October 17, 2017

Maine IFW’s “New Communication” Void of All Things, Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

The other day I was highly critical of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s (MDIFW) new approach to “getting their message out” by hiring a professional actor to make “funny videos” to “educate” people about “hiking preparedness, birding and invasive species.

It appears more and more likely that my critique of what appears to be an outward (as opposed to covert) new direction for MDIFW is accurate. In my article I wrote: “It appears to me that the message MDIFW wants to get out is void of deer and moose studies, or anything to do with hunting, trapping or fishing…”

If you haven’t been to MDIFW’s new website, maybe you are unaware that the site is, for all intent and purposes, void of anything to do with hunting, trapping and fishing, other than some generic species information – and, of course, where you can buy a license.

I understand a little bit about websites and website development as I’ve done some of that over the years. Perhaps MDIFW has released their new website a bit prematurely in hopes of tying in all their previous pages of information in time. Or then again, maybe not.

I did my share of bitching and complaining to MDIFW because it took nearly a year for them to get some of their game harvest data reports published Online. It appears that the “new direction” and in MDIFW’s effort to better communicate with the public, they have solved the relentless problem of publishing harvest data for deer, moose, bear, and turkeys. To solve that problem, they’ve simply scrubbed all those pages from the website.

So, if you are interested to get some information about harvest data, like comparing one year to the next, etc. you’ll have to rely on making a phone call and or trying your luck at sending an email. Just for your information, emails will often never get answered….depending, of course, on who you are and what history you might have, good or bad, with the department.

Phone calls might give you some answers but should someone, like me, decide to quote something said in a conversation, it only becomes a matter of “he-said, she-said.” There is no paper trail. I like paper trails. It creates honesty.

In the past 15 years or so, I have amassed quite a collection of web page links to data and information from the MDIFW, that I use in my research, studies and writings. In going down the list this morning, it appears none of the links are any longer operable. And this presents another entire set of difficulties for my readers and I’m sure other media outlets, who, over the years, have published countless articles with links to MDIFW website information. I know I have done that for years. It’s the only way to provide interested readers with credible information. This kind of education is critical to the future of hunting, trapping and fishing. With this information now, effectively censored, MDIFW can go about their business better hidden behind a shield that prevents openness and accountability. Fascism always leads to communism.

It appears that now, unless I see changes forthcoming from MDIFW and their “environmentalist-friendly” website about, “hiking preparedness, birding and invasive species,” and let’s not forget “funny” videos (I want to be a rock star), I will seriously consider if I want to continue buying a license in Maine for hunting and fishing, or any other expenditures that prop up environmentalism and animal rights. If my license fees are going to support this obvious communistic, totalitarian regime of environmentalism, I’m sure I do not want to be a part of that. There are many other places to hunt and fish….well, at least until they all have gone the way of animal rights and environmental perverted ways.

I have asked the question before – Does MDIFW have plans on how they intend to fund their fascist department after they have driven all the hunters, trappers and fishermen from the state? And let’s not forget the snowmobile riders and ATV riders. So long as Maine wants to promote national monuments and all other ways to shut down access to land, funding for MDIFW and the Maine Warden Service will dry up. Then what?

Having said all this, I will keep watch. Either MDIFW has hired a terrible web designer and all those pages of information, now missing, will slowly begin to reappear, or the intention is, in fact, to become like all the rest, catering to the perverted environmentalists. Soon MDIFW will be changing it’s name, once again, to Maine Department of Natural Resources (and piping plovers).

I’m tired and fed up listening to other “sportsmen” exclaim the tremendous work of MDIFW, when the result of that work is being revealed on a daily basis. Is this really what you want MDIFW to be? I hope not.

Added note: If you visit the MDIFW website, click on “Site Map” in the upper right hand corner. This can give you an overview of all pages available to readers. It becomes quite clear what the message is intended to be.

Share

So, Just What Exactly is Maine IFW Trying to Communicate?

First thing this morning I opened a link to a news story about how a major land owner in Maine, J.D. Irving, has been awarded a conservation award from Sustainable Forest Initiative. In gleaning the report, I read this: “JDI is supporting a large study of white-tailed deer through collaboration with six scientists as well as partners in government across New Brunswick and Maine. The deer research is using GPS tracking and extremely accurate forest inventory mapping to look at how deer are using different forest types during summer and winter months. This long-term study will monitor 140 deer and the habitats they choose over the next four years.”

Did I know this? Did you know this? Without knowing what exactly “supporting a large study” means, one might think that activity deserving of recognition might be worthy information to openly and eagerly share with the Maine people. Evidently it’s not.

In my work with this website, part of that includes a pretty close monitoring of the things that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) does….or doesn’t do. I am signed up to receive press notices, email notifications and Twitter Updates, although I suspect strongly that I don’t receive all that go out…for whatever the reasons.

It wasn’t until long after MDIFW had begun their deer study, that I and the rest of the public learned of it. It wasn’t until today, that I learned that J.D. Irving was “supporting a large study” with Maine and New Brunswick. If I, as someone who spends probably more time and effort than the majority of Maine residents keeping track of such things, don’t know these things, one has to suspect the general population isn’t either.

To date, MDIFW has been very stingy with any information about the study. Other than an occasional “release” to a “safe zone” propaganda outlet, the public would know nothing about the study or that it even existed.

However, this really doesn’t come as a surprise to me, as MDIFW does a very poor job of “communicating” with the public and and even worse job “communicating” with the license-buying sportsmen who pay their salaries. One example of terrible communicating is the department’s relentless tardiness in making available deer, bear, moose and turkey harvest reports and data. Seriously, I wonder why that is?

I also wonder why it is that a better effort can’t be made to share information about the ongoing studies of deer and moose in the state? Is it that the department really hasn’t the time or the money?

Following the revelation that J.D. Irving was awarded for “supporting a large study” of deer, I found out that the MDIFW has decided that the T.V. show, North Woods Law wasn’t embarrassing enough for them and the Governor’s office, so as part of what is being expressed as a campaign to “better communicate their mission with the general public,” they have teamed up with a professional actor to make “funny” videos.

The article I just finished reading says these videos are to share with the public and to “get our message out.” It appears to me that the message MDIFW wants to get out is void of deer and moose studies, or anything to do with hunting, trapping or fishing, even though, as I have repeatedly stated, it is these sportsmen who fund a great part of MDIFW’s budget…a budget that evidently allows them to hire a professional actor and spend their time recording “funny” videos for the “new” website and to publish on YouTube.

I also learned that: “The videos, produced by a professional ad agency [how much did this cost license holders?], are quick hits on three outdoorsy topics: hiking preparedness, birding and invasive species. (emboldening added)

If J.D. Irving’s “supporting a large study” is great enough that it actually made the study possible (and I don’t know what “supporting” means – maybe MDIFW should tell us?) maybe it would make a whole lot of sense to get J.D. Irving into one of those videos, if they are all that important to “getting the message out.” But maybe this is more telling than we realize. Perhaps the “message” is more about hiking, birding and invasive species, than deer, moose, trout or roughed grouse because the department has changed their focus to side dishes while disregarding the meat and potatoes.

But here I am again saying, this shouldn’t come as any surprise. Maine’s fish and game department – even fisheries and wildlife is an inaccurate title for the message it appears they want to send – is no different than all the rest of this country’s environmentalism-driven departments based on Scientism and the relationships of people and animals, far exceeding the relationships between person and person, as is obvious in our violent, angry and hate-filled society.

What I want to know is what plans the State of Maine, and the MDIFW, have in place to fund the future department of natural resources, animal rights and protectionism, when hunting, trapping, and fishing, along with the closing down of access to forests, effectively stopping ATV riding and snowmobiling, are eliminated in about 10 years?

The MDIFW evidently doesn’t have the time or resources to get game harvests reported online until the start of the following hunting seasons, or later, but they have time to make “funny” videos and resources to hire an ad agency, with a professional actor, to send out the message that hiking, birding, and invasive species are far more important than hunting, fishing and trapping.

I think the message is very clear and that MDIFW has been advertising that message loud and clear for several years now. MDIFW is NOT about getting the message out that hunting, trapping and fishing are the very backbone of this entire industry that has brought Maine and the rest of this nation to a point were responsible wildlife management has become the norm. Because we live in a post-normal age, all that has proven to work and has been successful and effective, must be destroyed and replaced with Romance Biology and VooDoo Scientism.

Maine, and the rest of the nation should say goodbye to our traditions of hunting, fishing and trapping and prepare for the “message” MDIFW and others are trying to get out.

From my perspective, it’s a real shame. I also feel bad for J.D. Irving that MDIFW cannot even take the time to acknowledge their support for their ongoing deer study. It is terrible public relations like this that next time MDIFW wants to have a study, they will be left on their own to figure it out.

Good work people!

As I see it, the choice now becomes mine. I can either hope that hunting and fishing are around until I drop dead, or I can become part of the “New Science” Scientism that is driving it all. Answer? I will NOT be signing up for “Keeper of the Maine Outdoors.”

Share

Not Knowing What’s Science and What’s Scientism

The Wildlife Alliance of Maine has placed a link to what they call “science” to prove – “this is the science proving” – that baiting bears changes the dynamics of the animals and the surrounding forests, where bears “could” cause damage to plants.

First off, the fake “study” is not science. It is the result of Scientism and a couple of students who set out to discredit in any way they could, hunting and in particular hunting bear using bait as one of the tools to accomplish the task. In other words, this is very typical of outcome based “scientific research.”

Scientism is nothing more than what some of us have come to recognize as “what scientists say and do.” It is also a dangerous and unrestrained credence of the power and authority realized from the manipulated field of science. This study is a fine example of how the scientific process is foregone and replaced with someone’s belief system because there is power in the publication of “studies.”

The scientific process is almost never followed anymore, due to a myriad of reasons, money being one of them along with political idealism and personal agendas.

Secondly, this “study” takes place within a national park in Canada, where black bears are protected. Without having data at my disposal, an intelligent supposition would be that in a park where black bears are protected, depending upon the cycle the bears were going through during the study period, there are probably too many bears in the park. Those dynamics differ greatly from areas where bears a responsibly managed and kept in check to meet management goals and social tolerances.

The study references bear baiting stations adjacent to the park placed there by hunters. Not all hunters are stupid and thus they realize that with too many bears in the park, perhaps a good place to set up a bait station and a tree stand would be adjacent to the park. Does this tactic actually result in increasing the odds of bagging a bear? I dunno. Neither do the researchers.

The short of all this is that the “scientists” chose a location for their study that is far from being typical of the vast forests that make up Canada and parts of the U.S. So, the dynamics of bears and their habitat is not what one might expect to find in the majority of the rest of the world. Observations might prove interesting but for what purpose other than political?

So, what good then is the study? I alluded to that above. And when the study was all said and done, the authors state that with hunters having baiting stations adjacent to the park, bears “could” cause some damage to the trees and vegetation. I wonder if this “could” happen even if the bait stations weren’t there. Did the “scientists” set up a comparative study area outside of the park, in a location more typical of the forests?

The purpose of the study, more than likely, has been exemplified as we see an animal rights, environmental group emotionally grasping at anything, even when it doesn’t even closely resemble the scientific process, to promote their totalitarian agendas aimed at ending a lifestyle they don’t agree with.

The Wildlife Alliance of Maine, in their posting (on Facebook?) states that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) doesn’t consider this dynamic change possible. Actually, I’ve never heard or read anywhere that MDIFW doesn’t believe that baiting bear changes the dynamics of the forest in places where bear are being baited. It doesn’t take a science degree to understand that any and all “changes” within a forest ecosystem can and will have an effect on the dynamics between animal and ecosystem. It then is left to a person’s, or a group of person’s, perspective on what they want to see or have before them.

I think that it is wrong to make a statement about MDIFW of this kind. MDIFW has made it perfectly clear from the beginning that they would like to continue with baiting bear as a tool to help keep the growth of black bears in check in order to assume responsible management of a healthy bear population. Should numbers of bears drop to management’s desired levels, I’m quite certain that MDIFW would cease bear baiting.

But, within this entire debate, both sides cherry-picking convenient products of Scientism to bolster their arguments, in the grand scheme of things, there is so little baiting going on anywhere that it is akin to somebody dumping a cup of coffee into Sebago Lake (47.68 sq. miles) and declaring that the lake dynamics have changed and thus the lake has gone to hell.

Share

Venison 101

Share

People in Eastport, Maine Complain of Nuisance Deer and Complain About How It’s Done

Nearly a year ago I shared a report that in far eastern Maine, the town of Eastport wanted the state to do something about the slew of deer that had moved into town. Of course there are reasons the deer have moved into town but, as usual, that issue is never addressed. Instead, according to George Smith, columnist at the Bangor Daily News, a mere 30 permits were issued to kill up to 30 deer. With those permits, 11 deer were taken.

It appears as though the town and its people are complaining about the deer and yet don’t seem willing to remove all or some of their restrictions in order that the job can be done. Perhaps it is time to tell Eastport that if they aren’t willing to give a little, they are on their own to figure the problem out.

Eastport has a ban on the discharging of a firearm, and so only archery can be employed to kill the deer. As Smith points out, “This is not hunting. This is killing.”

The Town of Eastport is not entirely to blame. Because of new zoning, it became unlawful to hunt does in the Eastport region. The allotment of “Any-Deer Permits” by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) is to control the growth or decline of deer populations. This is why the state stepped up and issued 30 permits for just one year. Realizing this effort did nothing to mitigate the deer problem, the MDIFW has issued another 30 permits and when 30 deer have been killed, they will issue another 60 permits.

With continued restrictions on the use of firearms, that hunters are restricted to using designated tree stands and the outlawing of baiting, the stage remains set for the killing of perhaps as many as 11 deer.

Evidently the deer problem isn’t THAT bad.

Share

Maine “Any-Deer Permit” Lottery Results for 2017

You can find the results of the lottery drawing by visiting the MDIFW web page. Click on the letter of the first letter of your last name and then scan the list.

Share

Maine Fish and Wildlife Sets New Record

A record for losers!

Before the 2018 bear season begins, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) finally releases the bear harvest report for 2016, setting a new record for being the latest it has ever been reported.

The top five slowest years have all occurred in the past 10 years. At this rate, the report will be done away with completely in a few years leaving interested sportsmen further guessing as to just what is going on.

Lousy business as usual.

Total Bear Kills By Year

For some, I guess they would congratulate the MDIFW for publishing the bear, deer and moose harvest reports for 2016. However, it seems a deliberate attempt to withhold information from the public by waiting until after or just before the start of the next year’s hunting seasons before publishing the data.

 

 

Share

Two Lynx Share Brief Conversation on Road Near Kokadjo

Read More here, but I think the statements that indicate there aren’t enough Canada lynx around is just typical propaganda.

Share

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

IFW News — Bear Season Starts Monday, Youth Bear Hunting Day is Saturday

Press Release from the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife:

AUGUSTA, Maine — Maine’s bear season begins on Monday, August 28 throughout the state of Maine, and youth hunters get their own day on Saturday, August 26. Last year, 10,936 hunters purchased a permit to hunt bear, with 2,859 hunters harvesting a bear for a success rate of 26%.

“Conditions look promising for hunters to have a better year than last year, but just how successful hunters are depends on the abundance of natural foods and how long those natural foods remain available” said IFW Bear Biologist Jen Vashon.

Maine’s black bear population is closely monitored by Department biologists through one of the most extensive, longest-running biological studies in the U.S. The study began in 1975 and continues today. Over nearly 40 years, Department biologists have captured and tracked over 3,000 bears to determine the health and condition of Maine’s bears and estimate how many cubs are born each year.

“Over that time, our research has shown that when natural foods are in low supply, hunters have more success taking a bear since bears are more likely to seek out other food sources,” said Vashon.

Maine’s bear season is divided into three segments, as hunters can hunt with bait from August 28 to September 23, hunters can hunt with dogs from September 11 to October 27, and hunters can still hunt or stalk bear from August 28 to November 25. Maine has one of the longest bear seasons in the country since Maine has one of the largest bear population estimated at over 36,000 animals. In addition to a season that starts in August and ends after Thanksgiving, Maine allows hunters to take two bears, one by hunting and one by trapping.

In 2016, hunters harvested 2,859 bear and 68% were taken over bait, 21% with dogs, 2% by deer hunters, 1% by still-hunting or stalking prior to deer season, and 4% in traps. The remaining 4% was taken without the method of harvest being reported.

Even with the lengthy bear season, only about 25% of all bear hunters are successful. By contrast, 75% of moose hunters were successful last year, turkey hunters enjoy success rates between 30-35% and deer hunters in Maine are successful 14-18% of the time. Young hunters will once again get their own day on Saturday, August 26. Youth hunters who have a junior hunting license can hunt bear with a firearm, bow, or crossbow on this day. Youth hunters may hunt bear with the use of bait, or still hunt; however the use of dogs during youth hunting day is prohibited. Last year, 27 youth hunters were successful in taking a bear on youth day.

Youth hunters may hunt only in the presence of an adult supervisor who is at least 18 years of age. The adult supervisor may not possess a firearm, bow, or crossbow while the youth hunter is participating in the bear hunt. Any person who accompanies a junior hunter other than the parent or guardian, must either possess a valid adult hunting license or have successfully completed a hunter education course.

While the abundance of natural foods this year is likely to impact hunters, in-state research shows that it is also what drives nuisance bear complaints. In years when there is a good natural food crop, the numbers of complaints drop. In poor natural food years, nuisance complaints increase.

Over a span of 40 years, Maine’s bear study has shown that not only does the availability of natural foods drive bear cub survival and bear birth rates, but it also directly influences when bears den for the winter, as well as hunter success rates. In poor natural food years, hunter success is higher than in years when natural food is abundant.

Successful bear hunters are reminded that it is mandatory to submit a tooth from their bear when registering. Tagging agents will provide envelopes and instructions to hunters as to how to remove the tooth. Biologists age the tooth, and the biological data collected help biologists adjust season lengths and bag limits for bears.

In August, hunters can learn the age of the bear they harvested the previous season by visiting www.maine.gov/ifw/hunting_trapping/hunting/bear/index.htm.
Hunters and trappers must have a bear permit in addition to a big game hunting or trapping license to harvest a bear in Maine.

However, during the deer firearm season, resident hunters can harvest a bear without a bear permit. Bear hunting is most popular and bear populations are the densest in the northern and downeast regions of the state.

Share