January 21, 2019

Maine: All Aboard for the IFW Commissioner Cocoa-Puff Train?

Golly gee whiz! Seems everyone is all on board for the governor-elect’s nomination of Judy Camuso as the new commissioner of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) – that is all except those who want to end bear hunting…and hunting, trapping, and fishing in general.

Up front let me say, I honestly do not know enough about the former head of the Division of Wildlife for MDIFW to make an intelligent decision for or against her nomination to head up that department. And if that statement doesn’t make any sense to some, let me just say I’m neither for nor against.

I am, however, a bit more of an independent thinker than some. Earlier I wrote about how I mostly believed that when the Wildlife Director Camuso became the quasi-mouthpiece for MDIFW in discussions involving the environmentalist’s second referendum to end bear hunting, she assumed that position more than likely because commissioner Chandler Woodcock asked her to. She may have also eagerly volunteered. I just don’t know and before her approval, I think all of us deserve to know.

So what does that mean? Who knows. It may mean nothing or it may mean everything. When the candidate for the commissioner’s chair says she won’t talk until after the nomination and selection process, how are any of us supposed to know whether the boot fits on the left or right foot?

What concerns me are those who point blank support Camuso’s nomination because she was that mouthpiece. Is it that people just don’t get it or are they so shallow-thinking they believe 100% that the items she appeared to support as the MDIFW’s mouthpiece are her own beliefs? Maybe they are maybe they are not. How many times in political history have people supported one person only later to find out they were wolves in sheep’s clothing? Too numerous to try to mention.

We may not find out for sure until it’s too late.

The Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (SAM), head of the Maine Guides Association, and other outdoor writers have come out “all in” for Camuso’s selection. Probably some of these individuals and groups know a lot more about Camuso’s political ideology and how heavily engrained in Voodoo Science and Romance Biology she is than I am. If so, they seemed quite tight lipped about it.

One such outdoor writer who I am a strong supporter of, in his recent article stated that he thought supporting Camuso was a good idea. But perhaps the major reason he gave for that support isn’t the best one. He wrote: “Because Camuso was a strong and effective advocate for the game management value of recreational bear hunting during the controversial bear referendum, her appointment, however,will no doubt be opposed by the anti-bear hunting faction. For most of us in the sporting community, her role in that debate is reason alone to support her appointment with vigor.”

Is it reason enough, and “with vigor?”

Evidently.

Historically we see where voters cast a ballot for someone for similar reasons only to discover the error of their ways later on. As well, think of some of the recent nominations made by so-called “conservative” presidents to the Supreme Court, i.e. Souter and Kennedy (Bush and Reagan). (This is where I insert: BUT DON’T GO LOOK!)

Let me repeat, I am neither for nor against the nomination of Judy Camuso. As I said, I don’t know enough about her to know whether she will be a good commissioner. One thing is certain, I would want her in my employment because we do know that she was faithful in being Chandler Woodcock’s (Governor’s?) mouthpiece. If she is commissioner, will she exemplify the same management practices or will, as the appointment of a pretty left-wing democrat governor, go “all in” for Voodoo Science and Romance Biology?

For my dollar, I would rather base any decision about this appointment on a whole lot more than the fact that she is at least good at doing what her boss told her to do.

I wish others, instead of jumping in feet first and remaining submerged, would demand a lot more answers to certain questions rather than make assumptions…”with vigor.”

Don’t regret your support. Do your homework. She could be in charge for 8 years…8 very long years, perhaps.

Share

Maine Legislature To Consider 14 “Gestapoesque” Gun Bills

With the Democrats taking over the Maine Legislature, as near as I can tell they plan to introduce a minimum of 12 gun control, rights destroying bills that will do nothing to stop what it is the progressives believe they can stop. So, what else is new?

Without having the text of each and every bill, at this point all we can do is go by the titles of the bills. For those with a brain, we know that most bill’s titles are deceptive at best and an outright lie in most cases.

If we examine the titles, the Democrats intend to ban large capacity magazines (whatever that is); protect children by requiring safe storage of guns (whatever that is); mandatory background checks for anyone who even thinks about a gun (whatever that is); a prohibition that would stop “extremely dangerous and suicidal individuals” (whatever that is) from owning a gun; allow municipalities to ban guns wherever they choose; establish a “voluntary” (whatever that is) gun collection day (all unwanted guns can be dropped off at my house); waiting periods they believe will reduce suicides and violent crimes (chuckle).

What a waste of time.

I would suppose we can also expect abortions to increase, Welfare to explode, illegal immigration to expand exponentially, unemployment to go up and free CELLPHONES for everyone.

Share

Frustrations In Dealing With Rigged Systems

Most fail to even recognize that our trapped existence takes place within a politically rigged system – at all levels – designed by man for man. Those of us who completely understand this presence avoid it like a wicked plague. Most get frustrated by failures in getting their idealisms pushed through governmental agencies that don’t operate on the same plain as our captive existence.

I was reading a piece the other day from someone exemplifying this very reality. The frustrations where spelled out in disheartening text, sharing such depressing news of how, in his opinion, our government – legislators and administrative departments – don’t do as the people ask, even extolling misguided beliefs that our legislators, as commissioned by their vote, are required to bring to the Legislature all proposed rules and regulations all of which are designed, either purposely or ignorantly, to further repress a once freer society.

Of course our government institutions don’t do as the people want. They do as the People want, but few understand that concept.

We’ve been trained to believe we live in a democracy…as though a democracy was a good thing. The best known definition of democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for lunch. And somehow this is sought after by some? The wolves no doubt.

The frustration exhibited in the piece I’ve referred to is that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) won’t have public hearings and full panel discussions on every proposal any person has ever thought of. The writer exclaims the system is, “…not as it should be.

I might agree with such an assessment however, it appears that according to this writer the way it should be is more personal idealism than realism. In this case the frustration might be more fueled by a person not getting his way most of time rather than the system “not as it should be.”

Then things get confusing. The frustration with the system, described as “the antithesis of democracy, as well as the undermining and ultimate suppression of citizens’ rights,” turns to resentment and whining because the system won’t do things his way. The writer then begins to blame everything on the special interest groups – those groups of course he does not support – and how such special interest groups represent a minority. Is this what his idea of democracy is? That only the majority have a “right” to complain? When we don’t get our way, it seems to be quite normal to blame it on everything but what it is. Blaming special interest groups – in this case hunters, trappers, and fishermen – is a much easier task than learning about and then explaining why our system is rigged and does not operate the way we have all been taught, and then discovering what can be done to change this reality.

In frustration, the author writes, “Let’s not forget that Maine’s wildlife is a vital part of the public domain, not some group’s private preserve to do with as they wish. Just as motorists don’t own public roads, boaters and swimmers don’t own public lakes, hikers don’t own public land, anglers don’t own the fish who [fish should not be referred to as a who. They are not people.] live in public ponds and streams, so hunters and trappers don’t own the state’s wildlife.”

I understand the frustration…really, I do, but, on the same token a voter does not own every proposed piece of legislation. The writer makes it sound like hunters, motorists, boaters, swimmers, hikers, and anglers enjoy unfettered access to any and all wildlife and lands and waters. I believe the argument could honestly be made that those special interest groups experience just as many frustrations as this writer. There is no need to suppress the frustrations and desires of one group over another so that a rigged system might operate as one might suggest it ought to in order to get their way.

It’s difficult to take the complaints seriously from those who stand up in support of democracy and in the same breath speak out against the symptoms of democracy. That makes little sense. If democracy is the form of servitude rule you desire, then your only recourse is to be subject to the rigors of democracy. In other words, sometimes you are the sheep.

Perhaps if the writer, instead of saying the system isn’t working the way he thinks it’s supposed to, had said the system isn’t working the way HE wants it to, would have been more accurate.

We all experience the same frustrations. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and sometimes the squeaky wheel is not the wheel we choose. One thing is for certain. You can’t change a rigged system by employing the rigged system to fix itself. Insanity dictates it’s time to change.

Share

Statistics Prove Statistics Can Prove Anything

I’ve used this line before. It’s difficult to pin down exactly where or from whom specifically this quote came from, but the real problem lies in the understanding of statistics. I like the explanation found on Quora.com. It reads: “Statistics is only the representation of an empirical fact, a connection between abstract representations of real world concepts. By itself, it can prove nothing except the dry statement of an idealized probability. What the public often overlooks is that correlation does not imply causation.”

Some in Maine seem to be upset by some numbers recently published in a local newspaper’s opinion column that Wildlife Watching in Maine generates $1.3 billion in revenue to the state. Can this be so?

Not exactly, if you have a basic understanding of how the numbers (statistics) are manipulated by anyone to prove anything.

In December of 2017, the Portland Press Herald published an article that stated that according to the Maine Office of Tourism, the state took in revenues of $8.8 billion from general tourism. Keep in mind here that we are not working on any set definition of “tourism.” That is the first problem. I’ve spent a great deal of time over the years examining and researching surveys, questionnaires, polls, etc. and there exists a lot of gray area…by design. This allows for anyone to use those “statistics” to prove anything their little heart desires. I do not have time or space to write the book required to cover the dynamics of surveys and statistics.

But for the sake of this discussion, let’s go with the $8.8 in tourism revenue. According to the same Portland Press Herald (PPH) article, of that $8.8 billion, 28% of 1,407 tourists surveyed said they preferred wildlife watching “to all other touring activities, such as enjoying ocean views or fall foliage or sightseeing.” (is this a scientific survey?)

What does that mean? Not much really, for two very basic reasons. One, we don’t know what constitutes “tourism” as it pertains to the Maine Office of Tourism. Two, given no other statistical data, we don’t know how many of whom preferred what, when, where, and how. Is 28% of the total tourism revenue generated average nationwide? Below average? Above average? Who conducted the “query” the Office of Tourism refers to and who paid for it.? Just what exactly is represented by this 28%????

Are you following along?

If 28% of Maine tourists, preferred wildlife watching over all others, did 100% of those 28% participate in Wildlife Watching which contributed to the $8.8 billion? Who knows. 28% of those surveyed may “prefer” wildlife watching but perhaps only 2% actually did it. By the way, what constitutes “wildlife watching?”

Anyone can do anything with these numbers. Taken at face value (if that fits my narrative), 28% of $8.8 billion dollars is nearly $2.5 billion. Therefore, I could say that wildlife watching in Maine generates around $2.5 billion a year in tourist-generated revenue. Is that accurate? Is that honest?

For the numbers nerd, you can take any of these base numbers and percentages and create anything you wish.

A few years ago, I spent a great deal of time studying, in order to fully and honestly understand, how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts their surveys in which they dazzle us with all kinds of statistics about hunting, fishing, wildlife watching, etc. for each and every state. I believe this is done or used to be done, every 5 years.

Aside from the muddled information I’ve given you above used to manipulate statistics, the biggest takeaway I got was how questions were asked and then how answers were handled according to their application in compiling data.

For example: If John Doe decides to take a lifelong big game hunting trip to Western Montana, and while he is there is confronted with a survey taker, he might be asked questions like: Why did you come to Montana?; Did you visit Yellowstone Park?; Did you see any wolves?; Did you go fishing?; Did you stay in a motel?; Did you hire guide services?; Did you go hiking? etc.

As you can see, the sky is the limit on what questions could be asked of a “Tourist.” In this case, if John Doe answered yes to all of these questions, after being discovered he came for a hunting trip, then the data would be recorded that he participated in all those activities. If John Doe spent $50,000 on his trip, then the data could, and most often is, manipulated to state that John Doe spent $50,000 hunting; that he spent $50,000 to visit Yellowstone Park to watch wolves and go hiking; that he spent $50,000 to go fishing, stay in a motel, hire guides, buy gas, buy food. I think you get the picture.

This is how it all works. This is why I take a very vocal stand against governments or any other organization using surveys and the like to draw conclusions. That’s a form of Scientism and outcome-based VooDoo Science. The results presented are dishonest and politically driven.

When addressing the comments of people with political agendas, recall the simple statement that statistics used to make such claims can prove: “nothing except the dry statement of an idealized probability.” 

It might even be more accurate to call it an “idealized POSSIBILITY.”

And, just remember. More than likely the person parroting the numbers is only repeating those given them by other echo-chambers who know no better. That’s why it pays to know and understand your resource for information. There’s more to it than it just sounds good.

Share

Disease: For the Love of Predators?

Here we go with one more “study” that “suggests” that a reduction in the presence of foxes and perhaps other smaller predators who feast on mice is causing an increase in those rodents/mice that carry and spread diseases such as Lyme Disease.

For at least 6 years there have been ample studies suggesting the same thing. However, one of the problems associated with these so-called “studies” is that in one form or another all causes not desired by the individual or group of individuals seeking desired results, are blamed on “Climate Change,” i.e. Global Warming.

When reading the latest report about predators and the spread of disease, I recalled that I had read not that long ago about Joh Lund, publisher of the Maine Sportsman Magazine stating that he tended to agree that a reduction in the number of foxes could be the root cause of an increase in Lyme and other diseases carried and spread by small rodents like the white-footed mouse that carries Lyme. Lund’s hypothesis is that the reduction of foxes is caused by direct competition from coyotes. With Maine and other states experiencing ample growth in the number of coyotes, wolves, and coywolves, the result is a sharp reduction in foxes and other smaller prey responsible for keeping in check the rodents that carry disease.

Perhaps we can just as easily blame the increased spread of diseases, such as Lyme disease, on a misguided approach to wildlife management. So long as wildlife managers insist that the crux of their decision making will be based upon social demands, i.e. the protection of large predators, then we cannot expect any changes that might result in the reduction of disease-carrying rodents.

To go along with this misguided approach to wildlife management, there are ample groups and individuals with pet projects aimed at protecting one species of animal over the other with all the fabricated excuses for doing so. The larger and wealthier the animal protection group is the more pressure they can put on wildlife managers who insist on making their decisions based on social demands. 

Most state wildlife managing departments openly invite this kind of pressure to be brought on themselves by publicly announcing that they will cave into social demands regardless of any scientific knowledge.

At work, we have those who believe that killing off large numbers of deer will reduce the presence and spread of Lyme Disease. We also have those who love coyotes, wolves, coywolves, and all other breeds and mixed breeds of wild dogs who refuse to allow any managers to necessarily go about killing those animals in order to find some kind of balance that should be desired for a healthy ecosystem and thus creating an atmosphere where people are less likely to get sick.

Perhaps lost in all this modern-day Voodoo Science and Romance Biology is the fact that animals are nasty and spread diseases. I don’t personally believe that this creation was intended to live in our homes or that we should be demanding that disease-spreading animals of any kind should be protected. This misguided hogwash about Nature’s Balance is causing all kinds of problems, the majority of which are not being talked about and people refuse to listen. It’s easier to blame all problems on Climate Change than to address these issues responsibly.

If wildlife biologists and managers, who aren’t completely brainwashed into this modern wildlife management hocus-pocus, were allowed to manage wildlife from a real scientific perspective and an understanding that many of these animals are a resource intended for the people, and void of perverted social demands, perhaps then and only then will be able to do a better job. Until that happens – and I’m not holding my breath, – we can expect more disease problems and safety threats to the people who want to pursue Life, Liberty, and Happiness. 

Share

My Recommendations for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

George Smith, an outdoor writer, and environmentalist, provides his readers with a list of his recommendations for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW). I can’t say I agree with everything he is suggesting. I’ll explain why.

Smith wants a better open door policy at the MDIFW main office. I agree although I don’t use it and probably never will. You can’t fix a rigged system by using the rigged system.

George says it’s time for MDIFW to do something about turkeys. He says there are too many, that the fees and permitting system needs to be changed, bag limits raised, in order to motivate more hunters to take up turkey hunting.

I’m not a turkey hunter. I’ve never tried it and doubt that I will for a number of reasons. I will, however, concur that there are too many turkeys. I’ve never seen as many wild turkeys as I have this late summer and fall.

It is a known fact that management and acceptance of any wild animal on the landscape are heavily influenced by acceptance and satisfaction from the general public. When such animals become a nuisance and a public health and safety issue, acceptance by the public disappears in a hurry. Maine is reaching that point where they are considering the turkey to be a nuisance. I agree something should be done to get those numbers under better control.

It is my strong opinion that Maine has too many moose. This has caused the overwhelming growth in winter ticks that are destroying the moose herd. Maine should have been keeping the moose population at lower, healthier levels than growing them to numbers great enough to appease the selfish desires of tourists and hunters.

Smith suggests a program of capturing and “spraying” moose to kill the ticks. This is about as feasible as trapping deer and planting birth control devices in them. It certainly appears to me that the biggest motivational factor in finding ways to kill the ticks other than reducing the population is completely selfish. Whining and carrying on because moose gawking businesses can’t make enough money unless they can see moose anytime and everywhere they want to is not only selfish but it’s irresponsible. MDIFW is irresponsible in their management goals of the moose to attempt to grow moose to numbers that satisfy the tourist industry.

Smith says that Lee Kantar, MDIFW’s moose biologist, said he, “…believes that eventually the population will be reduced to a level where ticks will not be such a problem.” Eventually? Is this going to happen when the ticks (Natural Regulation) have successfully brought the number of moose to levels it should be through years of suffering moose, or is MDIFW actively manipulating the moose hunt to bring numbers to tick-free desired levels?

Hypocrisy exists when Smith in one breath suggests that moose numbers should be protected by finding ways to “spray” moose to kill ticks, while in the next talks about how proud he was to help facilitate the slaughter of deer on one of Maine’s coastal islands. That doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. While killing the deer was in the name of putting a stop to Lyme disease, evidently, such a suggestion informs us that ignorance is abundant when it comes to winter ticks, moose, and disease.

Marketing Maine by the Maine government to draw in tourists, hunters, anglers, hikers, etc. is a waste of time and money. Many Maine residents, who aren’t the business owners trying to make a go of it, while calling upon the government to promote their businesses, don’t want more of these people coming to the state, all for the sake of collecting more money. Any business should be geared to do their own marketing and provide a product or service good enough that “if you build it they will come.” Why should I subsidize another’s business? Who is subsidizing me? This is nothing more than an exemplification of the socialist/totalitarian society we have become.

Once again, Smith extolls the need to fund MDIFW with general taxation dollars. He even says that MDIFW should be run by “groups representing hunters, anglers, conservationists, and environmentalists.” It doesn’t take much effort to see that in other states that have done this, their fish and game departments have gone to hell in a handbasket.

I don’t understand how anyone of sound mind can encourage the operation of the fish and game department by those “conservationists and environmentalists” who have cost us millions of dollars over the years attempting to put a stop to hunting and trapping. Isn’t this a form of insanity?

The MDIFW has become overrun with “conservationists and environmentalists” and that’s one of the biggest reasons large predators have grown out of control and deer populations are shrinking to a point they’ve decided not to even bother attempting to manage deer in those areas that have lost all their deer.

Environmentalism is a planned mental illness that operates on the false pretense that “Natural Regulation” (which is an oxymoron) works better than a hands-on approach. Turning the reins of MDIFW over to the environmentalists and animal rights radicals, which is what you’ll get once the leverage of how the MDIFW is funded, is the nail in the proverbial coffin.

It might be of great interest if some who promote general taxation monies to fund the MDIFW would expend a little effort and look into what has become of other state’s fish and game departments when they lost control, turned their work over to Environmentalism and renamed their departments, departments of conservation and environment.

Granted the MDIFW needs some changes, but not in the wrong direction. Moving it more toward the demands of Environmentalism isn’t a cure unless death is what you are seeking.

Share

UMaine is Going to Test for Infections in Ticks

What a great idea! According to V. Paul Reynolds, the University of Maine is going to test ticks to determine how many or what percentage of ticks carry infections and what kind they carry. From the article linked to, it appears researchers want to focus on Lyme disease, babesiosis, and anaplasmosis, all diseases that are extremely dangerous to people.

This is all good and never should any of us downplay the importance of understanding ticks and the spread of disease. However, consider what I am about to write.

Hydatid disease in humans comes from the ingestion of Echinococcus granulosus eggs. These tiny eggs are carried in wild and domestic dogs, foxes, and raccoons (definitive hosts) and spread through their feces and ingested by secondary hosts – deer, moose, cows, sheep – ungulates – which causes the growth of cysts in organs such as liver, lungs, brain, heart. Most common are the lungs and liver.

Maine scientists and researchers have determined that moose in Maine are infected with cystic echinococcosis (they like to call it lungworm), most likely contracted from wolves/coyotes that populate the state of Maine in the tens of thousands.

But, we are talking about ticks, right? Correct! Hang on!

There are many kinds of ticks that carry diseases, some of which are talked about in V. Paul Reynolds’ piece. But there is no talk of this very dangerous, even deadly disease that can infect and affect man. I have written extensively about how men can become infected by the inadvertent ingestion of the E. granulosus eggs, i.e. through infected water, foods, feces (disturbing wolf/coyote scat) and from your pet dog that roams about freely and is not adequately treated by your local veterinarian.

Few in the U.S. know anything about and have never heard of such a disease. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) recently had stated that worldwide Hydatid disease among people was at epidemic levels. Today, WHO says that at any one time, more than 1 million people are affected.

WHO also states that: “Humans are infected through ingestion of parasite eggs in contaminated food, water or soil, or through direct contact with animal hosts.”

But, Tom. We are talking about ticks and the spread of diseases. That’s right.

Ticks cannot be carriers of the E. granulosus egg…through their own ingestion and pass it on through their feces or blood…that we know of. But there is a remarkable phenomenon that shouldn’t be disregarded.

Research has discovered that insects that are commonly found on scat can carry the microscopic eggs on them and transplant those eggs on the next warm body or object they land on, i.e. you, me, a bird, a cow, a deer, a moose, a picnic table, plants, flowers, etc. Should that egg(s) be inadvertently ingested by you or I or any of the listed unsuspecting culprits and hundreds, perhaps thousands of other contacts you can come up with, there is no limit in how this disease can be spread. The odds are low, perhaps, but realistic none the same. This is something that we should be educated about.

Our own Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tells us that these eggs can remain viable for up to one year. Extreme heat and cold has little effect. Fire will destroy them.

So imagine if you can, any of the several tick varieties that inhabit our areas, crawling on or near an infected coyote scat before working their way up a stem of grass or a bush. You are out for a walk later discovering that same tick on you. The way we have been brainwashed and fear instilled in us about Lyme disease, in our semi-panic stage to get the tick off us, we grab the tick, trying to squeeze it and kill it, or simply to touch it to save for the doctor or burn in a fire, we forget to wash our hands thoroughly or before we do, we put our hands on or near our mouth or nose. The next thing you know, this possible Lyme disease-carrying tick also has a few viable E.g eggs that got on you and you ingest it.

Frightening prospects to say the least.

Also, consider the possibilities of those ticks that find deer and moose as a source of a blood meal. It’s not that the tick will necessarily infect the deer or moose, or any other ungulate it might land on by spreading it through the blood, but the ungulate, even it doesn’t groom well, may ingest the eggs from a tick carrying an E.g. egg.

We know that ungulates that grow the cysts will not often die directly from the disease but surely lungs infected with cysts inhibits that animal’s ability to avoid large predators. This, in turn, increases the mortality rate which could present significant problems with managing wild ungulate herds and sustaining a viable population. This act aides in the spread of disease.

With all the many ways that E.g can spread, it is time that all of us become educated to the prospects of how these diseases are spread and how other animals and ourselves can become infected.

There are other diseases from ticks than Lyme disease.

Get educated. You may want to begin by going to this page and begin reading.

Share

Cursing Globull Warming

This morning I woke up to some more of Al Gore’s BS global warming, a.k.a. Climate Change. I need to remind readers that it is ONLY November 15th. It has been brutally cold. Presently at my house here in Maine, we have about 7 inches of snow on the ground. The current temperature is hovering at a balmy -2 F. The forecast calls for a Winter Storm Warning tonight into tomorrow. Snow accumulation of 5 – 10 inches expected, followed by more blustery winds and bone-chilling temperatures.

I haven’t even ventured out to go deer hunting. In my youth, I would have taken complete advantage of this snow and been on the track of a big buck every opportunity I had. Instead, yesterday I tried to figure out why my Farmall tractor up and decided it wasn’t going to run. The problem is it’s so damned cold I can’t spend but a few minutes at a time tinkering. With cleanup from the last winter storm still needed everywhere and more predicted, it looks like I might have to call a friend to plow me out if we get too much of the white stuff. I can pack it down and hope for the best. I’ll be headed South around the first of December (what was I thinking?) so maybe I can get by until then.

It would be nice to get some of that “Indian Summer” next week, or even the week after but so far nothing of the sort is in the forecast.

In the meantime, Al Gore can suck rotten eggs.

Considering that I used to walk to school every day, uphill, both ways, this weather is not normal, nor does it tell us the climate is changing. It reminds us that weather is weather – aside from the fact that technology exists to manipulate the weather and to use it as a weapon of warfare and people control.

This prolonged cold and snow remind me of November 1968. I hunted on snow just about the entire deer hunting season. Heading into Thanksgiving week, even in the lower elevations, the snow was higher than knee deep. Most of us in the family had tagged out before Thanksgiving and I clearly recall that right after dinner on Turkey Day, my father and brothers and I headed to the local ski jumping hill, packed it out and took a few jumps – on Thanksgiving. We could have been jumping before this but deer hunting came first. We needed the sustenance.

*Note* – It was two years later that during Christmas Vacation Week, the ski team gathered afternoons and evenings with bushel baskets, garbage cans, boxes, shovels, snow blowers, and snow plows. We scraped the adjacent field next to the ski jump trying to find enough snow to cover the jumping hill in order to ski on it. Comparing the two events is a reminder of “Weather Change” and nothing to do with Climate Change.

The Winter of 68/69 turned out to be a record snow year. I have to say I honestly cannot remember about temperatures. Generally speaking, with a lot of snow there is an absence of any real prolonged frigid air.

I am in hopes that all my hunting friends are able to take advantage of this snow and it increases their chances at success.

I wonder if the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife had it in their minds someplace, before issuing a record number of “Any-Deer Permits” that there may be snow to hunt on the majority of the season?

 

Share

Is Maine Really in the Midst of Deer Hunting Season?

I wonder if the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) is ashamed or embarrassed that it is regulating and administering the state’s annual deer hunting season? – or any of the big game hunting seasons for that matter.

Someone visiting the state would have no idea unless they happened to see some people running around with hunter orange clothing on, but then again, blaze orange is often daily attire for some of the locals. The majority of Maine residents don’t even know the deer hunt is on. Didn’t it use to be a right of passage? Didn’t kids skip school, with or without their parents’ permission, to go deer hunting? Hell, I did!!! Once I even went to the boys’ room and lit a cigarette (I didn’t smoke) so I would get expelled from school to have more time to deer hunt. The principal laughed at me and told me I would have to wait until Saturday like everyone else.

It was a time when the fish and game department got to brag about the successes of their efforts at managing deer, touting the number of deer tagged, even in estimations. In a way, it was the canary in the coal mine of successful deer management.

Is that what’s going on? Is the MDIFW refusing to acknowledge the deer season because they are ashamed of how global warming has yet to produce more deer? Or maybe it’s because most managers are believers in nonconsumptive use – that animals should be protected from all killing, even when scientifically proven over generations to be the trophy model of success. The brainwashing is in full metal jacket.

I’ve spoken often of what appears to be the deliberate act of not placing live data of deer tagging on the websites so we can all see. If you are a mainstream media person in good standing with MDIFW, you can call or email and ask for some numbers, but not the rest of us. MDIFW even fails to take 5 minutes (omg we just don’t have the resources to do that) to send out a press release on their website with a brief update about the hunting season. It’s really like the preteen who insists their parents drop them off a block away from the school for fear the parent might embarrass them somehow.

How do we maintain hunters, say nothing of recruiting new ones, if the MDIFW appears ashamed of the event?

Yesterday, the MDIFW took enough time to release their “Monthy Review.” And what was in the monthly review? About anything except hardly a mention about hunting.

Commissioner Woodcock expresses appreciation to private landowners for land access, we can read about the “mysteries of bats,” honoring fallen game wardens, salmon in Sebago Lake, or learn more about chronic wasting disease.

Whatever happened to the sense of pride in Maine’s deer, bear, and moose hunting seasons?

It is extremely obvious that the MDIFW has little or no interest in such things anymore and is a precursor to what lies ahead for those left who still enjoy hunting. I’ll give it 10 years, perhaps as many as 20, and it will be a violation to hunt any animal, which would be difficult to do considering that the totalitarians will have what guns they can take away from us and it will be unlawful to own any.

God, the future looks bright, doesn’t it?

I don’t want to be this way. I don’t want to berate the MDIFW, but for 50 years I have paid my way and now the department is too conscience-stricken to even publically speak of one of Maine’s historical events that used to knit a community together. There’s a lot more to “Git ya deeyah yet?” than the poking fun of hunters it is today. It was all that was talked about. Now people get “offended” when they see or even hear about deer hunting.

Evidently, the MDIFW is the same way.

Share

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