00:00:10 Speaker 1: From Meat Eaters World News headquarters in Bozeman, Montana. This is Cow's Week in Review with Ryan cow Calahan. Here's cal and what is sure to cause some awkward interactions around the water cooler. A Colorado man nearly died last month after his coworkers left him alone on a mountain height None of the parties have so far been named, but Chafe County Search and Rescue officials say a team building activity went horribly wrong on Mount Schavano in central Colorado. San Isabel National Forest. Fifteen office workers began their trek up the mountain at sunrise on August twenty third, but only fourteen made it back down. That's because, for reasons that remain unclear, one of the men was left to hike to the fourteen two hundred and thirty foot summit all by himself. The other members of the party made it to the summit and hiked back down, but this unfortunate gentleman didn't reach the top until eleven thirty am that morning. Search and Rescue says that he became disoriented when he tried to hike back to the parking lot. That's because the trek involved working his way through a steep boulder and screen field where the trail apparently became unclear. To make matters worse, his coworkers had left some belongings on a rock to mark the correct trail, but they collected those belongings on the way back down. He had to retrace his steps at least once, but still hadn't made it to the bottom. When a strong storm hit the area with freezing rain and high winds, the man became even more disoriented and lost cell phone service, but his colleagues didn't report him missing until nine pm that evening. Search and rescue tried to find him that night, but weren't able to and so he spent the night alone on the mountain. The man says he fell at least twenty times during his adventure, and he wasn't able to pick himself back up after his last fall. Fortunately, he had enough cell service the next morning that he was able to call nine one one, and he was taken to the hospital and stabilized later that day. Two ways to look at this situation, folks, Either this fella was you know, quote unquote that guy at the company retreat and that's why he was ostracized and left alone on the Mountain, which is just incredibly poor form no matter how you feel about somebody or big mistake, and this guy's gonna have no problem getting his shifts covered for the rest of the year. Big thanks to listener Bob T for sending us that story. This week, we've got bears, elephants, wolves, and keep your hands off our public lands, Utah. But first I'm going to tell you about my week, and as you may have guessed, I spent my time on public land for the big Labor Day weekend. Don't think you messed up the feed. Remember I'm recording these podcasts ahead of time so I can get my butt into the elk and deer woods. A friend of mine has an incredibly hard to get elk tag and wyoming something he spent fourteen or fifteen preference points on, meaning try as he may likely be his only opportunity to ever hunt this area. Point creep draws all that stuff that just makes me nauseous thinking about will prevent him or I for that matter, from ever drawn this tag again. On top of that, it's mostly wilderness, so yes, as I have lamented here before, we non residents cannot hunt federally designated wilderness in the state of Wyoming without a resident guide, which can be a friend or in my good buddy's case, his cousin. But the intent is to have non residents pay for the services of a Wyoming wilderness outfitter. Now, I got to thinking on this issue, and if you recall way way back when we talked about North Dakota's rule about pike spearing for non residents, which is based on reciprocity, meaning that non resident anglers are only allowed to participate in spearing if their home state also allows for spearing. If you come from a state or province where spearing is not allowed, you can angle in different ways within North Dakota, but you cannot spear. So you see where I'm going right, I'm going to introduce a bill in Montana that specifically prohibits Wyoming residents from hunting in Montana wilderness areas. I think other states should too. Anyway, we had a great time in the wilderness, not hunting, did a bunch of cruising around. It was super cool. I'm going to share my notes with you in the spirit of group participation. I started my hunting journal for the year. Remember to keep one this season for yourself. I'll read you. You know what I have so far. Labor d eight weekend stock got loose around four am or so. Found them grazing in other campsites about a quarter mile away. We did a big loop through the high country. Found antelope at ten four hundred feet, big bull moose, real nice one, folks. Dot bit me on the ass name of the mule. Got a heck of a bruise. Found two nine inch cutthroats in a creek at ten thousand feet. Got back to camp well after dark. Went up another river the next day more awesome country. Asked clerk at the Matitzzi store about their Labor Day festivities. She said drinking found. A US Forest Service employee reported the location of cow elk that was acting strange, possible CWD. We were informed about a plane crash on Phelps Mountain that started a fire. Supposedly a woman hired a plane to spread her husband's ashes. The employee said she should have called, would have told her it was illegal. Woman and pilot died on impact. There was a third passenger. It was badly burned, broken back. Flown to Saint Vincent's Hospital in Billing's, Montana. Somebody may have made the MacB joke of so that was kind of a two for one deal in regards to spreading the ashes. My uncle Jeff died September first, that's a story for a different time, had a nasty cancer. Sad deal. Anglers at camp explain that when our stock got loose, the big mule Juughhead stuck his head into the back of this guy's truck and woke him up, scared the shit out of him. I'm gonna keep this going. I suggest you do the same. But that's what I got so far on this grand adventure. You take notes however you want, but submit your evidence to me prior to October thirty first, and I'll pick a winner for a final rized bird vest and another winner for some fhf ammo pouches. The spun out of the Michigan rough grouse survey that's going on there asking for citizen science, which, as you know, is something we we dig around here. Everybody's a citizen science and hunters are tip of the spear for so much of the year. It's amazing hunters and anglers are. That's a reputation that people don't typically slap on us. So let's remind them of where good data comes from. Folks who get outside back off man, I'm a scientist. In other news, I got a couple of interesting responses I wanted to share regarding pants or mechanical advantage in general. Cal the electric pants or any mechanical assistance that may aid in hiking is a very interesting topic. I think you bring up good points that people who have quote aged out of the fitness level required for backcountry hunts have missed their shot. The electric bike argument, as you pointed out, is very similar. Technology allowing people to go farther and stay longer will bring undue stress upon the animal populations in the form of higher hunter success. I have a question and another area of thought on the subject. However, I don't currently hold strong opinions on these particular pieces of gear. My question being how is this vastly different from the prevalence of atv U TV crowd that bring their entire home in the form of a camper. These comforts allow people to bring more gear, stay longer, and cover much more ground than ever before. Of course, you can't drive a side by side into true backcountry, but it has opened up deeper levels of hunting for a more sedentary population, again just asking. My other subjective thought is what happens when technology advances human health to the point of not needing mechanical assistance. If you extrapolate modern medicine advancements out fifty years, it is not unreasonable to expect life spans to be a bunch higher. More importantly than longer life spans will be the level of activity people will be able to maintain for more years. We could legislate out fancy electric pants and weight reducing backpacks, only for those laws to become obsolete when medical advancements allow a seventy five year old to perform at the level of a forty year old. I know a lot of hardcore wolf trappers here in Idaho, and the most successful guys are in their forties and fifties. They've had the time to gain experience, making them more effective, and they are also at a fitness level where they can compete with younger guys. Their only limit is age, and if that is remedied with modern medicine, they will continue to be very effective into quote old age. How do you limit effectiveness when physical limitations aren't as severe? That was Garrett who wrote in for Idaho assume great questions, right, Gang, And I think the what ifs here, right is this stuff's always advancing, and we know that we've covered this at gajillion times different forms of this, so you know, no new stuff comes out, and we can see game laws written on the basis of technology. But really what they're trying to get at is to somehow regulate fair chase, which often is is kind of like a moral or ethical choice wrapped up in laws, which you know, it's like we want need laws if people would just you know, mind their p's and ques. Right, so, and full disclosure, I am sitting on a chunky US forest service ground. I have a little bit of cell reception just enough to send this last pod cast out, and I'm recording it from a very fancy camper, a little toe behind black series. And you know, I wouldn't be sitting here enjoying nature through the window while I get my work done if it weren't for that technology, just the increasing cell phone technology, right, being able to send this whole podcast up into space or wherever the heck it goes. To our main man, Phil. The other point that he brings up right is a very good one. And it goes back to that idea that ninety percent of people pay the bills, ten percent take home the goods, as in, there's a smaller percentage of truly effective hunters that make up for the bulk of the take Right. So this guy's saying he's got these super knowledgeable guys that are only going to phase out and quit putting the hurt on a wolf population in this case when they physically can't go anymore. Right. And so that's another part of like these mechanical advantage these aids, where it's like you can get somebody who has all the knowledge, all the hunting prowess, but they just physically can't get up to that spot, and they're going to be more effective than the people who can physically get in there, but they haven't had the time in the woods the tow, that's time on water, get my spear fishingly and go mixed up. Next one. Thanks for covering the idea. Not all public lands should be accessible to all people, regardless of physical ability. All too often as humans, we forget that remote and hard to access places are what make our public lands in wilderness worth having. Not only that, but these places will exist to many once we as individuals are long gone. That's from Richard. Next one, Mike says, I wouldn't be too concerned about older folks invading the landscape. I'm worried about obese folks. Take a pill to stay slim, but no muscle mass, buy robopants to replace actually having to get in shape. And lastly, Fella rights in from Florida. I want to give you a great, big Hallelujah for your recent at a time too about bionic pants. We have a woeful lack of huntable public land in the southern half of Florida. The majority of the public land that is huntable is contained within wildlife Management areas with typical and much needed draw systems. Those draw systems generally revolve around either Dove's big game turkeys or waterfowl. A few of the WMAs are open a small game during non draw hunt days. The one closest to me is such. For the last twenty years or so, the hardest reached portions of the WMA have been my favorite places to chase, snipe, quail and occasionally ducks during wetter years. I even take the occasional pig with the introduction of e bikes, I no longer have those tough spots five to six miles in to myself unless I want to walk in at two o'clock in the morning and sit until hunting light. I now get passed on the trail by a half dozen old dudes on e bikes. I'm forty eight. I'll be an old dude pretty quick here and when that happens, much like you said, I will spend the rest of my days on the bow of my flats boat. I could go get in, but getting there is a big part of the draw to those areas. I love the walk in. I can't imagine the things that those guys miss while zipping through the woods at twenty five miles an hour. I can't tell you how often I've walked up on deer, pigs, and turkeys, not to mention all the non game critters that I get to observe. Just like every dude in late middle age, I have inadvertently found myself to be an amateur birder. And let me tell you what, there isn't much cooler than seeing a loggerhead shrike impale a lizard on a barbed wire spike and slowly dismember it. I'll stop and watch that every single time. We enjoy the hard to get to areas because they are hard to get to as much for what they contain once we're there. Kind of butchered your sentence there, But yeah, getting there's part of the adventure. It's a challenge. That's what makes it fun. Oh you know, I should say, you know, if you're like a big fan of robopants and stuff, please write in. I'll read your letter here without judgment, I promise. Moving on to the Africa Desk. Faced with a historic drought and the threat of starvation, Namibia's government has announced plans to kill more than seven hundred animals, including elephants and hippos. But this isn't a desperate move being made without regard for wildlife populations. The Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism says the harvest will occur in areas where game numbers are sustainable, including national parks. They will contract with professional hunters to kill eighty three elephants, thirty hippos, sixty buffaloes, fifty impalas, one hundred blue willed debaese, three hundred zebras and one hundred elands. Meat will be distributed to the country's residents through the drought relief program, which has already given out fifty seven thousand kilograms or about one hundred and twenty five thousand pounds of game meat. You might say that meat from seven hundred won't do much to help a population of two and a half million, but this isn't just about harvesting food. The drought is hurting crop yields, but it's also leading to more human wildlife conflict over the shrinking supplies of food and water. Animals will be culled from areas that wildlife officials believe will have trouble supporting both wildlife and domestic livestock. Quote. This will assist in managing the current grazing pressure and water availability by reducing wildlife numbers in some parks and communal areas where we feel numbers exceed available grazing and water. Of course, animal rights activists have criticized the decision as short sighted. We urge Namibia to reconsider these actions, Peter Senior Vice President Jason Baker said in a letter to the country's Prime minister. The plan is not only cruel, but also dangerously short sighted and will have no long term impact on these complex problems. He argues that killing even a few animals from these herds will destabilize the entire population. But as we've covered in previous episodes, Southern African countries like Namibia and Botswana have struggled in recent years with having too many elephants on the landscape. They've rejected calls from animal rights activists in Europe and America to never kill an elephant, and this latest initiative will both serve needy residents and address some of the country's human elephant conflicts. Moving on to the public land desk, the state of Utah is asking the Supreme Court to force the Bureau of Land Management to dispose of eighteen and a half million acres in the state. I've mentioned this story on a previous episode of the podcast, and we hit it again with Patrick, the CEO of BHA. Those of you who follow me on the socials have also heard me talk about it, but I wanted to do a deeper dive on this issue because it could have huge implications for public land hunters and anglers out west. Some of this info comes from a great article by Eli Fournier over at the meadeater dot com, so shout out to ELI on this one. Here are the basics. The State of Utah has filed a petition with the US Supreme Court because they don't believe it's constitutional for the BLM to retain what they call unappropriated lands. They argue that it's fine for Congress to designate federal lands pacific purposes, such as national parks, national conservation areas, or National wildlife refuges, but they want the Supreme Court to say that all other land which is held by the BLM for the most part, must be either given back to the states who gave it away in the first place, or sold to the highest bidder. And that's an important point. Utah officials want the public to think that those eighteen and a half million acres will be transferred to the state, where wildlife officials would continue to manage it for resource extraction and recreation. But in reality, Utah is asking the BLM to dispose of the land. Per the BLM's Federal Land Policy and Management Act of nineteen seventy six. Disposals occur for the most part, under competitive bidding or at auction preference. Is sometimes given to the state the land is located in, or to local governments, but realistically most of the land would likely be privatized if it were to go to auction. Even more concerning, if the Supreme Court rules in Utah's favor, it will don't just impact federal public land in Utah, it would impact hundreds of millions of additional acres of BLM land, mostly located across the West. The BLM would be forced to dispose of this land as well, which means either giving it to the states or selling it off. This would no doubt increase the tax base in these states, which is one of the explicit goals of the public pushing this campaign, but it would be a disaster for wildlife, habitat and recreational opportunities. So where do things go from here? The Supreme Court is in the process of deciding whether or not they want to take up this case. If they do, they'll hold oral arguments at the beginning of next year and make a decision in June. If they decide to pass on this case, Utah will still be able to file it with a federal district court. From there, it will have to work its way through the system until reaching the Supreme Court. Once again, if there's a silver lining here, it's that utah legal argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Eli spoke with our buddy Dave Wilms at the National Wildlife Federation, and he pointed out that the lawsuit doesn't do a great job explaining why the federal government needs to appropriate lands to own them. Dave said, quote, why would the ability to own lands be unconstitutional as to the BLM, but not as to our national parks, monuments for us and everything else. Utah claims that there was a federal purpose for those designations, but somehow not for BLM land. But where's the legal basis for that? They don't actually provide any legal rationale for why those are okay for the federal government to own but not these BLM lands. We'll see if the courts agree, but one thing is for sure, this case won't be going away anytime soon. I'd really like people to think about what's happening here. Okay, this often gets put under the lens of providing land for the people. Okay. One thing that we're not making any more of is land. We are ready under this system, whether you like it or not, we already have land for the people, absolutely fricking incredible. I'm sitting on it right now. Unreal. There's grazing going on, there's hunting going on, there's all sorts of recreation going on in this little spot that I'm in right now, Okay, and we don't have much of it. Right we have six hundred and forty million acres of public land in the United States. That is next to nothing. The private acres already far, far, far, surpass the public acres. Now. Just as an example, we were driving by this absolutely gorgeous, unbelievable ranch in Wyoming the other day and it happened to be listed sixty seven million dollars. Okay, and they're like, oh god, that's a lot of money. But if you really consider what that ranch is, it's invaluable. There is no price tag that you can put on it that's really appropriate for what it is. You know, it's it's whole ecosystems, it's habitat, it's water. And again, we're not making any more of it. But what we are making more of is billionaires. And when these billionaires get together, they form large buying groups, hedge funds, investment groups. Do you think that you or I, the people who probably cared a little bit too much about going outside and playing versus making enough money to equal a billion dollars, are going to get any chunk of that ground or any access to it. With the money floating around out there, folks, it is a pipe dream. On top of that, for these people who are saying, oh, well, we need the land in order to make affordable housing, that is just a kick the can down the road argument. Look at what you got in front of you right now. We got plenty to make this stuff work by moving the goal line out and saying no, no, no, I know we didn't do a great job with what we had, but we just need some more and then we'll do better with it. I mean, that's not an argument that I'd accept from anybody. Right Well, turn around, go back to the drawing board and prove what you can do with the land that you already have if you want me to consider giving you more of it. Obviously, gang, I'm on my soapbox here at the end of this. Okay, that was a brief editorial opinion piece. You know where to write in, Tell me where to stick it. Askcal at the mediaor dot com love to hear your side of it. What you can do at home, right now, right is just you can write into the governor of Utah. You can write into all the state representatives in Utah and let them know what you think about this move. That's not going to affect just Utah, but it's going to affect all BLM lands. If it doesn't, it's also just going to piss away a bunch of money in Utah. The u Utah taxpayers through in there. Moving on to the Colorado Desk aka the Wolf Desk, Colorado's transplanted wolves haven't even been in the state for a year yet, and they're already getting into trouble. Most recently, the newly christened Copper Creek Pack is suspected of killing over a dozen sheep and cattle in just the last few months, so Colorado Parks and Wildlife announced plans to move the two adults and three pups to a place they'll hopefully cause less trouble. The Copper Creek Pack should have been a reason for wolf advocates to celebrate. It's the first confirmed pack, which biologists define as a breeding pair, plus at least three puppies. Since ten wolves were shipped in from Oregon last December, two of those wolves mated and the Copper Creek Pack was born. Now, the future of those wolves is anything but certain. Since early April, there have been sixteen confirmed livestock depredations in Grand County, which is where the Copper Creek Pack resides, and that number represents the bare minimum. Farmers and ranchers in the area say the true number is much higher, they just haven't been confirmed by state biologists. The problem has gotten so bad that even though the CPW denied a rancher's request to remove some of the wolves lethally, they chose the unprecedented step of rounding up an entire pack and moving them somewhere else. They say this decision quote is by no means a precedent for how CPW will resolve wolf livestock conflict moving forward, but they've decided to do it anyway. You can see why they'd be hesitant to go down this road. Moving the wolves makes almost no one happy. Wolf advocates say that moving the pack risks their survival because they might have trouble finding food for all the puppies in unfamiliar territory. Farmers and ranchers who live near the relocation site won't be happy about the development, and even those who live in Grand County likely worry that wolves will just walk back to their home territory. I'm sure CPW biologists are choosing the pack's new home with that in mind, but wolves aren't great map readers. The animals have been known to travel great distances, so it's hard to imagine any suitable habitat in Colorado that's far enough from Ground County to keep the adults from walking back homeward bound style. Colorado's wolf pack is considered an experimental population, which is how state biologists are able to appro of these kinds of drastic measures. That's a good thing, but I'm sure Grand County ranchers would have preferred that their lethal take permits were approved. According to a report from local media outlet WTKR, state officials determined that the rancher who submitted a request for lethal take failed to implement enough non lethal controls. Moving on to the money desk, a Wisconsin legislative committee will be auditing the state's Department of Natural Resources to make sure the agency is spending hunting and fishing license fees like they're supposed to. The Joint Legislative Audit Committee has ordered an audit of the State Fish and Wildlife Account, which is funded by money from hunters and anglers. State Senator Eric Wimberger told the media outlet The Center Square that he's concerned that the DNR might not be spending that money to benefit sportsman. He pointed to the most recent audit in two thousand and six that found that the dn R had spent one point six million dollars on things that did not directly benefit hunters and anglers. A spokesperson for a group called the International Order of t Roosevelt said that hunters should support an audit to ensure the DNR is not using the funds to quote pad their budgets in other areas or grow the bureaucracy on the backs of hunters and anglers. Now, I did a little bit of research on this group earlier. They might be doing good stuff, but I will tell you one thing that they are completely crossways with the biological community is their real proponents of stealing greater sage grouse chicks from successful adults and hand rearing them. They're pretty alone in that category, but they do say that their mission is to protect the North American model of wildlife conservation that is so closely tied to our namesake's legacy. The International Order of t. Roosevelt will stand up against bad actors, protect our hunting heritage and at risk wildlife habitats before they are gone. Now, some lawmakers in the Wisconsin state legislature or pushing for an audit after the DNR announced that they were expecting a sixteen million dollar budget shortfall in the next two years. By twenty twenty six, the DNR expects to draw in around sixty two point three million in revenue, but it must meet a seventy eight point two million dollar spending obligation. The DNR says that changing demographics and hunter participation numbers are causing the drop in revenue, while the state's overall population has increased, but by calling for an audit, some legislators are suggesting that the DNR's own fiscal management is responsible for the shortfall. Meanwhile, other legislators say that hunting and fishing license fees need to be raised since they haven't seen an increase in nearly two decades. One bill, for example, would have raised some nonresident license fees, which the DNR says would have helped address the deficit. While the bill passed unanimously in the state Assembly, the proposal never received hearing in the state Senate. State Senator Robert Wirsch told Whisky consin Public Radio that it's quote shocking that license fees haven't increased in two decades. He argued that many hunters and anglers would happily pay increased fees because they know that the money is necessary to conserve the state's resources and make sure the DNR is fiscally solvent. It's unclear whether that's actually true, and there will always be a subset of hunters and anglers who make it their hobby to complain about their state wildlife agency. Still, a lobbyist with Hunter Nation told WPR that he thinks hunters would be up for paying higher fees as long as they knew the money was being well spent, Hence the audit. Raising hunting license fees is never a popular proposal, so I can see why legislators who serve rural communities would be opposed to it. But it's tough to argue that hunting licenses shouldn't at least match the inflationary rate. For example, a resident combo hunt fish license for a Wisconsin resident was set at sixty dollars in two thousand and five, which is the last time license fees were raised. According to the inflation calculator published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, sixty dollars in two thousand and five would be worth ninety six dollars to day. It's great that Wisconsin hunters haven't had to pay more to get out in the field, but the DNR isn't immune from inflation. They've had to pay their employees more. Gas prices have gone up, in real estate for offices has gotten more expensive. Those are just three of the ways inflation has hit the DNR. So it makes sense to me that license fees should increase to at least partially make up for those rising costs. The good news is that whether you agree with me or not, you have an opportunity to get involved, and you should send a note to your state legislators to let them know how you feel. They may not agree with you, and they may not vote like you when you want them to. But the only way to guarantee your voice won't make an impact, is to not use it in the first place. Last one for you, This is another listener mail that I just thought was too good. Overheard a conversation at a party store while picking up supplies for my daughter's birthday. A man approached the counter and asked the clerk what they had for biodegradable balloons. The clerk was confused and threw out a few options and asked why. The man said he wants to use them somewhat like a water balloon. The clerk said, well, we have water balloons and explained how they are used. The man stated he didn't want water balloons, he just wanted to fill balloons. Then a manager got involved and the customer repeated the request for biodegradable options. He stated he wasn't releasing the balloons in the normal sense of releasing them. He is going on a bear hunt in Wyoming, where baiting is legal. His plan was to freeze bait and stuff the balloons so he can throw bait balloons in the woods and have them burst. The manager said he didn't think there'd be enough pressure to burst the balloon, and the man said, well, if it's frozen, maybe they'll just tear open. When I heard the man's baiting plan by throwing balloons in the woods to scatter around, I thought, I know someone who loves finding balloon trash in the woods. So yeah, you're right, love the story. Lots of biodegradable options out there that you can spread sent around with. For sure. You can get those organic tampons that have a string on them. You dunk those in whatever scent that you're going to use to attract a bear, like annis or honey or cinnamon or all the things, and then you use that little string to tie on on the branch that's been used for a long time. The guy who wrote in said maybe a cotton tube sock would be a better biodegradable answer. Now, outside of the balloon debate, there's plenty of products out there that boy, I just have a hard time getting behind, right, because really, what you're buying is trash that unfortunately does get left in the woods. You're on public land, primarily gang I'll just bring it up healing stick targets. If I could snap my fingers, they'd all go away. You're buying trash. It instantly becomes trash. If you like handing over cash like that. I got a long list of kick ass conservation works that needed a lot more than you need that stick on freaking thing you're that you're gonna shoot at. Just use a cardboard box and a sharpie. Gang, cardboards recyclable. You already got it, I promise, super effective. Well seth Morrison. I horde cardboard boxes that are gonna be awesome targets. Join us. All right, gang, That's all I got for you this week. I'm staring at the big old Elk Woods. I'm gonna get out there. I'm just waiting on old Bradbrooks and dirt to show up so we can get this party started. Thanks so much for listening. Remember to write in to ask c A L. That's Askcal at the meeteater dot com. Let me know what's going on in your neck of the woods. You know I appreciate it. Thanks again. We'll talk to you next week.