• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Center for Biological Diversity is not our friend

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
Killing wildlife to protect stock always has bad outcome for nature
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 02.09.2006

Federal hunters in a small plane last month buzzed the Coronado National Forest in Southern Arizona, shooting coyotes from the air. The Star's Tony Davis reported that about 200 coyotes were killed.

The government began a systematic wildlife-killing program in 1915, ostensibly to protect livestock. In November 1917, the U.S. Bureau of Biological Survey trapped two Mexican gray wolves in the Canelo Hills, the first lobos it killed in Arizona.

In December 1918, the Biological Survey killed a jaguar on Mount Wrightson in the Santa Ritas, also a first, and like the wolf pair, hardly the last.

By the early 1930s it had trapped and poisoned every wolf in Arizona and New Mexico, though they (as well as jaguars) continued to migrate across the border from Mexico for decades to come.

Over the years, the Biological Survey's name changed nine times as it sought to obscure its actions. In 1928, in response to complaints from wildlife biologists, it replaced its standard word "extermination" with the less inflammatory "control," and pledged not to wipe out any species.
In 1945, under the name U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, it killed its last remaining U.S. wolf, along the Colorado/New Mexico border.

In 1950, the agency began exporting American-produced poison and sending its salaried personnel to Mexico to wipe out lobos there.

(It almost succeeded, but after passage of the Endangered Species Act in 1973, the last five Mexican wolves were captured alive for an emergency captive breeding program, and beginning in 1998 their progeny were reintroduced to Arizona and New Mexico.)

In 1985, the Fish and Wildlife Service became a separate, weaker agency with responsibility for recovering endangered species, while the killing function, along with much more autonomy, resided with the agency today called Wildlife Services.

Whatever name it goes by, and whatever excuse it offers, Wildlife Services has always served the livestock industry and always finds a reason to kill more animals.
Its funding derives from a combination of federal, state and county appropriations, as well as from the livestock industry itself.

After wolves were wiped out, the agency elevated coyotes to its No. 1 one target to keep its coffers full, and shortly after World War II it adopted the military's use of aircraft to kill coyotes. When coyotes decreased precipitously, the agency focused on killing rodents — the coyotes' natural prey. As a result, prairie dogs declined and the blackfooted ferret, which eats prairie dogs, also disappeared from the wild. (It, too, was saved through captive breeding and reintroduction.)

The Endangered Species Act limited the government's use of poison and allowed coyotes to rebound.

But Wildlife Services has a long history of surreptitiously killing protected animals.

Were endangered Mexican wolves "accidentally" shot last month in the course of killing coyotes? We will never know.

Killing coyotes induces others to fill newly vacant habitat. These new and often younger coyotes, unfamiliar with local rodent distribution, are more likely to depredate livestock.

In contrast, ranchers who stay close during calving, and those who use guard dogs or llamas, suffer fewer losses than those relying on the federal killers.

Systematic wildlife killing has destabilized predator/prey relations with little benefit to agriculture. The Coronado National Forest and its wildlife deserve better.

Michael J. Robinson works for the Center for Biological Diversity in Pinos Altos, N.M. Contact him at [email protected]
http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/115035
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
I’ve got lots of them. My neighbors. Our predator control pilots. SOME of the GF&P trappers. The duly-elected sheriffs in all of the surrounding counties. The folks at the local courthouses, the town boards, the local school boards, the county commissioners and the predator control boards.

I also get along really well with the guys at the feed store, the bank, our general store, our main street businesses and our local ministers, several of which are good at keeping coyotes and prairie dogs thinned out. :wink:

Heck, I even get along with the head of the Wildlife Federation, although we have yet to agree on one single thing, except that South Dakota is a great place to live. With most of my neighbors I’d take a chance on getting myself killed to save them from danger and they would do the same for me.

I am not, on the other hand, friends with these environmental kooks like the Center for Biological Diversity, who would allow predators that they themselves helped to introduce and continue to protect, slaughter my livestock and my livelihood, so they can sit in their inner city offices and pat themselves on the back for “restoring the balance of nature”. :evil:

I am also not a friend of anyone, government employee or private citizen, who presumes that they can trespass on my private property without either my knowledge or consent. Those government employees used to be called public servants because they were hired to serve the public. Methinks that now some of them would rather be addressed as “Your Highness”. :mad:

Who is your friend? Just curious. :???:
 

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
as a guy with 4 young kids and cougars on the prowl, I say kill all the damned predators they want, no skin off my nose.

neighbor a half-mile away has a pet cougar, all penned up so there is no escape, but everytime she comes into heat there are males that just show up and you can hear them out "calling" to each other.


shoot, shovel, and shut up. that is my endangered species policy
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,247
Reaction score
0
Location
saskatchewan
I figured that would get out the soapbox -have you ever asked yourselves if after all the money spent on shooting,poisoning etc there are still as many or more coyotes as before-isn't that the definition of insanity repeating the same behavior but expecting different results. We ranch and calve our cows in probably one of the highest predator concentrations (bears,wolves,coyotes,) and we don't suffer catostraphic losses-and we sure as heck don't have a bunch of air wolves flying around shooting them out of planes. I think if both sides of this issue would get off their @#$%$# highhorses and discuss it maybe an equitable solution would come of it. AS for me I can get along with just about anybody-except hypocrits-ranchers who lockout everybody but the chequebook hunters unfortunately fall under that category. OK boys brace yourself for some cutting and pasteing and hyperbole.
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
5,962
Reaction score
0
Location
Western South Dakota
Northern Rancher said:
I figured that would get out the soapbox -have you ever asked yourselves if after all the money spent on shooting,poisoning etc there are still as many or more coyotes as before-isn't that the definition of insanity repeating the same behavior but expecting different results. We ranch and calve our cows in probably one of the highest predator concentrations (bears,wolves,coyotes,) and we don't suffer catostraphic losses-and we sure as heck don't have a bunch of air wolves flying around shooting them out of planes. I think if both sides of this issue would get off their @#$%$# highhorses and discuss it maybe an equitable solution would come of it. AS for me I can get along with just about anybody-except hypocrits-ranchers who lockout everybody but the chequebook hunters unfortunately fall under that category. OK boys brace yourself for some cutting and pasteing and hyperbole.

While I agree with the beginings of your post, I sure ain't fond of the last part. Sure glad you ain't any closer a neighbor than you are. You don't live where we do and go thru' what we do, yet you are making judgement on all of us. I don't need neighbors like that.

Too bad they don't make you King as you seem to be the only one who is farsighted enough to know what is best for yourself and everyone else, from Canada to the tip of South America.
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,247
Reaction score
0
Location
saskatchewan
I guess if you have an opinion different than the Padlock Gang you aren't allowed to post it-my point is-I don't think there is any progress to be made by locking out game wardens and hunters or by the wardens forcing their way on to peoples land-as for aerial hunting coyotes that money might be better spent by compensating ranchers for their losses. The reality is on both sides of the border we ranch in the publics eye and continuing a program that has been going on for years with no real success isn't really helping things out. Sorry I ruffled your feathers Jinglebob but you sure came with the hyperbole just as I predicted now we got a S.D. Stalker and a S.D. Squawker.
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
Northern Rancher, sometimes you are downright funny.

Have you ever asked yourself why we would allow a sheep killing coyote to live? Our results are pretty consistent. Shoot the predator that is killing our livestock and we might actually be able to market some of our livestock, which allows us to continue to support our ranching habit.

I’ve seen the pictures you’ve posted of your area. Aerial predator control wouldn’t have a prayer of working up there – it works great here, thank you very much. Now I’m happy that you don’t have catastrophic losses, but if you did, I also think that what you do to control those loses would be none of my business.

Do Canadian ranchers get compensated for your livestock loses? If you do, I guess that explains why you don’t worry much if predators are preying on your stock. Ranchers here on the prairies of South Dakota aren’t compensated for either livestock loses to predators or for depredation of our grass, our fences, our vehicles, or our water by the “public’s wildlife”. Since all of these losses are borne solely by the private landowner, we get a little touchy when blasted by guys like you. You might ranch in the public’s eye, but we don’t. We are still capable of taking care of ourselves as long as we are allowed to tend to our own business – and that’s the American way.

As for our predator program going on for years without success – how do you figure that? As long as we can keep the government out of our business, we can control the predators. On our side of the border, government is not the solution for every problem, a lot of the time it IS the problem.

I might remind you that as a Canadian, you don’t have a dog in this fight, so, although we appreciate your advice, this is our problem and we’ll handle it by ourselves. If that seems hypocritical to you – oh, well.

And you might want to look up the definition of hyperbole; there sure has been a lot of hot air coming across the border from your direction. Post away - we can use the warmth today. :twisted:
 

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
Libety Belle wrote :
government is not the solution for every problem, a lot of the time it IS the problem.

can I get an Amen ?
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,033
Reaction score
252
Location
Big Muddy valley
Plucked from LB's post " the Center for Biological Diversity, who would allow predators that they themselves helped to introduce "



Say LB could you give a example of a predator that's been introduced to South dakota that wasn't there before?
 

nenmrancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
416
Reaction score
0
Location
north eastern new mexico
Hey folks, take it from someone who has seen the tatics and methods that these folks use. You dont want anything to do with these wackos. They started off in Las Cruces and then moved from there to the Gila Wilderness near Silver City and have caused nothing but trouble anywhere. They want everything their way and only their way. They have always had a take no prisioner attitude. They are as extreme as you can get.
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
Say LB could you give a example of a predator that's been introduced to South dakota that wasn't there before?
All the predators we have now were here when this country was first settled, however good managers (and good shots) eradicated the wolf, mountain lion, eagle and bear. All we had to deal with were coyotes and fox until the government and the environmental whackos like the Center for Biological Diversity stepped in. Now all the predators we had gotten rid of are back and no rancher I know thinks that our lives have been improved because of it.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,033
Reaction score
252
Location
Big Muddy valley
Liberty Belle said:
Say LB could you give a example of a predator that's been introduced to South dakota that wasn't there before?
All the predators we have now were here when this country was first settled, however good managers (and good shots) eradicated the wolf, mountain lion, eagle and bear. All we had to deal with were coyotes and fox until the government and the environmental whackos like the Center for Biological Diversity stepped in. Now all the predators we had gotten rid of are back and no rancher I know thinks that our lives have been improved because of it.

LB do yu think maybe with rural depopulation that it is allowing those animals that were driven out when our area was settled to move back in is a logical reason that some are showing up now and not that they are being reintroduced. We have game animals that must have roamed this area that haven't been seen for years moving back in.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,861
Reaction score
4
I checked out the web site for this " Center" and it's a swanky set up. They must really bring in the big bucks to support all those people on the payroll.
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
BMR, that might be at least part of it, because as far as I know no one has been introducing predators into this state. Having the eagle on the endangered species list has caused them to be more numerous that sparrows or starlings, and not being able to shoot mountain lions, wolves and bears have caused their populations to explode and they range further into this area as they are crowded out of their home territories.

Some of the wolves that have been showing up lately come from the pack introduced into Yellowstone, but some of them have been traced back to packs in Minnesota by DNA tests.
 

WB

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
463
Reaction score
0
Location
North Central S.D.
I get a kick out of those that think that if we did no predator control and just let nature take care of itself that things will eventually even themselves out. It shows whose pocketbook is not being effected. Yes I know for every coyote we shoot another takes his place but we have to protect our livestock. For those of you who have to contend with wolves and mountain lions I feel sorry for you.
 

Frisco

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
174
Reaction score
0
Location
God's country aka NW SD
The Center for Biodiversity uses half truths and downright lies to promote their ideas, which are as whacko as ideas can get. One of their "biologists" as well as the Center itself was successfully sued by a southwest ranching family. The ranchers proved that the Center's "science" was flawed and that the Center's people slandered the ranchers. The article was in the summer issue of Range Magazine.
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,033
Reaction score
252
Location
Big Muddy valley
Liberty Belle said:
BMR, that might be at least part of it, because as far as I know no one has been introducing predators into this state. Having the eagle on the endangered species list has caused them to be more numerous that sparrows or starlings, and not being able to shoot mountain lions, wolves and bears have caused their populations to explode and they range further into this area as they are crowded out of their home territories.

Some of the wolves that have been showing up lately come from the pack introduced into Yellowstone, but some of them have been traced back to packs in Minnesota by DNA tests.


Gee Liberty Belle I hope yopu don't condon flag burning cause shooting a eagle is as unpatriotic as it comes. :stop:
 

Latest posts

Top