Advertisement
A blog of all section with no images
What is Conservation? Who are conservationists? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Hunters Alert   
Thursday, 03 December 2009

There are many words that have double meanings, like “gay”, “coke” and “conservation”. Most people would argue that conservation only has one meaning. Through language deception perfected by government agencies and environmentalists (which has been so skillfully brought to our attention by Julie Smithson of Property Rights) words are of monumental importance in our perception of the way we view things and make decisions. Government agents (bureaucrats) and news media (journalists) like to refer to anti-hunting groups like Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club and many others as “conservationists”. These anti organizations (environmentalists) spend much of their time and their money on lawsuits, suing the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (the government) thus establishing their agendas and imposing their will on the American people. Hunters were the first conservationists practicing sound conservation in America and they are still the best, spending their money for all forms of wildlife. These two words today, conservation and conservationists, have been usurped by these organizations, agencies and journalists from the true conservationists……..none other than the HUNTER and by so doing make the hunter appear as the problem and they are the saviors. Now, think it through, who gave us all the abundant wildlife we have known up to this day that we rapidly see disappearing all around us? These hunters did it with their dedication to wildlife and their money without having to sue the very government agencies that these hunters pay to represent them in ALL wildlife management. Enter these environmentalist organizations, paying virtually nothing, infiltrating our government agencies and you can see who and where the problem is. NOW……who are the real conservationists?

                 HA

 
Is this who got your deer this year? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Hunters Alert   
Sunday, 29 November 2009
coyote_1838_s.jpg
Last Updated ( Sunday, 29 November 2009 )
 
THE DESCENT INTO TYRANNY PDF Print E-mail
Written by Hunters Alert   
Friday, 16 October 2009

Were alarm bells going off throughout the Twin Towers after the planes struck them and up until they collapsed?  Whether or not the alarms sounded until the buildings collapsed or whether they immediately or eventually malfunctioned, the situation is analogous to America today.  Regardless of whether the alarms saved some individuals, or malfunctioned eventually, or perhaps were ignored by persons that could not conceive of what was about to take place; the results were the same, an enormous loss of life and the disappearance of those two buildings (forever?).

Today, 16 October 2009, there are alarm bells going off all

Read more...
 
Attention Deer Hunters PDF Print E-mail
Written by Hunters Alert   
Sunday, 23 August 2009

Good news for Nevada sportsmen! HUNTER'S ALERT has been waiting to write a report like this for over 20 years. Sportsmen now have 5 (the majority) good Wildlife commissioners on the Board. A very nasty Wildlife Commission meeting was held on August 14 and 15 in Elko. The bighorn sheep people did everything they could to see that Gerald Lent was not re-elected as chairman. Thankfully, the sheep people were defeated.

Gerald Lent is in the process of forming a Mule Deer Task Force committee. The intent of this committee is to facilitate input from concerned deer hunters. For that reason, we are requesting that everyone with an idea or suggestion to bring back our deer to submit it to the committee chair, Scott Raine. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it or PO Box 812, Eureka, NV 89316.  All ideas will be considered and I can assure you that some will be presented to the Wildlife Commission for implementation. 

Past and current directors and NDOW biologists have done nothing to bring back our deer so it is going to be up to this Wildlife Commission to implement some changes. At last the general public is going to have some direct input. Please pass this information on to your fellow hunters as the committee wants as many suggestions as possible.

Thank you for your support of HUNTER'S ALERT. We are working for ALL of the sportsmen of Nevada to preserve and protect our hunting heritage. 

Listed below are recommendations sent to Commissioner Raine by HUNTER'S ALERT.

Dear Commissioner Raine:

HUNTER'S ALERT is pleased that someone with some authority has finally realized that we have lost our deer and actually wants to do something to address this loss. For that reason, HUNTER'S ALERT is listing five suggestions which we hope you will consider. 

1.     Replace the current director with someone who wants to bring back our deer.

2.     Managing mountain lions is a state right. The mountain lion should be returned to predator status without any federal repercussions. The threat of withholding P-R money goes against the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution. P-R money should be given to states with no strings attached.

3.     If number 2 is unattainable, insure the objective harvest of mountain lions is accomplished every year.

4.     No killing of does until deer numbers are at 200,000 statewide.

5.     More emphasis on predator control.

 
Some biologists believe in predator control but certainly not Nevada Department of Wildlife PDF Print E-mail
Written by Hunters Alert   
Friday, 17 July 2009
The North American Wildlife and Natural Resource s Conference held its 72nd meeting in March, 2007 in Portland, Oregon. This conference brings together wildlife biologists and state wildlife agencies for discussion of wildlife related problems. Session five of the Conference had nine symposiums just on predator control. Below are a few excerpts from that Conference.

 

Culling Mountain Lions to Protect Ungulate Populations-Some Lives Are More Sacred Than Others

 

Eric M. Rominger

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish

 

Bounties and Bounty Hunters

 

          Historically, top carnivore removal was carried out to protect game species and livestock throughout the western states. In fact, most predator species were bountied, with higher bounties paid for culling females in a concerted effort to reduce or eliminate populations. For example, in New Mexico in the 1950's, the New Mexico Department of  Game and Fish employed full-time trappers in New Mexico as well (A. Ford, personal communications 2003). This intensive governmental effort occurred during an era when most private ranchers kept their  "steel in the ground", i.e., leghold traps, year-round in an effort to eliminate top carnivores. It is important to note that these government trappers were highly respected members of their communities and were considered members of an honored profession. However by the early 1970s, all but two western states had converted mountain lions to game-animal status and state-agency trapper positions were essentially eliminated. Despite the best effort of the government trappers and of their private-sector allies, mountain lions were never extirpated in the western United States.

 

California versus Texas

 

California and Texas, bounding the western and eastern distribution of mountain lions, have equally dichotomous management strategies for mountain lions. Presumably, these divergent management strategies are based on differing societal values in these two states. Texas never elevated mountain lions to game-animal status, and year-round hunting and trapping of mountain lions continues throughout their range there. The management strategy in Texas contrasts sharply with that in California where a legislative moratorium passed in 1972 ceased sport harvest and public trapping of all mountain lions.

 

Intensive mountain lion harvest in Texas has not resulted in the extirpation of mountain lions, and mountain lion distribution is considered to be similar today to what it was 35 years ago (C. Brewer, personal communication, 2007). Because of this fact, Texas Parks and Wildlife (TPW) was a principal complainant resulting in the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) not endorsing, or otherwise sanctioning, the recently drafted  Cougar Management Guidelines-First Edition (Schroufe 2006). Perceived differences on the needs for harvest quotas and sanctuaries, to maintain mountain lion populations, were central to this complaint.

 

The consequences of no-sport harvest of mountain lions are less understood in California. High levels of mountain lion predation on small isolated populations of bighorn sheep (Ovis Canadensis cremnobates) and Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep (O. v. sierra) populations being listed as federally endangered populations.

 

Ballot Initiatives

 

It is interesting that prior to the elimination of sport hunting in California, annual harvest was approximately 150 mountain lions per year. Today, California and U. S. Department of Agriculture, Wildlife Services cull approximately 150 mountain lions per year because of depredation complaints on livestock and on pets and because of concerns for human safety. The historical number of 150 mountain lions per year more accurately reflects the actual number of mountain lions killed than does the current estimates because a bounty was paid during much of the historical period. It has been suggested that frustration with restrictions imposed by Proposition 117 may result in mountain lions being killed illegally, resulting in an underestimate of mountain lion harvest. Total mountain lion harvest in California today, following the complete ban of sport harvest, probably exceeds mountain lion harvest prior to the ban.

 

Endangered Ungulates versus Hunted Ungulates

 

Last Updated ( Friday, 17 July 2009 )
Read more...
 
"SPORT FISH" & "WILDLIFE" RESTORATION PDF Print E-mail
Written by Hunters Alert   
Friday, 17 July 2009

As hunters and trappers and fishermen see a White House and federal agencies stuffed with anti-hunting, anti-gun rights, environmental extremists and as an unfettered US House and Senate are churning out all manner of extremist and costly legislation; questions are being raised about minor things that we ignored for years but which are beginning to appear as razors that have been quietly slashing our hunting, trapping, and fishing heritage, traditions, and rights.  I speak here of the federal programs originally known as the Pittman Robertson (1936) and Dingell-Johnson  (1950) Acts.

 

These two Acts provided that the federal government collect excise taxes on certain items and that each year these funds be apportioned to all State fish and wildlife agencies for "Wildlife Restoration" and "Sport Fish Restoration" projects.  Funds for "Wildlife Restoration" are derived from an 11 percent excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition; a 10 percent tax on pistols and revolvers, one-half of which may be used by the States for hunter safety programs; and an11-percent excise tax on bows, arrows, and their parts and accessories.  Funds for "Sport Fish Restoration" are derived from a 10-percent excise tax on certain items of sport fishing tackle (Internal Revenue Code of 1954, sec. 4161), a 3-percent excise tax on fish finders and electric trolling motors, import duties on fishing tackle, yachts and pleasure craft, interest on the account, and a portion of motorboat fuel tax revenues and small engine fuel taxes.  The current annual collections vary from $500 Million to over a Billion considering the ongoing stampede for arms and ammunition in anticipation of federal government attempts to subvert the 2nd Amendment to The Constitution of the United States of America.

 

These Acts have been manipulated and amended by politicians to name Amendments after themselves (Wallop-Breaux); to gain votes from certain blocs like boat owners and archers; and to give favors to ethnic voting groups like Puerto Ricans and Samoans.  Importation of arms and fishing tackle has made up increasing amounts of these taxed items while federal bureaucrats have increasingly ignored the collection of these import taxes and as importers have exploited the indifference of federal bureaucrats by smuggling (the correct term) such items to competitive retail outlet stores. While there are strict rules for use of the funds by state agencies, required 5-year audits and "oversight" by federal bureaucrats are intermittent, poorly administered, and ideologically driven by federal and now state bureaucrats enacting agendas aimed ultimately at destroying hunting, fishing, and trapping.  State fish and wildlife Directors want to be free to please the Governors that appoint them like offering (illegally) to allow a prison to be built on wildlife areas or to put wildlife vehicles in state motor pools for use by others.  So, just like federal thieves, state thieves exist and benefit personally from foregone or slipshod oversight and audits.

 

All that said, let us focus on the terms "Wildlife" and "Sport Fish" and "Restoration".

 

- "Wildlife" in the original Act and in the eyes of American citizens meant deer, turkeys, ducks, pheasants, etc. (i.e. "GAME" animals whether or not they were present during the Ice Age, were eaten by Sitting Bull, or were brought over from China or Europe on a sailing ship).  The "sporting" uses were what generated the funds and thus did everyone understand that game animals were to be the primary beneficiaries of the funding. The other animals that shared habitats with and benefited from the MANAGEMENT AND EXISTENCE of the habitats for those game animals were significant but secondary beneficiaries of much of the projects generated by the collected taxes.  Harmful animals were to be controlled thus benefiting rural America while other "users" like campers, hikers, school groups, canoeists, and birdwatchers, etc. were always free to use the purchased wildlife areas and facilities like boat ramps.

 

- "Sport Fish" in the original Act was necessary because "Commercial Fish" and "Marine Fish" were jealously guarded (meaning they generated employees and funding) functions of the Commerce Department as opposed the Interior Department where the US Fish and Wildlife Service was ensconced.   Consider for the moment how the Endangered Species Act divided the whales and seals and porpoises from other "endangered" animals between the Commerce and Interior Departments.  (National Marine Fisheries Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service always "cooperated" for environmental benefit like the CIA and FBI always shared info with other agencies for the common good.)

 

- Finally, the term "Restoration" always (up until the radical 60's and 70's) meant the active "MANAGEMENT" of these desired (i.e. GAME and SPORT FISH) species to levels, distribution, abundance, and harvest levels known to previous generations CONSISTENT WITH THE EXPANDING AMERICAN SOCIETY, AMERICAN RIGHTS, AND AMERICAN TRADITIONS.

 

Last Updated ( Friday, 17 July 2009 )
Read more...
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 1 - 10 of 554

Sponsored Links

©Hunters Alert 2008