2 arrested for interfering with Blue Hills deer hunt,

“Two people were arrested for allegedly interfering with a
state-sanctioned deer hunt in the Blue Hills Reservation on Tuesday,
the Norfolk district attorney’s office said.
“Erin Dart, 29, and Jonathan DiNapoli, 33, were making noise to
distract hunters, said David Traub, spokesman for Norfolk District
Attorney Michael W. M


Please Don’t Feed the Trolls

If there’s one thing trolls can’t stand, it’s being ignored. Every few days someone trolls this anti-hunting site and tries to infest it with their pro-killing comments.

But the old adage that there are two sides to every coin doesn’t carry any weight here. Oh sure, a killer has the right to rationalize murder all he wants, but it doesn’t mean anyone has to listen to him.

Today’s troll wanted to argue the alleged merits of the shooting (or, in their words, “bagging”) of the “world record” grizzly bear. I’m sorry, but nothing anyone can say can justify that crime; commenting here to argue otherwise is just a waste of everyone’s time.

As I’ve said many times before, pro-hunters should read the About page so they won’t get frustrated when their comments go unheard. The fact is, sport hunting disgusts us and nothing any troll could ever come up with could change that.


Hunt the Hunters Hunting Licenses

Satire, by Jim Robertson (with a nod to the late Cleveland Amory, author of Mankind?: Our Incredible War on Wildlife and founder of the Hunt the Hunters300807_10150348639491188_858580348_n Hunt Club):
In a comment on one of the many tragic hunting accidents I’ve blogged about lately, a gentle reader mentioned there should be a hunt the hunters hunting season, to which another compassionate soul replied, “I’d contribute to that.”

We’ve all heard (ad nauseam) hunters boast that their license fees pay for wildlife programs, implying that it entitles them to kill the subjects of their alleged generosity—of course hunters don’t contribute out of the kindness of their hearts or their profound love for living animals. This got me to thinking we need a non-hunter license and tag system that emulates hunter tags, to finally put to rest this notion that hunters alone pay for wildlife through their consumptive use licenses. There have been some good ideas out there about this; people have floated the notion of a non-hunters duck stamp, for instance, but those have yet to really take off.

Perhaps it’s because non-hunters wouldn’t get anything tangible for their money. Sure, they could bring back a photo or wonderful memories of the amazing wildlife they saw at a quiet slice of heaven preserved for the wild non-human species of the Earth. But how does that really compare to the kind of meaty trophy a hunter takes home with him? (Sorry, or her; I keep forgetting that women are now being lured into the blood sport.) Hunters can pet and fondle the bodies of their dead victims, and even ingest certain parts they don’t plan to mount on the wall.

The only way a non-hunter can have such a tactile experience is if they can actually bring their “harvests” home with them. Granted, a human carcass doesn’t have the popular appeal of say, a mounted deer, elk, moose, goose, sheep or bear, but to the one who made that good, clean kill shot, it’s a symbol of their prowess and their mighty-yet-selfless effort to thin the hunter herd.

Fortunately, state game departments have given us a model to go by. State residents’ licenses would be kept at an affordable price, while out of state hunter hunters would have to contribute more to the coffers. Logically, someone would have to be hired to insure there were plenty of hunters out there to harvest; and who better for that job than the experienced wildlife “managers.” After all, they’ve been doing their darnedest to recruit more hunters for years now.

Tags for different breeds of hunters could emulate hunting tags for specific non-human animal species. (For those unsure of which sub-species of hunter they’re aiming at, watch for the post, “A Field Guide to North American Hunters” coming soon.) Obviously a tag for the average Elmer would cost less than a tag for a globe-trotting trophy hunter.

Since they’re among the most sadistic, and are the least likely to lay down their weapons and make peace with the animals willingly, out-of-state hunting licenses to hunt wolf hunters will hereby be reduced from $250 to $50. And wolf hunter tags for residents will be similarly underpriced at around $15, since the goal is ultimately to eliminate that breed altogether.


Lead-ing the Way in California

From Wayne Pacelle’s blog, A Humane Nation

October 11, 2013

Bullets should not keep killing long after they’ve left the barrel of a firearm. Soon, in California, they won’t.

In an act that will have major national reverberations for hunting and ammunitions manufacturing in the United States, Gov. Jerry Brown today signed legislation to make California the first state in the nation to halt the use of lead ammunition in hunting. The HSUS led the fight, along with Audubon California and Defenders of Wildlife, besting the National Rifle Association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and other hunting-rights lobby groups that called for the status quo and the continued incidental poisoning of countless birds and mammals, including endangered California condors, in the Golden State. Gov. Brown also signed legislation today to forbid the trapping of bobcats around Joshua Tree National Park and other national parks and wildlife refuges – a second major wildlife victory for us.

Thank you, Gov. Brown. We are immensely grateful.

The lead ammo bill, AB 711, was authored by Assemblymembers Anthony Rendon and Dr. Richard Pan, and the bobcat bill, AB 1213, was authored by Assemblymember Richard Bloom. We are also so grateful to these legislative champions for pushing these important policies over the finish line.

Last year, Gov. Brown signed legislation to outlaw the use of dogs in hunting bears and bobcats, and the year before put his signature on a bill to ban the sale and possession of shark fins. He’s also signed more than 25 other animal welfare bills, protecting mountain lions, banning cruel traps and a wide range of other practices. In all, since voters passed Proposition 2 in California in 2008, state lawmakers and two governors have together enacted more than 40 new statutes for animals – including bans on tail docking of dairy cows and forbidding the sale of shell eggs that don’t meet the standards of Prop 2. Hats off to my colleague, California senior state director Jennifer Fearing, and the rest of our team for leading the advocacy efforts and skillfully working with so many lawmakers and with Gov. Brown. This incredible raft of legislation cements California’s place as the nation’s leading state on animal welfare.

When the NRA and other groups fought efforts more than two decades ago to ban the use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting, they said that a legal prohibition on its use would result in the end of duck and goose hunting. Such outlandish claims, which we can now evaluate in a very tangible way, have proven false. In this year’s legislative fight in California, the National Shooting Sports Foundation – the trade association for gun and ammunition makers, based in Newtown, Conn., of all places – spent tens of thousands of dollars running print and radio ads attacking The HSUS, but their expenditures were all for naught.

Lead has been removed from paint, gasoline, and other consumer products because lead kills. A preponderance of scientific evidence demonstrates that there are significant public health, environmental and wildlife health risks associated with lead from ammunition. One estimate says that there are more than 10 million doves a year who die from lead poisoning. When you consider that there are more than 130 species known to suffer from the toxic effects of spent lead ammunition, it’s quite a staggering toll. Scavenging birds like condors, owls, eagles, and hawks, as well as mammals like coyotes, are all at risk and known to be suffering. Death from lead poisoning is painful, and even when lead exposure isn’t high enough to kill an animal, it doesn’t take much to weaken an animal to the point that it succumbs to predation or disease.

With an alternative product available – including steel, copper and bismuth ammunition – why not make the switch?

Editorial support for AB 711 from newspapers across California has poured in – The Los Angeles Times, the Monterey County Herald, the San Jose Mercury News, the Fresno Bee, the Sacramento Bee, the Riverside Press-Enterprise and the Bakersfield Californian, to name a few. The president and the vice president of California’s Fish and Game Commission backed the bill, as did Department of Fish and Wildlife director Chuck Bonham.

This is an enormous win for our movement. Committed conservationists and animal welfare advocates know it is wrong to allow random poisoning of wildlife. It is inimical to any sound principle of wildlife management and other states should follow California’s lead. With the signing of these two bills, today is a great day for condors, bobcats, and more than 130 other species of wildlife in California!


No Really, Who Should Read Exposing the Big Game?

My book opens with a satirical preface that asks: “Who Should Read Exposing the Big Game?” It depicts a far-fetched scenario of a hunter deciding to smash his weapons after reading the first three chapters of the book. Unfortunately, at least one reviewer took it seriously and wondered why—if I hoped to convert hunters—didn’t I assume a more placid demeanor? (The old “honey versus vinegar” debate.)

The fact is, I never really entertained any fantasy that I could talk the average hunter out of objectifying and killing animals. It’s what they like to do best; it’s “better than sex,” some of them would say.

Later in that preface, I point out that avid hunters make up less than 5% of the U.S. population. The vast majority of Americans, 90%, are non-hunters, with an additional 5% who consider themselves avid anti-hunters.

If the purpose of the book were to negotiate with hunters (whom I’ve found to be about as reasonable as the angry torch-carrying mob after Frankenstein’s monster), I would have used a different approach and tried to sweet-talk them a little. At least I would have spent some time seriously examining their silly, feeble rationalizations for hunting, like the standard: “If humans weren’t supposed to be predators, why do we have sharp canine teeth?” Give me a break! Gorillas, one of our closest relatives, have much more prominent canine teeth and they come from a line of strict vegetarians.

I’ll be the first to admit I don’t have a clue how to get the message across to hunters and change their minds about killing for sport (short of electro-shock therapy). Believe me, I’ve tried and found them to be pretty darned set in their ways (to put it nicely). The real target audience for Exposing the Big Game is the 90% who are non-hunters, whom I hope—after learning some of the ugly realities of hunting—will decide to get active and join the ranks of anti-hunters.

Another goal of the book is to encourage (and entertain) anti-hunters, giving them a bit of renewed incentive to keep up the good fight. Though we outnumber trophy hunters, they have a heavily funded propaganda machine, including libraries of snuff films and volumes of glossy, full-colored “sportsmen’s” magazines available at any grocery store, drug store or mini-mart across America.

Non-hunters and anti-hunters alike now have at least one book to keep by their side and give them strength to speak out for the animals the next time the pro-hunting industry tries to shut us out of the process of deciding the fate of our wildlife.

If my attitude towards hunters seems too steeped in vinegar, it comes from a deep concern for the well-being of animals, who, as Sea Shepherd’s Captain Paul Watson wrote in the book’s Foreword, “…are the disenfranchised from who we have stolen habitat and life – for far too long. It’s time to make peace with our fellow citizens, to live in harmony with them and to understand that those who today club seals, harpoon whales, shoot bears, trap beaver, hook a shark, or blast a goose with a shotgun will be viewed in the future in the same light as we now view slavers, warlords, gangsters and politicians.”

For more information on Exposing the Big Game, visit:             http://www.earth-books.net/books/exposing-the-big-game

Wildlife Photos Copyright Jim Robertson