August 27, 2014

One Person’s Dispute Over Scientific Fact Does Not a Scientific Fact Make

God, I’m confused this morning. Thank God, we can still submit letters to editors of local and national newspapers. And, thank God, he gave me a brain to understand nonsense and avoid it.

In another letter to the editor of the Bangor Daily News, a writer states that a statement made by representatives of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) that baiting bears for short periods of time over many years in a row, has no measurable impact on bear populations. The writer claims the statement was, “nothing more than an untested hypothesis.” And to prove that this is an “untested hypothesis”, the writer uses an untested hypothesis and states that if a department that most believe operates under the pretext of scientific approach can’t produce a scientific “study” the claim is no good. There! That’s settled.

Let’s not consider a 40-year ongoing bear study by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries as a “scientific study.” What nonsense!

Washington Authorities Target Sheep-Killing Wolves. Wolf Protectors Use Event to Fundraise

According to a Spokesman Review article, authorities in Washington State have decided to order helicopters and shooters to kill four members of the so-called Huckleberry Pack because of persistent depredation by wolves on sheep in the area. This is why forcing large predators into human-settled landscapes is a non-starter.

As is ALWAYS the case, those groups who make a living pretending to care for wild animals, went to work to feverishly do all that they could to raise money. Wolf pimps is what they are, and if it isn’t a wolf, it’s a grizzly bear, a piping plover, a Canada lynx or any other species that can be exploited for profits.

In an email that was sent out by Predator Defense Fund, the effort to stop the destruction of private property by wolves, was called “a secret operation” because Washington officials didn’t take 10 years to consult with the fascists of predator protection first.

The remainder of the email if full of balderdash aimed at playing on the emotions of ignorant people eager to give their money away to fraudulent groups like Predator Defense Fund. Isn’t that why these criminals jump on every opportunity to make money?

Hat tip goes out to Shake, Rattle and Troll

Outdoor Industry Executives Warn North American Wildlife Conservation Model in Peril

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- Arguably, the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is in peril.

But, there is a solution to not only preserve the model, but push it to new heights of success.

Technology is the answer.

“We must open up access to hunting and fishing for everyone, especially new generations,” says Powderhook visionary and CEO, Eric Dinger.

“I’m not talking just access to lands and waters, but access to information and easy participation. Improving access will save America’s outdoor heritage and industry.”<<<Read More>>>

Maine’s Kennebec Journal Editor Corrects False Accusation About HSUS

In what can only be described as unprecedented, the editor of the Kennebec Journal corrects a statement made by a person in a Letter to the Editor promoting a “yes” vote on Question One of Maine’s upcoming November referendum vote. In that letter, the writer accuses a previous letter writer(Carroll Ware) of “made up stuff out of whole cloth” when Ware said that Wayne Pacelle, CEO of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), wanted to end all hunting.

The editor adds a correction after the Letter to the Editor that reads: “Editor’s note: In 1991, when he was CEO of the Fund for Animals, a radical anti-hunting organization, Pacelle was quoted by The Associated Press as saying, “If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would.””

The other information contained in this letter about the results of bear baiting is “made up stuff out of whole cloth.”

Maine IFW Enhances Website With Information Concerning Bear Referendum

Press Release from Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife:

AUGUSTA, Maine — Voters who want to learn more about Maine’s black bears and Question 1 on the November ballot should visit the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife web page, which features a new section designed to inform citizens about the upcoming bear referendum and why the department is opposed to Question 1. You can visit the website at www.mefishwildlife.com.

“No one care’s more about Maine’s black bears than Maine’s bear biologists—they have dedicated their careers to protecting Maine’s bear population,” said IFW Wildlife Division Director Judy Camuso. “They are hired by the state to protect and care for Maine’s bear population, and we want to let voters know what we have learned from over 40 years of research and why we are opposed to the referendum.”

The site includes research authored by Maine’s bear biologists, videos focused on Maine’s black bear management and bear biology, infographics, biographic summaries, pictures of field research, a presentation on Maine’s bear management program and other information regarding the upcoming referendum.

The site is full of information about Maine’s black bears. For instance, just over 50 years ago, black bears were relegated to no more than a nuisance animal, with the state paying a bounty to those who killed black bears. Now bears are a valued game animal to hunters and non-hunters alike.

“We want to provide Maine’s voters with facts about Maine black bears so they have the information they need before they cast their vote,” said Camuso. “Maine’s biologists are some of the most experienced and respected in North America. Their research has been utilized in bear management programs throughout the continent.”

Web users should visit the site often, as it will be updated with new videos and infographics about Maine’s black bears on a weekly basis. The videos feature Maine wildlife biologists and game wardens and focus on information learned from Maine’s long-running research program, why the department opposes the referendum and why these hunting methods are important to control the bear population.

“We felt it was important that voters understand the ramifications of this referendum,” said Camuso. “Maine’s biologists and game wardens are opposed to this referendum, and this website clearly shows why we are opposed and why this referendum is bad for Maine.”

Should You Fear the Pizzly Bear?

*Editor’s Note* – Everyone should consider reading this and then giving it some thought. As Dr. Valerius Geist worded it, in reference to this article: “Excellent article ! It takes something like this to shake us out of our
stupor. In North America the big and the little wolf are melting into one, and it’s only a matter of time before it will happen in the west. Be glad that you knew coyotes and wolves! Your great-grand children will not. The best thing that happened in the 20th century to wolves were 60,000 trappers in Canada and Alaska, encouraged by bounties, killing every wolf they could get by fair means or by foul. It kept wolves and coyotes pure, it contained hydatid disease, it kept wolves out of agricultural and where predator control officers were waiting for them anyway, and it relegated wolf attacks on humans to a myth – by their absence.

The worst enemy of woodland caribou, so argues Tom Bergerud, are environmentalists. Ditto for wolves?

“The animal comes from an area above the Great Lakes, where wolves and coyotes live — and sometimes breed — together. At one end of this canid continuum, there are wolves with coyote genes in their makeup; at the other, there are coyotes with wolf genes. Another source of genetic ingredients comes from farther north, where the gray wolf, a migrant species originally from Eurasia, resides. “We call it canis soup,” says Bradley White, a scientist at Trent University in Peterborough, Ontario, referring to the wolf-coyote hybrid population.”<<<Read More>>>

Case Challenges California Mountain Lion Import Ban

“Despite a continuing increase in mountain lion and human encounters in California since the passage of Prop. 117 – including fatalities – attempts to reverse the ban legislatively have been unsuccessful. And perhaps the most hypocritical aspect of the mountain lion hunting ban is that lions continue to be managed (i.e. killed) by wildlife officers and public safety personnel in numbers equal to or greater than some neighboring states where hunting them is legal – it’s just not being done by legal, licensed hunters.

Last week, Safari Club International (SCI) filed an interesting lawsuit in federal court that has the potential to chip away portions of the prohibitions put in place by Prop. 117 and could perhaps clear the way for future challenges.”<<<Read More>>>

Bear Hunting is Maine Culture

And those who aim to remove that part of Maine’s culture do so for the purpose of destroying that culture by imposing their own totalitarian beliefs onto others. Perhaps it is best worded by Douglas Lawrence of Wilton, Maine in an editorial published in the Bangor Daily News(scroll down just a bit):

It is natural for people from away, with different cultures, to believe that their cultures are better and should replace the old ways of Maine people. When modern colonizers come with money, they can buy the land, dictate government policies and impose their new culture. Just as Europeans replaced 20,000 years of native culture here, so too do these new colonizers remake Maine culture.

Maine already suffers from an eroded culture. When a people whose traditions tell them to make a living as farmers, fishermen, loggers, hunters, trappers, or to make valuable things such as shoes or ships, are unable to live that life, they lose their direction, hope and self-worth. Anger, hopelessness, alcoholism, drug use and family abuse are all part of this downward spiral of a culture.

As Maine voters stare down the double barrel of a referendum, a fake one at that, shrouded behind all sorts of fake claims, mostly lies, about bears, bear hunting, humane treatment of animals and hunting ethics, they will be asked to make a decision as to whether or not they want to strip the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife of their tools necessary for the management of a healthy bear population. More importantly they will decide whether to destroy Maine culture and replace it with the perverted teachings of anti human, animal rights beliefs.

Most voters don’t understand bear hunting, never done it, and can only be persuaded by the propaganda and talking points spewed by both sides of the issue.

It has always amazed me at the degree of ignorance displayed by many who migrate to Maine from points south, many to escape the city life. Their claims are that they NEED to get away from the hustle and bustle, the noise, the regulations, the limitations and the overall “nastiness” of urban dwelling. They head for Maine, are here for a short time and then begin to work hard at making it exactly the way they left it behind them.

We all have our rights to opinions and beliefs. We think we have a right, brainwashed to believe in democracy as a means of protecting any rights, to force our own beliefs onto others. It is one of the very dark sides of democracy. The old saying is that democracy is two wolves and a sheep discussing what will be for lunch.

Minds have been twisted and demented to a point where perhaps a majority of people believe that animals have rights, feelings and the power to think and reason. We see this in everything in media today. Just last evening I was watching a program on television about an elephant and it was quite sad to listen to the perverse narration and talking points throughout the entire program. It was completely based on the humanization and rationalization of human nature projected onto and into an elephant’s life. What have we become?

Animals are an incredible thing but they are not human and do not have any human traits and yet we, as misled non thinkers, seem to think they are.

We have a responsibility to care for the resources God gave us – including the animals of the earth. Over the past near 100 years, here in the United States, we have done a remarkable job of caring for our wild animals, to a point now that we have too many of them in certain places. We have devised ways to fund the conservation of wild animals and created and protected habitat for them to live mostly healthy lives and yet these totalitarians want to change that. They lie to tell others it doesn’t work and that animals have rights and feelings, so blinded by this insanity that they are seemingly more willing to have too many animals starve to death or suffer from disease than to humanely die by the quick death of a hunter’s bullet. This tells us the effort is not about the welfare of animals but the destruction of culture and all that is good and traditional.

As part of the hunting culture, something that has been a part of the landscape since the first settlers who came to this land, for all of us there once was the personal choice, within the laws that govern wild game harvest, to decide our own ethic when it comes to the methods we choose to harvest game. Contrary to what some are being taught, wild animals, a resource for the American people, are crafty creatures and as such, since the beginning of time, man has had to devise ways to make the job of putting food on the table easier. In addition, wildlife managers, through implementation of the North American Model of Wildlife Management, regulate hunting and hunting harvest and the tools that can be used in that pursuit for the purpose of maintaining a healthy population of game.

Ethics in the context of hunting then becomes a sticky subject. Remaining within the laws that govern the sport, we must all decide, on our own I wish, how we would like to hunt and not have some other do-gooder, who thinks he knows what’s better for me than himself, tell me what is an ethical way to hunt.

A reader sent to me a link to a discussion among hunters about the ethics of baiting bears. Posted below is a copy of some of those comments.

Number1

Number2

Number3

And for perhaps far too many, what they have been convinced to be “tradition” isn’t in the same neighborhood as the tradition that carries value with it.

FreakShow

All Three Candidates for Maine Governor Oppose HSUS’s Anti Hunting Referendum

Excerpts from the Sun Journal:

“The campaigns of all three candidates said they don’t support changing Maine law and are in opposition to a citizen-backed ballot measure asking voters to do just that.

“Maine has one of the best, scientifically sound bear management programs in the nation,” 2nd District U.S. Congressman Mike Michaud, the Democrat in the race, said. “I firmly believe that decisions about method of take should be left to the experts at the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife who have been properly managing our bear population for decades.””

“Eliot Cutler, the independent candidate in the race, seemed to agree.”

“LePage also supports maintaining the status quo and not disrupting a wildlife management practice that has served the state well for decades.”<<<Read More>>>

Even Heavily Populated Connecticut Seeing Problem Bears

“Over the past 12 months, Wiltonians have reported two bear sightings to the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. While Weston has been home to only one reported sighting, Ridgefield has seen seven, and Redding has seen 11.

In fact, a Redding beekeeper even had his artificial nests destroyed by a black bear in June. The large pawprints left behind on the equipment were one reason the resident knew it was a bear and not vandals.”<<<Read More>>>

ReddingCTMap