another Indy Star editorial

A liberal paper using their bully pulpit to slam us.Can a full page be purchased to respond. I don't see any editorial space or response being given by our side in the paper. Why not? Has anyone contacted the Indy Star from Nadefa and attempted to get an editorial response published. They might welcome our perspective. It wouldn't surprise me if no ones even tried.If I were college educated and could write I would. It is a shame to see our paid industry leaders lack of response to this. They are paid to represent our industry and are expected to facilitate a response to stuff like this. I think its the job they are paid to do just like I am paid to be a Ups man. They'd be in big butt trouble if they worked here. It's a fair days work for a fair days pay round ole buster brown.

If we were to slaughter all the agricultural deer on farms and harvest every one in the preserves how would this effect the North American Model for Wildlife in Indiana?.I think wild cervids would still be able to parade and migrate back and forth without health papers from the dreaded CWD state across the Wabash to our west by the same number before and after all our agricultural deer were gone.How do they act like the agricultural deer we have been legally breeding , farming,and hunting privately for decades on our fenced private property belong to every one? We are not taking cervids from the wild and buying and selling them .That is illegal and has been since I've had deer about 15years.

I wonder what a full page would cost ?  Would they even sell the space to us ?  I think a very well written fact based article would go a long way in reaching "self thinkers".  We are not going to change the mind of mindless people no matter what but sometimes you can be found guilty by silence.

Our South Dakota Wildlife Federation opposes anything that would benefit any kind of commercial hunting operation or non-residents coming into our state. But they will accept the non-resident over priced license fees so the state can lease private land for the public to hunt for free, public walk in areas. They want all this private land to hunt as long as someone else pays the bills other then them. As you can imagine, most of it doesn't have so much as a field mouse that actually lives on it after it's opened for a public free for all. With no people management, the wildlife that once was there is usually pushed out or shot dead within a few days and is pushed back onto private land that does limit access. If wildlife or access doesn't have any kind of commercial value, very few people will set aside any kind of land for wildlife habitat. These people claim to be against commercial hunting but all the road hunting slobs circle the commercial pheasant operations all day long. It's common liberal practice, ***** and whine about all the "rich" people having too much so the DNR will lease private land for them. What's next, I like to fish but I don't have a $50,000 Ranger boat like the "rich people" who catch more fish? Can the state lease a fleet of Ranger boats and let the public just use em for nothing? They would look at you like your an ***** if you suggested that but what's the difference?  

' ';(0,0,0);19px;background-color:transparentQuote in the Indy Star article by writer:
' ';(0,0,0);19px 
' ';(60,60,60);18pxOther questions abound: Does it really make sense to put millions of wild deer  (205,35,44)and cattle at risk, to increase whatever threat CWD poses to humans, to spend millions culling herds after a disease breaks out and  (205,35,44)"to erode  (205,35,44)America's egalitarian hunting tradition?"
;(0,0,0);19px 
;(205,35,44);equalitarianism—is a trend of thought that "favors  equality for all people". Egalitarian doctrines maintain that all humans are "equal in fundamental worth or social status", It is defined either as a political  doctrine that all people should be treated as equals and have the same  political,  economic,  social, and  civil rights [5] or as a social philosophy advocating  the removal of economic inequalities among people or the  decentralisation of power. Some sources define egalitarianism as the point of view that equality reflects the natural state of humanity. [6] [7] [8]
' ';(0,0,0); 
' ';(0,0,0);In the U.S. are we all equal in social or financial status?  Don’t we have different economic levels?  Aren’t we a Capitalistic society? 
' ';(17,5,59);[ Sounds like they are again promoting communism , or at the very least socialism ]  We keep hearing this theme over and over, but they use fancy words to hide their agenda.  You also hear them say we are threatening the greater good of the public wildlife.  Again "the greater good" or "the good of the all", is in the definition of communism. 
Georgia;(17,5,59);15px 
Georgia;(17,5,59);15pxOur deer are putting the American cattle industry at risk?  If the captive deer are such a health risk, then aren’t the wild, untested, unmanaged wild herd a much greater risk?  Should we get rid of the wild herd?  The wild herd has grown 80 times in size since 1900.  Has that growth been properly managed?  Is it too large?
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px 
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px 
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxThese are highlights I took out of the 28 pages of The Public Trust Doctrine.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px 
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxTHE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE  http://www.fw.msu.edu/documents/ptd_10-1.pdf ;12px 
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxPresidents of The Wildlife Society (TWS) occasionally appoint ad hoc committees to study and report on selected conservation issues. The reports ordinarily appear as technical reviews or position statements. Technical reviews present technical information and the views of the appointed committee members, but not necessarily the views of their employers.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxThis technical review focuses on the legal underpinnings and application of the Public Trust Doctrine as it pertains to wildlife management in the United States and Canada. (255,64,19) The review was a collaborative effort by TWS, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA), the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA), and the Wildlife Management Institute (WMI).  font-weight:bold [All DNR or DNR friendly groups.]
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px (255,64,19)In July 2006, the North Dakota Game and Fish Department hosted the annual meeting of the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies in Bismarck, North Dakota. The two-day plenary session, “Keeping the Public’s Wildlife Public,â€� focused on the Public Trust Doctrine and the implications for the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.  font-weight:bold[Again all DNR or DNR friendly groups] 
' ';(0,0,0);16px 
Times;(0,0,0);15pxThe North American Model of Wildlife Conservation
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxThe North American Model of Wildlife Conservation has seven distinctive components (Geist et al., 2001):

1. Wildlife as a public trust resource. 
2. Elimination of markets for wildlife. 
3. Allocation of wildlife by law. 
4. Wildlife can only be killed for a legitimate purpose. 
5. Wildlife is considered an international resource. 
6. Science is the proper tool for discharge of wildlife policy. 
7. Democracy of hunting. 

Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxThe Model evolved in response to the continental demise of once abundant wildlife resources due to unregulated economic markets that placed value only on harvested wildlife.  (255,64,19)It asserts that wildlife is a public resource, and therefore should be managed by governmental trustees as a public trust for the benefit of all people.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px (255,64,19)If the public’s ownership of wildlife, or the value they place in it, is compromised, the Model could be jeopardized. Threats to the PTD (e.g., inappropriate or unsustainable commercialization and privatization of wildlife) exist and are increasing. If these threats prevail, the trust (wildlife populations or their habitats, water quantity and quality) could become mismanaged, or the public may lose access to these resources resulting in their value to the public becoming diminished. Lack of awareness and understanding of the benefits and responsibilities of the Doctrine leading to social and legal indifference by the trustee (government) or the Times;12px beneficiary (the public itself) could therefore create grave consequences for conservation
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxThis raises an important legal question: Is a wild animal enclosed within a large fenced area and ostensibly “free roamingâ€� the property of the private landowner or part of the public trust? Is there a distinction between the status of a wild animal Times;12px that happens to be enclosed by a fence, and an animal deliberately placed within an enclosure? These are central legal issues associated with the PTD and wildlife conservation in North America, (255,64,19) but they have not yet been conclusively addressed in case law.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px 
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxIf the hunting public becomes disenchanted with either the quality of the hunt or having to pay too high a price to hunt, they may quit hunting (Responsive Management/National Shooting Sports Foundation 2008), and consequently could also stop sup- porting wildlife conservation efforts. Over time, access for other uses of wildlife (e.g., observation) may also be compromised. Collectively and cumulatively, the loss of access to wildlife for a diversity of uses is likely to erode support for public custodianship of wildlife resources, a central premise of the PTD.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxIn the U.S., the PTD in its traditional form is firmly rooted in statutory and case law. The PTD has traditionally been used to protect the public’s right to use navigable waterways and to protect each jurisdiction’s sovereign ownership of those waterways to hold in trust for the public’s use.  (255,64,19)In recent times, a movement has taken place in both statutory and case law to extend the PTD to other natural resources.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxIndeed, bringing wildlife into the PTD through statutory measures appears to be the best way to accomplish the goal of extending the Doctrine in this area.
Georgia;(227,36,0);15px (0,0,0)The PTD is a long-time cornerstone of the most successful model of wildlife management and

it has fostered the public’s interest in conserving wildlife resources in North America. With few exceptions, however, it rarely is supported by state or provincial constitutional law, and inconsistently by statute. This presents a degree of insecurity to its consistent application, now and in the future.
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19px 
Georgia;(0,0,0);15pxThe Public Trust Doctrine is a crucial element of the Model. Geist and Organ (2004) identified emerging threats that challenge the PTD in North America, thereby jeopardizing the legal underpinnings for wildlife conservation. In particular, a trend towards the commercialization and privatization of wildlife challenges the notion of trust species held in custodianship by competent authorities (both state, federal, and provincial agencies) for broad public benefits. A corollary to this threat is the loss of public access to wildlife via highly controlled land access systems managed by private individuals.
Georgia;(0,0,0);15px------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19pxThe Public Trust Doctrine and The North American Wildlife Model, where drawn up by DNR and Wildlife bureaucrats.  This was a wish list that they thought would be the ideal model.  It was not voted on by the citizens, or received very little if any input by stakeholders.  Yet it is being sold as the "Holy Grail", or the "Holy Gospel", of wildlife management.  Most of the groups that support and push them, I guarantee have never read them.
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19pxThe Public Trust Doctrine started out to protect the offshore oyster harvests over 200 years ago, now these people are trying to twist it to included all wildlife.  
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19px 
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19pxThe problem I see with these agendas are that these people don't want to accept that the U.S. was set as a Capitalistic Society.  In this country, we want private industry to be the leaders and be profitable.  Yet these groups think that Private Industry is evil, and the government will save everyone!
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19pxWhere are these groups trying to lead us as a country?  
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19px 
(0,0,0);, ' ', 'Lucida Grande', ;19pxGary Olson

Deer farming is putting the cattle industry and wild deer herd at risk???Go to Texas towards the end of July and load a stock trailer full of cattle pull them around a couple days then bring them back up north and put them in a pasture across the road from your deer farm. Within two weeks you will be burying most of your deer. Who is being put at risk?The midge fly is here every year . The EHD virus is NOT. One way it is being introduced is by the unrestricted SEASONAL movement of livestock primarily "cattle"a slow moving easy target for the midge and reservoir host for the virus.We who are midwestern deer farmers should be a little more conscientious of our seasonal movements as well. Buying a velvet buck late summer from a southern area of high EHD occurance for the sake of making a couple thousand dollars isn't worth introducing EHD and killing all the other animals in the preserve before a hunter can shoot them.A high percentage of the wild mule deer herd in Kansas were wiped out by EHD last year which is right in the corridor of cattle movement from Texas to the northern plains grasslands but not a peep from those against deer farming about it. Only their continual fear of CWD,which was documented to have killed a total of how many deer last year???What are the chances of an animal virus (EHD)mutating to a human verses the prion jumping to a human?.Thanks, Gary for the compilation of great info and commentary.A professionally written editorial response to the Star paper could be written using info like this. I know our industry has the talent. I have read powerfully persuasive and thought provoking articles in our industries magazines. Who is responsible for asking these gifted writers for their help or financing a response in this paper?.I want to see it!Sick of hearing about the pain!We want to see the baby!Our industries leaders need to deliver and lead!

jerrilee cave912361397270777



Gary,


Great information.


Seems as if it is all a reflection of this administration.


whatever happened to people working?????  for a lot it is easier not to work because the government will provide


I think that is the nail on the head with a lot of the wildlifers.  They that is exactly what they want.  Sooo  many are complaining about cost of leases.  They are getting run off private land or else they have to foot the bill for a lease and they are mad about it.  They claim it is taking away from the common hunter.  Well folks, buy the land and you can hunt all you want on it. 


 


Rodney,


Yes this is what NADEFA/IDEFA should be doing.  What do we pay membership money for?????  Why do people donate to them???   we need a leader!!!!!! not someone that says it will all blow over and we will be ok, or the auctions are great therefore this industry is great.  If they want a job they better get with it because there may not be an industry left for them to lead when its all said and done.




I agree that there needs to be replies to all this bad press in one way or the other. I would hope both. You throw darts at NADEFA but we also have a committee with a group of great people on the ACA. Whats the word for this group. That group was put together for this very reason alone.


I know there are laws and things have to be done right but alot off negitive press has came across the table as of late and now with these last cases of CWD hitting more farms with more bad press.  Not good at all.

The ACA meets Wed. night.  The committee is suggesting a plan for the group to discuss in response to the bad press.  Please attend if you can.  Should be some good discussion.  All comments and suggestions are welcome.  We are all in this together!


Gary

Silence is consent! Lead! 10-4

Found this interesting. I guess if and when lawsuits start flying around we can add Mr Singleterry to the list.


 
verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', ;(0,0,0)Indiana David Long calls for study of Trophy deer industry disease risk
(0,0,0);verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', ;Sunday, April 27, 2014 


Indiana State Senate chief David Long calls for study of trophy deer industry's disease risks 


Greetings, 


Since Ryan Sabalow and or the indystar.com are not going to even acknowledge my help with the story BUCK FEVER, I guess I will finally have to. I have/had helped Ryan since 2012 put together this story on Buck Fever and game farms, and the potential for CWD there from. I had thought, the least he or the indystar could have done, was acknowledge my help, and why I do this, and have done this since December 14, 1997, they called me, I did not call them. but I was wrong. anyway, when I lost my mother to the hvCJD, and just made a promise, never forget, never let them forget, but, as with many times in the past, they all seem just to forget. 


you can see my communications below with Ryan Sabalow and the Indystar since 2012, the information I was sending them and trying to help educate them, over time toward the bottom of this posting. ...just saying, cause if I don’t, nobody else does. but, as I said before, job well don ryan and the indystar. ...Terry S. Singeltary Sr.


Sunday, April 27, 2014 


Indiana State Senate chief David Long calls for study of trophy deer industry's disease risks 

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogs...avid-long.html




kind regards,

terry

This Terry guy is a serious troll! He posts on every deer hunting web site running us down.

Terry even posted to my Facebook page. This is the first time that I realize what drives him. It was the death of his mother to CJD. While I do have sympathy for his loss, I think he is barking up the wrong tree. Maybe while he was on my Facebook page he read my article. It would be great if people like him would push as hard for a live CWD test as he did trolling us.