Bears in dens to be off-limits to Colorado hunters

http://classicarms.blogspot.com/b/post-preview?token=hjkPXy0BAAA.5au2TCVwfPLQ432PEhCOLg.apxsrY9mODwcWOxDyiBZ6Q&postId=5861930453729289218&type=POST

 

By Colorado Division of Wildlife
Real Aspen – January 6, 2011

The Colorado Wildlife Commission has directed the Division of Wildlife to draft a regulation that would prohibit the hunting of bears in their dens.

Commissioners were asked to consider adopting a regulation following an incident in the fall in which a hunter near Craig said he tracked a large black bear to a cave, entered the cave and killed the bear. Colorado hunting regulations currently do not prohibit hunting a bear in a den.

 

Regulations manager Brett Ackerman told the Commission Wednesday that den-hunting is apparently not common among bear hunters. However, he said the Division monitors issues which Colorado citizens may find do not meet public expectations of fair chase and this incident has provoked significant negative public feedback. Ackerman said numerous other states have banned den-hunting on the grounds that it does not meet public expectations of fair chase.

Commission Chairman Tim Glenn said the Wildlife Commission considers regulations regarding hunting ethics on a case-by-case basis.

"This is a perfect example of the kind of issue that the Wildlife Commission needs to look at," Glenn said. "We talked about the importance of fair chase for maintaining public trust in what we do. That is absolutely critical, so for what it's worth, I certainly think we do need to address this issue."

Several commissioners wondered if the issue could be addressed by closing bear hunting seasons earlier, before bears would be expected to enter hibernation. But others noted that weather, elevation and geography all factor in to the timing of bear denning, which varies across the state. As a result, the Commission directed staff to draft a regulation specifically aimed at prohibiting den-hunting.

Division staff will present a draft regulation for consideration by the Wildlife Commission at its March meeting in Denver. Commissioners could approve it in May.
The commissioners have approved the control of coyotes and other mammalian predators that are threatening to wipe out an important population of Gunnison sage-grouse that is centered on the Dan Noble State Wildlife Area. This fall, the Gunnison sage-grouse was designated a candidate for the endangered species list by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

 

Evidence collected by the Division showed that 75 percent of sage-grouse nests in the area failed and no young survived to adulthood. In addition, biologists recovered radio transmitters researchers placed on sage-grouse chicks inside coyote scat.

Commissioners approved the Division's plan to control coyotes and other nest predators for five months a year, for two years. Division biologists will monitor the impact of the program to determine if sage-grouse production increases.

"This is a difficult issue, one of the most contentious issues across the West," Remington said. "Colorado has a very high bar for when the Commission or Division recommends any kind of predator control. We don’t bring this lightly at all."

The commission also gave Division biologists authority to kill individual mountain lions if they begin to prey on a small band of desert bighorn sheep relocated to the Middle Dolores Canyon in mid-December.

This is the third time the Division has attempted to establish desert bighorn in the area. Two other attempts, in 1990 and 2001, did not result in the establishment of a new herd. Biologists believe that mountain lion predation played a primary role in the outcome.
Commissioners said that if a mountain lion kills more than one sheep, it should be removed. If a lion kills only one sheep, biologists would have the option to remove it. There has been no known mortality among the radio-collared sheep since their release three weeks ago.

The complete agenda for the January Wildlife Commission meeting can be found on the Division of Wildlife's web page at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeCommission/Archives/2011/Jan52011.htm
The Colorado Wildlife Commission is an 11-member board appointed by the governor.

chicagotribune.com

Ind. retools deer hunting plans that upset hunters

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-in-indianadeerhuntin,0,3903908,print.story
Associated Press
January 6, 2011
FORT WAYNE, Ind.

Indiana's wildlife agency has released a revised set of suggested changes to the state's deer-hunting rules two months after dropping its original proposal amid an outcry by hunters.

The News-Sentinel reports that the new suggestions would leave Indiana's firearms and muzzle-loading seasons for deer at 16 days. Some deer hunters were unhappy with the state Department of Natural Resources' proposals released last year that included scaling back those seasons to nine days.

The DNR withdrew those proposals in November. Its new proposal goes before the Indiana Natural Resources Commission on Jan. 11.

The agency is under pressure to cut the size of the state's deer population because the animals are eating crops and native plant life and are involved in a large number of collisions with cars.

Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Navarrette: Of guns and political reality

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/navarrette-of-guns-and-political-reality-1163653.html

Ruben Navarrette Jr., Washington Post Writers Group

Published: 6:51 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2011

Consistent with its creed that words speak louder than actions, the Obama administration likes to send officials down to Mexico so they can pose for photo ops and talk about how the United States is a full partner in the drug war.

Yeah, some partner. The White House should have listened to Johnny Cash, who crooned:
"When I was just a baby my mama told me, ‘Son, always be a good boy, don't ever play with guns.' "

It turns out that someone in the White House has been playing with guns — or rather, playing politics with guns.

According to The Washington Post, White House officials last summer scuttled a proposal that would have required gun-shop owners on the U.S. side of the border to report bulk sales of high-powered semiautomatic rifles — the preferred weapons of drug dealers.

These officials did so despite the fact that, weeks earlier, President Barack Obama had personally assured Mexican President Felipe Calderón that he would crack down on gun smuggling from the United States to Mexico. And they did so despite the fact that the proposal in question came from within the administration. The Justice Department had proposed the plan on behalf of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the federal law enforcement agency responsible for keeping guns away from the wrong people.

That's not even the whole enchilada. According to the Post, and to the senior law enforcement sources it interviewed, it was then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who killed the idea and for purely political reasons. It was strongly believed that the proposal would agitate the gun lobby, whose philosophy is that anyone should be able to buy any gun in any quantity at any time for any reason. Upsetting the National Rifle Association was not something that Emanuel was eager to do in the run-up to the midterm elections, sources said.

A spokesman for Emanuel, who is running for mayor of Chicago, denied the accusation. Ben LaBolt told the Post that Emanuel "did not stop the policy from being implemented" and offered assurances that Emanuel "has never taken a back seat to anyone when it comes to standing up to the NRA to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals."

Swell. But what about keeping the issue of the Mexican drug war, which has cost more than 30,000 lives, out of the clumsy hands of U.S. politicians?

The White House had no comment. Yet spokesman Reid Cherlin did offer assurances that "the president is committed to cracking down on violence on the Southwest border."

As he tries to put out a fire that Americans help fuel by purchasing a good deal of the world's illegal drugs and selling most of the guns and bullets that drug cartels use to kill Mexican soldiers, police and civilians, I'm sure Calderon could do with fewer assurances from his neighbor — and more assistance.

By the way, note the specific language coming from the White House, which insists that Obama is committed to cracking down on violence "on the Southwest border."

Is this the extent of it? The administration has to look beyond the border and help control violence within Mexico. If that spirals out of control, the robberies, kidnappings and murders won't stay south of the border. In fact, such violence is already spilling over into the U.S. and Mexican drug cartels are believed responsible. Nor will the violence be contained to the Southwest. It could soon be coming to a city or town near you.

That's the message that officials in the U.S. border states — California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico — have tried to get across to the White House since the Mexican drug war began. And no one is listening. Now we know one reason why. The problem isn't just indifference or inattention. There are those in government who are actually undermining the cause of border security and helping to destabilize Mexico for the sake of what happens in an election. Ironically, these politicos are just as afraid of the gun lobby as Mexicans are of the cartels.

Mexican dictator Porfirio Diaz was on to something a century ago when he supposedly lamented: "Poor Mexico, so far from God. And so close to the United States."
And, God help it, just as close to the American political system.
ruben@rubennavarrette.com

Animal Rights Group Threatens To Sue FWS If Wolves are Not Introduced Everywhere in USA

http://www.ammoland.com/2010/12/30/animal-rights-group-sue-to-introduced-everywhere-in-usa/

The CBD filed the notice after the FWS did not respond to an earlier petition filed by the group. In the petition, CBD requested that the FWS create a wolf recovery plan for the lower 48 states.  (AmmoLand Reported on this Plan to force Wolves on the USA in July of 2010)

Specifically, the Center requested that wolves be introduced or their populations bolstered in “at least seven interconnected regions” throughout the continental U.S. This would include: “1) the Pacific Northwest, including the Olympic and Cascade Mountains, 2) the Great Basin, including portions of California, Nevada, and Utah, 3) the southern Rocky Mountains, 4) the northern Rocky Mountains, 5) the Great Plains, 6) the Midwest, and 7) New England.” Basically all of the USA.
The FWS has 60 days to respond before the Center can file a lawsuit.

“Wolves in the Western Great Lakes and Northern Rocky Mountains regions have already far exceeded recovery goals and have become an increasing threat to people and domestic and wild animals,” said Rob Sexton, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation vice president for government affairs. “The reintroduction of more wolves would not be in anyone’s best interest.”

Earlier this year, the USSAF filed a petition with the Service requesting that it remove the wolves in the Western Great Lakes region from the Endangered Species List. This would return management to state wildlife agencies. Recently, the Service issued a press release stating that it intends to seek comments on a schedule that would allow it to delist wolves in the region by the end of 2011.

In the press release, the FWS noted that “wolves continue to exceed recovery goals and are no longer threatened with extinction.”

Previous efforts to delist recovered wolf populations have been reversed as a result of lawsuits filed by animal rights groups. In those cases, the reversals did not question nor overturn the findings by the FWS that wolves have met recovery plan objectives but dealt with technical legal issues.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Last week, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed a notice of intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) if the Service does not create a new nationwide wolf recovery plan.

Capital Ideas: Openly carrying handguns seems certain to be legal here soon

http://www.news-press.com/article/20110103/COLUMNISTS50/101030324/1002/NEWS01

By Paul Flemming • news-press.com Capital Bureau • January 3, 2011  

Robert Bork was in the process of having his name turned into a verb while his Supreme Court nomination went down in flames during that week in 1987.

The Florida Legislature was in the midst of a protracted special session to deal with the doomed services tax. On Oct. 1, the state's then-new conceal-carry law went into effect after it was passed earlier in the year. It was a major victory for the always-formidable gun lobby.

To get it done, however, the Legislature swept all existing gun laws out of the statute books, taking away from counties and cities the ability to have their own gun ordinances.

By erasing all those previous statutes, Attorney General Bob Butterworth and a state attorney in Miami by the name of Janet Reno figured an unintended consequence resulted. Floridians could openly carry handguns. Since 1893, Florida had prohibited that.

The consequence may be a matter of legal opinion, but the fact that it was unintended is beyond doubt. Rep. Ron Johnson, a Panama City Democrat who sponsored the conceal-carry legislation, said so.

"It's insane to consider that you'd want to reinstate this ability to carry guns on the streets," said state Sen. Jack Gordon, a Miami Beach Democrat.

Florida was, at the time, struggling to counteract tourist-scaring national media coverage of crime in the state, earning a Gunshine State tag in TV shorthand. In the week after the effective date of the conceal-carry law and the supposed end of prohibitions against open-carry, a number of activists walked around with holstered pistols. Lawmakers felt the need to act quickly, and did so. Gov. Bob Martinez signed the open-carry prohibition as soon as he got it.

Now, 23 years later, the National Rifle Association wants to undo it. And why not, with the stated support of incoming Gov. Rick Scott and huge GOP majorities in both the House and Senate? Florida is one of seven states with a full ban on open-carry. There are slim exceptions - gun owners can carry holstered weapons on their own land or while traveling to and from fishing and hunting.

State Sen. Greg Evers, a Republican from Baker, has introduced a bill to allow Florida handgun owners to carry their guns openly. The proposal also changes existing law to allow licensed owners to carry concealed guns on college campuses and at private schools.

Evers holds the seat last occupied by Sen. Durell Peaden. Back when Evers was in the House, he and Peaden were the pair that were the NRA's biggest supporters. They were sponsors of legislation that repealed the need to retreat - the Castle Doctrine law - allowed guns at work, created hunter-voter, and protected the conceal-carry fee trust fund. Marion Hammer is the one-time president of the National Rifle Association and the head of Unified Sportsmen of Florida. It was she who got conceal-carry passed in 1987. Hammer remains the most-feared and effective lobbying force in Tallahassee. Evers got Unified Sportsmen of Florida's endorsement of his Senate run back in January.

"He's worked hard carrying legislation for us and getting it passed," Hammer said at the time of the decisive Evers endorsement. Now in the Senate, Evers continues his hard work.

OpenCarry.org is a national advocacy group. Its members in Florida have an online petition - "it is an old right, not a new threat" - with 2,227 signatories. They hold regular meetups to openly carry guns. The next one is Saturday in seven cities around the state, including events in Fort Myers at the Centennial Park fishing pier. Online instructions include directions on getting a free fishing license and bringing along rods and reels to meet the exceptions allowing open-carry while on the way to angling.
Evers' bill is coming and its passage is all but assured. It's right out there in the open, and you know it's loaded

Deer hunting in Wisconsin: Is canary in the coal mine?

Patrick Durkin|For the State Journal | Posted: Saturday, January 1, 2011 8:29 pm
http://host.madison.com/sports/recreation/outdoors/article_aab5828a-1618-11e0-9e48-001cc4c03286.html?print=1

Warning signs are useless unless recognized as such.

A first-time visitor to an 1850s coal mine might have felt sorrow seeing a dead parakeet in its cage. A miner, meanwhile, would have glanced at it and dashed for the exit, knowing deadly gases would kill him next if he didn't act fast.

Likewise, folks in wildlife agencies and the hunting industry gasp, blink and request verification when told Wisconsin's greatest declines in deer hunting participation the past decade were among males 25 to 44 years old.

But yep, that's what Dr. Richelle Winkler at the University of Wisconsin's Applied Population Laboratory found while studying Wisconsin's trends.

Why is that so alarming? Because 25- to 44-year-old males have long been considered prime participants. They generally hunt the most, hunt the hardest, buy the most gear, shoot the most deer, father the most kids and train the most young hunters.

As long as their numbers grew, or their participation rates kept pace with their segment of the overall population, hunting would remain strong. In fact, even as Wisconsin's hunter numbers declined the past decade -- and the nation's declined the past quarter-century -- analysts often assumed the losses reflected the aging Baby Boomer generation.

That is, as Boomers passed age 50 and quit hunting as their interest or health slipped, they supposedly depopulated the hunting community. But it's not that easy. When Winkler studied Wisconsin's firearms hunting data from 2000 through '09, she didn't simply chart license sales for each sex/age group between 15 and 80.

No, she determined hunting participation rates for each age group, which meant dividing each year-group of deer hunters by its corresponding cohort in the state's overall population. This revealed Baby Boomers are in no hurry to quit hunting, but they aren't being replaced by equally large groups of diehards.

"Yes, there's a lot of Baby Boomers in Wisconsin, but a high percentage of them like to hunt," Winkler said in an interview. "They're also hunting later into life than their predecessors, probably because they have more money and are in better health. But there's fewer hunters in the age groups behind them, and their participation rates are lower, too."

Further, although 23 percent of males aged 25 to 44 statewide bought a gun deer license in 2009, participation rates were lowest in highly populated counties: Milwaukee (5.3 percent); Kenosha (9.2); Dane (12.3); and Racine (13).

In contrast, counties with high participation rates for males aged 25 to 44 in 2009 were rural, less-populated "outposts" such as Taylor (64 percent); Buffalo (62.2); and Price (61.6).

A decline has other repercussions. When analyzing 2004-2009 data, Winkler detected increased participation rates for 12-year-old hunters. This suggests the state's increased efforts to introduce youths to hunting might be working.

She said, however, that it's too soon to know if these programs will boost long-term participation. The 2004-2009 analysis showed a steep drop in participation rates for 14-, 15- and 16-year-olds; and even steeper declines in 35- to 45-year-olds.

"If your parents aren't hunting, you're not likely hunting, either," Winkler said.
Again, the numbers suggest hunting's challenges go beyond simple factors such as fewer deer sightings, unhappiness with hunting regulations or hunter-education requirements.

The declines also don't suggest a rising tide in anti-hunting influence. In fact, a recent Department of Natural Resources study found 25 percent of Wisconsinites identified themselves as hunters, even though DNR sales figures show only 14 percent of residents buy hunting licenses each year. Apparently these folks have hunted before or intend to hunt "next fall," but don't get around to it.

It's time we ask why their interest has waned.

“Mexico has some of the toughest gun-control laws”

From the Washington Post: “Mexico has some of the toughest gun-control laws in the world, a matter of pride for the nation’s citizens. Yet Mexico is awash in weapons.”

In 25 words, reporter William Booth has made the best argument against gun-control laws that could be made.

But worse than being awash in guns, Mexico is awash with gun killings. The homicide rate for Mexico is 15 per 100,000 residents — 14th highest in the world. Latin American countries dominate the top of the homicide list, so it is not just the drug trade.

The story went on to blame the Second Amendment in the United States for the proliferation of guns in Mexico, but never quite got around to Mexico’s standing as a murderous nation.

From the article: “Manzano said the wide gulf in gun laws between Mexico and the United States creates an almost irresistible arms-trafficking market for the powerful criminal organizations terrorizing wide swaths of his country.”

I have many times blamed Mexico’s illegal drug trade on American law-breakers who use these drugs, particularly marijuana which accounts for roughly two thirds of the Mexican drug trade.

The difference of course is that Americans legally sell guns where as the drug dealers are braeking the law on both sides of the border.

But if we want to stop the sale of guns to Mexicans, make gun dealers check IDs so they don’t sell to illegal immigrants.

Likewise, the fault for guns in Mexico lies with the Mexicans, not the Americans.