By: Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

It’s been nearly a year since I last wrote about the precipitous decline in New Jersey’s fisheries management capabilities, and the trend continues unabated.

Last year it was a free registry that prompted many people to examine the ruinous underfunding of the Bureau of Marine Fisheries (BMF) and this year it is the closure of the river herring fishery.

According to “The Economic Contribution of Marine Angler Expenditures in the United States”, a report prepared by NOAA Fisheries for the US Department of Commerce, marine recreational fishing in New Jersey is an industry that generates sales of $1.6 billion, provides  total tax revenue of $242 million and New Jersey tax revenue in excess of $100 million. In fact, fishing supports 10,000 jobs and provides the highest sales, income and employment of the Northeast region, as well as the highest tax revenues. Fishing also supports a tourism industry worth $16 billion.

Saltwater fishing is not only a recreational and economic engine for New Jersey; anglers and their disposable income are the source of essential conservation initiatives. It is the BMF that is responsible for the administration of marine fisheries management programs that include 127 miles of Atlantic coast and 83 miles of bayshore. The purpose of the bureau is to protect, conserve and enhance marine fisheries resources and their habitat.

With such an important and high profile contribution to New Jersey’s socioeconomic well-being and environmental health one would be forgiven for thinking that the BMF is a formidable competitor for state budget appropriations and is given priority for its potential to expand state revenues.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Incredibly, BMF operates on an appropriated budget that is less than $2 million while multiple coastal states have budgets that exceed $20 million. New Jersey currently ranks last in total State Marine funding per angler among every Atlantic Coast State. Since 1988, the Bureau’s appropriated budget has increased only by the inflation factor and not in real terms and at the same time federally mandated Fisheries Management Plans (FMPs) have increased from one (1) in 1988 to 22 in 2009.

In a recent New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection announcement of the shutdown of the river herring fishery blame was assigned to inadequate resources to prove that the fishery was sustainable to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. This deficit should concern us since it may be cause for future fishery closures given that New Jersey competes with Atlantic Coast States that are in a better position to justify coast-wide fisheries quotas.

Let the house burn

Metaphorically speaking, the tacit message sent by policy makers and legislators has been clear; let the house burn. The metaphorical house is the Bureau of Marine Fisheries. The arsonist in this figure of speech is the angling community that has lit the flame with apathy and fear.

My definition of the angling community includes the individual angler that has refused to hold our state government accountable for adequately funding BMF, and saltwater fishing organizations that have allowed the situation to dilapidate in order to avoid the conflict that will be created by addressing the problem – conflict that might cause a potential loss in membership rolls and associated fees. However, to let the house burn makes both government representatives and the angling community accomplices in negligence.

During the past decade attrition and the forfeiture of institutional knowledge has crippled BMF and it might take an equal number of years to reverse. While finding a solution to funding BMF may be difficult the first course of action is clear – it will take an honest assessment of the problem and the development of a viable solution. To accomplish the task requires angler involvement, leadership from saltwater organizations like the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance and all 23 NJOA (CF) council members including NJSFSC and JCAA, and the courage to do the right thing.

I think it is appropriate to end this commentary with a quote from Izaac Walton, renown for celebrating the art and spirit of fishing, “Rivers and the inhabitants of the watery elements are made for wise men to contemplate and for fools to pass by without consideration.”

Color The Green Movement Blue

Ant

About: Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects. Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

Not too long ago the prevailing wisdom of American surgeons was to prescribe bed confinement for most surgery patients.

It was ultimately discovered that the prescription of bed confinement not only caused life threatening complications it also delayed the physical recovery of patients.

The medical community soon replaced a “passive management” approach with treatments of early ambulation. As a result patient outcomes improved markedly.

Similar to the experience of American surgeons, there are some who have prescribed “passive management” for our forests over many decades and the effect has been equally injurious to forest health. The prevailing thought has kept woodlands from being managed by both humans and Mother Nature. We have learned that “passive management” is conspiring against forest health through degradation by aiding invasive plants and insects, and other wildlife to overtake forests.

Mother Nature manages forest health by making use of fire, wind, disease, insects, and other forces. Judicious doses of forest destruction are her way of regenerating forests and guaranteeing sustainability. Destruction and regeneration are performed in varying areas and at differing levels and intervals, which provides forest age classes that are well distributed. This in turn creates biodiversity – a foundation for forest vigor and the health of dependent flora and fauna.

Efficient disturbance created by fire, wind, disease, and insects not only provides for the long-term well-being of the forest and its dependent plant and wildlife communities but also reduces the susceptibility of the landscape, as a whole, to catastrophic damage. Disturbance is as crucial to forest health as early ambulation is to surgery patient health.

Although it appears counterintuitive, when humans prevent Mother Nature from managing forests by suppressing her natural forces we act to compromise her immune system. Passive management creates severe imbalances in the ecosystem, which allows insects, disease and deer, to intensify beyond the ability of nature to manage these forces efficiently. It causes overstocking of bio-fuels. The result is forest susceptibility to massive insect and disease outbreaks, devastating crown fires, and increased vulnerability to wind.

The evidence of a compromised immune system in New Jersey forests is found in overpopulations of deer preventing forest development by browsing seedlings and saplings, and ruinous infestation to the Pinelands by the southern pine beetle.

In the Highlands the hemlock woolly adelgid has infested eastern hemlock forest trees. Also, gypsy moths have caused defoliation, with oak forest types being the most affected. Over the years continued defoliation has made trees susceptible to insects and diseases that can eventually cause their death from other agents. As a consequence there might be a reduction of the larger mature oak species in certain areas.

The remedy for woodland restoration is in pending legislation. Bills A1954/A4358 provide for a forest harvest program on State-owned land. For nearly three years the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Forestry Association, New Jersey Audubon Society, New Jersey Farm Bureau, and Department of Environmental Protection have worked with legislative leadership provided by Senator Robert Smith and Assemblyman John McKeon to create a template for a forest harvest program. The result of this effort is also supported by the New Jersey Division Society of American Foresters and the New Jersey Tree Farm Program. Additionally, scores of forestry professionals and Ph.Ds. in the fields of wildlife ecology, forest biology, natural resource management, and agriculture have endorsed the legislation.

The bills provide a means to facilitate natural processes through forestry practices. These intentional, human-induced activities can initiate the recovery of ecosystem health, integrity, and sustainability. If we are going to continue to prevent Mother Nature from freely using her methods to manage forests it is our obligation to safely and responsibly replicate her formulas.

Bills S1954/A4358 legislate a Forest Stewardship Plan using environmental health standards as the basis for forest regeneration – it does not rely on economic standards. The Department of Environmental Protection and forestry professionals determine the types of methods needed to replicate those used by Mother Nature for purposes of environmental health.

Approval for forestry projects requires that water quality, soil erosion, and threatened and endangered species be considered before authorization is granted, and a Forest Stewardship Plan must be in place before any cutting is initiated. By-products can be sold and the revenue put into an account created by legislation that is used to finance continued forest stewardship practices. This approach treats each forest individually but takes into consideration its place as part of the overall environment.

The lack of forest management and fragmentation in New Jersey are partially to blame for the extirpation of several animals. At the same time we prioritized the recovery of the bald eagle we ignored the needs of animals such as bobwhite quail, red-headed woodpecker, ruffed grouse, pheasant, and more. We have prevented forest disturbance and as a result the integrity of the habitat needed for these species to survive has been severely compromised.

Some special interest groups have misrepresented bills S1954/A4358 as logging and distribution legislation. Their portrayal is not only untrue but unwittingly takes advantage of people’s lack of knowledge of forest biology and the specifics of the legislation, and plays on prejudices that enlist them as advocates of the status quo – a campaign that facilitates environmental damage.

S1954/A4358 provides a means to restore forest health and provides a source to fund the undertaking. The citizens of New Jersey are stakeholders in this matter and they deserve intellectual honesty and rational arguments as the basis for making informed decisions. Forests are critical to sustaining life on earth and we are therefore obligated to woodland stewardship.

Ant

Color the Green Movement Blue

About: Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects. Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Wildlife Land Trust is an Anti Hunting & Anti Conservation Group

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- If you have never heard of the Wildlife Land Trust, now could be a good time to take note.

This project is a subsidiary of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the country’s largest animal rights group. This anti-hunting trust reported control or ownership of more than 100 “sanctuaries” in 38 states.

Hunting and trapping are prohibited on these sites, many of which are donated to the HSUS. In fact, they boast that “recreational and commercial hunting and trapping will always be prohibited”.

Unfortunately, they garnered $5 million in donations last year alone for this trust.

Additional details, in case you want to determine if these anti-hunting properties are located near you, can be found at: www.wlt.org.

And in true HSUS fashion, you’ll spot a donation link if you go there.

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.org.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)-  After reading the New Jersey Sierra Club belief that a bear hunt is unwarranted and   unfounded  because it will not help to manage bears in the state of New Jersey, as well as similar comments from Sierra’s  allies in the animal rights community, it occurred to me that one has to overlook some very compelling evidence to the contrary in order to cultivate such faith.

Firstly, to reach the conclusion of the animal activist one must disagree with the findings of both a Superior Court and Appellate Court, each ruling that the State of New Jersey had put together a viable, comprehensive bear management plan. The two courts agreed that the hunt should proceed.

People would also need a deaf ear to avoid hearing the pervading wisdom of biologists, wildlife managers, and State agencies across America that argue persuasively in favor of hunting as one of several necessary bear management tools.

To agree with the conclusion of the animal activist one must close their eyes to the negative psychological effects associated with human-bear conflicts in residential, commercial, and camping situations. It requires an exceptional degree of callousness in order to ignore claims of economic loss caused by bears to agriculture related businesses. This insensitivity would also extend to financial harm that would befall employers and employees of hotels, camps, and other businesses as a result of lost tourism should a bear-human conflict result in injury or worse.

To agree with the animal activist requires one to show complete disregard for human safety. There would need to be ignorance about the ways black bears respond to periods of declining food sources, and a lack of understanding about the perils associated with bear habituation. These are reasons for increased bear-human conflicts. They may in fact be the cause of recent livestock and pet deaths by black bears as well as reports of physical encounters between bears and humans.

It is the goal of animal activists to promote the rights of bears but to do so at the expense of the public health is emotional thinking; a sign of difficulty in distinguishing between emotions and thoughts. It may be the reason for the sensational claims by animal activists that the bear hunt is a grand conspiracy of New Jersey’s Governor to curry favor with hunters, roll back environmental progress and turn over the Garden State to developers and polluters. It is a radical accusation regardless of its origin.

Emotional thinking may also be the spark that ignited a handful of activists to hold a bear hunt protest in Trenton. They lectured using spurious claims based on manipulated data and research. It even earned them the “Pants on Fire” award from PolitiFact, the truth watchdog arm of the Star-Ledger. It is a distinction awarded to those making ridiculous statements.

Color The Green Movement Blue

Finally, for the animal activist to believe that during a time of dwindling habitat and prolific bear population expansion that bear-human conflict can be managed solely by garbage containment and public education is to defy common sense and rely on wishful thinking. While limiting food sources and educating the public about black bears is useful it does nothing to address the primary reasons for increased bear-human conflicts; bear population expansion, loss of habitat, and habituation. Hunting is the tool that addresses these causes.

The New Jersey Outdoor Alliance believes that a black bear hunt is a responsible, pragmatic, environmentally sound, and a science-based method for bringing the black bear population in line with the cultural carrying capacity of available habitat, which is the goal of environmental stewards.

It also provides food for the hunter and his or her family while aversively conditioning bears, which provides a measure of lasting public safety.

About: Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects. Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Note: Below is an open letter from Rick Berman, owner of Berman and Company (a public affairs firm) and executive director of the Center for Consumer Freedom (which runs HumaneWatch).

Letters to the AmmoLand Editor: Got something on your mind? Let us know and you can see it here.

USA --(Ammoland.com)- USA Today once did a feature on me titled “Got a Nasty Fight? Here’s Your Man.” I was flattered, fancying myself a kind of bare-knuckle-brawling advocate for free-market issues.

But I realized last week that when it comes to “nasty,” I’m a novice. If you really want to learn something about how to wage a nasty (and I mean vicious) battle, look no further than Wayne Pacelle, CEO of The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

In the past his organization has hired people to stalk and photograph me at my home, hired unemployed journalists to write hit pieces about me, filed erroneous and failed ethics complaints, and he has made reams of false and libelous claims about my organization’s motives and our funders. But recently he’s taken his personal brand of intimidation and harassment to a whole new level.

Last week a new animal advocacy group called the Humane Society for Shelter Pets (HSSP) jumped onto the scene with a high-profile advertising campaign asking people to give to their local pet shelters instead of to national groups that give the impression of helping shelters, but don’t pass more than a pittance of the money along. I’m proud to say that my firm, Berman and Company, helped get this excellent group off the ground by providing substantial pro bono PR and operational services. The group is managed by two long-time animal advocates, Jeff Douglas, who has 30 years of experience promoting veterinarians, and Diana Culp, the former director of education for Humane Society of the United States who now works at a local animal shelter. The group’s Board of Directors is chaired by Debbie Price, Director of Education and Policy at one of the nation’s largest non-profit groups.

You’d think that this venerable team coming together in an organization devoted to encouraging funding local pet shelters wouldn’t be controversial. Unfortunately for the group, Wayne Pacelle does not like competition. He was apoplectic at the notion that people would forego giving to his behemoth organization in favor of local shelters and irate that a pet shelter group was pointing out that HSUS — despite more than 85 percent of the animals in their ads being dogs and cats — gives only 1 percent of the money it raises to local pet shelters.

Rather than respond directly to HSSP’s concerns, Mr. Pacelle has lashed out wildly against me, my firm, and the non-profits my firm manages, writing on his blog:

In forming his new group, [Rick Berman] hasn’t come out and said he likes cruelty. He’s hoping you forgot his efforts to defend sealing, puppy mills, and other forms of abuse. But today, by saying all animal welfare money should go to animal shelters, he’s saying that no money should go to combat puppy mills, animal fighting ventures, factory farms, captive hunts, the exotic animal trade, the fur trade, or other animal welfare problems.

First of all, HSSP isn’t my group. While my firm has in the past established a number of non-profits (most of which are 15-20 years old) to educate the public on free-market issues, this group is different. My firm simply wanted to help this shelter organization get off the ground and so we donated over 1,000 hours of our time to its efforts. Check its 990’s (publicly available tax returns). Wayne Pacelle is simply trying to change the conversation.

Also, no matter how many times Wayne Pacelle claims that I or any organization affiliated with me defends or is funded by cock fighters, etc., won’t make it true. I don’t defend animal abusers, but one of my firm’s managed non-profits does defend farmers. As far as I’m concerned, farmers are not animal abusers.

As has been said to Mr. Pacelle in the cease and desist that was sent to him and his Board of Directors, the allegations related to sealers, puppy millers, cock fighters, etc., are entirely false. Neither I, nor any Berman and Company-managed organization gets money from any of these groups, nor do we defend them. Mr. Pacelle is aware that he is making false and defamatory statements against me, my firm and its non-profit clients, and yet he continues to do so with a wanton disregard for the truth. And frankly, by doing so he puts HSUS in legal peril. (Ironically, the only known animal abuser in the mix here is actually a partner of Pacelle and HSUS: Convicted dogfighting kingpin Michael Vick. Pacelle has even said that Vick “would do a good job as a pet owner.”)

Finally, not I, nor any of the organizations managed by my firm have ever said that “no money should go to combat puppy mills, animal fighting ventures, factory farms, captive hunts, the exotic animal trade, the fur trade, or other animal welfare problems.” What we are saying is that donors should be clear about where their money is going. If people want to support HSUS’s animal-rights (as distinct from animal-welfare), anti-meat agenda, then by all means do so.

But 71 percent of the public believes that HSUS is an umbrella group for local shelters and HSUS actively perpetuates this confusion by running emotionally manipulative advertising campaigns in which 85 percent of the images are of dogs and cats. HSUS is using its largess to purposefully confuse people about what it does and where its money goes. I thought it was worth my firm’s time to donate our help to an organization that would set the record straight about HSUS and encourage people to give local. That type of “record setting” is what this firm does every day over a wide range of issues.

This new organization does not collect money from the public and, like I said, much of my firm’s work has been pro bono. So all of Wayne’s wailing that there is some personal enrichment on my end is bogus. Any inquiry from the IRS about our work has been answered completely and allowed us to remain in good standing.

Since HSSP launched, it has been welcomed warmly by the shelter community, with over 500 shelters signing on immediately to the HSSP mission of educating the public. Pacelle on the other hand has gone nuclear to keep people from hearing the truth about HSUS’s deceptive advertising campaign.

In fact, HSUS has done so many terrible things in the last week that I have to enumerate them in bullet format:

• HSUS is harassing and intimidating HSSP’s co-director Didi Culp at her place of work. Because she used to work for them, they are most threatened by what she has to say. They have gone so far as to file baseless ethics complaints against her in order to intimidate her into silence.
• HSUS is reaching out to its network of animal rights bloggers to repeat the false and defamatory claims about me across the internet, even going so far as to use information about my children and family. These bloggers are also encouraging people to file false claims against HSSP with the Federal Trade Commission.
• HSUS and their animal rights minions have started several websites attacking me and people on my staff, both current and former.
• Following the HSSP launch, one of the websites managed by my firm was mysteriously hacked and modified to include a virus. I can’t say for certain that this is HSUS or someone in the broader animal rights community, but it’s a mighty coincidence.
• Pacelle has referred to me publicly as a “con man” and the “king of charity fraud” among other libelous statements. Furthermore, he keeps referring to me as a tobacco lobbyist and alleging that I tell people that “smoking is fine,” despite knowing full well that I haven’t done any work on tobacco issues in over a decade—and when I did it was related to retaining separated smoking sections in restaurants. I never told anyone that “smoking is fine” with regard to the health impact.
• Pacelle’s favorite scurrilous claim is that I pocket the “lion’s share” of “90 percent of funds that wash through [my] other misnamed ‘charities.’” First of all, Mr. Pacelle is getting cute with the word “charities” here. The organizations that Berman and Company manages are non-profit groups and trade associations that educate the public about various issues. This is a typical Wayne Pacelle straw man. Second, Berman and Company doesn’t “wash” the money, it bills the money for services rendered. And it’s nonsense that the “lion’s share” goes to me. Like any business, the money goes to pay the staff’s salaries, keep the lights on, pay for advertising, etc…

And that’s Wayne Pacelle’s whole game. Rather than fight about the facts or ideas, he strips every position I’ve ever taken of its nuance and presents it out of context. So when he says that I “defend drunk driving” and “fight MADD,” the truth is that the Berman and Company-managed American Beverage Institute (ABI) has legitimate disagreements with MADD over policy issues. And on many of those issues, the founder of MADD—who I worked with for years—is in agreement with ABI.

Unfortunately for Wayne, people will be distracted by this personal attack approach for only so long. Eventually he’ll have to answer for his organization’s dishonest advertising and fundraising campaigns and explain to the American public why he gets them to give HSUS money with pictures of sad dogs and cats, but gives 1 penny on the dollar to local shelters. And if I were him, I would stop telling reporters that HSUS’s TV ads contain a disclaimer that HSUS isn’t associated with local pet shelters. We looked at all of their ads over the past two years, and over 90 percent of them don’t have a disclaimer on them. And the ones that do require a magnifying glass to understand.

The Humane Society for Shelter Pets is an exciting new organization with important goals. At the end of the day, this new group is going to succeed in getting the word out about the importance of giving to your local shelter and the American public is going to realize that HSUS is altogether different from local humane societies—despite its best efforts at brand confusion. So no matter how nasty Wayne and HSUS get, they won’t stop me from being proud of my contribution to this excellent new organization and he won’t be able to stop its leadership from excelling. And that’s all that matters.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)- The title of this article is certain to be controversial. But, I  think that consideration of controversial issues helps us to become more  informed and makes us engaged and active citizens.

After all, it is the  mission of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance to educate conservationists so that  they can be a catalyst for advancing environmental health through policy and  legislation.

Perhaps, this controversial topic may have the result of moving us  towards this end.

The philosophers tell us to  have compassion for negative people, although I admit it is often a test of my own temperament. But, as I find it unpleasant to be around negative people I am struck by the fact that it must be far more unpleasant for the negative person,  since they are forever bound to their own torment.

Negative people are troubled souls. They view themselves as victims of all types of imagined enemies, and those displaying the most bluster and belligerence usually represent the most fear-filled.  After all, isn’t anger a manifestation of fear and therefore evidence of one’s vulnerabilities?

I include animal rights activists as negative people because they are not content to live their lives at peace with their world view, but instead work as despots to control those with differing ideas and values. Special targets of their tyranny are people that fish and hunt. It is a negativity that has provoked animal rights activists to behave in unscrupulous ways and without a sense of personal boundaries.

For example, I recently read  a letter from an animal rights activist attempting to fool an unsuspecting public with a harebrained theory that scientific game management techniques (harvesting/hunting game) actually increases game  populations. Her theory, simply stated, is that if 50 deer are harvested from a population of 100, the deer will notice 50 deer are departed and will produce a biological phenomenon that will result in multiples of the number of fawns than  would have been born (e.g. 4 fawn births, instead of the 2 fawn births  considered normal).

In an attempt to give  gravity to her silly premise she invented an authoritative sounding title to place under her name: “Wildlife Policy Specialist.” Now, the woman has no college education in the fields of animal biology or wildlife management, nor  has she ever noted any official wildlife training. She even omitted from her letter that she is a representative of an animal rights organization.

Similarly, there is another  person representing an animal rights organization that promotes himself as an “Inspector.” 

Is there an official and legitimate profession which certifies animal rights inspectors? Does this profession have any official oversight? What does an animal rights Inspector inspect?

What is the depth of vulnerability that people feel that leads them to deceive others with imaginary importance and make believe titles, such as Wildlife Policy Specialist and Inspector?

In another attempt to fool the public, the same organization that the woman and man belong to went to great lengths to have a Ph.D promote a similarly outlandish game management theory. They advanced the Ph.D’s theory and referred to him as an expert, but omitted that his field of expertise is chemistry and not biology or game management. His research was never made legitimate by peer review (peer review is when a community of experts in a narrowly defined and relevant field perform an impartial review). It is similar to a podiatrist using his credentials as Ph.D to represent an expertise related to the workings of the heart.

Who would rely on a foot doctor for diseases related to the heart? How low is one’s self image that they would substitute their agenda for the truth?

In another example, the person heading the same animal rights organization was so desperate that she took reckless actions which are noted by the Anti-Defamation League (the nation’s premier civil rights/human relations agency) on its website under the heading “Extremism in America: Eco-terrorism?” The Anti-Defamation  League states that the woman and her organization speak on behalf of the actions of extreme and militant animal rights groups that the FBI considers serious terrorist threats.

It has also been reported that people in her organization acted as brokers to fund the freeing of six animal extremists from jail, each convicted of a campaign to terrorize the employees of a New Jersey based company and its shareholders. In fact, Governor Chris Christie, then US Attorney in charge of the case, stated “…The verdict reveals these individuals for what they really were: thugs who went far beyond protected speech and lawful protest to engage in and incite intimidation, harassment and violence.”

How negative is one’s self image that it would cause them to abandon critical thinking and aid convicted felons?

Perhaps the most poignant example of negativity exhibited by animal rights activists is found while observing everyday life: The angler, hunter, or conservationist rarely protest the animal rights activist for their values or preferences.

Conversely, the animal rights activist makes an industry of harassing and demonstrating against the angler, hunter, and conservationist. What depth of negativity causes people to overtly act with hostility and domination towards people with differing views?

A wise person wrote that if we want others to be happy we must practice compassion, and if we want to be happy we must practice compassion. If so, it makes good sense for us to practice compassion for animal rights activists.

More information about animal rights activism and eco-terrorism can be found at the following link:     http://www.njoutdooralliance.org/eco/terrorism.html

Color The Green Movement Blue

About:
Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects. Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

Ant is a public speaker on the topic of conservation and the ways  anglers and hunters can become involved in shaping outdoors releated legislative policy. He has authored three books on conservation, hunting and the great outdoors including the controversial and highly regarded, “Color The Green Movement Blue” (available as ebook). His other books include; “Take Me on Safari: A Family Affair” (available as ebook) and  “The New Age Hunter”. He also wrote the children’s book “Where is Wildbeary?”

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- While hunting can have unexpected dangers such as tripping over roots and rocks as you trek, the real dangers facing hunters these days is the animal rights lobby who are trying to stop hunting and trapping all together.

While you’ve been hunting and scouting for deer or other animals, these groups have been scheming, developing, and working to pass legislation, and to win political favors and public opinion, to prevent you from ever hunting again.

Those groups are:

• The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is a powerhouse fund-raising machine that has been pushing through dog breeder bills in many states in back door efforts to make it harder for you to buy your next bird dog, fox hound, squirrel dog or other hunting breed. So called “puppy mill” bills affect far more than puppies. A good example that these bills hamper dog ownership and increase fees for all dog owners everywhere can be found in a Missouri bill that began as a “puppy mill” bill pushed by HSUS. When the bill was passed, the wording and regulations rightfully covered animal shelters owned and operated by nonprofits—one of the biggest places in any state where puppies are housed in cages. HSUS and other groups complained the new fees were expensive, hampered dog ownership, and were too burdensome to keep track of. Now, they want those same fees and restrictive regulations inflicted on hunters who breed and sell dogs. HSUS has also run undercover programs to investigate high-fenced hunting operations, and it vehemently opposes dove hunts and polar bear imports.
• People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is a group well-known for having nearly naked models parade around and make egregious statements about fur, fishing, whales, meat, and hunting. The group opposes all hunting and makes many attempts to halt hunting, fishing, trapping and everything but eating vegetables.
• Defenders of Wildlife works to protect the “pretty” animals. The group uses stunning photographs of bears, wolves, and lynxes to invite the public to join them to protect these species they declare to be “threatened or endangered”. Then, however, those donated dollars are used to file frivolous lawsuits to stop hunting. In fact, some species this group touts as threatened or endangered are not on any list.
• Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) was formed for the purpose of filing frivolous lawsuits against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the guise of protecting the sanctity of the Endangered Species Act. According to the CBD, nearly 800 plants and animals should be added to the lengthy endangered or threatened species list. These add-to-the-list requests tie up valuable man-hours and dollars of the USFWS and prevent the agency from doing research and improvements on habitat that help all wildlife populations. This hurts hunting and all wildlife in the United States.

This fall when you think about the possible dangers of hunting and how to protect yourself and your family, joining the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance as a Sentry could be the best protection.

By being a Sentry —at no cost to you— and staying informed on attempts to stop hunting, you will be better prepared to hunt again in the future. Help us spread the word about the dangers to all hunting.

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.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has formally announced that it is considering issuing an incidental take permit to Maine’s Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.

This allows for the accidental take of a small number of Canada lynx in traps set by sportsmen for other legal species.

This is the latest step in a long battle against anti-trapping groups who have attempted to use the Canada lynx’s status as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to ban trapping in the state.

In 2006 and 2008, anti-trapping groups sued the state seeking to stop Maine’s trapping season by claiming that the protected Canada lynx might accidentally be caught by a trapper while attempting to trap other legal species.

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF), along with the Maine Trappers’ Association, Fur Takers of America, National Trappers’ Association, and several individual sportsmen, intervened in the cases, ultimately winning a landmark victory for trapping in the state. At the same time, this sets a legal precedent nationally that makes it harder for antis to use the ESA to try and ban hunting, fishing, or trapping.

An incidental take permit issued by the USFWS would help shield the state from similar lawsuits seeking to shut down trapping. The permit would allow the state, and licensed trappers, to accidentally trap a small number of Canada lynx, when trapping for other legal species, without being in violation of the ESA. Essentially, the permit would recognize that a few accidentally caught Canada lynx do not threaten the species’ ability to survive and recover.

Without the permit, anytime a Canada lynx is accidentally caught in a trap, it is a violation of the ESA by the trapper, even if the animal is released unharmed. To be clear, the permit does not allow for the intentional trapping of Canada lynx but would act to protect the state and trappers who might accidentally trap one while trapping for other legal species. The permit would also include a cap on the total number of lynx that could be accidentally trapped.

The USFWS will seek and review public comments before making a final decision on the incidental take permit. It can then choose to approve the permit as written, deny the permit, or approve the permit with additional restrictions on trapping within the state.

“Maine has already enacted strict rules and reporting requirements for trappers in the state to help ensure that Canada lynx are not accidentally caught in traps,” said Jeremy Rine, USSAF associate director of state services. “

We hope that the Fish and Wildlife Service will grant Maine’s request for the incidental take permit without any new, unnecessary restrictions on trappers.”

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.org.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)-  Many outdoorsmen and outdoorswomen have spent more than 4 years trying to do the “right thing” and have commercial fixed gear removed from the artificial reefs.

Why do I call removing fixed gear the “right thing”? Because recreational anglers are being deterred  from using the reefs they are paying to build and maintain by a commercial fishing industry that pays nothing. Because Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, and New York have removed fixed gear in order to do the right thing. Because Delaware is now in the process of removing fixed gear in order to do the right thing.

Because the Federal government stopped funding New Jersey’s Reef Program  because it believes that the State is not doing the right thing. Because a former DEP Commissioner (and now Administrator of EPA) and Director of Fish and Wildlife stated in a letter that to remove fixed gear from the reefs is to do the right thing. Because more than 50 assemblypersons and 34 senators (70% of our legislators) have supported  removing fixed gear from the reefs in order to do the right thing.

Removing fixed gear from the reefs is the “right thing” because the commercial fishing industry has annexed a public resource for purposes of profit and uses a portion of the profits to continue the practice of deterring access to the rightful owners of the reefs – the recreational anglers that pay to build and maintain them.

For those of you that may not know, during the past 4 years representatives from the NJOA have  met with the two DEP Commissioners, numerous legislators, two Governors and members of their administrations, environmental counselors and policy personnel, and many others, and we have asked them to do the right thing. We have held a rally and participated in three demonstrations in support of doing the right thing.

No one has told us that doing the right thing would be easy and we know that progress is sometimes measured in decades – not days or years. It took Einstein 10 years to arrive at the simply looking equation E=MC2. His commitment was as important to solving the riddle as his intellect. He resisted the temptation to accept an incomplete answer. He was true to the integrity of his mission.

Fortunately, our pursuit is not as complicated as exposing the secrets of the universe but is instead removing commercial gear – all fixed gear – from the artificial reefs. Our mission is to correct an injustice; to do the “right thing”.  We don’t need the smarts of Einstein to accomplish our mission; just his integrity and commitment. Each of you has the NJOA’s commitment to continue to pursue all avenues available to us to do the right thing and get fixed gear removed from the reefs, regardless of how  long it may take. We ask that you continue to work with us.

So, even if you have done so already, contact Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (973) 395-1166, and Assemblyman Nelson Albano (609) 465-0700, and ask that they do the right thing and allow Bill A1152  (legislation that prohibits the use of certain fishing gear on artificial reefs) to be heard . Contact Bob Martin, Commissioner, Department of Environmental Protection, (609) 292-2885, and ask him to do the right thing and create a regulation that will restore Federal Aid to New Jersey’s Reef Program.

 Finally, please forward this to others and ask that they join us in pursuit of the “right thing”.  

As a reminder, General Elections are held in New Jersey on Tuesday, November 8, 2011.

Color The Green Movement Blue

About:
Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects. Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Ant is a public speaker on the topic of conservation and the ways  anglers and hunters can become involved in shaping outdoors releated legislative policy. He has authored three books on conservation, hunting and the great outdoors including the controversial and highly regarded, “Color The Green Movement Blue” (available as ebook). His other books include; “Take Me on Safari: A Family Affair” (available as ebook) and  “The New Age Hunter”. He also wrote the children’s book “Where is Wildbeary?”

Anthony P Mauro, Sr

Ant is available to speak at your club and to do book signings.  ~ Contact him: apmaurosr@njoutdooralliance.org

NRA - ILA

FAIRFAX, Va. --(Ammoland.com)- In a major legal victory, a federal judge has ruled in favor of the National Rifle Association and the federal Bureau of Land Management, throwing a lawsuit filed by an environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), out of U.S. District Court in Phoenix, Ariz.

The case is Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Safari Club International had joined the case as a “friend of the court” and assisted NRA with its successful efforts.

CBD’s lawsuit, filed on Jan. 27, 2009, alleged that the BLM and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were illegally mismanaging federal lands in Arizona. The lawsuit challenged the allowance of off road vehicles, construction of roads, inadequate protection of desert tortoises, and inadequate protection of California condors.

Among other things, the suit sought to force BLM to ban the use of lead ammunition for hunting in the Arizona Strip, a rugged area in the northwest corner of the state renowned for great hunting. CBD contended California condors in Arizona and elsewhere were being poisoned from scavenging game that was shot by hunters using lead shot or bullets. But the record plainly shows that California condors were reintroduced to this area of Arizona based on express promises by FWS and other agencies that the reintroduction would not affect hunting.

Among other things, the Court ruled that CBD had waived its claims concerning BLM’s failure to assess the alleged impact of lead ammunition on condors because “[i]t did not argue that BLM was required to include the potential effects of lead ammunition in [BLM's] analysis of environmental impacts.”

Even before the ruling, NRA’s intervention in the case on behalf of its members had already resulted in several legal victories.

A Jan. 13, 2010 court ruling granting NRA’s motion to intervene was recently published in the official Federal Rules Decision Reporter. The Federal Rules Decisions Reporter is a compendium of selected United States district court rulings that specifically interpret and apply the Federal Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure.

Publication of this court ruling is important to hunters and NRA members because it sets legal precedent by confirming that there is a “significantly protectable interest” in hunting that can justify intervention by hunter’s rights groups like NRA in the increasing number of lawsuits filed by so-called environmental groups against state and federal natural resource, game and land management agencies.

To see key documents filed in this case, visit http://michellawyers.com/cbdvblm.

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

Hornady Presents Boone and Crockett Club from Boone and Crockett Club on Vimeo.

Boone and Crockett Club

MISSOULA, Mont.--(Ammoland.com)- Lead in all its forms has become a four-letter word in our society.

Of late it has become a tool for environmentalist, animal activist and anti-hunting and fishing groups – a tool with dangerous consequences, in some ways maybe more so than the metal itself.

If there ever was an elephant in the room that could affect how we hunt, shoot, and fish from here on out, this is it.

Environmental groups are now claiming that wildlife on a large scale are being impacted by lead poisoning, either by ingesting spent lead, or in the case of large raptors and scavengers, ingesting lead fragments from consuming gut piles or unrecovered game.

They further claim a human heath risk from eating wild game. They make no secret; they are pushing for a complete ban on the use of lead in all ammunition and fishing tackle.

The facts surrounding this issue are complex and the ramifications of a complete ban far reaching.

Lead is the easiest and least expensive metal to form into bullets, birdshot, and sinkers. As such lead is at the foundation of the traditional outdoor actives of hunting and fishing.

All forms of hunting with a firearm, plus recreational, law enforcement, and military shooting involve lead ammunition. In fishing lead is used in weights, sinkers, and jig heads, and in flyfishing, in split shot and twist-ons.

Because lead is so widely used in the products that support these activities, two issues emerge – funding for wildlife conservation and management, and the low cost participation in these activities by young hunters, shooters, and anglers.

It’s no secret that sportsmen and women, shooters and anglers pay for the vast majority of wildlife conservation and management through the excise taxes on equipment purchases, including ammunition. It is also no secret that if equipment manufactures are forced to use alternative metals that cost more to source and produce into product, the cost of these products has to go up, and in some cases go up substantially.

Ramification #1 is future conservation funding – as costs go up participation goes down, purchases go down and excise taxes go down. Ramification #2 is the loss of inexpensive ammunition for young shooters getting into shooting or hunting. The last thing conservation, our wildlife, and hunting and fishing needs is another obstacle keeping young people for getting active outdoors.

Shots Fired
On August 3rd, 2010 environmental groups petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue a complete ban under the Toxic Substance Control Act.

Congress had specifically excluded ammunition from this legislation and the EPA rejected the petition on the grounds it did not have the authority for such a ban.

Subsequently, environmental groups filed suit against the EPA claiming they do have authority to ban lead ammunition. Those behind this petition would have us believe that any amount of lead deposited into the environment is a threat to wildlife and humans.

Real Science
Lead is a naturally occurring element in the environment and has no functional or beneficial role in biological systems. Based on our knowledge of its toxicity, lead has been banned in paint, toys, and gasoline – gasoline being of the biggest concern in transfer to humans.

Over concern for waterfowl eating spent lead pellets and the threat of lawsuits by environmental groups, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service banned lead in all waterfowl hunting in 1991. The ban followed from research documentating the accumulation of lead shot in wetland habitats that were heavily used by waterfowl hunters, and other studies reporting mortality in bottom-feeding waterfowl following the ingestion of lead pellets while foraging.

Depending on a range of factors lead can be toxic to some wildlife, but it is primarily an issue with birds. This is because birds have gizzards, which hold on to and grind up food, rather than pass it quickly through their systems. The right type of lead can also be a toxic to humans depending on the amount consumed, over certain duration of time, individual body size, and age.

Proponents of the ban cite the impacts on individual raptors, such as Bald Eagles even though raptor populations are increasing across North America and the Bald Eagle was removed from the Endangered Species list as recently as 2007.

Understanding this issue and sorting fact from fiction is difficult because of all the variables. It is being made even more difficult by groups asking for more science. Many studies have already been conducted and a technical review of existing scientific literature on the subject was completed by The Wildlife Society, the premier professional organization for wildlife science and management, in collaboration with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. These studies show that potential ingestion rates and health impacts vary by species, age, body size, amount consumed, method ingested, and geographic area.

Some have measured the amounts and distributions of lead fragments found in carcasses and gut piles. We know that ingestion rates are related to lead concentration in the specific environments where animals may possibly ingest pellets or fragments while feeding. On the extremely low-hazard end are individual bullets fired in the field. On the high side is where shot-shell pellets concentrate where shooters regularly use the same locations, like dove fields and trap and skeet ranges.

Other than condors there is no evidence lead bullets are a serious conservation issue at the population level – meaning an entire group of one species living in a certain area.

With the endangered California condor, every death is significant and so banning the use of lead ammunition in condor range made sense and sportsmen have supported this effort.

Considering human health, we have to realize that the lead in gasoline was emitted into the air and settled everywhere in our environment and that is very different from how hunters and anglers are depositing lead. The question is not whether lead fragments or pellets can be found in wild game. The question is can this be a source of lead toxicity for humans?

The only reported human health issue from ingested lead ammunition comes from a study of subsistence hunters in Northern Canada that ate lead-harvested wild game in high quantities every day.

The punch line is, if there is more science needed it would on be at the population level for a specific species in a specific area.

The real question with lead is should our policy- makers take a sledge-hammer approach to an issue science says is tightly limited to certain populations and situations?

Bottom Line
The tools used for centuries by hunters, shooters, and anglers are in the crosshairs of environmentalists whose agenda appears to be mixed. Some would say theirs is a real concern for wildlife and humans. Others contend the plot to ban all lead is just another attempt to chop the legs out from under sportsmen and the user-pay model of wildlife conservation.

A blanket ban on all lead ammunition and in fishing tackle is clearly overreaching, especially when it includes lead that has no chance of being deposited in the environment, like indoor facilities for shooters, self-defense and law enforcement training. This is not a one-size fits all issue. The science simply isn’t there to support a human health issue. As for wildlife, in terms of the health of populations and ecosystem function there may be the need for localized restrictions, but those decisions are best left to local managers, not judges. Our wildlife professionals need to clearly articulate to policy-makers what is a conservation issue requiring drastic regulatory changes and what is a non-issue, or a personal choice based on a desire to not kill or sicken individual birds.

S. 838
After the environmental groups filed suit a Bill was introduced to Congress supported by sportsmen’s organizations that would amend the Toxics Substance Control Act to clarify the jurisdiction of the EPA. The S. 838: Hunting, Fishing, and Recreational

Shooting Protection Act is now being discussed and considered in committees. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-838

Where this issue will land is yet to be seen. What we do know is that sportsmen care about wildlife, all wildlife, and have proven so time and again. If or where real science, not advocacy called science or agenda-based science, but real science that holds up to scrutiny demonstrates a population impact and the use of non-lead products is warranted, sportsmen will do their part.

The best thing you can do now is stay informed and let yourself be heard, especially regarding the proposed Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act.

About the Boone and Crockett Club:
Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair-chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship. Member accomplishments include enlarging and protecting Yellowstone and establishing Glacier and Denali national parks, founding the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System, fostering the Pittman-Robertson and Lacey Acts, creating the Federal Duck Stamp program, and developing the cornerstones of modern game laws. The Boone and Crockett Club is headquartered in Missoula, Montana.

Traditional Lead Shot Shells Under Attack

Boone and Crockett Club

MISSOULA, Mont.--(Ammoland.com)- Anti-hunting and anti-fishing interests are currently litigating against the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to force the EPA to expand its Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) authority in order to regulate traditional ammunition and recreational fishing tackle.

When the Act was established in 1976 Congress explicitly excluded from regulation any article subject to excise taxes — including pistols, revolvers, firearms, shells and cartridges.

The EPA has already once declined a petition that asked the agency to prohibit the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of lead for shot, bullets, and fishing sinkers because it did not have the authority to do so under the TSCA.

Anti-hunting and anti-fishing interests assert the EPA does have the authority and that a lead ban is necessary to address the significant impacts to wildlife populations that are resulting from traditional tackle and ammunition.

The assertions made by the petitioning groups lack credible scientific foundation, especially when seeking a blanket ban on all lead use. Outside of the California condor, where every death is significant, there is no evidence of a lead crisis at the population level – an entire group of one species living in a specific area.

The biggest threat of lead in wildlife is with birds that have gizzards, which hold on to and grind up food, rather than pass it quickly through their systems.

Proponents of the ban cite the impacts on individual raptors, such as Bald Eagles even though raptor populations are increasing across North America and the Bald Eagle was removed from the Endangered Species list as recently as 2007.

If a complete ban on lead in ammunition where achieved it would have a dramatic negative impact, because of the increased cost of alternative metals, on the cost of ammunition, and therefore participation in hunting and recreational shooting, which in turn is the engine that drives most of the funding for conservation and wildlife management through the excise taxes paid on the purchases of ammunition.

Sportsmen groups have rallied to push forward the introduction of the Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act (S.838 & H.R. 1558), which will amend TSCA in a manner that serves to protect and enhance our hunting, recreational shooting and recreational fishing heritage while concurrently facilitating the important benefits that the hunting, shooting and recreational fishing industries contribute to the betterment of our nation’s economy and treasured natural resources.

The Act is now being discussed and considered in committees. To learn more: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-838

About the Boone and Crockett Club:
Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair-chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship. Member accomplishments include enlarging and protecting Yellowstone and establishing Glacier and Denali national parks, founding the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System, fostering the Pittman-Robertson and Lacey Acts, creating the Federal Duck Stamp program, and developing the cornerstones of modern game laws. The Boone and Crockett Club is headquartered in Missoula, Montana.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)-  In the story of David and Goliath the Philistine army gathered for war against Israel.

The two armies were positioned on opposite sides of a steep valley. The Philistine’s had a daunting weapon; a gigantic warrior measuring over nine feet tall and clad in full armor.

They would send the giant, named Goliath, out each day to mock the Israelites and challenge them to fight. This act of provocation and intimidation continued until a volunteer chose to fight the imposing tyrant.

The challenger was named David; a young teenager dressed in a simple tunic, and armed only with a slingshot and stones. In spite of overwhelming odds David remained fearless – he was inspired by an honest cause.

As Goliath approached David he became enraged by the boy’s defiance. David searched for a hole in the giant’s armor, then secured the stone and slung it at an opening near Goliath’s forehead. The giant’s legs buckled and he fell lifeless to the ground.

Today, the recreational anglers of New Jersey find themselves in a situation similar to David. And, it is state government that has become giant-like through the influence of commercial fishing interests. The state government of NJ is the Goliath that intimidates the everyman and acts to keep him from the ocean reefs for which he has paid. Apparently it is a state government that believes it is unaccountable to its people.

David and Goliath

It is the recreational angler that funds the ocean reefs, not the commercial fishing industry. Recreational anglers pay a federal excise tax on sport fishing tackle and gear. These tax monies are given back to states as Federal Aid, and are designated to be used for management and restoration of fish having material value in connection with sport or recreation in the marine and/or fresh waters of the United States.

To be eligible to receive Federal Aid, states are required to assent to federal law and pass laws for the conservation of fish which include a prohibition against the diversion of license fees for any other purpose than the administration of the state fish department. With respect to reefs, they were designed for use by the general public and built with Federal Sport Fish Restoration funds. The appropriate gear for use on  ocean reefs is inefficient gear; hook and line, and spear. Hook and line can be used by recreational or commercial fishermen.

In April of this year, the federal government terminated funding to New Jersey’s Reef Program because NJ state government allows excessive traps, pots and lines to restrict access to the reefs by anglers and divers. State government built the reefs with money from recreational anglers and with the same purpose as a public park; everyone is welcome as long as they participate in activities for which the park was  designed. A park is designed for public recreation, not a place for commercial fishing enterprises to profit.

In fact, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, and New York have all complied with the federal government and have removed traps and pots from their ocean reefs. Delaware has now initiated steps to do the same. Only New Jersey state government behaves as Goliath. Even as New Jersey enacted the toughest anti-bullying law in the country it ignores its own bullying behavior. The New Jersey Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee (A&NRC) refuses to allow a bill to be heard that will bring New Jersey into compliance with the law for federal aid and allow conflict-free access to reefs.

To date, New Jersey state government has refused to follow the lead of the other states along the Atlantic seaboard and remove traps, pots, and lines from the ocean reefs. The A&NRC refuses to hear the bill: 1. Even though the Senate has overwhelmingly passed a companion bill. 2. Even though the majority of Assembly members have signed on as co-sponsors. 3. Even though it will likely restore Federal Aid to New Jersey’s Reef Program. 4. Even though it will eliminate conflict by removing fixed gear.

It is evident that the recreational angler must act as David against a state government that acts as
Goliath. It is the recreational angler that must contact Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (973) 395-1166, and Assemblyman Nelson Albano, Chairman, A&NRC, (609) 465-0700, and ask that they allow Bill A1152  (legislation that prohibits the use of certain fishing gear on artificial reefs) to be heard.

It is also up to the recreational angler to contact Bob Martin, Commissioner, Department of Environmental Protection, (609) 292-2885, and ask him to create a regulation that will restore Federal Aid to New Jersey’s Reef Program. We must ask him to follow the lead of Commissioners in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, New York, and Delaware, and remove traps, pots, and lines from New Jersey reefs. Legislation or regulation can be used to remove the fixed fishing gear.

If you are told that there is a compromise in the works, make sure to insist that any compromise must remove fixed gear and also restore Federal Aid to New Jersey’s Reef Program.

There are approximately 800,000 recreational anglers in NJ, which would make it the largest voting bloc in the state should anglers speak with one voice. As New Jersey state government acts as Goliath, anglers must look at the giant with the same perspective as David and not feel defeated. David knew that action needed to be taken and did the right thing in spite of overwhelming odds.

So, respectfully ask Speaker Oliver and Assemblyman Albano that they allow Bill A1152 to be heard and to make certain Federal Aid is restored to New Jersey’s Reef Program. Respectfully ask Commissioner Martin to create regulation that will do the same. Let New Jersey policy makers know that you expect them to do the right thing.

This is an election year and the voices of 800,000 recreational “Davids” can change a state government that acts like “Goliath”. Our collective voice is the one stone we have that is capable of slaying a giant.

Color The Green Movement Blue

About: Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects. Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Ant is a public speaker on the topic of conservation and the ways  anglers and hunters can become involved in shaping outdoors releated legislative policy. He has authored three books on conservation, hunting and the great outdoors including the controversial and highly regarded, “Color The Green Movement Blue” (available as ebook). His other books include; “Take Me on Safari: A Family Affair” (available as ebook) and  “The New Age Hunter”. He also wrote the children’s book “Where is Wildbeary?”

Anthony P Mauro, Sr

Ant is available to speak at your club and to do book signings.  ~ Contact him: apmaurosr@njoutdooralliance.org 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources

SOCIAL CIRCLE, Ga. --(Ammoland.com)- The largest, most successful wildlife conservation program in the world, the Federal Wildlife Restoration Program, is fueled by hunters.

Over the past 70 years, hunters nationwide have contributed more than $6.8 billion dollars to wildlife conservation efforts. In Georgia alone, since 1939, hunters have contributed more than $145 million for wildlife conservation in Georgia.

“The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Program is the most successful wildlife conservation program in the world and serves as a financial cornerstone to the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. It benefits all wildlife species, conserves and restores habitat and helps enhance wildlife conservation through research,” said Alex Coley, Wildlife Resources Division Game Management assistant chief and Federal Aid Coordinator.

“Through this program, America’s hunters continue to provide the most substantial source of funding for wildlife conservation and management in the United States.”

The program was established through the Pittman-Robertson Act in 1937. Through lobbying efforts in Congress, America’s hunters created this act as a way to fund conservation and management of the nation’s wildlife. Wildlife Restoration funds are accumulated from excise taxes on firearms, ammunition and archery equipment. This excise tax is levied at the manufacturer’s level, collected by the Federal government, and distributed to state wildlife agencies to fund wildlife conservation and management programs. The amount of money each state agency annually receives is determined by the number of paid hunting licenses and the land area of the state.

The Wildlife Resources Division uses Wildlife Restoration funds for various types of programs, including restoring habitat and improving wildlife populations, conducting research, monitoring wildlife populations, operating more than one million acres of wildlife management areas that benefit a diversity of wildlife species and provide wildlife-related recreational opportunities, providing information to landowners on how to manage their property for various species, conducting hunter education classes and building and maintaining public shooting ranges.

For more information on the Federal Wildlife Restoration Program, visit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service website at http://www.fws.gov/southeast/federalaid/ . For more information on wildlife management practices in Georgia, visit the Wildlife Resources Division website at www.georgiawildlife.com , contact a local Game Management office or call (770) 918-6416.

National Animal Interest Alliance

Portland, Oregon --(Ammoland.com)-  NAIA has long been concerned by the dangerous practice of importing dogs into the United States from countries that lack proper veterinary standards, and we have worked to raise public awareness of this issue while encouraging appropriate regulations for dealing with it.

As you can imagine, neglecting to properly vet an incoming dog greatly increases the risk of transmitting parasites and diseases to the native population (including rabies), and can lead to tragic consequences for the dogs themselves. Bypassing regulatory safeguards is a cruel and irresponsible practice.

Thankfully, outreach and education on this issue is beginning to pay off. In response to the 2007 farm bill (an act that NAIA contributed to), APHIS has proposed changes to the Animal Welfare Act regarding the importation of dogs. These changes will improve the health and well-being of dogs involved in this underregulated practice, while reducing the risk of harmful infections and zoonotic diseases to U.S. citizens and their pets. Here are some of the highlights:

• More stringent health certificate and rabies vaccination requirements. Certificates must be written in English by a licensed veterinarian.
• Better identification and tracking. Persons involved in importing the dog must identify themselves (name, address, etc.); dogs must be identified as well (breed, sex, age, color, markings, etc.).
• Persons importing dogs must present their permit at the first port of arrival, in order to ensure that the dog(s) are eligible for importation.
• Penalizes those who try to import dogs without proper certification: dogs may be seized, and the person trying to import the dog is liable for the cost of the dog’s care (which can include expensive veterinary procedures).

Please note that these rules do not prohibit people from bringing foreign dogs into the United States, nor do they arbitrarily punish or single individuals out for undue hardship. These rules merely put common sense safeguards in place in order to better ensure the health of imported animals and the communities they will be living in.

Issues like this may not be the most glamorous or dramatic; it is unlikely we will ever hear Sarah McLachlan sing about the cruelty of puppy smuggling. But these proposed rules are positive, reasonable changes that are necessary to address one of today’s important animal welfare and public health concerns. APHIS is taking comments on these proposed rules until October 31st, 2011. Comments can be made here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2009-0053-0001. It is imperative that you take this opportunity to let your elected officials know how serious this issue is.

In the coming days, NAIA will be providing more information on these proposed rules as well as the issue of dog importation. In the meanwhile, if you’ve got strong eyes and a fair amount of patience, check out the current Federal Register for a full description (starting on page 54392). Stay tuned!

P.S. For more NAIA news and views, check out our blog: informative and entertaining, with new content available most weekdays. And did you know that you can support NAIA while you shop by using your own official NAIA credit card? Why yes you can – apply for yours here! Finally, don’t forget to sign up for our raffle to earn a chance at winning a trip to the 2011 World Dog Show in Salzburg, Austria!

About:
The Mission of NAIA is to promote the welfare of animals, to strengthen the human-animal bond, and safeguard the rights of responsible animal owners and professionals through research, public education and sound public policy. Visit: www.naiaonline.org

Slow cooked rabbit leg with duck confit mousse, pancetta, sautéed liver and pearl barley risotto.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- While PETA, the Humane Society of the United States, and other animal rights groups and anti-hunting zealots aggressively promote veganism through numerous programs—including free courses supplied to schools and forced on kids and young minds across the US—seems their efforts are not lasting.

According to a recent study by Psychology Today, most vegetarians return to eating meat. Food & Wine magazine also recently profiled several meat-eating former vegans who now believe purchasing sustainable meat is a new form of activism. So, why the switch and obvious about-face?

Seems there are many health issues when humans try living like a rabbit. Becoming anemic, with dark circles and odd-colored skin, has plagued many who passed on beef or other meat sources.

More details are at www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animals-and-us/201106/why-do-most-vegetarians-go-back-eating-meat.

For those who claim they will now only eat sustainable or organic meats, take note. We are quick to offer up that a deer, elk, squirrels, rabbits, bears, or pronghorn are food sources that rank at the top of the organic chart. Add to that list doves, pheasants, problem geese and that raccoon in the backyard, and you have a virtual smorgasbord in which to choose.

A shopping trip to acquire these wonderful foods is called “hunting,” and in this meat-to-the-table process, collecting sounds like a sudden “bang” and nothing like the “ring” of a cash register. Any former vegans needing to learn how to “shop” can go to www.wheretohunt.org .

We’ll be happy to let them borrow a sharp knife.

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.org.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)- Those of you who have read my book “Color the Green Movement Blue: A Remedy for Environmental Health” will most likely have insight into the meaning of the title of this blog.

While much of the modern green movement views any disturbance of the natural world as a destructive force, including humanity’s utilization of nature, the fact is that “disturbance” is a key ingredient for ensuring the health of things in Mother Nature’s care. Disturbance is at the root of conservation and it is conservation that is used to sustain life on earth.

Conservation is defined as: maintaining the health of the natural world by means of sustainable use of environmental resources. In other words, forests, fisheries, wildlife habitats and biological diversity are not sustained by being left undisturbed, but are in fact sustained by countless interactions (disturbances) with their environment.

For example, life is dependent on living things attaining energy by means of consuming other living things. This “disturbance” takes the form of predator and prey relationships; living things pursuing other living things, and themselves being pursed by living things, for  purposes of consumption and subsistence. Even plants make use of decomposing organic material; the resulting nutrients are taken up by roots allowing growth and development. These plants are then preyed upon by living things.

When there is balance in these predator and prey relationships there is the ability for living things to sustain their existence, this is known as conservation or the sustainable use of natural resources. Conservation helps to provide the symmetry needed for maintaining the health of the natural world and has been used successfully by Mother Nature to sustain life on earth for billions of years.

Natural disturbances are also used to preserve forest ecosystems. These disturbances come in the form of fire, diseases, pests, storms, etc. They are used by Mother Nature to regenerate forests; they are important factors that influence the structure and health of forests and provide for the survivability of forest dependent species. Disturbances and conservation are also used in our oceans and freshwaters, in
different ways, with similar results.

The question we must ask ourselves is that if much of the green movement attempts to preserve nature by preventing healthy disturbances from occurring, and views humanity’s dependence on the natural world as intrusive, then how do we square the green movement with promoting true environmental health? After all, disturbance and conservation are at the very foundation of Mother Nature’s formula for preserving life and are the basis of evolution.

Since it is the act of conservation, and the applied principles of sustainable use, that is the heart of Mother Nature’s formula for preserving living things then who better to promote and educate others than those who participate in, and have an appreciation for, this dynamic; anglers and hunters.

Anglers, hunters, foresters, marine biologists and all conservationists recognize that they are cogs in the
machinery of conservation. They do not see themselves as contaminates or destructive forces, but instead view themselves as vital components.

Humankind is as dependent on the principle of conservation for its own survival as are all living things in the natural world. The disturbance we create is not destructive but productive when we act in ways that manage the environment so that we do not exhaust, extinguish or defile natural resources. We form a basis for natural resource safekeeping by our desire to use them and perpetuate them based on our understanding that humankind’s survivability is dependent upon them.

With such awareness comes a responsibility for conservationists to take a leadership role in the environmental movement and to educate policy makers and inform the public of the importance of healthy
disturbance and the principle of conservation. We must teach of the good that comes from emulating the ways of Mother Nature.

It is anglers, hunters and conservationists who labor within the realm of Mother Nature and have a keen appreciation for her ways. It is we who must take a leadership role in the environmental movement and engage in meaningful environmental stewardship. It is we who know first-hand that preservation of our natural resources is achieved through conservation.

Color The Green Movement Blue

About:

Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Conservation Foundation, and New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects.

Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and environmental stewardship helped to create the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus (NJA&HC). The NJA&HC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers about the principles of conservation; the foundation for healthy ecosystems, fish and wildlife.

Ant is a public speaker on the topic of conservation and the ways  anglers and hunters can become involved in shaping outdoors releated legislative policy. He has authored three books on conservation, hunting and the great outdoors including the controversial and highly regarded, “Color The Green Movement Blue” (available as ebook). His other books include; “Take Me on Safari: A Family Affair” and  “The New Age Hunter”.  He also wrote the children’s book “Where is Wildbeary?”

Ant is available to speak at your club and will do book signings.  ~ Contact him: apmaurosr@njoutdooralliance.org 

The fanaticism of our adversaries and the encouragement of a complicit and supportive media are hard at work gnawing away, inch-by-inch, at our freedoms to fish, hunt and practice conservation.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)- It is said that parents are the bones on which children gnaw to sharpen their teeth.

And it is my experience that we who fish, hunt, and practice conservation, make allowances for our wayward adversaries to do the same.

I speak specifically of our acceptance of the encroachments of animal rights extremism and the damaging actions of preservationists.

It is not the divine doctrine of “turning the other cheek” that leads us to accommodate our aggressors, or some different form of benevolence; the cause is indifference.

This indulgence is a peculiar aspect of our humanity. That we would allow any extremist, not just those who practice the religion of animal rights or preservation, to execute a campaign to alter our way of life without the slightest measure of our own rebellion seems contrary to survival instinct.

What peculiar aspect of the human psyche allows us to be indifferent to losing the things we love; such as fishing, hunting, healthy forests and waters?

Has our discomfort with acknowledging fanaticism caused us to over-medicate with doses of denial?

It is a rare gravestone that is inscribed with the words “This man died while allowing others to gnaw at the edges of the things he treasured, until their progress consumed his very heart.” It is a rare inscription indeed, but one that could be found far and wide if kind dedications to the dearly departed were replaced with honest ones.

You may be asking yourself, “Why the fuss, Mauro? What is the point of all this?” And I would respond, “I hear the calling of a modern day Paul Revere. He cries, the gnawing is coming, the gnawing is coming… it approaches the heart of the things we treasure!”

The question to be answered is whether we will respond with a revolution similar to that inspired by the warnings of Revere, or will we deal with these encroachments with our usual indifference? Will we begrudgingly accept the gnawing of fanatics who would deprive us of our freedom to enjoy the things we value or will we respond with a call to arms?

In 1775 the colonists responded to the loss of their freedoms (taxation without representation) with a call to arms. The odds of success were stacked against them. They had everything to lose in a battle to keep the Kingdom of Great Briton from gnawing at their valued way of life; their farms, homes, businesses, wealth, and even the state of their well-being. They accepted the charge of treason that came with uprising, along with the consequence – execution.

On the other hand, to protect our freedoms to fish, hunt and practice conservation we put none of our creature comforts, or our very lives, at risk.

After all, what great sacrifice is there in writing a letter, sending an email, or making a phone call?

We certainly do not imperil our homes, businesses or the security of our families, nor is it remotely entertained as a treasonous act. It looks to me that the greatest danger is a insufferable attack of separation anxiety between us and the nattering TV.

The fanaticism of our adversaries and the encouragement of a complicit and supportive media are hard at work gnawing away, inch-by-inch, at our freedoms to fish, hunt and practice conservation. They industriously invest in New Jersey’s political machine, while pandering to public prejudices, promoting half-truths, and inventing propaganda as if they were based on scientific principle instead of an acute form of neurosis. Their fervor prevents them from understanding that their actions subvert the good that conservation does for our natural environment.

Indifference is a disease that afflicts all of us but it is the chronic kind that is the cause our undoing. There are times and things that are worthy of our indifference but it is counterproductive to wholly rely on it as a rule-of-thumb. The medicine devised to heal indifference is quantities of involvement. We can begin with a small dose and sign up to the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance “Action Alert” email system. These alerts contain state-of-affairs alerts about fishing, hunting and conservation in New Jersey, and actions we can take to protect and advance these things we love.

Just ask to be added to the NJOA “Action Alert” by emailing me directly: apmaurosr@njoutdooralliance.org. Or ask others to join by forwarding my email address.

Consider the “Action Alert” a modern day version of Paul Revere, and yes, “The gnawing is coming, the gnawing is coming…”

Color The Green Movement Blue

About:
Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance.

In addition to NJOA, Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and stewardship for the environment helped to found the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus. The NJAHC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers of the principles of conservation and the benefits that confer to the state’s wildlife and ecology.

A lifelong resident of New Jersey, Ant is an international big game hunter and avid conservationist. He has authored two books on conservation and hunting, including “Color The Green Movement Blue“.

[Editor's Note: The National Shooting Sports Foundation's Larry Keane recently updated NSSF members as follows: "The non-profit watchdog group Humanewatch.org has gone on the offensive with two full page advertisements running in the LA Times, educating the public that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) gives less than one percent of its budget to local animal shelters. Last year, Humanewatch issued a challenge to Humane Society of the United States CEO Wayne Pacelle: "Share just half of HSUS's income with hands-on pet shelters, and we'll shut this website down for good." A year later...it looks like Humanewatch still has a job." The following has been published at Humanewatch.org in response to a LA Times editorial defending HSUS, which is a rabid anti-hunting group.]

HumaneWatch.org

Washington, D.C. – -(Ammoland.com)- If you’re hearing from HumaneWatch for the first time today because you saw an editorial that criticized us in today’s Los Angeles Times, welcome!

It seems our hard-hitting national ads, including a recent one in the Times, have struck a nerve.

Tinseltown is fast becoming the Humane Society of the United States’s power center, so we’re not surprised to learn that its leaders apparently persuaded the Times to take a closer look at our campaign to keep them honest.

The Times Editorial Board told its readers two important facts about the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Commenting on our recent ads in the paper, they wrote:

One of the current ads features a photo of dogs looking wide-eyed in shock under the caption “SURPRISED to hear the Humane Society of the United States shares only 1 percent of your donations with local pet shelters?” The ad goes on to state that the Humane Society “is NOT your local animal shelter.

The ad is true on both counts.

Too few Americans are aware of HSUS’s misplaced priorities and the Times’ reiteration of our central message is an important step in educating more Americans about HSUS’s deception. But alas, the newspaper’s editors couldn’t stop there. They go on to write:

But [the ad is] also misleading. The Humane Society has never claimed that its mission is to fund local animal shelters… While some people may mistakenly believe that the Humane Society of the United States does the same job local humane societies do, it should not surprise anyone who has looked at the organization’s website that only a small percentage of its money goes to local shelters.

Here we disagree—strongly.

There is an important distinction between HSUS’s claims and public perception. Although the Humane Society of the United States never explicitly claims to support local hands-on pet shelters, it does go out of its way to perpetuate the myth that its primary focus is helping homeless dogs and cats. The result? Robust national polling shows that 71 percent of Americans believe HSUS is an umbrella organization for the nation’s hands-on pet shelters.

It’s frustrating to see the Los Angeles Times papering over HSUS’s intentional public misrepresentation of its own mission. Whether you love us or hate us, we encourage you to make up your own mind about this wealthy animal rights group.

Just take the Times’ own challenge and visit HSUS’s website. Three of the four primary images on its home page today feature dogs and cats. Better yet, take a look at HSUS’s fundraising page. It’s wall-to-wall pets. Now try to find HSUS’s disclaimer explaining that it doesn’t fund local shelters. Can you find it? Good luck.

For the record, though, here are a few things today’s editorial didn’t tell you.

1. The Times suggests that we are “dragging shelter pets into the fight” over HSUS’s duplicity. But it’s HSUS that has been throwing shelters (and their furry charges) under the bus for years, mainly by poaching unsuspecting donors from their communities. The State Humane Association of California has already publicly complained about similar misbehavior by the ASPCA, so this problem is certainly on shelters’ collective radar screens. (HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle’s response has been to suggest that the Association should fire its employees who are pointing out the truth.)

• The Times observed that a public affairs firm with which HumaneWatch’s parent organization contracts for services runs another organization that questions some policies of MADD. Today’s editorial blurs an important distinction, in the way an unscrupulous commentator might hold one attorney responsible for the way another lawyer in the same firm defends his clients. That organization and this one are separate, although the management firm in question provides services to both.

The Los Angeles Times concludes:

If [HumaneWatch.org] don’t like the Humane Society’s positions, they are entitled, of course, to make their case. But don’t drag shelter pets into the fight.

It is the Humane Society of the United States—not us—who is guilty of dragging dogs and cats into this debate. We’ve tirelessly engaged the HSUS toe-to-toe on numerous issues affecting companion (and other) animals. We’re happy to debate the group’s leaders on the merits of their proposals, but we refuse to allow them to cloud the debate by falsely insinuating that it has the moral authority of representing the nation’s struggling animal shelters.

About:
HumaneWatch.org is a project of the Center for Consumer Freedom, a nonprofit watchdog group supported by a unique combination of consumers and American businesses. Visit: www.humanewatch.org

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- When you buy a hunting license, you help fund programs that provide hunting opportunities.

The same applies to fishing and trapping.

Sometimes, however, you need to invest more, to have more. One of the best—and most important—investments you can make for your outdoor sports future could be the time it takes to log online and become a member of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (USSA) grassroots Sentry program.

The time required is short, and joining is FREE!

The USSA is a watchdog organization that protects and advances America’s hunting, fishing, and trapping heritage. The USSA monitors legislation from all 50 states, Congress, and state and federal game departments and agencies, plus courts, to discover laws and proposals related to hunting, fishing, trapping and wildlife management. When a bill or proposal is discovered that negatively impacts those outdoor opportunities, the USSA staff goes into action. Efforts are made to alert sportsmen and sportswomen and win public support.

Jeff Foxworthy Becomes a Sentry for USSA

This tireless effort has taken place in all 50 states, against many court cases, and on federal and state land issues. The topics have ranged from hunting on national wildlife refuges to bear hunting with dogs and bowhunting for deer issues. During recent times, the USSA has countered attempts by anti-hunting and animal rights groups to curtail the use of dogs during hunting by creating prohibitive breeder regulations. These and countless other issues are reviewed daily by USSA staff and a game plan for each issue is developed.

By performing this valuable service, the USSA is the eyes and ears of hunting and outdoors communities across America.

“Becoming a Sentry is possibly the single most important thing you can do to protect your hunting, fishing, trapping and outdoor sports rights,” said Dick Cabela, co-founder of Cabela’s, and chairman of the USSA Board of Directors.

“This program permits you to discover the details and stay abreast of any introduced anti laws or animal rights agendas. If you think such bills don’t –or won’t– happen in your state, you are wrong. The thousands of anti-hunting bills introduced across the nation each year should be reason enough to cause you concern. Becoming a Sentry is a step in the right direction to ensure the future of our hunting heritage.”

Sentries are needed in all 50 states to work to protect dove, deer and predator hunting, fishing, bowhunting seasons, trapping opportunities and other sporting interests.

The Sentry program is used to quickly call attention to legislation and action that will negatively impact your hunting, fishing and trapping opportunities. This program is a rapid response method to spread the word in this electronic age, and it helps concerned sportsmen take action to speak out against —or in favor of— legislation that will impact their interests. The Sentry releases also help educate the general public on issues.

Sentries receive action alerts, news releases and issue updates via e-mail when hunting, fishing, trapping and conservation are under attack. This is a proven method to counter the efforts of powerful anti-hunting and animal rights groups wanting to take away your privileges. If you are already one of the 110,000-plus USSA Sentries, encourage a friend to sign up also.

For more details, or to become a Sentry, visit www.ussportmen.org/beasentry.

High points of the Sentry program:

• In less than one year, more than 110,000 hunters and anglers have become USSA Sentries. Sentries are needed in all 50 states.
• Signup is free at www.ussportsmen.org/becomeasentry
• You will receive e-mails when negative legislative bills or action are underway in your state or region.
• You can obtain maps, and other useful hunting gear and information as part of a member package.
• Sentries receive a free weekly e-newsletter that covers the issues.
• You will be provided details on how –and when—to take action.
• You can take part in battling—and beating—anti-hunting and anti-trapping forces, such as HSUS, PETA and other groups.
• The Sentry program has a proven track record of winning legislative and court battles.
• Work together with other hunters and anglers to defend your rights and interests.
• The Sentry program is championed by celebrities like: Jeff Foxworthy, Jim Zumbo, and Dick and Mary Cabela.

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.org.
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Misinformed Anti Hunting Protesters fail to realize that Sportsmen fund almost all conservation efforts in the USA.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The lengthy battle over hunting access on dozens of units of the 100 million-acre National Wildlife Refuge system has ended—and hunters can declare VICTORY!

In April 2011, federal Judge James S. Gwin ruled for sportsmen across America by granting summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other defendants while denying a lawsuit aimed at closing hunting on National Wildlife Refuge System parcels.

After this ruling, an appeal process was opened, and the appeal clock began ticking. On Monday, that appeal period came to an end with the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) failing to file any appeal.

“This long sought win is a great victory for hunters everywhere, and reinforces the process of keeping national wildlife refuges open for hunting, by hunters,” said Bill Horn, the US Sportsmen’s Alliance director of federal affairs.

This long-running case began in 2003, when the Fund for Animals, which later merged with the HSUS, filed a lawsuit to stop hunting on 39 refuges. The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF), along with other organizations, intervened on behalf of sportsmen. Anti-hunting groups later expanded the lawsuit to nearly 60 refuges. USSAF defended this case for eight years, through many rounds of hard-fought and costly briefing, providing stability in the defense as the U.S. attorneys assigned to the case changed frequently over that time.

Judge Gwin’s April 2011 ruling stopped HSUS’ attempt at using the National Environmental Policy Act to close hunting on these refuges. In making the decision, the judge noted that “Plaintiffs, however, are not entitled to an inviolate sanctuary for their preferred uses – Congress has determined that, to the extent possible, hunters, fishers, observers, photographers, and educators must share the refuge.”

The 1997 Refuge Improvement Act, championed by the USSA, made hunting, fishing and other wildlife oriented activities priority uses on refuge units. The Act also mandated hunting and fishing activities be “facilitated”. Now, 14 years after passage of the Act, Judge Gwin’s ruling firmly rejects Plaintiffs’ attempt to “end run” the Act.

“The majority of national wildlife refuges were created to be open to hunting, and now hunters everywhere can continue to legally pursue their interests on these great public lands,” said Walter “Bud” Pidgeon, USSA president and CEO. “With the end of this prolonged battle, this solidly reaffirms that hunting is a priority use of refuge land wherever and whenever compatible with wildlife management.”

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund (SLDF), the legal arm of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation, has worked since the beginning of this case to defend the rights of hunters and has collaborated with other groups including Safari Club International (SCI). Together, the SLDF and SCI are co-counsels and also represent Ducks Unlimited, the National Rifle Association, Izaak Walton League, Delta Waterfowl Foundation, and California Waterfowl Association.

National Wildlife Refuges provide vast opportunities for hunters seeking waterfowl, big game, furbearers, and much more. Refuge hunting provides countless hours of public recreation while also helping maintaining optimal wildlife populations.

The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 empowered the Fish and Wildlife Service to open refuges to hunting when compatible with the purposes for which the refuges were established. Today, hunters can continue to enjoy these benefits thanks to this important win.

About USSA and USSAF: The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation watchdog efforts protect the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress, and through many public education programs. The USSA has more than 110,000 Sentry members that regularly receive information about conservation issues, and then actively work to promote and protect scientific conservation through calls and contacts. For more information about the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation and the Sentry program, call (614) 888-4868 or Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

My Gun Culture

USA --(Ammoland.com)- It’s time to fight fire with fire. Or whoppers with even bigger whoppers.

One thing that we’ve learned over the past couple of years is that medium scale whoppers need not apply. Those get questioned and challenged. If you want to tell a whopper and get away with it, is has to be epic. Huge. Outrageous. Then, and only then, it’s sucked up by the media and public like Deep-Fried Snickers Bars at the State Fair.

You may be familiar with the American Hunters and Shooters Association – AHSA. AHSA is a shameless sham. Is that redundant? Even if it is, the label certainly applies as AHSA’s leadership is a ‘who’s-who’ of anti-gun rights rock stars. Collectively, their Executive Director, President, and board members have helped ‘protect’ the rights of American hunters and shooters by:

• Donating tens of thousands of dollars to the Brady Campaign – at the time known as Handgun Control, Inc.
• Serving as paid expert witnesses in frivolous liability cases against gun manufacturers
• Serving as consultants for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
• Making campaign donations to pro-gun rights champions like Barbara Boxer, Bill Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Carolyn McCarthy and John Kerry
• Serving as the leader of Stop Handgun Violence, the leading anti-gun organization in Massachusetts
• And more. You can find additional detail from the National Shooting Sports Foundation Fact Sheet

This organization is about as helpful to gun rights as Chocolate-Covered Bacon on a Stick and Fried Coke are to Rosie O’Donnell’s diet.

You see, anti-gun groups got smart and decided to fabricate an organization that sounded gun friendly so politicians could flock to it like, well, like Rosie O’Donnell to Chocolate-Covered Bacon on a Stick. The idea is to scrounge up a few more votes from gun owners. Ones that are still living that is.

So back to fighting whoppers with epic whoppers. It’s time to found our own shammy-sham-sham organization of fraud, lies, deceit, and general inappropriateness.

Legislative Institute Against Redneck Shooters

The Legislative Institute Against Redneck Shooters - LIARS.

Here’s the plan – stay with us here as it gets confusing: We create an organization that sounds really chic, elitist, and Hollywood-friendly on the surface. Then we do things like support common sense gun legislation, thereby getting what we want by telling really big and bold lies.

We’ll whip up a website – www.liars.com if we can buy it – and talk about the danger of shooters and guns to a utopian socialist society. Like Cuba or Venezuela. We’ll have feature articles that expose shooters, and especially redneck shooters, for what they really are – bloodthirsty carnivores that want to do uncivilized things like provide for themselves, be left alone, and work for a living. And of course, we’ll write frequent guest articles for the Huffington Post. We’ll be heroes and probably get lifetime invitations to the Academy Awards. And not in the cheap seats either.

Of course we would need some big names as board members to get the ‘street cred’ we need. You know, folks that have a proven track record of telling truly epic whoppers. We’re thinking we start with…

• Former President Bill “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” Clinton
• Former North Carolina Senator John “I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby” Edwards
• Congressman Barney “I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound” Frank
• And last but not least, Actress Lindsay “I don’t do drugs” Lohan.

We’ll need some funding from a handful of heavy hitters to get this thing off the ground. While I haven’t asked them yet, I’m pretty sure the folks from AmmoLand.com are good for a cool million or so. I hear they’re obscenely loaded.

See, succeeding in politics is easy. Can we count on your support?

About: Tom McHale describes himself as a conservative gun-totin’ bible-clingin’ literary assault dude who enjoys finding humor in just about anything. His web blog My Gun Culture is an irreverent, twisted look at gun news bordering on the ridiculous. It covers shootin’ stuff, loud noises, defending your own, the occasional mall ninja, and about 200 years of the American way. “These are the (partially) true stories of… My Gun Culture” says Tom. Visit: www.mygunculture.com

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- House Bill 115, introduced by Rep. Rodney Schad (R- Versailles), and Senate Bill 299, introduced by Sen. Brian Munzlinger (D- Williamstown), would make Missouri hunters pay for any damage caused by wild elk in the state by holding the Missouri Department of Conservation financially liable.

The bills would also allow property owners to kill an unlimited number of elk without any proof that the elk are actually causing damage.

Specifically, the bills hold sportsmen financially responsible for any damage caused by elk to a person’s property or for damage caused to vehicles. Additionally, the bill takes away the state’s management authority of wild elk by allowing anyone to kill an elk that has caused damage to their property, even if the damage is minimal.

“It is outrageous to hold sportsmen financially responsible for damage caused by wildlife which is owned by all people of the state of Missouri,” said Evan Heusinkveld, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance director of state service.

“The bill only gets worse by stripping the Conservation Department of its authority to manage the states wildlife. Allowing an unlimited number of elk to be killed without any oversight of the Department, or confirmation of damage, is unconscionable. Sportsmen need to call their legislators today and tell them to oppose this bill.”

Take Action! Missouri sportsmen should contact their state representatives and senators TODAY and ask them to oppose HB 115 and SB 299. Tell them it is outrageous for the state to pay for damage caused by wildlife and that authority of wildlife management should be left in the hands of wildlife professionals. To find your state legislators’ contact information, visit the USSA Legislative Action Center at www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

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.org.

Massachusetts Bill Sets Unreasonable No Hunting Areas

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A bill in Massachusetts could drastically decrease land open for hunting.

House Bill 657, introduced by Representative Kathi-Anne Reinstein (D- Suffolk), would double the size of the state’s no hunting zones near occupied dwellings.

Currently, state law prohibits possessing a loaded firearm or hunting on someone else’s land within 500 feet of an occupied dwelling without the dwelling owner’s permission. This bill would arbitrarily double that distance to 1,000 feet.

If passed, the bill would force sportsmen to get permission to hunt from adjacent land owners even on many of the lands they currently hunt. In effect the bill could shut down vast tracks of land that are currently open to hunting.

“This bill could prohibit sportsmen from hunting on lands they have enjoyed for years simply because the person living next door doesn’t like hunting,” said Jeremy Rine, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance associate director of state services. “The current 500 foot no hunting restriction is already excessive, there is no justifiable reason for further limiting the amount of private land available to hunters.”

Take Action! Massachusetts sportsmen should contact their state representative ask them to oppose HB 657. Tell them there is no justification for limiting hunting land access and for infringing on private property rights. To find your state representative’s contact information, please visit www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

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.org.

CalGunLaws.com

Glenn County, California --(Ammoland.com)- Last year the NRA and the CRPA Foundation joined forces under their California Legal Action Project (LAP) to provide legal assistance for high school student Gary Tudesko in his fight to be readmitted to Willows High School in Glenn County, California.

NRA News, in cooperation with the CRPA Foundation, has now released a video chronicling the events and the ultimate victory. It is posted at www.youtube.com/MichelLawyers. The Tudesko’s will be guests of honor at the upcoming CRPA banquet to be held on February 26, 2011.

Sixteen-year-old Tudesko was expelled on November 19, 2009 for having unloaded shotguns in his pick-up truck that he legally parked on an off-campus, public street near the Willows High School campus. The high school is located in a small rural community near Sacramento, and the unloaded shotguns were in his truck because he had gone duck hunting in the pre-dawn hours before school. The case garnered significant national media coverage as an example of zero-tolerance policies run amuck.

Tudesko’s shotguns were discovered in the pick up truck by scent-sniffing dogs during a questionable school search. Police ran the license plates, determined Tudesko was the owner, and then called him out of class. Tudesko cooperated and readily told the Principal about the shotguns and his early morning hunting trip.The school first suspended Tudesko for five days, then extended the suspension indefinitely until an expulsion hearing was held. Tudesko’s mother, Susan Parisio defended her son during the November 19th public hearing on his expulsion. She challenged the school district’s legal jurisdiction to enforce the Education Code’s prohibition of guns on campus against her son for having unloaded shotguns locked in an off-campus vehicle parked on a public street. High Principal Mort Geivett told the local School Board that, as a matter of law, it had no choice but to expel Tudesko, and the Board did just that.

Tudesko appealed the local school district’s expulsion order to the Glenn County Board of Education. The appeal hearing was held on January 19, 2010. Tudesko was defended by civil rights lawyers Chuck Michel and Hillary Green of the Long Beach-based law firm of Michel & Associates, P.C. (www.michellawyers.com).

In a dramatic victory, the Glenn County Board of Education unanimously reversed the decision of the Willows Unified School District and Principal Mort Geivett reinstated Gary Tudesko at Willows High School!

This was a great victory for law-abiding gun-owners – particularly young adults who wish to enjoy their rights – over nonsensical “zero-tolerance” policies.

Disturbingly, Geivett claimed the school had jurisdiction over students traveling to and from school, as well as students off-campus during lunch, and that the school had jurisdiction over off-campus vehicles because students could not possess firearms within 1,000 feet of campus. But Geivett confused the Penal Code with the Education Code. With a number of exceptions, it is a potential criminal violation of the Penal Code, specifically the Gun Free School Zone law, to knowingly possess a gun within 1,000 feet of a school. But that law has nothing to do with the sections of the Education Code generally prohibiting possession of firearms on school grounds Tudesko was charged with violating.

Tudesko’s truck was parked off school grounds, and Gary was not traveling to or from school at the time of the search of the off-campus truck. He was in class. Moreover, schools do not enforce criminal/penal statutes like the Gun Free School Zone law, the District Attorney does. And, the District Attorney and Willows Chief of Police had already stated there would be no charges filed against Tudesko, likely because there was no intent to violate the law.

Legal issues aside, Tudesko was in this position because of a short-sighted bureaucratic approach to enforcing the school’s “zero tolerance” policy toward firearms, which is in many cases misapplied. Time and again these policies have resulted in a triumph of irrational political correctness over common sense and justice. Given that Tudesko had gone duck hunting that same morning with friends (hence the two shotguns), had bird-shot loads as ammunition, had both firearms unloaded, had intentionally parked off-campus to avoid any issues, and had several people who corroborated his story, school administrators should have acknowledged that the circumstances did not warrant expulsion.

Seventeen years ago the NRA and CRPA joined forces to fight local gun bans being written and pushed in California by the gun ban lobby. Their coordinated efforts became the NRA/CRPA “Local Ordinance Project” (LOP) – a statewide campaign to fight ill conceived local efforts at gun control and educate politicians about available programs that are effective in reducing accidents and violence without infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. The NRA/CRPA LOP has had tremendous success in beating back most of these anti-self-defense proposals

In addition to fighting local gun bans, for decades the NRA has been litigating dozens of cases in California courts to promote the right to self-defense and the 2nd Amendment. In the post Heller and McDonald legal environment, NRA and CRPA Foundation have formed the NRA/CRPA Foundation Legal Action Project (LAP), a joint venture to pro-actively strike down ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances and advance the rights of firearms owners, specifically in California. Sometimes, success is more likely when LAP’s litigation efforts are kept low profile, so the details of every lawsuit are not always released. To see a partial list of the LAP’s recent accomplishments, or to contribute to the NRA or to the NRA / CRPAF LAP and support this and similar Second Amendment cases, visit www.nraila.com and www.crpafoundation.org.

Huron-Manistee National Forest - NO HUNTING ALLOWED

National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn --(Ammoland.com)- NSSF is urging all hunters and sportsmen to submit comments to the U.S. Forest Service on a proposed firearm hunting ban for areas of the Huron-Manistee National Forest in Michigan.

The proposed ban could pose a threat to firearm hunting on portions of federal lands across the nation. The Forest Service is accepting public comment on alternatives until Feb. 11.

Background: In September, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Forest Service’s regulations required that it consider banning hunting with firearms on lands designated as “semi-primitive” within the Huron-Manistee National Forest. The court felt the noise associated with firearm hunting could harm the quality of the recreational experience of hikers, backpackers, and cross country skiers.

The court ruled that the Forest Service had to consider closing these areas to hunting with firearms if other public hunting land was available nearby. The U.S. Forest Service is therefore required to do a formal review to determine if it should move forward with a ban on firearms hunting ban on these areas.

Please submit comments to the Forest Service urging it to adopt the “No-Action” position, which would allow hunting with firearms in areas designated as semi-primitive to continue.

Sportsmen can fax comments to Lee Evison at 231-775-5551 or e-mail comments to comments-eastern-huron-manistee@fs.fed.us.

Please include your name and address with your comments. E-mailed comments must include “Forest Plan SEIS” as the subject line of the e-mail. All comments must be received by Friday, Feb. 11.

You may also submit your comments via mail to:

Visit NSSF’s Government Relations site at nssf.org/GovRel.

About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A constitutional amendment has been proposed in Missouri that would help prevent anti-hunting groups from attacking hunting, fishing and trapping at the ballot box.

Take Action! Missouri sportsmen are urged to contact their legislators and ask them to support House Joint Resolution 15.

Tell them the amendment will help protect conservation and science based wildlife management.

House Joint Resolution 15, introduced by Representative Don Ruzicka (R- Mt. Vernon), would require a two-thirds majority vote to pass any ballot issue dealing with the harvest of fish, wildlife, or forest resources. Currently, ballot initiatives in the state only require a simple majority of the vote to pass.

For the amendment to take effect it must first pass both chambers of the legislature and then be approved by voters.

Anti-hunting groups often turn to the ballot box when they are unable to sway lawmakers into passing anti-hunting, fishing, and trapping measures. These ballot campaigns often use emotional rhetoric instead of scientific facts and cost millions of dollars to defend against.

“This amendment would go a long way toward protecting Missouri sportsmen from anti-hunting attacks at the ballot box,” said Evan Heusinkveld, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance director of state services. “Sportsmen should ask their legislators to help protect hunting and science based wildlife management in the state by supporting this amendment.”

To find your state legislators’ contact information, please visit www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

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.org.

Remington Model SP-10 Thumbhole Shotgun would be Outlawed

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A bill in New York would redefine “assault weapon” to include many firearms that are commonly used for hunting.

Assembly Bill 1479, introduced by Asm. Linda Rosenthal (D-New York), changes the state’s definition of “assault weapon.” The new definition would classify firearms commonly used for hunting, like semi-automatic shotguns that have a thumbhole stock or a pistol grip, as assault weapons.

Currently, possession of “assault weapons” in the state are generally prohibited.

Even more dangerous to sportsmen and gun owners, the bill gives the Superintendent of State Police the authority to regulate and classify additional firearms as “assault weapons” by simply finding that a firearm feature or modification is “particularly suitable for military and not sporting purposes.”

The Superintendent can also designate specific firearms by make and model to be considered assault weapons.

Ultimately, the bill gives the Superintendent vast powers to determine which firearms citizens can and cannot own.

“This bill is taking an already extreme set of gun laws and making them worse. It outlaws many popular firearms that are commonly used for hunting and gives immense power to the State Police to restrict law-abiding gun owners even further,” said Evan Heusinkveld, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance director of state services.

“Sportsmen, gun owners, and collectors alike need to call their state assemblyperson and senator today to express their opposition to this dangerous bill.”

While AB 1479 does include an exemption that allows citizens to keep newly declared “assault weapons” that are possessed before July 1, 2012 the exemption does little to ease the concerns of sportsmen. The bill in turn requires that those firearms that are “grandfathered in” be rendered inoperable or mandates their registration with the state. Even after proper registration, the bill only allows those firearms to be used at a licensed gun range and not while hunting.

If passed the bill would take effect on July 1, 2012.

Take Action! New York Sportsmen should contact their state assembly-person and tell them to oppose AB 1479. Tell them the bill would ban many firearms that are commonly used for hunting, target shooting, and other recreational activities. To find your state assemblyperson’s phone number and other contact information, use the USSA Legislative Action Center at www.ussportsmen.org/lac .

Remington Model SP-10 Waterfowl Shotgun would still be Legal??

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.org.

Huron-Manistee National Forest - NO HUNTING ALLOWED

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The U.S. Forest Service is now accepting comments on a proposed gun hunting ban for areas of the Huron-Manistee National Forest in Michigan.

In September, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Forest Service’s regulations required that it consider banning hunting with firearms on lands designated as “semi-primitive” within the Huron-Manistee National Forest.

The Court feels that the noise associated with gun hunting could harm the quality of the recreational experience of hikers, backpackers, and cross country skiers. Additionally, the Court ruled that the Forest Service had to consider closing these areas if other public hunting land was available for gun hunting nearby.

As a result of the court ruling, the Forest Service began a formal review to determine if it should move forward with a gun hunting ban on these areas. Currently, the Service is considering two options:

1. a “No-Action” alternative which would allow hunting to continue without change; and
2. a “Modified Closure” alternative that would implement either a complete or partial ban on hunting with guns in the semi-primitive areas.

Take Action! Sportsmen should submit comments to the Forest Service supporting the “No-Action” alternative that would continue to allow hunting with firearms on areas designated as semi-primitive. Sportsmen can mail comments to:

Sportsmen can also fax comments to Lee Evison at (231) 775-5551 or email comments to:

comments-eastern-huronmanistee@fs.fed.us.

Please include your name and address with your comments. Emailed comments must include “Forest Plan SEIS” as the subject line of the email. All comments must be received by February 11, 2011.

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.org.

California Rifle and Pistol Association

Sacramento, CA --(Ammoland.com)- Although the case is still pending and a final ruling is yet to be issued, NRA’s intervention on behalf of its members in the case Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, et al., has already resulted in several legal victories.

CBD’s lawsuit, filed on January 27, 2009, alleges that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) are illegally mismanaging federal lands in Arizona. CBD contends California condors in Arizona and elsewhere are becoming ill or dying as a result of scavenging game that was shot by hunters using lead shot or bullets.

NRA has collected thousands of documents via public records act requests over the last year. Many of these documents raise doubts about the veracity of that claim. In fact, documents obtained by NRA indicate that claim is based on faulty science, and plainly show that California condors were reintroduced to Arizona based in large part on express promises by FWS and other agencies that the “reintroduction” would not impact hunting.

A January 13, 2010 court ruling granting NRA’s motion intervene was recently published in the official Federal Rules Decision reporter. The Federal Rules Decisions Reporter is a compendium of selected United States District Court rulings that specifically interpret and apply the Federal Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure. Publication of this court ruling is important to hunters and NRA members because it sets legal precedent and confirms that there is “significantly protectable interest” in hunting that can justify intervention by hunter’s rights groups like NRA in the increasing number of lawsuits filed by so-called environmental groups against state and federal natural resource, game and land management agencies. Groups like the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) often file lawsuits alleging improper regulatory action or inaction in managing public lands and natural resources in attempting to advance their anti-hunting agenda.

The publication of the decision followed an earlier NRA partial victory in this case; NRA’s legal arguments caused the CBD to abandon and dismiss its California condor related Endangered Species Act (ESA) claims rather than litigate them against NRA. CBD’s ESA claims were based in part on an incorrect belief that “any take of [California] condors from the use of lead ammunition would be a per se violation of the ESA.” CBD’s revised its lawsuit and dropped the ESA claims that CBD was primarily using as part of an attempt to obtain a ban on the use of lead ammunition for hunting on these federal lands at issue.

On December 10, 2010, NRA filed its “summary judgment” brief in the case Several other briefs have also been filed, and all remaining briefs will be filed by the end of February 2011. A hearing date will be set after the court receives all of the briefs. Because NRA intervened in the case on a narrow issue regarding the use of lead ammunition in northern Arizona (and the case has many other elements), it is possible the lead ammunition related aspect of this case may be resolved as early as this spring.

To see key documents filed in this case, visit http://michellawyers.com/cbdvblm.

About:
The California Rifle and Pistol Association “CRPA,” founded in 1875, is dedicated to defending the rights of law-abiding citizens to responsibly use firearms for self-defense and the defense of their loved ones, for sport, and for all other legal activities. CRPA is the official state association of the National Rifle Association. A California non-profit association, CRPA is independently directed by its own Board of Directors. CRPA’s members include law enforcement officers, prosecutors, professionals, firearm experts, the general public, and loving parents. CRPA has always worked to reduce the criminal misuse of firearms and firearms accidents, while actively promoting and organizing the competitive shooting sports and Olympic training programs in California. We are proud to say that many CRPA competitors are among the best in the world. Visit: www.crpa.org

Anti-Hunters Quietly Running for Anchorage Fish & Game Committee Elections

Anchorage Second Amendment Task Force

Anchorage, AK --(Ammoland.com)- The Anchorage Fish & Game Advisory Committee will hold their elections for regular seats on January 4th at 7:00 pm at the Anchorage Baptist Temple Children’s Ministry Gym, located at 6575 E Northern Lights Blvd.

The public that is interested in serving on the advisory committee is encouraged to prepare and provide an 81/2 x 11 bio for posting at the meeting for public review.

Also on the agenda will be an opportunity for public testimony. For more information contact Steve Flory at 727-3762.

This is our list of candidates below.

Just like at Matt Valley, the word is that the Anti’s are trying to keep a low profile hoping we do not show up as in the past or hoping that we split our vote.

They are planning a large turnout but want to keep it off the net till the last possible minute. Their goal is to be in place in order to stop Predator management in region 4 in March.

I can not stress enough how much as been accomplished in the last year. We have finally removed the members who were attempting to keep the AAC from it ‘s mission. Now we need to insure progress in the next year. There will be 2 Alternates appointed by the committee per regulation, these posts are a spring board to the full seats so if you have anyone who is interested please forward the information to Steve Flory 727-3762.

Please vote for the following pro hunting, pro gun candidates:

• Mark Campbell
• Joel Doner
• Bruce Morgan
• Kevin Sparrowgrove
• Zach Stubs
• Grant Klotz

About:
The mission of The Anchorage Second Amendment Task Force is to provide Alaskans with the knowledge of the meaning and true purpose of the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution, with which they may conduct themselves as responsible citizens of our republic. Visit: www.anchorage2atf.com

Arizona Game and Fish Department

PHOENIX, AZ – -(Ammoland.com)- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit today announced that, while conservation of desert bighorn sheep is a purpose of the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge and Wilderness, the existing record is not sufficient to demonstrate that the 2007 installation of the Yaqui and McPherson wildlife waters was necessary to reverse the historic decline in the Kofa desert bighorn sheep herd.

The Court returned the case for further action to the U.S. District Court for Arizona, which originally found in favor of the actions taken by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and Arizona Game and Fish Department on behalf of the herd.

The options available to the District Court include permitting the Service to supplement the record to more clearly demonstrate the necessity of these actions on behalf of wildlife, an approach the Department supports.

Details about wildlife water developments and other efforts to reverse the decline of the Kofa herd may be found at the Department’s website at www.azgfd.gov/kofa.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. If anyone believes that they have been discriminated against in any of the AGFD’s programs or activities, including employment practices, they may file a complaint with the Director’s Office, 5000 W. Carefree Highway, Phoenix, AZ 85086-5000, (602) 942-3000, or with the Fish and Wildlife Service, 4040 N. Fairfax Dr. Ste. 130, Arlington, VA 22203. Persons with a disability may request a reasonable accommodation or this document in an alternative format by contacting the Director’s Office as listed above.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a lower court ruling which protected active wildlife conservation efforts on National Wildlife Refuge lands.

In 2007, environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) after the FWS had restored wildlife watering devices within the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge in Arizona on lands designated as “wilderness areas.” The watering devices are critical to the survival of bighorn sheep and other desert species.

The groups’ lawsuit claimed that the Wilderness Act prohibited the FWS from constructing the watering devices because the Act required that wilderness areas be left totally unaffected by human activities.

The Service, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF), and a host of other conservation groups argued that the wilderness designation within the Refuge did not prohibit the FWS from engaging in active wildlife conservation efforts. Overall, the USSAF argued that the Refuge was required to be managed to conserve wildlife pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act, even on lands designated as wilderness areas.

In 2008, Judge Mary H. Murguia of the U.S. District Court for Arizona sided with the FWS and USSAF and found that the Wilderness Act did not prohibit active wildlife management in the Kofa areas.

By a 2 to 1 vote, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision. The Court found that the FWS could not construct or maintain watering devices unless it found that devices were “necessary” for bighorn sheep conservation. It also found that the FWS could not show that the devices were “necessary” for sheep conservation until the FWS showed first that banning hunting, banning sheep translocations, controlling mountain lions, and restricting other forms of human visitation would not sufficiently conserve the sheep.

“This is truly a misguided and unfortunate ruling by the Ninth Circuit,” said Bud Pidgeon, USSAF president and CEO. “Precedent from this lawsuit could severely handicap the FWS’s wildlife conservation efforts in the future.”
In light of the recent decision, the USSAF will be examining all remaining options to minimize the effects of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling.

Joining the USSAF in the lawsuit were several other conservation groups including: Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society, Arizona Deer Association, Arizona Antelope Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundaton, Yuma Valley Rod & Gun Club, Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association.

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.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Are you willing to help pass on your passion for the outdoors to the next generation?

Then consider volunteering as a Local Field Director (LFD) with the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance (USSA) and U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF)!

The USSA is gearing up for another year of grassroots battles against the anti-hunting movement and the USSAF is working to continue bringing the joys of the outdoors to hundreds of thousands of youth through our Trailblazer Adventure Program. By becoming an LFD, you will be on the front lines, defending our outdoor heritage. In fact, Local Field Directors are a critical component in protecting our outdoor right from coast to coast.

LFDs play an indispensable role in helping the USSAF organize our nationally recognized Trailblazer Adventure Program. They are “on the ground” at locations around the country facilitating Trailblazer events. The goal is to guarantee that youth and their families have the type of experience that will keep them interested in the outdoors. Thanks to the efforts of dozens of LFDs, the Trailblazer Program has had one million participants go through since its beginning in 2001.

Do you want the Anti's deciding your Hunting Future? Act Now!

LFDs also visit local sportsmen’s clubs to promote the missions of the USSA and USSAF. They help organize political and fundraising rallies and a variety of other vital activities.

Members of this elite group have received special attention across the nation. Howard Robinson, an LFD from Arkansas, was awarded the “People’s Choice Unsung Hero” award for 2010 from Outdoor Life magazine. He was recognized at a special event at the 2010 SHOT Show. Mike Kapp, another LFD from Wisconsin, made it onto the “Outdoor Life 25” 2010 list honoring the efforts of top sportsmen from across the country.

Although this is a volunteer position, the USSA and USSAF cover work-related expenses and, depending on the activity, provide compensation for time invested.

If you want to help protect outdoor traditions for future generations, we need your help.

Please contact Frank Price, Field Services Director at fprice@ussportsmen.org or call (614) 888-4868, ext. 202 for information about how you can protect our heritage for future generations by becoming a Local Field Director.

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.org.

HumaneWatch.org

Washington, DC –-(Ammoland.com)- Today the nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) pointed to the 2010 “Watchdog Report” from Animal People News, which determined the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) spends 50 cents of every donated dollar on continued fundraising and additional overhead costs.

HSUS has a holiday fundraising goal of $1.2 million, of which a staggering $600,000 will likely go to raise more money, pay lobbyists, and fund HSUS’s $11 million pension plan. HSUS’s skewed spending priorities leave countless shelters without funds in today’s tough economy.

Animal People News, the well-regarded newspaper of the animal rights movement, studied HSUS’s 2009 federal income tax return and determined that 50% of HSUS costs were “overhead,” not 29% as HSUS claims. CCF’s own analysis of HSUS’s recent tax filings indicates that HSUS shares less than one percent of the public’s contributions with America’s underfunded pet shelters.

“The holidays are all about giving but HSUS seems more interested in taking, keeping, and wasting,” said David Martosko, CCF’s Director of Research. “Homeless dogs and cats deserve better. American’s should support their local humane societies which are far more efficient with each precious dollar.”

In addition to the Animal People News report, HSUS received a “D” rating in the American Institute of Philanthropy’s most recent quarterly “CharityWatch” guide. And Charity Navigator now gives HSUS one star (out of four) for organizational efficiency.

These near-failing grades are a consequence of HSUS’s factory-fundraising practices and incompetent nonprofit management. The Los Angeles Times reports that of the $8.6 million HSUS raised through California telemarketing campaigns between 1997 and 2006, only $976,000 made it to HSUS. And HSUS’s most recent tax return shows that the group spent an exorbitant $3,999 for each animal its “rescue operations” saved.

Martosko added, “Animal lovers need to know the difference between HSUS and real humane societies. The only way to be sure your donations will help homeless dogs and cats is to give to organizations in your own community.”

For more information or to arrange an interview, please visit www.HumaneWatch.org or call Allison Miller at 202.463.7112

The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit watchdog organization that informs the public about the activities of tax-exempt activist groups. It is supported by American consumers, business organizations, and foundations.

Attention All States: Prepare to be Sued Over Wolves

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation recently submitted comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) urging the removal of wolves in the Western Great Lakes region as a listed species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

These comments were submitted as part of the FWS’ 12-month review of whether or not wolves in these areas (mainly Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin) should be removed from Federal protection and returned to state management.

In these areas, wolves have exploded past population goals and the FWS has tried to remove them from ESA protection several times. Sadly, each time the FWS has moved to delist the wolves the anti-hunting crowd has blocked the delisting with a lawsuit.

After reading through some of the comments submitted by animal rights groups, like the Center for Biological Diversity, the Humane Society of the United States, Help Our Wolves Live, and the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund one thing is obvious -

Their sights remain set on the courts.

Not only are they preparing to challenge any move by the Service to delist the wolves in the courts, they are preparing to argue every angle imaginable to win.

Even though wolves have far exceeded recovery goals, these groups know that in court, the smallest technical detail, unrelated to whether or not the wolves have recovered, can block the delisting.

This tactic undermines wildlife conservation by taking conservation decisions out of the hands of wildlife professionals and putting them in the hands of judges. Unchecked wolf populations threaten stable populations of other wildlife like deer and elk, they threaten the safety of hunting dogs and pets, and they threaten livestock. And, as wolf populations continue to grow, the possibility of aggressive wolf incidents towards people will also grow.

Moreover, these lawsuits can delay the delisting of a species for years on end while costing the states and federal government thousands of taxpayer dollars.

Overall, there is too much at stake for the management of a fully recovered wolf population, or any other wildlife population for that matter, to be based on a technical legal ruling instead of science based conservation.

18 Pet Dogs Killed by Wolves in Wisconsin in 2010

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.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Leave it to PETA to go for a headline by going after a celebrity that happens to hunt.

In this case it aimed at former Alaska Governor and Republican vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin.

Meanwhile, PETA also offered to “help” cash strapped Kansas. Needless to say, there were strings attached to the offer.

First, PETA issued a scathing press statement after the airing of a recent episode of Sarah Palin’s new reality show entitled Sarah Palin’s Alaska. The episode followed Palin as she hunted caribou in her home state.

The statement from PETA Vice President Dan Mathews, said:

“Sarah seems to think that resorting to violence and blood and guts may lure people into watching her boring show, but the ratings remain as dead as the poor animals she shoots.”

Governor Palin responded to the criticism preemptively. She issued a comment on her Facebook page saying,

“Tonight’s hunting episode of Sarah Palin’s Alaska ‘controversial’? Really? Unless you’ve never worn leather shoes, sat upon a leather couch or eaten a piece of meat, save your condemnation of tonight’s episode. I remain proudly intolerant of anti-hunting hypocrisy.”

“It’s great to see someone put PETA in their place,” said Doug Jeanneret, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance vice president of marketing. “Kudos to Sarah Palin for not caving in to pressure from these extreme animal rightists.”

Switching gears, PETA also again offered “help” to a government facing tough economic times. This time the target was Kansas.

PETA has indicated it would pay rent to the state if Kansas builds a huge anti-fishing sign at the Miami State Fishing Lake in Fontana. The sign would depict a dog with a fish hook in its lip and say, “If You Wouldn’t Do This to a Dog, Why Do It to a Fish?”

PETA got the clever idea when it learned that Kansas was looking to sell some of its assets in order to plug a $500 million budget shortfall. According to PETA Executive Vice President, Tracy Reiman, “Our proposal would help Kansas stave off the sale of valuable assets and help the fish in Miami State Fishing Lake live in peace.”

Current Governor Mark Parkinson declined the offer.

Spokeswoman Amy Jordan Wooden was quoted in the media as saying, “Governor Parkinson appreciates the long-standing history and tradition of fishing in Kansas.”

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.org.

Huron-Manistee National Forest - NO HUNTING ALLOWED

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- As a result of a recent anti-hunting court ruling, the U.S. Forest Service is starting a formal review of its Management Plan for the Huron-Manistee National Forest to consider banning hunting with firearms in some areas.

In September, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Forest Service’s regulations required that it consider banning hunting with guns on lands designated as “semi-primitive.”

The Court found that the noise associated with gun hunting could harm the quality of the recreational experience of hikers, backpackers, and cross county skiers.

Just as troublesome, the Court ruled that the Forest Service was required to consider closing these areas to gun hunting in places where there is other public, non-Forest land nearby that is open to gun hunting. This could require the Forest Service to close lands currently open for gun hunting when other state or federal hunting lands are opened.

The court ruling has prompted the Forest Service to start a formal review of the Huron-Manistee Management Plan. Primarily, the review will focus on whether or not hunting with guns should be banned on the “semi-primitive” areas.

Sportsmen will be given opportunities to submit comments to the Forest Service throughout the review process.

“This court ruling is a major threat to hunting on these lands and across the country,” said Rob Sexton, USSA vice president for government affairs.

“Anti-hunters will likely use this ruling to try and force the Forest Service to ban gun hunting on other Forest lands.”

On October 26th, the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and a coalition of nineteen other leading conservation groups sent a letter to the Forest Service requesting that it rewrite the regulations the Court used to render the anti-hunting decision.

The USSA will keep sportsmen apprised of when and where they can submit comments on this issue.

About the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance
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. For more information about the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and its work, call (614) 888-4868 or visit its website, www.ussportsmen.org.

New Jersey Fish and Game

Trenton, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- The NJ DEP has announced that a state Appellate Division Court today dismissed a legal challenge to the Comprehensive Black Bear Management Policy (CBBMP), clearing the way for a week-long bear hunt that will take place in Northwest New Jersey starting on Monday.

A two-judge panel rejected a request for an injunction made by the New Jersey Animal Protection League and the Bear Education and Resource Group to prevent the State’s first black bear hunt since 2005.

“The facts and science are clear,” said DEP Commissioner Bob Martin. “There are a growing number of black bears in New Jersey and a resultant increase in public complaints about bear and human encounters. This is clearly a public safety issue that requires responsible action by DEP and the Fish and Game Council.”

“Hunting is the only proven and most cost-effective method of wildlife population control, one that is utilized successfully by other states,” said Commissioner Martin.

“But understand that hunting is just one facet of our comprehensive black bear policy which also includes many other important measures designed to deal with the black bear issue.”

The CBBMP includes a common sense mix of bear management tools, including public education, research, bear habitat analysis and protection, non-lethal bear management techniques and enhanced efforts to keep human food sources, especially household trash, away from bears to limit bear-human encounters.

The two animal rights organizations sought a court order to stay the bear hunt. That legal request came a week after Commissioner Martin issued a letter that also denied their stay request for a hunt that is scheduled for a seven-county region, including parts of Sussex, Warren, Hunterdon, Passaic, Morris, Somerset and Bergen counties.

The bear population just in northwestern New Jersey has grown from 500 bears in 1992 to more than 3,400 bears today, and there are an uncounted number of bears that have now been encountered in all 21 New Jersey counties.

Although bear related complaints vary from year to year due to environmental factors, serious bear incidents have increased commensurate with the black bear population, up by 96 percent from 2006 through 2009, according to DEP wildlife officials. There have been 233 serious Category One encounters with aggressive black bears so far this year, an issue that requires action by the DEP to provide relief to residents in areas of the state with the densest bear population.

Since the 1980s, New Jersey’s black bear population has been increasing and expanding southward and eastward from forested areas of northwestern New Jersey. There have been increased sightings of bears this year in many suburban towns and urban areas, where black bears have not been previously been encountered.

The Fish and Game Council in July adopted the CBBMP, which includes a black bear hunting season, to deal with an overpopulation of bears and problems they are causing. The Council cited increasing damage to personal property and threats to public safety as key reasons for its vote.

The black bear hunt is scheduled to run concurrent with the six-day firearm deer hunting season, December 6-11. It will be held in portions of a 1,000 square-mile area north of Route 78 and west of Route 287 in Morris, Sussex, Warren, Passaic, Hunterdon, Bergen and Somerset counties.

• To view the court’s decision visit: http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/bearcase.pdf
• To review the State’s Comprehensive Black Bear Management Policy, visit: http://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/bearpolicy10.htm
• To view specific rules and requirements for the black bear hunt, visit: http://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw/bearseas10.htm

Mask wearing animal rights activists should think twice before targeting private residences in the nation’s capital.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Washington D.C. --(Ammoland.com)- Mask wearing animal rights activists should think twice before targeting private residences in the nation’s capital. A recently passed law by the D.C. City Council offers new protections for those on the receiving end of such protests.

On November 23, the Council passed the “Residential Tranquility Act of 2010.” The bill, sponsored by Councilwoman Mary Cheh, was developed due to constituent complaints involving the group called Defending Animal Rights Today and Tomorrow or DARTT.

The group organizes protests outside private residences. These often involve the wearing of masks and shouting slogans, like “you should die” throughout the night.

According to Councilwoman Cheh, “They scared some people so much that they feel like prisoners in their own homes.”

The legislation gives police the ability to arrest protesters under a set of limited conditions.

Those include:

• protesting outside a private residence between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.;
• wearing masks during the demonstration;
• Failure to notify the police at least two hours in advance of the demonstration.

DARTT is a D.C. based branch of a larger organization called Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. That group was formed in 1996. It focuses on protesting a European company, Huntingdon Life Sciences, which provides animals for scientific research.

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.org.