Search Site   
News Stories at a Glance
Deere 4440 cab tractor racked up $18,000 at farm retirement auction
Indiana legislature passes bills for ag land purchases, broadband grants
Make spring planting safety plans early to avoid injuries
Michigan soybean grower visits Dubai to showcase U.S. products
Scientists are interested in eclipse effects on crops and livestock
U.S. retail meat demand for pork and beef both decreased in 2023
Iowa one of the few states to see farms increase in 2022 Ag Census
Trade, E15, GREET, tax credits the talk at Commodity Classic
Ohioan travels to Malta as part of US Grains Council trade mission
FFA members learn about Australian culture, agriculture during trip
Timing of Dicamba ruling may cause issues for 2024 planting
   
Archive
Search Archive  
   
Keeping up with the ‘antis’ and the rightists takes time

Time marches on, and so does the ever-vigilant watch of the U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance in battling the anti-hunting, -trapping and -fishing factions here in the United States. I thank the dear Lord for people like Bud Pigeon and the USSA for their continued vigilance.

As usual, the animal-rights fringe of the far left are always up to their old tricks, and continually inventing some new ones. Just monitoring the radical groups who would take away all outdoor rights, rituals and traditions wouldn’t be so bad, but it seems even our own government bears watching as well.

Please, excuse me for my candid observations, but I have kept my comments brief and confined to parentheses:
Prohibit trapping in wildlife refuges? (It’s okay to trap … just don’t use a trap.)

A bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives would ban the use of the most common types of traps used to control predator populations within the National Wildlife Refuge System. House Resolution 3710 would make it illegal to use traps that “kill or capture wildlife by physically restraining any part of the animal” within the Refuge system.

The definition includes traps such as Conibear-style traps and foothold traps that are used to control both predator and nuisance populations. Proposed penalties include fines, jail time and forfeiture of traps.

“Trapping is universally regarded by the wildlife management community as an invaluable tool to control predators and furbearers,” said Pidgeon, USSA president and CEO. “The USSA will be working to kill this bill should it gain any traction.”

Decision defending wildlife management to be reviewed. (No water or habitat management in my wilderness area.)

It seems even providing water and initiating management practices for rare, threatened and endangered species is not acceptable to some extremist groups. Last year, a federal court ruled to protect hunting and wildlife management in the National Wildlife Refuge System, and environmentalists appealed the ruling.

In late October, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to hear oral arguments. The case, initially brought in 2007 by environmental groups, intended to block wildlife management projects to benefit desert bighorn sheep, mule deer and other species in the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge.

In 2008, Judge Mary H. Murguia of the U.S. District Court for Arizona decided in favor of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). This judicial decision preserved the principle of active wildlife management within national wildlife refuges, even those with part of their land being designated as “wilderness” under the National Wilderness Act.

The plaintiffs, Wilderness Watch and Arizona Wilderness Coalition, had claimed FWS violated the Wilderness Act by constructing and restoring wildlife watering devices on the Refuge.

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund (USSLDF), the litigation arm of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF), moved to defend FWS and several sportsmen groups in the case, arguing a “Wilderness” designation does not preclude wildlife conservation and active management.

Joining the USSLDF were other groups, including the Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society, Arizona Deer Assoc., Arizona Antelope Foundation, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, National Rifle Assoc., Safari Club International and the Yuma Valley Rod & Gun Club.

“An overturning of last year’s decision would mean restrictions on measures to conserve wildlife within areas designated as ‘wilderness,” said Rob Sexton, USSAF vice president for government affairs.

Administration policy shortchanges sport fishing. (Did I hear someone say, “No fish for you?”)

The Obama administration recently released a management plan for the oceans and Great Lakes which could have a huge negative impact on fishing in coastal areas. The policies outlined in the Interim Report of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force will govern federal ocean and Great Lakes waters.

Of concern to many organizations is the absence of any references in the report to the positive impact recreational anglers have on aquatic conservation. Instead, it raises an alarm as to what the framework for zoning in these waters will be when the final report is presented to the president by December.

The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of Farm World. Readers with questions or comments may contact Jack Spaulding by e-mail at jackspaulding@hughes.net or by writing to him in care of this publication.

12/9/2009