Greenfield man accidentally shot while returning from evening of coyote hunting/HUNTING ACCIDENT CLAIMS LIFE

Greenfield man accidentally shot while returning from evening of coyote hunting
PUBLISHED: 11/27/16 12:12 AM EST.
UPDATED: 11/27/16 08:10 AM EST.

GREEFIELD, Ind. (WTHR) – A Greenfield man was accidentally shot while hunting Saturday evening.

Indiana Conservation officers say 31-year-old Dustin Fischer and 26-year-old Johnathan Armstrong, both of Greenfield, were coyote hunting on private property near Wilkinson in Hancock County.

Both men returned to Armstrong’s truck after hunting. Armstrong placed his .223 caliber rifle on th rear floorboard of the pickup prior to Fischer returning to the truck.

When Fischer put his rifle on the floorboard, Armstrong’s rifle fired, striking Fischer in the left arm.

Armstrong and the landowner applied a tourniquet to Fischer’s arm to stop the bleeding.

He was transported to Hancock Regional Hospital and then airlifted to St. Francis Hospital where he will undergo surgery.

The investigation is ongoing.

___________________

http://wcluradio.com/hunting-accident-claims-life/

112816-hunting-accident-500x261
Edmonton, Ky. (November 28, 2016) – KSP Post 15 received a call on Sunday, November 27, 2016 at approximately 8:14 AM CST in reference to a shooting incident on Cedar Flat Rd. in Metcalfe County. Kentucky Fish & Wildlife Officers and Kentucky State Troopers responded to the scene along with the Metcalfe County Coroner.

35-year-old Herbert N. Lattin, of Edmonton, was located approximately 1/2 mile off the roadway, in a wooded area, with a single gunshot wound to the head. No foul play is suspected. Mr. Lattin was apparently deer hunting from an elevated stand when the accident occurred. Fish & Wildlife officer Jared Ervin is investigating.

Why coyotes and badgers hunt together

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/blogs/coyote-and-badger-hunt-together

The two predators were recently photographed collaborating in Colorado, a fascinating example of interspecies teamwork.

November 25, 2016,
coyote and badger hunting together

A coyote and badger stalk prey together on the prairie surrounding the National Black-footed Ferret Conservation Center in northern Colorado. (Photo: Kimberly Fraser/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

Competition and cooperation aren’t mutually exclusive. Just ask a coyote or a badger.

Both are crafty carnivores, and since they often hunt the same prey in the same prairies, it would make sense for them to be enemies, or at least to avoid each other. But while they don’t always get along, coyotes and badgers also have an ancient arrangement that illustrates why it can be smart for rivals to work together.

An example of that partnership recently unfolded on a prairie in northern Colorado, near the National Black-footed Ferret Conservation Center. And it was captured in photos, both by a wildlife camera trap and by sharp-eyed photographers:

coyote and badger hunting togetherA field camera caught this amazing shot, which shows the coyote and badger trotting across the landscape with a prairie dog looking on in the foreground. (Photo: National Black-footed Ferret Conservation Center/Facebook)

coyote and badger hunting togetherThe duo takes a break from pursuing prairie dogs. (Photo: Kimberly Fraser/USFWS)

coyote and badger hunting together(Photo: Kimberly Fraser/USFWS)

coyote and badger hunting togetherThe coyote and badger survey a black-tailed prairie dog colony near Wellington, Colorado. (Photo: Ryan Moehring/USFWS)

While it’s relatively rare to capture such good photos of a hunt like this, the phenomenon is well-documented. It was familiar to many Native Americans long before Europeans reached the continent, and scientists have studied it for decades. It has been reported across much of Canada, the United States and Mexico, according to Ecology Online, typically with one badger hunting alongside one coyote.

(In one study at the National Elk Refuge in Wyoming, 90 percent of all coyote-badger hunts featured one of each animal, while about 9 percent involved one badger with two coyotes. Just 1 percent saw a lone badger join a coyote trio.)

But why would these predators work together at all? When one of them finally catches something, they aren’t known to share the spoils. So what’s the point?

coyote and badger hunting togetherWorking together helps each species pursue prey more effectively. (Photo: Kimberly Fraser/USFWS)

The point, apparently, is to improve the likelihood that at least one of the hunters will snag some prey. Even if that means the other one ends up empty-handed, the partnership seems to pay off for both species in the long run.

Each member of the hunting party has a distinct set of skills. Coyotes are nimble and quick, so they excel at chasing prey across an open prairie. Badgers are slow and awkward runners by comparison, but they’re better diggers than coyotes are, having evolved to pursue small animals in underground burrow systems. So when they hunt prairie dogs or ground squirrels on their own, badgers usually dig them up, while coyotes chase and pounce. The rodents therefore use different strategies depending which predator is after them: They often escape a digging badger by leaving their burrows to flee aboveground, and evade coyotes by running to their burrows.

When badgers and coyotes work together, however, they combine these skills to hunt more effectively than either could alone. Coyotes chase prey on the surface, while badgers take the baton for subterranean pursuits. Only one may end up with a meal, but overall, research suggests the collaboration benefits both hunters.

“Coyotes with badgers consumed prey at higher rates and had an expanded habitat base and lower locomotion costs,” according to the authors of the National Elk Refuge study. “Badgers with coyotes spent more time below ground and active, and probably had decreased locomotion and excavation costs. Overall, prey vulnerability appeared to increase when both carnivores hunted in partnership.”

Badgers and coyotes aren’t always friendly, though. While the majority of their interactions “appear to be mutually beneficial or neutral,” Ecology Online notes they do sometimes prey on each other. The two species have developed “a sort of open relationship,” according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), since they tend to collaborate in warmer months, then often drift apart as winter sets in.

“In the winter, the badger can dig up hibernating prey as it sleeps in its burrow,” the FWS explains. “It has no need for the fleet-footed coyote.”

Not at the time, anyway. But winter eventually turns to spring, and these two hunters may start to need each other again. And just as they have for thousands of years, they’ll make peace, embrace their differences and get back to work.

Your Next Hamburger May Come With a Side of Endangered Wolf

http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/05/29/food-production-impacts-wildlife-extinction-labels?cmpid=tpdaily-eml-2016-05-30

A group argues for adding wildlife conservation facts to nutrition labels.


<!–

The remnants of uneaten hamburgers at a 2014 burger-eating contest in Washington. (Photo: Gary Cameron/Reuters)

May 29, 2016
Emily J. Gertz is an associate editor for environment and wildlife

When it comes to valuable real estate, the square inches that comprise the official food nutrition label may be a hotter commodity than the most impressive street address in Manhattan. How consumers react to the label’s black-and-white facts about calories, fats, sugars, and vitamins is worth billions of dollars to the food industry.

An environmental group would like to factor in one more thing: how food production affects wildlife. Piggybacking on the government’s overhauled nutrition label—which, despite industry opposition, now distinguishes added from naturally occurring sugars—the Center for Biological Diversity has released “extinction labels” that suggest how much impact a hamburger, a chicken breast, or a serving of bacon has on water supplies, forests, the climate, and the survival of endangered species.

“People probably don’t think that when they’re eating a hamburger they’re harming a wolf, but there’s a direct correlation,” said Jennifer Molidor, senior food campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity. “A wolf, for example, will be targeted by predator control programs in their natural environment, at the behest of the livestock industry, to protect the cattle.”


<!–

The “extinction facts” label. (Image: Center for Biological Diversity)

The Center for Biological Diversity and other animal welfare groups have charged that the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services program, which kills millions of wild coyotes, bobcats, mountain lions, bears, and other animals annually, lacks transparency as well as scientific justification for its practices. States also run such programs.

RELATED:  This State’s Population of Wolves Is Recovering, So Now Ranchers Can Shoot Them

There are other impacts as well. Increasing amounts of livestock manure are the leading driver of growing methane emissions from agriculture. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas and can also degrade air quality. Raising alfalfa for cow feed uses up 2.7 trillion gallons of water a year in California alone.

The Center for Biological Diversity would like the government to advise the public on how to make eating choices that have less impact on wildlife and natural resources. “We’re in the sixth major extinction crisis, the first human-caused extinction crisis, and it’s highly related to our diet,” said Molidor. “Americans eat about three times the global average of meat consumption. If the rest of the world ate like Americans ate in terms of meat and dairy, we would need four more Earths.”

Author and futurist Jamais Cascio has experience using the nutrition label format to make an environmental point. His “cheeseburger footprint” graphic, which was based on his research into the carbon emissions created by a quarter-pound cheeseburger, went viral in the mid-2000s, landing him an appearance in a National Geographic documentary about climate change.

(Full disclosure: Casio and I were colleagues on a blog-and-book project called Worldchanging during the mid-2000s.)

Ten years later, Cascio said, he continues to get requests to use the image, and he features it in his consulting on sustainability and future planning.



<!–

The “cheeseburger footprint” label. (Image: Courtesy of Jamais Cascio)

“I can say from my experience that adding that carbon facts image dramatically increased the amount of conversation around carbon footprints,” he said. “I started to see, in some places, the cheeseburger as the symbol of unintended climate consequences.”

Cascio called the extinction label “a good first draft,” but noted that “it doesn’t pretend to be objective.”

“This looks like they’re combining the nutrition label with a cigarette warning,” he said. “If you want to blame the elimination of sage grouse and wolves on beef production, I can understand that. I’m not sure how it factors into polar bears.”

But images can evoke interest and reactions in ways that pages full of text can’t match, he added.

“Greenhouse gases, water, manure, all have links to beef production,” Cascio said. “If they can draw a more direct link to the consequences, I could see this being applied across a wide array of products—or even a political candidate.”

Sportsmen’s Act, or Poachers’ Act?

Sportsmen’s Act, or Poachers’ Act?

Navigate to …
 Categories
–  Animal Rescue and Care
–  Animal Research and Testing
–  Companion Animals
–  Equine
–  Farm Animals
–  Humane Economy
–  Humane Society International
–  Investigations
–  Opposition
–  Public Policy (Legal/Legislative)
–  Wildlife/Marine Mammals
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Categories
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Donate

Navigate to …
 Categories
–  Animal Rescue and Care
–  Animal Research and Testing
–  Companion Animals
–  Equine
–  Farm Animals
–  Humane Economy
–  Humane Society International
–  Investigations
–  Opposition
–  Public Policy (Legal/Legislative)
–  Wildlife/Marine Mammals
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Categories
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Donate
Navigate to …
 Categories
–  Animal Rescue and Care
–  Animal Research and Testing
–  Companion Animals
–  Equine
–  Farm Animals
–  Humane Economy
–  Humane Society International
–  Investigations
–  Opposition
–  Public Policy (Legal/Legislative)
–  Wildlife/Marine Mammals
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Categories
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Donate

Navigate to …
 Categories
–  Animal Rescue and Care
–  Animal Research and Testing
–  Companion Animals
–  Equine
–  Farm Animals
–  Humane Economy
–  Humane Society International
–  Investigations
–  Opposition
–  Public Policy (Legal/Legislative)
–  Wildlife/Marine Mammals
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Categories
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Donate

Navigate to …
 Categories
–  Animal Rescue and Care
–  Animal Research and Testing
–  Companion Animals
–  Equine
–  Farm Animals
–  Humane Economy
–  Humane Society International
–  Investigations
–  Opposition
–  Public Policy (Legal/Legislative)
–  Wildlife/Marine Mammals
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Categories
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Donate
Navigate to …
 Categories
–  Animal Rescue and Care
–  Animal Research and Testing
–  Companion Animals
–  Equine
–  Farm Animals
–  Humane Economy
–  Humane Society International
–  Investigations
–  Opposition
–  Public Policy (Legal/Legislative)
–  Wildlife/Marine Mammals
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Categories
 Archives
 About Wayne
 Contact
 Subscribe
 Donate

By on May 20, 2015 with 33 Comments

If you thought the Senate version of the Sportsmen’s Act – which was the subject of a recent hearing – was awful, the House version that was examined in committee today is even worse.

The House version is called the “Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act” (SHARE Act), H.R. 2406. Yet it includes language to prevent the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from adopting a rule to restrict the illegal ivory trade in the United States. What does that have to do with sportsmen who hunt deer, ducks, and other traditional prey? The answer: it has zero to do with sportsmen, and everything to do with AK-47-wielding poachers slaughtering elephants and sawing off their faces, destroying the economies of Africa in the process, and financing terrorists who are a threat to African and western nations.

That’s a good starting point for a bill that’s careened off course and has almost nothing to do with its title.  H.R. 2406 helps no rank-and-file hunters. It’s a grab bag of items largely unrelated to, and disconnected from, hunting.

In addition to the elephant poaching provision, the bill provides an opportunity for a handful of ultra-wealthy trophy hunters to import sport-hunted polar bears killed in northern Canada. This is a special-interest provision, which carves out an exemption in the Marine Mammal Protection Act, that has no bearing on regular hunters who fill their freezers with venison. None of these millionaire trophy hunters, who paid as much as $50,000 to shoot a polar bear, ate the meat. They just went on a head-hunting exercise, and paid a fortune to do so.

The bill is also a boon to the small fraction of the U.S. population that engages in trapping live animals. The SHARE Act adds “trapping” to the definition of hunting. This provision would open up millions of acres of land to trapping: an inherently cruel and inhumane means of ensnaring animals like beavers, bobcats, and foxes. Each year, millions of animals, including pets, are killed in painful traps, and they try desperately to free themselves for hours or days before they succumb to dehydration, predators, or the trapper’s bludgeon. Recreational trapping with the worst body-gripping traps is banned or severely restricted in nine U.S. states and over 80 countries, and Congress should be working to end this cruel practice, rather than expanding it.

The House bill also goes a step further than its Senate companion bill on the issue of toxic lead ammunition. It takes away the regulatory authority of the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to protect wildlife – and the public – from toxic lead ammunition. These agencies have already taken positive steps in requiring the use of non-lead alternatives for hunting certain species. In 1991, they put in place a nationwide measure requiring non-toxic shot for migratory waterfowl, after biologists estimated that millions of ducks were dying from lead poisoning. That federal rule has saved millions of birds annually from death by exposure to toxic lead, and it’s not put a dent in duck hunting. Now members of Congress want to take away the opportunity to build on this success  – handcuffing federal agencies that have a duty to address ammunition that poisons millions of wild animals.

The SHARE Act, just like its Senate companion , will not benefit rank-and-file hunters, and will destroy years of work done by animal protection advocates, environmentalists, and conservationists to protect endangered species and other wildlife. It is a special interest bill masquerading as a measure for sportsmen. Rank-and-file sportsmen, and the lawmakers who care about them, should not be deceived. Please call your members of Congress to ask them not to support these cruel bills.

men injured in helicopter crash – shooting coyotes

http://www.bluemountaineagle.com/Local_News/20160113/helicopter-crash-reported-in-grant-county

Blue Mountain Eagle

UPDATE: Monument, Pilot Rock men injured in Ritter helicopter crash

Published:January 13, 2016 10:19AM
Last changed:January 13, 2016 6:49PM

Photo courtesy of Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer
The wreckage of a 1988 Enstrom helicopter was found near Ritter Butte Lookout in northern Grant County. The crash was reported at 10:06 a.m. Wednesday, Jan. 13.
Photo courtesy of Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer

Photo courtesy of Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer
The wreckage of a 1988 Enstrom helicopter was found near Ritter Butte Lookout in northern Grant County.

Photos courtesy of Sheriff Glenn Palmer
The wreckage of a 1988 Enstrom helicopter was found near Ritter Butte Lookout in northern Grant County.
The Eagle/Angel Carpenter

RITTER — A helicopter pilot and his passenger were injured in a crash near Ritter Butte Wednesday morning.

Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer said a helicopter being used to hunt coyotes ran out of fuel and crashed into several juniper trees on a rock outcropping on property owned by Paul Walton, Ritter, about a half-mile southwest of the Ritter Butte Lookout and one-and-a-half miles west of Highway 395 in northern Grant County.

The crash was reported at about 10:06 a.m. Jan. 13, and the sheriff’s office, along with ambulances from Long Creek and John Day, were dispatched to the scene.

Palmer said, when he arrived on the scene, members of the Long Creek Fire Department were packing the helicopter pilot, Cliff A. Hoeft, 60, Pilot Rock, several hundred yards to an awaiting ambulance.

The single passenger, Cody J. Cole, 34, Monument, walked away from the crash, Palmer said, but both men were transported to Blue Mountain Hospital in John Day. Hoeft was later transferred by aircraft to St. Charles Medical Center in Bend.

Palmer, who conducted the initial investigation, said the men were “lucky to be alive.” He said the 1988 Enstrom helicopter, registered to BRD Equipment in Adams, was heavily damaged and is considered a total loss.

Palmer said the helicopter and pilot were hired by a number of people who were hunting coyotes on adjoining properties in the area. He said different passengers were taking turns shooting from the helicopter, and the crash occurred within about 1,000 yards of where the aircraft had been landing near the group of hunters.

End Nevada Killing Contests

from Project Coyote.org

Last year, Project Coyote led a successful effort to close the loopholes that permitted wildlife killing contests in California targeting “furbearing” and “nongame mammals” (coyotes, bobcats, foxes among other species frequently targeted in such contests). On December 4, 2014, the California Fish and Game Commission voted to end this barbaric practice.

Now we are working to repeat this success in other states and we need your help. This coming Friday our Nevada Representative, Leah Sturgis and other Project Coyote volunteers and supporters will testify before the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commission in support of a petition to end wildlife killing contests statewide.  We are mobilizing a grassroots effort to support this petition (you can read more about that effort here). We also have ongoing litigation in Idaho challenging killing contests on public lands.

Control Cruel Special Interest Groups, Not the Wild Animals.

Letter from Rosemary Lowe to the Albuquerque Journal:
NM Game Dept. Killing Machine
“Mexican Wolves belong on New Mexico lands, but there are special interests within the hunting & livestock industries which have a long history of prejudice about this (& other) wonderful native species. It is time to bring back the Lobo, and give it the priority & protection it needs. These cruel special interest groups need controlling, not the wild291789_400428663360054_2105335387_n animals.
The livestock industry grazes on public lands, at taxpayer expense, denuding & damaging water resources, native grasses, while demanding that the government slaughter native wild animals including wolves, bears, coyotes, mountain lions, & other innocent wildlife: a mindless hatred of so-called “predators.” Many of these species are in decline, despite the “pseudo-science” misinformation from the Game Dept.& other anti-wildlife interests.
Native wild animals are facing further declines as Climate Change worsens, affecting the health of remaining ecosystems, but the Game Dept. continues its antiquated “management” schemes to appease their special interest buddies.
Based upon the anti-wildlife mentality of the Game Dept. it does not belong in the 21st century. It must be abolished, if wildlife is to survive at all.

Two Bald Eagles Killed by Poisoned Meat Apparently Meant for Coyotes

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/05/28/two-bald-eagles-killed-by-poisoned-meat-apparently-meant-for-coyotes/?utm_source

May. 28, 2015 8:41pm           

Image source:

The two bald eagles — along with four coyotes, one opossum and three black vultures — were found dead in a field in Plaquemine, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

A pile of baited meat and bones with black granule spread across the top was also found in the field near the dead animals on April 9. Officials believe the poison was meant for coyotes, a press release about the incident said.

“Poison is an indiscriminate killer,” Sidney Charbonnet, Special Agent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said. “It is extremely poor practice for nuisance animal reduction, as it doesn’t just kill the target species, it can take out whole segments of the food chain with secondary poisonings, as well as potentially killing pet dogs or cats who may consume the bait or the poisoned wildlife.”

While the bald eagle is no longer considered an endangered species, it’s still federally protected.

Lessons From the Brief, Lonesome Life of Echo the Wolf

by Shelby Kinney-Lang

February 18, 2015 at 8:40
Photo from the Arrizona Game and Fish Department shows the wolf spotted on the Kaibab Plateau

Even true stories about wolves sound like fables.

Last October, an animal appearing to be a gray wolf showed up on the Kaibab Plateau in Arizona, just north of the Grand Canyon National Park. At first, no one was sure what, exactly, the “wolflike animal” was, but if, as suspected, it was a gray wolf that had migrated from the northern Rockies, it would have been the first time since the 1940s one had set foot in the Grand Canyon. Although there were once an estimated 2 million gray wolves across the continent, humans hunted and poisoned them to the point of oblivion. But thanks to federal protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), since the 1970s, gray wolf populations have slightly rebounded. After reintroducing 60 Canadian wolves in Yellowstone in 1995, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) estimate their population is now up to about 1,500 animals across Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming.

People reported sightings of the Grand Canyon creature through November and December and heard her howls across the forest. Scientists analyzed her poop and confirmed it: she was a gray wolf from the northern Rockies, 450 miles north, first collared near Cody, WY in January 2014. The itinerant, lonesome wolf seized the imagination of the nation and then the world. In a contest for school children, she was given the nickname “Echo.”

In late December, a hunter shot and killed a wolf near Beaver, Utah, thinking it was a coyote. (The state of Utah permits bounty hunting for coyotes, $50 a head.) Federal agencies refused to say whether the dead wolf was the same one from the Grand Canyon.

That is, until last week. Genetic testing by the FWS confirms Echo was shot dead.

More: http://magazine.good.is/articles/death-of-echo-the-grand-canyon-wolf