“What they are saying is dead wrong,” said John McKnight, Associate Director of Wildlife for the Maryland DNR. Turns out that Maryland mute swans eat about nine million pounds of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) annually. Loss of SAV impairs recreational crabbing and fishing, two enormously popular activities on the bay. What mute swans do to SAV is about what a small herd of buffalo could do to your backyard.

“Not only are mute swans destroying SAV,” McKnight continued, “they are driving endangered species like black skimmers and least terns, right off their nests. HSUS claims we are using mute swans as a “scapegoat” for other problems in the Bay area. But we are supported by about 60 local and national conservation groups, from the Nature Conservancy to Ducks Unlimited to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Why would we, or any of them, need a scapegoat?”

 Mute swans are exotics in the U.S, and in Maryland, a feral population took hold in the 1960s, growing to about 4,000 birds. A single swan can eat more than a ton of SAV a year. They are documented as being aggressive, to the point of killing mallard ducklings and Canada goose goslings. While there is no hunting season for swans, Maryland DNR uses lethal means to control them and landowners are allowed to take them as well to mitigate crop damage.

 “PETA and HSUS are both doing mailings about this,” warned McKnight. Indeed, HSUS has electronic petitions you can sign. As they urge you do so, they call on Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley to “call off the massacre. Tell him that the few swans left in the Chesapeake are not damaging the environment and don’t deserve a death sentence.” Once again, a case of HSUS using emotion rather than science to make wildlife management decisions.

As if working to end our right to hunt wasn’t enough, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) now wants to stop us from watching hunting shows on Saturday mornings, too.

The animal rights group has sent a letter to the Pursuit Channel urging that it “remove programs that feature hunting and fishing from your Saturday-morning programming schedule, for the animals’ sake, certainly, but also for the sake of children and society.”

What is it about anti-hunting groups that make them try to dictate how other people live?

PETA has the audacity to claim that there is a link between exposing children to what it calls “violence against animals” and a child being violent towards humans later in life. The group even uses serial killer Ted Bundy as an example.

The only thing our children need protection from is the insanity of groups like PETA. Hunting teaches children a love and respect for wildlife. It strengthens family bonds through shared experiences and time spent together outdoors. And it gives children a sense of responsibility that the anti-hunters at PETA can never understand.

Growing up, when I wasn’t hunting with my dad on Saturdays, we were watching hunting shows together on television. In our household, that was the next best thing to actually hunting. Heck, we still watch hunting programs together every chance we get. Based on the popularity of many hunting shows, I know we are not alone in that regard.

PETA's latest antics are further proof that these groups have zero regard for--or knowledge of--the hunting lifestyle. It’s my hope that the Pursuit Channel deposits PETA’s letter exactly where it belongs: in the circular file.

On May 13, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) gave testimony to the Rhode Island Senate Environment and Agriculture Committee to urge passage of Senate Bill 109, which would ban dove hunting in the state.

In a press release trumpeting its support of the bill, Michael Markarian, chief operating officer for HSUS, said, “Mourning doves aren’t overpopulated, don’t cause nuisance problems, and aren’t a viable food source—they’re shot simply for target practice. Sportsmen and women have dozens of traditional game species to hunt, and Rhode Island should join the rest of the New England states which view the gentle dove as a beloved backyard songbird, not a game bird.”

What is Markarian talking about? Did he ever consider that doves aren’t overpopulated because hunters keep their populations in check? And maybe doves aren’t a viable food source for the HSUS crew, but the dove hunters I know eat what they kill. Heck, the NRA Members’ Wild Game Cookbook has not one but 14 recipes for dove.

In its testimony, HSUS repeatedly refers to dove hunting as “dove shooting,” and Markarian says doves are “shot simply for target practice.” If that’s the case, why do the fast-flying birds often frustrate the wingshooting abilities of many seasoned hunters?  

Just because HSUS does not consider doves to be a game bird doesn’t mean the rest of us have to agree. And Rhode Island hunters shouldn't lose the chance to hunt doves just because HSUS says it's wrong. According to the Cornell University Lab of Ornithology, doves are the most frequently hunted species in North America. Cornell goes on to characterize doves as follows: “The Mourning Dove is the most widespread and abundant game bird in North America. Every year hunters harvest more than 20 million, but the Mourning Dove remains one of our most abundant birds with a U.S. population estimated at 350 million.”

But, according to testimony given by HSUS in support of S.B. 109, “There’s no good reason to shoot a dove.” Based on that organization’s track record, why does anyone bother listening to anything they say?

Recently I wrote a story urging hunters to participate in the public hearings and public comment periods held in conjunction with new Travel Management Plans (TMPs) being implemented by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service.

One of the reasons hunters need to get involved in this issue is because of how extreme environmental (read anti-hunting) groups can take advantage of it. The basic reason for TMPs is to reduce ecosystem damage and complaints brought about by drastically increased use of off-highway-vehicles over the years. TMPs essentially reduce where motor vehicles can be used. They provide public lands with more protection, but the price is more difficult access—and if there is one thing anti-hunters love it’s making it more difficult for people to hunt.

One group in particular, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), seems to be making TMPs a flag-waving issue. When the Forest Service decided to keep 233 miles of user-created tails open in Nevada’s Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, CBD filed an appeal, complaining that, “… the agency did an environmental assessment rather than a more comprehensive and public-input-friendly environmental impact statement.” They therefore failed to meet the intent of the rule, CBD claimed.

Jose Noriega, the Ely District Ranger disagreed, confirmed their assessment was sufficient and stated there was plenty of opportunity for public comment. “We actually did more than the minimum needed to satisfy the intent of the rule, and to provide opportunities for public comment,” he said. He added, “I definitely encourage hunters to get involved in the public comment process. Right now, an awful lot of them don’t seem to be doing so.”

CBD has also attacked the plan developed in the Tusayan Ranger District of Arizona’s Kaibab National Forest. In this case, the district officers allowed a provision for lawful hunters to go a limited distance off-road, specifically for the purpose of game retrieval (of elk only). (Joining CBD in this onslaught is the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club and the Grand Canyon Wildlands Council.)

Yet the Travel Management Directive as published in the Federal Register allows for game retrieval exceptions to be made, giving “some” discretion to the district ranger officer involved, and stating that exceptions are to be used “sparingly.” But no justifiable reason has been given for not allowing game retrieval exceptions. The agencies cannot argue that this limited use, during a limited time period, will have any measurable impact to the land.

Travel Management Plans are a controversial issue. NRA believes allowances should be made for game retrieval. Beyond that, NRA encourages citizens who hunt in affected areas to voice their opinions, since they know best how local road and trail closures can affect them. TMPs are being made at ranger district and field office levels. Check the website for such areas that you hunt, and watch for announcements for upcoming TMPs and their comment periods.