded in them. As far as “hobbies” go, you’d be hard-pressed to find a crueler one—except maybe trapping.

If selfishness is really a virtue, then a bow-hunter deserves to be Vice President, and this must seem the most virtuous of nations.