WSU blows off Promised Settlement Date with Dr. Robert Wielgus

protect washington wolves, protect the wolves, Dr. Robert Wielgus



WSU blows off Promised Settlement Date with Dr. Robert Wielgus


For Immediate Release: December 28, 2017

Questions can be directed to:

Dr. Robert Wielgus:  Contact Info can be obtained from Protect The Wolves™

Protect The Wolves™ (530) 377-3031   [email protected]

Patricia Herman President Protect The Wolves™

Roger Dobson Director Protect The Wolves™

To Begin with WSU ‘s Dean of Agriculture, Ron Mittelhamer conspired and colluded with wdfw’s wolf policy lead Donny Marorello and Republican Representative Joel Kretz to mislead and lie to the public , the WAG, and the Washington legislature by defaming and discrediting internationally renowned predator ecologist professor Robert Wielgus of Wsu.
Wielgus reported that his legislatively funded research on wolf livestock depredations could be easily avoided in Wa by keeping livestock away from known wolf dens.
Those results were not what Dean Mittlehamer, wdfw Donny Martorello, or Representative Kretz wanted to be reported. So they destroyed the career and laboratory of WSU Professor Wielgus by charging Wielgus with 4 phony charges ( fiscal misappropriation, illegal use of state resources, illegal political lobbying, and scientific misconduct) and denouncing him as a liar and fraud.
  WSU has defamed Wielgus, Wielgus was subsequently exonerated of All 4 charges. Needless to say  WSU has continued targeting Wielgus . Since then his reputation and research laboratory were destroyed and his research salary was withheld and withdrawn by WSU.

All of this comes at the tail end of a 4 month wait, costing Dr. Wielgus even more undue stress and possibly losing his home. Peer initially gave them a 60-day window to review our complaint and decide how they’d like to proceed! Adam Carlesco was told that WSU would like to avoid litigation, and therefore would get back to them ASAP with an idea of a settlement agreement. Guess what People WSU’s  60-day window has passed. WSU asked for a few more days since the attorney handling the case passed away, so Peer out of compassion for their loss gave them some additional time.  Sadly WSU does not appear to care about the undue Stress, heartache, financial loss, and  all of the other drains on Dr. Wielguses health.

WSU’s new attorney got up to speed and claimed he’d get them a counter offer, but then they received nothing by the 22nd as promised which coming from an AG influenced organization isn’t a total surprise. From what Adam understands, the Assistant AG now on the case is a straight-shooter, our local counsel has worked with him and say he’s an honest and good guy – so that implies the issue is WSU and state administrators.

So, in a nutshell this puts Wielgus/ Peer in a tough spot. They have a mediation date set for early Feb, but given that they have not even received a counter offer by the promised date, they are not sure it’s going to be productive anyway. Rob is upset, as is Peer, as are We. So Peer will be filing this suit next week when local counsel gets back into the office.

Nothing should hamper or prevent negotiations while this case sits in federal court, unless WSU continues playing games with Human Lives. Peer conceivably could do both mediation and settlement, however with filing in Federal Court Next week  WSU will know that they are not playing games and hopefully they’ll straighten up since Peer knows they do not want the court precedent or continuing bad press that this case would bring. Protect The Wolves will continue to post on them and their underhanded treatment of Dr. Wielgus until he is vindicated as WSU should have done straight up from the very beginning.

Additionally, since they missed Peer’s deadline, with no remorse it would appear to a prudent individual. Peer will be working with the American Assn. of University Professors (AAUP) to draft up a resolution calling for a vote of “no-confidence” for the administrators running WSU and its Ag influenced school. Given the support the AAUP has had in its previous resolutions against the administration they believe that this could make a big difference while at the same time gather the attention of a number of higher education press outlets – the kind of media that WSU wants to avoid. Combined with the reporter from NY Times Magazine snooping around on this story, it seems that WSU is in for another, bigger black eye and Protect The Wolves™ will stick with this story to help end the Influence on a so called publicly funded Institution.

Our Children as well as their Children need to know when they choose a publicly funded school that they in fact will receive fair treatment. After all, day in and day out We all try to teach our children to be honest upstanding citizens.  It is high time that WSU’s Administrators as well as Washington States Elected Officials are held accountable.  At this point in time, with the influence placed on WSU by Kretz to Throw Wielgus under the bus, It will take  a whole lot of back peddling to get this Black eye off their Faces! Considering Joel Kretz appears to have Violated Washington State LAW. By violating this particular RCW he appears to be guilty of criminal harassment under WA law. RCW 9A.46.020.  by issuing indirect death threats against Dr. Robert Wielgus.



Thank You Capital Press for pointing out the Cost of Welfare Ranchers

oppose welfare ranching, protect the wolves

Thank You Capital Press for pointing out the

Cost of Welfare Ranchers

It is beyond time that we wean Welfare Ranchers from the teet, and keep them out of our National Forests.

In 2014, $143.6 million was directly appropriated to the grazing program (an amount that’s been consistent over the last 10 years). Some quick math reveals that, on average, public lands ranchers paid just $376 for what cost taxpayers $6,838 last year.

Please Consider Joining Protect The Wolves™ Movement to end Welfare Ranchers receiving Taxpayer subsidies.

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife spent $15,097 to kill a wolf last summer in the Sherman pack, about one-tenth the amount that was invested in keeping the pack from attacking livestock, according to a department report released Dec. 15.

WDFW paid $134,170 for range-riders and other preventive measures in the pack’s territory in northeast Washington. Conservation Northwest, an environmental group, contributed another $12,880 for range-riders.

The report does not tally costs or losses incurred by ranchers, but some of the state’s spending was dependent on producers employing additional safeguards.

WDFW might have spent more on deterrence, but it ran out to money to enter into cost-sharing agreements with ranchers, according to the report.

WDFW wolf policy coordinator Donny Martorello said Monday that there is no way to know whether more spending could have prevented the pack from killing calves.

“Certainly, we’d like to be able to help as many individuals with the uptake of those non-lethal tools,” Martorello said. “The demand is starting to exceed the resources.”

Washington has a growing wolf population, particularly in northeast Washington. The report details efforts to safeguard up to 1,300 cow-calf pairs on 10 grazing allotments that overlapped the Sherman pack’s territory in Ferry County. Chronic depredations led the WDFW to shoot one of two wolves in the pack Sept. 1.

The pack formed in 2016 when a female left the Profanity Peak pack and paired with a male wolf. The female was hit and killed by a vehicle March 20, 2017. By the time the grazing season neared, the surviving male, who was wearing a radio collar, was traveling with another wolf.

The two wolves moved into territory occupied the summer before by the Profanity Peak pack, which was linked to 15 depredations in 2016. The department responded by shooting seven of the pack’s wolves. The lone surviving adult left the territory last spring, according to WDFW.

Before the grazing season began, five range-riders hired by WDFW began patrolling the grazing allotments to look for wolves. Patrols increased after WDFW determined June 12 that the Sherman pack had attacked a calf.

The pack attacked three more calves between July 12 and Aug. 23.

WDFW Director Jim Unsworth authorized killing one wolf Aug. 25. Initially, the department hoped to trap and euthanize a wolf. But the pack attacked a fifth calf Aug. 28 several miles from where WDFW was trapping.

WDFW shot the male wolf from a helicopter Sept. 1. The helicopter cost $9,868. WDFW staff time and travel made up the rest of the operation’s cost.

Martorello said the department believes wolves are still overlapping the grazing allotments.

“We have had reports of wolves in the area. I would fully expect there to be wolf activity,” he said.

In addition to hiring range-riders, WDFW spent $35,000 to help four producers pay for preventive measures. At least four other producers were interested in the cost-sharing agreements, but the department had exhausted the funds, according to the report.

WDFW also killed two wolves last summer in the Smackout pack in Stevens County. WDFW policy allows for possibly culling a pack after three depredations within 30 days or four depredations within 10 months.

Source: Washington spent $15,000 to shoot wolf, much more to avoid it – Washington – Capital Press


The Killing Agency

Many of us have now come to know that Wildlife Services is just another name for killing services. Wildlife Services is a century-old agency of the United States Department of Agriculture with a reputation for strong-arm tactics and secrecy. It is beloved by many farmers and ranchers and hated in equal measure by conservationists, for the same basic reason: It routinely kills our essential predators as well as an astounding assortment of other animals — 3.2 million of them last year — because ranchers and farmers regard them as pests.

Wildlife Services is a separate entity, in a different federal agency, from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, whose main goal is wildlife conservation. Wildlife Services is interested in control only appeasing the livestock industry. Killing is not a solution and we have seen that all the research done has proven to be true. Below you will see a very good article that goes into depth about what Wildlife Services does.

Should we be paying this agency to kill millions of animals and mismanage funds? It’s time we let Protect the Wolves hold them accountable. ~L.G

The Killing Agency

Coyotes hunt rodents, not cattle and deer. Photo by Tom Knudson.

They call it Wildlife Services. But the last thing on Earth that this branch of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture is serving is wildlife.

A remarkable series of articles by Tom Knudson in The Sacramento Bee (they deserve a Pulitzer) uncovers what goes on at the secretive agency, whose main constituents would seem to be the ranching industry.

Part One opens with the story of a Wildlife Services agent accidentally trapping a majestic golden eagle in a neck snare and being told by his boss to bury the evidence.

The newspaper lists some of its findings:

• With steel traps, wire snares and poison, agency employees have accidentally killed more than 50,000 animals since 2000 that were not problems, including federally protected golden and bald eagles; more than 1,100 dogs, including family pets; and several species considered rare or imperiled by wildlife biologists.

• Since 1987, at least 18 employees and several members of the public have been exposed to cyanide when they triggered spring-loaded cartridges laced with poison meant to kill coyotes. They survived – but 10 people have died and many others have been injured in crashes during agency aerial gunning operations over the same time period.

• A growing body of science has found the agency’s war against predators, waged to protect livestock and big game, is altering ecosystems in ways that diminish biodiversity, degrade habitat and invite disease.

This graphic illustrates how Wildlife Services goes about its work:


The agency claims to try using “nonlethal control” first, but says there are emergencies that call for the killing.

“If we can use nonlethal control first, we usually do it,” said William Clay, deputy administrator of Wildlife Services. “The problem is, generally when we get a call, it’s because farmers and ranchers are having livestock killed immediately. They are being killed daily. Our first response is to try to stop the killing and then implement nonlethal methods.”

What’s apparently given no consideration by the agency is that all of this carnage and destruction is taking place because of two highly invasive species: humans and their cows. Nature is being sacrificed to the beef industry.

In all, more than 150 species have been killed by mistake by Wildlife Services traps, snares and cyanide poison since 2000, records show. A list could fill a field guide. Here are some examples:

Armadillos, badgers, great-horned owls, hog-nosed skunks, javelina, pronghorn antelope, porcupines, great blue herons, ruddy ducks, snapping turtles, turkey vultures, long-tailed weasels, marmots, mourning doves, red-tailed hawks, sandhill cranes and ringtails.

And family pets.


Maggie, a border collie-Irish setter mix belonging to the McCurtain family, died when her spine was crushed by a vise-like “body-grip” trap set close to their home in suburban Oregon by Wildlife Services.

“Never once did anyone come to us and apologize,” Denise McCurtain said. “It was like they pretended it didn’t happen.”

In Part Two, Tom Knudson describes the fool’s errand of Wildlife Services setting out to protect wild mule deer from coyotes. But nature has had millions of years to figure out what makes for a healthy eco-system, and humans basically are clueless. Their efforts simply create more problems.

Kill too many coyotes and you open a Pandora’s box of disease-carrying rodents, meadow-munching rabbits, bird-eating feral cats, and, over time, smarter, more abundant coyotes. You also can sentence the deer you are trying to help to slow death by starvation.

There is a widespread perception that predators are the root of all evil and I’m tired of it,” said [Kelly] Stewart [of the University of Nevada]. “More often than not, if you have predation on a mule deer population, you’re going to have a healthier population.”

The numbers are staggering.

While fewer bobcats are killed today, the numbers of three other major predators shot, trapped and snared by the agency have risen. In 1970, agency employees killed 73,100 coyotes, 400 black bears, 120 mountain lions. By 2011, the tally had climbed to 83,200 coyotes (up 14 percent), 565 black bears (up 41 percent) and 400 mountain lions (up 230 percent).

In fact, the more coyotes you kill, the more you end up with. The smarter ones survive and you end up with an enhanced species: the super-coyote.

In any case, a recent study in Wildlife Monographs reports that coyotes rarely prey on deer. They’re much more interested in mice and rabbits. Kill the coyotes, and the rodent population rises.

Tom Wasley, a deer biologist, has tried to explain to Wildlife Services the futility of humans trying to control wildlife.

“I’ve been told my analysis is a morale breaker, that they don’t like me because I’m doing objective analysis,” he said. “The director told me he’s got a tough time keeping his guys’ spirits up when they read what they’re doing has yet to demonstrate any measurable benefit.”

In Part Three, Tom Knudson writes that the environmental group WildEarth Guardians has filed suit against Wildlife Services in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, asking that the agency’s activities be halted until it prepares a new, more comprehensive environmental impact statement. The suit also calls for a halt to its aerial gunning of predators in federally designated wilderness areas.

It says the agency’s 1994 document analyzes environmental impacts on only 17 species. “Fast-forward to 2010 when Wildlife Services killed over 5 million animals, representing a total of approximately 300 species,” the lawsuit says.

It also alleges that Wildlife Services violated the Wilderness Act in Nevada by conducting aerial gunning operations in federally designated wilderness areas that are off-limits to most human activities.

This is why Ranchers are after USFS and BLM Grazing then are referred to as welfare Ranchers

Cattle, Destroy our ecosystems that are necessary for our wildlife to survive!

BLM and Forest Service Announce 2017 Grazing Fee. The Federal grazing fee for 2017 will be $1.87 per animal unit month (AUM) for public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management and $1.87 per head month (HM) for lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service. The 2016 public land grazing fee was $2.11.

When you compare BLM per month to rates like these… then instead of being raised they get dropped more than a Quarter per month per head…….Who gets to pay the difference? The Taxpayer foots the Balance of the Bill….

USFS and BLM need to start charging Comparable Rates and take the burden off the Tax Payer.

Pasture rent is an expense that most cattle producers negotiate on a yearly basis and it can fluctuate based on competition from other grazers. This year cash rent pasture rates averaged $12.50/acre nationally, down $0.50/acre from last year and $1.50/acre lower than 2015. Rental rates in 2013-14 stayed at $12/acre and in 2012 were down to $11.50/acre, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data.

Still, it begs the question where can a cattle producer or livestock grazer find the best deal on grazing? And where is land in the highest demand for grazing?

The most expensive county to rent pasture in 2017 is Snohomish County, Washington where reported cash rents were $128/acre. The cheapest county to rent pasture in this year is Culberson County, Texas where reported cash rents were $0.60/acre.

The only other county with $100/acre or higher rent was Chester County, Pennsylvania at $113/acre. Of the 50 highest priced pasture rent counties in the country, Iowa has 39% of the counties in the top 50.

Forty-nine of the 50 lowest pasture cash rent counties are located in western states with rocky or desert terrain like Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, Wyoming and Utah, with prices being $3/acre or lower. Lewis County, West Virginia was the only county east of the Mississippi River to rank in the top 50 lowest, tied with Glasscock County, Texas and Weston County, Wyoming.

Source: Where Does it Cost the Most and Least to Rent Pasture? | Drovers

Protect The Wolves

Facebook By Weblizar Powered By Weblizar

Twitter Feed