| WOLF MEDIA 11/24/2009 Two news items folks. 1) 100 Heartbeats recently came out by Jeff Corwin. http://www.amazon.com/100-Heartbeats-Earths-Endangered-Sp ecies/dp/1605298476/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258 921103&sr=1-1 Although reviews have been positive, it really isn't as good as everyone claims to be. Why you ask? Well the problem is is that he supports alot of wolf destruction in his book and ignores what really is causing the problems of wolves. I.E.: pg. 209 -- "When a wolf continues to prey in livestock after repeated attempts to deter it, management does become necessary. "It's better for all parties, including wolves, if chronic killers are taken out." -- Smith [Doug Smith] says "A big part of wolf recovery is engendering local support. Funny considering both abhor hunting which USFWS didn't mind and illegally. Think about this, the book the solely blames ranchers for intolerance of wolves, yet the author is in support of wolf management and the murderous and criminal USFWS. In fact here is another such case. 'In 2008, we saw what could happen when wolves don't have sufficient protection. After the gray wolf population in the Northern Rockies was classified as fully recovered in March, 110 wolves were hunted and killed.' -- pg. 209 100 Heartbeats continues to support the machinations of the oppression of wolves because of passages like this: 'Wildlife management can be successful and beneficial to all parties when it's placed in the knowledgeable hands of professionals. Wolf conservation efforts can succeed. The Red Wolf is thriving proof of that.' --pg. 211 That totally contradicts the pg. 209 quote above. The Gray Wolf program was a complete failure. Wolves are hunted and the wolves were illegally delisted. Which the USFWS did for political reasons and ignored rationale. But what rationale is there in stripping the rights of wolves because their population is a small amount? None. If we took the rights away from people because the population was too big, which it currently is and growing, people would be really furious. How can things be a success when murderers like Carolyn Sime and Ed Bangs who deny Non-Lethal Methods and Predator Friendly Ranching, and cause wolf deaths in hunts? Corwin panders to the USFWS and if he actually remembered, Red Wolves were in this book because they are in danger of vanishing. Also captivity is no guarantee of survival. Oddly enough, Doug Smith is quoted in this book as saying that "Wolves' future depends on humans attitudes." Well I can tell you that if the attitudes of the dangerous hypocrite Doug Smith, Jeff Corwin, and others don't change, they will doom the wolves. Which will doom us. Final rating: -5/5 100 Hearbeats? More like 0. Especially since the USFWS is supported in the book. Along with the USFWS, this book is supported by none other than Rodger Schlickeisen President and CEO of Defenders. It's getting to be a more dangerous world. The groups that are also in this book are like WWF who supports animal testing for example. http://www.wickedwildlifefund.com/test.html And the group that uncovered this, PETA, supports dog killing shelters. http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2009/11/19/peta-loves-dog-k illers/ Yet this group doesn't like Michael Vick... You get the idea. We need groups and authors and true supporters with true hearts. Dedicated to bringing peace between humans and nature and a peaceful co-existence. This book totally shows things are about to get more difficult in that regard. 2) Miley Cyrus, the idol of young girls who watch her show Hannah Montana on Disney Channel, recently said this about the Twilight movie New Moon. Miley Cyrus: I "Don't Want Anything to Do" With 'New Moon' I don't like the wolf that pops out of the screen when I'm watching my TV at night. I don't like it. I don't want anything to do with it. I don't like the shirts. I don't like any of it." http://wonderwall.msn.com/music/miley-cyrus-i-dont-want-anyth ing-to-do-with...-new-moon-1526557.story?GT1=28135 Cyrus' being a role model has been questioned constantly by parents and other logically minded individuals. Here is another reason. She fears wolves, and as you know, fear leads to hate and suffering. Her negatively stereotyping wolves is a terrible thing indeed when so many children look up to her. 3) Sarah Palin's book Going Rogue has been out for a little while and it's definitely a book to pass. The book for one, is more of a revenge book. Kind of the idea of the ideology of you hurt me, so I hurt you, is the focus of this book. It for a biography, is poorly designed and written. Of course that is not surprising given the fact that the book was 'written' in four months. 4 months? That must have taken alot of staff to write it for her. The book also has no contents section, no index section, no sources to cite her so called 'evidence' to prove her seriously messed up views. And yet people bought it by the millions if not more even before it came out. She continues to gain more popularity even when she continues to support the destruction of nature and more to further the economy. Palin fakes to support nature, and says development that would harm the environment would work well together. Other horrendous ideas appear in the book as well. Here are alot of her quotes from the book. pg. 126 -- 'As a mayor I understood the communities' dependence on oil's economic contributions; as a lover of the land I understood as well the environmentalists' and Alaskan Natives' concerns.' This isn't true. She is a conniver who later in the book attacks environmentalists with utter contempt, insults, and cruelty. In otherwords it supports what we have been talking about her. pg. 134 -- 'If any vegans came over for dinner, I could whip them up a salad, then explain my philosophy on being a carnivore: If God had not intended for us to eat animals, how come He made them out of meat?' If your guests come over for dinner Palin and they are vegan, you should just respect them as a guest, serve them a salad, and be done with it. Pushing your agenda like that on a dinner guest is rude and inconsiderate. And there is the idea too that humans were not meant to be predators at all. Humans curiously over-breed and destroy that which it needs to survive. Oddly enough this is like cancer. Or since humans constantly over-breed were humans once just herbivores and wanted to be predators in an attempt to twist what their role was and dominate the world? Who knows, but just because people can do something, doesn't mean they should. The old adage, 'If someone jumps off a bridge, would you do it?, comes into play.' Here is more: pg. 133-144 -- 'As governor, though, hunting, was an issue, I would face pressure from Hollywood to halt hunting, ban guns and end our state's wildlife practices, such as controlling predators. I said no to all that nonsense: gun laws would destroy the Second Amendment and as a life-long member of the NRA (Alaska has the highest NRA membership capita in the nation), I had plenty of backup when telling Hollywood liberals what I thought of their asinine plans to ban guns. And we had to control predators such as wolves, that were decimating the moose and caribou herds that feed our communities. One animal rights group recruited a perky, pretty celebrity to attack our 'scientifically' controlled, state-managed wolf-control program. It was ironic that she opposed using guns to kill predators that would cause Native people to starve, but apparently not opposed to taking movie roles in which she'd use guns to kill predatory people. Outside of Alaska are often clueless about our reliance on natural food sources. (You know you're an Alaskan when at least twice a year your kitchen doubles as a meat-processing plant.) They don't use common sense in considering why our biologists need responsible tools for abundant game management. But as the ninety-year-old Alaska Native leader Sydney Hummington told Todd, "Nowadays, common sense is an endangered species." First of all the Second Amendment has been misinterpreted for the longest time. It was intended for militias in the early formation of the U.S. to defend themselves should the government get to be tyrannical like Britain's. Ironically the U.S. became the same over time. I digress. But even if you have the Second Amendment which has been changed, and the NRA with their obsession of guns, what possible difference would that make against a government who has access to nukes, tanks, bunker busting bombs, and stealth technology? Sarah Palin also didn't do her research and sided with corrupt interests. Predators in the wild don't breed as often as prey species. Otherwise you would see all around the world, predators out-breeding their prey. People like Sarah Palin don't need to hunt and take prey from predators who actually need it. She has no proof of her false claims about the need of the destruction of wolves and other predators, not that it would be right. But we do. Predators determine the health of nature and you need to read this report about it: http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/23730/ So don't listen to Palin, wolves are needed for the survival for all. Especially the Natives who depend on food there. Not regular residents and hunters who can go to grocery stores and buy their own food. Palin also didn't bother to cover all the facts. Which we will do so now. The actress who came out in support of the wolves is Ashley Judd, and the group that was with her was Defenders of Wildlife. http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/06/alaska.judd.palin/inde x.html Judd doesn't appear in gun-toting films all the time for instance. Her first acting gig was on Star Trek the Next Generation. She was in Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood with the big star Sandra Bullock. Again Palin didn't do her homework. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0279778/fullcredits#cast Or use her common sense on the subject. Those who protect the environment and seek peace between humans and animals only seek peace. Those who want to control nature wage war and death. Ultimately in the end this book is a wash. She claims to support alternative agency, but still still wants to "drill, baby, drill," and uses the excuse to say that if we don't drill, people will suffer in other countries because of that. Well, all the more reason to break from all together right? And if our country did develop these forms of energy years ago we wouldn't be where we are now at, would we? Sarah Palin's book scratches the surface of her life, then just attacks anyone and everyone she doesn't like. Or disagrees with for the whole book and has no proof whatsoever for why. The ironic part she said, 'Stand now. Stand together. Stand for what is right.' in this book, on pg. 395. Though this is true, Palin is standing for barbarous ideals, which are anything but right. If the writer was a man, this book also would have been promptly dismissed and laughed at. Oh wait, it wouldn't matter because most people tend to believe what is printed, regardless of whether it is correct or not. As a result, this book is a dud and shouldn't be read. Spread the word and review it at places like Amazon.com as well as Barnes and Noble. Our final thoughts? A Url. http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20091119/capt.c14f98d223ba44928ece 9fdea9a3b529.palin_cover_shot_ny129.jpg Yeah, we thought so too. Final Review: -5/5 Mike Wagner Founder and Director of Heart of the Wolf Organization http://www.heartofthewolf.org http://www.heartofthewolf.org/WolfNews.htm http://www.heartofthewolf.org/WolfMusic.htm |

