Wayne Pacelle in the Inky

Oh, how I can’t wait for the Philadelphia Inquirer to shut down its presses.  That will be a glorious day, fit for celebration.  But then what will I use to get my blood pressure up, and have something to write about?   Wayne Pacelle has an op-ed in the Inquirer:

Five years ago last week, I took the helm of the Humane Society of the United States, an organization founded in 1954 with the goal of confronting cruelty to animals on a national scale.

If by cruelty, you mean hunting and eating animals, he’d be accurate.  They aren’t your local animal shelter, even though they are perfectly aware they capitalize on the confusion.

Similarly out of step with prevailing public sentiment is the National Rifle Association’s opposition to an anti-poaching bill before the state legislature. Introduced by State Rep. Edward Staback (D., Lackawanna, Wayne), the legislation would make it a felony to assault an officer enforcing the wildlife code; increase the state’s penalties for poaching, which are among the weakest in the nation; add jail time for chronic or serial poachers; and require the forfeiture of hunting licenses for poaching violations.

Pacelle is misrepresenting the NRA’s objections.  The NRA’s objection is that the proposed law would make a felony out of some minor game code violations.  It’s one thing to argue that assaulting a game officer ought to be a felony, but it’s an entirely different matter to argue that taking a deer over your bag limit ought to be treated like robbing a bank.  What Wayne won’t tell you is that he believes shooting a deer at all ought to be treated like murder.  Pennsylvania’s game laws are not notoriously weak, and are entirely comparable with other states.

One NRA representative reportedly told a group of lawmakers that there should be “an acceptable level of illegal activity.”

Reportedly told, yet you have a direct quote eh?

For instance, it remains legal to shoot dogs in the state – even after the owners of a puppy mill in Ronks shot their 80 breeding dogs last year, rather than comply with an order to give them basic veterinary care.

I guess we’ll have to have a Wayne Pacelle approved remake of Old Yeller.  Either way, HSUS make the Brady Campaign look like pikers.  Pacelle is slick, very smart, and very good at what he does.  Hunters in this state need to be very concerned that he’s targeting Pennsylvania.  Shooters need to be concerned, too, because HSUS has called for a comprehensive lead ammunition ban.  This is a huge threat to an important American cultural tradition, all wrapped up in the happy-feel good of your local helping the animals shelter.   PETA is a joke.  HSUS, which shares the same goals as PETA, is not.

Duck Hunting at an End in Australia

Animal rights folks down under are trying to make sure this duck season that’s wrapping up is their last.  I used to think that shooters were under a much greater threat from extinction than hunters were, but I think that’s changed a lot in the last decade.  I would now say hunters are in far more danger.

For the shooting community, the 1994 assault weapons ban was a huge wake up call.  We saw further attempts to get more and more firearms, including commonly owned firearms like the M1 Carbine, M1 Garand, and even Ruger 10/22 added to the ban.  It became pretty hard to deny there was an active effort to ban guns slowly, until they could get all or most.  Divide and conquer.

Hunters haven’t had that awakening yet, and their numbers are dwindling.  If anything, I’ve noticed hunters are far more willing to side with the animal rights whakos when it comes to forms of hunting that they don’t engage in or approve of.  Witness dove hunting in Michigan.

Lead Ammo Ban in California Expanding

Now they are looking to apply it to upland bird hunting.   How long before you just can’t possess lead ammunition in California?  Will it be constitutional?  There’s a lot of these grey areas.  I expect our opponents will make ready use of them.

What Will NRA Do?

I was just tying up some loose ends with the Blog Bash this morning, and a thought occurred to me. This year’s banquet speaker was supposed to be Rush Limbaugh. Something in his schedule conflicted and he had to back out, but a note was sent to attendees that he promises to come to the 2010 banquet in North Carolina.

Only now, after he negotiated with NRA (presumably for a pricey speaking fee), Rush decided to become a shill for HSUS, an organization that vows to ban hunting and sponsors ballot initiatives to close down hunting seasons.

Now I suppose I have an interesting question for one of our sessions at the Blog Bash – will the staff who plan the NRA Annual Meeting for Charlotte continue to extend an invitation to (and pay) Rush to speak in light of his new support for HSUS? Will we give a stage to someone who is recording PSAs for an organization that seeks to end our hunting heritage if he does not apologize?

While I’m on the subject of pondering next year’s Annual Meeting, want to take bets on how many patriotic words NRA can fit into a banquet title? In 2007, I recall the event was simply called the National Rifle Association Annual Banquet. In 2008, it was the National Rifle Association Celebration of American Values Annual Banquet. In 2009, they have renamed it the National Rifle Association Celebration of American Values Freedom Experience Banquet.

If you can come up with a more patriotic sounding title using as many words as possible, I will submit it to NRA as a suggestion for the 2010 banquet. If there is sufficient interest and entertainment value, I’ll try to sweet talk Sebastian into awarding a prize for the best suggestion.

UPDATE: I forgot to add that another twist in the “WWNRAD” (What will NRA do?) saga is that they opted not to sign onto a letter with 28 other sportsmen’s groups asking Rush to stop supporting HSUS and their anti-hunting agenda. I will be sure to ask why they didn’t sign on to the group letter at the Bash, too. It’s quite curious considering they are usually part of these group efforts.

UPDATE: NSSF has posted the letter where you can see NRA did not join. (Before anyone asks, yes, they are on the list of groups notified when an effort like this is being organized.)

How Suburban Townships Like to Waste Money

Lower Makefield Township, in my area, has a deer problem.  Since the Township Supervisors were soliciting bids, a group of archers from my club put in a bid to reduce the deer numbers through bow hunting, rather than sharpshooters.   Last night, the Lower Makefield Board of Supervisors voted to stick it to the archers, and go with the “professional” sharpshooters:

Supervisors Pete Stainthorpe, Teri Appelson and Greg Caiola voted to award White Buffalo Inc. of Moodus, Conn., a $59,900 contract to conduct the sharp shoot. Board chairman Matt Maloney and Ron Smith voted no on the motion. They agreed a hunt was necessary, but favored a proposal from a local group called Big Oak Whitetail Management for an archery hunt that would have cost a maximum of $15,000.

Get that Lower Makefield residents?  Your township supervisors just voted to spend 45 thousand dollars of taxpayer money to hire professional sharpshooters when bow hunters were willing to do it for a fraction of the price.  Congratulations to supervisors Maloney and Smith for following the old adage about gift horses and mouths, and voting to save taxpayers some money.  What made them go with the more expensive bid?

Stainthorpe, Appelson and Caiola all said they felt a sharp shoot would be the quickest, most effective and most humane way of reducing the township’s deer population. They feared the possibility of deer shot with arrows suffering for prolonged periods, or at least longer than they would if shot with a rifle.

I’ve seen our archers shoot.  They won’t miss.  An arrow will kill a deer just as surely as a bullet will.  If the Pennsylvania Game Commission finds bow hunting sporting and humane enough to have a season for it, why isn’t it good enough for the Lower Makefield Board of Supervisors?