Market Farming

["Rick Williams" <mrfarm AT frontiernet.net>]

Paul and barb wrote:
> AGAIN, anecdotal evidence and argumentation do not substitute for
> statistics and verifiable, independent research. All that stuff about
> wolves is nothing but opinion and private agenda.

Are you saying that what I discussed is not true and factual? That wolves do
not attack livestock, do not attack dogs, do not attack llamas and donkeys,
etc. ?

There is simply no question that they do this ... a lot! You seem to live in
a vacuum. Check things out a bit because these kinds of things really are
happening. Anecdotal evidence can be mistaken in some cases, such as
statistical surveys, but with concrete things like killing your dog, and
killing you next dog, etc. is NOT invalid. It is called empirical evidence.

> That blanket accusation
> that '"Many environmental groups are very clear that they not only don't
> want
> farming or ranching, but they also don't want people going into pristine
> areas any more than necessary" is not backed up with any specifics.

It is NOT a blanket accusation my friend. Ease up a bit, and realize that
what I am saying is that it IS the agenda of many environmental groups.
These would be the more extreme folks. I am not saying this about such
groups as the National Wildlife Federation of which we are members.

> All
> that sympathetic blubbering over "Janet McNally" is fake. Personally I
> don't quite see the point of reintroducing wolves in any populated areas,
> but the point is the independent research is just not there. There's an
> article on McNally's testimony at
> http://www.hometownsource.com/capitol/2000/april/0410wolf.html
> which if you
> read closely shows there's no statistical evidence to support her claims.
> The simple claim that sheep farmers' numbers are dwindling in one area
> proves nothing about wolves.

It is surely a number of reasons. But when it comes to sheep farmers, yes,
the wolves are going to make it impossible to ranch with them. Most people
would have given up a long time ago compared to Janet. If you met here you
would realize that she has grit and determination way beyond most graziers.
But please do not defame Janet. I know her in person and from many years on
Grazersedge and even going back to Graze-L.

> While you're at it, tell us how many hunters have been "attacked" by
> wolves. How many children eaten? How many pets? How much
> livestock? We want
> statistics.

At least 4 hunters have had contact as in being physically in contact. No
children eaten yet that I have heard. I think that there have been some
close calls. Many, many pets have been killed, perhaps dozens? Maybe more?
Lets find out.  And as Janet has pointed out, if she did not use the attack
animals, the dogs, and her rifle, she basically would lose ALL her sheep.
The wolves enjoy killing for the sake of killing and enjoy destroying all of
them and any other similar animal. Even with all the protections she uses,
she still loses an enormous number.

I will look for statistics and report back if I find any information. It is
not exactly something that I look for as just knowing about the habits of
wolves is enough for many of us.

There is a reason that wolves were killed off in the lower 48 you know. It
was not just that they were an inconvenience. They were a serious threat to
farming.

> And then compare those stats to the numbers of pets and
> livestock preyed on by coyotes and barn owls. I've heard more children are
> attacked by pit bulls and dobermans than by wolves. You want to ban dogs?

Small dogs may be prone to attack by coyotes and possibly owls and hawks. We
have all of them here at Misty Ridge Farm and are very careful about it when
Berry, our miniature schnauzer comes out to the farm. In fact, it is one
reason we are hesitant about having chickens again, even though Judy would
like to. We used to have chickens over 30 years ago at a very (and I mean
VERY) remote farm about 50 miles north of where we are now. And we never had
any predator problems except only a potential threat from coon and possibly
owls and hawks. Today it is very different. We almost called the farm name
Hawk Ridge or Eagle Ridge but there are so many with that name already:)

Dogs MUST, repeat MUST be kept restrained at all times in most civilized
places. Owners pay a heavy price, financially, imprisonment, and moral pain
if their animals hurt others.

> And it's likely more hunters are killed by other hunters accidentally than
> are killed by wolves--if any at all are killed by wolves.

What in the world has that got to do with wolves killing? One is accidental
and one deliberate. As far as I know, at the moment, no lower 48 hunters
have been killed by wolves. They have had those altercations I mentioned.
And that is only the beginning because the range of the wolf will return
south if they are allowed to live in these regions.

> AGAIN, the corporate anti-environmental agenda dressed up in "sheeps
> clothing"

It is impossible to prove a negative. For those who undersand this specious
debate tactic it is as if any of us asked the "when you are going to quit
beating your mistress, kind of question.

Sincerely,

Rick Williams
Misty Ridge Farm
Dairy heifers and dairy beef graziers
Viroqua, WI

www.mistyridgefarm.com