Tim Smith

Thanks Jeb. This one should be ok. http://library.fws.gov/Pubs/natsurvey2011-prelim-state.pdf

From the AFS newsfeed: New Report Shows Rise in Hunting, Fishing & Wildlife-Related Recreation in 28 States "Gus Rassam" <grassam@fisheries.org> Sep 14 11:34AM -0400 September 12, 2012 New Report Shows Rise in Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife-Related Recreation Participation in 28 States Billions of dollars generated for local economies and conservation Participation in wildlife-associated recreation increased in 28 states since 2006, according to the findings of the 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation State Overview Report released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today. The State Overview Report is the second in a series of reports to be released by the Service over the next few months highlighting results from the National Survey. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar released the first report on August 15, 2012. The National Survey, conducted since 1955, measures participation in these activities and related spending on trips and equipment across the nation and in individual states. The 2011 National Survey data show that hunters, anglers and wildlife watchers spent $145 billion last year on related gear, trips and other purchases such as licenses, tags and land leasing or ownership. “Hunting, fishing and wildlife watching are part of our national heritage, and the trip and equipment-related spending of participants’ forms significant support for local economies across the country,” said Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe. “These survey results are good news for the small businesses and rural communities who depend on wildlife-related tourism, and it shows an encouraging increase in personal investment of citizens in the future of wildlife and wild places.” Public lands managed by federal and state agencies support much of the fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation that Americans enjoy. The State Overview, released today provides national survey data on wildlife-related recreation at the state level, which helps state natural resource agencies to plan and provide wildlife-related recreation opportunities. “The State by State data from the National Survey is where the rubber meets the road for state fish and wildlife agencies,” said Dr. Jonathan Gassett, Commissioner of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Resources Commission and President of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. “These results help each state set the course for future fish and wildlife conservation and they help quantify the results of investments that each state has made in its wildlife-related recreation programs, especially hunter and angler recruitment and retention programs.” Highlights from this overview include the following information: • Of the 28 States with increases in the number of wildlife-related recreation participants from 2006 to 2011, the largest percentage increases were seen in Alaska (47 percent) and Louisiana (40 percent). • South Dakota had the highest proportion of state residents who hunted– 21 percent. • Alaska had the highest proportion of state residents who fished– 40 percent. • Vermont had the highest proportion of state residents who wildlife watched– 53 percent. Overall, the 2011 Survey found that 38 percent of all Americans 16 years of age and older participated in wildlife-related recreation in 2011, an increase of 2.6 million participants from the previous survey in 2006. Participation in recreational fishing increased by 11 percent and hunting was up 9 percent. This increase reverses a trend over previous Surveys showing a 10% decline in hunting participation between 1996 and 2006. The 2011 Survey reports a corresponding increase in hunting equipment expenditures, which are up 29 percent from 2006. Through landmark conservation laws supported by American sportsmen and women, funds collected by states through the sale of hunting and fishing licenses are combined with federal funds from excise tax on sport weapons and ammunition and on angling equipment to pay for fish and wildlife conservation and associated recreational opportunities. Together, these laws support the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs, first established 75 years ago. Since then, hunters and anglers have paid more than $11 billion in excise taxes on purchases of firearms, ammunition, archery, fishing and boating equipment toward thousands of conservation projects, wildlife-associated recreational opportunities and access, and sport shooting ranges around the nation. The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, conducted every five years since 1955, has become one of the most important sources of information on fish and wildlife recreation in the United States. Federal, State, and private organizations use the rigorously-compiled and detailed information to manage wildlife and wildlife-related recreation programs, market products, and forecast trends in participation and economic impacts. The 2011 report was requested by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, coordinated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Survey Branch of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program, and administered by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau conducted detailed interviews from individuals at 48,627 households across the country to obtain samples of sportspersons and wildlife watchers. Information was collected through computer-assisted telephone and in-person interviews. The Survey is funded through a Multi-State Conservation Grant from the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. The Survey is being released in phases – the first report was issued in August 2012 and presented data for the nation as a whole. The final national report will be available in November 2012, and the detailed state reports will be issued on a flow basis beginning in December 2012. The full State Overview Report can be downloaded at http://library.fws.gov/Pubs/natsurvey2011-prelim-state.pdf. Connect with the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program: Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/USFWSWSFR Twitter: http://twitter.com/USFWS_WSFR The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific excellence, stewardship of lands and natural resources, dedicated professionals, and commitment to public service. For more information on our work and the people who make it happen, visit www.fws.gov. Connect with our Facebook page at www.facebook.com/usfws, follow our tweets at www.twitter.com/usfwshq, watch our YouTube Channel athttp://www.youtube.com/usfws and download photos from our Flickr page at http://www.flickr.com/photos/usfwshq -FWS-

I think that balance sheet approach is probably worthwhile, but it does have limitations. It's hard to know what to include and what to exclude when it comes to profit. With the current herd, the most profit possible from tags is probably well less than 20K. You can throw in revenue towards hotel stays and gas and food and entertainment, but that's not going to be huge. If you get 50K out of that crowd every year I'd be surprised. But. You're also developing a local strain of elk. You're learning about the ability of elk to survive in the state. Potentially, that translates to another ranch in the future. And then perhaps another. Each of those has some income potential of their own. You can set up observatories for the harems and bulls that could generate tourism as well. RMNP was hopping this weekend and most of the people there were there for the elk. And what is it worth to be able to say "We have elk in Missouri"? Does that elevate the tourism potential for canoe liveries and camp grounds around the ranches? How much more attractive is a state that has more of it's historical biota intact? I can tell you I'd rather camp where there are elk and bear and mountain lions than were there aren't. I think there are quite a few people who agree with that. It may all be too artificial and canned to be of any value, I can see that's possible. But I wonder too if there isn't a positive and profitable future possible. It's an open question to me.

No Jerry, I hate your logical train wrecks. I can see how the expense could be too great for a reintroduction and that is indeed a judgement call... ...although if you get enough of these to hunt, I gotta question which side of the balance sheet that program will fall upon. There were about 100 people in the park yesterday just to get a look at these. (Edit: There were 100 people standing there next to me when I took those pictures. There were probably several thousand people in the park and several hundred of them there to see the elk. Colorado makes about 90K a year on elk tags. I would be interested to see the balance sheet on the MO introduction.)

The Elk are starting to harem and bugle at Rocky Mountain National Park. http://brooksmith.blogspot.com/2012/09/fall-upon-us-harems-and-bugles.html The fighting won't begin for a while, but the bulls are getting testy. They're pretty awesome animals. Is it really such an awful thing to want them back in Missouri??

They love to stock those in Illinois but they never seem to get as beefy as they do in the heat of the south. Freakish redear. Sunfish always look so bizarre when they get that big.

This process has been ongoing for a while. New report is out. http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/07/13707186-coral-in-caribbean-florida-in-sharp-decline-no-signs-of-slowing-report-finds?lite

That was my reaction too, Ness. 250 burned homes is a pretty awful, but quite a bit is already being rebuilt. The stream was beat to heck but the fire itself was pretty scattered. It's not 136 square miles of charred woods. I'm sure there are bad pockets I didn't see but in general there is plently of standing timber even in the burn zones.

Thanks, Gramps.

Took a trip up the Poudre River today to see how it is faring in the aftermath of the High Park fire (136 square miles burned and 250 homes destroyed). It wasn't pretty, but the news wasn't all bad. Fort Collins is resuming use of the Poudre for drinking water this week. http://brooksmith.blogspot.com/2012/09/high-park-fire-beginning-recovery.html

Last week I jumped a black bear at 25 yards on the trail while hiking beside a father daughter pair on a state park here. I was grateful for the chance at the photo (although it was dark and he made it to dense cover before I got off the shot). The 13 year old girl's quote was "Awww...how cute." and they barely broke stride from their hike. Also turned up a prairie rattler on the same hike. It lit out the second it saw us. I'm definitely going to have bear mace for Yellowstone and grizzlies when I go there next. From what I hear, a handgun wouldn't help much, and ditto for the snake. The stats on these bears don't add up to much of a threat. I like that quote at the bottom of your post too.

You pointed nothing except your complete inability to engage in analytic reasoning. Those death risks compared to drunk driving have no connection to the numbers of violent crimes committed. There's not even a basis of comparison there...never mind that you didn't even attempt to address the counter point. I'm sure you copied and pasted it from a web site that probably spent more time thinking about this than you have, so go back and get the quote right so it makes more sense than the stinking pile of poo to which it currently compares poorly. This is so not worth my time.

Nice try. If you had established any credibility through logic that might have hurt my feelers. As it is, I'll just assume there's no point in knowing you.

Good Lord man, fix this statistical mess. You're comparing incidents of violent crime to death rates (death rates compared to being hit by a drunk driver??). Those are completely different things. How many of those violent crimes involved two morons who decided to have at each other...in a bar...in a bad neighborhood...way too late at night. Get some sleep and try again tomorrow with the burr out of your blanket. Normal people don't run those kinds of risks.

My point is: Based on your texts so far you're: 1) probably paranoid 2) definitely hyper aggressive 3) likely to be a "bad guy" What do you do when you come at yourself with a deadly weapon?

Twenty guns. And somebody get an ankle bracelet on this guy.

If you are laughing in bed you need 2 guns and a "you are more than welcome". If your wife is laughing at you in bed you need 4 guns and spyware. Right back at cha Ness and Phil.

That's the shame about those stupid mistakes...they have real consequences and we don't always get lucky enough to avoid them. Sorry about your student, rps. I'll put mine in the back pocket for now.

You are clearly overdue to arm yourself. Each one of these impending personal disasters will require a different weapon or ordinance. (For that you will need 8 guns and a Depends undergarment), (4 guns and an FOP sticker for the back window of the car), (10 guns and a straight jacket) , (3 guns and a pan with some bacon in it) (2 guns and a picture of Fess Parker) (1 gun, and a butcher knife) , (12 guns and a "Breaking Bad" Fan Club T-shirt) (16 guns and a banjo) (3 guns and a video tape of "The Golden Girls") Just keep all that stuff handy and you should come out OK. Some kevlar wouldn't hurt either. Especially for the frying pan.

For parking lots it's best to carry 3 to 4 guns plus a small RPG. At breakfast you can usually get by with just 2 guns... ...unless you're having a breakdown, in which case you should probably empty out the gun locker.

Pig or bear. What color hair is in it? I don't see any from here.

Since you pretty much have all the answers, Jerry, I can imagine that really chaps your butt, watching the government spending money to carefully collect data when all everyone has to do is come ask you. Man. I feel for you dude. I really do.

From the AFS webfeed: Minneapolis Star Tribune article: A federal research fish biologist specializing in Asian carp, Duane Chapman (AFS member, '80) is in the Twin Cities this week attending the American Fisheries Society gathering in St. Paul. Chapman works for the U.S. Geological Survey in Columbia, Mo., and is at the forefront of the nation's fight against Asian carp. He and other federal scientists, as well as those from various states and academia, are attempting to find the Achilles' heel of bighead, silver and other, similar evil critters. "Asian carp are not magical,'' Chapman said. "These fish can be controlled. But it won't be easy. And there likely will be ecological and economic consequences to controlling them, when we figure out how to do it.'' In an attempt to understand which types of rivers are suitable for Asian carp spawning, Chapman and his colleagues raise these fish in their Missouri laboratory. "In the U.S., Asian carp live mostly in rivers,'' he said, "but they actually prefer lakes when they're not spawning.'' Silver, bighead, grass and black carp generally require highly turbulent water for spawning. "Turbulent waters are needed because if the eggs sink to the bottom, they can die,'' Chapman said. He and other USGS scientists are studying which U.S. rivers not already infested might be vulnerable to carp expansion. "We're also trying to develop [chemicals] that will be toxic only to Asian carp,'' he said. Because Asian carp are very long-lived, they can experience back-to-back poor spawning years and still multiply their numbers. "We'd like to be able to control their big year classes of reproduction,'' Chapman said. "We have some ideas how to do that. But we need to go out and test them.'' Asian carp seem particularly vulnerable when they are young and measure only between 1 and 10 centimeters long. "That's a bottleneck for these fish, most years,'' Chapman said. So attacking them at that early life juncture might be best. Is eradication of Asian carp possible in the U.S.? Perhaps not, Chapman said. Restricting their expansion might be the best we can hope for, because controlling them once their populations are established will "take a long time and a lot of willpower. "And it won't be free.''

I would think being a cop...or even a retired cop...that puts you in a different risk category. Most other people don't live in that zip code and hats off to you for your service and the risk that you have borne for our sakes. But so far, the supermarket looks pretty safe to me. And good luck getting past all the kevlar on old what's his name. That would have been impressive finding an open spot there in a dark theatre, but your odds would have been pretty long.

But if you buy a pocket waterproof that completely solves that problem. The Olympus Tough series is built like a tank, and smaller than a cell phone. Just slip it in your pocket and forget about it until you need it. For a few years I made it a rule never to leave the house without a multi-tool and a waterproof pocket camera in my pocket and the result was that I GOT all those shots I had been missing. The top of the line Olympus is around 300-400 and probably worth the extra money. Ness is probably right about the lanyard, but I never got one since I wanted to keep things small and pocket sized. Extreme paranoia about dropping it in deep water has saved the day so far. I bought the Fuji product recently and am less pleased with the photo quality. It's still serviceable.