wolf ideologues and responsibilities jim beers 080207

Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.

Wolf Ideologues & Responsibility
7/30/07 by Jim Beers, retired FWS biologist. HERE for KBC Wolf Page.
I have felt a nagging obligation to try and report on the personal and hidden agendas playing out in Saskatchewan regarding the death of Kenton Carnegie for quite awhile. On 8 November 2005 Kenton Carnegie a 22 year-old college student from Ontario was working at a mine in northern Saskatchewan when he went for a walk. Hours later his body was found at the edge of a lake in snow covered with wolf tracks. He had been chased and knocked down several times before he was killed and worse.

Note the date November 2005. I am writing this in late July 2007. The Canadian and Saskatchewan governments have yet to issue a finding about the cause of death and the swirl of hidden agendas, academic disingenuousness, and bureaucratic gamesmanship rivals (if such is possible) anything seen in the context of environmental and animal rights falderal in the United States. Trying to analyze the situation is especially difficult for me since I am not a Canadian and even were this going on in the United States any attempt to examine it would be subject to vilification and hyperbole. I am determined to attempt this for two reasons. First, for the sake of the victim, Mr. Carnegie, whose humanity makes us brothers despite national differences: to permit his death to go unrecognized and for its cause to go uncorrected is a tragedy we share if we do not do all we can to resolve it. Secondly, what is going on (and not happening too) in northern Saskatchewan is an important lesson for all Americans and Europeans that are being oppressed and harmed by the very same villains and ideology at work here.

My reluctance to stick my nose in here evaporated last night as I watched several of the Discovery Channel propaganda features presented under the rubric "Shark Week". First there was the "documentary" on the shark attacks on the crew of the USS Indianapolis. The hubris involved in calling it the "worst shark attack in history", when thousands of ships have disappeared throughout history and undoubtedly untold numbers of sailors and fishermen that went into the water were killed by sharks never to be seen again, was astounding. The "experts" that comment were, without exception, people with a basic opinion that sharks are, for a variety of reasons, to be protected and studied at all times. The bottom line from the U of Florida "expert" was that very few of the sailors were killed by sharks and we are all just victims of having watched "Jaws". The similarities to the propagandizing of wolf behavior was overwhelming.

Then there were the photos of sharks coming out of the water with seals in their jaws. Never a word about the explosion of this shark food (seals) for
35 years and its certain increase in shark health and numbers as a result. This was interspersed with all sorts of technological descriptions of shark bites. Always those interviewed, including some victims that lived, expressed admiration for sharks and opposition to any "retribution" or killing of sharks. No one advocates "retribution" or killing all sharks but does that mean there can be NO DISCUSSION of managing the numbers and distribution of sharks considering factors like human activities and fishery resources?

The real issues are unmentioned in all the smoke and mirrors being passed off as a comprehensive look at sharks. For instance, should beaches or waters where deadly sharks congregate periodically be opened to swimmers or surfers? Should sharks be discouraged (that means everything from finding some means of scattering them to killing many of them) from using areas where humans are in the water routinely? What impact are sharks having on reduced or healthy fish stocks? Should we be managing shark species' numbers and distributions in ways that protect human safety and allow fisheries to recover and increase? What is the primary role of government
(both in the US and under UN policies) vis a vis human safety, fishery management, local economies, and species preservation and sharks? What is the impact of exploding Pinniped (seals, et al) and expanding Cetacean
(whales et al) populations (i.e. shark food) on shark numbers and distribution? How should shark numbers be managed? Who advocates shark management and why are they never heard from? There are more such questions but you get the point. Be it shark attacks or wolf attacks or bear attacks, the publicity is the same: man is the culprit and no matter how many or what the impact of these animals on men and their communities, management of men and not the offending animals is "the answer".

As I watched this propaganda I could not get the savage killing of Kenton Carnegie by wolves and the ongoing cover-up out of my mind. The differences in manipulating information and government duplicity in the US and Canada, like the shark pseudo-biology and wolf misinformation about how benign these harmful and deadly creatures are, as the WWII military slang for an old German saying meant, "mox nix". This means the differences are "of no consequence" or "not important". So let's look at the Kenton Carnegie affair and learn what we all can.

8 November 2005, Kenton Carnegie, a 3rd year Engineering student from the University of Waterloo, goes for a walk when he gets off work at a mine in N. Saskatchewan. His remains are found several hours later in the snow on the edge of a frozen lake. There are wolf tracks all around. According to those who found him:

"He walked from the camp. About a kilometre away, on the edge of a frozen lake, a wolf appeared, following Carnegie's footsteps through the snow, said Rosalie Tsannie, the province's coroner for the north, who was called to the scene and arranged for Carnegie's body to be removed.

Carnegie died close to these trees, about a kilometre from the camp.

Carnegie must have become aware of it - the snow pattern showed he quickened his pace.

There were other wolves on the way. One or two more moved in from the side, as the first wolf tracked him from behind, Tsannie said. "I believe he saw this wolf behind him.

"That's when he thought he would have been in trouble and started running. And just shortly after that, about seven feet from there or less, the first scuffle happened, and there's about five [sites of scuffles] that led to the point where the men had discovered his body."

The searchers who went looking for Carnegie read the signs in the snow. They found footprints and then wolf tracks that told a story about Carnegie's final struggle.

They say he fought hard, that he was knocked down and the animals drew blood but he kept getting up. Finally, the animals took him down and he could no longer get to his feet. It was getting dark when searchers found his remains, about a kilometre from the camp. The wolves were still there, close to the body, so the men retreated and called the RCMP."

Since that date, 20 months ago:

-The government hired a wolf "conservationist" and "protectionist" to handle the investigation. Like the shark "experts" he will never have met a critter that should be killed or a population that needed to be controlled. Such "experts" are really only "expert" at blaming people for what they are actually responsible for by excusing and obfuscating animal facts, the danger from animals, and animal behavior.

- The government "investigator" has blamed a black bear. (Note that the attack took place in snow in November in N. Saskatchewan where most bears begin hibernating in September. He maintains that a bear killed Kenton and then wolves arrived and covered up the bear tracks. I'll bet his dog ate his homework when he was a kid too.)

- National Geographic and the National Wildlife Federation ran glossy articles blaming "bears" habituated to a garbage dump". (See above re: bears and when they hibernate.)

- The government "Report" came out in the summer of 2006 before any Coroners report was issued.

- The "Chief Coroner", not a Doctor in Saskatchewan, then called an Inquest date of Feb. 2007.

- Disclosure was delayed and withheld between the Coroner, Crown lawyer, and the parents of the dead man.

- Disclosure was not made until January of 2007 leaving inadequate time to review and challenge government "findings".

- The witness List was not divulged until after the February date had passed. It did NOT include the scene Coroner, a highly respected Aboriginal official that had reported that Kenton "was attacked, killed, and partly consumed by wolves."

- The Pathologist involved in the case was on vacation and the Crown did not want to call him.

- The Inquest was rescheduled for 29 October 2007 (two years after the incident).

- The Crown lawyer gets to pick the 6-person jury without any challenge from the lawyer representing the parents of the dead man.

As this disgraceful minuet proceeds, every Tom, Dick, and Harry comes out of the woodwork to trumpet his own cause.

- Wolf lovers are blaming black bears and "the dump".

- Government biologists support the bear theory for many reasons. They don't want to be held responsible for "managing" animals that are killing people
(too much accountability). Also, they (like their American cousins) anticipate a future where Federal tax funds and Provincial funds pay their salary for "protecting" and "surveying" and "researching" the "environment" as opposed the accountable management of animals to minimize human threats, human economic activities, and rural communities. Bears and wolves "habituated" or visiting dumps are to be considered aberrations and therefore if you kill a couple the problem is gone: Voila!

- Fur Trappers oppose a hunting season for wolves to protect their annual fur take profits.

- The Mining Company blames Kenton for walking alone. This, in spite of the fact that Kenton's young supervisor had been involved with a wolf attack the previous Friday.

- Some are blaming it on the permitted "baiting" of deer and bears both in general and around the perimeter of Parks and other closed (to hunting) areas.

- Environmentalists blame "the dump". This was music to the bureaucrats' ears as they put up an electrified fence (that wolves routinely bypass) and thereby can point to having "done something". The electric fence shorts out all the time and wolf tracks are everywhere on both side of the fence.

- The academicians are blaming the "habituation" of the wolves and bears. This suggests that really, "only" when wolves or bears hang around people and towns and ranches do they become problematic and dangerous to humans. This, while a true observation except of the "only" part, allows the media and all the others cited to continue the fiction that all wolves belong wherever they want to be in whatever numbers as long as we (?) discourage "habituation". Ah, the "need" for grants and funding for such "research" will indeed be endless: a true Professors' Relief Act to coin a phrase from the "New Deal" during the US' Great Depression.

- Search party members and 3 RCMP officers still maintain that wolves attacked and killed Kenton.

- Kenton's family is spending scarce funds to assure an honest finding and follow-up to protect others but the cost of witnesses and experts is staggering.

It is not unlikely that the Crown will attempt to get a finding of at least "unknown predator" if not "Black bear" as the cause of death.

I have no doubt that both US and European Environmental and Animal Rights organizations are working behind the scenes here to preclude any negative wolf publicity and to emphasize how this tragedy is really the fault of anything other than the animals they are using to great advantage for their agendas in the US in particular. Refuting the "no wolf ever attacked anyone" lie will not be challenged if they can avoid it. Blame "dumps" or "bait piles" or "bears" or "walking alone" or "failure to behave properly" or eventually (I'll bet) global warming but don't mention anything else. Certainly it couldn't be the "fault" of the wolves, could it?

There are many other wolf attacks on men in Canada in recent news accounts. One of them gives a glimpse into yet another hidden agenda going on here. A few weeks ago a man in British Columbia disembarked from his kayak and was charged and severely bitten by a non-rabid wolf. What caught my eye in the reportage was the tortured explanation about how rural folks are better protected by a knife (as opposed a handgun) against an attacking wolf because, A.) the man might only wound the wolf which might then turn and charge the shooter and B.) a screaming wolf might cause a pack to attack. Whether this report is a knee-jerk reaction to the Canadian dislike of and laws against any handguns or simply the wishful thinking of a dreamer I leave to you. Waiting for a wolf to be near enough to stab is better than wounding or killing it? A pack might attack because I shoot and wounded a wolf but maybe not as I stabbed it?

As for me, if I lived where wolves occurred I would be carrying a handgun in a holster anytime I thought I might encounter wolves. Like a home invasion or an armed robbery, the difference between my (or my families) life or death may well be my ability to stop what is about to happen. I appreciate all these anti-handgun folks concern for the rest of us making it worse for ourselves than it might otherwise be but that is our decision at the moment and not theirs. It is impractical to carry around a loaded rifle or shotgun but it is entirely practical to carry around a handgun. If these same folks
(in the US particularly) that want to force these deadly predators on the rest of us don't like more people carrying handguns, then reconsider all this "wolves and bears belong everywhere" philosophy. This American writer thinks of Kenton and if he were my son, I would have hoped he could have had a handgun when this incident began: it could be no worse and possibly (like the 7-Eleven owner with a handgun under the counter) he might have had a fighting chance. Whatever the future of gun laws in Canada, I am sure that some Canadians are concerned about what the effect of man-killing predators will be on rural Canadians attitudes about gun availability. Yet another of the hidden agendas swirling around as the 2nd Inquest date approaches and the intrigues continue and deepen.

This is an American perspective on a Canadian situation. Take it for what its worth. Canadians might well dismiss it but Americans should understand it and remember. As the wolves and grizzly bears increase under Federal auspices and as State bureaucrats become extensions of Federal bureaucracies and anti-rural environmental and animal rights agendas these very scenarios are being acted out here. As cougars are protected and increase due to hunting restrictions and as grizzlies and wolves spread: human attacks and deaths are and will increase. You must ask yourself "who is government paid to protect"? What is the purported benefit from these animals that kill humans and that are increasingly in areas and numbers that jeopardize all manner of rural residents and their day-today lives?

None of us should allow government to misuse the important authority WE GIVE THEM to order society. The hidden agendas driving these environmental and animal rights campaigns must be exposed and discussed openly. Rule by Star Chamber processes must not be allowed to reassert itself after 350 years. Government in both our countries is losing sight of the fact that no matter the emotions of many citizens (mostly urban), government exists to serve men and not animals and that catering to popular international movements that jeopardize our citizens will not be tolerated. Kenton Carnegie deserves an honest decision so that his death was not in vain. If we and our descendants are to have any hope of living peacefully in rural environs, we too must assure that Justice is done and that the forces of evil not distort that Justice and provide precedents for even greater abuse.

Ideologues that are never held responsible for their deeds only get worse and worse. Just ask the property owner in Big Sur or the rancher on the Arizona/New Mexico border or the folks living along New England streams or the horse owner that can no longer dispose of his horse. Like the parents of Kenton Carnegie they fight for what is right to make governments represent them and not ideologies that only survive by misinformation, subterfuge, and perversion of government itself. We all have a stake in the outcome of the Kenton Carnegie Inquest.

I for one will be praying that the truth is served and that subsequent policies aim at assuring that such things are minimized or, ideally, never happen again.

For more definitive information about his entire affair go to:

http://www.mtechservices.ca/Kenton/index.php/topic,164.0.html

Jim Beers

30 July 2007

- If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
- This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at 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.