Rottwolves & Pitlions

by JIM BEERS

Am I the only one perplexed about the media and government officials
explaining attacks by mountain lions that kill rural New Mexico residents,
California bicyclists, Colorado joggers and children, British Columbia
mothers and daughters, and seriously maim and injure dozens of others in
recent years as somehow explicable and justifiable because "'they' (the
deceased and the maimed) were 'in the lion's habitat'"?

 

Is there no one else dumbfounded by the media and government officials
stating that the spreading destruction by wolves in America on livestock,
big game hunting, and rural dogs added to their stalking of western US
schoolchildren, their deadly attacks in Saskatchewan, their attacks in
British Columbia and Alaska, and their historic toll on thousands of humans
in Asia and Europe; is of no importance because wolves "belong" everywhere
they can exist because they are a "native species".

 

Other than those that "hate" hunters (and there are many such people) doesn't
anyone see the danger of increasing numbers of grizzly bears that are
killing stock, big game, rural dogs, and stalking rural homesteads while
beginning to stalk and attack bowhunters and other rural outdoors folks. To
say, as noted above that those and their property harmed by these massive
and dangerous animals are "in their habitat" or that they (the large
predators) "belong" here or that we "need" more of them should leave us all
in high dudgeon.

 

As a matter of fact, all of these animals ("red" wolf, "gray" wolf,
"Mexican" wolf, "timber" wolf [i.e. wolves], grizzly bears, cougars,
mountain lions, "Florida" panthers [i.e. cougars], and the laughably
"Listed" black bears of Louisiana and Florida) are merely the current tools
of those that would vacate rural America (but for themselves and the filthy
rich), eliminate hunting and fishing and trapping and ranching and the
concept of private property and animal ownership and use.

 

Wolves are eliminating the big game herds thereby reducing the number of
hunters (and coincidentally gun owners, a "two-fer" so to speak). Wolves
are eliminating ranching by making livestock losses, coupled with the
powerful hostility of government bureaucrats and the pressures of wealthy
environmental groups a powerful juggernaut to make the west a "corridor to
nowhere" devoid of rural community life, owned by government. and closed to
both use and management of natural and agricultural resources. Wolves are
making ranchers and other rural residents with families increasingly look to
sell out and move away to "safer" (more urban) places for children and the
elderly especially.

 

Lions are the excuse for closing more and more of Florida to hunting and
other human activities. Lions are the excuse being used by Midwestern
bureaucrats (dressed in state uniforms but in reality federal bureaucrat
wannabees) to argue for "protection" of "native species" as lions
mysteriously appear in Iowa and Wisconsin and Illinois. Lions increasingly
stalk and kill humans as their numbers increase and their food supply
dwindles and especially as they (like wolves and bears) experience no
adverse consequences as they move in and around human habitation.

 

Grizzly bears are very, very dangerous omnivores that, like wolves and
lions, are increasing in numbers and range. Their presence is used to
justify closing roads, eliminating grazing and logging, reducing hunting,
the easement and purchase of more and more private property by government
and their subsidized "partners" like the massively wealthy Nature
Conservancy.

 

All of these animals are making rural life more tenuous, more dangerous, and
less economically viable. Yhis is intentional. Add to this the urban
support for higher gas prices and the current crop of federal (give the
urban voters the rural countryside) politicians and you have a recipe for a
rerun of the Highland Clearances of rural Scotland (by British Lords) in the
years following our Revolution and the Founding of this country. Read John
Prebble's book The Highland Clearances sometime if you want to see how even
"civilized" and "educated" rulers can be every bit as callous as the worst
Third World or communist dictator. Ask yourself then, "How lucky am I to
have Constitutional rights and a limit on the power of government?" and "Can
I afford to allow others chip away at my rights?" But I digress.

 

The wolves, cougars, and bears are being protected and spread by federal and
state bureaucrats utilizing recent laws and regulations that are built on
the erroneous assumption that they belong everywhere (they definitely DO NOT
belong where they are a danger to humans or to human activities or property)
and that citizen protection of persons and property from these animals makes
the human guilty of a serious offense unless he can prove otherwise in a
court of law. Large predators near human habitation should be killed by
public employees or private citizens immediately. The numbers and ranges of
such animals should be controlled and strictly circumscribed. Public
hunting should be the preferred method of such control for a whole host of
reasons that would fill pages. Their adverse effects on livestock, big
game, and dogs should be minimized. Their danger to humans should be
strictly minimized and rural people should be given all freedom to carry
weapons and take deadly action in the few areas where such animals might be
expected to occur.

 

Let us ask what my liability would be if I released a vicious and deadly dog
("Rottwolf?") or large cat ("Pitlion?") in a town or suburb or rural area?
Let us further ask what my liability would be if the dog or large cat I
released killed a child or someone's dog or livestock or some wintering
deer? Could I protect myself from charges if I said, "the dog belonged
there" or "the child behaved improperly" or "the livestock and dogs didn't
belong there"? Could I take you into court and get you charged with a
felony (prison, fines, loss of gun rights, loss of voting rights, loss of
future employment, etc.) if you shot my dog and could not prove it was in
self-defense? Suppose I got some friendly veterinarian (better yet a
University veterinarian) to testify that my dog was really harmless and that
your dog was the culprit before it was killed based on forensic examination?
Suppose I got an archeologist to testify that dogs were roaming here
thousands of years ago and belonged here now because they were "native"?
Suppose I got some bureaucrat biologist to testify that dogs like mine were
"good" for the urban and rural environments because they kept down inferior
breeds and that there have not been any recorded and substantiated incidents
of my breed of dog ever attacking other dogs or children for hundreds of
years? Suppose that my dog or cat killed all the goats in the area and then
I got some vegan authority to testify why not having goats, and goatmeat,
and goat cheese was good for the health of children and adults? Suppose I
got a dog expert to testify that since my dog was purebred and was killing
mixed breeds that this was good for the canine gene pool? Who would buy any
of this?

 

All of the above and more is being perpetrated by bureaucrats using the same
false assumptions and claims every day. These are the same folks that
recently testified before Congress that guns should not be allowed on
federal properties no matter what state laws said. Just as they disregard
gun rights, the right of rural people to "Domestic Tranquility", the
provision of which appears in the Preamble of the US Constitution as the
PRIMARY reason for government, is not only ignored but purposely being
destroyed by those whose salaries we pay.

 

Federal and state bureaucrats, agencies, and laws can no more justify the
protection and spread of these deadly and destructive predators than I can
loose deadly dogs or large cats on my neighbors and beyond. Bureaucrats
that are responsible for these programs should be sued by relatives and
associates of persons killed by these animals. Similarly those injured by
these animals should also sue the bureaucrats responsible for establishing
and protecting these animals in places and numbers that could reasonably be
expected to have caused the attack. Charges up to and including
manslaughter should be sought. Per the OJ Simpson precedent, if the charges
don't stick; go after Civil Damages. Those who lose private animal property
like stock or dogs should likewise sue the responsible bureaucrats for the
damages and loss caused by these animals. Those that are losing their
public property opportunities to hunt game animals being extirpated by these
animals have begun the process of court actions against agencies and
regulators but have thus far avoided suing the individual bureaucrat
perpetrators of these disasters on four legs.

 

Do not be deterred from what I am saying by being told about how "protected"
from liability bureaucrats are by law. As observed by Charles Dickens, if
that is true "the law is an ass". Only by launching such suits nationwide
and challenging the preposterous assumptions and precedents that have been
built up by our apathy and failure to heed warnings of where this was
headed, can there be any hope of stopping this rule of the urban elites
through highly paid and amoral bureaucrats. The current crop of politicians
offer little hope, so it is up to us.

 

Just like it was done, so it must be undone. We need to WORK TOGETHER from
the gamefowl breeder and trapper to the dog owner and fisherman. We need to
rearrange our representative groups from the ineffective bureaucracies they
have become to focused advocacy groups full of fight, enthusiasm, and ideas.
We need to assert the local government controls outlined in the Constitution
and once again run our local communities as we want and not as urban elites
or animal rights groups demand. Expecting and demanding an environment free
of these damaging and deadly predators is just, proper, and the rightful
purpose of government. It is truly up to us. Reasserting the once
revolutionary notion of everyone, bureaucrats included, being responsible
for their actions is a first step in reasserting our individual rights and
the limited role of government that made this nation the envy of people in
every other nation of the globe for over 200 years.

 

Jim Beers

8 July 2008

- If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

http://jimbeers.blogster.com (Jim Beers Common Sense)

- Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact: jimbeers7@verizon.net

- Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Centreville, Virginia with his wife of many decades.

Good Neighbor Committee
P.O. Box 155 - La Salle, CO  80645
info@goodneighborlaw.com

| Good Neighbor Law© 2006 |