Chad Love

Invasive Giant Gambian Rats Resurface in the Florida Keys

Sarah Smith — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:41:44 -0400

Remember that one time when you were a kid at the carnival walking down the seedy, sticky midway trying not be creeped out by all the carnival barkers waving you over to their booth. After a little time and a little too much cotton candy and funnel cake you finally got up the nerve to pony up your fifty cents to see the giant, terrible, bloodthirsty man-eating rat contained in an escape-proof cage waiting just beyond the tent flap? And remember when you finally, and with great trepidation, peeked down into the "Cage 'O Doom" expecting to see an animal worthy of your nightmares munching on body parts, and instead all you saw was an overgrown guinea pig nibbling on a lettuce leaf and farting?

Well, move over sideshow capybaras, there's a new giant rat in town...

From this story on yahoo.com:

When it comes to giant rat infestations, New York gets all the attention. But a breed of giant Gambian rats have been rapidly reproducing in the Florida Keys despite a decade-long effort to wipe them out. KeysNet reports the invasive African native species first began showing up between 1999-2001 after a local exotic animal breeder released eight of the rats into the wild. "We thought we had them whipped as of 2009," said Scott Hardin, exotic species coordinator for Florida's Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. "We think they have not moved far but they clearly reproduced," he said.

The rodents, officially known as the Gambian pouched rat, are the largest known breed of rats in the world. They can grow up to three feet in length and weigh as much as nine pounds. Wildlife officials fear that if the rodents make it to the Florida mainland, they could devastate local crops. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has been working with Florida officials to wipe out the rodents, and there are only an estimated few dozen at large, but they can reproduce quickly and do so only five months after being born. After producing a litter, the Gambian rat only has to wait another nine months before having another litter, bearing up to six babies at a time.

Officials thought they had successfully gotten rid of all of the Gambian rats back in 2008, but several of the burrowing creatures recently began showing up in the yards of local residents. "We were skeptical but went back and talked to people and [saw] there were rats that we missed," Hardin told KeysNet. Using cantaloupe and peanut butter as bait, officials plan to distribute another 200 traps in an effort to clear the keys of the Gambian rats, some of which are larger than the average house cat.

Cheer up, Floridians. At least now the pythons will have something to eat other than your shitzues.

Matching 1984 Hand-Engraved Holland & Holland Shotguns Go for $135,000

Sarah Smith — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:44:36 -0400

Anyone who says guns can't be high art hasn't laid their eyes on this spectacular, custom-made matched pair of Holland & Holland shotguns commissioned in 1984 by a wealthy Texas businessman. These bespoke beauties took three years to complete, and feature some of the most stunning and detailed engraving ever seen on a shotgun.

Lone Angler Lands 987 lb. Bermuda-Record Bluefin, Despite The Sharks

Online Editors — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:25:46 -0500

A lone angler, far offshore. A giant fish, bigger than anything he'd ever hooked. And sharks. No, this isn’t the setting for "The Old Man and the Sea." It's the all-too-real situation 61-year-old Andrew Card found himself in earlier this month when, fishing alone some 30 miles off the coast of Bermuda, Card hooked an incredible 1,000 pound bluefin tuna, only to see his catch ravaged by sharks before he could boat it.

When Card managed to finally get the giant fish in the boat, it still weighed a scale-bottoming 987 pounds. The massive fish beat the old Bermuda record of 782 lbs., which happened to be caught by...Andrew Card. Here's how he did it.

Washington Waterfowlers Pushing for Electronic Decoy Legalization

Online Editors — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:39:52 -0500

--Chad Love

Electronic duck decoys. You see them virtually everywhere now, but the ethics of using them remains a point of never-ending debate among waterfowlers. These devices are legal in 47 states, and the state of Washington is not one of them. But now some Washington State waterfowlers are pushing to get the electronic motion decoys legalized. 

From this story in the Spokane Spokesman-Review:

If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck and flaps its wings like a duck, conventional wisdom dictates that it is, in fact, a duck. But not always. Not when the duck in question is really a Mojo Duck, RoboDuk or any other brand of spinning-wing decoy that waterfowl hunters use to lure real birds into shooting range.
Spinning-wing decoys, whose motorized, battery-powered wings rotate rapidly to simulate a bird landing on a pond, are more widely used but no less divisive among duck hunters than when they were introduced a decade ago. The debate whether these faux fowl are legitimate hunting tools or provide an unfair (and unnecessary) advantage to those who use them continues to ruffle feathers at public hunting areas and private duck clubs.

The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission is considering a proposal to reinstate the use of electronic duck decoys. Hunters have through March to comment on the proposal. The decision will be made at the commission’s April meeting. Electronic decoys were banned in Washington in 2002. Just about the only thing hunters on opposite sides of the spinning-wing decoy debate agree on is that they work as well as advertised.

Thoughts? Is it just another tool in the bag or does it give an unfair advantage? Is their popularity good for the sport, or does their ubiquity and ease of use simply degrade traditional waterfowling skills? How many of you are currently using motion decoys in your spread? What should Washington do?

NY Woman Sues Dog Breeder Over Genetic Abnormalities

Online Editors — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 14:37:42 -0500

by Chad Love

Does your dog have a soul? And if you answered yes, should you be able to sue an unscrupulous breeder for your dog's pain and suffering caused by genetic defects?

These are just a few of the interesting questions being raised by a lawsuit now making its way through the New York legal system. This lawsuit seeks to reclassify dogs as "living souls" so their breeders can be held accountable for any pain and suffering the dog endures from genetic defects (A big hat tip to Patrick Burns at the always provocative and entertaining Terrierman's Daily Dose dog blog for the find). 

From this story on cbsnews.com:

When Elena Zakharova took home her 2-month-old female Brussels Griffon from the Raising Rover pet store in Manhattan, she was excited about the new addition to her family. But, according to the New York Daily News, just a few months later in July 2011, the dog began whimpering and limping in pain. Now, her owner says despite expensive surgery, she will never run or walk like other dogs. Zakharova is claiming that the pet store sold her a dog with genetic abnormalities that could have been avoided if the pup were not bred from other dogs with disabilities. She is suing the business in a New York small claims court for the pain and suffering of the now year-old dog, which she named Umka.

"Pets must be recognized as living souls, not inanimate property," said Zakharova's lawyer Susan Chana Lask to the New York Daily News. But dogs are considered property under New York state law, which means that sellers aren't liable for their pain and suffering -- yet. And, while a "Puppy Lemon Law" allows owners to return dogs that manifest sicknesses within 14 days, Umka didn't show symptoms until a few months later. If the judge refuses to recognize Umka's plight, Lask told the Daily News she will argue that the dog bills should be paid under New York's Uniform Commercial Code, which gives a buyer four years to return a "defective product."

According to the story, Zakharova has spent $5,000 on medical bills so far, with the prospect of spending much more down the line. She claims she's not suing for money, but to raise awareness about unhealthy breeders and stop pet stores from selling puppy mill dogs. That's great and all, but it begs the question of why the hell she didn't perform some rudimentary due diligence before buying her dog from a pet store?

It bears repeating that one of the most important aspects in selecting a new puppy is, undoubtedly, the issue of health clearances. There have been huge advances over the past few decades in both physical and genetic testing for various issues: for hips and eyes to diseases such as Exercise Induced Collapse (EIC) and degenerative myelopathy. These days, most of us wouldn't even consider buying gundog pups from sires and dams that don’t have at least OFA and CERF clearances for hips and eyes. Any reputable gundog breeder will offer at least a two-year guarantee on their pups being able to obtain said clearances. (And if they don't, then don't merely walk away. Run.)

Your thoughts on the case? Should dogs warrant consideration for "souldom" or does that take us down a slippery legal slope for future dealings with the anti-hunting, anti-working dog animal-rights fringe? And while the world of sporting dogs does have its health and genetic issues, do you think the necessity of having a basic level of functional conformation in a working gundog has helped to spare us at least some of the myriad genetic problems facing many of the faddish, popular non-working dog breeds?

Who Hunts Upland Birds With Flushers?

Dave_Maccar — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:24:17 -0500

by Chad Love

Recently I blogged about trying to turn my duck dog into a flusher. That experiment is ongoing but thanks to the absolute dearth of quail in my area, I haven't yet been able to get my old, set-in-her-ways duck dog into any birds. But my efforts have left me wondering how many of you choose to hunt upland birds with flushers.

Now I don’t mean pheasants, which a great many people (perhaps even a majority) hunt with flushers, with great success. No surprise there. What I mean are the more traditional pointy-dog birds like quail and grouse--particularly quail.

I think there are probably more than you'd think. I have a friend with an American water spaniel who's probably notched more quail contacts this year than my setter. A flusher is exactly how I started out hunting with dogs. My first two real gundogs were a lab and a chessie, respectively. And since I didn’t know any better and only had room for one dog, I hunted everything with them. Ironically my lab, a breed quite well-represented in the uplands, was a mediocre flushing dog while my chessie, a breed more closely associated with big-water duck hunting, was a fantastic quail flushing dog.

In fact, the first quail I ever shot over my own dog, as opposed to someone else’s, was shot over that vacuum-nosed Chesapeake Bay retriever, which might help explain why I fell in love with – and have faithfully remained so ever since – with that particular breed. I shot a fair number of quail behind my chessie before getting my first pointing dog, and when my old pointer finally passed on I went right back to quail hunting with my chessies until I felt I was ready to dip my toe back into the pointy-dog world.

There’s no denying the massive visual appeal of a pointing dog. To bear witness to a beautiful, well-trained pointing dog hitting scent and suddenly transforming from a flowing, liquid form into a carved, immovable chunk of granite is one of the most breathtaking sights in all of hunting. It’s poetry, beautiful poetry. But aesthetics aside, there’s also no denying that a lot of people choose not to own pointing breeds, and in fact routinely commit the bird hunting heresy (in the eyes of pointing dog fans) of hunting behind flushers. And do quite well at it.

I love, absolutely adore my setter and the pointer before her. But at the same time I don’t think I suffered from the experience of spending my first few years quail hunting behind flushers. Everyone knows flushers make superlative pheasant dogs. Everyone knows pointing dogs make superlative quail dogs. Ultimately, however, what matters is the singular joy of being afield with a dog, and thankfully there’s no hard-and-fast rule for achieving that.

Anyone else ever hunted or still prefers to quail hunt behind a flushing dog?

Dumbest. Poacher. Ever.

Dave_Maccar — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 09:58:41 -0500

--Chad Love

Here's today's candidate for the Darwin Awards...

From this story on wnem.com:

DEERFIELD TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) - Here's some advice for hunters who don't follow the law: Don't wear a hat that promotes breaking it. During the traditional deer season last month, state conservation officer Jeremy Payne stopped a pickup truck with two hunters in central Michigan's Isabella County. They were from Maine, and 1 of the hunters was wearing a cap that said, "Registered Maine Poacher." Payne checked their guns and paperwork and found that the Mainers were illegally hunting with Michigan resident licenses, a savings of more $100 each. The officer later found two deer that had been killed illegally.

Dude's a shoo-in to reach the finals, don't you think?

Lost Newfoundland Couple Uses Fresh Moose Hide To Fight Cold

Dave_Maccar — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 09:51:15 -0500

--Chad Love

Remember that scene in The Empire Strikes Back where Han Solo and Luke Skywalker are trapped on Hoth, so Han uses Luke's lightsaber to cut open a dead Tauntaun and hollow out the body cavity to use as an overnight shelter from the freezing temperatures? If not, see below...and since it's kind of a sin to have never seen Empire, you get the dubbed version.

In recent news, a pair of Canadian moose hunters trapped overnight in the freezing wilderness didn't follow the script to the letter, but they came pretty darn close.

From this story on cbcnews.com:
A western Newfoundland couple used the hide of a freshly killed moose overnight Tuesday to keep warm after getting lost in the woods during a hunting trip near Gros Morne National Park. Stephen and Sheila Joyce said they lost their way after wounding a young moose and began following the trail of its blood. Shivering and soaking wet, they eventually caught up with the wounded animal.

“My wife thought it would be a good idea to skin the calf and we could use the skin as a blanket. Then we found a place under the root of a tree,” said Joyce. By morning, they were weak and scared. “It was quite horrific. We really were expecting the worst for a period of time there and we really didn’t know what would happen. The direction we were going was the wrong one,” he said.

Happily, the pair were found the next morning by a flight of rebel snowspeeders sent out to search for the lost couple. Then the Empire showed up and ruined everyone's day.

American Croc Off Endangered List Thanks To...a Nuclear Power Plant?

Dave_Maccar — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:02:03 -0500

The rare American crocodile has made it off the endangered species list thanks in large part to..."The Simpsons" Mr. Burns? Well, not exactly, but no one could have guessed that a nuclear power plant would play a key role in bringing the American croc back from the brink...

From this story in USA Today:
An unexpected but fruitful relationship has blossomed between two potent forces in the swamps of South Florida: the American crocodile and a nuclear power plant. The reptile has made it off the endangered species list thanks in part to 168 miles (270 kilometers) of manmade cooling canals surrounding Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant in the southeastern corner of the Florida peninsula. It turns out that Florida Power and Light was building prime croc habitat just as virtually every other developer was paving it over. Federal wildlife officials give the state's largest public utility part of the credit for a five-fold increase in the species' population in Florida. There are only two other sanctuaries for the crocodiles, which are still considered threatened.

"The way the cooling canal system was designed actually turned out to be pretty good for crocodile nesting," said John Wrublik, a biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service . "It wasn't designed for crocodiles, but they've done a very good job of maintaining that area." Hundreds of crocodiles, as long as 15 feet and as heavy as one ton, roam the swampland surrounding the power plant.

As Mr. Burns would say...excellent! But a nuclear power plant and crocodiles...those horror flick mutant possibilities are endless.

Congress Pushed to Limit the Number of Acres Elligible for CRP

Dave_Maccar — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 12:43:49 -0500

by Chad Love

Powerful ag interests are pushing Congress to drastically limit the number of acres that can be enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program.

From this story on argusleader.com:

Soaring crop prices are coaxing landowners across the Midwest and Great Plains to put Conservation Reserve Program acreage back under the plow, and Congress is considering reducing the program even further. A farm bill that leaders of the congressional agriculture committees drafted this fall would cap the $2 billion-a-year Conservation Reserve Program at 25 million acres nationwide, down from the current limit of 32 million acres. When the program was created in 1985, the government was allowed to enroll as many as 45 million acres.

Grain processors and livestock farms have been pushing lawmakers to roll back the program to increase production of corn and other crops. The National Grain and Feed Association, which represents processors, elevators, livestock producers and other grain users, argues that millions of acres of land in CRP could be broken and seeded to corn, soybeans, wheat and other crops without environmental damage. CRP cuts “didn’t go as far as we wished they had, but it was certainly moving in the right direction,” said Randy Gordon, grain users association vice president.

Well, at least now the nation's upland and waterfowl hunters know who not to send Christmas cards to. The vital importance of CRP to this nation's hunters has been covered before here and here and here and here so I won’t repeat, but there are two points to make about this particular story:

One, the entire purpose of the Conservation Reserve Program was to protect land that was deemed either marginally productive or environmentally sensitive. To claim that taking millions of those sensitive and/or agriculturally marginal lands out of the program and putting them back into production with absolutely no environmental impact at all is--to put it mildly--either a naïve fairy tale or a bald-faced lie. I'll leave it to you to decide which.

Two, keep in mind that CRP enrollment is completely voluntary. If you're a farmer or rancher and you don’t want any of your acres enrolled in CRP, there's certainly no government agency telling you that you must. So why would the National Grain and Feed Association be actively lobbying Congress to put federal limits on an individual producer's choice to run their operation in any way they see fit? If more than 25 million acres worth of landowners care enough about their land, care enough about upland bird and waterfowl populations to want to enroll it in CRP, what business is that of the National Grain and Feed Association?