December 14, 2019

SAM’s Compromise Gun Bill That Isn’t a Compromise That is a Compromise

Nonsense is coming from David Trahan in a notice sent to Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine members that although he is working on a compromise to a proposed “Red Flag” gun control bill that will determine whether somebody ought to be denied access to guns because of someone else’s perspectives on their behavior, he is not compromising our rights given in the Second Amendment. The bill is question is LD 1312.

In his notice sent to members, Trahan says that he has been working with Governor Mills administration to “…determine whether there was a way we could improve Maine law to better identify individuals in crisis and honor our individual liberties as it relates to due process and the constitution.”

Perhaps the best way to “improve” Maine’s law in regards to making a determination as to whether a person is in “crisis” is to stop pretending to act like a god. Whether a person is in “crisis” becomes a value-weighted determination based upon somebody’s perception determined by perverted, post-normal societal values. What could possibly go wrong. When somebody, living in La La Land thinks that a “LAW” can be created or amended that would “honor our individual liberties”, etc, reveals the ignorance of what freedom is all about. Any LAW is a direct restriction on any and all freedoms and cannot coexist with thoughts of “honoring” individual liberties.

Trahan somehow finds comfort to know other false gun rights groups have joined in the discussion to further restrict and water down gun rights.

Trahan assures members his efforts at a “compromise” is not a compromise to a “Red Flag Law.” What’s the difference. Anyone wishing to compromise any portion of the Second Amendment is not a friend of the rights of any individual.

The executive director of SAM is asking members to trust him: “…that your leaders are protecting firearm owner’s rights and your best interests,” and that when he is finished with his compromise that isn’t a compromise, “Maine people will be pleased.”

I have little confidence that he or any others working to compromise my gun rights away are looking out for my best interest. To think that any person or group of persons can equitably determine whether another person is in “crisis” and do it in any fashion that is within the scope of a person’s rights, not just gun rights, is unrealistic and fanciful thinking. It is, perhaps, the greatest tragedy of a person’s rights when others, equipped with political and personal ideologies, attempts to determine the condition in which another person is capable of exercising rights or should be removed from the normal activities of society.

Who in the hell do we think we have become?

Is it that we now believe that employing the evils of democracy we can, while instituting our own twisted, post-normal societal values, determine the fate of others while claiming we are protecting our rights?

Geez!

Share

Maine Fish And Wildlife: A Salute to Service

Share

Denial of Bear Behavior

In an article in the Bangor Daily News, a writer tells of how one area of Maine has become a hot spot for Spring bear encounters as the bears search for food after a long winter of prolonged diet.

Unfortunately, ignorance of bear behavior places people in danger of more serious encounters or attacks by hungry bears. The article states: “I don’t feel threatened by him, but I would not go out and try to pet him, no. We both respect him. You have to respect them and keep your distance. I have had so many people tell me that he will come through your door, he will come through your windows, but we use common sense, too. We don’t treat them like pets.”

The first thing to understand is that a hungry bear doesn’t much care about how you feel about them. Becoming acclimated to a source of food outside your house, means the next step will be to get a taste of some of that savory smelling foods from inside. Bears will easily go through screen windows and break doors and bust up glass if they are intent on the food inside. When they decide to do that, I hope the bears only go after the good smelling food and not the humans in the house.

I guess it’s some sort of human gesture to say you “respect” the bears, use “common sense” and “don’t treat them like pets.” But seriously, do you think a bear has the reasoning powers to understand that you respect them and are using common sense? It might sound like a good explanation for bad behavior but a hungry bear isn’t interested in your feelings toward them.

And on another note, when will writers stop insisting that bear attacks are rare? Rare as compared to what? Feeding bears out your back door causes the risk of a bear attack to go up exponentially and therefore the event is far from rare.

Every time a writer or a wildlife biologist suggests that bear attacks are rare, the signal is sent out that there is little to be concerned with. What should be of concern is someone feeding bears in their backyard, believing the chances of something happening as “rare” while having “respect,” “using common sense,” and “not treating them like pets.” Rare is gone out the window.

To feed bears, as pets, and then state that they don’t treat them as pets, shows the ignorance that will, eventually, land them in trouble. I hope it is not serious when it happens.

Share

Progress: Or When Others Don’t Give a Damn About You

Here’s an interesting story about how some, in Maine, who depend on and choose to live “off the grid” may be negatively affected by Central Maine Power Company’s proposal to destroy a large segment of the forest, along with disrupting wetlands, and watersheds, in the name of saving the environment.

The underlying truths in this affair is part of what is destroying this country and falsified beliefs that “this land is your land” and/or that We the People really are we the people and all things are owned and controlled by other men with their power.

Out in the open we can clearly see, from reading the comments at the end of the article a minimum of two things: First, the extent of the brainwashing that exists as it pertains to the environment and “Climate Change,” and, second, on full display is what the lovers of Democracy truly enjoy the most – two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner.

Lost is the real value of what life could and should be like for those who choose such…not what is forced on them by someone else’s ideals, backed by dirty money and a give-a-crap attitude by those blinded by truth and the useless eaters of the world.

The idea behind the power line proposal is to bring “clean” energy from Canada to Massachusetts. If Massachusetts need electricity make it within their own damned state and not off the backs of people trying to live a lifestyle of their own desires. Maine is what draws and keeps people there. Changing it to be just like Massachusetts makes it nothing different than the miseries of Massachusetts.

I don’t get it and never will…thankfully.

Misguided environMENTALists rave on about saving the environment and yet support such nonsense as windmills and hydropower that far more destroys the environment than saves it. One would think that a true environmentalist would be in full support of these kinds of people who choose to live off the grid and use, not abuse, the renewable natural resources the Creator intended for us.

That simple comparison should shed light on how we have all been deliberately misled…but it falls on closed doors and shuttered windows.

Share

Hungry Black Bears in Maine Coming Out of Hibernation

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

AUGUSTA, Maine – Black bears are emerging from their winter dens, and with natural foods in short supply this time of year, the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife is receiving calls concerning bears looking for easy meals in backyards around birdfeeders, trash cans, chicken coops and grills.

The department is reminding homeowners to remove potential bear attractants from their yard. You can learn more at http://www.maine.gov/ifw/fish-wildlife/wildlife/wildlife-human-issues/living-with-wildlife/bears.html. Maine has a growing bear population and bears are becoming more common in central and southern Maine.

“With a late spring and continued cool weather, bears are looking for food this time of year as natural foods for bears are scarcest,” says Jen Vashon, IFW’s bear biologist. As a result bears will often seek accessible food in peoples back yards.

Already, the department has received 38 nuisance bear complaints this spring, with the majority coming from the Ellsworth/Blue Hill and the Kennebunkport/Arundel area. Annually, the Department handles approximately 500 nuisance bear complaints, with May, June, and July being the busiest months for complaints. April sees between 20 and 50 nuisance bear complaints annually.

Once bears find an easy food source, they will return and they will cause damage to your property, said Vashon. These are simple steps you can take to avoid problems with black bears in your yard or neighborhood.

Black bears emerge hungry from their dens after losing between 15-40% of their weight during winter and they immediately start looking for food. Bears will often turn to suburban attractants such as bird feeders, pet food, and unsecured garbage bins when natural foods are not available.

It is important for people to be proactive so they dont attract bears to their homes. Dont wait until a bear gets to your birdfeeder or grill. They become accustomed to the location where they find easy access to food and they will return and cause significant damage, said Vashon.

Much of a bears diet is vegetation, and many natural foods such as leaves and grasses are not yet available. This time of year, bears will feed on grasses and sedges near wetlands, as well as the roots, tubes and bulbs of plants such as skunk cabbage and others. Bears are also opportunistic carnivores, and will also feed on moose calves, deer fawns, and small livestock.

In recent years, complaints associated with small livestock such as chickens have increased as backyard farming becomes more popular. To protect your livestock, please keep them behind a fence. At night, keep your animals in a secure building.

Bears that live near people often rely on foods inadvertently provided by people, such as highly nutritional sunflower seeds being fed to birds and garbage stored outside. Birdseed and other attractants should be removed to prevent attracting or creating nuisance bears.

Since bears are active between April and November, each spring and summer take these steps to avoid unwanted black bears in your backyard or neighborhood:

Secure garbage and recycling: Food and food odors attract bears, so dont encourage them with easily available food, liquids or garbage. Store garbage cans inside until the morning of trash pickup. Keep dumpster lids closed at all times and schedule frequent pickup so dumpsters do not overflow creating easy access to food.

Remove and store bird feeders: Birdseed and grains have lots of calories, so theyre very attractive to bears. Removing feeders is the best way to avoid damage to your feeders and property. Rake up any seed from the ground and store bird feeders and bird seed inside. Even an empty bird feeder can be enticing to a bear and they will tear it down, damage or destroy it. You can continue to feed birds in the winter when bears are not active.

Never leave pet food outdoors: Feed pets indoors when possible. If you must feed pets outside, feed in single portions and remove food and bowls after feeding. Store pet food inside where bears cant see or smell it.

Clean and store your grill: Clean grills after each use and make sure that all grease, fat and food particles are removed. Store clean grills and smokers in a secure building to keep bears out.

See bears in the area or evidence of bear activity? Tell your neighbors and share information with them on how to avoid bear conflicts.

By taking these precautions, you can prevent conflicts that could pose a danger to or require corrective action such as moving or killing a bear. Removing these food sources will also limit other backyard visitor (raccoons, skunks, etc.).

If you encounter a bear, do not approach the bear and slowly back away. If the bear approaches you, try to intimidate the bear by waving your arms and making loud noises, such as clapping your hands or banging pots together. A cornered bear may charge. Always back away while giving the bear an escape route. Although bear attacks are extremely rare, if a bear charges you, stand your ground and if necessary fight back.

For more information, visit www.mefishwildlife.com.

Share

Maine Spring Bear Hunt: “Sensible Wildlife Methodology”

It is a rare thing these days to read articles published by outdoor writers who do not necessarily shy aware from approaching wildlife management from a position of sense and sensibility, while at the same time promoting a proven scientific method of doing so, discarding fear and trembling from Environmentalism’s threats of lawsuits and their totalitarian desires to force all others to their perverted lifestyles.

V. Paul Reynolds, former information officer for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), editor of the Northwoods Sporting Journal, and radio host of “Maine Outdoors,” discusses a possible spring bear hunt for the State of Maine.

In his last paragraph he writes: “Maine bear biologists are advocating for a spring bear hunt as a way to better manage our state bear population. To shy away from this sensible wildlife methodology simply out of political concerns would be demonstrating a lack of moral courage and represent a compromising rebuke of state wildlife biologists, the professionals we depend upon to scientifically manage our wildlife.” (emboldening added)

Operating from a position of fear from lawsuits and social demands is a sure formula for the destruction of any fish and game management department. Wildlife management is and should be a methodology of proven scientific approach with consideration given to public safety; never making decisions based on politics.

The only hope left for the salvation of our once valued fish and game heritage is a return to the same proven methods.

The MDIFW and the Maine Legislature have shied away from making any bear management decisions based on the need to better control the bear population more out of concern for lawsuits from the animal rights groups and environmentalists than a scientific approach. As they dither and doddle a public safety issue grows more intense and there should be concern for the health of the animal as well.

I implore the MDIFW and the Maine Legislature to cast aside the social demands and threats from lawsuits and do what is right…for a change. It’s time to get serious about responsible wildlife management before such negligence casts a dark shadow over innocents.

Share

Event: Enhancing Deer Survival in Northern Maine — Are We Doing Enough?

A Forum Sponsored by:

Presque Isle Fish and Game Club

Aroostook County Conservation Assoc., &

The Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine

Date:         Thursday, April 25, 2019, 6 to 8 pm

Location:   Weiden Auditorium, Univ. of Maine at Presque Isle

Moderator:  David Trahan, SAM Exec. Director

Introductory Remarks: David Trahan.

Opening Remarks: Judy Camuso, DIFW Commissioner

Topics and Panelists:

     Topic Introductory Remarks: 

          Gerry Lavigne, Wildlife Biologist

     Current Status of Deer in Northern Maine

          Nathan Bieber, DIFW Deer Biologist – Deer population, harvest, and                   winter severity trends in Northern Maine.

Deer Wintering Area Protection    

          Ryan Robicheau, DIFW Wildlife Management Supervisor, Deer        

          Wintering Area Management and Protection (recent and historic status).

Predation Management

         Gerry Lavigne: SAM’s Coyote Control Model

        Ryan Robicheau: DIFW’s Predation Management efforts 2010 to 2019.

        Jerry McLaughlin: Pres. Aroostook County Conservation Assoc., The use

        of coyote contests to incentivize timely coyote removals.

Improving Nutritional Condition of Deer

        Ryan Robicheau: The strategic use of timber harvests to provide

        winter forage for deer.

        Nathan Bieber: DIFW’s perspectives regarding supplemental feeding

        of deer in winter.

       Jerry McLaughlin: ACCA’s winter feeding, food plot, and tree planting

       Programs.

Future Efforts

     Nathan Bieber, DIFW’s Deer Plan 2018 to 2025.

Are We Doing Enough?

     Suggestions from the floor.

Share

Gaining Understanding of Deer Habits…And Then Forgetting Them

I would suppose an “attaboy!” is in order for a Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) biologist from Northern Maine who tells some truth about why locations throughout Maine are finding deer in places they don’t “normally” spend their winters.

I put the word “normally” in quotations because it forces (or should) the question of what is normal? I’m not sure I can answer that in any other terms than to say it is what I think it should be. Perhaps none of us live long enough and are “expert” on deer biology to grasp an understanding of normal beyond only the period of time we are interested in the subject and what history books (often better relegated to the Fiction aisles and shelves in libraries) tell us about what is “normal” behavior for deer.

In our short life span, we have been indoctrinated (both citizen and biologist) to believe that it is “normal” behavior for deer to spend winters cooped-up in a classic, ideal, “deer wintering area,” known once to Mainers as a deer yard. This same indoctrination machine tended to cast dishonest claims about how deer, without those ideal deer wintering areas, shrivel up and die.

God only knows that this negative destruction can happen but does it happen at the rate scientismic biologists believe it does?

To believe such scientismic clap-trap is to say that deer, or any other wild creature, is mostly incapable of making adjustments to their habits in order to survive. I would claim that animals are more adept at this action/reaction than most humans.

Throughout Maine this winter, mostly toward the latter stages of a very snowy winter in many regions across the state, reports are surfacing of people finding pockets of deer (some in quite large numbers) hanging out in neighborhoods or right in the midst of down town. Why are the deer doing this?

I have written for years that I was finding deer in the throes of winter in places deemed as not “normal.” I guess normal is changing. Are the biologists though?

I doubt they are or at least not quickly enough to adjust their own habits to meet the management needs of the down town deer herds.

In Northern Maine, one biologist recognizes the reality – something that appears to have taken many years to admit: “Wildlife Biologist Shawn Haskell says between starvation, predators like coyotes and an occasional lynx, as well as competing with moose for food, it’s a struggle for deer in the wild. That’s why over time they’ve transitioned to more residential areas in colder months.”

Let’s point out the admissions often never spoken of in certain circles. First there’s the admission that coyotes kill deer; in winter; in deer yards. Aside from an “occasional lynx” perhaps the “occasional” bobcat was overlooked. And, lo and behold, the first time I’ve seen in writing that a Maine wildlife biologist is admitting that moose and deer compete for the same winter food. Thus, as honest logic would dictate, more moose hogging the food has a negative and detrimental affect on the deer herd. Too many moose, less deer. Too many moose, more winter ticks, fewer moose, more deer.

But the biggest admission of all is that the deer are adjusting and finding winter comfort (relative term) in places that, due to a more shy behavior of coyotes, Canada lynx, and bobcats, these predators might fear to tread. This is, as explained by the MDIFW biologist, one of the reasons we are seeing deer in places that are considered not “normal.”

So, “normal” is changing…it has changed. It isn’t “normal” anymore. Or, normal is not consistent. While it may be ideal in our brainwashing of “normal” things to see deer in those Hotel Hilton sort of deer yards, it ain’t gonna happen anymore. Things they are a changin’!

And they will continue to change. Yes, we should do what is reasonable to protect those “normal” deer yards. No, I’m not suggesting we “take em by force.” That’s not reasonable in my book, nor is it “normal.”

The Maine biologist alludes to a couple things we should take note of and I think there might be a lesson to be learned as well. The biologist says that the deer that are wintering in down town, “…have not forgotten where they came from.” Or, maybe they have. If “normal” is not their “normal” anymore, even if that “normal” disappeared forever due to forest management practices, a new normal will be achieved and lagging behind will be the education (indoctrination, if and when it fits another agenda) of citizens and wildlife biologists that deer ain’t where they used to be. (This is currently being blamed on Global Warming.)

Also alluded to about the changing habits of deer was, “…a situation that just works for them now.” I’m glad that the biologist recognizes the “for now” aspect of this event. Perhaps one day the deer will return to the Hotel Hilton’s winter resort of ideal “old growth” dense forests for protection from the elements. Or maybe they won’t. It’s what works. The deer will adjust but will the biologist?

Another issue not mentioned here which is mandatory in any honest conversation about deer management and predator control. We finally have the admission that coyotes kill deer. We are witnessing the deer making adjustments for their own survival by going places the coyotes, lynx, and bobcats might shy away from…FOR NOW!

If you know anything about wild canine behavior, you’ll have to admit that if deer decide that “normal” is in your back yard, the predators will overcome their fear and will dare tread on the winter habitats regardless of where they are. Predators are mostly driven by hunger. Fear of humans and our habitat is but a temporary roadblock.

How long will it be before bringing the wildlife into our towns, mostly due to predator protection, sets off a firestorm about public safety and that something needs to be done about it?

If things don’t change from current perverse perspectives on animal idolatry, when this day arrives, look for the call to go out to kill the deer (and waste the food) so that the wild dogs can have their way.

Share

Too Many Bears, Too Little Effort, Too Much Fear

Rome may be burning to the ground and those charged with the authority to stop it dither and doddle. Maine is swimming in bears and even though the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) expresses their “concerns” over a bear population that needs to be reduced, one effort that would have given the commission of the MDIFW authority to make adjustments to bear hunting, trapping seasons, and bag limits, was set aside until next year’s legislative session. I wonder if these clowns on the left and clowns on the right will feel any guilt when someone gets killed by a hungry bear?

Not likely, you might say. And last evening I glimpsed a video someone took while riding up the chair lift at Sunday River Ski Resort in Newry, Maine. On the ski trail that ran under their lift, a mother bear and her two cubs meandered about the packed trail, I suppose fresh out of hibernation and looking for a quick meal. Anyone interested in testing that hypothesis? I didn’t think so.

Perhaps it’s time for education courses on how to “Look Big” in case you are attacked by a hungry bear. And now we must add to that instruction now to “Look Big” while schussing down the ski trails. What next?

According to George Smith, Maine outdoor writer, discussion on the proposed bill that would have given the commissioner authority to manipulate seasons and bag limits, was lengthy but ended in tabling any decisions until next year.

MDIFW’s new commissioner said, “…the agency is concerned about the growing population of bears, and their goal would be to stabilize that population.” We can only assume that means it’s time to do something besides talk about it…or maybe not. If there is “concern” does that mean the bear population hasn’t risen to levels that threaten public safety…like bears running around the middle of a ski resort?

And here’s the chicken, environmentalist answer to the problem when Maine Rep. John Martin said, “…if the committee gave the department this authority, including the possibility that bear trapping would be expanded, it would provoke another ballot measure to ban bear trapping.”

With comments such as this one, I have to ask myself a few questions and I hope you do too. I want to know if members of the Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife are there to do the bidding for the environmentalists and their cohort animal rights activists? I also want to know if there is more value put on the threatening of lawsuits than on the welfare of a human life? There is no intelligent thought that remains anymore.

By now any politician, voter, or commissioner of the MDIFW should know and understand that because they exist is reason enough for radical animal rights groups and environmentalists to bring a lawsuit in order to force the rest of us to cave in and follow their perverse lifestyle. Here we see members of the Committee giving them what they want and it’s cheaper than a lawsuit or another referendum vote. It is for reasons of comments such as this one that the MDIFW has resorted to making wildlife management decisions based on social demands…which include the threat of lawsuits.

In the meantime, what are we to tell the families of those who get injured or killed from marauding bears, driven by hunger and emboldened by loss of fear of humans? Sorry, but we were afraid of a lawsuit from environmentalists. It’s not my fault.

Now the Maine Legislature must concern themselves with lawsuits from families of injured and dead members due to malpractice and negligence. I suppose that’s better than pissing off an environmentalist who wants to stop the world from doing most things the rest of us enjoy doing. It’s no wonder interest in hunting, fishing, and trapping is dwindling away to nothing.

Maybe it’s time that these mostly useless politicians made decisions based on science (not scientism), or social demands and threats of lawsuits, and did what was RIGHT for a change. And while they are at it, how about making those RIGHT decisions based upon something other than the demands of guides and outfitters.

There is little hope.

Share

Contracting With Incompetents For Bear Management

I was reading testimony provided by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) on proposed legislation LD 1118, a bill that would give the commissioner authority to manipulate bear hunting/trapping rules in order to better manage the growth of black bears in certain areas.

In that testimony, MDIFW wrote: “…are contracting with Cornell University to develop a new population model for bears…”

This all sounds innocent enough and perhaps even a good thing that MDIFW would reach out to higher institutes of “learning” (cough, cough) until you consider just who it is they are reaching out to (contracting) and their track record of doing some really damned stupid things when it comes to biological manipulations to control the growth of deer in certain places.

First consider their demise when Cornell University attempted to control the deer population on the campus and adjacent university property. This all began when the university, or at least the mental midgets in charge of whatever it was they thought they were going to do, promoted the belief that deer are possessed with “reproductive health is a cervine right.”

Yeah, I know. Where once anyone would and should be the laughing stock of the world to suggest that animals should have the same rights as people. What’s even more bizarre is that while delusional people are bestowing human rights on animals, they are working feverishly to take away human rights. Does that make sense to you?

So, Cornell, in their infinite wisdom (add a chuckle or two here), bestowing reproductive rights on deer, decided to gather up all the female deer on the campus and give them all a “tubal ligation,” i.e. get their tubes tied.

Evidently, to the brainless wonders of higher environmental indoctrination, they didn’t realize that a tubal ligation would do little to stop the female deer from entering estrus (a condition that indicates to every male deer within smelling distance a deer is ready to be bred). A female deer will essentially remain in heat until conception is completed. As a result, the attempt to reduce the deer population ended up increasing due to the mass migration of bucks to the campus, in much the same way as men show up in masses at a all women college.

Having learned absolutely nothing (or any misguided individual might think more reproductive rights need to be administered), Cornell decided to try a different approach on Staten Island. Here, the University coughed up $3.3 million dollars to give all the male deer (their turn this time around) a vasectomy.

With all the male deer having been denied their real reproductive rights, as were the female deer from the previous malpractice, they could never complete conception of the hundreds of does in heat. In a previous report on this event, I considered the fact that the male deer on Staten Island might all drop dead from….uh…well, you might get the picture? I hope.

So, these are the trials and tribulations of attempts at wildlife management from one of this country’s more prestigious learning institutions and now the MDIFW has contracted with them in developing a “new population model for bears.” If things go according to historic disasters, perhaps Maine can look forward to ten times the number of bears they have now. Or, perhaps within this “model” Cornell can devise a way so that bears won’t hibernate.

Don’t bears have the right to be awake year round? Sleeping through added reproduction periods might be considered a denial of rights.

I hope the MDIFW knows what they are doing…er…uh…or something.

And who is paying these clowns and at what expense?

Share