Man dies after hunting accident in Africa

http://news.iafrica.com/sa/871613.html
Mon, 22 Jul 2013 1:11 PM

A man who was accidentally shot in the head during a hunting trip in Limpopo has died in hospital.

Juan-Pierre Kleingeld (24) died on Monday morning after being in a coma for more than a week, Die Beeld reported.

Kleingeld was shot in the head while hunting with some friend on the farm, Alldays, in Limpopo. Kleingeld had been driving a bakkie during the hunt when he was shot.

According to Die Beeld, one of his friends – who was standing at the back of the bakkie – accidentally discharged his hunting rifle. Kleingeld was struck in the head.

90823_Pred_ATACS

Tell Congress to Vote NO on The “Sportsmen’s” Act

What’s your position on The Sportsmen’s Act:

S. 1335: A bill to protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes…

What do you think?

The next vote on this bill will occur in the Senate. How should your senators vote?

(Hint: NO!!)

Please go here and let them know:

https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/113/s1335?utm_campaign

What people are saying about the “Sportsman’s” act…

Dear Congressperson:

‘I oppose S. 1335 (“A bill to protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for”) because…I want a place to visit free of these murderous barbarians who call themselves ‘sportsmen’ <<< WHAT AN APPALLING JOKE! I want what is LEFT of our dwindling wildlife to have one last vestige of safety from these 19th century serial killers with impunity & the onslaught of an OVERPOPULATED, comatose, indifferent human species invading every last wild habitat with roads, housing and malls! Keep these MURDERERS out of OUR national parks, they have no need to be in there shooting & killing animals in the last place wildlife has any hope of safely existing! Hunting is Americas’ greatest SHAME!’    Sincerely, Stephanie T

Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved

Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved

The Boss Hunting Truck can track down big game for big bucks

[This gives new meaning to the phrase,…]

HNTSTK_1_2__66133_1314490481_1280_1280

 

by Alex Lloyd

When hunters need a vehicle for their excursions, the first choice tends to be a heavy-duty pickup — think an old Ford F-250 equipped with a viewing box on the bed, a few gun holders within, a beer cooler, and for the fancy even a camouflaged paint job. Parker Brothers Concepts, creator of pro-wrestler John Cena’s Incenarator from this year’s Gumball 300, decided to take that concept a step further, building what it calls The Boss Hunting Truck and billing it as “the luxury hunting truck of the future.”

If you want to hunt in opulence, (and who doesn’t?) the cost of this truck will set you back as much as a nice house. The Boss Hunting Truck starts at $200,000, but by ticking various options, it will quickly rise to $500,000.

Based off a Hummer H1 K10 Series, the Boss Hunter sports a tuned 6.5-liter turbo diesel meshed to its four-wheel drive system. Inside sits an abundance of leather with “The Boss” decals and a custom steering wheel. Five monitors for six external cameras are equipped, along with a CB radio and internal gun holsters with additional storage for ammo. The shop will also add a drone plane with iPad control and camera feed for “live viewing” of any extant deer, squirrels or chupacabra, if you so desire. Additional gun storage can also be optioned, as can a magnetically interchangeable exterior camo design.

…More about this slightly exaggerated version of the typical American sportsman’s war wagon here: http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/boss-hunting-truck-track-down-big-game-big-212333552.html

photo-1truckster

Unfortunately Twinkies are Back, and Sport Hunting isn’t Gone Yet

In honor of the return of the Hostess Twinkie (just announced on CNN Money), I’m revisiting a post I wrote last November, entitled:

Sport Hunting Should Go the Way of the Twinkie

Bemoaning the end of the Twinkie era (the company was only able to sell 36 million of the nutrition-less, lard-filled sponge-cakes last year and thus had to declare bankruptcy), the press have been calling Twinkies an American icon; a “family tradition,” even.

But what do Twinkies have to do with sport hunting? Well, both are long-standing traditions that should never have been. Hostess Twinkies (on par with hot dogs and canned spam) are an extremely unhealthy, potentially addictive, pseudo-food gimmick that should never have been invented, while hunting is a murderous act of desperation that should never have been taken lightly enough to have morphed into a sport. Both have seen better days, but while the Twinkie, along with its partners in crime, Ho Hos and Ding Dongs, will soon be ancient history, the US Senate is considering forever enshrining sport hunting with its very own act of Congress, the “Sportsmen’s” Act of 2013.

Those of you fortunate enough to own a first edition copy of Exposing the Big Game are in possession of a collector’s item. Subsequent printings will have the word “Twinkie” removed, since future generations will have no idea what they were. [Update: Twinkies are back much to the delight of Elmers and Elmerettes everywhere].

The following paragraph from the book mentions the iconic junk food in association with an exceptionally despicable form of hunting–bear baiting…

Sometimes Elmer sets out a pile of “bait,” using whatever he happens to have on hand. Today it’s Twinkies and hot dogs (no surprise there). Then he waits in a lawn chair safely perched on a tree stand (a platform secured high in a tree, reminiscent of his childhood tree-house) for an unsuspecting ursine to discover his offering. To pass the time, Elmer reads a frightening bear-scare story in the latest issue of his favorite sportsmen’s magazine. After a while, a beastly bruin catches wind of his Twinkies. Now it’s time for action! With the scary bear’s attention focused on the goodies, the plucky huntsman makes his kill.

Unfortunately, now anti-hunters won’t be able to use the “Twinkie Defense” if they go ballistic to protect an animal from hunters like Elmer.

130715091007-twinkies-box-comparison-620xa

Hunting is Not a Crime, It’s a Sin

After posting yesterday’s blog post, “White Hunter “Perverse Little Creatures from another Planet without any Dignity,” I remembered that there was another good line in the Clint Eastwood film, White Hunter Black Heart:

When Eastwood’s character, John Wilson (the director of a movie being filmed in Africa), announces, “I’m staying till l get my elephant,” Pete Verrill (the movie’s screenwriter) tells him, “You’re either crazy or the most egocentric, irresponsible son of a bitch that I’ve ever met. You’re about to blow this whole picture out of your nose, John. And for what? To commit a crime. To kill one of the rarest, most noble creatures that roams the face of this crummy earth. In order for you to commit this crime, you’re willing to forget about all of us and let this whole goddamn thing go down the drain.”

To which John Wilson answers, “You’re wrong, kid. It’s not a crime to kill an elephant. It’s bigger than all that. It’s a sin to kill an elephant. Do you understand? It’s the only sin that you can buy a license and go out and commit.

“That’s why I want to do it before I do anything else in this world. Do you understand me? Of course you don’t. How could you? I don’t understand myself.”

And neither do we, John.

photo IFAW.org

photo IFAW.org

Wolves: Brutal management, false facts

This letter to the editor by Roger Hewitt, a regular reader and commenter to this blog, appeared in today’s Missoulian. Way to go, Roger!

http://missoulian.com/news/opinion/mailbag/wolves-brutal-management-false-facts/article_98bac2b4-e57a-11e2-b13a-0019bb2963f4.html

The wolf is politically managed in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Wisconsin and other states, not scientifically or compassionately, but by a set of minds that are wolf jihad-minded, who intend to marginalize the wolf and other predators in the mistaken belief that nature needs to be controlled by man instead of lived with in a sharing attitude. It is being managed by a set of minds that go forward in their brutal management rationalizing it by claiming basically two false facts

• Myth 1: That wolves are harming elk populations which are, to the contrary, up in the states mentioned and other states. Elk populations are up 37 percent in Montana, from 89,000 before wolf re-introduction to more than 141,000 elk now, and elk populations are up in the Bitterroots contrary to popular beliefs (myths); and elk numbers have stabilized in Yellowstone at historic normal levels contrary to popular beliefs.

• Myth 2: The stock depredation by wolves in Montana is at 0.002 percent – 67 cattle in 2012, and it has been 67-80’s range.

Sheep depredation is 0.1 percent. So, the elk and stock depredation arguments are myths. What Fish, Wildlife and Parks is doing is farming elk, which the agency claims is 55 percent above desirable population. But the FWP and sportsmen and ranchers are of the same mindset, anti-predator and somewhat anti-wildlife unless it is a recreational killing opportunity. Predators are something to control-manage-dominate, not something to live with, not part of balanced ecology, which reflects our heritage, our prevalent mindsets that live against the environment not with it.

Roger Hewitt, Great Falls

copyrighted Hayden wolf in lodgepoles

America’s Top 10 Threats to Trapping; or, The enemy of my enemy is my friend

525140_440817092654544_311118433_n

http://www.ussportsmen.org/trapping/americas-top-10-threats-to-trapping-2/

Posted on August 22, 2012

Courtesy of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance/ http://www.ussportsmen.org.

There are many forces in America working to end trapping and wise wildlife management. Here are a few of those anti-trapping groups:

1- Sierra Club—this group’s board of directors has let America know it opposes any and all trapping—period. The official Sierra Club statement reads: “The Sierra Club considers body-gripping, restraining and killing traps and snares to be ecologically indiscriminate and unnecessarily inhumane and therefore opposes their use.” This position earns this group a No. 1 spot.

2- PETA—best known for being wackos, this group opposes fur, trapping and anything non-vegan. PETA also wanted to “trap” and euthanize problem hogs in Florida to prevent them from being hunted.

3- Humane Society of the United States—this radical animal rights group lists trapping as wildlife abuse. This group is currently being sued for violation of federal racketeering laws.

4- American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (alias ASPCA)—states openly on its website that “The ASPCA is against the use of leg-hold or body gripping traps to capture wild animals because of the pain and distress that they cause.” The group also opposes hunting.

5- Defenders of Wildlife—this group opposes wolf hunting and trapping, and launched an aggressive on-line campaign to skew an Idaho wolf trapping survey in its favor. D o W reported it had 39,000 followers overwhelm the Idaho Game and Fish Commission’s website.

6- Born Free USA—this radical animal rights group labels trapping as “barbaric” and has a trapping victims fund to help cover veterinarian costs for animals—including wildlife—caught in traps. It distributes a free “How to Organize an Anti-Trapping Campaign” booklet through its Animal Protection Institute group.

7- In Defense of Animals—opposes trapping and has created a “furkills” website to promote the group’s propaganda—and to collect funds. The group also encourages followers to create a display in their local public library to display leaflets, posters, and books about the cruelty involved in trapping or leg-hold traps.

8- Animal Welfare Institute: Opposes trapping and is pushing the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act in Congress to end trapping on national wildlife refuges. Filed a lawsuit in 2008 to stop coyote and fox trapping in Maine under the guise of protecting Canada lynx.

9- Center for Biological Diversity: has campaigns underway to stop wolf trapping and hunting in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho, and another in New Mexico to save Mexican gray wolves. Some of the group’s “urgent letters of action” also includes requests for donations to end trapping.

10- Footloose Montana—works to oppose wolf trapping and the management of these large predators in Montana while other wildlife species, like elk, dwindle in numbers at the hands, or paws, of wolves. Also works to end trapping on public lands.

As you can tell, trappers and hunters need to work together to overcome these radical forces…

7 Reasons the Left Should NOT Be Pro-Hunting

Here’s a clever little article which appeared on a site called “Ammoland.com” over a year ago, on Monday, May 14, 2012. Entitled, “7 Reasons the Left Should Be Pro-Hunting,” it was meant to spur on the passage of a “Sportsmen’s” Heritage Act [the senate version of which must be stopped in its tracks this summer]. My comments are injected within [brackets]…

Columbus, OH –(Ammoland.com)- The last 30 days have been chock full of key events that have a tremendous impact on the future of hunting, fishing and recreational shooting in America – events that are leading many sportsmen and women to draw conclusions about (or further cement their conclusions about) Democratic decision makers.
•In the nation’s capitol, Congress debated sportsmen’s access to public land, whether EPA could regulate ammunition and fishing tackle, whether recreational shooting should be permissible on national monument land where compatible, and last whether the United States should allow the importation of legally hunted trophies.
•In California, the Senate debated whether to ban hunting black bears and bobcats using hounds.
•In Ohio, lawmakers protested colleagues holding clay bird shooting events as political fundraisers in the wake of a school shooting that occurred in February 250 miles away from the proposed event.

In each of these cases, it was Democrats who led the charge opposing hunting rights, restricting target shooting or decrying the use of firearms for recreational purposes.
•In Congress, HR, 4089, the Sportsmen’s Heritage Act passed by an overwhelming 274-146 vote. Of the no votes, 144 were Democrats. (79% of the Democrats in the U.S. House)
•In California, SB 1221 passed the Senate Natural Resources Committee 5-3; followed by a 5-2 vote before the Appropriations Committee. All yes votes were Democrats. Not a single democrat voted to protect hunting.
•And as one might expect, the howls of protest over the shooting event fundraiser in Ohio were by Democratic lawmakers; while the shoot was held by a Republican.

It’s not news that sportsmen have a much harder time gaining support from Democratic lawmakers. The question68439_10151399495155861_1116657731_n is why?

There are so many reasons why the left-wing should love American hunters.

[Puke.]

Here are seven:

[Why only 7—was that as high as they could count?]

•We’re a minority. There are roughly 20 million hunters in the United States, making us less than seven percent of the population. Democrats purport to be the champions of the under-represented. Here we are!

[Hunters are underrepresented? Whoa, hold on there a minute pardner—I gotta call bull on that one— if anything they’re overrepresented, I’d say. No other group that size enjoys near as much representation!]

•We eat free range / organic food. Democrats decry large livestock farms, and the use of hormones in meat. Whether deer or duck, game is the ultimate healthy choice. What’s the difference between free-range chicken and free-range pheasant?

[Far from health-food, wild ducks and geese are rife with lead-poisoning, fish with mercury, while deer and elk carry chronic wasting disease acquired by eating contaminated feed meant for livestock. You’d have to have a serious case of mad-cow disease to call that “organic.”]

•We preserve green space. No single group of Americans puts more money into habitat acquisition and preservation than hunters…billions upon billions of our license dollars and taxes on firearms and ammunition for land that everyone else can use for free. I thought Democrats love free stuff!

[Billions? That’s a bit of an exaggeration, I’m sure—unless someone’s spending a shitload on ammo. And besides, the “green space” they speak of is a war zone for much of the year. Most people don’t want to have to watch out for land-mines in the form of traps and dodge stray bullets to recreate in their green spaces.]

•We feed the hungry. Each year, hunters donate thousands of pounds of venison to local food pantries. One would think the party of the Great Society would welcome our contribution to the safety net.

[Not if they love deer in addition to people. Giving the flesh of their victims away is just a feel-good excuse for their favorite sport—killing]

•We support women’s rights. There are few things that make a sportsman happier than successfully hooking a woman on hunting. We’re even okay that they outshoot us many times.

[Great, that’s all we need are more Sarah Palin-types getting hooked on hunting by someone who thinks women’s rights include the equal right to become a deadly and destructive “sportsman.”]

•We’re just regular folks. For every African big-game hunter, there are thousands of hunters making a blue-collar living, and driving our American made trucks.

[Gas-guzzling, carbon-spewing American made trucks with mondo brush-crushing tires, displaying bumper stickers like: “Fish Slayer” and “Ditch the Bitch, let’s go huntin’”]

•We’re animal lovers. Hunters are the ones who pay for endangered species rehabilitation, not Hollywood actors or fashion models. And don’t even get me started on our dogs. No one loves and is more obsessed with dogs than hunters. And we don’t keep our dogs caged in purses where they can’t even turn around or stretch their legs.

[Oh sure, I’ve seen how you treat your hounds and “bird-dogs.” The only time they get out of their crate or kennel is during hunting season.]

My hope is that our left-leaning law makers will read this article, and realize that we really do have so much in common. And that they will join the minority of Democratic legislators who do vote pro-hunting and put an end to the discrimination that we have endured over the last thirty plus years. I’m hoping their position on hunting is evolving.
[Good fuckin’ luck, buddy. Not unless they are all too preoccupied by news of which celebrity died that day or who is having a babies to notice that the last of our public lands are being opened up for hunting and that our roadless wilderness areas are about to be exploited by the Senate version of the “Sportsmens” Heritage Act coming up for a vote this summer.]

30973_4756818474045_484772904_n

 

“Sportsmen” Disagree over Hunting Heritage and Opportunities Act, H.R. 1825

Hunters disagree over hunting bill’s intent

LAURA LUNDQUIST, Chronicle Staff Writer | Posted: Friday, June 14, 2013 12:15 am

A bill aimed at providing opportunities for sportsmen and women has some hunters up in arms.

On Wednesday, the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee voted 28-15 to pass the Recreational Fishing and Hunting Heritage and Opportunities Act, H.R. 1825, a bill that directs land management officials to ensure access to federal lands for fishing, hunting, shooting and other purposes.

The bill’s primary sponsor is Rep. Dan Benishek, R-Mich. Republican Montana Rep. Steve Daines is one of the nine other cosponsors.

Several sportsmen’s groups have wholeheartedly supported the bill because it states that hunting and fishing have as much validity on public lands as other uses, including resource extraction and livestock grazing. Under the law, land management plans, such as forest plans, would have to include consideration for hunting and fishing opportunities.

This is particularly popular in Montana, which has a healthy population of sportsmen and women. But nationwide, only 6 percent of the population hunts and just 14 percent wets a line now and then, according to U.S. Census numbers released in September.

The bill would also prohibit legal and administrative efforts to block hunting and fishing on public land.

As a result, 20 of the country’s biggest hunting organizations support the bill, including the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the Boone & Crockett Club and the National Rifle Association.

But provisions in the bill dealing with wilderness have other groups balking.

The bill deals with all public land agencies, with emphasis on the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. But wilderness areas are also public land, and some of the bill’s language doesn’t differentiate between land types.

Groups, including the Montana Wildlife Federation, the Backcountry Hunters & Anglers and wilderness organizations such as the Wilderness Society, object to some sections dealing with wilderness.

One paragraph says the bill would not authorize uses not covered by the Wilderness Act “or permanent road construction or maintenance within designated wilderness areas.”

Montana Wildlife Federation spokesman Nick Gevock said the Wilderness Act already authorizes managers to build temporary roads for clearly defined purposes. Plus, wilderness study areas are not designated wilderness, yet they are supposed to remain roadless.

By including that specific clause instead of reinforcing the tenets of the Wilderness Act, a law that requires certain areas to remain wild, groups worry Rep. Benishek is creating a loophole.

“We see this as an open door to create more temporary roads, and once they’re there, people will want to continue using them,” Gevock said. “We support 90 percent of this bill. But then they had to go and insert this Trojan horse, which is now dividing the hunting community.”

Smoke Elser of the Wilderness Outfitter Consulting Group said his group depends on roadless wildlands, such the Bob Marshall Wilderness. Additional roads would degrade the area and the small businesses it supports, Elser said.

A similar bill was introduced in 2012 as the Sportsmen’s Heritage Act. It passed the House but failed in the Senate.

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation spokesman Mark Holyoak said his organization supports the bill and that it doesn’t usurp the Wilderness Act.

“Some may be reading between the lines,” Holyoak said. “The bill supports hunting, but this does not mean that if you hunt with an ATV that you can take your ATV into the wilderness.”

Daines spokeswoman Alee Lockman said people opposed the earlier bill because of concerns that it would open wilderness to motorized use.

So the paragraph in question was added to address those concerns, Lockman said.

“This legislation is not amending the Wilderness Act, merely aligning the bill language to it,” Lockman said. “The main driver of this bill is the threat that arbitrary action by federal agencies and frivolous litigation holds to federal lands. It makes the ‘open until closed’ policy clear.”

Opponents encourage support for the Senate version, sponsored by Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Ala., and Joe Manchin, D-W.V., which offers the similar protections without appearing to encroach on wilderness protections.

front-cover-low-res6

Be the Wind

Upon awakening from a fitful sleep after a cold, windy night, it occurred to me that birds must have to keep an unconscious death-grip on the branch they’re perched on to hold their place until morning. It must be second nature to them; part of what makes them who they are.
Next the thought came to me that a bird’s nighttime death-grip on a perch is analogous to the death-grip “sportsmen’s” groups, “game” departments and the livestock industry have on our wildlife. Like a trembling bird, fearful for its future, animal exploiters must be afraid that if they loosen their grip, they’ll be blown away.

Well, they’re right.

It’s high time we be the wind that finally breaks loose their death-grip on wildlife once and for all, and for the good of all.

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved

Text and Wildlife Photography ©Jim Robertson, 2013. All Rights Reserved