May 24, 2020

Texas Teenager Cyber Attacked After Posting Hunting Photos

Press Release from The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance:

(Columbus, OH) – A 19-year-old Texas Tech cheerleader is the latest female hunter to be attacked by animal rights groups after she posted photos of her successful African safari on Facebook.

Kendra Jones, from Cleburne, Texas has been hunting with her father since she was a child, including being on a safari when just six years old. Her latest hunt however has brought her a wave of Facebook attacks, including death threats.

Those included “Come to South Africa and try to hunt our endangered animals, you will be shot on sight and believe me, there will be celebrations.” “I hope you get eaten by a lion, you cow,” and “How about we have a real hunger games? I vote we hunt this horrible woman down first.”

Anti-hunters have also created “the official Kendall Jones Hate Page” on Facebook.

But even these attacks have not deterred her thoughts on hunting.

In an interview with a Houston television station, she said she always gives the meat to local villagers, but does not want to give up her hobby. In fact, she is pursuing a reality television series about her passion. She stated that all of her kills were the result of fair chase.

Jones is the latest female hunter targeted for her passion, but certainly not the first.

Charisa Argys, a Colorado native, legally harvested a mountain lion and posted the photo online with her father. An animal rights activist from Germany led a campaign to spread it to dozens of Facebook pages and Internet sites belonging to international anti-hunting organizations. The floodgates opened with specific threats targeting her physical appearance, her life and her family.

“I have never been called so many horrible, hateful names in my life,” said Argys. “They went so far as to post my full name, address and directions to my house. It was awful.”

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance has been working to help sportsmen fight cyber harassment from animal rights extremists by building support for them from the hunting community.

”It is never okay to harass and even assault someone simply because they choose to live their life differently.” said Nick Pinizzotto, USSA president and CEO. “Unfortunately anti-hunters clearly lack this basic value and have decided to use their keyboards to attack law-biding hunters.”

Whereas Jones and Argys are not hunting celebrities, some of the recent attacks have targeted high profile hunters as well.

Jana Waller, host of Skull Bound TV on Sportsman Channel, was recently barraged by activists after also posting photos online. She is undaunted by the criticism.

“It’s a shame that people who know nothing about hunting and conservation feel the need to spew insults and threats regarding a topic they obviously are uneducated about,” said Waller. “Without hunters’ dollars spent in Africa, there would be catastrophic effects on the vast majority of their animal populations.”

“Trying to explain that hunters are true animal lovers is like trying to explain algebra to a two-year old. They’re just not going to get it,” she added.

Another high profile hunter, Melissa Bachman, outdoor TV host and producer, came under attack after posting a photo of a male African lion she legally harvested while on a safari. Anti-hunters quickly took to social media to attack Bachman, labeling her as an “animal murderer.” Other posts included “I hope you die alone – losers.”, “I wish to have some money and kill you all myself” and “If I have the opportunity I will put a rifle inside Melissa’s mouth and I will shoot.”

“Each and every hunter needs to band together and support one another in our rights as hunters” said Bachman. “What the antis fail to comprehend is that if it weren’t for sportsmen and women, populations of game and non-game species plus the lands they inhabit would be in dire straits today, period.”

Anti-hunters wrath hasn’t been focused just on individuals. Organizations such as USSA and Dallas Safari Club have received threats and media outlets such as HuntingLife.com have as well.

“We have received death threats towards us and other people we have posted on our site,” said Kevin Paulson, owner of HuntingLife.com. “The antis are especially venomous toward women and those who are hunting big game such as cats in Africa and the U.S. “

As the cyber threats to female hunters and others continue to escalate, so to have the efforts to protect these innocent victims.“As an organization with the sole mission to protect hunting, fishing and trapping, we see it as our responsibility to step up and lead the effort to put an end to cyber harassment of sportsmen,” added Pinizzotto. “We are currently working with a number of conservation partners and key individuals to do just that.”

Share

Open Your Soul – Give Animals What They Want

Share

S.F. Don’t Know How to Stop Woman Who Breeds, Releases Wolves Rats

SAN FRANCISCO — Authorities in San Francisco say their hands are tied when it comes to stopping a woman who has been breeding hundreds of rats in her home and then releasing them into public parks.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Wolf Ignorant Zoo Keepers Allow Child to Be Bitten

A Serbian newspaper reports that in a children section of a zoo, employees were “walking” a 10-month-old wolf “pup” when the dog suddenly jumped on the back of a two-year-old girl and bit her. Ignorance is the cause of this action.

The reports says, “Walking of cubs of different animal species, including wolves, is a common procedure in the zoo. “It is a polar wolf that was manually brought up and fed, it is not aggressive and acts like a dog. Otherwise, any individual that is aggressive is not released from its cage.”

The ignorance comes from denial, more than likely, that all wild animals, whether they were raised in captivity or not, still can and do display their wild aggressiveness, often without any prior notice.

At what expense ignorance?

Share

Arrested Six Times Bear Protester Continues Civil Disobedience Unscathed

“Crain, charged with two disorderly persons offenses, pleaded guilty to a civil violation of engaging in acts forbidden on property under state control.

Crain paid a $1,000 fine, plus $33 in court costs.

He had faced up to six months in jail on one count of obstructing the administration of law and one count of

recklessly creating a hazardous or physically dangerous condition.

His four prior convictions, stemming from protests during the 2005, 2010, 2011 and 2012 hunts, also resulted in fines.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

Why Newspapers Can’t Be Relied on as Intelligent, Factual Source of Information

DontUnderstandIt began this way. On April 4, 2014, Pulse published an article by Jim Lundstrum called, “Wolves at the Door.” That same day Jim Beers, a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, wrote a letter to the editor of the newspaper with a comment to make about the substance of the article, “Wolves at the Door.”

The entire back and forth between Mr. Beers and the newspaper editor would make a fantastic comedic routine for any pair of standup comics. The problem is, this actually really happened. Beers introduces the act this way:

Talking to a (WI) Newspaper about Wolves

The following interchange followed a Letter to an Editor regarding an article about wolves recently arriving in his popular and populous NE Wisconsin County, where one would (mistakenly evidently) assume a modicum of familiarity with wolves. It is enlightening for anyone dealing with wolves and the media. I say this not to impugn my skill or this editor’s response, but only to present this rare glimpse of what often is the case when we assume we are having a conversation that is merely gibberish, for whatever reason, to a listener. Jim

“Are you Druids?

When you quote a respected warden regarding wolves in Wolves at the Door, to wit “It comes back to, what can the landscape tolerate” you are simply using your human-owned newspaper to promulgate a secular animal rights’ belief to justify government force to oppress rural people with dangerous and deadly urban fantasies.

To paraphrase the good warden, wolf presence and tolerance “comes back to what those being forced to live with them can tolerate.” It is really quite simple and quite American, I might add.

Jim Beers
Eagan, MN
4 April 2014”

The editor of the newspaper writes back to Beers and says:

“I have no idea what you are implying. I can’t run a letter that makes no sense.”

Perhaps a bit frustrated or something more, Jim Beers makes another attempt at making his point:

I imply that you present the matter of the presence and abundance of wolves as only limited by what “the landscape” can tolerate.

What you publish is literally that human objections and perceived harm to human values are of no importance. In other words, humans and their objections are of less importance than the amount of food and surface conditions wolves encounter.

This philosophical difference supports the value difference between us that establishes people like myself believing that the threats and harms from diseases, dog loss, livestock loss, game reduction and human safety concerns caused by wolves are not justifiable and others like Druids (?) or nature worshippers that believe that human enterprise and society like the rest of “the landscape” must and should adjust to whatever wolves cause much like, for example, what is happening to the Minnesota moose, European sheep flocks and The Northern Yellowstone elk herd thanks to wolves placed and protected by the force of government fiat.

I assume the warden’s job security is tied to such a statement and that your paper would only engender strong reactions from readers that obviously are not hosting many or any wolves to date and like other public factions from urban donors and environmental activists to bureaucrats and politicians whose families and livelihoods remain unaffected by what we are talking about here. It might be better stated (though more words) as:

When you report that a Wisconsin warden believes that the presence and abundance of wolves is limited only by “what can the landscape tolerate” you and he are legitimizing an environmental falsehood that dates back to ancient pagan nature worship. This justification for forcing wolves and their continued presence by government fiat on local communities where residents strongly object to them is greatly flawed because it treats human concerns as equal to or lesser than food availability and other survival conditions that affect wolves. Human concerns about wolves in settled landscapes are always superior to other factors. These concerns include but are not limited to, diseases and infections, livestock losses, dog losses, game herd reductions and most important the human safety of those forced to “live with wolves”.

To paraphrase the warden, wolf presence and abundance is ultimately limited only by “what those being forced to live with them will tolerate.”

It is really quite simple, quite sensible, and it reflects American traditional cultural values I might add.

To which the editor once again responded”

“Sorry. I still don’t get it.”

Share

Obamacare? Why, There’s No Such Thing

ObamacareAngus

Share

Perverse PETA Seeking Roadside Memorial For Chickens

If approved, a memorial would be placed at a Georgia site where a truck hauling live chickens overturned Jan. 27.<<<Read More>>>

Share

“White Bigfoot” Spotted in Maine

From WMTW.com:

“According to Cryptozoology News, M.P. told them, “I never thought I’d get to see something like this. I’ve always laughed at all these bigfoot nuts, I had my reasons. Now I guess I’m the crazy one here. Unless it was a very good hoax played on me, that could be, but I tell you again, it ain’t easy for a man to make those kind of moves. That didn’t look human to me.””

As was expressed to me by a reader, the Maine Legislature is in session. These people should be at work in Augusta, not out running around the countryside.

Yeti

Share

$2,984 A Deer for Birth Control

Madness

The latest round of village deer sterilizations removed ovaries from 12 deer in December and cost taxpayers $35,808.

Does were shot with tranquilizer darts and taken to a temporary surgical facility, according to a report by White Buffalo Inc. The company conducted the sterilizations and reported that no deer died during capture, surgery or release….

Costs for this winter’s doe sterilization were well above early estimates, set at $1,000 per animal. The cost for the December sterilizations was $2,984 per deer.<<<Read More>>>

Share