Some Pennsylvania deer hunters have yelled a lot ever since the Pennsylvania Game Commission began its current deer management program. This program calls for the reduction in deer populations throughout the state, mostly based on what has been deemed a destruction of forest habitat by too many foraging deer. Some hunters don’t like the reduction. They say now there aren’t enough deer and the program is not working. Perhaps their yelling has paid off.

Rep. David Levdansky of Allegheny is proposing House Resolution 642, which calls for an audit to be done of the deer management program by outside sources. According to the Morning Call, the audit requests specific tasks be accomplished.

To that end, Levdansky’s resolution includes a litany of specific topics the audit will address, including deer population trends for the past 12 years; a current deer population estimate for the entire state and each Wildlife Management Unit; a scientific review of the agency’s modeling techniques for deer harvests, deer health and forest health; the potential impact of acid rain in relation to deer on forest regeneration; a comparison of Pennsylvania’s deer management techniques to other states; and an evaluation of the current size of existing Wildlife Management Units.

The cost of the audit will run an estimated $100,000 to $200,000 and then that will put an end to all the yelling, fighting, back stabbing, bickering and lawsuits, right? Well, probably not exactly and in reality, it probably won’t change much of anything.

At least some hope that the audit will give hunters and the PGC a more accurate estimate of the existing deer population. One of the tasks of the auditing people will be to make recommendations as well as deliver hard facts. At issue also is the size and number of Wildlife Management Units. Some say the units are laid out wrong and/or too small or too big. Perhaps the auditors will make recommendations in that way.

But to quiet the masses, I don’t think that will ever happen. There’s some hope that it may help ease the dissatisfaction but in my opinion the majority of those unhappy will more than likely always remain unhappy for a host of reasons. Off the top of my head, I can think of one reason. There just is bad blood between some sportsmen and the government agencies who make the decisions. Some of that bad blood is a result of dissatisfaction over the new deer management plan and some if it has always been there and probably always will be.

If approved, which would only take the approval of the House vote, as per a resolution not a bill, once signed would have to be completed within one year.

I hope the audit proves to be a good thing for the Pennsylvania hunters, landowners and game personnel.

Tom Remington

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

Fascism takes on many forms some of which are difficult to spot. I see far too many groups and individuals attempting to force ideals onto others. When this happens an assortment of tactics are employed in order to manipulate the system and sway public opinion to achieve an end result.

Take for example the state of Idaho. Idaho is home to one of the best run domestic elk industries in the United States, in my opinion. It is well run, clean, disease free and brings a substantial economic contribution to the people of that state as well. Some people don’t like to see elk trapped behind fences even though elk have been domesticated world wide for centuries.

These people who have the problem, in some cases have organized and attempts have been made within the Idaho Legislature to shut down the domestic elk industry. Threats of running a campaign for a ballot initiative looms over the family’s heads who own elk ranches.

One of the tactics used, mostly to scare people, is the threat of disease. Elk can contract several diseases one of which seems to get the most attention, is chronic wasting disease. CWD is similar to mad cow disease but has never been found to be of the same threat to humans. In Idaho, the sale or importation of elk is strictly regulated. Animals are well cared for and tested for disease. Currently there is no live animal test for chronic wasting disease so every elk that is killed on a ranch must be tested for disease. No chronic wasting disease has ever been detected in any elk on any ranches in that state.

In North Dakota, a group calling themselves sportsmen, are in the process of gathering signatures for a citizen’s initiative to end all cervidae ranching in that state. Once again those wanting to shut down the industry spend a substantial amount of time trying to convince the public that disease from these ranches will infect the wild populations.

There is currently legislation being considered in Colorado that would create similar restrictions and a handful of other states have already passed legislation banning the industry in part or in whole.

Truth be known, no one is certain where the disease originated. Some studies suggest the disease is a “natural” occurrence that has been around perhaps since day one and goes through cycles. Some believe it originates on these ranches. Studies have indicated that the disease more easily is spread when animals, such as deer and elk, are congregated in large numbers. It is believed the disease is passed from animal to animal via bodily fluids but recent studies show that may not be the only way. Prions, which carry the disease, has been found in the soil and in some cases it is believed that it has been there a long time. Studies on the disease continue.

What some people don’t quite understand is that nobody seems to know which came first - the disease from inside out or from outside in. Because most all animals trapped behind fences are tested regularly for disease and testing of wild ungulates is spotty at best in some locations, wouldn’t it make sense that the disease would be discovered first on a ranch or a laboratory?

In states like Idaho, the fish and game there are dead set against the elk industry and would like to see it shut down. They too espouse the notion that the domestic elk industry poses a threat to the wild deer, elk and moose populations through the spread of disease.

What if the table is turned? What if the government agencies became the ranchers? What if local, state or federal governments owned elk or deer ranches? Would they then be as concerned about their own animals infecting wild animals on the outside of their fences? Or would their focus turn to protecting their animals inside the fences?

Oregon is another state where groups are trying to put an end to the elk ranching industry. These groups along with state officials lament over the idea that these ranches, like in Idaho and North Dakota, will spread disease. No cases of chronic wasting disease have been discovered in Oregon or Idaho for that matter, whether on a ranch or in the wild.

So, here we have a state claiming that fencing in elk will cause disease and that it can be spread to animals outside the fences. The thought process behind this is that animals can touch nose to nose through the fence or that in some cases, deer will be able to jump fences and get in.

Yet, in Eastern Oregon, near La Grande, the government runs a substantial elk ranch there. What is there concern? Disease getting in or disease getting out? Perhaps they don’t really have any concern at all about disease.

Thanks to reader Mark, he sent me an article he found in the Express-Times out of Pennsylvania. I chuckled when I read the first two paragraphs.

The elk herd at Trexler Game Preserve will get a higher fence meant to keep out company under a proposal that was expected to gain Lehigh County Commissioners’ approval Wednesday night.

Specifically unwanted are white-tailed deer that can transmit the fatal chronic-wasting disease to elk at the county-owned preserve.

The Trexler Game Preserve is owned and operated by the county. Their concerns are that deer FROM THE OUTSIDE, will jump the fence and get in threatening their herd of elk with chronic wasting and other diseases. How bizarre! Yet intelligent enough to consider protection one’s investment.

Are we to conclude that the government can run disease-free preserves and a private rancher can’t while under the regulations of the same governmental agency?

When I spoke with elk ranchers in Idaho about this same scenario, I discovered that many ranchers were quite concerned about their investment in elk being threatened by disease contracted from outside their fences. As I said before, Idaho has no known cases of CWD in the wild or on ranches. Should CWD show up in wild deer, elk and moose, this certainly will raise the fear factor considerably with the elk ranchers.

At the Trexler Game Preserve in Pennsylvania, officials there are putting funds together to raise the fence around the elk herd to 10 feet at an estimated cost of nearly $50,000. This will prevent the deer from jumping the fence but does very little in terms of keeping the animals from touching through the fence - an event that little is known as to how often if any it actually takes place and how real a threat it is.

So, now I have to wonder. In what direction would officials be focusing their concerns about disease if this involved a private game preserve? Would their concerns be about disease getting out or disease getting in?

Tom Remington

chronic wasting disease, domestic elk, elk ranching, express times, fascism, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Idaho Elk Breeders Association, north dakota elk industry, Oregon elk ranching, trexler game preserve

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

On today’s Open Air with Tom Remington broadcast on Skinny Moose Radio I talk in detail about what I believed to be the top ten stories that most affected our hunting, fishing and outdoor lives. These stories may not have been the most written or talked about but they deal with issues that I think has or has the potential to have the most effect on our lives. I thought I would list out the top ten with a brief comment.

10. Pennsylvania Deer Management Problems - There are nearly one million licensed hunters in Pennsylvania and that is reason enough to list this issue as one that has broad consequences. If you will recall, Pennsylvania decided a few years ago to change the whitetail deer management program in order to reduce the deer herd to save the ecosystem and restore the forests. Not all hunters have liked the idea - enough so that one organization sued the Pennsylvania Game Commission. The debate rages on and the success or failure of this deer management plan could have sweeping affects on many other states that are watching.

9. Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease - EHD or blue tongue is a virus carried by small biting insects that can kill deer, sometimes in large numbers. This year’s outbreak was larger than normal and hit states in northern climes not accustomed to the disease. Thousands of deer nationwide were wiped out covering more than a dozen states. Drought and dry conditions were blamed for the increase. In some locales, dead and decaying deer carcasses were feared to be contaminating water supplies.

8. Increased Bear Attacks in the West and Bear Spray - A prolonged and severe drought and hot temperatures resulted in a substantial reduction in natural food supplies for black and brown bears. The result was more human/bear conflicts. Of course this had to become a political issue when groups tried to blame elk ranchers for causing the increased bear encounters because of improperly caring for their animals. In one instance, the USFWS was considering a suit against a photographer who regularly feeds wildlife in order to get pictures.

To go along with this increased activity, officials in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming began telling people that using bear spray was a more effective way of dealing with attacking bears than a gun. This set off a controversy particularly among hunters who vowed they would not put down their gun and pick up a can of spray should they be attacked by a bear.

Vic Workman, a member of the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission, made enemies within his ranks when he went public after being attacked by a grizzly saying that if he had tried to put his gun down and take out his spray, he more than likely would be dead.

7. Wolf Delisting - The announcement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that it plans to remove federal protection of the gray wolf via the Endangered Species Act, will have broad consequences on millions of people. Most people believe that when the feds make the official announcement, animal rights groups, environmentalists and anti-hunting groups will file lawsuits tying the process up for years. It has been reported that as many as 27 groups are already prepared to bring suit against the USFWS.

However the outcome falls, this entire process will end up costing taxpayers millions, maybe billions of dollars, in fighting lawsuits and implementing management plans that will continue to include some kind of private property compensation to ranchers and livestock owners. This process will continue to test the structure and viability of the Endangered Species Act as it becomes clearer that the Act needs help. It is being abused and manipulated in order to achieve personal agendas.

6. Sunday Hunting - A topic that just will never go away, has worked to divide the people. It has been shown in debates recently over Sunday Hunting in North Carolina that it is a divisive issue for various reasons. From religious convictions to the demands for equality under the law, hunters and non-hunters aggressively continue this debate and it isn’t going to end.

Pennsylvania is once again attempting to get a bill passed in the Legislature that would give the Game Commission the authority to permit Sunday hunting. Once again that debate is dividing the people of the Keystone state.

It’s an interesting debate that affects a lot of people but in a strange way. There are only 11 states that don’t allow Sunday hunting. In the other states that do allow it, there is no debate to end it nor are there any significant outcries about Sunday hunting. As a matter of fact, Sunday hunting goes about its business quite nicely with very little fanfare, yet in these states that don’t allow it, the outcry is very loud on both sides.

This is sure to continue to be an issue that affects many people.

5. New Jersey Bear Hunt - Probably until New Jersey ever sees fit to elect an new governor who is not dead set against hunting, there will not be any bear hunting the the Garden State. Corzine and his puppets have successfully managed to convince enough people not directly effected by the overgrown black bear population to support his anti-hunting agenda.

Shortly after Corzine took office, his newly appointed head of the Department of Environmental Protection, Liza Jackson, took the court-approved Black Bear Management Plan and tossed it in the garbage. Corzine having the backing of the courts managed to get rulings in his favor and instead of a hunt that would generate revenue for New Jersey, they opted for millions more in tax dollars in order to continue wasting it on non-lethal bear management practices that don’t work.

The antis have a very strong foothold in the state of New Jersey. I’m sure they will continue their “end all hunting” campaign there and try to put an end to other species of hunting.

4. Supreme Court To Hear District of Columbia vs. Heller - In a move that is sure to have perhaps the most affect on the citizenry of this country in decades, the United States Supreme Court announced that it would hear the appealed case of District of Columbia versus Heller, more commonly known as the Washington, D.C. gun ban case.

Earlier last year a District Court ruled that Washington, D.C.’s ban on guns was unconstitutional, setting the stage for a debate within the land’s highest court. How the court will rule remains only speculative but it is believed they will take up the case in the spring or early summer.

This ruling will, one way or another, effect every person living or visiting within the boundaries of this nation. The ruling should come right smack dab in the middle of the presidential race for the White House and could actually determine who becomes the next president.

Yes, this is big - bigger than most people are thinking.

3. Scent Lok Clothing Lawsuit - A class action lawsuit was filed this year against the makers of Scent-Lok clothing charging that the company knew the product didn’t work and continued its advertising campaign claiming it as being 100% effective. The suit also claims that Scent-Lok conspired with major companies that sell the products to cover up their knowledge about the failures of the product in order to deceive consumers.

This lawsuit will be tied up in the courts for sometime and could lay the ground work for how other companies will be allowed to advertise their products.

2. Jim Zumbo - The Jim Zumbo fiasco showed us several things, two of which I would like to touch on. The first is that it showed all of us the speed and power of the Internet. A tool that Jim used to communicate to his readers was also the razor-sharp weapon that pierced his femoral artery causing near instant death of a career.

Zumbo posted a blog condemning the use of “military-style” weapons for hunting and within hours he was crucified. Outdoor Life refused to stand behind him as was followed by his sponsors and other companies. The actions by those using the Internet to condemn Zumbo’s words were quick and powerful.

The second issue that surfaced from this debate was one that addressed freedom of speech. Many were outraged because Zumbo spoke his mind and was fired because of it failing to comprehend that his responsibility was to those who signed his check.

The bottom line here was that within a flash, millions of Americans were wrapped up in a debate over Second and First Amendment issues.

1. Rex Rammell and the Chief Joseph Elk Ranch - Clearly for me, this was the most written about issue for 2007 and one that I feel mushroomed into a cloud much bigger than a few escaped elk. What began as elk getting out of the confines of an elk ranch in southeastern Idaho has not found an ending yet.

What many of us thought was a simple event of a rancher needing to go find his livestock turned out to be a political and social quagmire. Politics got ugly when then Gov. Jim Risch ordered his people to go to the areas around the Chief Joseph Ranch and shoot to kill any elk that belonged to owner, veterinarian Rex Rammell of Rexburg, Idaho. Standing on the unfounded fears of inferior genes and disease, Risch justified his actions. A lawsuit brought by Rammell over the loss of his elk is still pending.

This set off a firestorm of events with politicians and members of some animal rights and hunting groups mounting campaigns against the Idaho domestic elk industry trying to strong arm them out of business. What began some time ago to shut down the elk industry almost overnight now had just the tool they were looking for to scare the public into believing that raising elk on ranches is a public health issue.

This debate is not over as it is expected that many of the same players will launch a citizen’s initiative to put an end to elk ranching once and for all. How far these groups and individuals are prepared to go remains to be seen. In an event last spring, an anonymous source witnessed leaders of well-known Idaho conservation groups discussing the prospects of creating a public health scare in order to promote their private agendas.

Ranch hunting has raised the level of debate several levels and has moved from Montana through Idaho and on to Oregon and North Dakota. Groups in Oregon are waging a campaign to shut down the cervidae industry and another group in North Dakota is seeking signatures as I write in order to place an initiative on the November ballot to stop elk and deer farming.

A simple elk escape has spread to states where some are seeking to legislate ethics and others are contemplating overstepping their own bounds of ethical behavior to create public health scares to promote agendas. This debate is far from over and will prove to be more of a dividing block for the hunting community than anything constructive.

Tom Remington

assault weapons, bear attacks, bear spray, blue tongue, canned hunting, district of columbia versus heller, EHD, endangered species act, Epizootic hemorrhagic disease, First Amendment, gov. jim risch, Gov. Jon Corzine, gun rights, high fence hunting, hunting ethics, Idaho elk ranching, Jim Zumbo, Liza Jackson, Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks, New Jersey bear hunting, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Open Air With Tom Remington, Outdoor Life, Pennsylvania Game Commission, pennsyvania deer management problems, Remington Arms, Rex Rammell, scent lok, Second Amendment, Skinny Moose Radio, Sunday hunting, top ten news stories, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, united states stupreme court, vic workman, wolf delisting

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

* Edited 12/28/2007, 12:51 P.M.

Animal rights groups, which have shown in past history to have very little interest in saving animals and more interest in trampling on the rights of individuals, sued the state of Pennsylvania in order to force the Pennsylvania Game Commission to implement its regulations on game hunting preserves - specifically the Tioga Hunting Preserve which provides opportunities to hunt boar.

The PGC claims it has no jurisdiction over the boars at Tioga as they are non-native but the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a 4-1 decision said, “wild boar are protected wild mammals that are subject to the commission’s regulations.”

The intent of Fund for Animals is to stop any and all forms of hunting. They will chip away at U.S. citizen’s rights until they have achieved their sought after goals - forcing their ideals on the general public.

In an earlier statement made by Jerry Feaser (*edit - Jerry Feaser is not a representative of Tioga Hunting Preserve but of PGC) of the Tioga Hunting Preserve, he said that the rights of a property owner allows him to decide who harvests his animals.

Let’s put it to you this way, for comparison. If I’m a farmer and I have some dairy cows, and I decide for some reason to allow some people to come in and shoot them, there’s nothing the Game Commission can do.

The Court’s ruling stated that the boar were “protected wild mammals”. I assume as far as protected, they are using this term to describe that the PGC would regulate or manage the animal as part of its game management programs? Wild pigs are far from a federally protected species. As a matter of fact, many states are trying to figure out how to get rid of their wild pigs.

Part of the argument seems to be that the boars that are present at the Tioga Hunting Preserve are imported Russian and European boars. The PGC has said that because of that, they cannot control the pigs there.

What is questionable is the double standard being used by the animal rights groups. When their argument fits the mold, they will argue against the mere existence of game preserves claiming that none of the animals inside the fences are “wild” and fight to stop the slaughter of what they called tame or domesticated animals. If the moment is right, such as seems to be the case here, they will argue that pigs are wild animals and therefore need to be under the jurisdiction of the PGC.

Included in that double standard is that of the use of the term hunting. In some cases, animal rightists will attempt to use to their advantage that shooting animals on a fenced-in preserve isn’t hunting. They will refer to it as inhumane slaughter. In this case, they clearly refer to the events taking place at Tioga as hunting and are demanding that the PGC have jurisdiction because of that. So which is it? We can’t have it both ways, or can we?

With this ruling, it becomes clear to me that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has set precedence that shooting boars on game preserves is hunting and therefore needs to be regulated by the PGC. Will that stop the future arguments as to whether or not shooting game inside fences is hunting? Probably not but maybe some smart lawyer will use this ruling by the PSC in its fight to protect property rights.

But don’t get confused here. The goal of Fund for Animals and all the animal rights groups is to take away everyone’s opportunities to hunt. This is just one step in that direction.

Now that it appears the PGC has jurisdiction over Tioga’s boars and of course all other game preserves in Pennsylvania, it will be interesting to see how this actually changes things. You can bet that if this ruling doesn’t force the closure of Tioga and other preserves statewide, the animal rights groups will be back with more ridiculous lawsuits stripping away our rights as American citizens.

Weren’t cows wild mammals once also?

Tom Remington

boar hunting, canned hunting, fund for animals, hunting ethics, jerry feaser, Pennsylvania Game Commission, tioga hunting preserve

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

For those who may have missed Thursday’s broadcast of Open Air With Tom Remington, here’s you chance to listen now or download for later. We’ve provided you a play so you can stream the audio now and browse around while you listen.

Thursday’s show was interesting. I talked about the Sunday hunting debate starting in again in Pennsylvania, global warming and pay a tribute to the passing of Evel Knievel. I never knew that one of Evel’s first business ventures was owning and operating a outfitting business.

I also included a recording of a hip-hop, rap kind of a song called, “Mistah Man”. It’s a Maine humor recording that’s sure to keep you laughing. It does contain a few swear words and a couple graphic descriptions, so use your judgment.

Enjoy!

Tom Remington

audio, audiocast, evel knievel, Internet radio, mistah man, Open Air With Tom Remington, pennsylvanias sunday hunting, pod casting, skinny moose media, Skinny Moose Radio, Sunday hunting, Tom Remington

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

15-year old Matt Brunner, in only his second time ever taking aim at a deer, downs a rare piebald deer. A piebald deer is mostly white with some brown patches or patterns. Some confuse piebald with an albino.

Get more information about this event at the WHT, CBS affiliate website in Harrisburg.

Tom Remington

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

I have written and written about community after community trying to find ways to deal with overgrown populations of deer eating up the shrubs, the woods, spreading disease, causing property damage and at times personal injury or death. Most want to point a finger at just one person, group, set of circumstances or action to find blame. It’s not quite that simple but that doesn’t stop us from continuing our relentless assault on the issue.

There are more reasons than one can imagine why deer are living in our back yards. Most of those reasons are directly or indirectly associated with science. With science, responsible professionals can sit down and discuss ways that will affect the science in order to alter results. There is no such thing when it comes to dealing with irrational emotionalism in dealing with hunting. And for this we are all subject to the rants and raves and not so scientific reasoning of people who just don’t like to see any animal die.

Some wouldn’t agree but I can sympathize with people who feel that way. After all, life is life and I’m not so sure I would consider myself much of a person if I didn’t place some value on the life of anything, including snakes, poisonous insects and trees but that doesn’t mean I have to share every inch of my living space with them.

Back to the backyard deer problems. Those communities who have tried to deal with the deer problems, have tried several ways to combat it but most have had to resort to the hiring of “sharpshooters” to come in and systematically go about killing deer to achieve the desired results. Some people don’t like that.

You can search the Internet or newspapers and in hundreds, perhaps thousands of towns across America you will find editorials, rebuttals and thousands of articles opposed to or in support of the use of “sharpshooters” to deal with deer problems. I just wish some people would think a little bit before they decide to go to a public forum to express their outrage.

It is one thing when a member of the general public pens an editorial on an issue such as overcrowded deer populations but when a regular newspaper columnist writes about the issue, aren’t we inclined to expect something a big more? At least I used to.

Phillyburbs.com columnist Kate Fratti, whose column appears every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, wrote an article the other day about the deer problems in the town of Makefield. It’s full of the usual mumbo-jumbo about whether culling deer is necessary, etc. But then she asks a question.

But I wonder if those who press for the slaughter in the name of their children and grandchildren will take those little ones to view the heap of dead deer bodies and proudly proclaim they were partly responsible for it.

And if not, why not?

Is she serious? Are you telling me she doesn’t know the answer to this question? This is sensationalism at its ugly best. Let’s clear up an issue first and foremost. In deer culling operations, dead deer bodies aren’t piled up for public viewing. Fratti wants readers to paint a picture of “slaughtered” (her word not mine) deer stacked up in huge piles preparing to rot. In a previous sentence she again attempts to paint incorrect images by stating, “They don’t say how high the pile of dead deer carcasses will have to be to make them feel safe”, in reference to those who would like the deer numbers reduced for safety reasons. The last time I was at a deer slaughter, the stack of carcasses were 22 and a half feet and growing. (For those who are right now unsure, that was a joke)

But what can any of us expect from someone who can only see death and what they believe to be the needless killing of animals. Once again, I don’t have a problem with people who have issues with the killing of animals. I really don’t. They need only to be honest about it and say so. The rest of this emotionally charged sensationalism is ridiculous and dishonest.

Our society has trained us from day one not to think about Bessy the cow every time we order a Big Mac at MacDonald’s. This same society has impressed into our brains that deer have big long eyelashes, with tender, sweet voices and they talk to all their other forest friends while portraying the hunter as the big evil forest darkness.

I hate answering questions with a question but if Ms. Fratti has children or grandchildren, I’m assuming she would make an attempt to take her kid to see the dead deer? And while she’s out she might as well make a trip to the slaughterhouse and see all the beef carcasses piled up, along with sheep, chickens, turkeys, etc. Wouldn’t this be the same thing? And if she’s not going to do that, then I ask, why not?

But I get the biggest kick out of the “disclaimer” at the end of Fratti’s article.

Kate Fratti, whose column appears on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, confesses she felled a tree once to keep birds from pooping on her lawn furniture. It was a more gentle solution than blowing them out of the tree.

This is supposed to explain her behavior in dealing with unwanted birds? What about poor Tweedie Bird? And Heckle and Jekyl? But seriously, cutting down the tree is a more gentle solution? By this does she mean that if the “sharpshooters” used tranquilizer guns and first put the deer to sleep and then killed them, it would be alright? I don’t understand.

If somehow this is supposed to make Fratti a “humane” person with ideals that are better than mine or anyone else who advocates for hunting as a viable means of wildlife management, she’s got it all wrong. If the Pennsylvania Game Commission used Fratti’s reasoning then in any community with overgrown deer populations, all we have to do is move in with equipment and cut down all the trees, root up the soil and strip it of any vegetation and make sure nothing ever grows again. That way deer will go some place else and live, like she caused by cutting down her tree.

And so, I leave this rebuttal with a question for Kate Fratti. If you object to the killing of deer for the good of all wildlife and the ecosystems they live in, then do you not consider a tree as a living object?

Tom Remington

culling deer, deer eating shrubery, deer problems, kate fratti, too many deer

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

Pennsylvania this year has confirmed cases of dead deer as the result of Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease, referred to as EHD or blue tongue. It’s a deadly virus, regularly found in many southern states but this summer has spread to several northern states as well. EHD is carried by tiny biting insects commonly called midges or no-see-ums. It is believed that these bitings insects are the only way the virus is passed and not from one animal to the next.

Pennsylvania officials are asking hunters for assistance in reporting any dead deer found believed to have died from EHD. Samara Trusso, regional biologist for the Southwest Region of the Pennsylvania Game Commission describes the symptoms of EHD this way.

Once bitten by an infected midge, Trusso said it takes five to 10 days to see the signs of the illness in the deer. Trusso said the deer will start appearing lethargic, disoriented, lame or unresponsive to humans and other stimulus. Trusso said there have been incidents when people had to physically push an infected deer off a roadway because it would not respond to passing vehicles or honking horns.

As the disease progresses, the deer may drool, have bloody discharge from the nose, sores on the mouth and swollen, blue tongues; they could also become thin from not eating and normally die near sources of water because they seek the water when their fever rises. Once at the water source, they’re too disoriented to drink.

Trusso said between five and seven days after the disease is incubated, the deer could die. Some deer can survive.

The virus cannot spread from deer to deer, animal to animal and the disease is not transferable to humans.

Hunters should report any deer they find that they believe have died from EHD to Game Commission officials. This will help the PGC to track the disease. If a hunter shoots a deer infected with EHD, notify game officials immediately. New deer tags will be issued.

Tom Remington

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

Milt Inman, chief photographer for Skinny Moose Media and U.S. Hunting Today, sent me this absolutely stunning picture of a Maine deer.

Posted by Tom Remington

maine whitetail deer, Milt Inman, wildlife photography

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

This is an update to the story I ran on Monday about a Boy Scout who was attacked while in his tent by a black bear in Hickory Run State Park in Pennsylvania. Chris Malasics was attacked by a bear that ripped through his tent. The boy played dead while the bear tossed him about much like a beach ball. Malasics suffered cuts and bruises.

This was the second such attack in that park in one month and officials had made attempts to trap the bear after the first attack but with no success. Shortly after Malasics’ attack, they were able to trap a bear, one they believe is probably the same bear, and decided to put the bear down, as is common practice once a bear becomes accustomed to humans and has lost all fear, as was clearly the case here.

Tom Remington

bear attacks, chris malasics, hickory run state park, Pennsylvania

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

Even though portions of northern New England last night saw some frost and temps below freezing, cold weather has yet to reach areas that are infested with Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease (EDH), an insect-born virus that is deadly to whitetail deer. This year the outbreak of EHD was quite widespread. Common in many southern states, this year EHD has been detected in northern states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and now New York.

It has been confirmed that EHD was the cause of death for some deer found in Albany County. This is the first ever that EHD has been officially found in the Empire State.

Officials say that once the first freeze arrives it will kill off the tiny insects that carry the disease.

Tom Remington

albany county, deer diseases, deer hunting, EHD, Epizootic hemorrhagic disease, New York

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

14-year-old Chris Malasics from Chester County, Pennsylvania was attacked by a black bear. Around 11:30 Friday evening Malasics was in his tent when the bear ripped it down. He was with other scouts camped out at Hickory Run State Park in Carbon County. Malasics curled into a fetal position and played dead while the bear tossed him around like a beach ball.

The scout leader and other scouts tried creating a diversion by banging pots and pans and flashing car headlights. One report out of Pennsylvania described the bears reactions this way.

The bear then started tossing him around. Meanwhile, a scout leader started trying to create a disturbance, banging pots and pans and flashing car headlights. The bear eventually wandered off.

We as outdoor people should pay attention to the last sentence in the above - “The bear eventually wandered off”. It didn’t bolt, run, immediately head for the woods or any such thing. The bear “eventually” just simply “wandered” off. More and more bears have absolutely no fear at all of man and this spells potential danger. We must be made aware.

The boy was treated at a local hospital for cuts and bruises and will undergo rabies shots as a precaution.

Tom Remington

——–

The variety amongst hunting and fishing equipment can be compared to how hard it is to pick a watch for yourself or a gift. Something that can make shopping easier can be to go to some online shopping websites and read up on reviews, which you can find on hunting equipment just like you’ll find watches getting reviewed.

bear attacks scout, bear habits, chris malasics, hickory run state park, pennsylvania bear attacks

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

Around 500 people, many hunters, showed up at an open house meeting of the Pennsylvania Game Commission at the fairgrounds in Waynesburg on Friday. The hot topic was epizootic hemorrhagic disease, also referred to as EHD and commonly known as blue tongue.

EHD is a virus most often deadly to whitetail deer carried by biting midges or no-see-ums. Walter Cottrell, the commission’s wildlife veterinarian, told those on hand there is really nothing that anybody can do to stop or reduce the incidences of EHD in the deer. The first killing frost will kill of the midges and within a few days the deer will stop dying and the disease will go away.

It is unclear as to exactly how many deer have died in southwestern Pennsylvania alone from EHD. Some estimates are into the thousands but PGC officials tell hunters not to be concerned because there are still plenty of deer left unaffected.

Hunters are reminded that if they take a deer and during the field dressing process they detect odd smelling entrails, to turn the deer in to officials and get a new tag.

EHD has shown up in several states this year from the deep south to more northern states like Pennsylvania and Montana.

Tom Remington

deer diseases, EHD, Epizootic hemorrhagic disease, Pennsylvania Game Commission, Walter Cottrell

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

Over the past weekend, I posted a brief article along with a link to a story in a Pennsylvania publication about whether archery hunters were destroying our deer herds. Some believed that to blame archery hunters was simply a matter of being jealous because archery hunters got to go first. I have no idea whether that had anything to do with the writer’s thought process but from what I understood, his gripe was two-fold with bow hunters.

One was that bow hunters tend to hunt for only the larger trophy bucks and by taking the big bucks out early, they are not around to breed the does during rutting season, therefore leaving the breeding duties to the younger bucks.

Is there credibility to this claim? I asked readers to log in and leave comments and some did. I was also prompted to seek out some expert advice and so I turned to Lee Kantar, deer biologist for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. This is what I asked of Mr. Kantar.

Can you answer a question for me? I read an article this weekend from a person who is claiming that archery hunters are ruining the big buck deer pool by taking out only trophy bucks. I’m not sure why he picked on archery hunters other than perhaps he is jealous that their season comes before rifle in most states. I have heard this argument before that with the mindset of the hunter searching for only the “trophy”, it is reducing the average size of the deer, etc.

First of all, is there real evidence that indicates that hunters are more fixated with taking only trophy deer, more so than in previous years? Secondly, if that were true, is there scientific evidence to suggest that this is weakening the genetics?

I h