September 20, 2018

The Continued Misrepresentation of Wildlife Watching

A recent Letter to the Editor in a Maine newspaper is, at best, misleading as well as selfishly hypocritical probably due mostly to ignorance.

In the Letter, the author says, “…about two-thirds more people come to this state every year to watch a live moose than to kill a moose…” I have my doubts that this person has any real data to support this claim but even if they did, the data would be inaccurate unless “you know a thing or two because you’ve seen a thing or two.”

I happen to know a thing a two about these statistics that claim that there are more wildlife watchers than hunters. Here’s how it works.

Yellowstone National Park is a prime and representative example of how “statistic prove that statistics can prove anything.” When visitors to the park are surveyed they are asked if they saw any wolves during their trip. Whether they did or didn’t matters not. The statistic they were seeking was to put this visitor down as someone who traveled to Yellowstone for the purpose of viewing a wolf. This way the data gatherers can drum up a number to support their wolf agendas.

Throughout the country similar surveys take place. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts similar surveys. When asking participants in a survey what they did and where they went, they were also asked if they saw wildlife. If they did, they automatically become designated wildlife watchers even if their intent was something else. What they don’t differentiate is the honest and complete demographics of the person being surveyed.

Another example would be when a person who happens to be a hunter is in the woods hunting for any game animal when asked if they saw other wildlife, they then become a statistic labeled as a wildlife watcher, not necessarily a hunter. Most people believe because it is what they have been wrongfully misled to believe, that there are hunters and there are wildlife watchers. I don’t know of any hunters who aren’t wildlife watchers. So, what percentage of the “two-thirds” are actually hunters, fishermen, and/or trappers?

I might tend to agree that there are more people who come to Maine in hopes of seeing a moose somewhere than come to moose hunt. That’s a no-brainer. Only 210 moose permits were issued to “those from away” for the 2016 moose hunt.

The author mentions that hunting licenses in Maine have been on the decline. That may be so but it should be as important to ask why that might be so. Is it because those potential hunters have become wildlife watchers instead? Is it because the hunting over the past decade or so in Maine has become so poor fewer want to spend the money or take the time off work to hunt when success rates are dropping faster than the number of licensed hunters? Or maybe it’s like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that the number one reason for any reduction in hunting has to do with being able to get time off from work. So what does that suggest about the hunter? I’ll let you figure that out while you’re standing in the welfare hand-out line waiting to collect so you can go watch wildlife.

What’s also deliberately never spoken of is that if not for the efforts and money spent by hunters, there would be no moose watching or wildlife watching in general. And that is a fact that ALL hunters are extremely proud of. And we do that WITHOUT demanding that someone else change their lifestyle.

The author states a couple more grave errors deliberately attempting to influence public opinion. First, it is stated that if a constitutional amendment passed in Maine placing a “right to hunt” as part of the constitution, it “…would enshrine the right to hunt and fish into the Maine Constitution.” Whether intended by the author or not to mislead readers to believe that an amendment, as proposed, would give Maine citizens the protected right to hunt, fish and trap regardless of the goals and direction of the state’s wildlife management programs, use of the word “enshrine” certainly paints that picture. The proposal basically recognizes that hunting, fishing, and trapping are a scientifically proven method of managing wildlife populations to ensure their sustainability. It’s called the North American Model of Wildlife Management.

Secondly, if such an amendment passed it would not eliminate the right of citizens to petition the state in regards to wildlife management.

However, at the root of all this, we clearly see the real problem. The author makes the bold and extremely inaccurate statement that “…the hunting and trapping special interests in this state view wildlife as their own private preserve rather than a public resource.” That is the biggest bag of horse manure that I am sick and tired of selfish, ignorant, Leftist, immoral degenerates stating.

Clearly, it is before the reader to understand that there is nowhere in the majority of the hunting, fishing, and trapping collective that believes they own wildlife or game. It is the opposite. For decades the left has spent millions of dollars doing everything they can to force their perverse, degenerate lifestyle onto the rest of us. And just like the spoiled rotten brats they are, when hunters, fishermen, and trappers take a necessary step to protect one small activity to stop the onslaught, we are painted as selfish people who think the resource is ours alone. That’s never been the case in a million years.

Hunters understand that part of what they do is to perpetuate wildlife and make it so that everyone can enjoy it. We know that doesn’t come without a price. We understand that at times reductions in hunting permits need to be made in order to responsibly manage game populations. We like it when game populations exceed goals and we can hunt them and eat them. We understand that when we purchase a hunting, fishing, and/or a trapping license, that money is going toward responsible wildlife management for everyone to enjoy. How can any of this be seen as believing we own the resource?

As a matter of fact, it is the complete opposite. Not only does this writer want to claim ownership of the resource, but wants to prohibit those of us who have worked for generations from being able to enjoy it in our own way. Instead, by the will of the writer, we are supposed to stop doing what we do because the writer doesn’t believe in it or doesn’t care to be a part of it.

So you tell me who is the selfish one here who thinks THEY own the resource. Maybe if this mixed-up and misled person and their ilk would stop trying to make us just like them, people in Maine wouldnt be trying to figure out how to stop them.

Utter leftist, selfish, psycho-babble!!!

Share

Better to Remain Silent

It appears that I am always returning to the adage: Better to remain silent and be thought of as a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. Or as is found in Proverbs 17:28: (Wycliffe Bible) “Also a fool, if he is still, shall be guessed a wise man; and, if he presseth together his lips, he is guessed an understanding man.”

Here I go reading again! I was reading an article online about how one “outdoor writer” stated that hunters can mistake another hunter for game. He expressed it in these terms: “If it hasn’t happened to you yet, it probably will.”

Most disturbing about this piece is there is no differentiating between the actions by every hunter to sift through the hundreds upon thousands of objects his eyes take in in one day of hunting and seeing something and shooting at it or killing it.

This is followed by a bunch of psycho-babble about how the brain will see only what it wants to see and when a hunter is so anxious to see game and shoot it, he or she will pull the trigger on such things as a box of Marlboro cigarettes.

A friend of mine was a Maine Humorist. One of his albums he recorded was titled, “Tall Tales and Damned Lies.” Some of this guy’s claims belong in Joe Perham’s Tall Tales and Damned Lies. The author writes: “That explains why virtually every truly experienced turkey hunter I know has been shot at least once.”

Either this guy knows only a handful of “experienced” turkey hunters who are total, brain-dead idiots, or he lies longer than a bearskin rug. Evidently, he buys into the psycho-babble of whom he quotes in this article who says, “the more experienced the hunter,…the more likely you are to be tricked by your ‘mind’s eye.'”

For crying out loud! Years have been spent to educate hunters in recognizing their targets. In Maine, for example, the hunter is 100% responsible to recognize his or her target BEFORE they pull the trigger. Nothing is foolproof. Mistakes can happen but they are rare. Listening to this guy one is led to believe everyone who hunts gets shot and the more experienced you are at hunting the greater your risk of shooting someone.

Hunters don’t need enemies when they have friends like this.

Share

Tapping Your Inner Wolf – NYTimes.com

*Editor’s Note* – If a reader can disregard the psycho-babble B.S. and overlook the humanizing of wolves, one might find an ounce of usable information in this article. Mostly, it’s designed to give the human reader a false impression about how wolves are no different than humans and the WE CAN LEARN A LOT FROM WOLVES.

The alpha male stereotype of the wolf is wrong. He’s all about family.

Source: Tapping Your Inner Wolf – NYTimes.com

Share