New Jersey Working On New Bear Management Plan

*Update* There will NOT be a public meeting that was scheduled for Feb. 9, 2010. But please contact your rep. on this. It’s very important that fish and game decisions be left in the hands of fish and game experts not political experts.

The New Jersey Fish and Game Commission is working on a black bear management plan that would include a hunt in the fall of 2010. According the the U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance, a meeting is scheduled for Feb. 9, 2010.

The new management plan is to be heard at the February 9 meeting of the FGC being held at the Central Region Office in the Assunpink Wildlife Management Area in Robbinsville. According to one of its main authors, Council Member Len Wolgast, the plan would allow for a bear hunt to take place this fall.

If passed, the plan must then go to the acting Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for final approval.

I reported a couple weeks ago about a new bill, Assembly Bill 181, which if passed, would take away the lone power of the director of the Environmental Protection Agency in New Jersey, to be able to cancel a hunt or plan approved of by the Fish and Game Commission. Previous EPA Director, Lisa Jackson, now head of Obama’s EPA, arbitrarily canceled all bear hunts and ignored a court-approved bear management plan.

New Jersey sportsmen are encouraged to attend this meeting if possible and show your support for the management plan and the Fish and Game Commission.

Tom Remington

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

Proposed New Jersey Bill Would Bring Back Bear Hunting

Assembly Bill 181, proposed by Assemblyman Gary Chiusano (R- Frankford Township) and Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose (R- Franklin), would allow for the reinstatement of bear hunting as part of a scientific approach to wildlife management.

Under the rule of Gov. Jon Corzine and his appointed director of the Department of Environmental Protection, Lisa Jackson (now with Barack Obama’s administration), bear hunting was canceled, along with the state’s court-approved bear management plan.

AB 181 would put control and authority of wildlife issues back in the hands of the wildlife commission. The bill would prohibit any authority the DEP head had to this point to stop or overturn any commission approved wildlife management plan, including hunting.

Sportsmen in New Jersey are strongly encouraged to contact your representative in support of this bill.

Tom Remington

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

Corzine Scraping Walls Of Outhouse With The Fat Jokes

Somebody else must have told New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine that his gubernatorial challenger, Chris Christie, is fat, for certainly a blind man cannot see if someone is fat. They could of course assess the size of a person if they touched them – all over – but I think it safe to say, that didn’t happen. And yet again, we do hear of some really bizarre things these days.

Oh, for shame, that I must digress even if only momentarily to assure readers that only metaphorically is Gov. Jon Corzine blind. It was just over a year ago that I began referring to New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine as blind. As a matter of fact it was at that time I took a picture of him and added the dark glasses to make him look like he was blind. If he was going to act the part, he might as well dress the part.

The reason for his “blindness” began when all around his state, black bears were and still are presenting a serious problem. Public safety has become the issue and yet repeatedly Corzine has stated that he doesn’t see any bear problem.

His problem now is how to get reelected. His challenger, Chris Christie, at one time had a sizable lead in the polls over Corzine. I’m not sure who is advising Corzine in his campaign strategies but now we find out, through Hot Air, that Corzine has decided to make campaign commercials showing a fat Christie and making comments about his challenger “throwing his weight around”.

Abraham Lincoln was always on the butt end of jokes directed toward his physical features. Let’s face it, Lincoln certainly wouldn’t be a male model of today. God knows he wasn’t womanly enough to do that. Lincoln was tall, gangling, and oddly proportioned. He was a man of great strength. But what set Lincoln apart from his opponents and others who disagreed with his politics, was his refusal to engage in such sophomoric behavior with even the slightest acknowledgment. We know that Lincoln was the master of words, the legend of oration and perhaps the most sought after storyteller of his day but he refused to bring himself down to such a level.

I assume the biggest reason Lincoln wouldn’t play games with the boys was because he understood from a very early age that people who speak inappropriately of others will soon enough hang themselves with their own rope. Comeuppances are much sweeter that way.

Lincoln often spoke in anecdotes, which reminds of one that shows us what happens when you don’t pay close attention, are uncaring and end up having to stick you nose into places they shouldn’t have been in the first place.

Great Aunt Florena yelled at her husband of many years, Virgil, that he had to fix the seat on the outhouse. Virgil listened to Florena for days on end but paid little attention to what she was saying as he could see nothing wrong with the outhouse seat.

Finally one morning Florena had had enough and in a most firm manner instructed Virgil that before he got any breakfast, he was to fix the seat in the outhouse.

Virgil ventured out to the outhouse and looked briefly at the top of the toilet seat. He saw nothing. He yelled to Florena in the kitchen preparing breakfast and told her there was nothing wrong with the toilet seat. She yelled back that he had to look closer.

Virgil was a bearded man, having sported his relatively long facial hair for well over 15 years now. Virgil bent at the waist and took a closer look, yet he still saw nothing and relayed his findings to his bride.

She yelled back, “You have to stick your head down the hole before you can see what’s wrong with the seat!”

Virgil sprung to life and stood straight up vowing he wasn’t sticking his head down the hole of an outhouse – even his own. But he stood there for a moment and getting very hungry he examined the size of the hole for a moment and figured he could hold his breath long enough to take a look.

He shoved his head into the hole and almost instantly the hairs of his beard got stuck in a crack at the edge of the toilet seat. He couldn’t get out. Each time he tried to move or escape, his beard hair would hurt unmercifully.

Virgil began to yell, “Florena! Help! My beard is stuck in a crack in the toilet seat of the outhouse!”

With a broad grin on her face, Florena sauntered to the kitchen door and yelled back, “NOW, you know what’s wrong with the toilet seat!”

Tom Remington

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

Time To Do Something About New Jersey Bears……Or Else I’ll Tell You It’s Time To Do Something About Bears

Last December I told you that New Jersey’s Senator Steven Oroho, Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose, and Assemblyman Gary Chiusano sent out a press release urging the blind man, Gov. Jon Corzine, to “adopt scientifically-valid policies” for dealing with black bears. This was in response to what they called a 97 percent increase in bear complaints across the state. Nothing happened.

On August 14, 2009, Senator Steven Oroho, Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose, and Assemblyman Gary Chiusano sent out a press release urging the blind man, Gov. Jon Corzine, to stop “playing politics with the public’s safety and let wildlife experts decide the best method for handling the issue.” They say New Jersey’s “alternate bear management policies” are not working. Nothing will happen.

Bud Pidgeon, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance president and CEO, says that Corzine refuses to look at the problem. Seriously?

“For years, there has been a steadfast refusal to look at numbers produced by the professionals in the DFW.

As I gaze into my crystal ball, I see it is April 2010. New Jersey’s Senator Steven Oroho, Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose, and Assemblyman Gary Chiusano are sending out a press release urging the blind man, Gov. Jon Corzine, to please take off his dark glasses and see that it’s about time he did something about this bear problem.

It’s a bit hazy right now but I think I see Corzine losing his bid for reelection and his replacement thinks New Jersey just needs some better bear-proof garbage cans. Promises to appropriate $6.8 million dollars and buy $1,000 new garbage cans to be issued by a state run lottery costing $10 a chance. Susan Kehoe, not being able to comprehend what’s going on, buys all the chances. The bears win!

Tom Remington

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

Is Anti-Hunting Corzine Toast?

There appears to be a better than even chance that the crooked, anti-hunting, anti-gun, former Goldman Sachs chairman, Jon Corzine, New Jersey’s current governor, will lose his bid for reelection. Now that would be a treat!

One poll shows his challenger, former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie, a republican, beating Corzine 51-39.

One of Corzine’s first acts as governor was to hire now head of Obama’s EPA, Lisa Jackson, to run New Jersey’s EPA. Between the two of them they shut down the bear hunt and have now left some New Jersey residents struggling with an overgrown black bear population and nothing they can do about it. Some people have been attacked by the bears and the blind and belligerent Corzine, in his ignorance and arrogance, continues to state there is no bear problem.

But what would Christie do? To date I am unaware of him making any specific statements of how he would handle the bear issue. On his web site he lists 88 ways he will “fix” New Jersey. In that list he has the following:

I will review all current regulations and rescind rules that do not have a sound scientific or other technical basis, are not consistent with other state policy goals or legislative intent, or don’t effectively protect and promote the public interest…………………………

I will ensure rules and regulations are scientifically sound by establishing rule-making scientific advisory committees (where appropriate) to evaluate the underlying science in DEP or other departmental rule proposals.

We have recently heard President Obama declare that he would “restore science to its rightful place” and as was expected that meant his science that fits his agenda and not necessarily considering the entire scientific community. At this point, it is going to have to be a wait and see approach unless someone can get Christie to publicly announce his position on a bear hunt.

Tom Remington

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

7-Year Old Girl Nearly Electrocuted By Bear Deterrent Contraption

It what could have ended in tragedy and 7-year old girl from New York was revived and listed in satisfactory condition by doctors after having been nearly electrocuted from touching a metal plate, charged with 110-volt house current used to ward off bears.

George Kately of Sparta, NJ, operates the historic Delaware View House on leased property inside the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. He was subsequently arrested and charged with maintaining a hazardous device on federal land and disorderly conduct.

I certainly wish the best and a speedy recovery for the young girl.

An Additional Note:

Upon investing into this story of a young girl somehow coming in contact with a electrified device used to ward off black bears, I visited the web site of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. I found a page about black bears.

It offers much of the same information generally found about steering clear of bears and what to do to help prevent bears from bothering you. However, there is a section that I found that I don’t recall having seen in other places regarding bears. Here’s what it said:

Don’t Kill a Bear!

If you feed a bear, or leave food around for the bear to find, you “teach” the bear to approach people. Bears that approach people can be easily hit by cars or shot by poachers. “Problem bears” that annoy or threaten people must be trapped and removed from the park, or even destroyed.

People feeding bears is also a serious safety problem! If you feed a bear, you can be fined up to $5,000 and jailed for up to 6 months.

While the notion that a poacher can, for all intent, kill a bear anytime they want to, (isn’t that what poaching is?) I have never seen an official declaration that puts the blame of poaching partly back on the shoulders of someone who feeds bears.

A question I have is whether there is a problem with poaching bears inside the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area? I assume there must be otherwise why does it become necessary to warn users of the park that if they feed or cause to be fed, bears, they are partly responsible for a bear to be poached?

Tom Remington

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

Creating Doubt About Bear Problems In New Jersey

It appears now that there is a possibility that New Jersey officials opposed to any kind of bear hunt to control bear populations, have resorted to creating confusion and possible doubt in the minds of people by reporting that there have been errors in calculating the number of bear/human incidents.

The Daily Record has more.

Tom Remington

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

Hunting And Management: Aren’t They Synonymous?

Giggle! Snicker and Snort! To some hunting or use of the word is naughty and therefore they opt to use what they would consider a less “harsh” word, like substituting the word harvest for kill.

Fred Aun of the New Jersey Star Ledger tells us that the Corzine Administration of New Jersey, one that is anti-hunting has decided to rename “Bear Hunting Areas” with “Bear Management Areas” because they think this somehow better represents what goes on in these areas.

But Aun says:

If hunting is just another word for management, then banning a hunt is the same as failing to manage. And failing to manage is a nice way of saying “being irresponsible.”

So, this is pretty cool! We started out with “Bear Hunting Areas” and Corzine has morphed them into “Bear Management Areas”. Aun says that if hunting is just another word for management and banning a hunt is “failing to manage”, then shouldn’t we then rename these areas “Bear Mismanagement Areas” or “Bear Management Failure Zones”?

Perhaps we should also take this another step and make some adjustments to Corzine’s administration. Saying that Corzine “administers” is not really telling people what goes on in that area, so maybe we should try “Corzine Management Area”, which is really “Corzine Hunting Area”. But we know Corzine doesn’t hunt, therefore we should also call this the “Corzine Mismanagement Area” or the “Corzine Management Failure Zone”.

Isn’t it fun to play with words? After all, this is a far more important thing to do in a “Mismanagement Area” than actually doing your job.

By the way, the number of complaints lodged by the people of New Jersey about black bears has grown from 128 in 2008 to 508 this year. I think we need to go back to the “Bear Hunting Areas” and kill bears, then we could return also to the “Corzine Administration”.

Tom Remington

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

More Bear Attacks On Humans In New Jersey

The media in New Jersey must be taking a page out of the play book of the global warming alarmists and simply censoring any coverage of bear attacks in their state. We have to go to New York to find media coverage of a bear that attacked a man in Sussex, New Jersey while he was packing his car for a business trip to New Hampshire.

According to the Times Herald-Record, Henry Rouwendeal, 51, was packing his car for a business trip, when a 300-400 pound bear knocked him to the ground to get after a sandwich he evidently had packed in his car. After some time, he was able to get himself into the house to wake his wife, a registered nurse, who treated his wounds.

As long as those in charge in New Jersey continue to bury their heads in the sand over this issue, the shorter the fuse on the time bomb becomes that will result in someone getting seriously injured. But we continue to hear ridiculous rhetoric from bear lovers similar to the one the Black Bear Blog received from a bear lover yesterday.

People are 247 times more likely to be killed by lightning and 60,000 times more likely to be murdered by another human being than to be killed by a black bear.

I am far more afraid of being hurt by a human than by a bear. But I would never suggest that we kill humans just to prevent them from possibly hurting someone, and we should not kill bears either.

Personally, I could care less about what my odds are in getting killed by a bear. That’s not the issue nor is it an issue of getting injured from a bear attack as has happened with Mr. Rouwendeal. The issue is why do we have to be subjected to living a lifestyle that some bear lover deems necessary, living in fear of our kids and property, because someone wants to protect bears? Can a man now not go from his house to his car without fear of being attacked by a black bear because a handful of perverted minded people say so?

The person who made the above comments also made several comments which shows us clearly that she hates human beings and has little use for them. She blames man for everything. What a shame. The combine hatred of mankind along with an abnormal desire to protect animals, is sick behavior, yet it is being supported in far too many places.

There are proven means to deal with overgrown populations of wild animals, yet this continued perverted behavior is ruling the day. Hopefully enough people will wake up to the fact that their right to own property and to be able to protect themselves and that property is being taken away by those who are more fond of animals than humans. Let’s just hope this happens before another is attacked by a bear.

Tom Remington

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

N.J. Bear Problems Continue To Rise. Press Tells Another Story

It’s one thing to have an agenda. It’s admirable in some respect to have ideals and are willing to stand in support of those. It’s despicable to lie in order to convince others to side with you. New Jersey bear and human encounters are on the rise. They have been for several years now and many media sources within the state are reporting such.

At issue in the Garden State is whether non-lethal (interpreted as a ban on bear hunting) methods is all that is necessary to properly manage bears. Even though the facts reveal that when bear hunts are being implemented, bear and human encounters decline, those opposed to hunting claim that education programs geared at teaching the public how to live with bears is all that is necessary.

New Jersey’s bear management has a storied and controversial history and continues to this day. Bear hunts were held in 2003 and 2005 and were quite successful. These were followed by years of reduced human/bear conflicts. A hunt schedule for 2006 was canceled shortly after Jon Corzine was elected the state’s governor and he appointed Lisa Jackson, now Barack Obama’s environmental czar, to head up the state’s department of environmental protection. Since then, a court-approved bear management plan was tossed in the garbage and the Corzine administration insists that bears can be be managed without a hunt while at the same time turning a blind eye to the facts. Public safety may be at risk while the Governor continues to claim there is no bear problem.

While there is certainly nothing wrong with educating the public in how to safely deal with and live with bears, allowing the population to grow unchecked is irresponsible. What’s also irresponsible is for media to spread information about bears that simply isn’t true.

On June 24, 2009, the Daily Record published an article that stated that the number of bears being euthanized has declined of late.

Only six bears have been euthanized this year. That compares to nearly 30 that were put down in 2008 and 18 in 2007, according to the state Department of Environmental Protection.

Let’s say this information is certainly misleading if not an outright lie. The comparison being used is disingenuous. There have been 6 bears killed this year for being “category one” problem bears. That number is from the beginning of the year up through May, 2009. The 30-bear comparison is for all of 2008.

On June 27, 2009, in the Atlantic City Press, David Burke, a member of the New Jersey Fish and Game Council, denied the claims that human and bear encounters were on the decline.

The claim that there has been a decline in the most dangerous types of bear incidents attributable to the state’s non-lethal bear-management program is not supported by fact. Bear incident reports compiled by the Department of Environmental Protection through May 20 of this year indicate that the most serious complaints (Category I) actually increased by 14.5 percent compared with the same period last year.

The author also mentioned that only six bears have been euthanized for threatening or dangerous behavior this year compared with 30 last year. This is not a valid comparison. The actual number of bears euthanized through May of this year was the same as last year.

It is quite unfortunate, to say the least, that bad information gets placed in media locations that the public can read. In this case, people who read such inaccurate information can actually be put at increased risk of safety thinking bears are no longer a problem. This runs counter to the efforts of those who believe that educating the public is the answer. If that is their belief, then why is it necessary to mislead the people by distorting the facts?

The truth is, probably the non-lethal methods crammed down the throats of New Jersey’s residents of bear country have helped but it has nothing to do with controlling bear populations. The number of bears in New Jersey are said to be at record levels and while teaching people how to reduce bear conflicts is commendable, it does nothing to address the real problem.

At some point in time, people will begin to ask who is going to be responsible for a bear/human conflict that might result in serious injury or death? The governor? The DEP? The Fish and Game Council? The Daily Record?

Tom Remington

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

Just Yell, “Boo” And They’ll Run Away!

Missing from this report is that Metler, the woman chasing bears away and yelling “boo” has been convicted of locking herself in a bear trap barrel and harassing bear hunters.

Tom Remington

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

Where Bears Are In New Jersey, More People Now Want Hunt

New Jersey’s Gov. Jon Corzine must be getting nervous. In Sussex County, where most of New Jersey’s bears hang out, now a majority 56%, according to a recent poll, think the problem with bears is big enough that they agree a hunt should take place.

The dynamics of the poll are interesting. Clearly as more and more bears roam the neighborhoods, more and more bears are seen. As such, bear/human encounters go up and this causes concern among the people, but not all of them. According to the New Jersey Herald, residents between the ages of 18 and 24 didn’t think bears posed a serious threat…..not one and 70% didn’t think there was any threat at all. Those numbers change as group ages rises.

But half of the respondents between 25 and 34 and nearly a quarter of respondents between 35 and 44 believed there is a serious threat. More than two-thirds of those 35 to 44 said the bears pose a minor threat to humans.

It will be interesting to see what transpires in the Garden State as far as dealing with bears. Gov. Corzine has made it clear he is anti-hunting and cares little of the wishes of its citizens. How serious does this problem of too many bears have to get before something sensible and easily remedied will be done?

Tom Remington

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

Communists In New Jersey Seek To Demolish Fish And Game

Groups disguised as animal protection are circulating a petition that would complete destroy the existing New Jersey Fish and Game Council and replace it with socialist/communists whose bent is the destruction of capitalism, liberty and they’ll take down hunting, fishing and trapping in the quest.

Simply read the declaration that accompanies the petition and it becomes clear the basis of their actions.

I support Assembly bill A3275 and Senate bill S2041 – legislation that will democratize, modernize and remove the corrupting influence of profit from the hunter-dominated New Jersey Fish and Game Council, the state body that has power over our wildlife.

Declaration for an Independent and Democratic Wildlife Council

We, the people of New Jersey, stand united against the NJ Fish and Game Council, for it has abused its power, has broken the law, and benefits from millions of our tax-dollars every year without giving one voice to the common man.
We seek nothing but reasonable reforms that will prepare our state for managing wildlife in the twenty-first century. We aspire to nothing more than bringing democracy to a state body that now has none.
We act for the environment, for wildlife, for the people of New Jersey and the ideal of good government, for when one special interest holds tyranny over all, only arrogance and corruption can follow.
In this cause we are unanimous and resolute: The NJ Fish and Game Council must be dramatically reformed, so that it will at last serve the interests of the many instead of the recreational hunting desires of the few.

Tom Remington

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

New Jersey Bears On The Prowl. Authorities Care More About Bears

A black bear near Swartswood Lake tore into a rabbit pen and killed two rabbits and one is missing. Twin brothers, Logan and Garrett Bennett, were raising them for a 4-H project and their Dad, a builder by trade, had constructed what he thought to be a bear-proof hutch that required three men to move. He was wrong.

What’s interesting about this story is this. The father, Tom Bennett, said that living where he does he accepts that he has to put up with bears. He’ll work on a different plan should they decide to raise rabbits again. He also said he wasn’t a hunter but supported a season in order to “be some sort of check”.

Most people understand about living with bears but to what extend should people be forced by the state to tolerate this? The state of New Jersey refuses to institute a bear hunt to keep populations in check which in turn would help to reduce human/bear encounters. The state also seems to refuse to accept any kind of responsibility for this management, denying there’s a bear problem.

Officials from the Department of Environmental Protection, lead department for fish and game, told Bennett he “would need to either get an electric fence or not have rabbits”. Which prompts the question, why should these boys and their Dad be forced by the state to give up the notion of raising rabbits for 4-H when a solution to the problem exists and is easily implemented? The state is irresponsible and should be held liable and accountable for loss of rights and damage to property.

Tom Remington

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

New Jersey’s Denied Bear Problem

I wonder with New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection leader Lisa Jackson moving on up to Washington to serve as head of the EPA under Barack Obama, if New Jersey’s much denied bear problem will magically disappear? Gov. Jon Corzine refuses to accept the truth about bears and places any blame on the ignorance of humans who can’t figure out how to bear proof their homes.

Some unofficial statistics for 2008 are in and it looks like bear conflicts at least doubled from a year ago.

Bear/human interactions are listed three ways.

Category III (Cat III) are situations where the bear is not behaving in a menacing or life-threatening way, and includes basic sightings, but also bears that get into urban areas, are struck and killed by vehicles, are found dead for reasons other than vehicle kills, etc.

Category II (Cat II) are incidents where the bears caused property damage valued less than $500, or got into garbage, entered a campsite but didn’t do any damage, etc.

Category I (Cat I) are the most serious bear/human interactions, include livestock kills, pet kills, vehicle entries, home entries, attacks on humans, unprovoked dog attacks, and others

Bear Activity

2007 2008

cat I 112 276

cat II 726 1489

cat III 570 1059

hit by vehicles 79 144

Tom Remington

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

Next Page »