By Audrey Hudson THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Another case of "biofraud" has surfaced in Washington state, prompting lawmakers there to call for congressional intervention. Top Stories

A state fish and wildlife biologist asked taxidermist Jim Gintz for grizzly bear hair samples in March 2001, said state Rep. Bob Sump, Republican co-chairman of the Natural Resources Committee. If such a sample had been given, it could have tainted a grizzly habitat study in Washington that encompasses 3,600 square miles and, as a result, affected recreation, timber, mining, road construction and other human activities. The Washington Times reported last month that seven federal and state employees were caught submitting false samples of another threatened species in the state, the Canadian lynx. When the taxidermist read that officials used the hair of captive lynx and pelts to fix the sample, he alerted Mr. Sump that additional fraud may be occurring.

"Unfortunately, the lynx biofraud is not an isolated event but an egregious example of a serious malady that has infected environmental regulatory agencies," said Rob Gordon, director of the National Wilderness Institute.

The rest of the article is here: http://washingtontimes.com/national/20020107-98672664.htm

what do you think about this?

Talk to you later.

-- Bob in WI (bjwick@hotmail.com), January 07, 2002

Answers

So, this surprises you? We've been complaining about this issue (ESA) and many others for decades. The enviro wackos, I politely call them, have spent many years worming their way inside all bureaus of federal and state govts. Agenda 21 and NWO are not fiction, but fact. IMHO, it is they who wish to remove all humans from the backcountry, from the countrysides and place the animals above all else.

-- matt johnson (wyo_cowboy_us@yahoo.com), January 07, 2002.

Easy, Matt, this sort of behaviour could just as easily be used on the other side to "determine" that a larger, more stable population existed than really did, thereby "unendangering" species prematurely, for the sake of hunting, fishing, development or other useage issues. I know many "wise use" folks who wouldn't hesitate to do just that if they thought they could get away with it. He who is without sin, and all that.

-- Soni (thomkilroy@hotmail.com), January 07, 2002.

Actually the strange thing I find is, that

A: we actually think we need GOV to tell us to be kind to animals and that

B: It seems it is only the Republicans that are screaming foul (fowl) and none of WA reps or senators are. Hmm... Something smells fishy

Weebus from Washington

-- Laura (lauramleek@yahoo.com), January 07, 2002.

Gosh, the way I heard it (second-hand, I'll admit) was that the people planting the lynx fur were doing so as a kind of scientific control, to see whether lynx fur would actually be picked up and reported by the study if it were, in fact, in the collected samples. So they seeded a few specific samples with "known" lynx fur to see if it would actually get reported as lynx, or possibly blown off as bobcat or some other fur source. Am I being redundant? I'm trying to be clear.

-- Laura Jensen (lauraj@seedlaw.com), January 07, 2002.

Laura,

I'm afraid that if you believe their reason for doing this I would like to talk to you about this property I have for sale. Of course they are going to say whatever it takes to get them off the hook. What other option do they have? My biggest problem is the fact that they lie and NO ONE AT ALL does anything about it. A few whine on the sidelines, but nobody in government has the guts to take on these liars. The more they get away with, the more they will be emboldened the next time. Those involved should be dismissed immediately. Any other business would send them all packing asap. Why not our government?

Talk to you later.

-- Bob in WI (bjwick@hotmail.com), January 07, 2002.

I'd have to side with Laura on this one

Laura

-- Laura (lauramleek@yahoo.com), January 07, 2002.

The base reason was to find out if the lab could determine whether the fur was from a lynx or another furbearer. The lab does DNA testing and it had previously undergone similar testing the month before. But that's not the point.....it's where they found the lynx fur that was in question. There aren't any lynx in those two national forests, however, the bunny huggers would like to have lynx if only to keep the loggers, hunters, campers and fishermen out. It's their agenda to close out everyone, except themselves from using our national forests.

And yes, if this had been done by a private business and not govt agencies, someone would be cooling his heels in jail. I live in grizz habitat & it's been grizz habitat since the earth was formed. Yet to others, it's not. There isn't a year that goes by when someone is attacked, mauled or partially eaten by a grizz. Following NPS/USFS guidelines, the animal is tranked, hauled off to another section of Yellowstone or Glacier and marked. If the offending bear is spotted again (doesn't have to do anything) in nearby campgrounds, it's shot and killed on sight. It's this mentality that has caused irreprable harm to the animals. While on one side of the coin (toss) the bunny huggers want to save all the animals, they are first to cause the death of a great bear in their zealous stupidity. Leave the bears alone and get rid of the campgrounds. Problem solved.

-- matt johnson (wyo_cowboy_us@yahoo.com), January 07, 2002.

Matt,

Thanks for saying what I was trying to say, only much better.

Talk to you later.

-- Bob in WI (bjwick@hotmail.com), January 08, 2002.