January 19, 2018

Once Upon a Time, Long Before Dunkin’ Donuts

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

*Editor’s Note* – It sure is a blessing for me to have someone who cares enough about our future that has become my volunteer researcher. He provides me with tons of relevant information that I use in various ways and I sure do appreciate it. The information provided in this article of history was sent to me by my “volunteer researcher.”

A reader on this website this morning left a comment. Part of what the reader said was: “No, there is no proof of that _____, it is an assumption that it worked.

And as usual, trying to find the minority of examples doesn’t change the truth.”(emphasis added)

I got thinking about this, along with some information that I was sent in which I had already formulated some basic structure for an article today, and surmised what the reader might have meant by “minority of examples.” That’s when it came to me that what I intended to compose today about predator attacks and human encounters, particularly black bears, describes to a “T” what “minority of examples” might mean.

To set the stage, let me say that often in reading, researching and writing about wildlife, the outdoors, environment, etc., I find many are guilty of attempting to prove their position or perspective on an issue by invoking an anomaly or simply repeating an unproven hypothesis. A good writer/journalist will work hard to avoid such embarrassing displays of ignorance and laziness and yet, we have to deal with the ignorance and effort of those wishing to bolster their idealism and/or animal worship, in some cases.

In dealing with predators, it becomes a difficult task for a couple of major reasons. Probably the first and foremost is the level of power that exists from abusing the existence of animals for political gain. It makes sense really, once you gain a good sense of the constitutional makeup of people, especially in the United States today. Americans love animals to a fault. I far too often find that their infatuation with animals is perverse and have often written about it. And this leads me to the other major reason it’s hard to deal with issues involving predators; people have at or near cult worship with certain species.

Today’s topic deals with black bears. For a myriad of perverse and ignorant reasons, too many people seem to want to protect large predators. I think that over time, brainwashing fascists have convinced people things about wild animals that aren’t true because of the political power gains. Convinced of these false beliefs, they perpetuate the nonsense, all of which is mostly based on the programmed affinity with animals in our culture.

The “True Believers” (if you haven’t read the book you can get it here.) then become the useful idiots who are extremely easy to convince of anything.

Those who want to end hunting, trapping and fishing, are often times not the same group of “True Believers.” No, “True Believers” become convinced that only evil people hunt, fish and trap and that because of that, wildlife if being destroyed. The anti-human fascists who are looking, for political reasons, to end hunting, fishing and trapping also believe and teach that humans are evil destroyers of Mother Earth and need to be stopped.

In this impious, anti-human attack on sanity, reason and truth, lies are commonplace within a society that has been programmed to believe that the end is justified by any means.

An example of such can be found in debates in Maine or any place where the useful idiots rhythmically chant the mantra of the anti-human fascists. It becomes an all out effort to protect the black bear (or pick your favorite predator).

One aspect of the debate involves the issue of bear behavior when subjected to humans and their surroundings. Common sense, grounded in fact, science and history, says that when large predators, like the black bear, become too numerous, it can cause conflicts with humans. In addition to the number of bears in a state’s population, the issues of natural food availability, health and length of hibernation play a role in how often bears and humans meet up.

In addition, people are warned not to feed bears and education efforts are underway in many states to teach people how to make their homes less attractive to intruding bears.

Aside from the hibernation and availability of natural food, man can control feeding wildlife and populations. Population control has historically, and with amazing success, been accomplished over several decades with regulated human hunting harvest.

Unfortunately, the anti-human fascists want to put a stop to hunting, trapping and fishing, not necessarily to offer any protection to the wildlife but to build on their wanton desire for political power and control over people.

In Maine, the Humane Society of the United States (anti-human fascists) intends a citizens’ initiative to end bear hunting and trapping. Victory in this effort will destroy a nationally recognized black bear management plan and destroy a valuable American heritage, resulting in loss of rights and the ability to express those liberties.

Those fighting against this anti-human move argue, in part, that ending bear hunting will create a seriously increased number of human and bear encounters; a real public safety issue. The anti-humans state that hunting, or actually any form of wildlife management is unnecessary; that Mother Nature can make it all nirvana. This, of course, is not true.

One tool that in Maine has become a necessity to keep the annual harvest rate of black bears high enough to stabilize a rapidly growing population of black bears, is the use of bait to lure a bear into a shooting area for hunters. The geographic make consisting of the mountains and dense forests has forced the fish and game department to come up with these tactics in order to keep bear populations at socially acceptable levels, i.e. to reduce the prospects of a public safety issue.

The anti-humans argue that baiting bears is inhumane and that baiting the bears in areas where the creatures live, is acclimating them to humans and this action will increase human/bear encounters in populated areas. This also is not true. Feeding bears in your back yard is acclimating bears to humans but baiting them deep in the forest does not. Repeating such nonsense is akin to the use of “minority examples” to substantiate a false claim.

Some of the lies are intended to make us believe that any problems people might have with bears is caused by the mere existence of human beings. After all, in their eyes, us humans are evil. Some have gone so far as to state that if it were not for the baiting of bears there would be no human/bear encounters.

Historically, not only can that not be proven, but it can reveal quite the opposite. Bear baiting in Maine was not implemented until recent years, certainly long before 1945.

Sent to me were a couple of pages from a book, “Nine Mile Bridge: Three Years in the Maine Woods”, written by Helen Hamlin, the first edition in 1945. The pages included below for readers to enjoy, account for the many encounters humans were having with black bears in Maine prior to 1945 and long before bear baiting and Dunkin’ Donuts.

cover1

copyright2 - Copy.ngm

part3

part4

part5

Share
  • somsai

    I’ve heard good and bad about the taste. I’ve never shot one so I don’t know. What do they taste like in Maine?

    • Idaho_Roper

      This I will tell you. The bears in North Idaho are some of the finest eating wild game there is. Their diet is very heavy toward huckleberries, elderberries and other vegetative matter, although they eat their share of elk calves. If you get the chance, give them a try.

      • somsai

        I hope to get that chance, and I will give them a try. I need to eat an animal a few times to really get a taste for it. I’ve eaten many unusual kinds of game and in unusual ways, so I’m not picky at all. I’ll probably be putting in for a bear tag every chance I get from now on, for conservation reasons as much as anything. I hear the fat stinks when you render it, but produces a very high quality lard. Baking snobs like it for crusts and pastries.

    • TRemington

      Bears in Maine for eating are probably not much different than anywhere else. The taste is driven by what the bears are eating, season to season. In addition, isn’t it always about how the meat is prepared and cooked, etc.? Along with preferred taste? Some like bear steaks, others prefer all sausage. Other, not at all.
      I am preparing a short story about a bear hunt in Maine, that is a bit comical but will also point out the quality of meat, the result of high stress. This article should appear next week sometime.

      • somsai

        Thanks, look forward to reading. Good article by the way, just came to the eating part at the end. Good luck with your hunting issues back there too. I had to get a refund on two of my tags this year as I couldn’t take time to hunt the part of the state they were in. One was a bear tag. I bought it in the remote chance that I found one on the gut pile, and therefore to increase the calf survival rate in the spring. No bait or hounds here. Lots of predation by bear and cats.

  • Idaho_Roper

    Huh….interesting little stories. I am not sure what to think of them because they do contain many inaccuracies, The old fable of a skinned bear looking like a man, I have skinned plenty of bear and it would take a real want to see a man hanging there. I have also been around plenty of bear meat, and given a diet of berries and other vegetative matter, sans sage, it doesn’t “smell’ in a negative way. One could say the same of any meat, they all have an aroma, the worse in my opinion is the favorite fodder of the anti-red meat fans, chicken. It’s a good thing most city folk don’t have to butcher their own yard bird as I doubt most of them would touch the stuff afterward. But, then again, antelope feeding on sage have a very pungent aroma and do many deer, but tasty they are. To each their own I guess.

    Bears are at times comical characters, but human they are not. And given the right circumstances, they will kill you dead. To forget that fact and consider them playful comics is a mistake that can be the end of you.

    I also know plenty of dogs that will devour bear meat, and to be honest, that is even a new wives tale for me. The stories do point out that human/bear encounters happen, but it seems the author attempts to impart a little to much Walt Disney into downplaying them. Something that still occurs today from the “animals are wonderful and talk to us” crowd.

    On another note, there is perhaps no bigger misconception from the anti-human, anti-hunting crowd that the lies and tales they peddle concerning the baiting of bears. What they do not like is that utilized correctly it is one of the successful methods of harvesting bears in a very manageable way. But, it is not, throw out a can of sardines any ol’ place and every bear for a hundred miles comes running. A bait set where bears do not already inhabit AND feel comfortable will result in exactly zero bears coming to a bait, especially during daylight hours. It’s just not going to happen.

    They also continually ignore the advantages of baiting. Done correctly it reduces the harvest of sows with cubs. Thus reducing the situation of orphan cubs left to fend for themselves before they may be ready. For every bear harvested, in an active bait, many more are provided nutrition at two critical times of the year. Spring, when they are coming out of winter with little or no food, and in the fall, when they are trying to put on the pounds to survive the upcoming winter. And perhaps most importantly, it keeps bear numbers in check.

    The only reason these lunatics claim to support the ‘spot and stalk’ method of bear hunting is that one, it is hugely unsuccessful and two, it keeps form them having to admit they are really just anti-hunting. Support the least efficient method, it is a ruse. When that is all that is left, they will come after that too.

    On a side note. I have come across 6 illegal baits in my years bear hunting. 5 of those were set by IDFG. It seems the biologists studying bears don’t seem to think they need to be so responsible as to not set baits to close to main roads. I guess they just don’t like working that hard……

    • GoldDust

      This New Age Brand of Environmentalism is 100% all about ending hunting period and any lie justifies the means to that end. Even whining about more gun laws. The Judas’s are everywhere speaking out both sides of their lying mouths. The Maughan site is crawling with these cretins. “Gun owners” and “hunters” in bed with anti guns and hunting advocates seeking “compromises” for “peaceful consensus” are nothing but Judas’s.

      • Idaho_Roper

        When one is talking of rights and needs, compromise is nothing more than surrender. One can not truly have consensus with a tyrant; one must either defeat the tyrant or submit to them……there is no middle ground. And you have very accurately labeled those whom try to convince others that one can compromise.

    • GoldDust

      HA HA, yeah if they had to kill and clean their own chickens they’d probably faint.