Fresh HSUS Propaganda

[Peter Meyer]

Fresh from the HSUS website:
California Voters Overwhelmingly Oppose Proposed Bear Hunting Expansion
New poll results indicate more than 80 percent of voters prefer managing bears with non-lethal methods
SACRAMENTO – A survey conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, Inc. has revealed that three in four, or 74 percent, of California voters oppose expansion of black bear hunting while only 17 percent support it. The survey results were consistent in every geographic region of the state and in every political and gender demographic, with all regions and political affiliations represented.
The poll comes in the run-up to the California Fish and Game Commission vote on whether to increase the statewide annual bear hunting quota by nearly 20 percent – from 1,700 bears to 2,000 bears per year. The HSUS submitted formal comments opposing the proposal, along with expert opinion questioning the legality and scientific foundations upon which the Department of Fish and Game proposal is based. The Commission will vote at its May 4-5 meeting in Ontario.
“This poll demonstrates convincingly that Californians oppose expanding bear hunting in the Golden state,” said Jennifer Fearing, California senior state director for The HSUS. “Current bear hunting practices, especially the inhumane and unsportsmanlike use of dogs to chase and kill bears, are out of step with most Californians’ sentiments toward these charismatic, iconic animals.”
California is one of only 18 states that permit the pursuit of bears with packs of dogs. The poll reveals that 83 percent of California voters oppose allowing packs of dogs to chase and kill bears – with 75 percent of voters saying they would support a statewide ballot measure to end this trophy hunting method that puts bears, dogs and other wildlife in jeopardy of serious harm, suffering and death.
Despite an increase in media coverage of bears showing up in human population areas, like the Lake Tahoe area, Californians voters say the state should prioritize non-lethal methods – like education, abatement, and avoidance – to resolve human conflicts with bears, by a margin of nearly 6 to 1.
The survey of 800 California voters was conducted statewide from April 14 through April 17, 2011. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percent. The questions and results are below.
QUESTION: The state of California recently announced plans to increase bear hunting with the expectation that hundreds of additional bears will be killed annually. Do you support or oppose the expanded hunting of black bears in California?

STATE
MEN
WOMEN
DEMS
REPS
IND
SO CAL
SF BAY
REST

SUPPORT
17%
24%
11%
12%
20%
23%
17%
11%
20%

OPPOSE
74%
65%
83%
81%
69%
67%
76%
80%
68%

UNDECIDED
9%
11%
6%
7%
11%
10%
7%
9%
12%


QUESTION: Some trophy hunters use packs of dogs to chase bears until they climb a tree, or until the dogs catch them on the ground. The dogs can be injured or killed during the hunt. Other wildlife is also killed by dogs that run loose in the woods during a bear hunt. Do you support or oppose permitting the use of packs of dogs to chase and kill bears?


STATE
MEN
WOMEN
DEMS
REPS
IND
SO CAL
SF BAY
REST

SUPPORT
14%
19%
9%
9%
18%
18%
14%
8%
17%

OPPOSE
83%
76%
89%
89%
77%
80%
83%
89%
79%

UNDECIDED
3%
5%
2%
2%
5%
2%
3%
3%
4%


QUESTION: California is one of only 18 states that permit the trophy hunting of bears with packs of dogs. Would you support or oppose a ballot measure to prohibit the use of dogs to hunt bears?


STATE
MEN
WOMEN
DEMS
REPS
IND
SO CAL
SF BAY
REST

SUPPORT
75%
65%
85%
83%
67%
70%
75%
84%
70%

OPPOSE
14%
20%
8%
11%
15%
19%
12%
9%
20%

UNDECIDED
11%
15%
7%
6%
18%
11%
13%
7%
10%


QUESTION: Bears sometimes come into conflict with people. The vast majority of these reported conflicts are nuisance complaints about garbage cans, bird feeders and simple sightings of bears near urban areas. Many states successfully manage bear populations and reduce conflict through non-lethal measures such as public education, trash management, and game officials using rubber pellets and loud noises to frighten bears away, instead of killing them.

Do you support or oppose California placing priority on policies that promote non-lethal methods to reduce conflicts between bears and people?


STATE
MEN
WOMEN
DEMS
REPS
IND
SO CAL
SF BAY
REST

SUPPORT
81%
75%
86%
87%
75%
78%
82%
85%
77%

OPPOSE
14%
19%
10%
9%
21%
14%
15%
12%
14%

UNDECIDED
5%
6%
4%
4%
4%
8%
3%
3%
9%

There it is, they are spending major dollars on this. Where do you stand now on raising the limit? -Pete "Audentes fortuna juvat" - "Fortune favors the bold"

[pegleg]

well remember that they base everything on cold hard facts, present their case in a rational scientific way no omissions or embellishments in the name of every big or little helpless animal all to save them from profiteers and those scum that would exploit them ONLY for the almighty dollar!! with no care for their quality of life. looking at all animals as pawns in the game of corporate power and greed. pointing a righteous finger at those who refuse to get involved, soil their hands caring for a animal personally or even help with the huge financial burden of their care or needs.

wait a minute!! all they have to do is donate all their ill gotten gains and profits from their lies. to the few org.s that actually help domestic and wild animals. celebrate the one kind and unselfish act with poisoned kool-aid and the word would be free of the HSUS....

[Liz ODell]

Well here we go, they have tested the waters and the bull is in the chute..IT WILL BE ON THE BALLOT NOVEMBER 2012..at the latest...unless they get a special vote before then.
They are not bullshitting this time and I would highly recommend that we all get ready...that includes those of you who don't live here but come here to hunt.

[Lori Jacobs]

Told ya so. Guess Fish & Game has no idea what they were doing!!!

[bluedogs]

wow that sucks hope you guys can win this one lots of $$$ gonna be spent to win it probably should start raising money and gettin commercials and pamplets out

[Peter Meyer]

Three quick things: One, Fish and Game sure the hell knows what they are doing.
Two, It doesn't matter what Fish and Game does, the HSUS is out
to end all hunting in California, starting with us.
Three, I just checked this morning with the California Secretary of
State's website and currently there is no initiative for the
2012 election cycle banning hounds or bear hunting in
the pipeline. And it
doesn't look like the HSUS will be able to do it time. That
pretty much insures we may be facing an intitiative in 2013.

"Audentes fortuna juvat" - "Fortune favors the bold"

"...It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
-Samuel Adams

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." -Bush II

"If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would."
-Wayne Pacelle, president HSUS, as quoted by AP in Impassioned
Agitator, 12/30/91

Interviewer: "Where would your organization support Black Bear
hunting-anywhere in the United States?"

Pacelle: "Nowhere."

Interviewer: " So all this debate about whether or not the Black Bear
is threatened or endangered and the actual number of
Black Bear that we have in Florida is really irrelevant
since the goal of your organization is to ban all hunting
everywhere?"

Pacelle: "Yes"

1992 debate on WJNO radio, West Palm Beach Fla.

It is pretty clear to me what needs to be done. -Pete

[BOSS HOG]

who did they poll , hsus members ????

[Peter Meyer]

They polled 800 California voters, by my simple math that equals about .0025% of California's estimated 30 million residents. The HSUS and their hired gun outfit, Live Oak Assoc. Inc. wants to questions the science behind F&G biologist Marc Kenyon's presentation at the Sacramento Commission meeting? If you call that a scientific poll that accurrately represents Californian's opinions on bear hunting then I don't freakin know. When people see this poll they need to know all the facts. The HSUS sure isn't going to lay all their cards on the table. So let's call their bluff. More later. -Pete

[Liz ODell]

I believe that the time period from when you begin to solicit people for autographs (to get an initiative on a public ballot) to the time when it can actually be placed on the ballot is relatively short window of time....you just have to have the time and money to send lots of people out with information and sheets.
I think that with all the recent news coverage (99% negative as usual - we live in a work of sheeple that believe in what they are fed) of bear hunting issues here and in Nevada and that lovely show 'Wild Justice' that they are feeling the time for them to strike is imminent...I'm sure they are also starting to feel a little spanked by the pro-hunting things that are starting to happen here and in Oregon and Washington.
One day their pride and elitism will be their downfall but until then we are going to have to fight them tooth and nail.