June 24, 2017

Maine’s Nuisance Wild Turkeys

Roll the film! Quiet on the set. Action! The scene begins with a line of people getting ready to board the colorfully decorated 15-passenger van headed out on a wildlife tour. The passengers are obvious city folks – dressed like city folks and acting like city folks – after all who would pay money to go “view” wildlife from a 15-passenger van and 14 other smelly people? I rest my case.

The first stop? Timberlake’s Apple Orchard in Turner…..cut! cut! cut! What to hell is this? The customers are not happy. They have to interest in seeing wild turkeys destroying an apple orchard. And perhaps that is one of the reasons that not enough noise is being made about the wild turkey nuisances that, in the case of the Timberlake’s, is costing them in excess of $1 million in lost produce each year.

It’s the city dwellers, the “Environmentalists” that instill fear in what the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) does. No, no, no. Science no longer dictates the necessities of wildlife management. It’s which group with the most money and the loudest voices who get the oil for the squeaky wheel. Environmentalists don’t care about wild turkeys nor do they care that some family in Turner, Maine is using up THEIR environment and habitat to produce food. After all, to them food is found in a grocery store.

MDIFW caves to the Environmentalists when they demand that the state grow more moose so that city dwellers, who have no skin in the game, can board one of those 15-passenger gas guzzlers (carbon producers – wink, wink) and sip their lattes and hope to gawk out the window and see a moose beside the road mucking themselves up to get out of the torment of the black flies and mosquitoes – even at the expense of increased wildlife diseases and parasites. But we don’t talk about that stuff because that isn’t what animal lovers do.

It appears that now the introduction of wild turkeys back into Maine was such a resounding success (in the eye of the beholder) that the animal has reached a point that it has become a nuisance. Just the simple example of one business losing $1 million in produce a year to turkeys, should be reason enough to start killing turkeys. Environmentalists, who by the way have infiltrated every crevasse of government agencies, including fish and wildlife departments, are probably glad the Timberlakes are losing money and turkeys are an animal, thus all animals should be protected and hunting stopped. Business and food growing is bad to the Environmentalist. So, there you have it.

But it appears that MDIFW, even with new authority to increase bag limits and lengthen hunting seasons on turkeys, doesn’t seem much interested in doing something about the nuisance. I wonder if the public tolerance part of the equation is losing its bite. Where once the ONLY way that something like turkey reintroduction could work is if the public was in support and how long turkeys remained depended on how long that support continued. It appears the support is dwindling faster than a stack of pancakes at Dysarts. If MDIFW waits too long to act, it may be too late.

There have been some changes to the hunting seasons, bag limits and fees charged but that doesn’t seem to have had any effect on the growth of wild turkeys or the number of the critters being harvested. According to George Smith, outdoor writer and political activist, in 2014 his proposed legislation, which passed with amendments, created some changes and gave MDIFW authority and flexibility to mitigate the problem: “The final bill in 2014 reduced the turkey hunting permit to $20 for both residents and nonresidents, with no additional fee for a second tom in the spring, expanded the fall season to the entire month of October and added a second turkey of either sex to the fall bag limit, reduced the tagging fee from $5 to $2 for each turkey (with all of the fee going to the tagging agent), extended the spring season to all-day, and authorized all-day hunting for Youth Day.”

Smith said that even these changes has not solved the turkey problem. Probably a bit understated.

In 2013, before the new legislation described above was enacted, the combined wild turkey harvest for both Spring and Fall hunts was 8,718. Those totals dropped to 7,554 for 2014 and essentially remained unchanged for 2015 adding up to 7,570 birds harvested.

2016 harvest data remains incomplete. The Spring harvest for 2016 was 5,154 turkeys, which when compared with previous years is below the average.

So, yes! Clearly the changes have done nothing to increase the wild turkey harvest, thus reducing the population. So what’ll it be? Is Maine going to fall in line with far too many other states that sit on their hands, fearful of the repercussions from the Environmentalists and allow Maine businesses to go under because of a damned animal? Time will tell but there may not be that much time left.

It would seem to me that given the implementation of more liberal turkey hunting guidelines and showing no results to reducing the wild turkey population, that’s it’s time MDIFW began looking at the turkey as a nuisance and a problem, allowing for harvesting the birds without any special permit or tagging requirement with fees. Set daily bag limits like those of grouse and monitor the situation. If it gets to a point that turkeys begin reaching low levels, adjust the seasons and bag limits to accommodate.

To hell with the Environmentalists. Apple growers and other private farms and business don’t need to be run out of town because perverts want to protect a bird that doesn’t need protection.

Just more of the same nonsense.

Share

More Fascistic Wildlife “Management” Rooted in Environmentalism

Here’s but one more glaring example of how wildlife biologists and managers of today are representing their “EnvironMENTALism” mind controled and manipulated educations.

Maine stupidly introduced Canada geese to Maine for various reasons (at a time when the world was overrun by Canada geese), including to provide more geese hunting opportunities for both of the goose hunters. Did you catch that? Now, the geese are nasty nuisances but few understand that. Many people feed them as pets – an extension of our perverted, mentally deranged society of animal lovers.

But not everyone wants the nasty things around and on their property. There’s very little that they can do about it, because, evidently, they are king’s geese on the king’s land. Sorry, you thought that was your land? You thought you had rights to protect your property and preserve your health? Think again.

Consider what George Smith wrote in the Kennebec Journal today. He was explaining how difficult it has become to do what was once a very simple thing – get the damned geese off your property, or any other unwanted nuisance critter of destruction and disease.

“USDA biologist Ben Nugent said that you can’t shoot problem geese until you get a depredation permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and they would require you to take many other steps before giving you a chance to shoot the nuisance geese. “It takes years before we give permission to shoot them,” said Ben, in response to one of my questions.

We were told at that seminar: “Response must be planned, consistent, persistent, and utilize multiple techniques including habitat modification to have any lasting effect.” Yes, they are talking about ripping out your lawn and planting shrubs that will discourage geese from coming ashore.

You might question why all of this is necessary to shoot a goose in June, while we can shoot 10 of them a day in September. Good question!”

This is but a clear example of misappropriated reasoning – or perhaps an absence thereof. The Government forces itself onto people, often disguised as something that will benefit the people. Since when did the Government ever do anything for the benefit of the people?

As is typical of fascist government, once the people have been forced to accept their “GI” geese (wolves, coyotes, lions, bears, delta smelt, piping plovers, bats, loons, Canada lynx, etc.) the people have no recourse in solving the problems the Government created. Is any of this coming through as new information to you?

Now, with geese shitting all over your property, creating safety and health issues, your only recourse is to add more shackles and chains to the ones you have already agreed to wear, and pay out the money to erect props, mirrors and smoker machines, designed and perpetuated by the EnvironMENTALists to protect THEIR animals (at your expense), when in the end, there will always be a goose turd problem, a coyote problem, a lynx problem, a bat problem, etc.

So, keep voting in these mentally deranged, corrupted, officials and nothing will every change. All that ever changes is the rhetoric of promises. BUT YOU BELIEVE! YOU WANT TO BELIEVE! YOU MUST BECOME A TRUE BELIEVER!

It’s a simple solution to a government-caused problem, but because the Government is control by EnvironMENTALism, because wildlife managers are controlled by EnvironMENTALism, because governments hate people, because governments hate your freedom, because governments hate your independence, because governments must always be in control, screw your safety and health, screw your loss of property, screw your loss of income, screw it all because ANIMALS MATTER more than you do.

You created this mess, now you got to fix it. The insanity comes from using the same rigged and faulty system that got you into the mess to begin with, thinking this time it can be corrected.

And of course I must end this in the best way I know how:

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Share

Save a Tree. Eat a Beaver…..or Something

Stupidity and common sense hves run so amok that now nobody seems to know what to do with a problem beaver – kill it, trap it, trap and move it, adore it, invite it to stay and bring in more or simply marry one of the dang things. Beavers are always a problem when they decide to build a damn in the culvert that runs next to your house or along one of the roads Maine’s towns must maintain.

Beavers are a stupid creature that knows nothing but chewing up trees and stopping the sound of running water. Water runs through a culvert and often when it comes out the outlet end of the culvert, rushing water can be heard. This is like smelling Spinney’s fried clams out at the end of Fort Popham for the tourist looking to clog their arteries with some deep fried clams.

But as things go these days, people who think animals, even those that are too numerous and present too many problems, have rights and deserve to live to build a dam another day, want the creatures spared the death sentence. Makes little sense but then again what does in this day and age?


Picture editorial by Richard Paradis

I suppose being that much of today has been the focus on ignorance, idiocy and the vacancy of common sense, it is time one again to bring out the famous letter of the guy trying to deal with nuisance beavers and his inept government.

Subject: Go Figure

This is a copy of an actual letter sent to Ryan DeVries, from the
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, State of Michigan. Wait
till you read this guy’s response – but read the entire letter before
you get to the response.

Mr. Ryan DeVries
2088 Dagget
Pierson, MI 49339
SUBJECT: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20;

Site Location: Montcalm County

Dear Mr. DeVries:

It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality
that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced
parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner
and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity:

Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet
stream of Spring Pond.

A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A
review of the Department’s files shows that no permits have been issued.

Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in
violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource
and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994,
being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws
annotated.

The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially
failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at
downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently
hazardous and cannot be permitted.

The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all activities
at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by
removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the stream channel.
All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 2002.

Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so
that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure
to comply with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the
site may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement
action.

We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter.
Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
David L. Price
District Representative
Land and Water Management Division
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RESPONSE:

Dear Mr. Price,

Re: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20;
Montcalm County

Reference your certified letter dated 12/17/2000 has been referred to me
to respond to. First of all, Mr. Ryan De Vries is not the legal
landowner and/or contractor at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan.

I am the legal owner and a couple of beavers are in the (State
unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood “debris”
dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond.

While I did not pay for, authorize, nor supervise their dam project, I
think they would be highly offended that you call their skillful use of
natural building materials “debris.” I would like to challenge your
department to attempt to emulate their dam project any time and/or any
place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no way you could
ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam
ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their
dam work ethic.

As to your request, I do not think the beavers are aware that they must
first fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam
activity. My first dam question to you is:
(1) Are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers? or,
(2) do you require all beavers throughout this State to conform to said
dam request?

If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, through
the Freedom of Information Act I request completed copies of all those
other applicable beaver dam permits that have been issued. Perhaps we
will see if there really is a dam violation of P! art 301, Inland Lakes
and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act,
Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.3010,1 to
324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, annotated. I have several
concerns. My first concern is aren’t the beavers entitled to legal
representation?

The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay
for said representation – so the State will have to provide them with a
lawyer.

The Department’s dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed
during a recent rain event causing flooding is proof that this is a
natural occurrence, which the Department is required to protect. In
other words, we should leave the Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than
harrass them and call their dam names. If you want the stream “restored”
to a dam free-flow condition – please contact the beavers – but if you
are going to arrest them they obviously did not pay any attention to
your dam letter (being unable to read English).

In my humble ! opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build
their unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green
and water flows downstream. They have more dam right than I do to live
and enjoy Spring Pond. If the Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection lives up to its name, it should protect the
natural resources
(Beavers) and the environment (Beavers’ Dams).

So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case can be
referred for more elevated enforcement action right now. Why wait until
1/31/2002 The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then, and
there will be no way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them
then.

In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention a real
environmental quality (health) problem in the area. It is the bears.
Bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you
should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the beavers alone.

If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! (The
bears are not careful where they dump!)

Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to
contact you on your answering machine, I am sending this response to
your office via another government organization – the USPS. Maybe,
someday, it will get there.

Sincerely,
Stephen L. Tvedten
The University of Texas at: Austin
Office Community Relations/Accounting unit
P.O. Box 7367
Austin, TX 78713

Share

Bear Encounters Soar In Maine While MDIFW Officials Still Haven’t Released Bear Harvest Data

*Editor’s Note* All the information for this blog post was provided by Richard Paradis.

The chart above shows the history of the past seven years of how long it has taken the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) officials to make public the results of the bear harvest and associated data. The last bear hunt for 2011 ended 189 days ago and counting. According to the chart, the average length of time is takes MDIFW officials to prepare the data, is 175 days; the longest being 269 days in 2006. I think getting deer harvest data is only slightly better.

So, why the long wait? Who knows! Probably the excuse is that there is no money. Odd that long before there were computers, harvest data was available on hunting seasons as the season progressed. Now we have to wait half a year or longer.

Meanwhile, the number of complaints filed for nuisance bears has doubled as compared to a similar time frame from a year ago. According to state biologist Kendall Marden, at least part of that increase is pinned on a growing population of bears; perhaps an unhealthy population of bears. One should consider that MDIFW and Maine outdoor sportsmen have realized there are too many bears and yet nothing seems to be taking place to increase seasons or bag limits, etc. to counter the growth. Is MDIFW now in bear protection mode along with other predators?

Share