August 1, 2015

Card Carrying Moose?

“The only place in Maine where moose arrive right on schedule for nature shoots is at Baxter State Park. The reason? Those moose are considered state employees and their activities are strictly governed by their 80-page union contract. At other well-known “moose venues” like Rangeley and Moosehead, the moose schedules are much more casual and seeing one is hit or miss, so good luck.”<<<Read More>>>



Puckerbrush Primitive Festival boasts bushcraft in eastern Maine 

*Editor’s Note* – Let me make sure I get this right. An event, hosted by a “fish and game” club, is seeking a more diverse membership and in so doing banned anybody from have a gun at this event. What kind of diversity is this club seeking?

Arrows fletched with red feathers arced through the air at the moving target, a disk of foam hurtling across the shooting range. Every arrow missed and plummeted to spear the grass-covered ground. Sounds of disappointment came from the line of archers, yet all of them smiled. The game was addictive. […]

Source: Puckerbrush Primitive Festival boasts bushcraft in eastern Maine — Outdoors — Bangor Daily News — BDN Maine

Blaming Numbers of Deer on Lyme Tick Increase is Dishonest

An online news article states that Vermont now leads the nation in reported cases of Lyme disease. The same report blames this on an “overabundant deer population.” The same report claims that the ideal deer per square mile, in order to “control” ticks, would be 20 per square mile. Other than a few isolated areas, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont don’t have that many deer.

We understand that deer are a source of a “last blood meal” for the ticks’ survival and perpetuation, it is not the only source. Surely, reducing actual “overabundance” of deer populations would contribute to the reduction in tick prevalence and thus Lyme disease infection rates, it appears as though, with information being given that shows low density deer populations in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, the deer is becoming a convenient scapegoat. Perhaps there are other agendas at work here.

If the intent is to reduce the prevalence of Lyme disease, how about providing some honesty in scientific research.

Poll: Sportsmen Support New Clean Water Protections

*Editor’s Note* – For those who understand that polls are nonsense and meaningless, designed for outcome-based results to support agendas, this information in the below news article is pure BS.

The survey, conducted by the National Wildlife Federation, polled 1,000 registered voters across the political spectrum who identify as hunters, anglers or both. More than four-fifths of them supported the revised Act.

Source: Poll: Sportsmen Support New Clean Water Protections | Maine Public Broadcasting

Maine Sportsmen, Retailers, and Business Leaders Join Forces on Hunting Economics Agenda

AUGUSTA, Maine, July 21, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — A group of local and regional leaders representing sporting organizations, small businesses and retailers announced a new partnership called Hunting Works For Maine today. The group formed to highlight the many benefits of hunting and shooting to Maine’s economy, noting that sportsmen and women are crucial drivers of in-state commerce. Speakers at the press conference pledged a more unified voice in support of Maine’s hunting and shooting heritage through this new partnership.

Source: Maine Sportsmen, Retailers, and Business Leaders Join Forces on Hunting Economics Agenda – Yahoo News

More than half of Maine counties are at high risk for Lyme

Lyme disease has tightened its grasp on the Northeast and Midwest, with a dramatic rise in the number of counties considered at high risk, a new government study finds.

The number of Northeast counties where the risk of Lyme disease is at least twice the national average skyrocketed from 43 in 1993-1997 to 182 in 2008-2012, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study. That’s an alarming jump of 323 percent.

In Maine, more than half of all counties are at high risk for the disease, spread by the bite of the eight-legged deer tick.

Source: More than half of Maine counties are at high risk for Lyme | Vital Signs

Maine’s Moose Population Cut in Half?

*Editor’s Note* – Estimates are there are between 60,000 and 70,000 moose in Maine. A Maine biologists once told the Joint Standing Committee that her estimate was 90,000 moose. We have linked to below a Maine Guide who says “confidently” that the moose population is “down about half.” I don’t know by what number this person is using in making the claim of a population reduction of half.

However, whether it is 90,000 or 60,000 to 70,000, half any of those numbers, in my opinion, is more realistic as to where the moose population in Maine ought to be. If this reduction exists in those numbers, then perhaps we will begin to see healthier moose due to a reduction also of the dreaded, deadly and tortuous winter tick.

“We are easily,and I say this confidently, we are down about half our moose population, Lambert said.

Source: Maine moose facing uptick in parasitic predator | Local News – WMTW Home

Anti-Park Group Sends Letter Asking Quimby Family to Drop Idea 

*Editor’s Comment* – If you kick a dog enough times, eventually the dog will turn on you.

“Despite all your efforts and expenditures, the people of Medway and East Millinocket have now joined the Millinocket Town Council in resoundingly rejecting your plan for a national park,” the open letter continues. “The opposition in these towns is even more striking given the economic devastation the region has experienced with the demise of Great Northern Paper. Yet, as much as the Katahdin Region desperately needs investment and new jobs, the people in the towns that would be most impacted by your plans have told you ‘no.’ ”

Source: Anti-Park Group Sends Letter Asking Quimby Family to Drop Idea | Maine Public Broadcasting

Maine Prostitutes Itself for Federal Extortion “Grant” Money

MDIFWBelow is a copy of the press release sent out by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) announcing the compilation of a Draft Wildlife Action Plan, while encouraging people to comment on it over the next 30 days. At the conclusion of the press release, I will offer commentary.

Draft of State Wildlife Action Plan Available For Public Comment

AUGUSTA, Maine – The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, in conjunction with a broad spectrum of partner organizations, has created a draft state wildlife action plan that is now posted on the department’s website and open for public comment.

Maine’s 2015 Wildlife Action Plan identifies practical and voluntary opportunities to conserve Maine’s most vulnerable fish and wildlife, while emphasizing that landowner and public participation is essential for wildlife conservation. Yesterday, July 13 marked the beginning of a 30-day opportunity for Maine citizens to review the action plan and provide comment. You can view the document at

The draft is a collaboration of IFW and 102 conservation partners — representatives from federal, state, local, tribal, and public organizations – who over the past 18 months have identified species and habitats in the greatest need of conservation, the factors negatively impacting these species and their habitats, and potential conservation opportunities that citizens, partner organizations, and agencies could undertake to address these issues.

The partners completed their review in June, and based upon their feedback, IFW, with state agency partners prepared the first draft of the action plan, which will help guide the conservation of rare and vulnerable fish and wildlife from 2015 – 2025.

States must have an approved Wildlife Action Plan to be eligible to participate in the State Wildlife Grants (SWG) program, administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The USFWS approved Maine’s initial Wildlife Action Plan in the summer of 2005. Since then, Maine has accomplished over 50 research, management, and conservation projects, benefitting brook trout, rare freshwater mussels, dragonflies, migrant birds such as Bicknell’s Thrush and Black-throated blue Warbler, and globally rare species, such as the Tomah mayfly. Puffins, wood turtles, Atlantic sturgeon, little brown bats and bumble bees are also recognizable species that have benefitted from Maine’s Wildlife Action Plan. IFW must submit the updated action plan to the USFWS by October 2015 for Maine to remain eligible for SWG funds.

Maine’s 2015 Wildlife Action plan is not solely a plan for IFW; rather, it is a cooperative fish and wildlife conservation strategy for the entire state and all Maine’s citizens and visitors. IFW encourages the public to review the 2015 action plan. Comments and suggestions from citizens will ensure that it reflects the values and priorities of Maine’s people.


The U.S. Congress requires any state that would like to participate in receiving tax dollars as part of their Wildlife Grant Program, to create a Wildlife Action Plan. This requirement amounts to nothing more than extortion money that forces states, with the greed to not be able to resist MONEY, to comply with the direction in which the dictatorial U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/U.S. Government, wants to go with its management of wildlife nationwide. When states opt for the pimp money, they essentially agree to become useful idiots of the Federal Government and forego what might be best for their state.

As you will also notice in the above press release, no explanation is given about how the Federal filthy money is allocated. From the USFWS website: “Grants funds are disbursed to States for approved grants at a maximum federal share of 75% for Planning grants and 65% for Implementation grants.”

This means Maine, or any other participating state, must come up with matching dollars in order to take the bait and willfully participate in the extortion ring. Maine, therefore, must come up with matching dollars. This can be done in a few ways but some of that money comes from hunters and fishermen who buy licenses.

The State Wildlife Grants Program provides federal grant funds for developing and implementing programs that benefit wildlife and their habitats, including species not hunted or fished. Priority is placed on projects that benefit species of greatest conservation need.

Grant funds must be used to address conservation needs such as research, surveys, species and habitat management, and monitoring, identified within a State’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plan/Strategy. These funds may also be used to update, revise, or modify a State’s Strategy.

Maine has a bragging page on their website about all the projects they have done through the Wildlife Grant Program’s money. None of these projects benefit game species and most of them actually limit and restrict hunting, trapping and fishing opportunities to those who directly foot part of the bill for matching money.

The money spent on Canada lynx is a great example. In the grand scheme of things, trapping in Maine has, for the most part, been seriously limited due to the over-protection of the lynx, which is not a “threatened” or “endangered” species. Our own money is being used to stop trapping by propping up a fake environmental program.

The projects that get the attention of the extortion, dirty money are all environmentalist (spelled anti hunting, trapping and fishing) projects. This is, of course, part of the agenda of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – to end hunting, trapping and fishing and fully implement non consumptive use of wildlife and all natural resources.

As we have seen over the years, groups like the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, have managed to steal Pittman-Robertson and Johnson-Dinghal monies to implement programs that work AGAINST the perpetuation of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. In other words, our own money is being used to destroy hunting, trapping and fishing.

It’s all about the money though. FREE MONEY is what people believe. During this time of Maine, and other states, drafting their prostitution plans, most believe this program to be a good thing, not realizing the long-term effects it has on traditional Maine hunting, trapping and fishing. And still, hunters, trappers and fishermen support the program and fully participate in it believing it’s all good.

For myself, I don’t like my money being used to support Environmentalism that is used against my enjoyment of hunting and fishing. You shouldn’t either.


Outdoors in Maine: Managing moose numbers best left to pros

*Editor’s Note* – Management of moose is the job of wildlife “pros.” However, not all wildlife pros know what they are doing and have agendas far and beyond “the best available science,” and sometimes even the rule of law. Therefore, we need watchdogs to keep a close eye on their every move, questioning those things that should be questioned.

The author of this piece (linked to below) tells of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s (MDIFW) responsibility and legal obligations to manage moose for viewers and hunters. Managing any animal for the purpose of providing viewing opportunities is a non scientific event proving only to provide management complications for healthy populations. The North American Model, i.e. managing game for surplus harvest, (taking advantage of our God-given resource) has a proven scientific track record while providing a healthy resource.

As the author points out, it appears that attempting to manage the number of moose for viewing and hunting is warring against each other.

Something is wrong as far as I can see things. Hunters are restricted and the number of moose permits available to hunters rise and fall according to how MDIFW determines a need for population controls within Wildlife Management Districts (WMD). There is seldom any complaining by hunters for this, although sometimes we question the reasoning behind certain decisions. At the same time, we are seeing where people are demanding that hunters be short-changed in opportunities to harvest moose simply because of their demands for more viewing opportunities. I believe that what we have witnessed is MDIFW deciding to forego scientific moose management, according to the moose management plans, in order to placate the selfish desires of those riding around in cars hoping to see moose without any effort.

If it is proven, or if anyone is willing to connect the dots, that increasing moose populations to satisfy the social demands of viewers, is exacerbating the tick problem killing moose and spreading disease, this is something that needs to be seriously addressed.

Hunters would be cut off if management demands showed the need. The same much apply to moose watchers.

As Kantar will tell you, he and the Fish and Wildlife Department are obligated by law and tradition to safeguard the moose resource, for moose viewers as well as moose hunters. Ironically, it is possible that an excess of moose in Maine may be exacerbating the moose tick infestations that have taken a lot of young moose.

Source: Outdoors in Maine: Managing moose numbers best left to pros | Sun Journal