As was written to me in a comment, “Ya gotta do it for the joy not the money.”
Not everyone is stupid and gullible. Unfortunately, radical, dirty-money-fed, environmentalists and their filthy organizations have no scruples when it comes to presenting some form of credibility in the bile fomented as letters to the editor and/or opinion pieces. Also unfortunate, is that some people seem eager to believe what is written because, well, it’s in print somewhere.
Maine, more than likely, will be facing another anti-hunting referendum next fall and as I precisely predicted, the nonsensical drivel has been oozing with stench for some time. Let’s look at one fine example of such.
The Portland Press Herald (Maine) carries an opinion piece for John Glowa, a man seemingly more in love with animals than humans and his obsession clouds his thinking. In addition it also seems to force him to state untruths (lies in case you need to know) about bears and what people say and do. In short, his entire piece is nothing short of emotional drivel, spiced up a bit with a dash or two of psychobabble.
The opening paragraph, not only sets the stage for the remainder of the regurgitation bought and paid for by the environmentalist, but pretty much defines the foundation by which the environmentalists want to force their way of life and their perverted values onto others.
The LePage administration and bear-baiting proponents would have us believe that the cessation of bear baiting would be a public safety catastrophe of epic proportions.
Rational speaking and thinking humans are quick to realize how ridiculous such a statement is. I have never once, in the many years I have been writing about wildlife management and outdoor issues nationwide, heard anybody speak of a “catastrophe of epic proportions” should bear baiting be halted. I would challenge this person to please provide the facts to back up this claim……but don’t hold your breath.
As I said, this sets the stage for the rest of the opinion piece, which means it is worthless balderdash saturated in emotion.
In addition, Mr. Glowa states that Maine needs a paradigm shift in order to convince (lie to, brainwash, indoctrinate, propagandize) people that bears will be dangerous if hunters are allowed to continue baiting them. And herein lies the rub. Wildlife management should not be based on paradigms and emotional poppycock.
Before assuming the crap sandwich that’s on special in your local newspaper, do some honest research and you’ll discover the unsubstantiated, emotional clap-trap found in this opinion piece, is worthless.
If baiting bears, as Glowa and others have falsely claimed, makes for more and bigger bears, then those states that do not allow bear baiting should not have very big bears, and fewer of them. According to Boone and Crockett (found on Peterson’s), the keepers of game animal trophy records, 11 of the top 20 all-time biggest black bears harvested came from Pennsylvania. Last time I checked, the Keystone State didn’t allow baiting, nor was there a shortage of bear to hunt. Do we need a paradigm shift there as well? And, by the way, none were from Maine.
Dang! Facts seem to be getting in the way of a good attempt at propaganda!
*Editor’s Note* – It sure is a blessing for me to have someone who cares enough about our future that has become my volunteer researcher. He provides me with tons of relevant information that I use in various ways and I sure do appreciate it. The information provided in this article of history was sent to me by my “volunteer researcher.”
A reader on this website this morning left a comment. Part of what the reader said was: “No, there is no proof of that _____, it is an assumption that it worked.
And as usual, trying to find the minority of examples doesn’t change the truth.”(emphasis added)
I got thinking about this, along with some information that I was sent in which I had already formulated some basic structure for an article today, and surmised what the reader might have meant by “minority of examples.” That’s when it came to me that what I intended to compose today about predator attacks and human encounters, particularly black bears, describes to a “T” what “minority of examples” might mean.
To set the stage, let me say that often in reading, researching and writing about wildlife, the outdoors, environment, etc., I find many are guilty of attempting to prove their position or perspective on an issue by invoking an anomaly or simply repeating an unproven hypothesis. A good writer/journalist will work hard to avoid such embarrassing displays of ignorance and laziness and yet, we have to deal with the ignorance and effort of those wishing to bolster their idealism and/or animal worship, in some cases.
In dealing with predators, it becomes a difficult task for a couple of major reasons. Probably the first and foremost is the level of power that exists from abusing the existence of animals for political gain. It makes sense really, once you gain a good sense of the constitutional makeup of people, especially in the United States today. Americans love animals to a fault. I far too often find that their infatuation with animals is perverse and have often written about it. And this leads me to the other major reason it’s hard to deal with issues involving predators; people have at or near cult worship with certain species.
Today’s topic deals with black bears. For a myriad of perverse and ignorant reasons, too many people seem to want to protect large predators. I think that over time, brainwashing fascists have convinced people things about wild animals that aren’t true because of the political power gains. Convinced of these false beliefs, they perpetuate the nonsense, all of which is mostly based on the programmed affinity with animals in our culture.
The “True Believers” (if you haven’t read the book you can get it here.) then become the useful idiots who are extremely easy to convince of anything.
Those who want to end hunting, trapping and fishing, are often times not the same group of “True Believers.” No, “True Believers” become convinced that only evil people hunt, fish and trap and that because of that, wildlife if being destroyed. The anti-human fascists who are looking, for political reasons, to end hunting, fishing and trapping also believe and teach that humans are evil destroyers of Mother Earth and need to be stopped.
In this impious, anti-human attack on sanity, reason and truth, lies are commonplace within a society that has been programmed to believe that the end is justified by any means.
An example of such can be found in debates in Maine or any place where the useful idiots rhythmically chant the mantra of the anti-human fascists. It becomes an all out effort to protect the black bear (or pick your favorite predator).
One aspect of the debate involves the issue of bear behavior when subjected to humans and their surroundings. Common sense, grounded in fact, science and history, says that when large predators, like the black bear, become too numerous, it can cause conflicts with humans. In addition to the number of bears in a state’s population, the issues of natural food availability, health and length of hibernation play a role in how often bears and humans meet up.
In addition, people are warned not to feed bears and education efforts are underway in many states to teach people how to make their homes less attractive to intruding bears.
Aside from the hibernation and availability of natural food, man can control feeding wildlife and populations. Population control has historically, and with amazing success, been accomplished over several decades with regulated human hunting harvest.
Unfortunately, the anti-human fascists want to put a stop to hunting, trapping and fishing, not necessarily to offer any protection to the wildlife but to build on their wanton desire for political power and control over people.
In Maine, the Humane Society of the United States (anti-human fascists) intends a citizens’ initiative to end bear hunting and trapping. Victory in this effort will destroy a nationally recognized black bear management plan and destroy a valuable American heritage, resulting in loss of rights and the ability to express those liberties.
Those fighting against this anti-human move argue, in part, that ending bear hunting will create a seriously increased number of human and bear encounters; a real public safety issue. The anti-humans state that hunting, or actually any form of wildlife management is unnecessary; that Mother Nature can make it all nirvana. This, of course, is not true.
One tool that in Maine has become a necessity to keep the annual harvest rate of black bears high enough to stabilize a rapidly growing population of black bears, is the use of bait to lure a bear into a shooting area for hunters. The geographic make consisting of the mountains and dense forests has forced the fish and game department to come up with these tactics in order to keep bear populations at socially acceptable levels, i.e. to reduce the prospects of a public safety issue.
The anti-humans argue that baiting bears is inhumane and that baiting the bears in areas where the creatures live, is acclimating them to humans and this action will increase human/bear encounters in populated areas. This also is not true. Feeding bears in your back yard is acclimating bears to humans but baiting them deep in the forest does not. Repeating such nonsense is akin to the use of “minority examples” to substantiate a false claim.
Some of the lies are intended to make us believe that any problems people might have with bears is caused by the mere existence of human beings. After all, in their eyes, us humans are evil. Some have gone so far as to state that if it were not for the baiting of bears there would be no human/bear encounters.
Historically, not only can that not be proven, but it can reveal quite the opposite. Bear baiting in Maine was not implemented until recent years, certainly long before 1945.
Sent to me were a couple of pages from a book, “Nine Mile Bridge: Three Years in the Maine Woods”, written by Helen Hamlin, the first edition in 1945. The pages included below for readers to enjoy, account for the many encounters humans were having with black bears in Maine prior to 1945 and long before bear baiting and Dunkin’ Donuts.
I’m thinking of all the maxims in existence that can be used to describe this story: It’s better to be thought of as stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt, perhaps fits best.
It’s certainly not profound on my part, or anyone else’s, that when it comes to discussions on animal welfare, often rational discourse is tossed out the window. How can you take a person serious at all when they open their mouth and say really absurd things?
Maine is in the beginning stages of another battle with environmental and animal rights perverts that want to shut down essentially all bear hunting and trapping in Maine. I’ve written several articles already about this absurdity and I’m sure there will be plenty more to come. Much of my focus has been on exposing the lies, mostly geared to play on emotions, perpetuated by the mentally ill people who promote animal welfare over human welfare.
Some of the worst actors become those who sell themselves as hunters and trappers and yet run to the side of the animal perverts pushing their progressive, totalitarian agendas on the majority of the citizenry. The mere act of taking the side of anti human organizations disqualifies anyone claiming to be a hunter and/or trapper. And if they don’t agree, it’s only more proof they have their heads buried someplace where the sun doesn’t shine.
The pile of sticks at the Humane Society of the United States, the major promoter and financier of the anti rights campaign in Maine, wants to stop the use of bait in harvesting a bear. I suppose credit should be given to the animal perverts for mounting a false campaign to convince people that the bait used by bear hunters is mostly made up of doughnuts. But is it really? I don’t think so.
Those who bait bear, use an assortment of things. I have talked with guides, who probably are the ones who mostly set up bait stations for their clients, who refuse to tell me one item they use in their concoction to lure bears. I know of several bear baiters that have never used doughnuts.
But for some reason, the image that gets conjured up in the minds of non thinking people, is that the landscape in Maine is littered with boxes of Dunkin’ Donuts. I feel bad for DD that they are being dragged through this slime hole that belongs to the animal rights mental midgets.
In a recent Times Record, an editorial that got it all wrong about the truth of bear hunting, included a handful of comments left by readers. One such person is notorious around Maine as fitting the description I’ve provided above of the person who claims to be a hunter and yet jumps in bed at every opportunity with the environmentalists and animal rights extremists.
And why should we take seriously people like Cecil Gray? Here’s his comment:
Millions of pounds of doughnuts and such are dumped in the north woods every year.
I don’t now what “and such” refers to in this person’s mind but I do know what doughnuts are. Millions of pounds he says. Really? That’s a lot of doughnuts. How many doughnuts is that?
I can’t define what Mr. Gray has on his mind when he says, “millions”, i.e. plural of one million. Usually when such a broad undefined number is used it’s only to embellish a story and prompt emotional responses. When emotions enter an equation, such as whether to ban the only population control strategy used by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife(MDIFW), any amount of common sense suddenly vanishes and we are left shaking our collective heads.
I got wondering about “millions of pounds of doughnuts and such.” Let’s work with one million pounds and then you can multiply the information as many times as you think is enough. I didn’t go to Dunkin’ Donuts and get a dozen doughnuts to weigh but an educated guess was that a dozen doughnuts, excluding the box or container they might come in (after all I don’t think bear hunters bait with cardboard or paper), weighed approximately 2 pounds. If I’m way off on this, please weigh your own box of doughnuts and then do the simple math.
One million pounds of doughnuts then would comprise 6 million doughnuts. I wonder if collectively the state of Maine produces 6 million doughnuts in one year and still have enough left over to feed the people? According to the 2012 bear hunting harvest information found on the MDIFW website, last year a total of 3,207 black bears were taken by all methods of harvest. Of those 3,207, 2,613 were taken over bait; clearly the majority of the harvest and there’s a reason for that, but that’s another story.
That works out to having 382 pounds of doughnuts at every successful bait site. Maybe Mr. Gray sees millions more pounds of “and such” and I don’t know how much “and such” weighs but I bet it weighs more than doughnuts.
It’s all very laughable because even if this man’s statement was true, what difference does it make? Is he insinuating that this is just millions of pounds of “doughnuts and such” of illegal litter scattered willy-nilly across the forests? I wonder if this man would think it alright if hunters could bait bear with tofu?
But do you understand the last part of this guy’s comment?
Hunting is not in the equation at all. It’s time for the general populace, hunters and non hunters alike, to stop these ridiculous money making scams.
Odd title for this article wouldn’t you say? I chose this title because of a similar title I placed on an article I wrote back in February of 2007. It was titled, “Me and Teddy Roosevelt Were Best Friends.”
What prompted the title invoking the name of Teddy Roosevelt, was because I was tired of people making statements about Teddy Roosevelt much because they believed they understand what was on Roosevelt’s mind over a century ago. In addition, untold quantities of uninformed mouth pieces, yap about Teddy this and Teddy that, when they know nothing about the man and their abuse of poor Teddy comes from quoting him, mostly out of context, or fabricating thoughts Mr. Roosevelt must have had that would support one’s agenda.
Evidently, the pickings have reached the bottom of the barrel and some people are not even adept enough to lie about dead people to promote their agendas. No, they have to pick on animals. After all, like knowing what Teddy Roosevelt was really thinking, these clowns actually think they know what animals think and how they feel.
For purposes of this discussion most any animal could be front and center but let me pick on the black bear for a moment.
Say what you will about mentally retarded environmentalists but they sure know how to pick a tool that will put money in their bank accounts to pay those big salaries. After all, there are lawsuits to be won.
In the State of Maine, Washington, D.C.-based totalitarian environmentalists, specifically the Humane Society of the United States, have waged another war on the citizens of Maine in an attempt to stop bear hunting and trapping. In addition, it appears that I have discovered one such person that must be best friends with a bear and is therefore more qualified to tell the voters of the Pine Tree State about bears than bear scientists.
I have done my share of dumping on wildlife scientists but as bear biologists go, the ones up in Maine do a better than average job of studying and understanding about bears. They just don’t want to believe that bears are eating up too many deer fawns and moose calves. But that’s another story.
The problem with this soul mate of the black bears, is she was caught telling stories about bears that just don’t seem to agree with other people’s information about bears. Fortunately, Cathy DeMerchant, a board member of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine took the time to challenge Connie McCabe of her claims and provide the evidence disproving those claims.
Bear (sorry) in mind, that it is difficult to dispute McCabe’s bear findings, being one with the bear and all and rumors have it that recently Spock appeared to administer a “mind meld” with the bear. Therefore, it is up to readers to decided whether information about bears is more reliable from bear scientists or from Spock’s mind meld.
All joking aside…….well, I doubt that very seriously. Despite the humor I’ve injected into this inane debate of Teddy Roosevelt and black bears being my best friends, it is no joke that environmentalists from away want to destroy a nationally recognized bear management program in order to pimp their anti human, perverted love affair with having lots of stolen money in their bank accounts.
These gangsters and thugs will go to any extreme for that money. The bear’s best friend’s commentary is an example of what, in comparison, would be considered stretching the truth to influence opinion. Don’t be fooled. It is a pretty good rule of thumb when anyone is offering up all sorts of claims about bears or any other animal, without any kind of substantiating resources, it’s probably just lies…..er, I mean stretching the truth.
To further that discussion consider that one of the excuses these environmentalists are using to argue against using bait to lure a bear into a shooting area, is that the food stuffs being used for bait is not good for the bears. Some of what is being used is junk food. Environmentalists love to pick on doughnuts as being a really nasty food for bears (they say this while sipping Starbucks and gumming a glazed doughnut).
I have even heard and read claims from people that bears become addicted to this bait food and that the bears are storming down the doors of Nurtisystem, Weight Watchers and Overeaters Anonymous. The only hope for these bears is to ban bear hunting and trapping. It is important that we get bears onto a strict natural diet and NO 24-oz. soft drinks. Thank God for animal rights activists like Michael Bloomberg!
To help with getting bears onto healthy diets (don’t forget. People know this because they are best friends with bears…and mind melds), more and more towns like Tallahassee, Florida are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to make and distribute bear-proof garbage cans. Hundreds of thousands of dollars when a $1.00 bullet would be a long term solution to an unnecessary problem.
With all this focus on man’s best friend, the bear, to lock them out of garbage cans and break them of their honey-dipped doughnuts addiction, I’m afraid of what will happen to hungry bears with the DTs!
Oh, we’ve become such a foolish society. God help us.
It’s like the movie Ground Hogs Day. It’s repeated over and over. Every fish and wildlife agency in this country now adjusts their wildlife management plans according to the pressures and influences of the mindless, incapable of thinking beyond television, public: That is those more willing to care for animals than humans.
So why shouldn’t wildlife be managed due to public influences? Perhaps this bit of wisdom will help explain. In a Letter to the Editor in the Portland Press Herald out of Maine(scroll to find), a writer attempts to paint a picture of those proponents of bear hunting and trapping as somehow not understanding their own positions.
At issue here is that anti rights, anti hunting, anti trapping, anti (you fill in the blank), out-of-state, totalitarian fascists want to control what the citizens of the State of Maine do. They are attempting, once again, to end bear hunting and trapping. One of the arguments being used by, not only hunters, trappers and citizens at large who do understand the necessity of science-based wildlife management, but also by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, is that ending any means to be able to control the population of black bears in Maine, will result in a public safety issue of too many human/bear conflicts.
Should the writer have had enough brain matter(I use the term loosely. Please see fable below), he would have been able to see the ignorance of his own statement when he said:
They say that too many conflicts with humans make these practices[bear hunting/trapping] essential to controlling the bear population.
But they also claim that that they need to use these techniques because bears are too difficult to find and shoot otherwise.
Which is it – too many bears or too few?
If you don’t know anything about hunting bears, then my recommendation would be to continue reading here the fable of the bird who refused to fly south for the winter.
A bird found a wonderful place to build a nest; right behind the wind-protected and warm chimney on top of a house. There were bird feeders around and such and so the bird decided not to fly south with the rest of the birds as winter approached.
The bird didn’t realize that when the leaves fell, the people that provided the bird feeders and warmed the chimney, closed up their house and went south as well.
The bird got cold and could find no food to eat.
One day, as the bird sat in his nest believing his life was going to end, he heard and saw a neighbor come by the house riding on a horse. He was there to check on the house for his neighbors. As the man looked around, the horse deposited a big pile of excrement right near the side of the house.
After the man and horse left, the bird crawled out of his nest and worked his way down to the eave of the roof; unable to fly he was so weak from starvation. Struggling, the bird eventually fell off the eave of the house and landed in the pile of horse excrement.
The excrement had warmth and nutrition. Soon the bird recovered his strength and flew back up to his nest. Still ignorant of the ways of the world when winter sets in, the bird was so happy he was going to live for another day, he began to sing and sing loudly. Soon a hawk heard the bird, swooped down and ate the bird.
The moral of the story is: When you are full of shit, keep your mouth shut.
And I believe it was H.L. Mencken who said: “Nobody ever went broke underestimating The intelligence of the American public.”
*Note* – There may be some of you who will require additional help in understanding what has been written here. Seeking understanding from me is no longer free. My consultation fees begin at $100. I can take PayPal.
It has been brought to my attention that the Maine Trappers Association will be holding elections for officers at their meeting on September 21, 2013, at the Windsor Fairgrounds. This election may be the most important election in the history of Maine trapping as anti rights groups attempt to ban bear baiting, hounding and trapping. Anyone who knows and understands the history of these anti rights, totalitarian organizations, realizes this is just one step in the complete banning of hunting, trapping and fishing.
With a promised citizens’ initiative for November 2014, it is imperative the Maine Trappers Association has the right leadership in order to aggressively stand up to these groups and organize against them.
If you are not a member of the Maine Trappers Association, now would be a good time to join. If you are a member, make sure to vote. Results will hinge on your participation.
A few days ago I was reading Online an article that appeared in The Maine Wire, written by M.D. Harmon, the title of which is, “Anti Gun Liberals Prefer Emotion Over Fact.”
The construct of the article entails the messaging that took place by the gun-hating crowds after the mess in Newtown, Connecticut. The article is good but I’m a bit surprised that the author almost comes across as seeing this messaging scheme as something new, when it is a tactic that has been around for decades and has effectively ruined the lives of many people, including the destruction of personal liberties, among other things.
The article states:
As reported by Paul Bedard of The Washington Examiner, the activists created an 80-page blueprint called “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging” that was intended not to advance a rational argument but to “incite a moral panic” by the use of arguments deliberately designed to create an emotional climate hostile to Second Amendment rights.
Throughout the entire article, readers can substitute the subject of guns, gun violence, Second Amendment, etc., with whatever your favorite concern is.
As an example, in Maine, members of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the Wildlife Alliance of Maine (WAM), and others, have formed the organization “Mainers for Fair Bear Hunting.” They want to ban bear hunting with bait, bear hunting with hounds and bear trapping. I assure you, nothing these people will write or verbalize will have anything to do with facts or advancing a rational argument based on facts or science. It will be an emotional climate hostile to hunting and trapping in general and bear hunting and trapping specifically.
It is important that Maine citizens understand the tactics of those undergoing the process to place a citizen’s referendum on the November 2014 ballot. The garbage they will be subjected to has no semblance of sanity, fact or rational discourse and will be laced with emotions all designed to create a climate hostile to hunting and to demonize anyone who would support it. These tactics are not new. If they appear new to you, perhaps you need to get out a bit more and get involved in the life around you.
In 2004, a similar referendum, put on by the same anti hunting totalitarians, was defeated. It appears initially that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, Maine guides, Maine trappers, Maine hound hunters, and any and all other outdoor sportsmen, are going to struggle to defeat this effort.
It is my opinion that any hope to defeat this referendum should be based on effective messaging in defense of responsible bear management. While it is important to make sure that education, which includes actual facts and the science behind responsible bear management, supported by the long history Maine has in taking care of its bears, this alone will not stir the voters. Emotions will. If those in opposition to this bear referendum are not willing to fight fire with fire, i.e. create an emotional climate hostile to the efforts to ban effective black bear management, I fear a waste of effort and resources.
How strongly convinced are MDIFW and Maine sportsmen, that the present bear management plan and tactics are working that they are willing to do what it takes to defeat this utter nonsense from fringe groups hiding behind animal welfare in order to put a stop to hunting, trapping and eventually fishing. It is coming.
(Perhaps if sportsmen can defeat this new anti hunting effort, enough Maine citizens will better understand the importance of a constitutional amendment to protect hunting, trapping and fishing. If so, then also this time it can be presented to the legislature and citizenry the right way – protecting hunter/trapper/fisherman harvest and get it done.)
I and many other warned often after the 2004 bear referendum, in regards to the non authoritative and fearful approach being taken by MDIFW, guides and sportsmen in general, that being a nice guy wasn’t going to make these environmental zealots go away and leave Maine sportsmen alone. Environmentalists are all about take and nothing about giving. This historic fact must be learned.
Any coalition of Maine sportsmen to fight this initiative, needs a speed course in the tactics used to prevent hunting through effective messaging and then turn it around. The other side began long ago. Take notice of the continuous letters to the editors in many Maine newspapers, all repeating the same emotional talking points. This is being done by design. Many of those letter writers are paid members of these totalitarian groups and they will bombard the media with emotional clap trap for the next 14 or 15 months. And that’s only one small piece of the pie.
What do the Maine sportsmen have planned?