April 18, 2014

Radical Groups Intend to Sue Idaho to Protect Canada Lynx

LynxintrapThe usual suspects, those lust-after wolf perverts at the Center for Biological Diversity, Western Watersheds Project and Friends of the Clearwater, plan to do what they do best and sue the State of Idaho believing they are protecting the Canada lynx. These three groups will get what they want and probably more. My advice to Idaho is to just sit down and work out a plan that will essentially stop just about all trapping in lynx habitat. Going to court is a winless battle and a waste of money.

Gasp! I’m sure I will hear from the trappers and the haters of the environmentalist greedy pigs who lust more for money than saving any kind of wildlife, wanting to know why I am saying this. Just look at what happened in Maine. And where is Maine now in their trapping issues and how it pertains to protecting the Canada lynx? It is just surprising that Idaho has gotten away without making changes in their trapping regulations that are believed to help protect the lynx.

First, readers should understand that the Canada lynx, like the gray wolf, like the polar bear and God only knows how many other species romance, back-seat biologists cry out to protect, are not in any danger of being threatened, endangered, or extirpated. But in this day and age of new-science scientist and romance biologists, barking like underfed canines themselves, demanding “new understandings” and a “shift in paradigms” is there any wonder science and reality have absolutely nothing anymore to do with wildlife management. It’s about sick and often perverted dreams of “coexisting” with nasty animals. Best Available Science has become best romantic model.

So, then, what is it about? Mostly it’s about ignorance and what we see is the result of years of planned brainwashing. Is there any other explanation for human behavior that is……well, not human?

The real travesty in all of this is that either there is no real intent to protect the Canada lynx or the ignorance, the result of an inability to think beyond the next lawsuit, cannot fathom that while these environmentalist groups (and by God please let’s stop calling them “conservationists.” They just are not that at all.) wrongly believe that ecosystems would “balance” themselves if man would butt out, they themselves butt in like man does to change what is naturally happening. Does it make any sense? Of course not.

The cry is for wolves to be forced back into places they once lived a hundred and more years ago, with no consideration of the changes to the landscape in 100 years, while disregarding history. The perverse belief that wolves are magical and will create this fabricated “trophic cascade” of Nirvanic spender simply by existing will make everything a miracle or two, like the Candy Man can.

With the absence of critical thinking, it appears none of these shallow thinkers comprehends what competes with the Canada lynx and places it in greater danger of being run out of or killed off in Idaho. Because of the inbred hatred of the existence of the human species, they believe it is only humans that cause wildlife problems. Irrational thoughts of balanced wildlife proportions prevents them from existing in reality and therefore no thought is given to the fact that the wolves they long to protect and protect and protect some more, until everyone has 1 or 12 living in their back yard, kills far more Canada lynx than does a handful of trappers and yet the focus becomes the outrage that three lynx were incidentally captured in traps in the past two years. Two lynx were released unharmed and a third was shot by a trapper thinking the animal was a bobcat.

The “new understanding” and the “paradigm shifts” perpetuated by new-science scientism is this: Man is evil. Get rid of man and ecosystems will flourish and be in balance. However, the radicals can interfere in the management of all wildlife providing it is done their way.

There is no escape. Maine went to court over Canada lynx and the trappers lost; so did the lynx. The trappers always lose. But Maine had a way out. The Courts gave them a way out. Maine operates under a consent agreement, which is probably what Idaho will end up under. The judge in the Maine case said the terms of the consent agreement would remain in affect until such time that the state obtains an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). That was over 5 years ago and Maine has failed miserably in not pushing the USFWS for a permit. Such a permit would stop these kinds of lawsuits but bear in mind that the USFWS, an agency riddled with new-science scientists and balance of nature perverts, is going to place such ridiculous restrictions on trapping in order to get a permit, that the restrictions essentially end trapping.

As a good friend recently stated, it’s impossible to fight against a rigged system. The entire wildlife management industry is simply one small part of a corrupt and rigged system, enabled by “True Believers” and useful idiots with zero knowledge or understanding that they fight for all those things that are against them. Does that make any sense?

If it was suggested that we protect all predators and all animals at all costs and begin killing off the only problem these sick people think exists – humans, that they would do it? Do they not see this is precisely what they are asking for? Do they not realize that they are humans too? Do these same people believe the lie of protecting a desert tortoise is so valuable it is worth the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of one man and his family? The potential exists here for something more costly.

It’s a rigged system and the system is so large, few can see it.

The Largest Otter Ever Recorded

In V. Paul Reynolds’ latest outdoor article, he tells of his discovery of what was left of an old log cabin in Maine’s Aroostock County in the DeBouillie area. Through research he finds out, through a nephew of the cabin’s owner, that the cabin used to be the winter abode of trapper Walter Bolstridge:

The cabin was a trapper’s winter digs. And the trapper, Walter Bolstridge, was my friend’s uncle. According to Floyd his Uncle Walter would hire a bush plane to fly him and his gear into the roadless DeBoullie area in October. He would stay and trap. In March he would come out with his furs in time to make the Annual Town Meeting. Imagine that! What a special breed of man he must have been.

By the way, Uncle Walter may still hold the record for having trapped the largest Otter ever recorded. He got his name in the newspaper. The Maine Fish and Game Commissioner at the time, George J. Stoble, said that the critter, which Bolstridge trapped on the Fish River, was a world’s record otter.

Well, with a lot of help from a friend, who did some of his own research, this is what he found about Walter Bolstridge’s world record otter:





Maine Woman Member of ASPCA Not Happy About Anti Hunting Stance

From the Bangor Daily News, a woman, a member of the local ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) is not happy to learn that the ASPCA is supporting the Humane Society of the United State’s anti-bear hunting referendum that, if passed, would stop bear hunting with bait, with dogs and also ban trapping.

Recently, I discovered a percentage of my donations are also applied to another cause ASPCA endorses. This cause is anti-hunting.

ASPCA endorses laws to stop hunting of bear, moose, coyotes, etc. This is not what I expected my donation to support. I support structured hunting 100 percent. Without it, animal control would be out of control. The bear referendum currently on the table is endorsed by ASPCA.

A Reset Button To Hopes and Utopian Dreams

Maine wildlife managers are trying to figure out how they plan to manage the black bear population if this referendum, manufactured by idealistic dreamers and haters of humans, passes in November. Instead of voting against humanity maybe they can just press their “Reset” button and be whisked away to new hopes and Utopian dreams.

All together now:

Kumbaya my lord, Kumbaya, Kumbaya, Kumbaya!


Rhetorical Nonsense From Anti Bear Hunters

There were a couple of editorial comments found in the Bangor Daily News on March 13 where a certain explanation should be made concerning opinions and rhetoric.

The first opinion comment said that if the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife(MDIFW) thinks “to feed them [bear] jelly doughnuts, have dogs treeing them, and use traps” is scientific, then he would have to question MDIFW’s “science or lack of same.”

I suppose depending upon a person’s definition of “scientific”, I don’t think Randy Cross (MDIFW bear biologist) or anyone else at the department thinks there is much “science” in how bears get harvested; no more than the “science” behind how deer or moose or any other game animal gets harvested. How the harvest takes place is through the selection of tools, combined with public safety assessments, needed to keep a population of game species within healthy and manageable numbers. Determining what the healthy populations in specific regions of the state, aided by all of the ongoing bear studies and those from other education and research facilities, is SCIENCE!

The second opinionated comment is nothing more than rhetorical parroting rooted in ignorance. First was this opinion, of which the author is certainly entitled to: “cruel, unsporting, unnecessary practices of baiting, trapping and hounding.” Most people do not agree with this statement.

The rest are merely lies that cannot be substantiated and mostly founded in lies being perpetuated by media and the head of this upcoming referendum, the Humane Society of the United States.

The lies are:

1. “How can anyone believe that leaving a 300-pound bear stuck in a 2½-inch ankle snare for a day of extreme pain is acceptable?”
Answer: This person is completely ignorant of anything to do with trapping a bear.

2. “…that letting a pack of dogs attack a mama bear and her cubs is acceptable?”
Answer: This person is completely ignorant of anything to do with bear hunting with hounds.

3. “When bear baiting was banned in Washington, Oregon and Colorado, the bear population stabilized.”
Answer: Not true. This is unproven and unsubstantiated claims made by the anti bear hunting zealots in those regions. The truth is that now that a considerable amount of time has elapsed since the banning of hounds, bear numbers are growing and is posing problems in certain areas. These problems come and go depending upon circumstances on the ground, i.e. weather, availability of natural food, etc. There exist similar problems now with mountain lions after hounding of lions was banned.

4. “Interestingly, in Maine, the bear population began to increase shortly after bear baiting began.”
Answer: False! Once upon a time, the black bear in Maine was considered nothing more than a nuisance. In fact, for many years, even dating back to the 1700s, bounties were readily paid to hunters and trappers for killing as many bears as they could. These bounties lasted in some regions until as late as the 1940s, perhaps 1950s. It was after the establishment of a state fish and game department and the decision to begin seeing bears as a game animal, did the population of bears begin to increase.

Today, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife conducts extensive bear studies and has become the envy of many in North America. I believe that if this person did a little work instead of repeating the nonsense they have been told, they would also discover that it was a point in bear management that the MDIFW realized there were getting to be too many bears. (Note to the first commenter: MDIFW used science to determine there were too many bears and how many presented problems.) It was not too long after that baiting bears was implemented for the purpose of increasing the bear harvest in order to keep bears healthy in their habitats and not become a problem socially, i.e. public safety.

5. “A diet of doughnuts, pizza and grease fattens female bears, leading to more cubs in the den.”
Answer: Not true. As I have requested from others who make such claims, “Show me the science.” There is none. There are many theories but science has never been able to prove this claim about the specificity of effects on bears from eating donuts. The fact is, if there are any natural effects on bears in contributing the how many cubs will be born, the number of influencing factors are so great, no one item can be held accountable for any of the claims being made about baiting bears.

Besides, if there are 35,000 estimated bears in Maine, and that number is more than likely a low estimate, how many of those bears are the recipients of Dunkin’ Donuts?

6. “this type of junk-food diet can cause bears’ teeth to rot.”
Answer: Let’s see the science on this, where a few days out of the year, eating junk food causes teeth to rot in bears.

Another fallacy that I’m surprised this writer did not bring up when writing about how bear populations “stabilized” out West. That is the lie about how the number of bear hunting licenses increased. The lie being perpetuated here is that prior to the banning of bear hounding, there was not a single “bear hunting license.” With the new law the fish and game agencies created a new “bear hunting license.” Therefore, the number of bear hunting license sales did increase from zero to how ever many licenses were sold. But let’s not let facts get in the way of a good hateful, un-American agenda.

I’d like to end this article by bringing your attention back to the second opinion writer’s comment about Gandhi: “in Mahatma Gandhi’s words: “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.””

I am assuming this person finds this nation’s way of treating our animals as unacceptable from their perspective of what “moral progress” is. And just exactly how, in their weak minds, should animals be treated?

I would also like to point out something that a man, whom many people think was a great man, perhaps a greater man than Gandhi in some people’s eyes, did as a statesman and representative of the United States while abroad many years ago.

Thomas Jefferson was tasked with traveling to Europe to find business and trade partners after the Revolutionary War. As he traveled from town to town seeking reliable, decent, trustworthy and yes, perhaps even “moral[ly] progress[ive]” people, he had a routine before attempting to conduct any business with residents of any town he went to in which he had never been.

Jefferson would scope the town to seek out the highest vantage point; often a church steeple. He would climb to the top and survey the village and the landscape. Once he accomplished that, he would walk about the village observing the people going about their normal, everyday routines.

And with all of this, I suppose in much the same way as Gandhi stood judge and jury over a nation by how it treated it’s animals, Jefferson had a judgement of his own in which he never varied from. If he determined any town was mostly full of people who treated their animals better than the humans, he left that town refusing to engage in any business with them on the conclusion that such people were of poor character and unreliable.

Do you suppose Gandhi and Jefferson would have gotten along?


Maine’s Deer Harvest Data Missing, Something Going on With Moose?

The last of the Maine deer hunting for 2013 ended on December 13, 2013. It is now March 11, 2014 and not one breath of information coming out of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) about harvest data. And as is always the case, the longer we wait the more reason we have to believe there must be something to hide. I mean seriously, how long can it take? Or am I the only one who cares enough about factual information to make my own assessments as to what is and what is not going on with the state’s deer and deer management (or lack thereof)? After all, there was all this pre-season hype about a restored and surging deer herd with projected increases in deer harvest expected.

Maine counts about 20,000 deer of late, most all of that information being collected from tagging stations spread out across the state. I hate to make this comparison but New Jersey counted just shy of 50,000 tagged deer in their harvest and the last of their deer hunting, winter bow, didn’t end until January 31, 2014.

Not to pick just on the deer harvest, where’s Maine’s bear harvest data? Gee, the newspapers are always full of bear stories, of the great work the bear biologists are doing studying bears etc. but no bear harvest data.

So what’s new with whitetail deer management in Maine? Nothing, I guess, unless it’s a really well kept secret. Hoping for some more serious global warming I guess. And where’s that increased communication we were promised in Maine’s Plan for Deer?

There is some good news about deer management coming from Downeast Maine. Sorry, but this management has nothing to do with MDIFW. Downeast, they kill coyotes, they kill bears, they kill bobcats, that kill deer. Oh, don’t worry. They aren’t going to kill all the coyotes, bears and bobcats. They just MANAGE them. Instead they are going to prevent the extirpation of whitetail deer.

Unofficial reports I have just received show deer harvest numbers are great. Coyote tracks and other signs are at minimum levels compared with previous years and with a spring bear hunt on Indian Reservation lands, over 50 bears were taken last year.

And by the way, with a continued abundance of snowshoe hare, the Canada lynx, supposedly in danger of extirpation, is thriving Downeast.

But there is something going on with moose Downeast. One observer says he doesn’t believe it to be winter ticks, as the usual signs of tick infestation aren’t showing up.

I also have an unconfirmed report that 4 of the 40 moose officials collared, as part of their moose study, have already died. I believe those 4 dead moose were yearlings. No cause given yet but it is being reported that when those 4 moose were collared, officials knew they were sick then. But what were they sick with?

Maine has already determined how many moose permits they will issue for the 2014 hunt by lottery. Was this decision made knowing that there may be disease running its course? Should MDIFW reconsider moose permit allotments. If only there was better communication. I think sportsmen and others would be more concerned if they actually knew what was going on. Or maybe that’s the plan.

Hey! Anti Bear Hunters! “Go Back Where You Came From”

“If you don’t like our rules and regulations, then go back where you came from and remember how good you had it in Maine and New Hampshire.

It doesn’t matter how many times voters reject these frivolous bills that are introduced — at a substantial cost to the state’s taxpayers — they will be brought up again and again, as these protestors are backed by “big money” corporations.

There are other states being terrorized by these groups so don’t think it’s just a New England issue. The anti-hunters will use all means to stop hunting, even if they start small and work on prohibiting baiting bears or using dogs to tree bears. If they win they will be back with another bill for their cause, and another and another, until hunting and fishing are gone forever.”<<<Read More>>>

More Mental Drool Over Maine’s Anti-Bear Debate

At about 5 minutes into this video, the moderator asks the two gentleman if they think the upcoming bear referendum in Maine will further divide Northern Maine and Southern Maine (the two Maines). Ethan Strimling, described as a “political analyst” operates as any slimy politician would and never answers a simple and direct question. I mean how difficult is it to offer conjecture on whether a very emotional event will divide the state?

Instead, he eagerly demonstrates his ignorance of facts and, like a brainwashed robot, anxiously takes the opportunity to promote the two-party divide and be conquered system, while mouthing stupid talking points hoping to bolster the anti hunting environmentalists effort.

A simple question of whether the state will further divide becomes an ignorant echo chamber of why, in his perverted perspective, hunting is unsportsmanlike and inhumane.

Complete mental drool and emotional intoxication on display!



Don Helstrom: Defending Maine’s Black Bear Hunt

Exclusive to NRA News Cam & Co on the Sportsman Channel

Don Helstrom of the Maine Professional Guide’s Association describes new efforts by animal-rights organizations to end the black bear hunt in the state. Sufficient signatures have been gathered for a ballot initiative to ban the use of bait, hounds and trapping. Visit www.SaveMainesBearHunt.com to help.Originally aired on the Sportsman Channel. 2/05/14.

Maine Anti Bear Perverts Say They Have Enough Signatures

According to John Holyoke of the Bangor Daily News, the unrepresentative of truth, Mainers for Fair Bear Hunting say they have received enough signatures to present to the state for the purpose of bringing a voter initiative to the November ballot to end bear baiting, trapping and hunting with hounds.

Bookshelf 2.0 developed by revood.com