Four ice cores from continental Antarctica were drilled in East Antarctica, including two as part of the Norwegian-American International Polar Year Antarctic Scientific Traverse. Credit: Stein Tronstad
Several years ago, while analyzing ice core samples from Antarctica’s James Ross Island, scientists Joe McConnell, Ph.D., and Nathan Chellman, Ph.D., from DRI, and Robert Mulvaney, Ph.D., from the British Antarctic Survey noticed something unusual: a substantial increase in levels of black carbon that began around the year 1300 and continued to the modern day.
Black carbon, commonly referred to as soot, is a light-absorbing particle that comes from combustion sources such as biomass burning (e.g. forest fires) and, more recently, fossil fuel combustion. Working in collaboration with an international team of scientists from the United Kingdom, Austria, Norway, Germany, Australia, Argentina, and the U.S., McConnell, Chellman, and Mulvaney set out to uncover the origins of the unexpected increase in black carbon captured in the Antarctic ice.
The team’s findings, which published this week in Nature, point to an unlikely source: ancient Māori land-burning practices in New Zealand, conducted at a scale that impacted the atmosphere across much of the Southern Hemisphere and dwarfed other preindustrial emissions in the region during the past 2,000 years.
“The idea that humans at this time in history caused such a significant change in atmospheric black carbon through their land clearing activities is quite surprising,” said McConnell, research professor of hydrology at DRI who designed and led the study. “We used to think that if you went back a few hundred years you’d be looking at a pristine, pre-industrial world, but it’s clear from this study that humans have been impacting the environment over the Southern Ocean and the Antarctica Peninsula for at least the last 700 years.”
The James Ross Island core drilled to bedrock in 2008 by the British Antarctic Survey provided an unprecedented record of soot deposition in the northern Antarctic Peninsula during the past 2000 years and revealed the surprising impacts of Māori burning in New Zealand starting in the late 13th century. Robert Mulvaney, Ph.D., pictured here led collection of the core. Credit: Jack Triest
Tracing the black carbon to its source
To identify the source of the black carbon, the study team analyzed an array of six ice cores collected from James Ross Island and continental Antarctica using DRI’s unique continuous ice-core analytical system. The method used to analyze black carbon in ice was first developed in McConnell’s lab in 2007.
While the ice core from James Ross Island showed a notable increase in black carbon beginning around the year 1300, with levels tripling over the 700 years that followed and peaking during the 16th and 17th centuries, black carbon levels at sites in continental Antarctica during the same period of time stayed relatively stable.
“From our models and the deposition pattern over Antarctica seen in the ice, it is clear that Patagonia, Tasmania, and New Zealand were the most likely points of origin of the increased black carbon emissions starting about 1300,” said Stohl.
Black carbon deposition during the past 2000 years measured in ice cores from Dronning Maud Land in continental Antarctica and James Ross Island at the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula. Atmospheric modeling and local burning records indicate that the pronounced increase in deposition in the northern Antarctic Peninsula starting in the late 13th century was related to Māori settlement of New Zealand nearly 4000 miles away and their use of fire for land clearing and management. Inset shows locations of New Zealand and ice-core drilling sites in Antarctica. Credit: DRI
After consulting paleofire records from each of the three regions, only one viable possibility remained: New Zealand, where charcoal records showed a major increase in fire activity beginning about the year 1300. This date also coincided with the estimated arrival, colonization, and subsequent burning of much of New Zealand’s forested areas by the Māori people.
This was a surprising conclusion, given New Zealand’s relatively small land area and the distance (nearly 4,500 miles), that smoke would have travelled to reach the ice core site on James Ross Island.
“Compared to natural burning in places like the Amazon, or Southern Africa, or Australia, you wouldn’t expect Māori burning in New Zealand to have a big impact, but it does over the Southern Ocean and the Antarctic Peninsula,” said Chellman, postdoctoral fellow at DRI. “Being able to use ice core records to show impacts on atmospheric chemistry that reached across the entire Southern Ocean, and being able to attribute that to the Māori arrival and settlement of New Zealand 700 years ago was really amazing.”
Research impacts
The study findings are important for a number of reasons. First, the results have important implications for our understanding of Earth’s atmosphere and climate. Modern climate models rely on accurate information about past climate to make projections for the future, especially on emissions and concentrations of light-absorbing black carbon linked to Earth’s radiative balance. Although it is often assumed that human impacts during preindustrial times were negligible compared to background or natural burning, this study provides new evidence that emissions from human-related burning have impacted Earth’s atmosphere and possibly its climate far earlier, and at scales far larger, than previously imagined.
Drilling camp on James Ross Island, northern Antarctic Peninsula. Credit: Jack Triest
Second, fallout from biomass burning is rich in micronutrients such as iron. Phytoplankton growth in much of the Southern Ocean is nutrient-limited so the increased fallout from Māori burning probably resulted in centuries of enhanced phytoplankton growth in large areas of the Southern Hemisphere.
Third, the results refine what is known about the timing of the arrival of the Māori in New Zealand, one of the last habitable places on earth to be colonized by humans. Māori arrival dates based on radiocarbon dates vary from the 13th to 14th century, but the more precise dating made possible by the ice core records pinpoints the start of large scale burning by early Māori in New Zealand to 1297, with an uncertainty of 30 years.
Measuring the chemistry in a longitudinal sample of an ice core on DRI’s unique ice core analytical system. Credit: Joe McConnell/DRI
“From this study and other previous work our team has done such as on 2,000-year old lead pollution in the Arctic from ancient Rome, it is clear that ice core records are very valuable for learning about past human impacts on the environment,” McConnell said. “Even the most remote parts of Earth were not necessarily pristine in preindustrial times.”
CODY- The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and Wyoming Game and Fish Department (Game and Fish) are currently investigating a grizzly bear attack. On Saturday morning, a man was injured by a grizzly bear while elk hunting west of Cody, Wyoming. The man rode out to the trailhead and was flown by helicopter to an area hospital where he is receiving treatment for what was initially reported as non-life threatening injuries.
Upon notification of the incident, Game and Fish immediately responded to the scene. Their initial investigation indicates the hunter was attacked after a sudden encounter at close range with an adult female grizzly bear with two cubs. The female grizzly was killed by the…
Mother black bears emerge from their dens in the spring with their newborn cubs. Trophy hunting bears at this vulnerable time is exceptionally cruel.George Sanke/Alamy Stock Photo88SHARES
For all of us, fall is a time for winter preparation. For black bears, that means packing on the pounds to build a fat layer robust enough to withstandmonths of winter hibernation without eating, and even more so for female bears who will birth and care for newborn cubs during their denning season. But black bears are not the only ones looking forward to spring when they can finally emerge from their slumber—trophy hunters are also loading their guns, stocking their bait and readying their hounds for the chase.
Thousands of youth climate activists marched through the streets of Milan last week demanding world leaders meet their pledges to the Paris Climate Agreement and keep global temperatures from rising by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. The protest came at the end of a three-day youth climate conference, ahead of the United Nations’ COP26 climate summit in Glasgow. Activists at the Youth4Climate conference slammed political inaction on the climate crisis and world leaders’ vague pledges to reduce carbon emissions. “Historically, Africa is responsible for only 3% of global emissions,” said Ugandan activist Vanessa Nakate. “And yet Africans are already suffering some of the most brutal impacts fueled by the climate crisis.” Swedish activist Greta Thunberg mocked the jargon politicians use to talk about climate and the environment. “Net zero, blah, blah, blah. Climate neutral, blah, blah, blah. This is all we hear from our so-called leaders: words — words that sound great but so far has led to no action,” said Thunberg. “Our hopes and dreams drown in their empty words and promises.”
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! I’m Amy Goodman.
We end today’s show looking at the climate emergency. Thousands of climate activists marched Saturday through Milan, Italy, as leaders from around the world met for the pre-COP26 summit during a year that’s seen record-breaking heat waves, floods and fires. Climate activists also spoke last week at the U.N.-sponsored Youth4Climate conference in Milan. This is Ugandan activist Vanessa Nakate.
VANESSA NAKATE: My name is Vanessa Nakate, and I live Kampala, Uganda, a country that has one of the fastest-changing climates in the world.
In the past few years, I have seen more and more how the climate crisis is affecting the African continent, which is ironic given that Africa is the lowest emitter of CO2 emissions of all continents except for Antarctica. Historically, Africa is responsible for only 3% of global emissions. And yet Africans are already suffering some of the most brutal impacts fueled by the climate crisis: rapidly intensifying hurricanes, devastating floods and withering droughts. Many Africans are losing their lives, while countless more have lost their livelihoods.
The droughts and floods have left nothing behind for the people, nothing except for pain, agony, suffering, starvation and death. A recent World Bank report warned that we could see up to 86 million people in sub-Saharan Africa alone displaced due to rising sea levels, desertification, declining fresh water and food scarcity. Over the past few months, there have been deadly heat waves and wildfires in Algeria and devastating flooding in countries like Uganda and Nigeria. And the U.N. has declared that Madagascar is on the brink of the world’s first climate change famine. Tens of thousands of people are already suffering catastrophic levels of hunger and food insecurity after four years without rain. Who is going to pay for Madagascar?
And, of course, this is not just happening on the African continent. Hurricanes Irma, Maria, Dorian and Harold have left some islands in the Caribbean and Pacific totally uninhabitable. Six million Bangladeshis have become displaced as a consequence of climate change. By 2050, 17% of the country’s coastline will vanish underwater, creating an estimated 30 million climate — climate refugees. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature recently announced that there are now well over 38,000 species on its red list, the best available catalog we have of the species facing extinction.
Who is going to pay for the lost islands of the Caribbean and Pacific? Who is going to pay for the communities who must flee the Bangladeshi coastline? Who is going to pay for the thousands of species that fall off of the scientists’ red list and into the oblivion?
How long shall the land mourn? How long shall the farms lay in ruins? How long shall the hubs of every field wither? How long shall the animals and the birds perish? How long shall children be given up for marriage because their families have lost everything to the climate crisis? How long shall children sleep hungry because their farms have been washed away, because their crops have been dried up, because of the extreme weather conditions? How long are we to watch them die of thirst in the droughts and gasp for air in the floods? What is the state of the hearts of the world leaders who watch this happen and allow it to continue?
Our leaders are lost, and our planet is damaged. Loss and damage used to be something people thought of as happening only in the Global South. As we have seen in the recent months with wildfires in California and Greece and floods in Germany and Belgium, loss and damage is now possible everywhere. Everywhere I go, leaders fall over themselves to say how they will achieve net zero by such and such a date to mitigate the worst impacts of the climate crisis. Sometimes I hear leaders talk about the need to fund adaptation efforts, where mitigation will no longer be enough.
AMY GOODMAN: Ugandan activist Vanessa Nakate speaking Thursday at the U.N.-sponsored Youth4Climate summit in Milan, Italy. Also speaking there was the Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg.
GRETA THUNBERG: Climate change is not only a threat; it is, above all, an opportunity to create a healthier, greener and cleaner planet, which will benefit all of us. We must seize this opportunity. We can achieve a win-win in both ecological conservation and high-quality development. Fighting climate change calls for innovation, cooperation and willpower to make the changes that the world needs. We need to walk the talk. If we do this together, we can do this.
When I say climate change, what do you think of? I think of jobs, green jobs. Green jobs. We must find a smooth transition towards a low-carbon economy.
There is no planet B. There is no planet Blah. Blah, blah, blah. Blah, blah, blah. This is not about some expensive, politically correct, green act of bunny hugging or blah, blah, blah. Build back better, blah, blah, blah. Green economy, blah, blah, blah. Net zero by 25 — 2050, blah, blah, blah. Net zero by 2050, blah, blah, blah. Net zero, blah, blah, blah. Climate neutral, blah, blah, blah. This is all we hear from our so-called leaders: words — words that sound great but so far has led to no action. Our hopes and dreams drown in their empty words and promises.
Of course, we need constructive dialogue, but they’ve now had 30 years of blah, blah, blah, and where has that led us? Over 50% of all our CO2 emissions have occurred since 1990, and a third since 2005 — all this while the media is reporting on what the leaders say that they’re going to do, instead of what they are actually doing, and they’re not holding leaders accountable for their action, or, rather, inaction.
And don’t get me wrong: We can still do this. Change is not only possible but urgently necessary, but not if we go on like today. They say they want “solutions,” but you cannot solve a crisis that you do not fully understand. You cannot balance a budget if you do not count all the numbers. And as long as we ignore equity and historic emissions, and as long as we don’t include consumption of imported goods, burning of biomass, etc., etc., and as long as clever accounting is one of the most efficient ways of reducing emissions, we won’t get anywhere.
And the climate crisis is, of course, only a symptom of a much larger crisis, a sustainability crisis, a social crisis, a crisis of inequality that dates back to colonialism and beyond, a crisis based on the idea that some people are worth more than others and therefore have the right to exploit and steal other people’s lands and resources. And it is very naive to believe that we can solve this crisis without confronting the roots of it.
Right now we are still very much speeding in the wrong direction. 2021 is currently projected to experience the second-highest emission rise ever. Only about 2% of government recovery spendings have been allocated to clean energy measures. And according to a new report by the U.N., global emissions are expected to rise by 16% by 2030 compared to 2010 levels.
Our leaders’ intentional lack of action is a betrayal towards all present and future generations. The people in power cannot claim that they are trying, because they are clearly not, as they continue opening up brand-new coal mines, oil fields and pipelines, pretending to have ambitious climate policies while granting new oil licenses, exploring enormous future oil fields and shamelessly congratulating themselves while still failing to come up with even the bare minimum and long overdue funding to help the most vulnerable countries deal with the impacts of the climate crisis. If this is what they consider to be climate action, then we don’t want it.
They invite cherry-picked young people to meetings like this to pretend that they are listening to us, but they are not. They are clearly not listening to us, and they never have. Just look at the numbers. Look at the statistics. The emissions are still rising. The science doesn’t lie.
But, of course, we can still turn this around. It is entirely possible. It will take drastic annual emission cuts unlike anything the world has ever seen. And as we don’t have the technological solutions that alone can deliver anything close to that, that means we will have to change. We can no longer let the people in power decide what is politically possible or not. We can no longer let the people in power decide what hope is. Hope is not passive. Hope is not blah, blah, blah. Hope is telling the truth. Hope is taking action. And hope always comes from the people.
AMY GOODMAN: Climate activist Greta Thunberg of Sweden speaking in Milan, Italy, at the U.N. Youth4Climate summit. Saturday, thousands of climate activists marched through Milan. Italian police in riot gear clashed with climate activists, who are calling on the COP26 policymakers to wean the world off fossil fuels.
And that does it for our show. A very happy birthday to Becca Staley!
BELINGTON — A hunter who suffered “severe injuries” after falling from a tree stand a mile deep into the woods was rescued this week by the Belington Volunteer Fire Department and other first responders, officials said..
At about 5:46 p.m. Tuesday, the Belington VFD “was dispatched for a search and rescue in the area of Dunham Cut road on the outskirts of Belington. Upon arrival, it was determined that calls for help had been heard coming from a wooded area by community members,” according to a Belington VFD media release.
Firefighters “immediately established a command post and requested assistance from Junior, Philippi and Coalton fire departments, who responded with side by sides and personnel,” the release states.
Belington VFD “personnel entered the woods in an effort to located the source of the calls for help. After trekking through over a mile of densely wooded trails in a remote area, a hunter was located who had fallen over 20 feet out of his tree stand and suffered severe injuries.
“Paramedics from (Belington VFD) and Belington EMS began life-saving emergency medical care for the patient, while our mutual aid departments brought the necessary equipment in via side by sides,” the release continues. “Once the patient had been stabilized, he was transported by side by side to (a landing zone) in a nearby field where he was flown to Ruby Memorial Hospital by HealthNet helicopter.”
The named of the injured hunter has not been released. The family reported that on Wednesday he underwent surgery at Ruby Memorial Hospital, according to the Belington VFD release.
“This incident could have had a more grim outcome if it wasn’t for the quick thinking of community members Brad Dumire and Brian and Tammy Ross, who, after hearing the calls for help coming from the woods, called 911,” the release states.
“Even after rescue personnel arrived on scene, community members Seth Ross, Jon Wright, and Joe and Whitney Hymes assisted responders by opening gates and allowing full access to their land, which helped emergency responders save precious time in locating and transporting the patient. Community member Aaron Yeager also assisted responders in the rescue effort.”
Belington VFD officials thanked the other first responders and the public for their help in the rescue effort.
“Belington VFD, Belington EMS, Junior Fire Department, Philippi Fire Department, Coalton Fire Department, Barbour 911, Barbour County Sheriff’s Department, WV State Police, WV DNR, HealthNet, and most importantly our community came together as a team to accomplish a great rescue and showed that neighbors still help neighbors because they care,” the release states.
There are a number of local, state, national and international organizations that publicly concern themselves with caring for animals and protecting the environment. Some have their foundations a century ago or longer (such as Audubon Society in the late 1800s), while others are relatively new to the scene (such as Love Canada Geese in 2005). Among these groups are several that clearly state their opposition to any form of hunting (particularly the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting), while others publicly align themselves with hunters (including The Wilderness Society ). Some organizations have chosen to maintain a neutral or “apolitical” stance with regard to hunting, or take exception to particular types of hunting or targets of hunting (such as Defenders of Wildlife, which focuses much of its effort on ending aerial hunting of wolves) but typically do not address the broader ecological impact of hunting.
Purpose
This wiki is designed primarily with the objective of providing information for anyone interested in learning more about the specific views on hunting held by numerous purportedly pro-animal and pro-environment organizations. As with any wiki, it is intended as a work in progress, with the goal of encouraging collaborative efforts to add more information and more groups as new knowledge is found or developed. The initial outline is focused on identifying organizations that belong to three main groups as described above:
Organizations that publicly oppose hunting
Organizations that ally themselves with hunters
Organizations that are self-described as neutral, or oppose only limited types or targets of hunting
Within each group, organizations will be added as support for their group membership becomes available (whether as quoted on their websites, or confirmed by an official representative via documented communication), and anecdotes, examples, and other information related to each organization’s views on hunting will be used to develop a clearer view of where these environmental and animal organizations stand on hunting.
Organizations Publicly Opposed to Hunting[edit | edit source]
All organizations in this group have adopted a public stance that is clearly anti-hunting. While in some instances the focus of the group is on a specific type of hunting, or a specific animal or geographical region, they support an end to hunting. In a few instances there are some organizations in this group that note that some cultures still rely on hunting for sustenance (most notably Inuit tribes), but they oppose hunting for any other reason, oppose hunting of any endangered species, oppose any “inhumane” forms of hunting, and are strongly concerned with the ecological impact of hunting.
AGRO — A National Coalition to End Aerial Gunning of Wildlife[edit | edit source]
AGRO focuses on ending the practice on aerial gunning of wildlife, but additionally opposes any other lethal means of preventing wild animals from harming domestic animals. Their stance is that the natural world is sacred and that we need to reconnect with the natural world, which includes respecting the lives of animals.
From their website: “It’s time for agribusiness to take responsibility and use well-documented, non-lethal precautions to protect their livestock from native wildlife and not rely upon killing.” “For centuries, we’ve been ‘conquering’ the natural world rather than honoring it for its sacredness. If we continue to hold onto this belief, we won’t grasp that the real basic concern for this century is not simply divine-human or inter-human relations, but our relations with planet Earth as sacred community.”
The Animals Voice is primarily a website and magazine-based publication launched in 1987, but its use as a tool by activists for networking and dissemination of information has given it a fair amount of heft in pro-animal communities. They support animal liberation, and are against recreational hunting, typically advocating a vegetarian lifestyle.
“The Animals Voice Statement of Purpose:
The purpose of The Animals Voice is to effect the liberation of animals. Through our online database of hard-hitting editorial and photography, resources and networking, as well as through our award-winning, international animal rights magazine, we have already proven our potential among activists and adversaries as being a powerful force in the changes necessary for the betterment in the living and dying conditions for animals around the planet. We promise to continue our work in globally networking activists and organizations, and in educating and enlightening everyone who visits or reads our material about the desperate plight of animals and what part they can do to cause animal liberation.”[1]
The ASPCA was founded by Henry Bergh in 1866 and works to rescue abused animals and to support animal shelters nationwide. It was the first humane society to be established in North America, and is one of the largest in the world today. Henry Bergh believed that animals should be protected by the law, and the ASPCA has the legal authority to investigate and make arrests for crimes against animals. While its primary focus has been on maintaining shelters and preventing the abuse of domestic pets, the ASPCA also has a strong policy against sport hunting.
From their website: “Because there is no guarantee that wildlife taken in sport hunting will be killed outright or spared the distress of pursuit and possible wounding and escape, the ASPCA is opposed to hunting animals for sport, even if the animals killed in this way are subsequently consumed. The ASPCA does recognize that wildlife management may be necessary in situations where animal and human interests collide, but urges that management strategies be nonlethal wherever possible and never include avoidable suffering or distress.”
Founded in 1977, Animal Aid is a British organization that is against animal abuse and promotes a “cruelty-free lifestyle.” Their campaigns range from promoting vegetarianism and veganism to ending activities such as the “game” bird industry, fox hunting, factory farming, and animal experimentation.
From their website: “Animal Aid are opposed to all forms of animal cruelty – and we therefore strongly oppose hunting. Hunting with hounds has no place in modern Britain. It should have ended years ago along with cock-fighting, bear-baiting and dog-fighting. When animal cruelty is portrayed by some as a ‘sport’ to get pleasure from it debases society and promotes even more animal cruelty. It is not just foxes and other wildlife who suffer. Horses and dogs are also victims of hunting – viewed simply as ‘sporting accessories’ many sustain fatal injuries during the gruelling chase.”
Best Friends was started in Arizona in the 1970s as a no-kill shelter that eventually grew into a large animal sanctuary, currently situated in Angel Canyon, Utah. They gained non-profit charity status in 1991 and provide a home to over 1,500 animals, and their primary goal is No More Homeless Pets, a community that is part of the larger Best Friends Network. They have a significant internet presence through this network, which provides news and information as well as a way for animal activists to connect both online and off. Their Animal Help staff responds to over 20,000 requests for assistance each year, and while their focus is on domestic/companion animals, they also have a strong anti-hunting stance, which was shared by Member Liaison Dori Jeurink:
“Best Friends is a no-kill organization, and we are dedicated to kindness towards all creatures. Therefore, we do not support activities that objectify animals, reduce their quality of life, or harm them in any way.” [2]
Founded in 2006 as a voice for carnivores such as bears, cougars, coyotes and wolves, Big Wildlife operates essentially as a public relations firm for wildlife, providing training for activists, supporting grassroots movements and animal campaigns, and educating the public about wildlife. According to Communications Director Brian Vincent (who is personally against all hunting), “We oppose all hunting of top and mid-level predators, such as bears, cougars, wolves, wolverine, coyotes, and others”[3]
Big Wildlife additionally supports a vegan lifestyle, is against the fur trade, and discourages “using words like ‘manage,’ ‘cull,’ ‘harvest,’ ‘game species,’ and ‘resource’ in reference to wildlife. Such words are often used by government officials, trophy hunters, the fur industry, agribusiness, and other interests to desensitize the public to the brutal reality of lethal control programs, trapping, snaring, and trophy hunting”[4].
Started in England in 1984 by the stars of the film Born Free, Virginia McKenna and Bill Travers, Born Free is “devoted to compassionate conservation and animal welfare.” Their goals include protecting endangered species, preventing animal suffering, establishing wildlife sanctuaries, and enabling people to live side by side with wildlife in their local communities without conflict. They are opposed to captive breeding, canned hunting, and trophy hunting.
From their website: “Whether its fighting the ivory trade and ‘sport’ hunting, opposing killing wild animals for ‘bushmeat’, or challenging the exploitation of wild animals in zoos and circuses, Born Free takes action on the front line for animals.”
API was co-founded in 1968 by Belton Mouras and Ken Guerrero, and Born Free USA was established in the United States in 2002 as a companion organization to the Born Free Foundation. Their mission statement is “to alleviate animal suffering, protect threatened and endangered species in the wild, and encourage everyone to treat wildlife everywhere with respect and compassion.”
Born Free USA has been involved in causes aimed to prevent funds earmarked for conservation from supporting hunting, opposing a Senate bill aimed at hunting conservation. Born Free USA “objects to this bill because it would fund projects related to hunting and habitat improvements for that purpose.”
Founded in 1993 to put a halt to the needless killing of Canada geese in Rockland County, New York, the Coalition is focused on nonlethal conflict resolution between humans and Canada geese, but publicly condemns hunting of other animals for sport as well. They also list other anti-hunting sites on their website.
The Coalition to Prevent the Destruction of Canada Geese is also actively involved in exposing the role wildlife agencies play in promoting hunting. Since wildlife agencies often rely on hunting license fees to pay managers’ salaries, and most agency managers are (or were) hunters, the primary motivation behind wildlife agencies’ supporting hunting is based on obtaining more resources, not “managing” wildlife.
From their mission statement: “We also work to expose how the economic infrastructure of government wildlife management actually perpetuates human-wildlife conflicts while simultaneously encouraging a bias that favors killing as a form of problem solving. We seek a complete renovation of this operating philosophy. Until such time, we advocate the use of humane, non-lethal methods to resolve or minimize the conflicts between Canada geese and humans.”
CASH is a committee of Wildlife Watch, Inc. and its mission is “to accomplish what its name says in the shortest possible time.” CASH provides materials to effectively argue against different methods of hunting as well as other lethal methods of resolving human-wildlife conflicts (baiting, trapping, etc.). Member Peter Muller’s No-Cull website provides responses to common rationales used by hunters to “justify” deer hunting, including basic points to make as well as documents supporting anti-hunting perspectives:
Some hunters argue that without hunting, wildlife populations will exceed “social carrying capacity.” In fact, hunted herds have been shown to demonstrate a greater percentage increase in population one year after a hunt than unhunted herds[6].
Some hunters argue that “culling” deer populations is necessary to preserve plant life, or that “culling” predators is necessary to preserve prey species. However, many more factors are involved in environmental changes such as decreases in a particular plant species[7], from climate change to soil erosion, and hunting is more likely to contribute to imbalances in the ecosystem than to serve as a “corrective” for ecological change.
Argument that Overpopulation contributes to Car Collisions[edit | edit source]
Some hunters argue that if it weren’t for hunting, there would be even more wildlife-car collisions. In fact, more animals are on the move during hunting seasons, resulting in a consistent increase in collisions between wildlife and automobiles[8].
Argument that Overpopulation contributes to Lyme Disease[edit | edit source]
Some hunters argue that the more dense the deer population, the more rampant Lyme Disease will be. In fact, the population of ticks carrying Lyme disease is related to the population density of rodents rather than deer[9][10].
Argument that Non-Lethal Methods of Population Control are Impractical/Expensive[edit | edit source]
According to CASH, “Immunocontraception is relatively inexpensive and has worked successfully in parks and urban/suburban settings”No-Cull.
Paul Shapiro was a high school sophomore in Washington when he started Compassion Over Killing in 1995. While the primary goal of COK’s campaigns is the promotion of a vegetarian lifestyle and an end to animal abuse, focusing on an end to animal cruelty in agriculture, it does support an anti-hunting stance. Literature on the website describes hunting as a form of animal abuse and cruelty[11][12].
Founded in 1957, Friends of Animals “advocates for the right of animals to live free according to their own terms.” They are a strongly anti-hunting organization that also supports a vegetarian lifestyle. One of their main goals is to abolish hunting altogether, and they are “unequivocally against hunting and the destructive methods of ‘wildlife management’ that caters to, and fosters hunting. Hunting is an act against Nature on both moral and biological grounds.”[13]
According to Friends of Animals, hunting is cruel, deceitful, socially unjustifiable, and ecologically disruptive:
Hunters try to disguise the reality of hunting with euphemisms such as “harvests,” “culls,” “wildlife management,” “bag limits,” “sport,” “game,” and many others.
Hunting disrupts natural ecological dynamics. “Wildlife management” of deer in particular actually increases the number of deer, but alters the proportion of males to females since hunting almost solely targets male deer, and since hunters seek out “trophy” deer it is typically the strongest of the species that are killed.
Cleveland Amory, an author and animal advocate, founded The Fund for Animals in 1967. In 2005, the Fund became part of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). “The Fund has won landmark lawsuits to protect animals from hunting and trapping, and the organization is currently fighting for animals with the help of the Animal Protection Litigation section. This group of full-time attorneys, law clerks, and pro bono law firms are defending animals in federal and state courts from cruelty and abuse. The Fund’s current cases seek to protect endangered species, stop the abuse of circus elephants, keep national wildlife refuges safe for animals, and much more.”[14]
As an HSUS subsidiary, the Fund no longer has separate public positions. Fact sheets issued by the Fund for Animals before the merger are available on the Internet Archive.[15]
Sport Hunting is Ecologically Destructive[edit | edit source]
Hunters kill many endangered and threatened animals, including elephants, rhinos, and giraffes. In addition, hunters annually position themselves along the migratory flyways and harvest millions of ducks. Although it is illegal to not eat these birds, some hunters shoot just for sport. Though some states are outlawing lead in bullets, many hunters still use toxic lead shot, except in waterfowl hunting, where it is illegal across the U.S.
Individuals who would not normally have reproductive success will have it because hunters do not select the weakest animals as nature does. By often killing the ablest, hunters downgrade the quality of the gene pool.
State Wildlife Agencies Propagate ‘Game’ Species[edit | edit source]
On average, over 90 percent of funds go to “game” species projects, when non-game animals make up a majority of the ecosystem. State agencies also spend millions of dollars burning and clearcutting forests and stocking “game” animals. Finally, further funds are directed towards enforcing hunting regulations, providing hunter education courses, and building target shooting ranges.
Non-hunters are not safe walking in the woods during hunting season, have fewer chances to view wild animals, and are not given the same voice in determining how wildlife is treated. Although hunters make up less than 10% of the public, they are given an undue influence in determining wildlife and land “management” policies.
“For these reasons and others, The Fund for Animals opposes sport hunting and seeks a restructuring of state wildlife boards and commissions to ensure that all parties legitimately concerned about wildlife are proportionately represented.”
Founded by Anthony Marr in 2009, this brand-new organization currently has a myspace page and a blog, but is already being promoted by other organizations that oppose hunting, who are posting Mr. Marr’s 36-states-in-6-months Compassion for Animals Road Expedition #7 (CARE-7). “All groups and individuals opposed to hunting, trapping, and culling (including recreational hunting, trophy hunting, whaling, dolphin slaughter, seal massacre, wildlife population reductions, the illegal wildlife trade, the fur industry, etc.) can become part of this newly formed coalition, which has the capacity to significantly strengthen any local campaign by bringing the attention, people, resources, and pressure of our growing network of allies to bear on animal exploiters, torturers, and murderers. On December 9, 2009, with barely a week’s notice and with little backing behind us, we made a sizeable impact at Shawnee Mission Park in Kansas City by means of the Funeral Motorcade for the Deer, which garnered coverage by at least 2 TV channels, 2 newspapers and 2 radio stations.”[16]
Founded in 1954, The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) “seeks a humane and sustainable world for all animals—a world that will also benefit people. We are America’s mainstream force against cruelty, exploitation and neglect, as well as the most trusted voice extolling the human-animal bond.”[17] The HSUS supports both local humane societies and a Human Wildlife Services program. Their campaigns target such activities as dogfighting and cockfighting, abusive puppy mills, factory farming, canned hunting, internet hunting, horse slaughter, dove shooting, pheasant stocking, bear trophy hunting, contest kills, poaching, fox pens, and the fur trade[18].
The Human Society’s policy statement on wildlife and hunting makes it clear that “The HSUS actively seeks to eliminate the most inhumane and unfair sporthunting practices, such as the use of body-gripping traps, baiting, use of dogs, pigeon shoots, stocking of animals for shooting, and fee-hunting on enclosed properties. Unfortunately, the welfare of animals may, on occasion, necessitate the killing of wildlife. When such killing is permitted, it must be used as a last resort, be demonstrably necessary, and be conducted by responsible officials, and the methods utilized must result in an instantaneous and humane death. The legitimate needs of human subsistence may also sometimes necessitate the killing of wildlife. In such cases, killing should be accomplished in a humane and non-wasteful manner. Individuals of endangered or threatened species must be protected from subsistence hunting.”
In 1983, veterinarian Elliot Katz began IDA — initially called Californians for Responsible Research — when he joined with others to take legal action against UC Berkeley for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. Today, IDA campaigns against animal abuse in Korea, animals in entertainment, dissection, foie gras, fur, puppy mills, and vivisection, among other atrocities.
The IDA Wildlife Campaign includes literally dozens of anti-hunting campaigns, and IDA is a proponent of banning sport hunting, blood sports, trophy hunting, and aerial hunting. Their website includes non-lethal alternatives for coexisting with wildlife without conflict.
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) was started in 1969 in New Brunswick, Canada by a small group of people who wanted to stop the the commercial hunt for seal pups in Canada. IFAW now has offices worldwide dedicated to several animal protection campaigns: providing emergency relief during disasters, ending commercial whaling, stopping ivory poaching, fighting the illegal wildlife trade, ending the seal hunt, helping dogs and cats, supporting humane education, and banning hunting with hounds.
While IFAW’s anti-hunting activities tend to be directed towards specific campaigns, such as ending trophy hunting of bears and banning canned hunting and captive breeding, they are generally against sport hunting, though there may be minor variations between international offices. The Animal Welfare Manifesto makes it clear that IFAW favors strong restrictions on trophy hunting and wildlife hunting as well as the banning of commercial whaling, elephant hunting, fox hunting with dogs, and seal hunting. In addition, James Isiche, the regional director of IFAW in East Africa, takes an anti-sport hunting stance[19]. IFAW does, however, work with more “apolitical” groups as well as state and federal wildlife agencies from time to time, so IFAW may be a borderline case for inclusion in the anti-hunting category.
Founded in 1984 by Hollywood actor Chris DeRose, LCA began as an anti-vivisection organization using nonviolent strategies and “direct action.” LCA has expanded its campaigns to include protests against factory farming, the fur trade, animal experimentation, and animals in entertainment. They also campaign against pet theft, puppy mills, and animal fighting and promote animal sanctuaries, humane education, and vegan activism. Along with Compassion Over Killing and several other organizations, they are a member of the Coalition to Abolish the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.
LCA’s statement of philosophy: “Last Chance for Animals (LCA) recognizes that animals have the ability to experience pain, and as such they deserve certain basic rights protecting them from pain caused by humans. LCA believes that non-human animals should not be subjected to suffering and exploitation by humans because alternatives exist for nearly every traditional ‘usage’ of animals. LCA opposes the use of animals for scientific curiosity, entertainment, clothing, and food. LCA recognizes the use of non-human animals in medical experimentation as both immoral and of questionable scientific validity due to the tremendous biological difference between species. LCA’s work advocates conscious and informed lifestyle decisions, and the organization is committed to disseminating truthful information about societal animal abuse to improve the treatment of animals.”
Although hunting is not one of LCA’s campaign areas, “Yes LCA is against hunting . . . If you go to youtube our founder Chris DeRose recently did a video asking President Obama to demand an end to all Whaling”[20]
Love Canada Geese is primarily a website by Choo and Earl Rosenbloom, but is included here as it is also a source of information on Canada geese and humane (cruelty-free and non-lethal) methods of geese population control. In addition, many articles on the site address problems with hunting and non-lethal alternatives to wildlife “management.” According to Choo, “Love Canada Geese is definitely opposed to hunting of all animals” and “We need to get the message out there that hunting should be banned.”[21] The website also includes an article by Barry Kent MacCay that debunks several common Hunting Myths.
Northwest Animal Rights Network was founded in 1986 as a Seattle-based animal rights organization concerned with ending animal exploitation in the food, entertainment, experimentation, and fashion industries. NARN’s campaigns include anti-cruelty litigation in Washington State, banning foie gras in Seattle, demonstrating against vivisection and animal experimentation, supporting activists in prison, and vegan outreach. NARN is also against factory farming, the fur trade, and the use of animals in entertainment such as circuses, rodeos, dog and horse racing.
While hunting is not one of NARN’s main campaign issues, according to Peter Keller (a member of the Board of Directors), “we are indeed against hunting. We recently partnered with the Global Anti-Hunting Coalition in the stance against hunting, and co-ordinated an action with them in their tour across the US and had a successful protest action with them to start off this years’ tour for them. In short, we oppose any violence taken against any animals, and hunting is an egregious form of it. We also work for the animals that are confined and tortured for the food, fashion, research, and entertainment industries, because we feel animals shouldn’t be used for those purposes”[22].
Founded in 1967, PAWS operates both an animal shelter and a wildlife rehabilitation center. Also known as People Helping Animals, PAWS devotes time to both companion animals and wildlife in its campaigns, and takes a very explicit anti-hunting stance. Their work is focused in Washington State, where they made a point of encouraging non-hunting citizens to participate in the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2008 wildlife management survey, since “92% of those surveyed held hunting licenses!”[23]
PAWS operates a no-kill shelter, promotes spaying and neutering clinics, and led a campaign to ban the use of cruel traps on wildlife in 2000[24]. PAWS began wildlife rehabilitation in 1981. “Our goal is to return the animals to the wild with the best possible chance of survival. We do not keep any wild animals permanently in captivity, for display or for educational purposes.”[25]
PAWS also educates adults and children on how to peacefully co-exist with wild animals, works to pass legislation to protect wild animals in Washington State, and provides practical humane solutions for solving conflicts with wildlife. Their vision is for “this world to be a place where all people recognize the intrinsic value of animal life, are mindful of the impact of their daily behaviors and choices on animals, and consistently demonstrate compassion and respect” and their core beliefs include “the recognition and respect of the intrinsic value of animal life,” “the right of animals to be free from cruelty, neglect and abuse,” and “the preservation of wild species and their habitats.”
“Wild animals are best served by being allowed to live undisturbed in their natural environment. Wild animals should not be owned as household pets or property. Wild animals of any kind should not be used for commercial exploitation.”[26]
by:Jack SummersPosted:Sep 29, 2021 / 09:10 AM EDT/Updated:Sep 29, 2021 / 09:15 AM EDT
(File/Getty)
QUEENSBURY, N.Y. (NEWS10) — The Warren County Sheriff’s Office is investigating the death of a Warrensburg man after he reportedly failed to emerge from the woods.
Police say on Tuesday around 3 p.m. Gordon Bartholomew, 58 was given permission from a resident of Chestnut Ridge Road in Queensbury to use his property for bow hunting. Later in the evening, the resident became concerned after Bartholomew never came out of the woods and went to check the area where he had been hunting. Bartholomew was eventually found in the woods unresponsive. EMS tried to revive him on scene, but were unsuccessful.Active structure fire in Schoharie
According to police, Bartholomew had been bow hunting from a tree stand where it appears he may have lost his footing as he was climbing…
Dog owners are reminded that it’s year-round wolf trapping season on private land.
With many wolf trapping seasons open, and many bird hunters taking to the field in the fall, bird hunters and other people recreating with off-leash dogs are reminded to avoid traps and be prepared to act quickly in the event their hunting or hiking companion becomes trapped.
Most traps and snares are simple in design and easy to operate if you know what to do. Some of the larger foothold and body-gripping traps can be challenging because they require more effort to open, but the principles are the same.
Idaho Fish and Game provides information on how to spot and avoid traps, and what to do if a pet gets caught. Both videos and brochure are available online.
While traps and snares are rarely encountered by bird hunters, many areas in Idaho have trapping seasons that overlap with upland game bird seasons.
To determine if and when trapping seasons are open in the area they are hunting, upland bird hunters can find updated wolf trapping season dates, and other furbearer trapping season dates by contacting local fish and game officials. Trappers are advised to avoid conflicts by closely following all rules and regulations, including not setting traps close to popular trails, trailheads or areas where people commonly frequent. Trappers are also encouraged to post warning signs near their trap lines to inform recreationists that traps or snares are in the area
