September 18, 2020

Are We Seeing Signs of Maine Bear Predicting the Future?

BearFuture

Share

HSUS Turns In Signatures for Anti Bear Management Referendum

The bears are beginning to react to the reports they are hearing about the effort of the mentally ill people at the Humane Society of the United States to gather enough signatures to force a referendum vote in November to stop good bear management.

BearEatHikers

Share

HSUS Bear Drool in Radio Interview

The Humane Society of the United States, the radical and illegal political giant the remains protected by the U.S. Government as a non profit, sends their Maine representative Katie Hansbury to participate in a radio interview about bears, bear hunting, bear trapping, bear baiting and bear hounding. Get a towel because the drool gets pretty sloppy.

560 WGAN News radio podcast.

Share

Maine Radio Hosts Feature Discussion of Maine Bear Referendum Consequences

RadioAd

Share

HSUS’ Anti Bear Referendum is Delusional

rabid

Share

Mainers for Fair Bear Hunting, a Pack of Lies, Unsubstantiated Claims

Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) spreads lies and unsubstantiated claims about black bears and bear management. Clearly his knowledge of bears and bear management is non existent. Remember, HSUS and the Wildlife Alliance of Maine present themselves as being advocates for “fair” hunting practices. This is a con job as both groups are driven to end all forms of hunting. This is just another step toward that end.

bearmanagement

Share

Bear Spotted in Downtown Ellsworth, Maine

It is that time of year when in Maine black bears emerge from their wintering dens. More than likely they are all out by now and some are probably hungry. Such was the report from the Bangor Daily News of events occurring in downtown Ellsworth, a small village south of Bangor, toward the coast.

In the BDN report, it suggested, from earlier press releases from MDIFW, that increases in these bear encounters happen when spring comes early.

Last year, when the state saw an early spring, the Maine Warden Service received 870 bear-related complaints — up from 436 complaints in 2011 and just 395 in 2010.

While this information may be true, what should have been included in this was a statement of fact that as bear populations increase, so to do the number of incidents of bear meeting man. I bring this point up because recently the Joint Standing Committee for Inland Fisheries and Wildlife voted “ought not to pass” a bill that would end bear hunting with dogs and trapping, among other limitations; a bill sponsored by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). However, HSUS has promised a referendum on this issue next year.

Maine, like most all other states, implements hunting and trapping as a means of regulating the desired populations of game species, including predators. Should HSUS be successful in their referendum, from the information I have received to date on what the proposed referendum will look like, basically all aspects of bear hunting will be eliminated with the exception of stalking.

Already the bear population in Maine is at perhaps record high numbers with MDIFW facing a difficult task in getting hunters and trappers in enough numbers to keep in check the population. Contrary to popular belief, wildlife does not “balance itself” and one can easily and logically conclude that, among other difficulties, Maine people would be facing increased problems with bears.

The MDIFW spokesman speaks of, “bear incidents tend to slow down as summer progresses, when it’s easier for hungry bears to find natural food.” Again, this is true under “normal” circumstances. With overgrown bear populations, too many bears will be competing for food. If natural food is not abundant, the competition becomes even greater and this circumstance will tend to drive bears into human populated areas in search of food. Now imagine a scenario of too many bears AND not enough natural food.

Maine residents should be encouraged to take the advice of MDIFW in making your homes as bear proof as possible and don’t allow HSUS, or any other animal rights groups, to force our fish and game experts into managing or not managing wildlife based on social demands rather than science. Sound wildlife management benefits both humans and wildlife.

Share

Two Psychotic Actions Don’t Equal Rational Justice

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a fringe, psychotic group that uses fraud and other unethical means to raise money to pay overblown salaries and fund programs not geared to saving or protecting animals, attempted to file a lawsuit on behalf of 5 California whales demanding the same constitutional rights as humans. PETA vs. Sea World was subsequently thrown out of court because the judge ruled animals don’t have the same rights as people.

As perverse as this kind of behavior is, it is not a position shared only by whacked-out PETA members. Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s pick to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, has stated publicly that he believes lawsuits should be brought on behalf of animals.

The United Nations and most animal rights groups fully support the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights which claims that animals and humans all share in the same rights.

Understandably a psychotic behavior on the part of those who support such rights equity with animals, we now learn that the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) is considering filing a lawsuit against PETA that would, “represent the 25,000-plus dogs and cats that PETA has killed since 1998 whose “rights” have been violated under the 5th and 8th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution”.

While the notion in and of itself is totally asinine, those who understand the differences between rights for humans and welfare for animals, get their point. I am only assuming the announcement of consideration to sue is for the purpose of making a statement and not actually an attempt at using two wrongs to somehow come up with anything that resembles truth.

Similar to the actions of the Humane Society of the United States, these two groups solicit money from anyone from small individual donors to very wealthy celebrities. In 2009 Carrie Underwood gave $200,000 to HSUS.

Unfortunately for all the donors, they are not made aware of the fact of the tens of thousands of family pets these two groups routinely euthanize, sometimes without giving any effort to find them homes.

It is very important for individuals and organizations like the Center for Consumer Freedom to recognize and expose fraud and hypocrisy as is the case here with PETA. What is not acceptable is to use PETA’s own crack-brained ideas to allow animals to have legal representation of any kind in our courts.

We get your point. Now let’s move on.

Tom Remington

Share