Hunting seasons enter outdoors picture
Reply
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Orange or pink? Hunters now have a choice
Walk-in access to private land for hunting, other public use begins Sept. 1
Rains, mild temperatures set the stage for strong fall hunting outlook
Malaysian Bird Trapper Dies After Electric Shock From High-Voltage Cable
The 53-year-old bird trapping enthusiast died instantly when his modified pole contacted high-voltage cables while pursuing his hobby in Kampung Bukit Tok Chom, Pendang.
August 27, 2025
Subscribe to our FREE Newsletter, or Telegram and WhatsApp channels for the latest stories and updates.
A 53-year-old man died from electrocution while trying to catch birds using a modified pole that came into contact with high-voltage power lines in Kedah on Tuesday (26 August).
Sahrulnizam Ramli from Kampung Hujung Ketun was found dead at the scene in Kampung Bukit Tok Chom, Pendang, with severe burns across his body.
Pendang District Police Chief Superintendent Rodzi Abu Hassan said members of the public discovered the victim’s body and alerted authorities.
Police received a report from the public who found the body of a man with burns all over his body lying on the ground. Investigating officers who arrived at the scene examined the victim’s body and found no signs of criminal activity.
Police found a modified pole used for bird trapping still caught on the high-voltage electrical cable that caused the fatal shock, while the victim’s Modenas Kriss motorcycle was discovered nearby.
Social media posts showed the victim’s motorcycle parked in tall grass near power lines, with images of the electrical cables visible overhead.https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpenangkini%2Fposts%2Fpfbid0TRWZw6mSJmrmL2x2ixpq5VEYgxT6wge84wFPjcBm4kQMAtNVtwPx7EMiQUoHHQtEl&show_text=true&width=500
Public Reaction Mixed
The tragedy raised questions on social media about bird trapping practices, a popular pastime in rural Malaysia.
While many offered condolences, some criticised the hobby as harmful to wildlife.
“Please don’t catch birds… they have children to feed. They should be free,” wrote one Facebook user, urging people to release any caged birds at home.
Others in the bird trapping community warned about safety precautions, particularly avoiding electrical cables during rainy weather when lightning strikes are more likely.
One commenter noted similar incidents involving farm machinery coming into contact with power lines in the same area in previous years.
Police have classified the case as a sudden death with no criminal elements.
Why Birds Are Safe on Power Lines
Several commenters pointed out the scientific reason why birds can safely perch on electrical wires, while humans touching them with poles face deadly consequences.
Birds are safe because they only touch one wire at a time and don’t provide a path for electricity to flow to the ground.
Their bodies don’t complete an electrical circuit since they’re not simultaneously touching the wire and the ground or another wire.
However, when humans use metal poles or other conductive materials to reach power lines, they create a pathway for electricity to flow through their bodies to the ground, resulting in electrocution.
The length of fishing rods or bird-catching poles also increases the risk of accidentally bridging the gap between different electrical conductors.
“This is basic physics – birds don’t get shocked because they’re not grounded,” explained one commenter.
But when you’re standing on the ground holding a long pole that touches the wire, you become the path for the electricity.
Wildlife officials urge public to ignore fake social media post about new hunting rules
Crossbows can be used for big game in NYS, effective immediately
Indictment in Wyoming wolf killing puts human indifference in the spotlight
Date: August 26, 2025
Author(s): Kitty Block and Sara Amundson
We take comfort in a small but positive bend in the moral universe’s arc toward justice for animals after a Wyoming grand jury’s indictment of a man for shocking and callous cruelty to a gray wolf. He is charged with running over the wolf with his snowmobile in late February 2024, dragging her into a local watering hole in Daniel, Wyoming (population 148), taunting and tormenting her as she lay injured and bound in front of patrons, and finally, taking her outside to kill her. He now faces a maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of $5000, under Wyoming’s anti-cruelty statute.
On its face, of course, this is despicable conduct. In a more advanced and morally principled setting, there would be resounding consensus that such an action is deserving of punishment. But this happened in Wyoming, one of those states still burdened by a longstanding prejudice that—whatever our ethical obligations to domestic animals might be—we have no such duties to wildlife. There are other states where this is so, and yet this case, as much as any in our memories, highlights a striking contradiction in social, cultural and legal conceptions of animal cruelty. That’s what makes this indictment a big deal.
After this revolting incident came to public attention, members of our animal protection law team supported Wyoming advocates and organizations in their efforts to persuade authorities that certain specific actions of the suspect met the definition of both misdemeanor and felony cruelty under existing Wyoming law, and that the state could and should prosecute him. It was clear to us that there was no refuge for him in the statute’s stated exemptions concerning wildlife.
We understood, too, that there is a supremely important principle at issue in this case, one that we wish was more widely understood and accepted after nearly 160 years of organized animal protection work in the United States. All animals, including wild animals, are deserving of society’s basic concern, moral consideration and protection from the worst kind of cruelty, the kind so horribly and hauntingly on display that night at the Green River Bar.
Nor did this cruelty take place in a vacuum. It occurred in the very region of the country in which the states with resident wolf populations, unrestrained by federal law and the listing of wolves under the Endangered Species Act, have all but declared war on them. Their assault has taken the form of hostile state legislation or rules authorizing higher killing quotas, authorization of cruel methods of killing, and permitting the killing of wolves without even a license. And that’s not to mention the political and practical support that the rapacious governments of several of these states are receiving from Congress and the Trump administration, in the form of malice-driven legislation, appropriations mischief and other maneuvers.
Preserve ESA protections for wolves and grizzly bears!
In early August, a federal judge in Montana ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ran afoul of the law when it denied a petition to protect gray wolves in the Rocky Mountains under the ESA. This ruling, which came in response to a petition we filed with partner organizations, means that the agency must now revisit the question of whether to grant federal protections to wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, along with portions of three other states, Oregon, Utah and Washington.
Of the many things that sadden us about this deeply disturbing incident, one of the most disconcerting is the fact that only one patron of the bar chose to report what occurred that night to law enforcement or other government authorities. Even now, some residents of Sublette County continue to express their worry and anxiety about the unwelcome attention and tension that the indictment will bring.
We see it differently. Because one person present that night decided to bear witness, and one County Attorney, despite opposition from the state fish and game department and some predictable local interests, is pursuing this prosecution, we can mark and remember a small but certain move toward greater justice in the world.
Sara Amundson is president of Humane World Action Fund.
Bird Flu Detected in Vultures in Hillsborough
Why Fighting Donald Trump on Climate Change is a Waste of Time and Actually Counter Productive by Paul Watson
There is no point getting upset about Donald Trump and Climate.
Change this one thing.
Donald Trump’s denial of Climate Change is irrelevant.
Climate change is a scientific reality and the denial of climate change as a problem does not make the threat go away. The reality cannot be changed by the personal beliefs of the President of the United States. This is akin to King Canute demanding that the tide cease to rise. When he failed, he proclaimed, “let all men know how empty and worthless the power of kings is.”
Presidents like kings have no authority over nature.
And when you really think about, just what is the difference between a President that denies climate change and a Prime Minister who acknowledges it, yet acts as if he is denying it?
It is of course the politically correct thing to acknowledge climate change as a reality but none of these world leaders are actually doing the ecologically correct thing and doing something about it.
Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and others are saying that Trump’s presidency poses a direct and real danger to our climate and environment.
Just how is President-elect Donald Trump any different from Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney or Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese or any other world leader.
There is this myth that Carney is doing something to address climate change. He’s not. His energy policies are not much different than former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He has not stopped development and extraction in the Tar Sands, he’s pro-pipeline, pro west coast tanker traffic and pretty much pro anything that is going to profit the energy corporations.
At COP 21 in 2015 former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau he said he was going to take real action on climate change…. like someday—-maybe, or maybe not. He did nothing.
Before becoming Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney was the United Nations special envoy on climate action and finance and was behind the United Nations near net zero banking alliance so we had reason to believe that he’d prioritize climate action if he won the election. After the election he now describes fossil fuel infrastructure as pragmatic. He has also been very silent on connecting climate change with severe forest fires ravaging Western Canada
What did the U.S. under Obama do? Trump will not diminish the Obama, Bush and Clinton efforts. He would actually have to try hard to do less than they did.
I very vividly remember that it was Al Gore who refused to sign the Kyoto Accord and I also remember everyone in Canada and Australia giving the Americans hell for not signing that accord, yet the Canadians and the Australians were creating more greenhouse gas emissions per capita than the Americans at the time and continue to do so.
So, it seems that signing a climate change agreement is more important than doing something about the problem and acknowledging climate change and doing nothing about it appears to be more significant than denying it and doing nothing about it.
Many people will now throw their energies into fighting Trump on this issue and this will make leaders like Carney in Canada or Stamer in the U.K. look relatively good while they do nothing more substantial than Trump in reality.
We humans do love our illusions.
Fighting Trump on this issue serves to send a message to all those who voted for him that he’s, their man. Making the Democrat, the Greenies and the Lefties angry is something that will endear him even more in their minds. They want him to be seen as the climate changer denying hero. Instead, we need to ignore him because climate change deniers are irrelevant to reality. By challenging the deniers, we validate them, we engage them and thus they are taken even more seriously.
Donald Trump is not really stupid man, (debatable of course) although he plays the role quite well. He knows damn well that climate change is real, but he needs to tell his base what they want to hear and challenging him on this helps him to send that message even stronger.
Trump is not a scientist and therefore does not need to score any points with science. He is a populist politician wooing people who he knows want to hear the message that climate change is a hoax and, as is his way, he embellished it with a silly explanation that the Chinese created it. Does he really believe that? Of course not, but he wanted the people who want to hear him deny climate change to think that he does. It’s called politics, also known as the ‘art of the possible’.
Confronting Trump on climate change achieves less traction than ignoring him. Saying he is a dunce with the science does not hurt him, in fact it only makes him stronger with his base and his base has demonstrated that science pulls very little weight when it comes to their self-interested priorities.
What he and his climate change denying constituents will not be able to ignore is when mother nature continues to slap them in the face harder than the year before. They can only ignore super-storms, floods, drought, rising sea levels, devastating fires, etc., for so long until the realization that something is not quite right sinks through their hard skulls into that area of their brain that can comprehend consequences.
Trying to get a politician, any politician, to actually withdraw from energy addiction is akin to trying to get a hardcore junkie to lay off the needle.
The Greenpeace message states that Trump poses a direct and real danger to our climate, our environment, and our democracy.
But does he? The threats to our climate, our environment and our democracy have been the same threats for decades, well before Trump. He did not just jump out of the bushes to scare us with these threats. Are the Native Americans at Standing Rock being pepper sprayed and beaten because of Trump? Did the Deepwater Horizon disaster happen because of Trump? And what could be a greater threat to our environment than BP’s disaster in the Gulf and the fact that they were never really punished. If I deliberately poured a barrel of oil into the harbor I would be in jail. This double standard is not Trump’s creation.
I think the oligarchs would love nothing better than to scapegoat Donald Trump for their sins. He is after all a loose cannon in their eyes. They would much rather replace him and most likely they will.
And these COP conferences are accomplishing absolutely nothing but talk, talk, talk and more freaking talk. We’re up to COP 30 now with this recent meeting in Azerbijan and without the charisma and energy of a Nichola Hulot who organized COP 21 in Paris, hardly anyone even heard anything about COP 29.
How many COP’S will there be before anything substantial is actually done. COP 33? COP 57? These charades are simply cop-outs from action.
Not one of these COP gab-fests has shut down a single coal fired generating plant or a single pipeline. Not one.
The only thing that excites any government appears to be the possibility of imposing a tax. Politicians love taxes and carbon taxes are just another scam to secure tax dollars. Carbon trading is yet another scam.
There is not a single nation that is undertaking the effort to realistically and effectively address climate change.
Is anyone shutting down fracking, drilling, open pit mining, deep water exploration? No. Is there a single nation cutting subsidies to energy companies or to the destructive fishing industries? No. Will we stop slaughtering 65 billion animals a year to reduce a carbon footprint that is even greater than that of transportation? Hell no, “I like my hamburger” is the answer.
Is there a single world leader ready to make economic sacrifices for the environment? Absolutely not.
“Oh but….,” say my critics, “there are great educational programs underway.” How’s that working? Not that great?
And now some people want us to waste our energies battling Trump the climate change denier as if that’s going to accomplish anything. It won’t. When will we stop reacting to the circuses so we can actually focus on taking the initiative?
My point is that Donald Trump simply is no worse and no better than all the rest of these so-called leaders whose agenda is to serve the corporations and to enrich themselves.
He won’t do much, but he will most likely do just as much as any other world leader.
The embarrassment of the Dakota Access Pipeline happened under the Obama administration. Would Kamala Harris have stopped it has been President? Would she have done a damn thing to address climate change if she had won? The evidence indicates that she would have done everything to maintain the status quo which has brought all these problems to us and will present much greater problems in the near future.
I did not vote for Trump and I don’t know of a sane person who did but I’m not going to pretend that on this issue i.e. climate change anyone else would mean anything different.
I can see fighting Trump on women’s issues, LGBT+ issues, immigration issues and many more important social issues and I will support any such efforts with both passion and action BUT I have no intention of fighting Trump on Climate Change because to do so would simply be a distraction away from the fact that not one goddamn world leader is actually doing anything at all to address the problem and I have no intention of contributing to making them all look good compared to Trump.
Because when it comes to climate change Trump is on par with everyone else in power, meaning that they all are pursuing agendas that are contrary to the reality of climate change.
So where do we look for answers?
Individual passion. Individual imagination. Individual initiative. Individual courage. These are the keys to our survival.
Depending on a politician to solve any of these problems is like depending on an oil executive to promote solar energy. It is simply not in their interest or as James Carvil once put it, “It’s the economy stupid.”
That is reality. Politicians serve the economy. They do not serve the Environment.
It’s like asking a Kindergarten teacher to teach advanced calculus. They won’t do it because they can’t do it. Not in their job description.
We need to look beyond the limited horizons of elected officials because the answers are to be found well beyond their restricted and blinkered worldviews.
To paraphrase Matthew in Matthew 22:21 “Render to the Donald the things that are the Donald’s.”
Climate change is not one of his things and never will be. It is our thing, those of us who understand the consequences and thus it is our responsibility to explore and invent alternatives and to fight the technologies, not the hired mouthpieces of these destructive technologies
Exposing the Big Game 