Think Progress

Judge reinstates rule banning roads in national forests.

By Guest Blogger on Sep 20th, 2006 at 5:02 pm

Judge reinstates rule banning roads in national forests.

A federal judge has restored the “Roadless Rule,” a ban on road construction in nearly one-third of national forests (58.5 million acres in 38 states and Puerto Rico). President Bush overturned the rule, established by President Clinton, in favor of much looser policy of requiring state governors to petition for federal forest protection.

Comments
59

59 Responses to “Judge reinstates rule banning roads in national forests.”

Republicans are the fear and smear party says:

Bush’s plans to destroy America aren’t going very well this week….
September 20th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
SKdeA says:

Hopefully a trend!
September 20th, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Wayne A. Schneider says:

It has always amazed me how the Bush Administration views pubilc property as theirs to give away. I applaud US District Judge Elizabeth Laporte for this ruling. How long before they start smearing her?
September 20th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
turtle says:

I think the push-back to years of Bush incompetence, mismanagement, and lying is finally beginning to materialize. The people have had enough.
September 20th, 2006 at 5:31 pm
Kermit the Freedom Frog says:

Bush needs authorization to use extraordinary methods to persuade legislators and judges.
September 20th, 2006 at 5:36 pm
budpaul says:

Boy, them damn librul judges, always protecting us from roads and stuff. Bastards.
America’s Least Wanted
September 20th, 2006 at 5:38 pm
Punchy says:

I smell a signing statement….
September 20th, 2006 at 5:46 pm
Roger_Roger says:

Now I know you all think I am this neo conservative, but this was a very smart ruling. I have a passion for hiking, hunting, and fishing but the scene is wrecked many times by nasty jet skis, snow mobiles, and 4 wheelers. There is nothing that piss’ me off more then to have some jerk on a loud snow mobile drive right underneath my bow stand and wreck the whole morning. I am a big fan of ridding our parks and nature areas of all motorized vechiles and boats.

You see, unlike the ultra lib. folks hear that are “big” environmentalists, we normal folks are the ones that actually use and enjoy nature. We aren’t in some skyrise 1 million dollar condo in LA complaining about how to save ANWAR.

I have been to ANWAR and it is amazing. Some of you big on this topic should actually come to the outdoors once in awhile.

Also, I still think it is time for the moderate environmentalist groups to join with the large hunting organizations. Us hunters have done more to save wildlife then anything PETA could ever dream of. You see, guys like me cherish wildlife. I even own 250 acres. When I bought it, it was a black dirt cornfield. I worked with the local DNR to plant CRP grass, retile it to make some of it into swamp and even plant various types of foriage that deer love. On top of all that, I take a very small amount of game. People like me are the ones that bring back habitat and increase wildlife numbers. I also fish all summer and haven’t keep a single fish in over 5 years. Catcha nd release is very important. I am also a member of Muskie’s INC. We have raised millions of dollars each year which we use to buy stocks of fish that we donate to the DNR to help our lakes get better.

Outdoorsmen, Hunters, Fishermen, and big city environmentalist groups need to unite. They all have the same endgoal in mind anyways.
September 20th, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Dick says:

Aww I can just see poor Pombo crying his little $$$$ out..=)
September 20th, 2006 at 6:34 pm
ForTruth says:

God your such a stud Roger, sittin in your bow stand for days at a time so you can be like Ted Nugent, crap on yourself, piss yourself, so you can get that kill.

America is the only place where people hunt on a full stomach. (ok maybe not)

Yeah Roger, I never go outside and enjoy nature.

Glad to see you support this decision.
September 20th, 2006 at 6:36 pm
LiesNDeceit says:

Roger Roger,

My how the twisted mind works.

Us enviromentalists view you hunters as part of the problem. See before men hunted for fun, it was to survive. There’s something sick in your head to kill for fun. And the problem is you hunter types have killed all the other natural predators, wolves, bears, lions, tigers, and it was these animals who thinned herds by killing the weaker. You instead go for the biggest bulls so you can nail their head on your walls.

And there’s something even sicker about someone who hunts with a bow, which more than likely ends up with the animal suffering beause you good ole boys more often than not mix alcohol and weapons, and couldn’t hit the bulls eye sober.

So don’t call yourself normal folks, anyone hunting with a bow is not normal. Unlike you hunters, us enviromentalists respect life, and think it’s not there for game. And respecting the life your taking should ensure the animal is brought down and put out of it’s misery. I’ve see too many photos of animals running around in the wild with arrows sticking in them. You’re sick dude.

But alas you repukiliclowns will project your BS anywhere, and anyway you can.
September 20th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
ForTruth says:

Hey now, Roger is a hunter and he is trying to find common ground here so we can work together. I can chew on that.

Its funny though, these types feel they are helping the ecology of a habitat. Well yes they are in today’s f*cked up habitat, due to the natural cycle being severly disrupted, we need “hunts” to thin herds, etc. Did anyone tell the hunters this was all created by man overhunting to begin with? like all the predators are gone, and a lot of other game that used to be present, is now gone.

Whatever motivates a person to preserve whats left of nature, I’ll give him that.
September 20th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
Dick says:

Now I know you all think I am this neo conservative, but this was a very smart ruling. I have a passion for hiking, hunting, and fishing but the scene is wrecked many times by nasty jet skis, snow mobiles, and 4 wheelers. There is nothing that pissâ€™ me off more then to have some jerk on a loud snow mobile drive right underneath my bow stand and wreck the whole morning. I am a big fan of ridding our parks and nature areas of all motorized vechiles and boats.

I never said I thought you were a neo-conservative, I was thinking that you were a ‘true-conservative’ that has been screwed by the neo-conservatives as many others have with the destruction of social infrastructure and the dissembling of the Constitution.

I agree with this post, I am not into hunting though — but I have always worked outdoors and still mostly do today. You couldn’t pay me to work in a office again.

Anyway, Hunting with a Bow is not illegal nor is catching a fish with a hook…so I don’t see much point doing alot of finger pointing when we all wear leather.
September 20th, 2006 at 6:51 pm
CoffinsDrapedWithFlags says:

Looks like frat boy is batting 0 for 3

1st loss – Supreme Court ruled his NSA wiretapping program was illegal.
2nd loss – The Senate has NOT voted to support his torture police.
3rd loss – Court overturns his corporate logging welfare program.

He must be furious… bet it won’t be long until he returns to his best friend – alcohol… and then he is called the “devil” by another democratically elected official from another nation.

During his Rose Garden news conference last Friday, he was on the brink of completely losing control… he responses were all over the place and he never really answered any questions, at least not the hard ball questions.

Poor, poor, dictator chimp… it must be a very lonely life. Only Karl loves you… frat boy.
September 20th, 2006 at 6:55 pm
Mark says:

Damned activist judges!

It reminds me of way back in ‘01 before George became emorer of the world. George and his cronies did nto like the Clinton adminsitration ban on Snowmobiles in Yellowstone. George’s adminsitration commisioned a study to show that no harm was being done. The study came back and said yes, harm was being done and recomneded no more snowmobiles in yellowstone. So the adminsitraion readmitted them to the park. Thsi was before they learned to bury reports that did nto jibe with their views.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
theswan says:

Might it be we can leave our kids some of our National Parks System for their kids use? Sounds like a plan to me.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
CoffinsDrapedWithFlags says:

Roger-Roger
Also, I still think it is time for the moderate environmentalist groups to join with the large hunting organizations.

You are right on with this statement. As a member of Trout Unlimited, I am well aware that there are many environmental groups that are working with hunting groups to save our environment. A healthy woodland along with a healthy stream and wetlands, benefits all… I don’t hunt – I do fly fish, catch and release with barbless hooks. Even though I don’t hunt because I personally would have a hard time killing an animal (catch and release?), I respect hunters that respect the environment and the animals that they hunt. Hunters and environmentalists are really working for the same goal – save our world.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
CoffinsDrapedWithFlags says:

#11 Lies&Deciet

I have to disagree with you on your comment. I am a strong environmentalist, partically when it comes to saving and preserving watersheds. Bow hunting is challenging and the animal often times gets away without being injured. Then there is muzzles loaders… now it is even more difficult to have a succesfull hunt with one of these rifles.

I think you are being unfair to Roger. I probably don’t agree with a lot of Roger’s thinking but when it comes to hunters and environmentalists working together to improve our environment, I’m all for it. Extremists never win… regardless of which side of an issue they stand.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:15 pm
CoffinsDrapedWithFlags says:

Here in PA, we need hunters to help thin the deer herds that have grown because of all the housing developments that have displaced the deer habitat. In Valley Forge National Park, the deer herd is large and almost tame and the deer are wrecking havoc with the environment. What some people don’t realize is that overpopulations of deer can destroy a forest. We still have cougars in PA, but they are in the central part of the state. There are many farmers in PA that will allow hunters to cull the deer herd on their properties. The farmer benefits because the hunters will usually give the farmer some venison in return.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:21 pm
Kermit+the+Freedom+Frog says:

As long as Roger insists that libs are sitting in $1 million condos and never go out into nature, I say let the stereotypes fly!
September 20th, 2006 at 7:23 pm
Marie says:

Do I detect a little snowball movement here? Will we see a few more emboldened to stand up to the tyrant when his rewrites, de-signings, and overturnings are detrimental to the nation?
He calls them “activist judges” when what he really means is judges who rule against the boy-king’s petulant behavior.
September 20th, 2006 at 7:27 pm
meetmeineleusis says:

I will agree on the criticism of “Good Old Boy” drunken trophy hunters though. A pair of those kind of assholes shot one of our cows last year (Firing into our property, meaning they would have had to trespass to retrieve it anyway) thinking it was a trophy buck. They were firing their rifles before they even got out of their truck. Morons.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:54 pm
Zooey says:

Yay Roadless Rule!

This is a huge hot button in Idaho. Very polarized opinions — some feel the way Rogerx2 does, others think they can’t “use” those ares without roads.

There just ought to be places on this world you can’t get to using your SUV or 4-wheeler.

Glad we could finally find some common ground Rogerx2, but do you have to be such a bitch about it?
September 20th, 2006 at 9:00 pm
matthew says:

The hunters are a bigger problem than the deer in PA. The deer problem there is a direct result of mis-managment and urban sprawl. But the hunters like it that way because it gives them an excuse to hunt. The vast majority of them (in PA in particular) don’t give a damn about the environment, just look at how many of them use quads (four-wheelers). Deer hunting is a big part of the culture of PA, I remember having school days off for deer season, and cub scout troops selling hides on the side of the road. They love it.
September 20th, 2006 at 9:01 pm
Maven says:

Whoa, Lies – pick on Roger for other things if you want, but lay off on the bowhunting. It takes a lot more skill to hunt with a bow and arrow than with a gun – and, unlike with a gun, you can’t drink and hunt. Got any idea what alcohol does to the steadiness of your bow arm? Ever even USE a bow? (I have – for target, not for hunting.)

I give him props for his efforts on this particular issue, though I disagree with practically everything else he says.
September 20th, 2006 at 10:45 pm
JPark says:

Well, bowhunting is slightly more fair than hunting with a rifle but I would love to see more hunters dying on the rack.
September 20th, 2006 at 10:53 pm
Chris says:

We’ve heard Bush doublespeak for the last six years in which the “War on Terror” is actually a war for oil, and religious freedom gets perverted to conservative Christian dogma; now, unfortunately we get the return of Clinton-era double-speak.

Make no mistake – the Clinton “Roadless” rule was government double-speak at its best with a liberal, environmentalist spin. It worked like this: got an area with trails less than 50″ wide, used for many years by motorized and non-motorized recreation alike? Guess what – we can call that area “Roadless” because by definition (the Forest Service’s definition, that is) roads are more than 50″ wide. Everybody likes the sound of “Roadless” aras – they sound so, so, pristine…

Gee, we now have all these “roadless” areas so let’s make them Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) – oh, we’ll have to lock out the motorized and mechanized recreation users that have been there for years, but that’s OK ’cause machines are BAAAAAD.

Gosh, we have all these WSAs – let’s make them Wilderness Areas (even though, because the areas have recreation trails and other signs of human use they were passed over for inclusion in Wilderness Area legislation previously).

Voila, we now have locked up public lands that were previously open to us citizens, with widely dispersed recreation opportunities, and created areas that only the most healthy among us with the greatest available vacation time will ever see. But that’s OK, because we’ve “saved” all these “Roadless” areas and turned them into “Wilderness”. Bullshit.

Bush isn’t the only leader capable of lying to the people. Remember that. The Democratic administration previously in power hasn’t committed the heinous crimes of the current administration, but they still acted in duplicitous ways that hurt Americans. Remember Nafta? Remember the meaning of “is”? Remember lying to Congress and the American people? This site is about progress, and that means progress for everyone, not just the traditional supporters of the Democratic Party.

A tremendous opportunity is coming, for us to clear away the politics of east vs. west, rural vs. urban, labor vs. business. By treating those of us who hunt or fish or even ride OHVs as the enemy, you create the environment that will perpetuate power politics: government of, by, and for the special interest. Environmentalism that takes the Public out of Public Lands is just one more special interest.
September 21st, 2006 at 12:16 am
Roger_Roger says:

Actually,

I donated money to bring back predetors. It is true that we humans killed off the predetors and it is very unfortunate. I enjoy hunting but the “kill” is a very small part. Bow hunting season started last weekend and goes until the end of December. I enjoy it because I get to see wildlife act natural. I get to see things most will never see. Killing a deer (or whatever else your hunting) is simply a small part. Bringing predetors back is vital to bringing nature back to its norm.

BTW, I donate half of my deer meat to the poor each year and eat the rest. It doesn’t go to waste. Bow hunting isn’t anymore cruel then gun hunting either. To say that shows your ignorance of the sport. Bows these days fire arrows that will go straight through a 2,000 pound moose at 60 yards. They are tipped with broadheads that put holes the size a slug would make. I have shot 38 deer, 1 moose, 8 black bears, 1 Grizzly Bear, 2 Elk, and 1 Antelope. I have never had an animal run more then 60 yards before dropping dead. This is because I respect and value wildlife enough to practice my ass off and only take the shot if I know I can put it through there heart. I don’t drink at all in my life, so hunting and drinking doesn’t really appeal to me.

So, on top of the fact that I personally bought 250 acres and made it into habitat again, I also manage it as a true wildlife area. THis means I don’t kill all the predetors. While I enjoy a good coyote hunt, I would only take 1 as to not wipe them out. Furthermore, we hunters are the ones paying these heavy fees for tags and licenses to hunt. That money is what our states primarily use manage our wildlife.

To you that think hunting is bad, you really should go sit with a true bow hunter for an entire season. I garuntee you would enjoy it. Many days you don’t see deer, but you do see things amazing. I have had 6 Bald eagles on my property within 20 yards dive bombing mice. It is an amazing site to be sure. I also have a family of beavers that are really fun to watch. Also seeing red fox, martins, pheasents, wild turkeys, black bears, tons of ducks, geese, and all the other critters is very fun. You see, sitting in a bow stand perfectly still gives you a chance to OBSERVE nature without the wildlife even knowing your there. This creates many situations where you get to see true animal behavior and it is the reason I love hunting.

I also muzzle load hunt and some of you think that is cruel as well. Sadly, this isn’t further from the truth. In Minnesota where I live, true gun hunting season you can only use a shotgun with slugs. My muzzle loader fires bullets much more accurately and it is a .50 caliber. Needless to say, my muzzleloader is much more lethal then what the true gun hunters use.

All but 1 single day of the year, you are in nature enjoying watching it. Only 1 day out of the whole season are you taking your prey. Today, if we stopped all deer hunting, most of the deer would be dead within 3-5 years as there numbers would explode. We have reintroduced timberwolves, but they aren’t doing well. There is simply to much farming and not enough habitat for them. They travel long distances and also attack cattle which means farmers shoot them.

Sadly, humans long ago took the place that premier predetor and it can’t really be changed at this point.

Farmers are also thankful to hunters. My county last year estimated that 25%-30% of every cornfield got eaten by deer. That is ALOT of money lost for the small family farm.

Luckily, our hunter organizations got tegether with the shelters and food shelves and we now have a very nice way to donate our processed game to the poor.

Either way, if you can’t stand the idea of hunting, fine. Go by yourself a treestand and a digital video camera. You will be amazed at what your missing.
September 21st, 2006 at 12:37 am
Zooey says:

Rogerx2,

That’s the best comment I’ve ever read by you. You seem to have a great passion for nature. I’d like to see more of this side of you. I’m not a big fan of hunting, but it’s not hunters like you who give hunting a bad name.
September 21st, 2006 at 1:05 am
Roger_Roger says:

Zooey,

There are bad hunters that aren’t ethical. Then again, there are those bad apples in any crowd. My one true passion in life is nature. I am in the woods before work every morning and after work every night in the fall. It is stunning to watch deer interact. Hell, it gets really fun when you can “call” a deer. I have seen young male bucks actually piss themselves they were so excited to hear a doe”sadly it was me”. I never shot a young animal but it certainly is fun to see them in action. Lately, the big thing has been the flow of Bald Eagles back into our county. I never saw one around my place growing up. Now I would say I see at least 1 everytime I go. WIld turkeys has also been reintroduced by certain wild turkey organizations. THe first time I saw a wild turkey, it scrared the crap out of me. I was in my bow stand a good hour before the sun came up and I constently heard this clucking sound. As the sun finally started to come up, low and behold a female turkey was nested right above me in my tree. A few seconds later, around 20 turkeys took off out of there roast to go have a morning feed. Needless to say, that was a very cool day. We can’t hunt turkeys around my place yet as we are still trying to get the number up. It has been going very very well.

I also worked with the local DNR and provided them funds and the ability to use my land to help the mink population. Mink look like ferrets BTW, but smell more like a skunk. They live down by the river, but are really fasinating to watch. They are very curious and have had a few opportunies to have them come within feet of me to “check me out”. Once they figure out who and what I am, they make load barks that sound like a little dog. I guess it makes sense as they are part of the dog family.

We also are restocking the crane population. It is neat to see a bird fly over your head within feet of you that has a wing spam over 8ft.
September 21st, 2006 at 1:17 am
Bruce+Gorton says:

Roger_Roger

Why not go in for wildlife photography? You get the same sort of experience you just don’t end up killing things. Another alternative that I have always wondered about is possibly allying hunters with scientists – Have the hunters shooting with tranquillisers and the scientists tagging the animals.

That said I eat biltong along with the rest of the population out here, it seems a bit hypocritical to call hunting evil so long as I do that. While I will always argue against hunting if it is cruel (Fox Hunting), if it is unfair (canned hunting) or if it is an endangered species, I don’t think one can really eat meat or wear leather and claim that hunting in general is evil. To a point killing is killing, and I like lamb entirely too much to turn vegetarian.
September 21st, 2006 at 6:19 am
Sharon Cox says:

Good Morning all, Great posts Roger-Roger and everyone…..This old past hunter, present fisher person and noted tree hugger is just weighing in…

You are correct that the sales of licences and work done by the true hunters and fishermen are what has kept our wild life and wilderness areas alive…In years past I have hunted all over Wash. Idaho and Montana. Alway’s taking my camera along with my gun..Never did get into the bow hunting or black powder, should have, just never did. Knew a lot of people who did. First I never liked to get up in trees, like on the ground work better… Any one who think’s hunting is easy hasen’t done it…Real hunting is a lot of work, both in prepairing for the hunt and then the work of packing out your game and prepairing for the freezer..Spent more time going in with pack strings and not much with vehicles…In recent times many are even using LLamas because of their low impact in the wilderness or hunting areas…Well, many in Montana are.

Any gains we can make towards keeping our park’s, wilderness and wildlands is a huge plus considering Pambo and bush have most recently wanted to lease or sell much of our heritage, there by leaving nothing for future generations or even present one’s to hunt on….In all my year’s of hunting and wondering in the back country the biggest threat’s were by huge rancher’s leasing for cheap and reckless city folk’s looking for a place to play in their 4 wheelers…In all thing’s there must ba a balance and there has to be areas where motorized vehicles are not allowed….

Where I live now is close to the cities, on a lake and lot’s of wildlife . Eagle, Mink, Beaver, Muscrat, Deer and Cyote all atound but that to may change due to huge development’s planned. I find no fault with any of the post’s here only one little coment, Roger…I think Mink are of the mustelidae family, that is weasels, ermin, ferrits, or muskiloid (sp) stinky type’s like skunk….Not posative but think maybe…..Keep up the good work and Thank You for the work you are doing……Blessings
September 21st, 2006 at 9:49 am
Roger_Roger says:

I thoght the mustelidae family was a relative of the dog family. I could be wrong. Either way, mink are neat animals. They have this pure chocolate coat, smell bad, and occasionaly have a white patch on there under bellies (RARE, I have only seen one).
September 21st, 2006 at 10:05 am
Zooey says:

How someone could wear a coat made of something stripped off a mink’s back, I’ll never know. It’s sick.

Good morning Sharon & Rogerx2,

I never hunted in my life, but have no problem with ethical hunters (I see plenty of the other kind in my line of work). I had to gas a worm in high school biology, and I thought I was going to die, poor worm.

Have a great day!
September 21st, 2006 at 10:25 am
Sharon Cox says:

Back at ya Roger, Year’s ago I raised mink,(pastels and buffs). as well as a few winter blues. Not sure if they are part of the dog family either but do know they are related some how to the skunk…A little piece of trivia from a old trapper friend I knew..The best way to remove skunk smell is to use immatation vanella, not tomato juice as some believe…Mink are among the meanest of all animels for their size, like the badger, tasmanian devels so on….Having first hand knoledge with raising them I think that is true…The dark brown color are the wild ones and many have the small white patch, some are so dark in color they appear black…Ranch raised mink are many colors from pure white to black and all colors in between…Advise…Unless you have very heavy gloves don’t try to catch one…If you see other colors in the wild they may be escaped ranch raised……I am not a turn loose PETA person…The animels that these groups turn loose for protest’s starve or get run over in traffic, generations of being cage raised make’s them unable to hunt for them selves and survive…..I didn’t like being a mink rancher, it was not in my nature and a dreadful business to be in. I inherited and had to learn the business from feeding to extensive genetic’s.Still I would not go after the people that raise them now or then. Sorry for the length here….Have a good day….Blessings
September 21st, 2006 at 10:28 am
Sharon Cox says:

Good Morning Zooey, Yep! I agree and no I don’t now nor ever did own a mink coat but I do have a nice suade one….Sorry

Still a nightmare to post and takes forever for the post’s to show up…Gave up and bailed yesterday and may do the same again today….Lot’s of rain headed you’re way….Blessings all…
September 21st, 2006 at 10:35 am
CyraBrown says:

I could not bring myself to hunt , unless that was the ONLY way to continue to eat. I respect huners who’s purpose is to consume what they kill. It was how it was done before grocery stores came along. Nothing wrong with that. But killing for ’sport’ is just messed up. It is unecessary, and cruel, and the ‘trophies’ are disgusting. But if the ‘body’ is in the freezer, and the head is on the wall, ok. It’s not the ‘how’ so much as the ‘why’ of it. Do you think the bears that killed and ate “Grizzly Man” and his unfortunate girlfriend, were crowing over what fun it was to kill that annoying S.O.B., who just wouldn’t leave them alone? Sometimes I wonder…
September 21st, 2006 at 10:43 am
Cyra Brown says:

*hunters, not huners
September 21st, 2006 at 10:47 am
Sharon Cox says:

Good Morning Cyra, how are ya?…..Note my posts above and also the fact I had to hunt and raise stock to eat and feed my family. I raised pig’s and cattle on a tiny scale so we could eat and it was not a pleasent thing to do, also had a huge garden and canned and froze everything possible untill 10 year’s ago when it was only me and no longer necessary to survive.. The old timers and I had a lot of work to do to just get by…..I agree canned hunt’s are awful and only supply a need for killing something. It’s not hunting in my opinion, it’s a business……I have known a lot of poachers (by today’s standard’s) as well…People so dirt poor they coulden’t afford to buy a hunting licence, but they only hunted what they absolutely needed to survive….Life has many lessons and many road’s for us all to travel on our way to here in the computer age…

How’s everything in you’re neck of the wood’s?….Blessings..Peace
September 21st, 2006 at 11:04 am
Sharon Cox says:

Sorry Cyra, I didn’t respond to the question….My opinion is,some loose sight of the fact they are encroaching on the wild life terratory in their quest to study and photograph….I alway’s hunted in grizzly territory and took enough fire power for self protection but I respected and gave the bear’s a wide birth…..Notibly there are more people killed by black bear than griz, not many know that but it’s true….Bear are opertunest and not to be taken litely.. They will kill and eat people if hungry..Never did care for bear meat so never hunted them…….Blessings
September 21st, 2006 at 11:13 am
Roger_Roger says:

Actually,

Most ALL states require that hunters take all meat with them. The days of simply cutting off antlers or heads are over for the most part as ethical hunters like myself find that very wrong.

When I hunt Alaska, you actually have to take the entire animal (except for the “guts”) out of the field BEFORE you take anters or the head. These are very good laws. If you kill something, you are responsible for eating it or donating the meat to the needy. Those that don’t use the entire animal, should not be allowed to hunt.

Also, if you were an animal, would you rather be raised on black dirt next to 500+ other animals shoulder to shoulder your whole life or would you rather be wild? Seems like we have to kill animals regardless. My point is that I would much rather rely on my meat from animals that enjoyed free ranging nature instead of being crammed into a barn their entire life.

I also do NOT support Ted Nugent. If you watch his hunting show, you need to look very carefully at the scenery. He almost exclusively hunts on “Game Ranchs”. These are fenced in areas. The hunts are “canned” and the animals have no espace. On top of that, many times the animals are semi-tame. This makes me more upset then PETA does. People like Ted Nugent need to be stopped. Hunting animals inside small fenced area’s is completely wrong IMO. Hell, just watch what he actually shots sometimes. Most are “exotic” species and variations of goats. These aren’t even North American species and are obviously in pens. I have seen many shows that if you look carfully, you can actually see the fence in the background. That piss’ me off in a BIG way.

Hunting “fair chase” is the only way to hunt. You are hunting wild animals that are fully able to get away and espace and most do. Deer hunting, like all wild animal hunting isn’t easy. No times then not, a deer will see or smell you before you even see them and are gone.
September 21st, 2006 at 11:45 am
Roger_Roger says:

I have hunted in Alaska many times. Grizzly bears should NEVER be trusted. THey are one of the few species that will attack out of fear. If you spook a Grizzly, there first instinct is to charge. If you ever are in Alaska, especially up around the artic circle, BRING A RIFLE with a minimum .338 mag with you at all times. I prefer a .375 H&H mag. Even if you are just going on a picture safari, Bring a big ass gun with you. If you don’t, you are begging to be killed. Most of these animals were I have hunted have never seen a human nor heard a gun shot. This adds up to predators that don’t see you as a threat and the situation can become bad. And like I said, bigger is better when it comes to firepower and grizzlies. If they attack, you need a gun that will hit so hard, it will knock the bear on his ass so you have a chance to take another shot. If you use a little rifle, you could put a whole right through there heart and they would still run right to you and kill you before dying themselves. My guide has actually killed 3 grizzlies in 12 years of hunting defending himself. Of course while dangerous, you get what you get when you are out in nature.
September 21st, 2006 at 11:51 am
CyraBrown says:

#39 Sharon- Good morning to you! Amazing that you were living what could reasonably be called a “Pioneer” lifestyle, till so recently. Talk about ‘hard work’! I am humbled by your experience. My Uncle Frank was a life long hunter, the for food type. No trophies, but a whole lot of guns! My cousins and I used to play at the Rifle Range, we’d spend hours picking up empty shells and the ’shot’ that went in them, refill them and try to sell them to the guys at the range. Gosh that was a long time ago… When my Uncle passed away, my Aunt didn’t put a notice in the paper, she didn’t want all of his old hunting buddies coming around, trying to get his guns. I had never thought that ‘group’ would be that way. I was shocked, really. Cheney’s Quail ’slaughter’ is an especially repulsive example of ‘thrill killing’ and speaks to the type of person who indulges in it. They just want to kill something (or someone) just to watch it die. And they take pleasure in being the cause of it. My neck? Rather moist, and all my tomatoes are getting ripe at the same time. I have about 15-17 plants, I forget. I get a little carried away. They are the only things I can grow for some reason. I even killed a “Chia Head”. Bald, bald, bald. I say I have a ‘brown thumb’. :0
September 21st, 2006 at 12:08 pm
Roger_Roger says:

Why is Quail, pheasent, and duck hunting “Thrill killing”? I go hunting for these birds every year. Do you think we hunt them simply for the kill? They are hunted for 2 reasons. 1, Because we enjoy getting out into the wild country, and 2 because they fill our freezers full of wild game that WE EAT. I would guess that me and my family’s meals are at least 80% wild game. People that shot something should eat it, period. If they don’t, most states would take there license and they would get fined at a minimum. There are only a few states left that allow hunters to not use the entire animal and that is wrong. Mostly however, states require all hunters to take any animal the kill home with them. Of course this isn’t something new, those laws have been on the books for over 10 years already.
September 21st, 2006 at 12:19 pm
CyraBrown says:

#44 Rogerx2- I was refering to the Quail hunt where Cheney shot his “friend” in the face. This was not some ‘out in the wild’ event The birds were held until the ‘hunters’ approached, then they were turned loose, to be mowed down easily by the ‘hunters’. That is what I mean by ‘thrill killing’.
September 21st, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Roger_Roger says:

#45

I can’t say I am completely familiar with the hunt itself, just the fact Cheney shot someone.

Quail often stay in thick cover and dog’s find there scent and usually will stop and point. In turn, the hunters get into position and then command a dog to flush them out. That is an example of true Quail hunting. Now if you are saying that people were actually holding the quail and throwing them in the air to be shot at, well that is retarded.

But standard pheasent and quail hunting requires the use of dogs. I myself have a hunting dog. It is very amazing to watch your dog work a field or a swamp for pheasents. Bird hunting without a dog is basically impossible as most upland game birds will just sit tight. If you went hunting for these birds without dogs, you could walk within inches of birds all day long and they would never even move. You would never see one.

Again, if they had people throwing birds in the air in front of them to shot it is just dumb. Clay pigeons work just fine for target practice.
September 21st, 2006 at 1:23 pm
Sharon Cox says:

Roger_Roger, I agree totaly about the big gun’s in bear country….I had a 44 mag…7&1/2 inch barrell black hawk that I carried as a side arm all the time and then for protection in areas I wasen’t hunting in.. Not now, now I have a short barell 357 and an old 30-30. But not hunting anymore…Blessings
September 21st, 2006 at 1:58 pm
Sharon Cox says:

Wow, Cyra….Never met any one who had a brown thumb and killed plant’s….Guess I have been lucky that way, had a neighbor say to me once he thought I could grow an acre of corn on a bowling ball, guess I could then…..Now I have bearing fruit trees in pot’s in my yard…Can’t take the country life out of this transplant…Blessings
September 21st, 2006 at 2:10 pm
Roger_Roger says:

I have actually got into a side project of growing ADENIUM’s. They are an odd plant from the middle east with a large caudex. I finally got my first one to flower after about 12 months.
September 21st, 2006 at 2:22 pm
Roger_Roger says:

Sharon,

Don’t ever shoot a little gun like a .44 mag at a grizzly. All you will be doing is pissing it off. Go big or go home in bear country.
September 21st, 2006 at 2:23 pm
WaltTheMan says:

I once went hunting in an area near Sterling Forest in southern New York State. That about 40 years ago. Apparently it is a region used by people from the city to get their game. It was like a war zone, I was out of there in about 10 minutes. Shoots were being fired like seconds apart and I heard a few bullets fly by. Saw a few hunters in full camouflage which seemed to be a defense as most of the city boys believed that deer have fluorescent orange pelts. My hunting companion beat me back to his truck.
September 21st, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Roger_Roger says:

Public hunting ground is scary. We hunt public land around my county, but it is because we hunters locally seem to have some manners. If I pull up to a certain plot of public land and already see a truck parked next to it, I keep driving. Public hunting I have heard is better out west though since the sizes of the area is much much larger. In Minnesota 40 acres is about the stanrd size of a public piece. That is only large enough to support 1 hunting party at a time.

Anyways, all the way back to my point. Hunting groups and groups that are “environmentalists share the same end goal”. I am part of a group called pheasents forever. We of course are all about increasing habitat. To date, my local chpater in my county as raised 4 million dollars in just the last 10 years. We have used 3 million of it to buy bare black dirt fields. Me and many of my friends then work to change these fields back into true habitat whether it be CRP grass, swamp, or forest. Once we are through getting that land back to how it should be, we donate it to the State in a legal way that will not permit the State to ever sell it or change it. It is pretty cool knowing that the land we worked on for years will now be protected habitat forever. By protected, I mean it can never be turned back into a field or built on. It becomes public hunting land in the end for everyone to enjoy. Many hunters and simple hikers thank us because finding land that is true nature is hard to do if you don’t have cash to buy it yourself. Honestly, the hunting groups and most good hunters are some of the best environmentalists I know. Most all of them want to increase habitat and wildlife. None I know want to kill off predetors. Most actually work to reintroduce them. We are learning that having a healthy fox and coyote population will thin the week deer out of a heard meaning the genetically superior ones now have more resources to thrive in.

Any hunter that breaks the law is hated in my book. I actually have our Minnesota DNR poacher hotline on speed dial on my phone. I average 2-5 calls a year reporting poachers for the last 8 year. 6 of the poachers I turned in even spent jail time. Honestly, there is no one I hate worse then someone that abuses nature and wildlife. But overall, Hunters are not the problem at all. They are largely the solution to bringing back habitat and wildlife.
September 21st, 2006 at 3:28 pm
WaltTheMan says:

#52 – Roger_Roger,
We were both Southern boys. I from Texas and he from Georgia. We had never witnessed such carelessness in any of our experiences in the field. That included the battlefield.
September 21st, 2006 at 9:37 pm
Sharon Cox says:

Yep! I agree on much you have said Roger, the true hunters, enviromentalists and land stuards are the one’s working to keep the balance and habitat…I worked quite a lot on introducing the wolves back in Montana, it was a real struggle..

Funny about the 44 Mag, the guy’s I knew and recomended I carry it all were big game hunters and said it was one of the best for griz and black bear..Saw a few but never had to shoot and test the gun…Only did a lot of target with it…..Blessings All….P. S. Walt that was another reason I gave up hunting in Washington state…..Along with to much underbrush there was so many drunk hunters shooting up everything that moved even if they couldent see it…I alway’s called them brush hunter’s cause that’s what they were shooting at…..
September 21st, 2006 at 10:36 pm
Roger_Roger says:

Sharon,

The problem I have with the .44 for Big bears is that it doesn’t provide the pounds of pressure per square inch required to “knock back” a bear. Sure, the bullet out of a .44 will go right through the bear. THe problem is, the Bear wouldn’t even know it was hit and would continue its attack.

Get yourself at least a .338 Mag, .375 HH mag, ot even a solid pump action .50 caliber short barrel. These weapons will literally knock a bear on its ass even if you hit them in the leg. It gives you a chance to take more shots. It also tells the bear you mean business.

Also, be careful when your practicing with these weapons. They will turn your shoulder black and blue within about 3 shots.
September 22nd, 2006 at 9:38 am
Pee Public Pee Public Pissing says:

Pee Public Pee Public Pissing

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 2:53 am
Pee Female Pee Pee Hole says:

Pee Female Pee Pee Hole

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 10:49 am
Bad Credit Car Loans says:

Bad Credit Car Loans

Bad credit car loans are mainly people who prefer pronto dough with no sweat steps .
April 1st, 2008 at 7:15 pm
fly fishing for trout in the summer says:

fly fishing for trout in the summer

Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok.
April 5th, 2008 at 1:15 am

Judge reinstates rule banning roads in national forests.

Judge reinstates rule banning roads in national forests.

59 Responses to “Judge reinstates rule banning roads in national forests.”

Blogroll