October 16, 2018

Vermont Wants Fewer Moose, Environmentalists Want to End Hunting

Vermont, which has been a part of an ongoing moose study in three states – Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont – is now saying they also believe that the reason for an increase in winter ticks that are killing off their moose herd is because of too many moose. Maine was bold enough to make that claim a few months ago.

As with Maine, it appears not everyone in Vermont agrees with the assessment that the state needs to reduce is moose population in order to mitigate the deadly winter tick problem that continues to kill the herd.

At a public hearing earlier this year, attendees thought the logic behind reducing the moose herd absurd and instead called for an end to moose hunting “until the tick problem is better understood.”

The tick problem will never be better understood because there is no end to the terrible misinformation about what causes ticks to increase. So long as brainless automatons narrowly focus their attention on global warming as the culprit, nothing will change. This is insanity.

Even the editors of the linked-to article practice their echo-chambered response that “Mild winters have created a safe haven for ticks to thrive year-round.”

They know nothing about winter ticks and are too lazy to do any real investigating – much like the biologists who manage our game species. There’s little hope for a bright future so long as the ignorant continue to be led to the slaughter with false and ridiculous claims about “Climate Change.”

Share

Vermont to Issue 13 Moose Hunting Permits…But Not Really

Vermont says it will allot 13 moose hunting permits. However, unless you are a military veteran, have a terminal illness or are filthy rich, you will not have a chance at obtaining one of these permits. But that is only one issue.

With all the money and research done on moose, this is the best we can come up with?

According to Vermont officials, the state has decided that it will attempt to maintain the moose population, the majority of which is found in the very northeast corner of the state, at 1 moose per square mile in order to “reduce the effects of winter ticks.”

I have an idea there will be few people happy about this move but if now the wildlife managers are going to put more focus on the “health” of wildlife rather than population estimates, it’s difficult to know what to expect into the future.

We’ll just have to wait and see.

Share

Vermont Continues To Reduce Moose Permit Allotments

It appears that the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife has decided, once again, to cut back on moose hunting permits. Where once there were 25 permits issued, authorities are recommending only 14 be issued this year.

A news article said the decision is based on the continued reduction of the moose herd because of, “…infestations of ticks and brain worms believed to be caused by the warming climate.”

If this was a game where you could buy a clue, the clue to buy would be this: So long as fish and wildlife departments continue to wallow in the deep manure pile of “global warming” they will never find any real answers to wildlife management problems.

Evidently, that’s the easiest mode of operation and are we to now believe the most lucrative?

 

 

Share

Vermont Moose Study: Ah, Say What?

Maybe there is still hope to save the moose. In an article found Online at The Sun, Vermont Fish and Game biologists are quoted as saying, “Winter ticks spread more rapidly when moose are overabundant,” said Cedric Alexander, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department’s lead moose biologist. “Although we decreased Vermont’s moose herd to reduce the impacts of moose on the landscape, it may have also contributed to the much lower rates of winter ticks on Vermont’s moose than biologists observe on moose in New Hampshire or Maine.”

However, there are a couple of thing also written in this article that makes me pause and exclaim, SAY WHAT?

For those with some knowledge know that the media, most often fed by fish and wildlife departments, lay the blame of reduced moose populations squarely on global warming, even when there is no science to support such a claim. As we have learned, global warming is a very convenient excuse for everything. And of course, we have reached a point in moose studies where scientists seem to agree that much of the loss of moose through the United States is caused by the infestation of moose ticks, or winter ticks – Dermacentor albipictus. The problem is that it appears there is no agreement as to why there appears to be a problem of too many ticks and too many moose dying from those ticks. Many simply want to lay the entire blame on some fabricated idea of a warming climate. Certainly weather, as has been shown, affects tick survival and perpetuation. Weather is NOT global warming.

Now Vermont is whistling a different tune: “Vermont has already taken steps to help reduce the issue of the winter ticks by increasing the number of licenses sold to hunt moose in recent years. This has taken the population of the species from over 5,000 in the state in the early 2000s to around 2,200 moose today. The species is healthiest at medium densities…” This is perhaps the first I’ve heard of this claimed deliberate action to reduce Vermont’s moose population.

In the “Say What?” category we read:

“As seasons in recent years have warmed up, the winter ticks have been more able to survive and reproduce in the winter.” Winter ticks don’t “reproduce” in winter.

“They don’t pose a problem to deer because deer evolved with the species present…” I don’t understand what the embolden statement means. Somebody help me! I’ve fallen and can’t get up!

SAY WHAT?

 

Share

Lynx in South Vermont – Driven There by Global Warming?

*Editor’s Note* – If readers have even a basic understanding about Canada lynx, including its history, the tone of the information found in the below article, is typical environmentalism’s clap-trap nonsense. History tells us that lynx in Vermont, at any time in history, is a very rare thing and most likely any spotting of such a critter is the result of a wayward male lynx looking for a place to settle down. It is nonsense for Vermont and other locations, where sustained habitat and available prey is nonexistent, to “protect” a species that, even under the best of conditions, is never going to sustain itself. A simple occasional spotting of a Canada lynx in southern Vermont should be a welcomed indication that the species, overall, is very healthy and doing remarkably well…but to environmentalists, that’s never good enough. 

Also of note, we are repeatedly told that global warming is much the cause of the absence of lynx on the landscape of the United States and yet this particular lynx seems to be traveling outside the southern boundary of its range. We find the same with other species. The hoax of climate change, as presented by a fascist government, becomes only a convenient excuse when control, power and greed are at stake. 

“A lone Canada lynx was photographed in the southern Vermont town of Londonderry this June, marking the first confirmed evidence of lynx in Vermont outside the Northeast Kingdom in decades. Lynx are listed as ‘threatened’ under the federal Endangered Species Act and ‘endangered’ in the state of Vermont.

The lynx was photographed in the back yard of a rural Londonderry home. Biologists with the Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department confirmed the identification of the animal from the photos and visited the site to confirm the location of the photos.”<<<Read More>>>

svermontlynx

Share

Predator Hunting in Maine Has Caused the Deer Population to “Thrive?”

A report filed with the Portland Press Herald about Northern New England’s plans to issue more permits to kill antlerless deer to control the deer herds, states that: “Hunting of predators, like coyotes, has also helped deer thrive. Maine’s hunting season for coyotes is open year-round, unlike the seasons for deer, moose and bears, which are short and restricted.”

I think it would be responsible for the newspaper to produce some data to support that claim. While there have been pockets of effort to work toward the control of coyotes/wolves, I have serious doubts that any of that effort can honestly be translated into, “has also helped the deer thrive” and thus contribute in any way toward the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s notion that portions of Maine have too many deer due to ONE mild winter.

Share

Taking Aim at Vermont Coyotes

“Erik Hammond has killed or been hunting with someone who has killed more than 500 coyotes since he started hunting them six years ago. He will continue on with his hunt to help out farmers and Vermont’s deer population.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

State says coywolves are no myth

“They certainly are in Vermont,” said Louis Porter, commissioner for the Vermont Department of Fish & Wildlife. “There’s a continuum of canid (a mammal from the dog family) species that go all the way from coyotes to Eastern wolves. Any individual (animal) can fall on that continuum depending on what their genetic makeup is.”

Technically speaking, a coywolf is the informal term for a hybrid descended from coyotes and a gray, Eastern or red wolf.

“We’ve had at least one case where it was pretty definitivel

Source: State says coywolves are no myth  : Rutland Herald Online – tremington@gmail.com – Gmail

Share

Understanding Wildlife Conservation

I read yesterday a letter to the editor of a newspaper in New England. The complaint from the reader/writer was that New Hampshire’s fish and wildlife department wasn’t “conserving” wildlife because they didn’t reduce the number of hunting permits for deer when Maine and Vermont did.

The writer first claimed that because New Hampshire was “wedged between” Maine and Vermont, and those two states suffered deer mortality due to a severe winter, that, “Presumably, the impact on New Hampshire’s deer herd suffered the same toll…”

It’s difficult to respond on a case by case basis, just as well as it is difficult to offer criticism on a case by case basis unless one has all the facts, along with the background to understand those facts. I’m not saying we all should be quiet and blindly let any government agency do anything without keeping a close eye on them and speaking out when necessary.

With all this in mind, let me say that a properly, well-operated and truthful, scientific wildlife management department, make their decisions based on what is best for each designated wildlife management district. In short this means that simply because Maine and New Hampshire suffered deer losses due to a “severe winter,” New Hampshire suffered the same throughout the entire state. Please study and understand the components of the Severe Winter indexes and how these are measured according to geographic regions of each state. It’s quite interesting…even if you don’t agree with it.

If we can actually compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, then perhaps one might have reason to think New Hampshire is operating afoul. If it can be proven that science and the welfare of deer is being exploited for money, or some other sinister reason, then by all means show us the facts.

The same writer also complains that she paid “extra money” to purchase “moose plates” believing that money was being used to, “fund conservation efforts for the benefit of the state’s wildlife,” and seemingly believes that because New Hampshire isn’t reducing or ending hunting, her money is not being spent wisely.

I have no idea exactly what her money is being spent on. I can, however, attempt to reassure the writer that a well-allotted hunting season on game animals, i.e. deer, moose, etc., is an important and integral part of a well-proven, scientific, and healthy management plan.

In addition, the writer appears a bit panicked because she has heard that the fish and game department is considering a “hunting season” on bobcats.

Again, I don’t know the details of this proposal, but assuming (a bad thing, I know) that the New Hampshire fish and game department has scientifically determined that there are too many bobcats that are negatively affecting the anthropogenic “balancing” of wildlife, then we should support that action for the betterment of all wildlife species.

There is a balance somewhere between collecting hunting license fees, dispersing the money to wildlife programs and knowing when to increase, reduce or end hunting of a certain species. I pays to be concerned and become involved in that process. It also requires a solid understanding of the total science behind these efforts. It’s not all just about societal demands…yet.

Share

Composting and Bears: Adjusting to Vermont’s Universal Recycling Law

“With more Vermonters choosing to compost, we want to help them prevent any potential problems with bears,” said Hammond. “People can effectively reduce the chances of bears causing damage to their property and protect the bears as well.”

Source: Composting and Bears: Adjusting to Vermont’s Universal Recycling Law : The Outdoor Wire

Share