October 16, 2019

Animals Are NOT People

Recently, an animal protectionist voiced concern about the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in Maine. We all should be concerned about the spread of this deadly to animal disease (it has of yet not proven that it can jump over and infect humans). But, animals, as much as we care about their welfare, even those animals given to us by our Creator as a natural resource to enjoy from viewing to table fare, are not people and should not be treated as such. In doing so, lines of priority in the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of all get blurred even to a point of perversion.

The article begins by making an association of equality or even preference of the animal over that of man by stating: “If we had a chance to help a human or an animal, why wouldn’t we do it? If we knew that the situation could easily get worse — in some cases, far worse — why wouldn’t we do what we could now instead of waiting?”

The first priority, in a natural setting of existence understanding, should always be that of man. Because Man was granted “dominion” over all the plants and animals by our Creator, the first concern is with people. Animals become secondary and of concern in this case because man’s existence is directly affected.

The perversion shows when the author uses the relative pronoun “who” in reference to a deer or deer collectively: “I would have thought that the DIFW biologist’s primary concern would have been the suffering and death of the animals who might contract CWD.” and, “…the feeding of deer who might have been exposed to CWD…”

The importance of this misuse of pronouns isn’t so much that the writing is grammatically incorrect, something a “published author from Bristol” should know, it is the exposure of the indoctrination that has perverted the minds of millions who insist on categorizing animals at the same existence level as that of man. How sick is that….really?

It is impossible to rightly attack any problem or establish any kind of rule or regulation in the management of any animal when the animal is not placed in the correct hierarchy according to relative importance based on the existence of Man. Because our animal-perverse society has muddied the differences between man and animal, such distinctions of utmost importance are lost and decisions rendered ended up being acts of perversion in their own right.

This misguided perversion shows when the author takes issue with comments made by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) about the concerns of the hunting industry should CWD have a devasting effect on the deer and moose. The author chooses to disregard the common sense association that their concerns over the health and welfare of the animals exist in unspoken words from the quotes that were handpicked.

Perhaps the upside of this is that the MDIFW sees the potential risks of the spread of disease as being first and foremost a concern for that of the people and their welfare and secondly to the animals and their health…or maybe not.

But, make no mistake about it, CWD is extremely problematic and the author does bring up some good points to consider.

It is impossible to stop the spread of the disease but steps can be taken to slow it down. The MDIFW already has mandatory regulations in place to help in that regard. Some of those steps may need to be strengthened if the disease shows signs of actually making its way into Maine.

Because CWD prions can find their way into the commercial marketing of urine-based scents and lures, I agree with the author that they should be banned.

I think the jury is still out on feeding of deer as to whether or not congregated feeding actually causes the spread of disease any more than in a natural setting due to the make-up of the disease itself. There are some trade-off issues that need to be considered when it comes to feeding deer, but the bottom line is that CWD will destroy the deer and moose herds and thus destroy the hunting industry as well as wildlife viewing.

As might be spoken by any avid totalitarian, animal rights activist, the following statement should be of concern to all: “It needs nothing less than the force of law.” 

As our collectivist society works harder and harder at destroying their own free existence, avidly calling on a fascist government (force of law) to rule with an iron fist should be of concern for all…but isn’t.

As with any of this talk, based on utter ignorance of facts, media echo chambers will continue to repeat misguided claims and false information without actually doing any real research to understand the creation and history of CWD. It’s a shame really but nothing more than a reflection of the automatonic existence that has been created for all of us.

As a brilliant man recently shared, with Collectivism comes collective ignorance and stupidity. Collectivism ensures like existence. How frightfully boring!

Share

Frigid weather and extended snow cover once kept the ticks in check.

BULLPUCKY!!!!!!!!!

As is typical of Environmentalism’s propaganda machine and brainwashing throughout all of Academia, another BS article in the Bangor Daily News, when discussing the problems with winter ticks and moose, states that “Frigid weather and extended snow cover once kept the ticks in check. But with climate change resulting in winters starting later and less snow in some places, winter ticks have more time to find their hosts.”

This is utter nonsense – propaganda fomented by environmentalists to promote their lies about global warming. It’s also ignorance about the winter tick itself. Even existing studies don’t support such nonsense.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!!! GEEZUS MAN!!!

So, is Maine now backing off their claims of earlier in the year when they were leaning toward attributing the large growth and presence of winter ticks to an inflated moose population? Maybe there are more grant monies available to those promoting Climate Change?

This is what Maine’s moose biologist Lee Kantar said about the differences in moose between Northern Maine and those in Western and Southern parts of the state: “I’m trying to strike a balance here between concern for moose in parts of the state and then the idea that in other parts of the state, in northern Maine, the population appears to be quite stable…We’re trying to do our due diligence in understanding the moderating climate, winter ticks and moose densities.”

If they believe in their nonsense about climate change then why can’t they see that attempting to grow moose in Maine to levels that are too high to sustain a healthy population, in time will force moose further south into climates that might attribute to better survival of the winter tick? But then again, weather and climate play such a minor role in the existence and perpetuation of the winter ticks that biologists are wasting their time trying to figure it all out.

It’s all hocus pocus – biology 101. If you want to get rid of the winter ticks and thus the high rates of mortality among moose calves and female moose, reduce the population. The longer wildlife managers remain befuddled by the BS lies of Climate Change, nothing will ever be learned.

God, the insanity!!!

Share

At What Point Will Maine Hunters Simply Hang up Their Deer Rifles?

In Bob Humphreys’ article this week, he does a very respectable job of explaining to his readers about the politics of deer management. His basic premise is that as the deer management goals are changing, opportunities to hunt deer will continue to diminish, a result of attempting to sustain a deer herd at “social carrying capacity” rather than biological carrying capacity.

In his article, he writes: “In other words, some areas (central and southern Maine) could support between 40 to 60 deer per square mile with no deleterious effects on the natural habitat, and would be well within the limits biologists strive for under the precepts of sound deer management. But then current management objectives for those areas were 15 to 20 deer per square mile.”

Environmentalism’s powerful lobby has extended to a point where not only have their objectives become an integral part of our basic education curriculum, but the continued effects have successfully bred environmentalist-minded young wildlife biologists/managers who now are the majority with our fish and wildlife agencies.

A major problem exists as we attempt to look into the future of deer hunting in Maine and elsewhere. Brainwashed by Environmentalism, it is impossible to understand or acknowledge the vital importance that hunting plays in managing and sustaining a deer herd. Without hunting, there is no way to control growth…period. It doesn’t take a Ph. D. to understand that in places where hunting is not permitted, there are eventually problems with too many deer and with too many deer there are problems with disease and the spread of it – diseases harmful to humans.

I repeatedly have heard the claim from animal rights people and environmentalists that they are not trying to stop hunting. Well, perhaps not directly. The ending of hunting is one of their major goals. Through propaganda and lobbying efforts if environmentalists can convince enough people that there is a need to reduce the deer population to levels that will limit automobile collisions, reduce Lyme disease, and stop them hungry critters eating their expensive shrubbery, bringing the herd to numbers low enough to achieve that might effectively put an end to deer hunting, at least as we know it and certainly as it used to be.

There exists a line of effective interest, where if that line is moved further and further to the point where the effort at deer hunting yields few or little results, interest in the activity will evaporate. At what point will it have to reach in order that so few will want to hunt deer anymore that hunting as a management tool can no longer be usable?

According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service surveys, the number one reason fewer people hunt is that they don’t have the time. This may be true but doesn’t it become harder to justify taking the time to hunt if the hunting is poor?

I can only speak for myself. I have always loved to deer hunt. In my prime, I hunted in any weather for the majority of days that deer hunting season was open. I most often took home a deer by end of the season. Today, the effort is no longer there. I believe the biggest contributing factor is that in the past 10 years of deer hunting, I can count on one hand how many deer I have SEEN in the woods. Granted, some of that lack of success is due to aging and reduced effort, but a lot of that reduced effort has become perpetuating. In other words, it becomes harder and harder to yard this tired aging body out of bed at 4 a.m. to be in the woods before it gets daylight because the motivation to see deer and have an opportunity to bag one is gone. As a matter of fact, it seems I look for excuses not to go out, especially if the weather is threatening.

Where once Maine set herd management goals for deer to approach 400,000 animals, their latest management goals call for 210,000 deer by the year 2033. Simple mathematical logic might tell us that in theory if there were the same number of hunters 20 years ago as there are today, the odds of bagging a deer have been cut in half. It takes a person completely in love with the act of hunting to pursue an animal that gives a hunter a less than 20% chance at filling his freezer. Some say the challenge increases which is some kind of a draw, but that is not the interest of the majority of those looking for meat. As chances shrink so does interest.

What kind of a conundrum will the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries (MDIFW) be in when, due to environmentalist-spurned deer management, they have successfully driven away enough hunters so that they cannot depend on hunters and their long-standing “Any-Deer Permit” system to deplete the herd to “social carrying capacity?”

Regardless of whether deer management is paid for with license purchases or through general taxation, if the deer hunting sucks, nobody will want to hunt anymore and then what?

Share

Politics May Cause Focus on CWD Spread to be in the Wrong Places

Chronic Wasting Disease has been found in deer in Ontario Province in Canada. Some in Maine and other New England states have taken up a panic or semi-panic mode while saying and doing stupid things. One thing is for sure. Few of us know anything about the disease…even those pretending to be an authority.

As with most things like diseases that are serious, why does it seem the focus is placed on the wrong aspect of the problem? It seems an American thing to avoid the real issue and place the focus on emotional and political BS. We see this in discussions about AIDS and the Second Amendment. With AIDS, instead of addressing the immoral lifestyles that most greatly contribute to the spread of the disease, we only focus on a cure in order to permit the perpetuation of homosexuality.

In speaking of guns, Americans almost never focus on the real issue of what causes a person to resort to violent behavior that is deadly to other humans. So much effort is placed on ensuring that law-abiding citizens have their right to choose how to protect themselves taken away.

And now we see Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) sneaking up on us. Many admit that scientists don’t fully understand the disease. They have a better sense of the end result – almost – than the cause and the spread.

As is typical, with diseases such as CWD, brucellosis, Echinococcus granulosis, Neospora caninum, etc., where both wild and domestic animals can become infected and infectious, often the blame, if you will, is placed on captive animal facilities as being the culprits in the growth and spread of these diseases to the wild population of the same animals. This has never been proven as fact and is next to impossible to do so. To state otherwise is dishonest.

In an article I read in the Berkshire Eagle of Massachusetts, it was written that: “If you have regulatory authority over captive farms you could require really high fences, double fences and require tags on your deer.”

Part of the argument being expressed here is that an agriculture department will not be strict enough in regulating captive cervids and that authority should be given to fish and wildlife agencies. There is serious political corruption that exists within both departments that we should never consider one government agency as being better at regulating than another. History has shown us that fish and wildlife agencies can be just as corrupt in their wielding of authority for political reasons as any agriculture department.

By directing the focus of the problem on captive cervid ranches, we may be doing ourselves a real disservice when it comes to serious efforts to understand this disease, for without the right knowledge proper control if there is such a thing, is impossible.

For those who don’t know, I will tell you that captive cervid ranchers would put up “high fences” and “double fences” if they could afford it in order to protect their herds from the spread of disease from outside into the ranch. It’s been several years now since I last spent a great deal of time learning about elk and deer ranching, but the last time I recall discussing double fencing the cost ranged somewhere around $1 million a mile. The argument for high and double fencing is to prevent any kind of contact between captive animals and wild ones.

It is sometimes lost in these emotional discussions that ranchers absolutely do not want any disease in their herds. It’s stupid to think differently. CWD within a herd of captive elk or deer would put the rancher out of business.

Because some choose to believe that diseases like CWD originate within the fences and is spread beyond the fences through contact with other animals outside the fences, they fail to understand that it can just as easily happen in the reverse. There was a time when in areas where CWD occurs, no instances of CWD had been detected in captive cervids. That should tell us something. It seems the real issue is in regulating the import and export of captive cervids, especially across state lines.

I visited domestic elk ranches in the West a few years back and was impressed with how conscientious they were about every aspect of their business, including the threat of disease. Again I say, any serious disease will destroy that business and none of them want it.

The author of the article linked to does a pretty good job explaining to readers about how easily and quickly CWD can spread in the wild. He writes: “Deer disperse out, and in studies they have found 75 percent of yearling males will disperse from two miles on up from where they were born. Stainbrook cited that one yearling disperser in Pennsylvania, which had a GPS collar on it went over 90 miles. This could be a major contributor to how CWD can spread across the landscape. There are ongoing studies to try to determine the average distance that deer will disperse. If the average males travel four or five miles, one can estimate after 10 years how far CWD has been spread.”

Captive deer are captive, enclosed behind fences, and unable to “disperse.” It, therefore, makes a bit of sense that they are less likely to be the chief culprit in the spread of the disease. Any agriculture business needs to be responsible for disease spread and for the most part, I think that is the case. We can do many things to reduce the risk of the spread of disease, or at least perhaps slow it down, but short of a cure, there is little hope of completely stopping it. Ensuring that we keep our focus on the problem in the right places, prioritizing them from a scientific position rather than a political one will go a long way in addressing a serious disease spread.

Share

Anti-Hunting Mental Drool

Along with the time of year when there is much activity with hunting and trapping, we all regularly are subjected to the mental drool of those who don’t like any of the activities. Maybe if they just said I don’t like hunting and trapping and left it at that, some of us wouldn’t bother to single them out to expose their limited mental capacities while disparaging a worthwhile, long-standing, cultural heritage that has unlimited benefits to both man and wildlife – hunting.

A letter scribbler in the Bangor Daily News called hunting and trapping “incivil” – evidently meaning that any reporting in the news about hunting and trapping is offensive, rude, or impolite. The writer also called hunting and trapping an unworthy event and unsportsmanlike and said hunting was no longer “fair chase.”

Here’s a couple of things to ponder. Most of these terms – fair chase, sportsmanlike, etc. – have been crafted by men over the years perhaps as a means of pulling the wool over someone’s eyes about hunting and trapping. They are man-made terms much the same as when some mental midget declares hunting is an act to “prove one’s manhood.”

Fair chase is really nothing but abiding by the laws crafted by men for men to hunt and trap animals for consumptive use. All rules and regulations for hunting and trapping are grounded in species management and public safety – nothing more. I never thought of hunting as a “sport” therefore sportsmanship had nothing to do with the act. I see hunting as something I enjoy doing that occasionally (emphasis on occasionally) rewards me with a few good meals of healthy meat.

So give it a rest already. Take your “fair chase” and “sportsmanship” to the athletic field, where these days everyone gets a “trophy.” Hunting and trapping are a well developed scientific necessity to responsibly manage and maintain a healthy and sustainable game population.

The other issue is one in which I’ve never quite understood. Obvious this whiner takes offense – finds incivility – in news reports about hunting and trapping, and yet in order to find offense, the person must be reading the reports.

As this writer mentions, they find politicians offensive and rude, as do I. I find the solution sensible. Stop reading the articles and looking at the pictures. Any moron should understand that basic concept, but evidently, that is above the capacity of some who would rather whine, bitch, and complain about something they know nothing about.

 

Share

Return to a “Savage” State

The below article has been sent for publication in the local newspaper, The Bethel Citizen.

James Beers, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service employee who spent considerable time in Washington, D.C., who became a whistleblower discovering as much as $60 million was stolen from Pittman-Robertson Federal Excise taxes to be used for reintroducing wolves to the Northern Rockies and other illegal activities, recently said that if we are not willing to put a stop to the current “Ecological Theory” that places man as equal to or lesser than that of plants and animals and “spiritual rewilding” our forests and plains, this lack of action will “…return all of us eventually into a “savage state.”

The definition of “civilize” is “to bring out of a savage state.” As our civilization advanced from what some have perceived as uncontrolled slaughter of many of our wild animals and destruction of the habitat that confronted the settlers, through responsible wildlife management which led to developing an understanding of the cooperation of both consumption and conservation, establishing the North American Model of Wildlife Management, we are now moving in a direction that is calling for a hands-off approach to plant and animal management; establishing wilderness and predator protection based somewhat on the belief that Nature produces a preferred outcome.

If the land was in a “natural” state when we found it, i.e. “savage state,” working to restore it to what it once was, or what we think it once was, surely must be a return to an uncivilized, savage state.

We have and are being misled that leaving things up to Nature, will provide for a stabilization of animal and plant existence, i.e. that Nature achieves a “balance” where everything is Nirvana. My very good friend, Dr. Valerius Giest, a professor emeritus at the University of Calgary, says that the Utopian belief in nature, free from the hands of man, achieving balance is “intellectual rubbish.” Life consists of constant negative and positive feedback loops where everything is in constant change.

Leaving it to Nature will yield what Nature has to offer. Reality shows us that Nature’s results are not what most of us prefer. We prefer control and manipulation to achieve healthy plants and wildlife as best possible, while at the same time continuing to provide an opportunity for that long-held, civilized existence of regulated hunting, trapping, and fishing.

If we prefer a healthy existence for our wildlife, someone has to manage and control it. Nature will not, contrary to what some believe, give us what we want in this civilized society. Taking from the resource in a responsible, scientific approach is a cooperation that undertakes the task of managing wildlife for a healthy bounty and providing opportunities for those who wish to take sustenance from that resource. It’s a win-win.

It seems with each passing year, the grumbles and groans get louder and louder of the need to end hunting, fishing, and trapping. As it currently stands, we exist in a back scratching situation where licensed hunters, fishers, and trappers pay the costs of wildlife management in return for an opportunity to reap the rewards of taking from the resource. To deny that privilege, thinking wildlife will manage itself is wrong thinking. To steal it away with a belief that wildlife will control itself is uncivilized, returning us eventually to the previous savage state.

The next time you see a hunter, trapper, or fisherman, thank them for providing the means of responsible conservation so that all of us can enjoy a healthy wildlife.

 

Share

I Sure Appreciate All Those Men and Women That Chose To Serve and Protect.

I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect at all levels of political public offices held… The Local and National police that know fake news with fake people acted out by actors in the news is used against the citizenry of this country and they do nothing about it because their careers would be terminated.. I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect the citizenry of this country when they do nothing about legal system injustices that are unjust acts perpetrated against the citizens by lying lawyers acting as god prosecutors and god judges all in the service of their god who owns the legal system the Vatican’s man of sin..

I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect the National Forests who are arsonists who start forest fires and then pretend they are heroes by fighting their own fires for millions and even billions of bucks.. I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect our freedom and freewill even though it has been redefined to mean granted liberty which are privileges that can be un-granted by those serving and protecting us whenever they deem it necessary to do so because the Bill of Rights is obviously not the Supreme Law of this land..

Yessiree I sure do appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect corporate fascism, fake banks, fake money, fake economies, fake free markets, fake sciences, fake politics, fake myths of who we the people actually isn’t, and who stood idly by while fake environmentalists serving the U.N. put diseased wolves amongst us and large carnivores above us in rights.. I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect the United Nations invasion of this country using fake environmental policies which under a deep forensic analysis turns out to be evolved legal terms in international legalese dick spittle for eugenics on steroids for the purpose of depopulating those of us they allegedly serve and protect…

I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect that did nothing when the courts in the United States told us several times in their case history ” You Can’t Use The Constitution In This Court.” Because you’re not a party to it… I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect all of those lies at all levels of political public offices held…That put children in the same public restrooms, that taught evolutionary science lies in their public schools, that teaches them to believe myths fairy tales while dumbing them down..

I sure appreciate all those men and women that chose to serve and protect at all levels of political public offices held…Especially in those wildlife agencies who’s mission is obviously the total destruction of wildlife while causing consumptive use of the surplus to be accused of the cause.. You bet.. We need more people like all of you sorry SOBs to pretend you’re here to serve and protect the citizens of this country at all levels of political public offices held…

I can’t wait to see how you men and women that chose to serve and protect at all levels of political public offices held are going to save the citizens from wising up to your masters big con next..

Signed the Betrayed Exile…

Share

Maine Map: Deer Wintering Areas

I was sent the below map the other day. When I finally got around to looking at it more closely, I began formulating some questions. Perhaps you will have them too. If so, please become part of a discussion in the “Disqus” portion of this post at the end.

As you will notice, the dark green spots on this map show the locations of what the creators of the map are calling Deer Wintering Areas. The map also shows the locations of all the major highways throughout the state. Is it my imagination or do the majority of deer wintering areas happen to exist near to all the main highways? Is it reasonable to assume that much of the population of Maine can be found in and around all the major highways? If so, why?

Also, notice in the Northwest sector of the state – an area often referred to as the Big Woods. Where are all the Deer Wintering Areas? Is it because all the trees have been cut and there are no more Deer Wintering Areas left? Or do many of the deer migrate to the East near Interstate 95 and U.S. Route 1?

In the far north, take notice of the large Deer Wintering Area near the town of Allagash. Is it my imagination, again, or do the deer move closer to civilization in order to spend the winters?

Or maybe, the mapmakers didn’t want to venture too far from the main highways to locate Deer Wintering Areas.

I’m trying to make sense out of the map and what we have repeatedly been told that there are no Deer Wintering Areas left – that they have all been destroyed by logging. Is this why we seem to see the majority of Deer Wintering Areas near major highways? Or have the experts got it all wrong?

What I would like to see, if it even exists, is a map of Deer Wintering Areas from 30, 40. 50 years ago and overlay it with this map to see if those areas have moved, some lost, some added, etc.

Talk is cheap. Valued scientific research might tell us some truth.

Share

Management Design of Scarcity

In Jim Beers’ article I posted yesterday, he spoke of what he called an “ecological theory.” This ecological theory is the transformation of the role of man in this existence. He writes: “We must restore the “primacy of man” in the cosmos and recognize that man has a transcendent purpose.  Today we see how treating man as just another animal in the cosmos and rejecting the understanding of an afterlife with an all-powerful Creator leads us to far more than “astray”.  I do not see how we can reject this ecological theory or heresy by simply rejecting it and those that propound it.  If we do not accept and value the traditional mores, cultures and beliefs that have underpinned millenniums of civilizing societies how can we defend them from avid proponents of this “ecological theory” or convince others to do so?”

Contained in this ecological theory, the role of man is changed from one of dominance among species to one of equality. This is achieved through an abandonment of the Scriptures where we are specifically told that Yehwah, our Creator, gave us dominion over all the plants and animals. This new theory, one that is vehemently perpetuated by Environmentalism and in particular the animal rights movement, places man as nothing more than an equality, or less, to animals and plants and that we have no right to wield any kind of control through management and ultimately any right to consume those wild animals as a natural resource.

On the Maine Deer Hunters Facebook page (I will not recognize FB with a link), Troy Frye writes of the troubles in Maine within deer management when the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) decided to allow a record number of Any-Deer Permits (a system used for more than 20 years to control and manipulate deer populations) at a time when deer populations are far below carrying capacity and when hunter harvest remains at dismal levels.

Frye points out some statistics he has put together of the recent history of Any-Deer Permit allocation. He writes: “Wildlife Management Districts (WMD) 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 accounted for 41,065 permits in 2016, this is 90% of the state’s (45,625) antlerless deer permits.”

(Note – For those who might be wondering, the issuance of Any-Deer Permits for 2018 reflect the same percentages. Of the record number of permits issued, 84,745, those handed out to WMDs 16. 17, 20 – 25 total 76,975 or 90.8% of the total.)

(Back to the 2016 data) We know of the 29 WMDs, 7 of those districts receive no Any-Deer Permits. That is because deer populations in those areas are so terribly low, MDIFW believes simply issuing no permits will somehow cause the population of deer to grow. It isn’t happening.

Five other WMDs received less than 100 permits each, again signifying low deer densities.

So Maine’s deer seem to be all congregated in one geographically small area.

To help understand why some are disgruntled by MDIFW’s decision to issue a record number of Any-Deer Permits in certain WMDs, we should examine the stupid logic that is used through the Environmentalist’s influence on wildlife management nationwide.

Environmentalists and animal rights organizations believe that if you protect animals (no hunting, trapping, etc.), such as wolves, grizzly bears, Canada lynx, mountain lions, bobcats, etc. somehow the population of these animals will spread to all those regions that do not currently have populations of these species. And yet, in the reverse, in Maine’s WMD’s that show signs of good deer populations, management intends to issue so many permits to kill off enough of the female deer to reduce the population overall. Evidently, the reverse logic doesn’t work in the minds of environmentalists? Or, maybe the logic of protecting to cause the spread is incorrect.

In those areas where MDIFW believes the deer population needs reducing, are the deer starving to death because of competition for habitat? I’ve not heard of such a thing.

We know that the MDIFW is heavily influenced in their deer management decisions by pressure placed on them from social interest groups. MDIFW uses what they call “social carrying capacity” meaning whatever the numbers are that people will tolerate regardless of best available science in making those management decisions. Is this what is prompting MDIFW to slash deer numbers in WMDs throughout the state that are the only havens where people can find deer to hunt and eat?

We just don’t know what MDIFW is thinking or if they even are. It makes little sense. MDIFW wants to base their decision on the fact that deer harvest has been increasing at a trickle pace since the really bad winters of 2008 and 2009, but yet the overall harvest is still far below what should be expected.

MDIFW has given up attempting to manage deer that includes using counting and numbers, probably because of their repeated failures at deer management.

It appears to me that there is really only one explanation in MDIFW’s decision to kill as many doe deer in the WMDs listed above that make up 90% of the total allotment of Any-Deer Permits – management for scarcity.

If Maine’s WMDs 16, 17 and 20 – 25 become the only areas where there are any deer, is there any concern that hunters will begin filling up the woods in those areas searching for meat for their freezers? If so, maybe that’s the goal; to make the deer population in those zones look like the rest of the state.

In this condition of modern “ecological theory,” what has been lost is the fact that hunting, fishing, trapping, and a basic consumption of resources given to us by our Creator is the only thing in existence that is natural. To promote this modern ecological theory, as has been pointed out by Jim Beers, is uncivilized.

Environmentalists control wildlife management. We can tap dance around the truth and deny it all we want but when wildlife management is being so strongly influenced that scientific/biologic decisions are given a back seat to social demands, where society has become completely brainwashed by Environmentalism, then there is no denying who is pulling the puppet strings.

Succumbing to this neo ecological theory, i.e. changing the way we approach wildlife management, is a loss of about the only remaining stronghold on the natural behavior of man. All else is uncivilized in reality – a reflection of the society of which we live where up is down, wrong is right, hate is love, etc.

Jim Beers puts it this way, “If we do not accept and value the traditional mores, cultures and beliefs that have underpinned millenniums of civilizing societies how can we defend them from avid proponents of this “ecological theory” or convince others to do so?”

If we cannot rip this ecological theory apart and convince our game managers to do the job that provides man a chance to utilize the resources God has given us, hunting, fishing, trapping and any and all consumption of resources will become a thing of the past. This is happening at breakneck speed. What can be done?

The problem is I don’t think there are enough people left who care.

THE END!

 

Share

Feedback Beginning to Come in on Maine’s New Game Tagging System

It was announced a few days ago that Maine was entering the techno-zombie world of electronic game registration. This new system went into effect with the onset of the black bear hunting season. We are also in one of those “Expanded” seasons for deer with archery hunting.

I saw a first comment about the new system of registration from a person who shot and registered a deer taken in the Expanded season.

Essentially, he said the new program was easy to use and mostly begged that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) would begin to allow field registration so tagging could be done in the field with a smartphone.

I hope not.

Field tagging, while appearing convenient to some, presents a myriad of problems as I see it. I’ll present one.

Registering of game serves more than one purpose. It provides game managers a location where they can go and physically inspect the game, take samples, and collect all kinds of data. It is this data that should make Maine wildlife managers better at doing their jobs. Consider what might happen if this data was no longer collected.

Maine is one of those states that is not overrun with deer for example. Because of this, more importance is put on responsible and effective deer management. Data is vital to accomplishing this.

Let’s not be greedy. I’m still in a bit of shock over this announcement of MDIFW moving to a more modern form of game registration. We should be thankful for that. We should also be eager to be a part of game management by understanding the need to visit a registration center to tag our haul.

Share