Monthly Archives: April 2013

Wild Horse Herds – Wolves – Hatred and Psychosis: Humanity Must Win the War Over Hatred

taylor creek siskyou

Over time mankind’s hunting beliefs were and remain detrimental toward our wildlife.  Now exists a multitude of destructive factors focused on our wildlife and the deadly combination of hunting, trapping, corporate intrusion, politics, and ignorance.  These types of intervention not only destroy our wildlife, but destruction of our country.  Whereby, nature serves as an example, and where it goes our nation goes —

Today the fact that we call ourselves a civilized society simply becomes another oxymoron.  A slight perusal of facts, when it comes to wildlife analysis and the outright destructive and abusive methodology used today.  The situation is definable, the reality obvious.

Oddly, debates both within the decision making process and politics remain based more on myth and hatred — rather than respect, concern, reality, or compassion.  The realities, or facts of the issues, approached complacently at best with no consideration given them, do exist but not included.  Thereby, most often and up to this point, the decision making process to actually save our wildlife becomes non-existent as well as extremely flawed.

The truth is we have a government that has been, for a few decades now and becoming worse, administrators for nothing more than foreign corporations and small lobby groups.  Within this context propaganda directed toward subjective reasoning and ignorance plays a significant roll in the extinction of species — i.e. Wild Horses and Wolves for example, are heading down the path of extinction at a tremendous rate of speed.  People’s callousness and ignorance just as deadly as a bullet to the head.

Modern Society and Wildlife

Today’s extinct species list, as well as the endangered species list, contains proof of excessive or mismanaged hunting and trapping principles.  Ironically, this history more than documents the arrogance of our society in centuries past, not only the Buffalo but other rare species, for one reason or the other, that become formidable targets for trophies or combined with gender egos.

“Let them kill, skin, and sell until the buffalo is exterminated, as it is the only way to bring lasting peace and allow civilization to advance.”  – General Philip Sheridan

General Philip Sheridan said the same thing about the American Indians, and life or living things in general, simply did not make sense to him.  His perceptions carried over into the more ignorant of people, and the rest history, in both the Buffalo hunts and the blatant massacres of Indians in the old west.

Where are we today –  as a people, as a society?  This shows us not only a past circumstance of ignorance, not unique in any way within history, but oddly a current phenomena as well.  Beyond a doubt this behavior is allowed to progress, which history defines as a matter of truth.  The present challenges to our wildlife becomes the daily task of simply staying alive, mostly accomplished by avoiding humans.  Inclusions of less wildlife habitat, exploitation of our water and mineral resources, increased cattle onto Public Lands, and corporate profits which out rightly demands less government regulatory management at a time when there should be more management, is a normal situation now.  The fact is wildlife has no chance of living unless things change rapidly!

The book, “Extinct and Vanishing Animals” (i.e. Ziswiler, 1967), develops a sound conclusion to some of the history of animals destroyed through ignorance in the name of civilization.  This book directs people’s attention, written in 1967, to the “. . . morbid pleasure of killing. . .” throughout the previous couple of centuries by trophy hunters, poachers, and trappers.

Inclusive of one category, this situation sums up a large percentage of those that hunt today.  One can honestly make the statement, from a prolific perusal of historical fact, that nothing has changed over the centuries.  The obvious links in this chain of notable events is disturbing, it becomes quite obvious that “necessity” has been replaced with blind ignorance and contempt toward our wildlife.

The truth, the “necessity” to kill our wildlife no longer exists and is simply a morbid sport or deranged kill-only management paradigm of today.  It’s apparent we learn nothing from history, and there exists no inward look at ourselves, as a civilization, when it comes to the treatment of our animals.

History most often can be viewed as objective, despite the subjective witnessing of many events of the past.  When we study the events of Wounded Knee, or May Li Massacre in Vietnam, for example, we often wonder why it was covered-up for so long.

But another aspect, and more interesting toward this discussion, is we discover the same mentality or psychology and mentality portrayed by human weakness and what actually follows.  History demonstrates this quite well, and over the past centuries.  That of slaying or murdering those defenseless beings, whether people or wildlife, is a psychosis of a low mentality, low self-esteem, for men an attempt to obtain manhood, demonstrate power over another-whether human or animal, and either/or when combined with ignorance remains a dangerous mental state of affairs. (to start your research see: Animal Cruelty and Psychiatric Disorders – Roman Gleyzer, MD, Alan R. Felthous, MD, and Charles E. Holzer III, PhD)

The examples abound by our government’s treatment of the Wild Horse Herds, cattleman’s lobby, or the sportsmen’s lobby efforts which evolve into the murdering of Wolves and Wolf Puppies.  The wild horses being rounded up abusively, even deadly at times, and sent to slaughter.  The wolves are being aggressively shot, skinned alive at times, burned-out or gassed in their family dens, or even shot from airplanes and left to die and suffer for hours before doing so!  To say these situations are perpetrated from a psychosis remains an understatement.

To say this is humane practice or for management of the wildlife is strictly psychotic, and demented as well!  There is so many options that the kill-only option is antiquated, and the kill-only aspect simply subjective and with no legitimate references in doing so.  When compared to objectivity, favorable toward life — resources and data abound and in abundance as to directly involve and provide appropriate alternatives, rather than the killing of wildlife.

Ignorance and Civilization

When we say ignorance, in the form of academic discussion, it is derived from a none the less proven and fact filled history.  To be more precise, the acts of people toward nature become horrendous, and when looking back to particular events we as a people state clearly, “That should not have happened, and how can we avoid it happening again?” (i.e. author’s quote)  Again, we can look past the Buffalo hunts of last century and the ongoing wild horse herd roundups and wolf hunts of today (which history will no doubt record in the same venue as the Buffalo hunts).

History:  American settlers feared wolves of centuries past, considering them vermin of the worst type.  Keep in mind nothing was known of their contribution to an ecological system, or enhancements to our environment until this century.  But laws were made, for example in South Carolina and in 1695, “An Act for Destroying Beasts of Prey”.

This same law, in 1695, Mandated All Indian Braves be required to bring in yearly at least one wolf, panther or bear skin, or two Bobcat skins.  If he failed to do so he would be “severely whipped” but if he brought in at least one skin he would be rewarded.

During the 1800’s wolf hunters were considered hero’s, eliminating the expressed and supposed dangers of the wolves and grizzly bears from the Great Plains states.  The Plains Wolves, their white glowing fir, made for easy targets, and are an extinct species today.

The significant situation that existed here is the fact the Great Plains states in America, that is until the 19th century, rivaled East Africa in wildlife quantity — A resource that, assumed, our forefathers could care less if those of us today could see.  But a few of us can still imagine — with a tear in the eye, the Great Plains and actually see such a devastating sight of beauty,  being the “Sight of all Sights” — and of so much wildlife and variety of animals, running free, healthy, and in abundance.

In reality it is just as ignorant, contrary and disgusting to any civilized people then as now, that similar laws to those of killing wolves or be whipped, remain as disgusting as the recent State Constitutional Amendment in Idaho for making it a “Right” to murder wolves.  Good God, is anyone paying attention to this?

But as a society we are just now acknowledging the benefits of the wolf, and the positive attributes to ecological systems.  The similar aspects of America’s Wild Horse Herds, with their roaming and non-destructive grazing habits are benficial to our Public Lands.

In Idaho and other states, though they want to openly kill wolves on America’s Public Lands, and essentially ignore the safe-guards of these same Public Lands for ecological preservation and having them still around for the future, is blatantly and abusively ignored by these hunters.  So we indeed see nothing more than hatred and blind ignorance of the worst type!

So when the ecological systems collapse from overly-stressed browse from the sports animals, then the sportsmen should pay for this — the same with cattle and the cattleman’s lobby.  Because after all — Public Lands belong to America, not the sportsman’s lobby groups or the cattleman’s lobby groups.  They should remain responsible for their decisions, not the innocent tax payers who take no part in the destruction of wildlife and our environment!

Their science is the subjective and ignorant science of hatred that spawns more hatred.  This, conclusively, must be changed, as hatred is not a necessity or an item to pass onto our future administrators and management people.  Saving Our Wildlife Saves Our Humanity, Our Ethics, and Our Morals for better days to come.


Ziswiler, Vinzenz. 1967. Extinct and Vanishing Animals. A Biology of extinction and survival. Springer-Verlag, N.Y. Inc.

Nowak, Ronald M. 1972.  The Mysterious Wolf of the South. Natural History, Jan.; and Nowak, R.M. 1979. North American Quaternary Canis. Museum of natural History, University of Kansas, Mongraph #6, 154 pp.


Posted by on April 28, 2013 in Uncategorized


Subjective Reasoning and our Wild Horse Herds in America: Can America Afford the Bureau of Land Management

valley below onion mtn 4_24_13There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance. — Socrates

Subjective Reasoning remains bad for our wildlife and environment, in this case America’s Wild Horse Herds.  This situation is costly to taxpayers.  While perusing a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) yearly budget for the Wild Horse and Burro Program, many questions arise as to the reality, or the necessity for this program.

The estimated cost here is above and beyond $650 million, and more when considering the end of the year costs, as BLM always over-budget and unreasonable and not frugal in spending taxpayer money — yes, it goes unchecked and apparently no working checks-n-balance system in place.

When compared to Objective Reasoning, which would leave the Wild Horse Herds on America’s Public Lands, and for good and objective science and sound data specific reasons — costing taxpayers at most $1.2 million dollars for management purposes.

The very basis, or needs that are given to conduct costly horse herd roundups and horse storage, taking the Wild Horse Herds off of America’s Public Lands, remain quite subjective, to the point of being unsound and simply attesting to the BLM’s bad decision making process.  What becomes obvious as well is the fact that this program is not based on any factual science what so ever, and the premise for the actual removal of wild horses inadequate for such taxpayer expenditures.

The WH&B Act of 1971 Changed

What is noticeable to this journalist is the facts formed from objective reality, taken from the original WH&B Act of 1971, and had indeed changed over the years.  Subjective reasoning become the dominant influence, and resulting in a definite negative impact to the wild horse herds.

What started out to be a good program, had become nothing more than a money maker, or what one can concede as criminally oriented.  This was done over years, not over night.

It was accomplished through non-compliance and ignoring of the WH&B Act of 1971.  Once this achieved, since there was no agency overseeing the BLM at that time, criminally manipulated situations were accomplished by BLM employees (a sound history of BLM criminal investigations and political intervention exists and factual — as well as the most litigated agency in American history).  The WH&B program become nothing more than a profit funnel for government consultants, contractors, welfare ranchers, and corporations.

“The manner which the WH&B program is managed today makes no sense and has no basis in actual facts, and management decisions are based on nothing more than subjective reasoning.  In my opinion, what was done to accomplish a protective shroud for these horse herds has become nothing more than a government mafia; whereas, corruption and monetary profits go to a small and select group of consultants, criminal contractors, welfare ranchers, and corporations.  The non-debatable fact is — nothing exists in reality that has to do with proper scientific and proper wildlife management principles; rather, it is now based on money oriented and politically driven decisions.  How can any of this be attributable to benefit our wild horse herds?” Mark S. Hathaway, PhD Research Scientist. . .

Subjective Reasoning / Objective Reasoning

Subjective reasoning is a statement, or a sequence or pattern of a thought process, that has been colored by many of our government agencies today, the BLM being one. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through the speaker’s or writer’s views of that reality.  The situation of interest to us is the fact subjective reasoning cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.

How true has that become over the years, as we have profoundly learned there is such an anonymous situation as “BLM Speak” used quite frequently by BLM staff and within their reports, and certainly their information over the Internet.

Objective reasoning is directly contrary to subjective reasoning.  It is important to be objective when making any kind of a rational decision. In this case decisions that involve managing the WH&B program — which decides the basis of approach to manage wild horses within a reality basis (compared to political agendas, criminal intent, etc.) certainly becomes of paramount significance.

So we can then assume objective reasoning should be conducted while gathering and assimilating data, research, field studies, and other sources in order to conduct sound and correct decision making.  Bad decisions are based on bad science, alternate goals of a criminal nature, political agendas, and greed, which all are bound into subjective reasoning but portrayed as being accomplished as a necessity.  Think about this when perusing or reading BLM material, and see for yourself, especially when the term “necessity” is involved, which most often based on illegitimate facts and profound data of low quality.  Most often this term and others are simply used within a non-reality based sequence of rhetoric (a good example given in Notes below).

Easy Ways to Remember Objective and Subjective

Objective : sounds like the word object. You should be objective whenever you are discussing an object, something concrete that you can hold or touch. The facts that make up your objective statement should also be concrete, solid objects.

Subjective : is just the opposite. You can’t point to subjective subjects. They are all in your head and your past experiences. Subjective opinions are ephemeral and subject to any number of factors that can range from facts to emotions.  Manipulation of BLM budgets, information, and even their Public Relations have been noticeable based on subjective references and material.  Information given to Congress, when reading an abundant amount of testimony from BLM staff, is obviously subjective and has been for quite some time.

Examples of Objective and Subjective

Objective: scientific facts are objective as are mathematical proofs; essentially anything that can be backed up with solid data.

Subjective: opinions, interpretations, and any type of marketing presentation are all subjective.  If one follows BLM this is very noticeable.


1.Objective and subjective statements are used by speakers to get their points across.

2.Objective statements are facts that can be verified by third parties while subjective statements may or may not be entirely true as they are colored by the opinions of the speaker.

3.Objective statements are most commonly found in the hard sciences, whereas subjective statements are generally used to describe the arts.

In the end we find many questionable “things” to indeed question what it is the BLM is doing with our taxpayer money.  And who are the people making these undignified and outrageous decisions, certainly criminal in nature, obviously “not” of sound process derived from an Objective Reasoning decision making process what so ever!

“The shortest and surest way to live with honor in the world, is to be in reality what we would appear to be; and if we observe, we shall find, that all human virtues increase and strengthen themselves by the practice of them.”  — Socrates


BLM 2013 Budget Reasoning:

Note: Items such as this situation, becomes something transitory, originated within subjective reasoning, yet taxpayers are to pay for this situation — Welfare Ranching costs taxpayers $450,000,000 dollars (GAO Report) to just administer this program — many fees simply go uncollected, or so low it makes no difference anyway — as they continue to pay for grazing on public lands far below the commercial costs, welfare ranchers pay only $1.35 per AUM Unit (i.e. 1 cow 1 calf), while commercial rates reach far over $85 per AUM Unit, and those ranchers paying commercial rates remain making high profits on their sales (per GAO).  As you will see in the BLM/DOI justification statement to Congress, the $1 charged to welfare ranchers simply expects the taxpayers to cover their increasing criminal behavior in ripping off taxpayer dollars, with the BLM as an accomplice — BTW the amount taxpayers would pay, roughly estimated for the year, would be an addition $5.2 billion dollars over the estimated budget the BLM requests — BLM does not make a profit (i.e. GAO Report) and never has done so, that is simply a lie generated by BLM over the Internet, beyond subjective reasoning.

:. . . Rangeland Management Program – A $15.8 million decrease in funding is proposed to be partially offset by a 3-year pilot program to recover some of the costs of issuing grazing permits/leases permit and lease renewals through a $1 per animal unit month administrative processing fee levied upon grazing permittees. . .”


Posted by on April 25, 2013 in Uncategorized