October 19, 2017

Fish and Wildlife Management is a Laughing Stock, Unless You Are an Environmentalist

While the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) pat themselves on the back for all the outstanding work they have done (every child gets a trophy), some of us are wishing that a little of that effort would be focused on better deer and moose management.

To justify an increase of 60% in Any-Deer Permits (ADP), MDIFW says Maine has had two “mild” winters in a row and thus there are now too many deer in some places and we got to get rid of them. What’s confusing is that some of those places that got increases in ADPs, last winter saw record-breaking amounts of snow and continue to see extremely poor deer hunting. Evidently snow no longer is a factor is calculating severe and mild winters. Little did I know.

But if you take a moment and read through the “everybody gets a trophy” recognition is given to looking out for piping plovers, arctic char, bats, updating the website, selling licenses, shuffling papers and creating more regulations, with not one award listed for deer management, moose management or even bear management.

To make sure we understand this, license fees from hunters, fishermen, trappers, etc. pays for the operation of MDIFW and yet all the awards and recognition goes to the list above. This, of course, is the result of the direction that Maine and every other state in the Union has taken, turning their fish and game departments into carrying out the goals of environmentalism – totalitarian socialists doing the bidding for the fascists and liking every minute of it. They never learned that this, historically, is always followed by communism. Today the brainwashed would labeled this “fake news.”

Unfortunately, this is only recognized by a handful of people who still have their heads mostly screwed on the right way. Otherwise, the majority of people, think that using my dollars I spend on a hunting license to make sure piping plovers get everything they need, while at the same time restricting access by taxpayers to beaches near nesting sites, is a good thing. Evidently they need to entice more people to buy hunting licenses, at the expense of the deer, in order to buy those “everybody gets a trophy.”

At the present rate of declension, only a short time remains before hunting and trapping are regulated and forced out of existence because of the influence of Sustainable Development’s Environmentalism.

I stand as a distinct minority in my judgement as to how I perceive fish and wildlife departments nationwide…But that doesn’t make my perspective wrong.

Share

You Ain’t Nothin’ But a Hound Dog?

Share

Parasites “A Major Threat to Moose” But Leads “Occasionally to Death.” HUH?

Perhaps Cornell University is at it again. The last time I recall the antics of Cornell University, was when they, in their attempt to do something about the overrunning deer population on campus, decided to conduct some “tubal ligations” on some of the female population of deer.

When a university, or any other organization, is wallowing in liberal idiocy, stupid things happen to stupid people. What the brilliant wildlife department at the university failed to understand, in their blindness, was that tubal ligations on female deer only caused those female deer to go into estrus and remain in estrus until they had successfully mated. Now, without the ability to successfully mate…The result? Every buck within a hundred miles descended on Cornell looking for action.

And now, the $34,000.00 a year tuition at Cornell, has students who are conducting tests, and what they call research, to see what are killing the Adirondack moose. They say moose eating snails is how they contract “brain worm,” which ends up killing the moose. However, in one paragraph, the university writes: “…surveys in 2016 on 11 live moose and 22 necropsies and concluded parasites are a major threat to the moose population.” (Emboldening added by editor)

This if followed almost immediately by this: “Foraging moose then ingest infected snails, culminating in a diseased brain and spinal cord, and occasionally death.”(emboldening added by editor)

I may be wrong, but from my perspective, if I was going to state that parasites, from eating snails, are a major threat to the moose population, then it must be that death, and/or failure to reproduce, is at a level high enough the recruitment of new moose calves is lower than total mortality of the adult moose population.

If that is true, then how can the results of foraging moose, eating snails, lead to “occasional death?”

Maybe they should try some tubal ligations.

Understand that by reading Cornell’s own words, they are clueless as to whether moose are eating snails and if so, if it is killing the moose. “Our results show that moose foraging in areas with high soil moisture may likely encounter higher densities of gastropods – snails and slugs – which likely increases the risk of parasitic threats from deer brain worm if the snails are eaten.” (Emboldening added by editor)

I suppose it is just as LIKELY that moose MIGHT eat a truck full of cannabis a LIKELY die!

Here’s one more observation. The student researchers (give em a break, right? So they can graduate and fill our wildlife manager departments with more progressive, brainwashed, environmentalist, idiots.) said they are looking into wet and “water areas” where they think, perhaps they will find these parasitic-laden snails. One area of interest to them is described this way: “Since moose make use of water areas and eat in wet, dense pine forests, they’re susceptible to a large presence of gastropods …”

I grew up in Maine and lived the majority of my adult life here. Maine is the Pine Tree State. Pine forests are everywhere and for some strange reason, the people of Maine decided to call Maine the Pine Tree State. Maine also has moose…more than any other state in the lower contiguous states. I’m going to go out and search for moose eating in “wet, dense pine forests.” And all this time, I thought pine trees, like the hundreds of thousands I have on my small acreage, thrived in dry, sandy places.

I just can’t believe my own eyes!

Maybe I should try some tubal ligations.

Share

Fewer Moose Permits Because Of Fewer Moose Collisions With Cars?

George Smith writes, “A Portland Press Herald news story by Deirdre Fleming recently reported that collisions with moose are down 55 percent in the last 10 years. And that led DIF&W this year to eliminate moose hunting permits in three coastal WMDs.” This information evidently comes from the Portland Press Herald. Certainly, neither Fleming, Smith or the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) mean, or are suggesting, that MDIFW is now basing their moose management decisions, along with the allotment of moose hunting permits, solely on how many cars collided with moose and how many people died in the process? Are they?

Smith also writes, “DIF&W’s outstanding moose biologist Lee Kantar still maintains that we’ve got between 60,000 and 70,000 moose, a drop from 76,000 in 2013. I am skeptical, given the significantly fewer moose I spot in my travels…” Here’s a thought. Suppose that MDIFW’s Kantar is correct, mostly, in maintaining his belief that Maine has between 60,000 and 70,000 moose. And let’s suppose that Smith is correct that he sees “significantly fewer moose” and that is the case statewide. They both could be correct you know.

The terribly incorrect information might just be that there was not 76,000 moose in Maine in 2013, but perhaps there were 90,000 or more moose in Maine before the ticks began wiping them all out. Someone from the MDIFW made the statement that there were at least 90,000 moose in Maine.

 

Share

Are Radio Tracking Collars Just a Waste of Money?

One might think so.

I was reading last night a story about what authorities in Minnesota are saying is killing their moose. According to this report, Minnesota once had 8,840 moose in 2006 and now there are only 3,710 “based on aerial surveys in January.”

What about those surveys?

We are told that that between 2013 and 2015, 173 moose were collared as part of a planned study to determine why the moose were dying. It has been reported that because of animal rights perverts’ complaints about the study (probably fearing the study might prove their ideology wrong), the governor stopped any further collaring of moose and essentially the study ended and one has to wonder whether much or any of the information they claim to publish is worth camel dung.

The report says, “Of 173 moose that were captured and fitted with GPS-transmitting collars from 2013 to 2015, here’s what happened to them:

* 28 moose are still alive with collars that are working.

* 53 are believed to be alive but their collars have stopped working.

* 23 are presumed to be still alive but their collars fell off and their status is unknown.
* 12 died immediately after being collared so were not part of the mortality study.
* 57 died with working collars and are the basis for the mortality study data — the moose where cause of death is known”
57 moose, out of 3,710 is the sample used in making their determinations as to what is killing Minnesota’s moose. I doubt that the pie chart they have provided is very accurate and can tell us only what perhaps killed those 57 moose.
But it gets worse. Minnesota officials tell us that collars are very problematic. “It’s frustrating. It’s disappointing. But it’s still a developing technology. Everyone who uses collars like this has issues. There’s a lot that can go wrong,”
The report also contains some other interesting bits of information. As an example, some have determined that the moose are “malnourished.” Undernourishment is being blamed on habitat and there are indications that the highest survival rates for moose are coming in areas that recently saw very large forest fires and the forests have begun to regenerate.
In addition, calf survival rates are running around 30% which, if accurate, tells us it is doubtful that there would be any growth in the moose herd contributed from newborn moose. And, those moose calves, according to Minnesota officials, are being killed mostly by wolves and bear.
Share

2017 Maine Moose Lottery Drawing Results

Follow this link and click on the letter that begins your last name to see if you won.

Share

Confusing Moose Crash Information

Statistics Prove that Statistics Sometimes Don’t Prove Anything

Either Maine has more moose or fewer moose and more car crashes with moose or fewer crashes with moose. Or, maybe there’s both or all of the above all at once…or none of the above.

A recent article written for the Online version of the Portland Press Herald, in the title, states that the moose herd has declined and so have the number of vehicle collisions with moose. The article begins by stating that these collisions have dropped “in part because of efforts by state officials to alert drivers to the danger of the crashes.”

Then we are told that three Wildlife Management Districts (WMD) will not be allotted any Moose Permits this Saturday during the Lottery Drawing, “where a dramatic decrease in moose-vehicle collisions indicates a drop in the region’s moose herd.” Evidently the DOT doesn’t work to educate drivers in these WMDs about the dangers of colliding with a moose? And is the fish and wildlife department now using vehicle collisions to determine moose populations?

Maine’s moose expert, Lee Kantar, says in the early 2000s methods used to estimate moose populations weren’t as good as they are today. Because of the constant changes in methods of estimating, it’s impossible to make any honest comparisons as to increases or decreases in moose and vehicle collisions and the causes for reductions or increases. We shouldn’t kid ourselves. All we really know is the number of collisions. That’s easy data to collect.

What’s confusing is that this report says that the Maine moose population “is between 60,000 and 70,000, down from 76,000 in 2013.” I have serious doubts about these numbers. At one time, during debate about how to manage Maine’s moose, some members of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) estimated Maine’s moose population to run around 90,000. About all that boots on the ground tells us is that moose numbers are way down – from how many is anyone’s guess.

But the information continues to be confusing. Kantar says there are “probably less moose” and then cites, “moose populations in midcoast and southern Maine are thin.” If we go by the numbers given, statewide there has been a reduction of 6,000 moose since 2013. How much of that reduction then comes from these three WMDs? Perhaps all of it as Kantar states, “the moose population appears to be thriving there [Aroostook County].” He says that the moose population in the northern counties has remained “stable.” Stable? I thought it was “thriving.” What’s also confusing is that he says moose in the southern part of the state are diminishing because of the winter tick problem. Huh? There are no winter ticks in the northern tier of the state? Or is it because MDIFW has data due to the ongoing moose study in the northern tier of the state while they continue to guess about what’s going on in the south?

Confusing!

So, let’s not take just Lee Kantar’s word for what’s going on. Ted Talbot, MDOT, says that, “despite installation of new forms of reflectors along Aroostook County’s main roads, crashes still occur frequently because there are more moose in the region.” Is the population “stable” or is it “thriving?”

This report states that according to Law Enforcement in Aroostook County, “there are still plenty of moose to avoid on the roads.”

Even though this report says that moose collisions in Aroostook County have “dropped to 129 last year, from 247 in 2007,” Madawaska Police say, “traffic accidents seem to be just as much a problem.” Are we to then assume that the efforts at warning drivers about moose is a waste of time and money?

So, what’s the point of all this? People should know by now that colliding your vehicle into a moose can be a very dangerous thing. If you live in Maine, you should always expect any animal is going to step into your path and you should be prepared. But, it’s bound to happen.

It appears as though the number of collisions with moose has decreased. That’s a good thing, unless moose numbers continue to decline to a point where there are no collisions and thus might tell us that the moose herd is in serious jeopardy. As far as what has caused the decline in moose collisions, this report isn’t really that much help and the information from MDIFW, DOT and law enforcement only confuses the issue.

All of this just makes me wonder a lot of things about media reliability and the accuracy of information being given by fish and wildlife, DOT and law enforcement. Maybe all their information is just too political and therefore makes no sense at all.

 

Share

Moose Socialism: More Special Interest Allotment of Moose Permits

It appears that where once there was a “lottery” to decide who gets a limited number of moose permits for the annual Maine moose hunt, it is now a process of doling out certain numbers of permits to a wide variety of special interest groups, all the while further screwing over the people and the process of “randomly” selecting recipients for a moose permit, some of whom have been waiting for decades.

Now it appears that if you are 65 years old and have accrued 30 Moose Lottery Points – another crooked process that benefits the wealthy and puts the screws to everyone else – you can automatically be awarded a moose permit when you apply. Theoretically that could use up all that is left (which isn’t much) of moose permits that haven’t already been handed out to crony, special interest groups already.

Nonresidents will, once again get the shaft, as the allotment of moose permits given to nonresidents will be cut from 10% to 8%. One would think that the extra 2% of moose permits would revert back to the general (fake) lottery, so Maine resident hunters can have a better chance to bag a moose. But, NO! Those 2% will be “sold” to hunting outfitters to “subsidize” the hunting outfitter industry – socialized moose hunting.

Another brain child of some wealthy hoarder of moose permits (also known as a crooked politician with the ability to bullshit his way through the Legislature with such perverted nonsense), proposed and it has passed, another bill that will provide kids 10 years of age to begin paying taxes to hunt moose but aren’t allowed to do so until they get old enough. The bill is typically worded with deception saying that a 10-year-old can begin “accruing points” so that when they are old enough to hunt, they think their chances of winning are going to be higher. In truth, it’s another way for the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) to make money off a golden goose that is about to go extinct.

How many times have people and groups, such as the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, stood up to defend those brazen enough to dare claim that MDIFW and game management use game animals and their management practices to promote trophy hunting? And yet here we see an example of how, where once, after a little proper management, Maine was able to rebuild a seriously diminished moose herd to a point where it was decided that the herd could sustain a limited harvest. A lottery was devised and the process has gone to hell since that time, thanks mostly to ignorant and corrupt politicians looking to beef up their constituency as they look forward to reelection. Of course if you have been a beneficiary of the elitism and cronyism of the special interest groups, along with the subsidizing of your private enterprise, you think I’m an old spoil-sport, whiner.

Think what you will. But this is all truth. It’s a damned shame!

Those same people who are often chastised by the “hunting” community often say that all wildlife is for everyone. What a bunch of horse manure that has turned out to be. Hunters and license buyers pay the majority of the cost to “manage wildlife” so everyone can enjoy it, and generally speaking we don’t mind. Now, people like me and tens of thousands of other licensed outdoor sportsmen, are paying our share toward the system, to grow and maintain a moose herd, and the state’s socialists are seeing fit to take the rewards of that investment and doling it out to every special interest group in the state as well as helping to subsidize private businesses.

Every allotment of moose permits to any and all special interest groups and private enterprise, should be repealed immediately.

What B.S.

OLD HUNTER says:

 

 

Share

There Is No Credibility When Talking Moose and Global Warming

It’s just a constant echo chamber! It never ends. Stupid begets stupid and the heritage of ignorance is perpetuated.

Moose in Northern New England are being killed by winter ticks…at least that is part of the reason. So long as fake scientists, along with the tools of the inept media echo chambers keep repeating utter nonsense, there is no hope.

In a recent diatribe from an environmental website, there is a relentless onslaught of how global warming and the existence of man is just screwing everything up. As an example of just plain stupidity, the author tells readers that what destroyed the moose in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont around the turn of the century was unregulated hunting and logging operations: “the moose—nearly disappeared from New England in the 19th century, a result of unregulated hunting and the clearing of forests.”

This statement is immediately followed by this one: “In recent decades, they found ideal habitat among the mechanized logging operations of Maine…. The timber industry provides a constant supply of new tree growth, the animal’s primary food.”

In another recent email I received, someone was quoted to say that warmer winters were a benefit to the deer population in Maine, followed by a statement saying, however, global warming was killing off all the deer in Maine.

There is no credibility. It matters not whether there is full, some or no truth in the points these people are trying to make. When you make such absurd statements that once a Second Grader could pick up on, one must find real difficulty in swallowing any of the rest of the regurgitated offal the media and fake scientists toss out at us.

The short of it all is this. Greed and the perverse worship of animals (worship of the creation over the Creator) demands that wild animals can be viewed regularly from the comfort of ones home or automobiles. An honest scientific application to achieve healthy wildlife populations has taken a back seat to social demands made by ignorant and greedy people unwilling to get outdoors and find the creatures where they are.

With this ingrained into our society, don’t ever expect that things will change…there will continue to be prevalent diseases.

My God! Didn’t we use to learn this stuff in like 3rd Grade?

Share

The Only Way To Control Moose Ticks Is……

This Alaska state veterinary must be as stupid as I am…..She says, “Once (winter ticks are) introduced in a moose population in an area, the only known way to control it is to reduce the moose density, especially calves, so that there are no hosts available,” she said. “It would require an antler-less hunt or even a cull of calves and yearlings, which would not be something that would be easy to sell to the public.”<<<Read More>>>

And this is a classic example of why I end many of my articles by saying:

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Old Hunter says:

 

Share