Every five years, the US Fish andWildlife Service (USFWS) publishesits National Survey of Fishing,Hunting, and Wildlife-AssociatedRecreation. While we eagerly awaitthe publication of the full 2016Survey in December, as it will showthe further decline in the number ofactive hunters, the 2016 NationalOverview has been published and itshows a 16% decline. We decided totake a look back to the latest full sur-vey for information that tells anencouraging story if you’re interestedin pushing hunting into the abyss ofextinction. This survey dated 2011,can be found at http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/fhw11-nat.pdf.

It’s an interesting read if you’re a sta-tistics geek.

When we cracked open the publica-tion to page 41, we found some inter-esting tables. The first thing wenoticed is that, in general, huntershave limited formal education.Official USFWS statistics show that47% of hunters have only a high-school education, and 73% of huntersdo not have a four-year collegedegree. Because age is not factoredinto these numbers, this alone is notan indication that education is theenemy of hunting, but a table on page39 shows us that 73% of hunters areaged 35 and older. By age 35 most

people are done with formal school-ing, so it may indeed be said thatthe more educated people are, theless likely they are to enjoy killinghelpless wildlife.

Another telling statistic comes fromthe US Census Bureau. Hispanicsare the quickest growing ethnic groupin the United States, and this does notbode well for the future of hunting.Getting back to page 41 we can seethat Hispanics make up only 2% ofhunters, while non-Hispanic whites (ashrinking segment of American socie-ty) are 94% of all hunters. This indi-cates that kids should be encouraged

THE C.A.S.H. COURIERTHE COMMITTEE TO ABOLISH SPORT HUNTING

A DIVISION OF WILDLIFE WATCH, INC.© 2017 BY WILDLIFE WATCH, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Summer/Fall 2017

MISSION STATEMENT:The mission of C.A.S.H. - Committee toAbolish Sport Hunting - is to accomplishwhat its name says in the shortest pos-sible time. Understanding that abolish-ing hunting entails a process, a seriesof steps taken and not a single actionthat would effect our goal overnight, atime frame cannot be established. Wehope for building a succession of wins,and if not wins immediately then atleast a succession of stirrings of con-sciousness. We hope to encouragethose who are still silent to speak out,awakening community after communityabout the heavy hand of state and fed-eral wildlife management agencies. Wehope to alter whatever belief still existsthat sport hunters are conservationistsand champions of the environment to arealization that they are destroyers ofwildlife and ecosystems in the narrowand broad sense. Where the naturalfeeling for wildlife doesn’t exist, westrive to engender among citizens out-rage that their own rights are violatedby legal hunting and their quality-of-lifediminished.

Luke A. Dommer was the founder of theCommittee to Abolish Sport Hunting. He was itspresident from 1976 until his passing in August1992. Mr. Dommer’s research and publicationsserved as the foundation for the anti-huntingmovement. He remains, through this organiza-tion, an invaluable and dedicated warrior in thebattle to save wild animals, the environment,and general public from the silent economy thatencourages and preys on the passion of a few tokill the wildlife that belongs to all.

Wildlife Watch Inc.a 501(c)3 Not-for-Profit Corporation.

Contributions are tax-deductible.------

C.A.S.H. COURIERPO Box 562 New Paltz, NY 12561

845-256-1400 - Phonewildwatch@verizon.net

Anne Muller - Editor------

Robert Greenough - Desktop Publishingwww.wildwatch.org

www.abolishsporthunting.org

Please see EDUCATION Page 2

PAGE 1

BY JOE MIELE

Education, Ethnicity, GunOwnership, and the Dying

Sport of Hunting

PAGE 2

EDUCATION & THE DYING SPORT OF HUNTINGContinued from page 1

to stay in school and pursue formal education past highschool and college and into graduate school. As we’velearned, education is one of the nails in sport hunting’s cof-fin.

Looking at the 2016 National Overview, we’ve founddata showing that despite the best efforts of the hunt-ing cartel, hunting is less popular now than it has beenin decades. Some may wish to disagree, but the proof isin the data. In 2016, 11.5 million people 16 years old andolder went hunting. This is only 5% of the U.S. popula-tion and a 16% decrease from 2011 to 2016. The numbersof big game hunters fell 20%, and hunters seeking “otheranimals” decreased by 39%. Interestingly, and despiteever increasing costs, total hunting-related spendingdecreased 29% between 2011 and 2016. For the firsttime the report is tracking non-hunting firearm andarchery target shooters, and the number of people whoparticipate in these forms of recreation exceed thenumber of active hunters. In 2016 there were 32 mil-lion target shooters using firearms and 12.4 millionarchery target shooters. The number of non-huntingarchery shooters is larger than the number of allhunters combined. I like that.

Predictably, hunting apologists are coming up with thesame old excuses for why interest in hunting is waning.

Hunting columnist Ken Perrotte of the Free Lance-Star inFredericksburg, VA, blames forest mismanagement, anti-logging “tree-huggers,” and kids who are increasingly bury-ing their faces in smartphones and video games for the lackof interest in hunting. One thing hunters consistently failto see is that hunting is dying because today there isgreater access to information than ever before. Back inthe day, when a child was taken hunting for the first timeand became upset over the needless death of a harmless andhelpless animal, it was much easier for the adult accompa-nying that child to brainwash him by saying “deer are dyingof starvation and we have to thin the herd; nature is cruel;this makes them healthier; it’s a proud and noble tradition,blah blah blah.” Today nearly every child and teenagerhas access to the Internet where truthful informationabout hunting is posted everywhere. They can learn forthemselves how hunting creates overpopulation, devas-tates the environment, and causes horrific suffering.They no longer see hunting in the same distorted lightthat was shining 40 years ago. Is it any wonder whyhunters want to keep kids off their computers andsmartphones?

--------------------------Joe Miele is a board member of C.A.S.H. and former

President.

WHO FINANCIALLY BENEFITTED FROM THISDEVASTATING CRIME? ANSWER: THE WILDLIFECONSERVATION AGENCIES!

C.A.S.H. has been writing about this for a long time, butisn’t it time for the media and anti-gun groups to under-stand the connection between the purchase of firearms andammunition and the US Fish & Wildlife Service(USFWS)?

If bullets aren’t expended, the “wildlife conservationeconomy” would come to a screeching halt.

Normally animals are the recipients of bullets, and thegame agencies’ purpose is to continue to create animal vic-tims to keep the firearms manufacturers in business...

But every weapon used in crime, every bullet shotinto a person, pays into the USFWS and is then doledout to the states depending on the number of huntingpermits sold relative to the state’s land area.

Shouldn’t Congress now be appropriating what is need-ed for people’s funerals, medical bills, hospitalization, andfamilies left without breadwinners when someone is killed

or maimed by firearms in urban crimes?The Pittman-Robertson Act places an excise tax on

firearms and ammunition regardless of the use (except mil-itary and law enforcement equipment) which then goes tothe USFWS. The P-R Act needs to be revisited in thelight of how many people are being killed or injured byfirearms.

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE LAS VEGAS MASSACRE AND HUNTING

PAGE 3

BEARS ARE SAFE IN CONNECTICUT FOR NOWBY JANET PISZAR

As a longtime NJ bear protector, I have followedConnecticut’s defeated bear hunt proposal.

Twice I completed black bear field studies with Dr. LynnRogers in Ely, Minnesota. Dr. Rogers studied black bearsfor 50+ years and is the world’s foremost expert andresearcher. Black bears are shy and skittish. Their sur-vival instinct is to run away or up a tree at the slightestperceived threat (www.bearstudy.org and www.bear.org).However, more important, was learning the predictablepolitical ploys behind instigating a bear hunt.

Fish & wildlife agencies employ wildlife biologists whoare hunters. Agencies are in desperate need for huntinglicense revenue and millions annually from Pittman-Robertson federal grants. In part, apportionment is contin-gent on the number of hunting licenses sold. More speciesin the game code equals more licenses sold.

Bear hunts restrict seasons and baglimits to ensure there will be bears forthe subsequent years’ hunts. Huntersbuy licenses when there is shootablesurplus for likelihood of success.Selling licenses is fish and game’scovert goal.

Connecticut’s Lt. Governor, Nancy Wyman, deservesaccolades for her deciding dissenting vote in the Senate.However, fish & wildlife agencies will persist to resurrectthe proposed bear hunt by furthering public acceptance.

Connecticut bear protectors must prepare for theheightening of the bear-scare campaign. This biasedagency collects/compiles statistics, and can manipulate,fabricate, conceal or reveal what fulfills its purpose.Most often, fish & wildlife agencies are autonomousand without constraints of accountability.

Unsurprisingly, fish & wildlife will publicize increasednuisance complaints, escalated bear-human interactions,supposed aggressive behaviors, bears visiting parks andschools, etc. The latter will serve to evoke fear in children,parents, and administrators. The agency will grossly exag-gerate danger to children so politicians will look crimi-nally negligent to not support bear hunts.

Bear protection activists should visit parks/schools inLitchfield County/bear country and photodocumentthe unprotected dumpsters that lure bears. Onus mustbe placed on school administrators/township officialsfor negligence in not deterring bear foragers – not theopportunistic bears who are just being bears.

Contrary to what was published in Connecticut,bears are one of the slowest reproducing species. Sows(females) first breed between three and eleven years ofage and thereafter every other year. Cubs remain withtheir mother for 17 months before dispersing, when themom is then able to mate again.

Bears, according to law, are a publicly owned natural

resource, are indis-putably a self-regulat-ing species.

According to Dr.Rogers’ research,despite having mated,sow reproduction willfail if, when going toden, she is under 147pounds. The sowwould not be able tosustain herself and apregnancy withoutfood and water forfive or more monthsof hibernation/torpor.Sows weighing 148-176 may have cubsbut with higher mor-talities.

This is a preciseexample of how popu-lation follows food supply. Less food translates to a low-ered ability to reproduce.

Bear problems are human problems. Research by Dr.Edward Tavss, Rutgers University professor, proved hunt-ing is ineffective in lowering bear complaints. Removalcreates a vacuum whereby surviving bears fill in vacatedterritory and continue to scavenge for food. Human pro-vided food/garbage, bird feeders, pet food left outside,etc. are invitations! Regardless of the population, bearswill find the food sources in human environments.

Hunting a black bear who may be aberrant and danger-ous is comparable to firing a gun into a crowd of people tokill a dangerous person who may be lurking within.

Connecticut’s increasing fragmentation of wildlife habi-tat brings bears closer to homes. Nonlethal bear manage-ment works at the core of the issue—removing theattractants that lure bears into human environments.In other aspects, people behavior affects bear behavior.Residents in bear country must enlighten themselves,adapt to coexist, and accept that bears are their otherneighbors.

“Hunting is not for wildlife management; wildlife man-agement is for hunting” (Humane Society of the UnitedStates). I hope that Connecticut’s animal rights activistspersevere to keep black bears safe from what would bepurely recreational hunts.http://www.indianpointcamp.com/dryden-black-bear-hunting.htm

--------------------------Janet Piszar is founder of PUBLIC TRUST Wildlife

Management, est. 2011PO Box 646, Chatham, NJ 07928

PAGE 4

WILDLIFE WATCH COMMENTS ON THE NEW YORKSTATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION’S (DEC) THIRD DRAFT PLAN FORMUTE SWAN MANAGEMENT IN NEW YORK

BY ANNE MULLER, WILDLIFE WATCH INC.

The Plan addresses how to contain,limit, or eliminate mute swans region-ally. There are two regions of con-cern. The first is the downstate regionconsisting of about 1500 mute swans(DEC Draft Plan, pg. 3, Figure 1)ranging across NYC, Long Island,Westchester, Putnam, and Rocklandcounties. The second region isupstate which, according to theAudubon Society Christmas count,has less than 200 mutes.

To understand the Bureau ofWildlife’s (BOW’s) near hysteria overthe low number of mute swans, wehave to look at it in the context ofBOW’s agenda, which is to increasewaterfowl populations including twoother swan subspecies: tundra and,especially, trumpeter swans FORTHE PRIMARY PURPOSE OFHUNTING.

Waterfowl are managed across thecountry including NYS in coopera-tion with Canada to create an over-population of game species for sporthunting. Waterfowl and their man-agement are of great importance toBOW for the firearms and ammuni-tion excise tax yields from killingwaterfowl.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS), the Canadian Wildlife Service(CWS), and state game agenciesincluding BOW (operating within theDEC), are mandated by the NorthAmerican Waterfowl ManagementPlan, first announced and promoted in1986, to increase waterfowl popula-tions (ducks, geese and swans) forhunting https://www.fws.gov/migra-torybirds/pdf/management/NAWMP/2012NAWMP.pdf . Evaluation oftheir progress and changes to strategyoccur about every five years.Waterfowl managers must manageour waters and lands to send millions

of ducks, geese, and swans to theskies for eager hunters. While theNAWMP is touted as a “waterfowlconservation” plan, in fact it is thepromotion of strategies to producehigh numbers of waterfowl forhunters, while leaving a population tocontinue the cycle the following sea-son.

Between the mid-90s and 2004, asan interested civilian, I attended anInternational Canada GooseSymposium in Madison, Wisconsin,and three Atlantic Flyway Councilmeetings that were held in Florida,Pennsylvania, and Georgia. At leastone was a joint meeting of both theAtlantic and Mississippi FlywayCouncils. I was privy to discussionsat the general meetings, as well as theclosed committee meetings, andfilmed a number of these meetingsprior to the existence of YouTube andthe popularity of the Internet. Thevideos captured the inner workings ofwhat self-congratulatory wildlifemanagers referred to as “world-classscience.” During the meetings,waterfowl managers shared what theirstate was doing to promote increasesin waterfowl hunting and discussedhow to satisfy their own hunters with-out lessening impacts on other states.In other words, since waterfowlmigrate south in the winter and north

in the spring, if, for example,Maryland were to allow high bag lim-its, it would impact the hunting in NYas waterfowl migrated northward.Basically, I witnessed what was thesharing of management techniques,observations of waterfowl populationstatus, and, shockingly, a barteringgame of species and bag limits. Themeetings were attended by the water-fowl managers of the states within theFlyway, as well as by representativesfrom the US Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS) and the Canadian WildlifeService (CWS). During the period Iattended, Jerry Serie was the Flywayrepresentative of the USFWS. He isnow an advisor to The TrumpeterSwan Society (TTSS) http://www.trumpeterswansociety.org/your-society-at-work.html.

The goal of TTSS is to increase thetrumpeter swan population to a hunt-able level. At that point, they wouldbecome a “game” species with sea-sons and bag limits for their killing.

TTSS is one of the driving forcesbehind the introduction of trumpeterswans in NYS. They describe theirmission this way:

The Trumpeter Swan Society bringstogether private citizens, organiza-tions, and public agencies to helpmeet challenges facing TrumpeterSwans today. It takes partnershipsand collaboration to continue torestore and conserve these magnifi-cent birds across North America.

TTSS has been North America’sleader of Trumpeter Swan conserva-tion since 1968. For nearly 50 years,TTSS has played a pivotal role by pro-viding expert science based technicalsupport in most of the major restora-tion programs. Our vibrant “swannetwork” of researchers, swan man-

Please see MUTE SWANCOMMENTS, Page 5

Mute Swan

PAGE 5

MUTE SWAN COMMENTSContinued from page 4agers, and biologists have gatheredand shared the best science basedinformation and research to helpbring back the Trumpeter Swan inareas where they have not been seenin more than a century. [They contin-ue in that vein.]

TTSS’ EFFORTS FOCUS IN FIVEMAJOR AREAS

Protecting and increasing therestoration progress already made

Working with Flyway Councils andswan managers on swan issues

Habitat assessment and protectionPublic information/educationSwan research and its dissemina-

tionAt the second flyway meeting I

attended, I was told I could videotapethe general meetings, but not the com-mittee meetings. At one of the com-mittee meetings a small group ofmanagers met for the purpose ofdemonstrating that the trumpeterswan was native to NY. The groupincluded Jerry Serie representing theUSFWS and Bryan Swift, who wasthe NYS Waterfowl Manager. Bryanhad an exciting announcement tomake: he asserted that there had beena sighting of a trumpeter swan in NYSin the 1800s. What a boon to the fly-way council and to BOW, as that sin-gle sighting thus allowed NYS toclaim that management efforts werefor the purpose of the REintroductionof an extirpated species rather than forthe introduction of a new species tothe state, as the latter form of manage-ment is not legitimate.

Bryan Swift’s trumpeter-sightingsource is questionable in the light of apaper titled: THE STATUS OFTRUMPETER SWANS IN NEWYORK STATE IN 2007 by DominicSherony 51 Lambeth Loop, Fairport,NY 14450 dsherony@frontier.netJeffrey S. Bolsinger 98 State St.,Canton, NY 13617 http://www.nybirds.org/KBsearch/y2007v57n1/y2007v57n1p2-8sherony.pdf .

The paper throws the legitimacy ofBOW’S claim that it is “re”introduc-ing trumpeters to NYS into questionand has a significance that should

cause the NYS Legislature to take ahard look at wildlife managementtoday.

The Sherony/Bolsinger paper’shighlighted quotes below are excerptsfor a quicker read. Their paperreveals that trumpeters are in factbeing INTRODUCED into NYS statethrough a deliberate collaboration ofthe Canadian Wildlife Service,provincial wildlife agencies, theUSFWS, BOW within the DEC, andprivate cooperators who are breedingtrumpeters. One major breedingground called Savannah Dhu doublesas a private hunt area for other speciesand is adjacent to the MontezumaNational Wildlife Refuge, which isopen to hunting during the season. Ofparticular relevance is the following:

Although most of these programsstyle themselves as “reintroduction”or “restoration” programs, and theyare referred to in this manner below,the original breeding distribution ofthis species remains a contentioussubject (Carroll and Swift 2000;Whan 2000; Rising 2001). Page 1 ofthe Sherony report.

The first reports of TrumpeterSwans (Cygnus buccinator) in NYSwere of wing-tagged birds at DunkirkHarbor, Chautauqua Co., in the fall of1988. Since that time sightings haveincreased and breeding has been con-firmed in at least six locations. Mostlikely, these NY birds are derivedfrom two sources: the Ontario rein-troduction program for this species,

and a private reserve in Clyde,Wayne Co., NY [Savannah Du]where unbanded fledglings havebeen allowed to roam freely sincearound 1990. Although less likely,swans from reintroduction programsin Ohio, Michigan, and Minnesotacould also be a source for NYS birds.According to the DEC, taggedTrumpeter Swans in NYS are pre-sumed to be from the Canadian rein-troduction program north of LakeOntario. Page 1 of the Sheronyreport.

To date there are at least four con-firmed breeding locations forTrumpeter Swan in Wayne Co. Theinitial nesters were birds introducedat the Savannah Dhu, a 5000-acreprivate reserve at 2500 Noble Rd. inClyde, NY, in 1990; one or possiblytwo pairs have been breeding thereannually ever since. The original 4birds were pinioned but subsequentbreeding pairs there are all free rang-ing. Page 4 of the Sherony report.

As an example of nesting success,single nests in 2005 and 2006 pro-duced six cygnets each year. &I TheSavannah Dhu location has servedas a most likely source for otherWayne Co. pairs. The longest knownnesting site outside this privatereserve is near the property of DonColvin on Hogback Rd. just south ofRt. 31 in the township of Savannah,where one pair has successfully bredannually since 2002. This propertycontains a large pond, islands and amarsh, all visible from Hogback Rd.Six cygnets were hatched in 2007;four remained by the end of June.Another pair has bred in a marshyarea behind the home at 4427Boynton Rd., Walworth, in2004,2005, and 2006 and has fledgedcygnets successfully in both 2004 and2005. … These three confirmedbreeding sites are documented in theNYS Breeding Bird Atlas (in press)and are all believed to pertain to

Please see MUTE SWANCOMMENTS, Page 6

Trumpeter Swan

PAGE 6

MUTE SWAN COMMENTSContinued from page 5

progeny of the birdsfrom the SavannahDhu reserve. Page 4of the Sherony report.

… According to themost recent informa-tion from theMontezuma NWR andthe NorthernMontezuma WildlifeManagement Area,there has not beenany confirmed breed-ing at these locations,but both are near themain source of swansin Wayne Co., theSavannah Dhureserve (L. Ziemba,

pers. comm.), and could host future nesting sites.Frequently, young swans will remain into early winter inthe area of the Savannah River on the NorthernMontezuma WMA. … Page 4 of the Sherony report.

REINTRODUCTION PROGRAMS IN THE NORTH-EAST … At Wye Marsh, swans are fed a mixture of cornand duck grower pellets twice daily, both to provide areliable source of food, and so that volunteers can moreeasily record swan tag numbers. The feeding programcontinues to the present time… Page 5 of the Sheronyreport.

LITERATURE CITED: Carroll, D., and B. L. Swift.2000. Status of the Trumpeter Swan in New York State.Kingbird 50: 232-236. Henslee, K. A., 2005. 2005 SeneyNWR Trumpeter Swan Monitoring Project. Seney NWRReport, Seney, MI. 49883. Rising, G. 2001. TheQuestionable Wisdom of Introducing Alien Species. TheKingbird 5 1 : 575-578. Whan, B. 2000. Did TrumpeterSwans Ever Breed in Ohio? The Ohio Cardinal 24: 30-46.Page 8 of the Sherony report.

It’s clear that managers who are trying to grow a trum-peter swan population sufficient for hunting have a hardrow to hoe. While at a flyway meeting in 1996 or 1995,an enormous loose-leaf binder was handed to me by anagent. It was titled: Waterfowl Habitat Restoration,Enhancement and Management in the Atlantic Flyway.That publication provides insight into the methodsemployed by waterfowl managers to create high numbersof waterfowl for hunters. The following partial table ofcontents, informs the readers of the breadth and depth ofland, water and wildlife manipulation for that purpose:

HABITAT RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT ANDMANAGEMENT IN CANADA

Beaver Pond ManagementArtificial Fertilization

Managing Small Wetlands for Waterfowl (DucksUnlimited Canada)

Wetlands Stewardship in Atlantic CanadaHABITAT MANAGEMENT IN THE USWaterfowl Breeding Habitat Management TechniquesWaterfowl Wintering HabitatManagement of Brackish and Saline Tidal Wetlands for

waterfowlGreentree Reservoirs (creating unnatural wetlands

through flooding for attracting waterfowl to food source)Use of Water Level Control in Habitat ManagementConstruction of Potholes for Waterfowl HabitatFencing Stream Corridors for WildlifeCanada Goose ManagementWood Duck ManagementNest Box ManagementIMPOUNDMENT MANAGEMENTTide Marsh- Estuarine Interchanges and ImpoundmentsConstruction, Maintenance, and Water Control

Structures of Tidal ImpoundmentsSmall Impoundments for Waterfowl.HABITAT RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENTURBAN-SUBURBAN HABITAT MANAGEMENT AND

HUMAN DISTURBANCEMULTIPLE USE MANAGEMENTWATERFOWL HARVEST MANAGEMENTInnovative Regulations for Managing Waterfowl

HuntingRegulation of Harvest and Hunting Practices for

Quality Experiences on Managed WetlandsFURBEARER MANAGEEMNT FOR WATERFOWL

HABITATBeaver Pond ManagementBeneficial Uses of BeaverManaging Beaver to Benefit Waterfowl and Other

Please see MUTE SWAN COMMENTS, Page 7

Tundra Swan

Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge 9-25-17

Pho

to A

nne

Mul

ler

PAGE 7

MUTE SWAN COMMENTSContinued from page 6wildlife

Muskrat and Marsh Management inthe Manipulation of WaterfowlHabitat

DISEASE, PREDATION, DEPRE-DATION

Mute Swan Control in the AtlanticFlyway

MANAGEMENT EQUIPMENT,WATER CONTROL STRUCTURESAND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT

Wetlands Restoration EquipmentAquatic Vegetation Cutter Use in

Freshwater WetlandsAmphibious Hydraulic Rotary

ExcavatorWooden Trunk Water Control

StructureMaterials and Cost of Canada

Goose Platform Newest StructureNesting Structures for Puddle

DucksWater Level Control StructuresThe Herbicide Glyphosate for

Phragmites, Purple Loosestrife adCattail Control

Authors listed write: The advent ofglyphosate-based herbicides hasgiven waterfowl managers anothertool for controlling plants that have a

tendency to dominate wetland areasand form a monotype such as phrag-mites, purple loosestrife and cattail.This chapter is not intended to advo-cate the use of glyphosate over othermechanical, biological or chemicalcontrol substances…

There’s no doubt that hugeresources are devoted to increasingwaterfowl populations and the “rein-troduction” of species to satisfy theappetites of sport hunters.

In the above publication, in SectionJ titled POPULATION MANAGE-MENT AND CONTROL with a sub-section Mute Swan Control in theAtlantic Flyway, it states,“Opposition to mute swan manage-ment will develop from animalrights groups…politicians might beswayed to opposition because oftheir constituents and emotional-ism.” Page J-149. All of the sugges-tions that are in the current draft planare the same suggestions from that1995 publication.

TRUMPETER BREEDING,WATERFOWL PRODUCTION,AND THE MUTE SWAN CONNEC-TION

If we need more convincing thatthere is a connection betweenBOW’s efforts to rid NYS of muteswans to in part provide space fortrumpeter swans, the WisconsinDNR put out the following state-ment: The presence of mute swansin the wild has the potential to inter-fere with the restoration of the nativetrumpeter swan. Mute swans alsocompete for resources with otherwaterfowl such as loons, ducks, colo-nial waterbirds, tundra swans, andgeese and will sometimes completelydisplace, or even kill, native water-fowl. While trumpeter swans may alsocompete with other waterfowl, this isa natural occurrence because it isbetween native species. Mute SwanIssues Wisconsin - Wisconsin DNR,dnr.wi.gov/files/pdf/pubs/wm/wm0473.pdf

A Canadian publication: https://www.ec.gc.ca/mbc-com/1F7DE11E-F4B9-4638-9260-DC9E79437996/Mute_Swan_E_04-1_WEB.pdf

states the following: Although uncom-mon, Mute Swans and native swanspecies can interbreed and producehybrid offspring that can threaten thegenetic integrity of native species;Trumpeter Swans may be most at riskdue to overlap in breeding range andhabitats.

BOW’s trumpeter swan introduc-tion efforts, as well as other water-fowl production projects, deservescrutiny because it is the only way tounderstand the urgency of BOW’sdraft plan for Mute SwanManagement, and because it underliestheir mute swan eradication proposal.

The Third Draft Mute SwanManagement Plan is really a plan toclear the way for trumpeter and tundraswans by severely reducing or elimi-nating the mute swan population fromthe wild.

BOW’S STATED OBJECTIVESStatewide:Kill mute swans only when non-

lethal measures don’t work.Authorize property owners, local

government and local agencies to takedirect action against the swans.

Downstate:Limit the population growth prima-

rily through egg-addling and render-ing juveniles or adults flightless.

UpstatePrevent the establishment or expan-

sion of mute swans and achieve a sta-ble or decreasing population throughkilling or capture.

BOW’S STRATEGIES FORACCOMPLISHING UPSTATEGOALS

BOW will conduct aggressive muteswan control, such as direct removalof mute swans . They suggest captureand placement at a DEC-licensedfacility. If no facility can take thebirds in a timely manner, lethal con-trol will be used. The total statewideremoval is expected to be less than100 birds annually (as though those100 lives don’t matter, with another

Please see MUTE SWANCOMMENTS, Page 8

Pho

to A

nne

Mul

ler

Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge 9-25-17

PAGE 8

MUTE SWAN COMMENTSContinued from page 7100 placed at DEC-licensed facilities.

BOW will permit property ownersand local government entities to takeadult swans, cygnets, eggs, or nests .They refer to mute swans as “offend-ing birds” that need to be “disposedof”.

BOW is considering a hunting sea-son for mute swans. One primary con-cern of theirs is the accidental take oftundras and trumpeters.

BOW’S STRAGEGIES FORMANAGING THE PUBLIC:

Public Education and Outreach:Outreach to the public demonizing

mute swans. Allowing individuals to take direct

action Discouraging feeding at sites IS THERE A NEED FOR MAN-

AGEMENT OF THE MUTE SWAN?In the light of BOW’s goal to

encourage two large swan species tofill the gaps left by the removal ofmutes, this ludicrous and contradicto-ry plan should be dismissed out ofhand for the following reasons:

THE TUNDRAS AND TRUM-PETERS WILL EAT EVEN MORESAV AS THEY ARE LARGERBIRDS and will have the same impactor a greater one on other waterfowland fish spawning areas. They out-weigh the mutes and can do their owndisplacement without the help ofwildlife managers. Bascially, nomanagement is needed as evidencedby the sparse number of upstate muteswans, less than 200 total!

Aggression has only been seen dur-ing nesting. Some observations con-tradict even that, attributing aggres-sion to some individuals. The pointbeing that aggression may be a trait ofsome individuals not necessarily thespecies.

In a 2016 article http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.3161/00016454AO2016.51.2.002

published in Acta Ornithologica,titled: “Analysis of Spatial PointPattern Shows No Desertion ofBreeding Mute Swan Areas by theOther Waterbirds Within Fishpond,”the authors write: “In conclusion,

these results question whether theincreasing Mute Swan populationsactually directly threaten the otherwaterbird communities, in such habi-tats, and require population control asis often claimed.”

In 2017, an analysis by Dr. KevinWood et al. concluded that swanswere unfairly being singled out foraggressive waterfowl. The study waspublished in the scientific journalAnimal Behaviour, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347217300453

and concluded that swans were nomore or less aggressive than any otherbirds they studied. The global meta-analysis of published time–activitybudgets, using a data set comprising555 values from 88 studies, to deter-mine variation in the time that water-birds engaged in aggressive interac-tions.

According to literature quoted inour comments, it is doubtful thattrumpeters were ever native to NYS,and if that is the case, the mute popu-lation precedes trumpeters by morethan 100 years.

It can be assumed that tundras andtrumpeters will also acclimate if theyare in suburban and urban areas wherepeople are feeding. It is the feedingthat keeps them now from migratingfrom Ontario where they are beingbred.

The problems that BOW cites intheir draft plan can easily be dis-missed when we look at the full scopeof their goal of introducing a swansubspecies that will cause the veryproblems that they argue are the rea-son for eliminating the mute swan:

Trumpeters are native swans andmutes are not.

BOW is demonizing the mute swanin part for being non-native, yet theyare participating in increasing a largersubspecies of swan that was possiblynever native to NYS.

Mutes have been in NY since themid-1800’s and trumpeters startedbeing introduced to the state begin-ning in 1988 through today. Mutesprecede trumpeters by over 100 years.

Mute swans eat too much sub-merged aquatic vegetation (SAV)

BOW asserts that without lethal andnon-lethal intervention mute swanswill take over all critical bodies ofwater in NYS. BOW is disingenuousas it hides its agenda of increasingtrumpeter and tundra swans through-out the state for hunting purposes.Hypocritically, all the impacts thatthey cite will only be exacerbated bythe increase of trumpeters and tundraswans, which are larger birds with alarger capacity and need for SAV.

Mute swans who are at most 26 lbseat on average 4 to 8 pounds of SAVa day; trumpeters will eat concomi-tantly more than that as their weight isclose to 40 lbs. All swans eat SAV.

Presently, BOW’s big game man-agers are encouraging a moose popu-lation in NY for eventual hunting.Moose eat large quantities of SAVand will dive to about 18 feet to grabit. A trivia fact is that moose can holdup to 112 lbs of food in their stomachsand eat about 60 lbs a day of vegeta-tion both SAV and land veggies.

Mute swans impact native wildlife,their habitats, and people.”

This is a disingenuous statement astrumpeter swans and moose will havea far greater effect on SAV and publicsafety (“bird strikes” or car-moosecollisions).

Mutes are not protected by therevised Migratory Bird Treaty Actbecause they are non-native.

The MBTA changes when wildlifemanagers suggest change. As law-suits for killing mutes had beenbrought against game agencies basedon violations of the MBTA, in 2015the FWS requested the removal of themute swan claiming they were non-native. https://www.fws.gov/laws//Testimony/displaytestimony.cfm?ID=134

“Protection” is a deceptive term asit means that migratory waterfowl areprotected from hunting only duringbreeding season to build numbers

Please see MUTE SWANCOMMENTS, Page 9

PAGE 9

MUTE SWAN COMMENTSContinued from page 8so that they can be hunted duringset seasons by the game agencies.To state that they are not protectedgives the message that they can beharassed, mutilated or killed any timeof year with impunity.

Displacement of Native BirdSpecies.

If we look at the type of manage-ment described in the publication ref-erenced above, “Waterfowl HabitatRestoration, Enhancement andManagement in the Atlantic Flyway,”we see that game agencies manage forgame species, which comprise lessthan 1% of all species, to the detri-ment of non-game species.

Any alleged damage that 2,000 dis-persed mute swans across NYS cando pales in comparison to the manip-ulation by game managers of land,waterways, and wildlife to create con-ditions that will increase waterfowlhunting. See the table of contents ofWaterfowl Habitat Restoration,Enhancement and Management inthe Atlantic Flyway on pages 3 and 4of these comments.

Mutes have no fear of humans. That is actually a plus for wildlife

watchers, as other animals can beskittish or learn that people are to beavoided as a result of hunting.

Trumpeters and tundras have thesame potential to become visitors towaters in friendly areas, and thiswould, of course, be a game agencyconcern.

WILDLIFE WATCH STRONG-LY OBJECTS TO THE FOLLOW-ING PROPOSALS BY BOW TOREDUCE AND ELIMINATEMUTE SWANS IN NYS:

..DISSEMINATION OF MATERI-ALS TO DEMONIZE MUTESWANS:

As the DEC’s waterfowl productionprograms are far more deleterious tothe ecology and environment, theDEC should not be allowed to put outpropaganda to schools, paid for byproperty taxes, when they serve lessthan 3% of the state’s population thathunts and where students attend who

are rightfully disturbed by hunting.Mute swans are the current straw manin the cruel and destructive businessof wildlife mismanagement.

.. A HUNTING SEASON FORMUTE SWANS:

This online hunting forum showsthat hunters are drooling to have amute swan season. https://huntingny.com/forums/topic/27071-decs-mute-swan-management-plan/

BOW’s connection to the firearmsindustry needs to be exposed andNYS General Fund monies that endup in their hands should be uncoveredand recovered for purposes such aseducation and health, and to pay forthe victims of gun crimes or accidentscaused by firearms. Minimally, theNYS General Fund foots the lion’sshare of BOW’s upkeep via overheadcosts.

.. ALLOWING “EUTHANASIA”BY PROPERTY OWNERS OROTHERS:

This will unleash sadists and thosewho are indifferent to the lives, pain,and suffering of individual animals.A recent news report illustrates theneed for mute swans to have protec-tion by states who have no protection

under the revised MBTA. http://wnep.com/2017/01/24/no-charges-in-swan-hunt-in-the-poconos/

no charges were filed against manwho shot and killed a mute swan asthey are not protected….

.. RENDERING SWANS FLIGHT-LESS:

This is the equivalent of amputat-ing a person’s legs.

.. REMOVAL TO A “SUITABLEFACILITY”

Such a facility would need to bedefined and approved by animal pro-tectionists who should be consideredstakeholders. Decisions need to bemade by full consensus. A “DECapproved facility” could in fact be aprivate hunt area. Examples of someBOW licensed private hunt facilitiescan be seen here: http://www.ulti-matewaterfowlhunting.com/busi-ness/spring-farm/

Although it offends the senses,I’m including a photo as proof thatthere are hunters who crave killingswans:

https://www.google.com/search?q=swan+hunting&tbm=isch&imgil=UzkHF97gU3LYvM%253A%253BxoL6uxfNQa9rWM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.uwcadventures.com%25252Fswan-hunting-guides&source=iu&pf=m&fir=UzkHF97gU3LYvM%253A%252CxoL6uxfNQa9rWM%252C_&usg=__vOsOxigXH9R7Av-v3s7P4Loj48I%3D&biw=1280&bih=694&ved=0ahUKEwi3ovH-grTWAhVJwiYKHTKrDQgQyjcITg&ei=uIHCWbfmCcmEmwGy1rZA#imgrc=Yp6DXUDYu1EbSM:

Swan Comments continued on page 13

Submit your comments to stop theNY mute swan annihilation before

12-3-17 to wildlife@dec.ny.gov

PAGE 10

MARILYN LEYBRA’S TO THE EDITORTo: letters@lohud.comThe quote, "Hunting, fishing and

trapping license sales are key tofunding the fish and wildlife man-agement duties undertaken by theNY State Dept. of Conservation,DEC, translates into the fact thattheir Bureau Of Wildlife BOW (likein bow hunting) funds itself off theblood of wildlife. A pitiable truththat says it all.

The fact that the agency's wildlifebiologists’ (mostly all hunters them-selves) salaries are paid with thisblood money, makes it stand to rea-son that BOW will always cater tothe less than 5% or less citizenry whoenjoy nature by killing wildlife.Early to late fall and through the win-ter may be the biggest season sinceit's for what's called “big game,”bears and deer, including fawns bare-ly six months old, but there is no

time of year when there isn't a 'sea-son' on some hapless wild creaturewhether it be furred, feathered, orliving in water.

Most of the non-hunting publicwho care about & take pleasure inthe natural beauty of NY's wildlifealive don't have a clue how wildlife'sfate is controlled by what amounts toa private hunting club run by thestate DEC and their <5% of thepopulation, clientele. There is abill, S3327/ A6519 introduced bySenator Tony Avella to change therequirement that any member ofthe inaptly named 'conservationfund advisory board' have to holda hunting, fishing or trappinglicense to serve on the board, a bla-tant inequity. The bill is languish-ing in committee & needs support& NY residents can Google the Bill& from there comment on & ask

their senator & assembly person toco-sponsor & support it.

It also needs publicity in the sameway this lohud reporter gave publicityto the upcoming fall sport of the annu-al war on wildlife. In all fairness, thiswould've been a great opportunity toadd a few words of info on SenAvella's Bill, a start for those of uswho believe there is something horri-bly wrong in the way this agencydepends on getting its funding. It’shigh time for some change!

--------------------------Marilyn Leybra is a long time

activist. She was a dear (and deer)friend of Luke Dommer’s, thefounder of C.A.S.H. She has been awildlife rehabilitator for over 25years. You can contact Marilyn atleybrabear@optonline.net

THE AVELLA-MAYER BILLBILL NUMBER: A6519-S3327SPONSORS: Mayer-AvellaTITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the environmental

conservation law, in relation to qualifications for individu-als designated or appointed to the conservation fund advi-sory board

PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF THE BILL: Tomake optional the requirement that all members of theConservation Fund Advisory Board possess a valid hunting,trapping, or fishing license.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: Section1 of the bill establishes that a valid NewYork hunting, fishing or trappinglicense may be sufficient to meetappointment or designation require-ments, but that such a license is notrequired.

Section 2 sets forth an immediateeffective date.

JUSTIFICATION: Section 1,paragraph b of subdivision 1 ofsection 11-0327 of the environmen-tal conservation law currently statesthat a person designated or appointedto the advisory board must demonstratea "long-standing inter-

est, knowledge, and experience in fish and

wildlife management." As the law is written, the appointeeor designee can only satisfy these requirements if they havea valid New York hunting, fishing, or trapping license.

While such a hunting, fishing, or trapping license mayindicate long-standing interest, knowledge, and experiencein fish and wildlife management, the law excludes fromappointment or designation a wide variety of individualswith ample experience in wildlife management who, simplybecause they lack such a license, may not sit on the board.

The purpose of the conservation fund adviso-ry board is to make recommendations to

state agencies on state governmentplans, policies, and programs affecting

fish and wildlife. These broad andimportant goals can be more ade-quately met by making the manda-tory hunting, fishing, or trappinglicense requirement discretionary,thereby diversifying the board withappointees and designees ofequally substantial interest,knowledge, and experience beyond

the scope of hunting, fishing, ortrapping.--------------------------

We are grateful to Tony Avella andShelly Mayer for introducing this bill!

PAGE 11

The following is directly from the 2017-2018 NYHUNTING AND TRAPPING GUIDE

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/17biggame.pdf

Make it a Community Affair Cooperating with yourneighbors and hunting partners to reduce harvest ofyoung bucks, meet your antlerless harvest goals, andimprove habitat conditions can magnify your impactand increase the rate at which you see changes in thewoods and in the deer you take. Deer hunting cooper-atives have been growing in New York, and they startwith a conversation about deer among friends andneighbors.

(See “What is CBDM” on the next page)

The DEC works on creating large bucks for trophy hunting in NYS

TROPHY HUNTINGBY PETER MULLER

Trophy hunting is the selec-tive hunting of wild game forhuman recreation. In “TrophyHunting” the entire animal orpart of the animal is kept as the“trophy.” It is frequently keptas a remembrance of the hunt.The game sought is usually theoldest with the largest bodysize, largest antlers or other dis-tinguishing attributes.

Trophy hunting has both sup-porters as well as opponents –both from within the huntingfraternity and from outside ofit. Discussions concerning trophy hunting are not onlyabout the question of the morality of recreational huntingand the supposed conservation efforts of hunting, but alsothe observed decline in the animal species that are targetsfor trophy hunting.

Trophy hunting occurs internationally at many levels.We all remember the worldwide press coverage and outcrythat Cecil received with many negative comments regard-ing that taking.

Was it legal? Was Cecil “set up” for the kill by a wealthy American?What was the benefit of the money paid by the hunter to

the local community? and so on..However, let’s restrict this discussion to the US only and

look at the arguments in favor and opposed to trophy hunt-ing in the US.

In the US, trophy hunters select their targets accordingto whether the animal has the largest horns, antlers, or

other visible attributes thatwould be of importance topass on to future generations –in other words, they are genet-ically laden with attributesthat need to be passed on tofuture generations for the ben-efit of the species as a whole.

To selectively kill off thesegenetically laden members ofthe species will graduallydiminish these positiveattributes from appearing infuture versions of the speciesas a whole. In other words,

the species, as a whole would slowly but surely decline.Trophy hunting causes what has been referred to as

“unnatural selection.” It has been shown to reduceantler size and body size in roe deer and horn size andbody size in mountain sheep.

This unnatural selection which is common to allgroups that are trophy hunted likely compromises thelong-term viability of all terrestrial and aquatic species.

You can read more here: Fred Allendorf and JefferyHard, “Human Induced Evolution Caused by UnnaturalSelection through Harvest of Wild Animals,” Proceedingsof the National Academy of Science 106 (2009); 9987-94.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219730/

To compensate for smaller bucks, game managers nowcooperate with the Quality Deer ManagementAssociation to build herds with large antlers for sporthunting.

--------------------------Peter Muller is the VP of C.A.S.H.

PAGE 12

To put the subject of hunting intoits proper context, the public shouldunderstand the goal of wildlife man-agement and its inextricable links tothe firearms industry.

In a nutshell, there is an 11% man-ufacturers’ excise tax placed on allfirearms and ammunition, and bowsand arrows (10% on handguns) thatends up in the “Conservation Fund”which the US Fish and Wildlife serv-ice doles out to state wildlife manage-ment agencies. (Here it’s the Bureauof Wildlife within the DEC.) Theamount a state gets from the federalfund depends on the number of hunt-ing licenses they sell relative to theirsize.

Obviously, the financial schemewould fizzle out if there weren’t aconstant need for more ammunitionto be bought and sold. Hence themanagement of deer into overpopula-tion to allow their killing in the falland winter, and their breeding in thespring and summer to produce thenext “crop” of deer for hunters.

Wild animals are turned into vic-tims of willing hunters who moreoften hunt for sport than subsistence.In fact, the entire vicious cycledepends on sport hunters for themoney their purchases generate forthese bureaus.

Consider that when hunters are let

loose on hapless animals in the falland winter, the populations quicklydrop. “Wildlife management is thenneeded to ensure a continuing popula-tion for hunters for the following “sea-son.” How is that done? Hunters aretold to kill primarily males. Thatleaves females, the breeders. Onemale can impregnate multiple femalesso a high population of males isn’tneeded. After hunters reduce the pop-ulation in the fall and winter, theremaining does will give birth in thespring to keep the supply of deer up.Obviously, where there are complaintsof too many deer, the game agencieswill allow does to be killed, but notenough to hamper hunting in the fall.

I don’t want to depersonalizedeer. They are individuals thatshare much in common with us.They love their offspring; their off-spring love them. They need to eat,sleep, play, socialize, and enjoybeing alive. Anyone who hasobserved deer can tell you abouttheir individual differences: one isshy, one is aggressive, one is skit-tish, one is curious.

The NYS Bureau of Wildlife isn’tinterested in what deer are oraren’t so long as they can keep thepublic from seeing them as beingswho deserve better than a bullet oran arrow in their eyes, their lungs,

or anyplace else in their body. Weat Wildlife Watch believe that deerdeserve better, the public deservesbetter. Deer are not plastic objectswithout feelings, without family, orwithout intelligence.

The Mohonk Preserve has alwaysallowed hunting and the MohonkHouse has always allowed “culling.”They have always worked with theBureau of Wildlife to ensure that the“tradition” of hunting continues.

Hunting is cruel. Let’s not roman-ticize it or turn a blind eye to whathunting does to the individual animal.

The goals of wildlife managementhave got to evolve from producingmore deer for hunters every year tomanaging for population stability andwildlife watching.

Students and residents mustn’t buyinto the demonization of deer. Deerand other “game” animals, such asturkeys, are managed into high popu-lations for hunting. Hunting is a cruelbusiness that with exposure will seeits own demise.

Wildlife management’s ties to thefirearms industry must be severed forso many reasons. Please contact usfor more information.

Anne MullerWildlife Watchwildwatch@verizon.net

LETTER TO THE EDITOR REGARDING PRO-HUNTING“DISCUSSION” ON THE SUNY NEW PALTZ CAMPUS

After writing the letter above that waspublished in the New Paltz Times, we wereforwarded information from someone whohad been invited to attend a webinar onCommunity-Based Deer Management.Their website describes it this way:

Community-Based Deer Management(CBDM) is a guided process for addressing deer-relatedproblems. It focuses on careful planning, targeted actions,and measuring progress. The process is flexible, helping com-munities adapt their deer management plan as needs changeover time.

Taking on deer management in your community can seemdaunting at first. Luckily, deer are among the best-studied

species of wildlife in North America. The liter-ature on deer biology and management is vastand spans decades. Here you will find a selec-tion of some of the articles, documents andmanagement guides that other communitieshave found most useful in shaping their deermanagement programs.

https://deeradvisor.dnr.cornell.edu/Then I noticed that the photo on this website (the one

shown here) was the same as the one used by theBenjamin Center to promote their “hunting discussion.”

We urge you to become aware that this is the latest tac-tic by hunting forces to divert attention from the grue-some business of wildlife management for sport hunting.

WHAT IS CBDM?

PAGE 13

IOWA NEWSThanks to Merle Wilson of Iowa

who sent an excellent article byRekha Basu titled: My Experimentwith Gun Training RevealsFrightening Lack of Standards inIowa Law. She writes, If someone likeme can pass the gun test, everyoneshould be scared. Ms. Basu had neverheld a gun, but wanted to get a permitand feared she wouldn’t pass the test.Then she heard that someone sleptthrough the training, messed up the

test, yet stillrecieved a permit.

Ms Basu reportedthe following:You’re supposed toshow a copy of yourtraining-comple-tion certificate to

the sheriff’s office, but if you don’thave it, you can just sign an affidavitsaying you completed it.

The permit allows both concealed

and open carry, and entitles the holderto buy a handgun. Reciprocity agree-ments are good in 31 other states!She said, This terrifies me, and itshould terrify you to know that some-one with my lack of gun skills couldbe walking around….Angry people,vengeful people, mentally unstable,people who hate or carry a grudge.

We suggest reading this eye open-ing article! Visit the link below.www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/rekha-basu/2017/07/08/basu-my-experiment-gun-training-reveals-frightening-lack-standards-iowa-law/459187001/

It’s quite clear from thelatest report of the 2016National Survey of Fishing,Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation,published by the USFWS,that the population ofhunters dropped 16%while the population ofthose who wish to viewwildlife has increased byabout 20%. It is of muchgreater public value tomanage wildlife for peo-ple who enjoy viewing,photographing, tracking,and other non-consumptive wildlife activities.

The general public needs to be informed that their taxesare being used to support an insensitive, destructive and

bloody sport of killingwild animals for pleas-ure.

Wildlife managementmust enter a new era ofmanaging for wildlifewatching and not forhunting. Their ties toweapons excise taxesmust be severed.

NYS legislative actionis needed to remove soleauthority over ourwildlife from the Bureauof Wildlife. Mute swansand other wild animals

need protection from their alleged protectors.Contact: Anne Muller, Wildlife Watch,

wildwatch@verizon.net

Mute Swan Comments continued from page 9THE GOALS OF THE BUREAU OF WILDLIFE NEED TO CHANGE

Hungry Preston Friedman being fed by a generous mute swan

As our readers and members know,there is an excise tax on firearms,ammunition, and bows and arrowsthat ends up with the USFWS and isdistributed to the states depending onthe number of hunting permits theysell relative to the land area of thestate.

Whereas most firearms carry an11% excise tax (at the point of man-ufacture or import), handguns carry a10% excise tax. The tax is collectedby the Alcohol, Tobacco, Tax andTrade Bureau and ends up in the

hands of wildlife managers at bothfederal and state levels.

CONSIDER THIS:Crimes committed with hand-

guns or other firearms on citystreets pay into the conservationfund to create more use offirearms. They are a source ofincome for game agents. Certainlywe are not saying that the USFWS orstate game bureaus want firearmsused against the human species, butwe are pointing out that they are ben-efitting!

How can that be changed?Congress must take back the por-tion of P-R funds from handgunand ammunition excise taxesrequired to pay for victims of hand-gun crimes. If handgun excise taxesare exceeded, then any additionalneeds should come from taxes onother firearms. Will this deplete theagencies’ funding to manage for thesmall minority that hunts? Yes!Will it give back to the 95% thatdoesn’t hunt? Yes!

CONNECTION BETWEEN USE OF HANDGUNS IN URBAN AREAS AND HUNTING

PAGE 14

BY JOE MIELE

GOT A QUESTION FOR UNCLE JOE? YOU CAN E-MAIL IT TO CASH@ABOLISHSPORTHUNTING.ORG. WOULD YOU RATHER SNAIL MAIL YOUR QUESTION? SEND IT TO: ASK UNCLE JOE,P.O. BOX 13815, LAS CRUCES, NEW MEXICO 88013UNCLE JOE GETS A LOT OF MAIL SO DON’T BE OFFENDED IF HE CANNOT ANSWER YOURQUESTION IN THE COURIER.LETTERS ARE PRINTED AS RECEIVED. THEY ARE UNEDITED.

ASK UNCLE JOE

Dear Uncle Joe:My home state of Tennessee has a sand-

hill crane hunt every year. This upsets evenmy friend’s husband, who is an avid deerhunter. He says he hunts for conservationand animals that are not overpopulatedshouldn’t be hunted. I am sure he’s notalone, so why is the state hunting them if somany hunters are against it?

Elizabeth,Franklin, TN

Dear Elizabeth,Why. That’s the eternal question, isn’t

it? Why do some people love killing help-less animals who pose no threat to anyoneor anything? The main reason why a statehunting agency will open a hunting seasonon a species is to keep hunters interested intheir sport. Across the country, hunterscomplain when they don’t see enoughwildlife or when they are unable to fill theirtags with dead animals. By opening up newseasons hunter interest is raised, even if agiven hunt does not bring in a lot of moneyfor the agency. According to theTennessee Wildlife Resources Agency,sandhill crane hunting has been in theworks since 2004, and the hunts have beencrafted in such a way that the populationwill continue to grow. The first hunt in themodern era of state wildlife (mis)manage-ment was in November, 2013. According tothe TWRA, this is not a revenue generatinghunt so it is being done solely to keephunters interested in killing birds. I don’treally know why they do it, or how theycan do it, but they do.

Peace,Uncle Joe-------------------------Dear Uncle Joe - I just learned that the decision-making

boards of wildlife agencies are composedentirely of hunters! If wildlife belongs to thepublic shouldn’t there be representatives ofthe public sitting on these boards?

Sue, Yonkers, NY

Hi Sue,The public is generally in favor of

wildlife protection, while wildlife agenciesare in the business of wildlife exploitation.As a result, the states have enacted regula-tions to prevent the public from having anymeaningful input into the way wildlife ismanaged. The regulatory body in the NewYork Department of EnvironmentalConservation is the Bureau of Wildlife, andaccording to the Bureau, they “managemany of the now common species such asdeer, bear, turkey and Canada goose to pro-vide recreational opportunities, ecologicaland economic values, and enjoyment to thepeople of the state…” Since this is all codefor “creating as much hunting opportunityas we can” it doesn’t suit the purposes ofthe DEC to have members of the non-hunt-ing or anti-hunting public making decisionsthat affect hunters and hunting seasons.Nothing they do will be objective and unbi-ased because being reasonable is bad forbusiness. State law requires hunters to bea majority of these regulation settingboards, and state law needs to be changedbefore wildlife will be given any respect atthe government level.

Peace,Uncle Joe-------------------------CASH.Why people, why? Hunting is good, so

good it makes good look....not good. So begood and don't think good is good enoughbecause if you want to not hunt then that

means no food and die of hunger to yourgrave. So be who you are cause this beAmerica where American, Mexicans andFrench people live. Full of great people likeMr. Hershey and HE had to hunt chocolatebars. SO LET HUNTING STAY IN THISGREAT EARTH GREATEST PLANETGREATEST PERSON and the greatest per-son is the guy right next to me. Don't thinkI'm pulling on your arm this is for real.

(Name and city not given)

Dear Mr. Name,I’m sorry for assuming that you’re a

man, but it’s only because I can’t imagine awomen being as incoherent as you are.Before you finish reading this, please takeyour meds. I’ll wait for you. La la la…hohum… one-Missippi, two Missippi…Ok, are you back? Good. I hope you’refeeling better.

Well, if you must know the truth. MiltonHershey didn’t hunt chocolate. I know youmight find that hard to believe, but it’s true.Mr. Hershey bought two chocolate makingmachines in 1893 at the World ColumbianExposition in Chicago, and the rest is histo-ry. Take my word for it, the great Americanchocolate bar has nothing to do with hunting.

Yes, a lot of French and Mexican peoplelive in this “greatest planet” as you say. It isweird that you singled out these ethnicities,however, since neither the French nor theMexicans is among the more commonhunting cultures in the USA. Do the Frenchand Mexicans have more sense thanAmericans? I tend to think that all of usare equal, but then I get letters like yours…

And, no sir, I don't think you’re pullingon my arm (huh?). I can tell you’re sin-cere. That’s what’s so disturbing.

I think I need a drink,Uncle Joe

PAGE 15

CASH HATNeon Orange, one size fits all. $7.50

C.A.S.H. CATALOG

C.A.S.H. T-SHIRT, X-LARGE,

BRIGHT ORANGE—$12.00

Front of shirt

HOW YOU CAN HELP US DO MORE:√ Become a member√ Include WILDLIFE WATCH, INC. in yourwill (you may earmark bequests for C.A.S.H.). Ifyou have general questions about leaving a bequestin your Will to Wildlife Watch, or making WildlifeWatch the beneficiary of life insurance or otherassets, you can contact Frances Carlisle, Esq. at212-213-0172. Frances Carlisle is a trusts andestates attorney with expertise in advising clientsabout bequests and other types of disposition tocharitable organizations.√ Donate shares of stock, avoid capital gains andget a tax deduction! Notify your broker or the com-pany whose stock you hold. Ask them to transferstock to Wildlife Watch, Inc. Federal TaxIdentification Number: 13-3076705A copy of our latest annual report may be obtainedfrom Wildlife Watch, Inc., or from the Office of theAttorney General, Charities Bureau, 120Broadway, New York, NY 10271.

A Voice in the WildernessVideotape approximately 20 minutes.

$12.00 and $8 for members.This video is an expose of wildlife

management by Luke Dommer,founder of C.A.S.H. It was producedby Focus on Animals, CT. EstherMechler of Focus has generouslygiven C.A.S.H.the right to sellthis videotape.Copies havebeen generouslydonated byNancy Gordonof HAVE, ana u d i o - v i s u a lcompany inHudson, NY. Luke Dommer

As always, we are grateful to The Mary T. and Frank L. Hoffman Family Foundation

for hosting the C.A.S.H. website!

Fans of Pete’s Humor www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/557305/#

PETER’S HUMOR?C.A.S.H. apologizes if you are not amused

BY PETER MULLER, VP, C.A.S.H.A hunter is introduced to his first

thermos-bottle. He is very curiousabout it and asks the sales clerk whatit does. The sales clerk says it’s awonderful invention which keeps coldfood cold and hot food hot. Thehunter is very impressed and buysone.

On his next hunting-trip he tells hisfriends, “Just wait till you see what Igot for lunch.” His friends’ curiosityis piqued and they press him to tellwhat it is that he brought with him.But he persists in not telling them.

Finally, it’s lunch time. With greatceremony, he pulls out his thermosbottle and proudly proclaims, “Howwould you like some hot soup and ice-cream?”

☺☺☺A guy is telling some hunting jokes

to his friends. Finally one of theminterrupts him saying, “Please beaware that I am and have been ahunter for years.” The guy hesitatesand says, “Sorry, should I start overand talk very, very slowly?”

☺☺☺A duck hunter bought a bird dog

and discovered that the dog couldactually walk on water. Shocked byhis find, he was sure none of hisfriends would ever believe him, so hedecided to take them all hunting withhis new dog. After a full day of notbeing able to kill any ducks, the hosthunter decided to throw some float-ing balls into the pond to show hisfriends what would have happenedhad they killed any ducks. He urgedthem all to watch. Each time thehunter threw a ball, the dog calmlywalked across the water andretrieved the balls while only gettinghis paws wet.

Finally, out of disappointment andboredom, the invited hunters decidedto leave. The hunter who hosted theirouting was surprised that no one hadcommented on his amazing new dog.Instead they sat stone-faced. Thiscontinued all the way back home.Finally, the duck hunter couldn’t con-trol himself any longer and asked hisfriends, "Did you notice anythingunusual about my new dog?" "I suredid," responded the most pessimisticof the bunch, "He can't swim."

Your generous contributions will help us to do much more.

Thank you for your support. Please visit: www.abolishsporthunting.org

PAGE 16

Wildlife Watch, Inc.C.A.S.H. Committee To Abolish Sport HuntingPO Box 562New Paltz, NY 12561Phone: (845) 256-1400 Fax: (845) 501-3175www.wildwatch.orgwww.all-creatures.org/cashwww.canadageese.org

Nonprofit Org.U.S. Postage

PaidNewburgh, NYPermit No. 473

PLEASE CLIP OUT AND MAIL IN THE ENCLOSED REMITTANCE ENVELOPE:

C.A.S.H. CATALOG ORDER BLANK

☺ YES, I WANT TO HELP THE COMMITTEE TO ABOLISH SPORT HUNTING END THE WAR ON WILDLIFE:☺ I AM HAPPY TO BECOME A Basic Plus Member for $50 _____________

I will receive the C.A.S.H. hat, return address labels, and newsletter. Check if you do not want a hat.____☺ I am happy to become a Basic member for $35_________

I will receive the C.A.S.H. newsletter and return address labels.☺ I am happy to contribute but cannot become a member now ________☺ I would like to make an additional contribution for Wildlife Watch ________C.A.S.H. accepts MasterCard or Visa:Card #_____________________________________________Amount_________________________ Exp. Date:________________Signature______________________________________________

All donations are tax-deductible.My e-mail address is _____________________________________________You can also pay through PayPal at www.abolishsporthunting.org link to “Donate” Thank You!

Description Qty $ Each $ Total

Subtotal: __________Shipping and Handling: __$5.00___

NYS residents must add appropriate sales tax: __________Additional contribution to help

C.A.S.H. carry on its work: __________Total: __________

You can now pay with:Mastercard/Visa # ________________________

Expir. Date: _____________Signature: _______________________________

Your Name: ________________________________Street: ____________________________________City: _______________________State: ____________________ Zip: _____________Day Phone: ________________________Eve Phone: _________________________Fax: __________________E-Mail: ____________________Date: ______________________Special Instructions: ____________________________________________________________________Ship to address below (if different from above):__________________________________________________________________________________________

Please make checks payable to: C.A.S.H. or Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting or Wildlife Watch, Inc.

Cut out along this dotted line if returning order form