Pay attention people in San Bernardino County, California, those cute and cuddly little coyotes are playing a little rough with the kids at Alterra Park.

Tom Remington

california coyote attacks, san bernardino county

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I have been called a lot of things for my stance against the current administering of the Endangered Species Act. This includes the abuse through manipulation, the interpretation of the ESA through the courts, the abuse of it in order to stop hunting, trapping and fishing opportunities as well as the lack of any effort to change or eliminate it in order to provide a better means of accomplishing its initial goals. I have also been called colorful things because I think environmentalist, including animal rights groups, have completely gone off the radar and I have minced no words in saying so.

Even Arnold Schwarzenegger, the RINO (republican in name only) governor of California, thinks the whackos have gone too far. You know it has to be bad when one of California’s own thinks so.

“It’s not just businesses that have slowed things down, it’s not just Republicans that have slowed things down, it’s also Democrats and also environmental activists sometimes that slow things down,”

These comments come from the governor in response to delays in the construction of solar energy generating facilities. One is particular is the one near Victorville, where environmentalists are adding delays to the construction because of the Mojave ground squirrel - a rare squirrel that doesn’t even live on any of the land to be used.

“Our Department of Fish and Game is slowing approval of a solar facility in Victorville. It’s because of an endangered squirrel, an endangered squirrel which has never been seen on that land where they’re supposed to build the solar plants. But if such a squirrel were around, this is the kind of area that it would like, they say.”

You read that correctly! Here we have a case of no threatened animal even living on this land and yet because the weirdos think the habitat is good enough for the squirrel, that’s reason enough. This is one classic example of what is wrong with our environmental laws, the Endangered Species Act, the interpretation and administration of the Act and proof all this needs to be changed.

For those who still believe that there’s nothing wrong with the Endangered Species Act and who think that the environmentalists are right in this, why don’t you head on out to California. I’m sure those squirrels are in need of a few more “nuts”.

Tom Remington

Arnold Schwarzenegger, endangered species act, mojave ground squirrel, solar power

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

It might be an understatement to say that there’s a conflict brewing between U.S. Congressman George Miller of California and U.S. Congressman Don Young of Alaska. The battle stems from issues over wolf management in Alaska.

The state of Alaska, under the direction of the Alaska Board of Game and with the approval of Gov. Sarah Palin, is using aircraft to reduce the wolf population in specific areas where they are destroying the moose and caribou herds that supply native Alaskans with food. Animal lovers don’t like this and have been fighting the effort for some time. One of the radical groups involved is Defenders of Wildlife, of which it appears that Mr. Miller is a strong advocate for.

Rep. Miller is also the sponsor of HR3663(pdf), the misleading “Protect America’s Wildlife Act of 2007″, which is being promoted as a bill to stop aerial hunting of wolves. Rep. Young has pointed out on several occasions that there are already laws on the books that prohibit hunting from the air and that what is going on in Alaska is a necessary wildlife management tool - a tool that is not understood by those unfamiliar with Alaska, the area and the difficulty the geography of the region presents, along with the needs of native Alaskans.

Last Tuesday, Congressman Young, a ranking member of the Committee on Natural Resources, sent out a “Dear Colleague” letter giving his reasons why his colleagues in Washington should oppose HR3663. In the process, he spells out quite clearly what he thinks of Miller’s bill and his friends at Defenders of Wildlife.

We are now witnessing firsthand one of the most cynical, disingenuous, and misleading fund-raising campaigns ever to be launched by a radical environmental group. Center stage in their campaign is Rep. George Miller’s H.R. 3663, the Wolves are Cute Act, which would end the State of Alaska’s Aerial Predator Management Program.

Young, like so many others, believe that Defenders of Wildlife, along with just about every other animal advocate group, have become so greedy to have money at their disposal to pay big salaries and keep their machine running, they now have to hand select the project they will lie, cheat and steal over, in order to be better able to play on the emotions of people to weasel money out of them.

In their efforts to muster support for H.R. 3663 while raising thousands of dollars in donations, Defenders of Wildlife have been busy inundating unsuspecting Americans throughout the country with emotional photos and inaccurate information about Alaska’s Predator Control Program.

After a plea from Mr. Young to his colleagues to take the time to better understand the truth of what’s going on in Alaska, he offers up a proposal of his own, albeit not the first time something like this has been tried.

Since the sponsor of H.R. 3663 seems to have such a deep love for wolves, and now that the Defenders of Wildlife have raised well over $100,000 on the animals’ behalf, I propose that Defenders use that money to gather Alaska’s surplus wolves and safely transport them to the seventh district of California.

This proposal is a win-win for everyone, and I would suggest my colleagues present it to Defenders of Wildlife representatives roaming the Capitol this week.

A reader here at the Black Bear Blog alerted me to the fact that Mr. Young’s proposal isn’t the first. I did a little research and found out that back in 2000, then Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, a state that got wolves dumped on its front door step with the support of Congress back in 1995, suggested that wolves also be reintroduced into New York’s Catskill Mountains.

Part of Mr. Simpson’s motivation is to give New York representatives a taste of their own medicine. Like most Republicans from the West, he resents how Eastern members of Congress pad their environmental records with bills that restrict the use of Western public lands. In 1995, U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents released Canadian wolves in the wilderness of his southern Idaho district. This brought loud protests from nearly all of the state’s politicians. Representative Simpson argues that restoring endangered wolves to the East is as important as saving them in the West.

I first learned of this proposal by Young while reading Amy Ridenour’s National Center Blog, which is part of the National Center for Public Policy Research.

Having communicated before with Kevin Kennedy, a member of the Republican Professional Staff of the House Committee on Natural Resources, I sent him an email for more information. He sent along some links where the “Dear Colleague” letter was getting some attention in the media.

Mary Ann Akers’ “Sleuth” blog at the Washington Post has some coverage. She says Young is sending “shockingly graphic e-mail letters to his colleagues with gory photos” and likens it to “the tactics of extreme anti-abortion literature.” Not surprising that animal lovers and those who have never witnessed the realities of a wolf attack would compare it to that of abortions, of which they probably haven’t witnessed either. Notice it’s always a comparison of animals with humans, putting us on the same level.

Kennedy also gave me a link to a story which I had already read and was holding for just the right occasion. The Anchorage Daily News is reporting that residents, living in and around the same areas where the Alaska Board of Game is trying to reduce wolf numbers, are asking Alaska officials to overturn the current ban prohibiting the natives from killing wolf pups in their dens.

This is sure to stir a hornets nest and become excellent fodder for the money hungry wolf/predator advocate groups. They would like nothing more than plaster a photograph of the world’s cutest little puppy wolf dog all over in order to convince you to give them your money. This from a group claiming to care for animals yet seem to care not at all for the moose and caribou or your pet. In order to protect those predators, they tell people who have lost their pets to either move to the city or suck it up and get used to living where the wolves do - they were there first attitude.

As an excellent point of history and education, the same article points out that this was a necessary practice from many years ago in order for the natives to manage their food resources, something our society here in the lower 48 has no interest in, nor do they choose to believe it even exists. Maybe they just don’t care.

Many of the Yup’ik hunters who once controlled wolves in Western Alaska have died, but their stories have passed down, Roczicka said. People who are still alive today often share those stories, including members of Orutsararmuit, Roczicka said.

The natives are saying that if the aerial wolf management program doesn’t work or opponents become successful in stopping the killing of the wolves, they for sure will be seeking approval of this den killing as a necessary means of feeding their families.

Of course this suggestion is vehemently opposed by the conservationists/preservationists.

“We’re fervently opposed to it,” said John Toppenberg, director with Alaska Wildlife Alliance. “It’s been illegal in Alaska for a long time and deservedly so. It’s a Stone Age concept of wildlife management and has no place as a management tool for civilized people. It’s just barbaric.”

Mr. Toppenberg may think its a Stone Age thing, that’s barbaric and has no place in his society but they don’t live in his world. Sorry! Any rationally thinking person would have to ask themselves why there wasn’t a problem with wolf numbers and subsistence animals back when these “barbarians” were handling wildlife management on their own?

I don’t think that Mr. Miller will take Mr. Young up on his offer to transport the extra Alaska wolves to California but Young is trying to make his point even though some don’t like to deal in realities. Much like in 2000 when Rep. Simpson suggested to bring wolves to New York, it didn’t take long to pile up all the excuses and reasons wolves wouldn’t be good in their back yards but looked awfully precious in some unknown rancher’s back yard in Idaho, Montana or Wyoming.

There are just too many people now in this country that can’t see beyond the end of their noses. They may step into the hallway of their mid-town multi-million dollar apartment and see a neighbor and never speak to them. Or, another person walks out of their cabin, hut or shack in Aniak, Alaska wondering where their next meal may come from. The problem is both of these people are real people. They are somebody’s family, humans with needs, albeit quite different. They have a lifestyle they have chosen for whatever the reasons. I may not like the idea of someone killing wolf pups in order to survive but I am still human enough to understand, appreciate and respect that these are people. This is what they know. This is what they choose to be a part of and cannot and will not attempt to force my ideals on them.

I am also one of many millions of other human beings on this earth that place the importance of the human far above that of an animal. I read a comment left by a reader of the Washington Post article in which they asked the question.

“Who do you love more - WOLVES OR PEOPLE?”

This is a far cry from the question asked at the beginning of “The Sleuth’s” blog. She sees the entire effort by Young as a means of protecting his pet dog, proving the point that I don’t think she gets it either. She asks:

Who do you love more - dogs or wolves?

Are humans of lesser value?

Tom Remington

aerial wolf killing, Alaska Board of Game, alaska predator control program, alaska wildlife alliance, amy ridenour, anchorage daily news, aniak alaska, caribou, catskill mountain of new york, Defenders of Wildlife, Gov. Sarah Palin, grizzly bears, house committee on natural resources, hr3663, Idaho, john toppenberg, kevin kennedy, mary ann akers, moose, National Center for Public Policy Research, protect americas wildlife act of 2007, rep. don young, rep. george miller, rep. mike simpson, sleuth blog, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Post, wolf management, wolf reintroduction, yupik

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Sacramento, CA
January 17-20, 2008 (Thursday to Sunday)

Cal Expo, California State
Fairgrounds
1600 Exposition Blvd.
Sacramento, CA 95815
www.calexpo.com

This is the grand-daddy of Northern California sportsmen shows and it just gets better and better. For 2008 there will be more exhibitors with more fishing, hunting and outdoor equipment. The halls will be brimming with adventure travel destinations and show priced gear.

Come out and discover all that’s new at this year’s show. With nearly 600 exhibitors, ISE Sacramento has all the gear, travel and experts you need.

Sacramento ISE contains northern California’s largest fishing boat show. With more than 15 dealers representing at least 25 lines of bass and sportfishing boats from the world’s top marine manufacturers.

The Western Outdoor News weekend Youth Outdoor Fair–the largest event of its kind in the Western United States–returns to the Expo Halls beginning Friday at 3:0 pm and running all Saturday and Sunday with more and new hands-on experiences for kids 12 and younger.

We’re still bringing in more exhibitors, experts and professionals

Show Dates:	January 17-20, 2008 (Thursday to Sunday)
Show Hours:	Thursday and Friday, Noon to 9:00 pm Saturday, 10:00 am to 8:00 pm Sunday, 10:00 am to 5:00 pm
Location:	Cal Expo, California State Fairgrounds 1600 Exposition Blvd. Sacramento, CA 95815 www.calexpo.com
Tickets:	$12.00 General Admission Free - Children 12 years and under Get your tickets online now! Buy tickets in advance for you, family and friends. All tickets are valid for admission on one day only.
Parking:	$7 per car
Seminars & Events:	Learning is just part of the fun at ISE Sacramento. Now you can share your opinion on both hunting and fishing, too. Here are several show highlights: NEW Plight of Our Fisheries Summit. Join us Saturday at 1pm in the California Sportsmen Theater to learn how you can fight for fishing’s future! Panelists include: Assemblyperson Lois Wolk; Jim Martin, former Oregon Chief of Fisheries; John Beuttler, CA Sportfishing Protection Alliance; Dan Bacher, Editor of the Fish Sniffer, and Dick Pool, Water4Fish. USAfishing.com’s Mike Aughney will moderate. NEW Hunting Under Fire Summit, with former Senator Rico Oller, Moderator, and panelists: Senator Dennis Hollingsworth; Assemblyman Doug la Malfa; California Fish & Game Commissioner Jim Kellogg; Bill Gaines, President, California Outdoor Heritage Alliance; and Sam Perades, Executive Director, Gun Owners of California. Help preserve your hunting heritage: 2:30 on Saturday at the Eastmans’ Journals Adventure Theater). NEW GPS and sportfishing-gear classes, presented by Garmin and hosted by Johnson Hicks, in Building D. Scheduled for Friday from 1-2, and Saturday from 11-noon. NEW Taste of the Outdoors cooking theater, also in Building D. NEW Survival 101 tips and stories from survival and outdoor-safety authority and author Greg Davenport. Dutch oven cooking demonstrations, classes and new contest, located outside near Building D (white tent). Rock-crawler demos on the giant mountain, presented by 4Wheel Parts. New faces and topics at the California Sportsmen Theater, hosted by Sep Hendrickson; at the Eastmans’ Journals Adventure Theater; and at the Fly-Fishing/Tying Theater, too. Get your fishing and hunting licenses–5% savings–and expert information at the California Department of Fish & Game pavilion. The Ultimate Bass Demonstration Tank, hosted by Kent Brown of Ultimate Bass radio, features seminars by California’s top professional anglers. Splash Dogs jumping contest is back with great entertainment for the whole family and includes ISE’s new Western Championship Series. Bring the kids to the Youth Outdoor Sports Fair (opens Friday at 3pm), presented by Western Outdoor News. This giant special event is located at Expo Center, near the show’s West Entrance. This year’s Fair offers new interactive displays from California Fish & Game. Check out the show schedule.
Contests & Competitions:	And whether you like to watch the experts, or test your own skills be sure to catch all the exciting competitions this year. See the exciting Best of the West Distance Fly Casting Competition Elk callers can participate in ISE’s Elk Calling Competition, presented by Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. The Splash Dogs are back. Get full details and schedule at Splashdogs.com. Get contest details and rules.
Exhibitors:	You’ll find the gear, adventure and information you need at many of the nearly 600 exhibitors at the ISE Sacramento show. If you’re interested in selling your outdoor product or service, click for more information on becoming an ISE ExhibitorView the alphabetical list of this year’s exhibitors.
Promotional Partners:	Check out our promotional partners. These sportsman-related businesses provide valuable prizes, gifts, incentives and other promotional items for ISE shows. We thank each one for their support. Please visit these partner websites for more information about their products and services.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

You have to wonder what affect, if any, the decision first by a District Court of Appeals to rule the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns was unconstitutional and then the Supreme Court of the United States agreeing to hear that appeal, has to do with other judges and courts ruling against gun bans. Is it now becoming “in style” to rule against gun control? Does this have anything to do with an election year coming up?

It was announced yesterday that in California, of all places, a Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that San Francisco’s gun ban was invalid because it was a preemption of state law. In other words, Proposition H, voted in by the residents of San Francisco in November of 2005, was a law that was declared invalid by the Court because the city can’t ban guns because the state allows them.

The judge in this case, Judge Ignazio Ruvolo, said that the city failed to show that banning guns would only affect criminals and that by banning the guns would affect every citizen who has a constitutional right to own a gun.

This is great news for Americans and hopefully another indication that the courts are beginning to understand what it is the majority of Americans want - their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Tom Remington

gun rights, guns, san francisco gun ban, Second Amendment

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Just this morning I was giving readers the low, low-down on the latest political midnight dealings that will result in the slaughter of over 1,100 deer and elk on Santa Rosa Island, part of the Channel Islands National Park.

Feinstein and fiendish friends flitted around the back rooms of Congress greasing a rider onto the Appropriations Bill in an attempt to repeal Duncan Hunter’s bill that gave protection to the elk and deer on Santa Rosa Island. Today, a release was issued to the press from Vail & Vickers chastising the efforts of Feinstein and friends.

A huge hat tip to the Newshound, J.R. Absher at Outdoor Life.

Vail family responds to latest Congressional action regarding welfare of Santa Rosa Island deer and elk

A Statement from Vail & Vickers

Yesterday’s sudden action to reverse legislative direction on the future well being of Santa Rosa Island’s deer and elk is disheartening.

It is unfortunate that Senator Feinstein and her colleagues would leverage their power to eradicate these healthy and magnificent herds. Instead of giving park visitors and the American public an open process, they acted in the dark of night to insert a legislative rider that is in violation of the House and Senate rules which were enacted earlier this year. With Senator Feinstein’s clout, it is disappointing that she has elected to force an outcome without input from the public, her colleagues and the family that currently owns and cares for the herd.

We wish that the Senator had engaged us in seeking a better, more common sense solution to a very real problem Vail & Vickers faces, one that we have attempted to discuss with the National Park Service for years: can we develop an option that allows the herds to remain in their habitat and results in no animals senselessly dying? Ironically, the current law (the so-called Congressman Hunter provision) does not extend hunting past our lease terms in 2011; all it does is protect the animals from extermination.
It seems that both current Congressional leaders and the media continue to ignore this basic fact while promoting Rep. Duncan Hunter’s unrealized intent of allowing military veterans future hunting privileges.

To put it politely, Congress’s current course of action is not in the best interests of these magnificent animals. To put it bluntly, the countdown to their demise begins if the President signs this bill. Let us be clear, next fall over 300 of these creatures will be
needlessly shot in accord with the terms of a legal settlement driven by extreme interests. This will continue for four years.

While some hope that this legislative rider will end this issue once and for all, they clearly do not understand the implications of overturning current law. We will continue to educate the public about the senseless slaughter now reinstituted by this rider and remain committed to protecting this herd from eradication. We remain willing to discuss a ‘winwin’ outcome for these animals that have called Santa Rosa Island their home since the 1920s.

Tom Remington

channel islands national park, diane feinstein, Santa Rosa Island, vail & vickers

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

We have heard for decades that two things are certain in life - death and taxes. Well, we can easily add a third - government screw-up! Give the United States Government anything and they’ll destroy it but not until they spend billions of our tax dollars first.

Santa Rosa Island in California, part of the Channel Islands National Park, has turned into a political nightmare led by Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer. If you want the history of Santa Rosa, read David Strege’s article in the Orange County Register.

Here’s the brief version. The island was owned by the Vail and Vickers family who operated a cattle ranch on the 55,000-acre island. They imported elk and deer and eventually began offering hunts to manage the elk and deer numbers and supplement the ranch’s income.

Then the biggest mistake they made, and one I would highly discourage anyone from doing, is they sold the island to the United States government to be added to the Channel Islands National Park. And so began the destruction of everything good.

Part of the deal allowed the families to continue operating the cattle ranch and hunting operations for 25 years. The environmentalists took over and forced an end to the ranching and part of the settlement required the removal of elk and deer by 2011.

Duncan Hunter, a presidential hopeful, penned a bill that would have kept the elk and deer on the island and provided a place for military members to could go and hunt. That part of the bill was rejected but another part was passed - to keep the elk and deer on the island.

But that’s not the end of it. As is typical with our politicians who are all out of control with spending, earmarks, behind closed door wheeling and dealing at the expense of us overburdened taxpayers, Feinstein and Boxer managed to slip a provision secretly through along with the Appropriations Bill passed on Monday by the House that effectively overturns Hunter’s bill that would keep the elk and deer on the island.

According to J.R. Absher, the Newshound, in his article this week, a spokesman for the company that still runs the island operation says the animals will be slaughtered.

Vail & Vickers Co., the former island owners who continue to manage the hunting operation, contend they were blindsided by the provision’s inclusion in the budget bill and that logistics prevent them from relocating the wild animals safely and humanely. Instead, they say, in order to comply with the terms of the original settlement, they will likely have to kill the entire elk and deer population.

“That’s a lot of animals to just needlessly kill, but that seems to be the only option left,” company spokesman Jim Youngson told the Los Angeles Times. He cited the enormous costs of transporting wildlife, the bureaucratic roadblocks to relocating the animals to public land in others states, and an exceedingly high mortality rate from trapping and moving wildlife.

The environmentalists who want the elk and deer removed say those animals are not native and they are destroying the rest of the islands ecosystem. Operators of the ranch are prepared to provide scientific evidence that this is not the case. One has to wonder what is really behind this maneuvering as animal rights groups have been silent at the prospects that over 1,000 animals will be needlessly slaughtered in order to make way for the public to have more access to the island.

Is this a case of just pure ignorance on the part of Feinstein and Boxer? Are they so stupid they don’t know they probably just signed the death warrants of 1,100 animals? It’s probably a combination of a lot things the main ingredient being politics as usual.

There’s one thing for sure. I bet the Vail and Vickers families regret the day they ever sold the island to the U.S. government. Let this be a lesson to others contemplating giving anything to this out of control and out of touch government.

Tom Remington

animal slaughter, channel islands national park, david strege, duncan hunter, J.R. Absher, Santa Rosa Island, sen. barbara boxer, sen. diane feinstein, The Newshound, vail and vickers families

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Phillip at the Hog Blog, also a resident and avid hunter of California, is saying that the California Game Commission has gone too far too quickly in banning certain lead ammunitions within the areas that are to protect the California Condor. He’s also beginning to lean toward the proclamation of others that this could be a back door initiative to ban hunting.

In the long run, I definitely agree that lead needs to phase out of our ammo boxes, but banning it all at once under the false pretense of “saving the condor” is a slap in the face to all hunters. This is wrong, and stinks of an anti-hunting agenda (despite my early resistance to conspiracy theory).

Phillip is calling for action by fellow hunters.

It’s critical here for sportsmen to stand up and speak out. Make our voices heard in Sacramento! Get on the phone, write letters and emails, and don’t let up. Outdoor bloggers need to get on this too, both in CA and outside of the state.

THIS IS A CALL TO ACTION!

Great advice! I too get frustrated with a lack of involvement by fellow hunters and outdoor enthusiasts. Let’s go! Take a proactive position for a change and see how effective it is.

Tom Remington

california condor, california game commission, california lead ban, hog blog, lead ammunition ban, phillip loughlin

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Usually hunters are the punching bag for anti-hunting and animal rights groups as they assault us with their ideals of a Utopian wilderness free from any access by us vile and evil hunters. But once in awhile, we run across someone who gets it and understands what contributions hunters make toward wildlife management and conservation.

Peter Ottesen, outdoor columnist for Recordnet.com, has an article today showering hunters with the well-deserved appreciation we far too seldom get for the efforts and monies we provide for wildlife management and the conservation of species, habitat and providing protections through land acquisitions.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service surveyed a total of 41.2 million breeding ducks this past summer, with nearly every species - except northern pintail and scaup - flourishing at or above record high numbers.

Species of geese far exceed their goals as well, so much so that the daily limit has been increased just to keep them at levels the habitat can support. White-faced ibis, a non-game species, has increased to more than 2,500 breeding pairs in the Central Valley. Twenty years ago, there were no known ibis breeders in the state.

These kinds of success stories are prevalent all across the U.S. as we are witness to wildlife species in numbers never before seen. Ottesen explains why this is so.

The point is the nation’s hunters have taken on an expanded, essential role in wildlife management. Since 1934 they have spent $700 million on federal duck stamps to purchase more than 5 million acres of land within the national wildlife refuge system. Annually hunters spend $1.22 billion on hunting and fishing licenses and another $616 million on taxes on equipment, according to the USFWS. Those funds are doled out to states and represent an average of 75 percent of all wildlife agencies’ revenue.

And this isn’t being noticed only by outdoor writers and other hunters.

“Hunters really care about wildlife, and their efforts keep waterfowl and non-game species of birds in healthy, sustainable numbers,” said Dave Widell, general manager of the Grassland Water District, a quasi-governmental agency that distributes water only for wildlife, not for agricultural or domestic use.

“Grasslands is made up of approximately 120,000 acres of privately owned wetlands,” Widell said. “The remaining 60,000 acres is comprised of state wildlife areas and national wildlife refuges. Without hunters to pay the money and have an obsession to preserve habitat, we wouldn’t have the strong populations of birds, not in this day and age.”

The thing is, I believe that the majority of Americans know what hunters and their contributions have done. I also believe it would be great if those same people were reminded more often through media outlets, etc. instead of being subjected us all to the same old negative rhetoric about hunting.

Studies show that 80% of Americans approve of hunting even though they may not participate themselves. At the rate that hunters are going, with increased efforts to educate the public and having a greater understanding of the need to actively promote and conserve hunting habitat, etc., it would be nice to see that 80% grow to 90% before the end of the decade.

Let’s take an extra moment out of our busy day to thank someone we know who buys a hunting, fishing or trapping license and let’s promise to educate one more person this week.

Thank you to all!

Tom Remington

dave widell, ducks, ducks unlimited, hunting conservation, peter ottesen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, wildlife management

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Does the Idaho Fish and Game Department live in a vacuum or does the entire force or perhaps a certain number of employees have an agenda that is geared negatively toward the domestic elk industry in that state?

For the entire summer, all I have done is read account after account of growing bear/human encounters in the west. In some areas it is quite severe and all one has to do is open their eyes and they will see that areas in eastern Idaho not that far from the Yellowstone National Park area are experiencing perhaps the worst grizzly activity involving humans in history.

I have written story after story, selecting only those that appeared to be the most prolific, here, here, here, here, and here. Nevada has also had more than its share of bear problems as has Colorado and portions of California. It should also be noted that no reports from anywhere else that are having bear problems blame livestock ranching. As a matter of fact, everyone including the common man knows by now that with the climate conditions, i.e. heat, drought, etc., natural food for the bears is limited and in some cases severely lacking causing the animals to find food wherever it is.

In an article I wrote last week, I laid out exactly why eastern Idaho was experiencing such a problem with bears and it has very little to do with domestic elk ranching as some want to lay the blame on. The blame needs to be spread around where blame is due and that includes residents who don’t take care of their garbage, etc.

A weekend article in the Idaho Falls Post Register (subscription) by Matthew Evans even tells of the bear problems and how this year’s problems compare with past years.

The problem, however, isn’t limited to eastern Idaho or even the greater Yellowstone region. Throughout the West, from Colorado to Montana to Nevada, grizzlies and black bears are straying into towns and places they usually avoid to forage for food.

Those who work with bears say they’ve never seen anything like it.

“In my 16 years here, I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Daryl Meints, a regional wildlife manager for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. “All the stars are perfectly aligned.”

A spokesperson for the Grand Teton National Park supports the same theory.

“Some people say that at this time of year, bears are either eating or searching for food 20 hours a day,” said Jackie Skaggs, spokeswoman for Grand Teton National Park, where rangers have killed four black bears this season after deeming them a threat to visitors. That’s more than she’s seen killed in her 20-plus years of working in the park — despite the fact that Grand Teton officials kicked off a “Be Bear Aware” campaign this year.

“We’re kind of scratching our heads,” Skaggs said. “There are many years where we don’t euthanize any bears. A couple of years ago, we had to euthanize two bears and we thought that was pretty extreme.”

And what does this article say is the reason for increased bear activity?

The problem stems from the ongoing drought, a mild winter and a dry spring. The conditions have decimated the berry crop, a mainstay in a bear’s diet.

“So when it comes to native forage, what bears are accustomed to eating, it’s just not there,” Meints said. “Even some of the kokanee runs are down.”

So why is the Idaho Fish and Game Department and a few local residents setting their sites on putting the blame on the Velvet Elk Ranch on Meadow Creek Road in Island Park? That’s the million dollar question and one many of us are searching for an answer. Either the Fish and Game have their heads stuck in the sand and can’t see the real reasons or they have an agenda. It may be that their agenda is to once again attempt to give the Idaho domestic elk industry a bad name.

Past accounts clearly show that Fish and Game doesn’t want elk ranching. Records also show that Fish and Game works very closely with other organizations that are working toward a ban on elk ranching - Idaho Sportsmen’s Caucus Advisory Council, Idaho Wildlife Federation, et. al.

Let’s be honest. There’s a bear problem in Island Park. Bears are hungry because there’s no food. Probably more bears are coming out of the Yellowstone area to find that food. Bears prefer berries and vegetation over gut piles to eat but they certainly will not pass up a pile of guts if that’s the only available meal. Readers should be educated to the fact that bears don’t have an affinity to elk entrails. They will also eat dead or live cattle, sheep, dogs, cats or whatever they can get when they are hungry but it’s not their meal of choice.

Mike Ferguson, owner of the Velvet Elk Ranch, has recognized that following the laws regulating the livestock industry to dispose of dead animals parts within 72 hours isn’t getting the job done. He has taken it upon himself to properly and legally dispose of his animal parts the same day. You can read his response here.

So, why isn’t this good enough? Ferguson is one rancher. From previous reports he had 167 head of elk brought to his ranch. There are thousands of head of cattle and other livestock all in this same area. Why aren’t we hearing about those ranches as being a magnate for bears? Is it because Velvet Elk Ranch is an elk hunting ranch?

Regional Fish and Game Supervisor Steve Schmidt said in an article in the Island Park News that his agency was concerned about all things that might attract bears to the area. Oh really? If that is true, then why did he finish that claim with this absurd statement?

IDFG Regional Supervisor Steve Schmidt said his agency is concerned about all attractants people are making available to bears, and concerns continue about Island Park residents who are not locking up their garbage. He said even if the Velvet Ranch is found to be disposing of animal waste properly, the operation still has the potential to attract bears to the area because there is so often the smell of blood on the ground.

With thousands times more cattle in the area than 167 elk, why isn’t Mr. Schmidt telling area residents to beware of cattle ranches? Their ranching activities may be an attractant to grizzly bears as well. Is Schmidt’s focus simply on elk ranches?

The Island Park News points out something that seems to be falling on the deaf ears of Fish and Game and a handful of local residents.

Grizzly and black bears have frequented this area of Island Park for decades and grizzlies have taken down sheep and cattle near where the Velvet Ranch is located. Around 30 years ago, the Forest Service canceled grazing leases in this area when it made the area Situation 1 grizzly bear habitat.

I wonder if any of those sheep and cattle that have been the target of hungry bears left any blood on the ground? Anyone who seems to want to single out the Velvet Elk Ranch or any other ranch for that matter, as the reason for increased bear activity has to have something on their mind other than the concerns for public safety. If their concern was protecting the citizens, why would the Fish and Game be wanting to spend thousands of Idaho tax payers dollars to investigate whether the bears in the Island Park area are eating Mike Ferguson’s elk guts?

The Fish and Game Department and Department of Agriculture are saying they want to investigate whether any of these bears are actually eating Velvet Elk Ranch’s gut piles. Mind none of these bears are dead, so in order to do this they would have to capture or bring the bears down by drugs, cut them open to extract remains from the bears stomach and try to match some DNA. This would cost tax payers thousands of dollars and for what?

I would be willing to wager poorly cared for garbage is more to blame for increased bear activity. Should F&G and AG spend money to try to find out which residents are getting their garbage eaten by bears? Can’t anyone see the ridiculousness of this entire event? It is nothing more than a blatant attack on one elk rancher which will have sweeping consequences for the entire elk industry. This is thuggery and extremely disturbing, say nothing about un-American.

Is there a bigger agenda or is this just a handful of people overreacting to a scary situation as described by Daryl Meints, a regional wildlife manager for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game as, “In my 16 years here, I’ve never seen it this bad.”

Perhaps we can get a better picture of what’s really behind these false accusations and attempts to scar the Idaho elk industry. Kirk Robinson of the Western Wildlife Conservancy in Utah says that the Idaho Fish and Game and the Department of Agriculture don’t need to investigate whether bears in the area have been eating Ferguson animal remains.

“What he’s doing may not strictly be illegal, but on the other hand what he’s doing is a hazard to the public and to these bears,” he said. “And it’s all the worse for a guy who’s making a lot of money off captive wild animals.”

So what is the Western Wildlife Conservancy and who really cares what Kirk Robinson has to say about what’s going on in Island Park, Idaho? From their website, this is their “vision”.

We envision a time when human beings accept the puma, the wolf, and their wild kin as citizens in the community of life - a time when, instead of hunting and trapping them for sport and profit we live peacefully with them, when instead of exploiting and despoiling land without restraint we accommodate their habitat and survival needs in our way of living. This will be a time when we have come to view nature quite differently from the traditional way that sees it only as a resource to be exploited or an enemy to be subdued - a time when we have adopted gentler life-ways that recognize and respect not only the fragility and sensitivity of natural systems, but also our own physical and spiritual dependence upon them.

The WWC also lists the species they aim to protect.

Ursidae (grizzly bear and black bear)
Felidae (mountain lion, Canada lynx and bobcat)
Canidae (gray wolf, coyote, and the gray, red, swift and kit fox)
Mustelidae (wolverine, fisher, marten and other members of the weasel family)

Make no mistake about the goals of this agency. They could care less about any rancher or even Derek Fesmire who was attacked by a female grizzly while bow hunting. Their interests lie strictly with the protection of animals and that supersedes any rights of Americans.

Last year after the “Great Escape” of Dr. Rex Rammell’s elk from his Chief Joseph Ranch outside Rexburg, Idaho, many people believed that certain legislators, wildlife advocacy groups and a handful of sportsmen, exploited this event in order to force their personal agendas on the citizens of Idaho by attempting to pass legislation that would have ended all elk ranching, not just ranch hunting. Some even thought the “Escape” was a set-up job. Those efforts were very much unsuccessful but those groups threatened to bring a citizen’s initiative to ballot in 2008.

With a soon to be convening of the fall Idaho Legislature and a deadline of next spring to get enough signatures on a petition in order to get an initiative on the ballot, we are all once again left wondering if this recent flurry of grizzly activity that happens to be near an elk ranch, is just another opportunity for these same people to exploit the situation for their own good. I’m sure some will even question whether any of this latest is also a set-up job.

Here’s some more disturbing rhetoric that has found its way into the local press. Local resident of Island Park, Martin Miller, says he won’t hunt again near the Velvet Elk Ranch after what he saw.

“It looked like a scene out of a ‘Halloween’ movie,” he said. “Heads, noses, legs sticking out in every direction, and gut piles everywhere. It stunk to high heaven.”

A spokesperson for Mike Ferguson told me in a recent interview that Ferguson was very upset that anyone would make such false accusations and said that those charges are not true.

If there is a hidden agenda here that is deliberately targeting the Velvet Elk Ranch in order to discredit and give the Idaho elk industry a black eye, it is certainly a sad commentary on the state of things within the minds of those who would do such a thing.

The Fish and Game and Dept. of Agriculture need to stop wasting taxpayer’s money and get back to their real jobs. It is time for the head of the Idaho Fish and Game to reel in and get control over his employees and put this non event into the perspective of what it really is - a hungry bear problem.

If the anti-elk hunting crowd has to stoop to this level because they have no evidence, facts or support for the perpetuation of their forced ideals, they are truly a sad lot. If the people of Idaho don’t want elk ranching as an industry in their state, that is surely their decision. For some to exploit a hungry bear problem for the purpose of creating a public safety scare to influence public opinion is really about as low as one can go.

Tom Remington

bear attacks, bear/human encounters, black bears, canned hunts, chief joseph ranch, daryl meints, drought problems, elk ranching, grand teton national park, grizzly bears, high fence hunting, hunting ethics, Idaho Department of Agriculture,