tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-87672280907812024282024-03-04T20:07:45.083-08:00The Progressive OutdoorsmanErik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-36484419044927272632013-02-04T10:50:00.001-08:002013-02-04T10:50:48.845-08:00Children learn about selves, nature during backcountry excursions<div style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-indent: 0.25in;">
<i>A version of this story originally appeared in the fall 2012 issue of </i>The<i> </i>Backcountry Journal,<i> the quarterly newsletter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers</i><br />
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-indent: 0.25in;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_RS7H8H7w4FxHMSOjDSAjC-G_2E4YBYCeri7pvc940mPAGZ85ivYRfRe-qlBqnqLPqRTby3eTGQptAQPKpmHOuwqOcSGvMV7fQpDe3v52Sz4gT3ZkApv9vlRb4dsTxZ0uYCYhuN4ZYTZD/s1600/P1010303.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_RS7H8H7w4FxHMSOjDSAjC-G_2E4YBYCeri7pvc940mPAGZ85ivYRfRe-qlBqnqLPqRTby3eTGQptAQPKpmHOuwqOcSGvMV7fQpDe3v52Sz4gT3ZkApv9vlRb4dsTxZ0uYCYhuN4ZYTZD/s320/P1010303.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-small; line-height: 19px; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;">Natalie in June 2012 with her first northern on Lake Kawishiwi, Boundary Waters Canoe Area</span><span style="color: lime;"> </span><br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
photo by Erik Jensen</div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">Hunter-angler
conservationists today face the challenge of how to pass on the
traditional outdoor culture to our kids and grandchildren. The
decline is well documented, even in regions of America where hunting
and fishing are revered parts of the culture. The average age of
sportsmen is climbing. In Minnesota, only 69 percent of the children
of hunters are taking up the activity and the state’s participation
in fishing has declined from half of the population to just over a
third.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">A powerful social trend is at
work: cramming numerous organized activities, whether it’s more
sports practices or rigorous band camps, into most kids’
schedules. “Putting Families First,” a non-partisan,
non-sectarian organization that advocates balance between children’s
outside activities and families spending time together, encourages
parents to make a conscious decision to “set aside” time for
family activities. The group cites family social science research
documenting a 50 percent decline in unstructured outdoor play among
children ages 3-12 from 1981-1997 due to a rise in structured
recreation.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">Making a commitment to set
aside family time and work at passing on the traditions of hunting,
angling and other outdoor activities can go hand-in-hand. </span><span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">Our twin daughters, Theresa
and Natalie, are turning 9 this year and have had numerous fishing, hunting and camping experiences, including two in the backcountry. They’re
even preparing to turkey hunt this spring, and Natalie still hasn't given up on shooting her first squirrel this small game season, which lasts until the end of the month.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">We are fortunate to live in a
state where residents of a large urban area still can with relatively
little time get to public fishing, hunting, shooting and camping
opportunities. These more conventional trips, which they call “daddy
days or trips,” allow for the flexibility of numerous activities in
one setting that kids love: biking around the campground, shooting
their bow, walking down to the lake or stream to fish. Then they can
go to a playground for some kid time. On afternoon trips to our gun
club 45 minutes north of Minneapolis, we always work in time to drive
over to a nearby lake for swimming or fishing.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">These easier trips set the
stage for more challenging trips in backcountry. The irritation of
noisy neighbors at busy car campgrounds can be a lesson on the value
of the time and effort to it takes to do backcountry trips.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">Our first family backcountry
trip was camping for three days about two miles up a forested canyon
in Rocky Mountain National Park, just before they turned six. They
complained about the hike and the weight of packs, but also said they
felt “big” while expressing pride in their newfound abilities.
They explored massive rock formations that were favorable fairy
habitat. Other memories included having to cook breakfast in a
small ravine below our campsite due to high winds, another watching
their first trout take bait in the gin-clear waters of the Big
Thompson River.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">For our first family venture
into the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness we gave up portaging
in favor of setting camp once on a big lake and paddling a channel to
a second lake. It had high moments and the girls added new skills.
Natalie finally caught her first northern pike on the last night of
the trip, which she demanded to eat immediately. Learning the mundane
skill of relieving oneself in the woods abiding by leave no trace
principles, the girls asked “Is this something hunters have to do?”
We also canoed into a massive burn area to see regenerative effects
of fire, offering a chance for a lesson in ecology.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left; text-indent: 0.25in;">During the family discussion
afterward, the girls said at times they felt locked in at the
campsite with an inability to roam. We concluded that we would
go back in a few years when they could go out in the canoe on their
own. We were already making plans for the next big trip and at the
same time talking about the memories we’ll share forever from our
most recent adventure. The negative memory of the 18-hour drive from
Minneapolis to the Rockies now overshadowed, Theresa said “I want
to walk in the mountains again.” </span></div>
</div>
Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-52478025551088476002011-12-08T00:00:00.000-08:002012-01-11T17:36:32.107-08:00When Kids and Guns mix and when they don't<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB_oNdvt4cPud1KEFrh56Zcqo2MIOAayXWe32NFoMsiaiWnejv8PpmceRWo9DOh4hSMlMtE24q93Fne9lGDveZAHboPdrzzLbLMCWVXWgOTpKRzZz3bxHT6r1Z3WOA_S5HmvFa2rQYbjVJ/s1600/P1030754.JPG"><img alt="" border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB_oNdvt4cPud1KEFrh56Zcqo2MIOAayXWe32NFoMsiaiWnejv8PpmceRWo9DOh4hSMlMtE24q93Fne9lGDveZAHboPdrzzLbLMCWVXWgOTpKRzZz3bxHT6r1Z3WOA_S5HmvFa2rQYbjVJ/s320/P1030754.JPG" /></a> </div>
<div style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div align="center">
<span style="color: #000099;">Theresa and Natalie Jensen love their single-shot, bolt-action Crickett .22, and are proud of their increasing shooting skills</span><br />
<span style="color: #000099;">Photo taken by Paula Faraci</span><br />
<span style="color: #000099;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="left">
</div>
<div>
Of all gun politics and policy issues, few, if any, elicit the kind of raw emotion than the "mixing" of kids and guns. Last year, I bought my twin daughters, who at the time were six and a half, a single-shot crickett .22. Aside from adult policy debates, the kids are loving it and usually shoot it when they have the opportunity. It's been a great way to spend family time and get prepared for their first hunts that should happen next year. The reaction from most of my friends and family was strong support, but shock from a number of non-gun owning family friends.<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
I've had the fear of kids and guns "mixing" come up regularly over time in conversations with other parents, usually liberal urban people with little or no connection to shooting sports. One particular memory I have was at an Early Childhood Family Education class. I mentioned the value of youth hunts as a family activity. One parent in the group said with contempt "oh, great idea, kids and guns". There is a significant section of parents who want the total separation of kids and firearms, they have an intense feeling about it.<br />
<br />
<div>
In 2008, apparently due to the opposition from some parents, a North Carolina school district took administrative action to prevent a high-school affiliated Future Farmers of America Marksmanship Team from participating in a weekend shooting contest. The school board's policy statement was "kids and ammo don't mix". See the International Hunter Education Association's <a href="http://www.ihea.com/news-and-events/news-releases/ihea-responds-to-nc-school-clash.php">response</a>.<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Shootings by youth, accidental and deliberate, is one of the few areas where pro-gun control forces have won some policy victories, although some of those victories are a decade or more old. A good example is the "no guns on school grounds [under any circumstances]" law that is in place in Minnesota, apparently a state level implementation of the 1997 Federal Gun-Free schools Act. We are what would be considered overall a "pro-gun" state, although less so than states in the south and west. We are certainly pro-hunting. There is no provision in the law for teenagers who are involved with hunting to have guns in their cars on school grounds if they are hunting after school, even with some procedures such as notifying the principal beforehand and using trigger locks. In rural areas of the state hunting after school would be common, and not uncommon in some exurban areas, so it is a significant restriction. Last year, <a href="http://www.fergusfallsjournal.com/2010/11/11/ff-students-suspended-for-bringing-firearms-to-school-property/">two boys were suspended</a> for three days under the law's provisions, even though everyone involved acknowledged there was no intent on their part to threaten anyone at school, they were just going hunting right after school.</div>
<div>
<br />
The well-intended but bluntly written laws responding to school shootings and the grassroots fear of "mixing" kids and guns are a significant problem for the future of hunting. Our numbers are in a slow decline, and there is tons of evidence that to sustain our hunting heritage, we have to bring kids into hunting and shooting, and the younger, the better. This is not to dismiss the very encouraging trend of <a href="http://www.tovarcerulli.com/2011/01/adult-onset-hunting-know-the-signs/">"Adult Onset Hunters"</a>, many driven by a desire for environmentally-friendly and healthy food and an active lifestyle. However, to maintain our hunting culture, it is clear that a key strategy is that it has to be done as it was for thousands of years: a skill passed through families, from older generations to the next. In today's society, where outside forces often overwhelm families, hunting families are going to need to have a support network among youth, in schools and other institutions. That is going to mean kids learning to shoot guns.<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
The gut reaction by many parents against mixing kids and guns is driven by some real dangers that shouldn't be ignored by the shooting sports community. The <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/guns-wound-30-percent-kids-study-finds/story?id=14741514#.Tt9UbmOVpkY">US rate of youth shootings</a>, both accidental and deliberate, and youth suicides by firearm, is the highest among the rich nations of the world. My readings of the studies on the matter lead me to conclude unsafe storage of firearms is largely to blame. While youth firearm violence and deaths aren't isolated to the poor, there appears to be significant socioeconomic differences. <a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/119/6/e1271.full">This interesting study</a> of firearm storage methods in households with youth under eighteen includes a number of excellent citations of other similar studies, and there is solid evidence that higher household income and education is correlated with safe storage, in addition to regional differences. <br />
<br />
Focusing only on the serious negatives, and foolishly ignoring the health, family, and environmental benefits of kids being involved with hunting, the American Academy of Pediatrics still recommends to not have guns in the home at all if you have children under eighteen. This is in spite of the fact <a href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/293/6/707.full">one JAMA study</a> showed safe storage methods decreased the rate of accidental and suicide deaths by youth dramatically, and concluded safe storage was a viable alternative to asking families to get rid of their guns.<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
Of course, the guns rights movement isn't doing the situation any favors. The NRA's<a href="http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=228&issue=003"> insane response</a> to school shootings is to begin a discussion of essentially militarizing public schools, that included "for consideration" armed principals and teachers. They intensely resist legislating gun storage practices that they recommend people do on their own, characterizing them as a government plot to invade the homes of gun owners. They recently pressured the Florida legislature to enact a law that barred pediatricians from asking families about gun ownership and how they stored them. The law was <a href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/PreventiveCare/28529">struck down</a> as a violation of the first amendment by a judge appointed by George W. Bush. The gun rights movement's response to the real dangers of <i>unsupervised</i> <i>and uncontrolled </i>access by youth to firearms is to argue that legislating storage methods would infringe on the right of armed self-defense. All of this amounts to more anti-hunting politics from the NRA. Their response makes it harder for shooting sports advocates to get the social support needed to recruit families to shooting and hunting.</div>
<div>
<br />
A new, progressive program of advancing youth shooting sports participation needs to be advanced. It would involve policies that encourage kids to start shooting guns at an early age, with proper controls. Some combination of safe storage legislation, broad based school and other institutional support for youth shooting needs to be enacted. Government-sponsored education campaigns should include the benefits of kids being involved in shooting sports, as well as the clear dangers of youth suicides, accidental shootings, and use of firearms in crime. In a large majority of suicides, there are warning signs, but the decision to commit suicide is impulsive, and the solid majority of those that attempt suicide unsuccessfully don't do so again. <a href="http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/">Access to lethal means</a> matters greatly, most of those that attempt suicide with a firearm are successful. The lessons that hunters learn in firearms safety, "you can't retrieve a bullet", or "once you pull the trigger, you can't undo the outcome", are very relevant here.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<br />
Enacting youth shooting sports programs are going to take a lot of effort. We'll need to both confront the NRA and educate and convince a lot of parents, school administrators, and legislators about the value of kids hunting and shooting. Public health officials concerned about gun violence, the AAP, and gun control groups will need to show strong support for youth participation in shooting sports. But ultimately, it's going to be concerned hunters who are concerned about the future of our tradition who can make it happen. We know the value of private gun ownership, and the serious responsibility it is as well. </div>
<div>
<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-59503418678709691112011-09-27T01:00:00.000-07:002011-09-27T10:56:18.289-07:00Erik's First Elk Hunting Adventure in the Zirkel Wilderness<div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><br /><div style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZJ-7LB7XdRrtmM3i6kinYrMiOsHEXKdjqhkK0g6A2LPulmHtmh6hh_xFpEZ5rvby2IthCUjcSKsil4Jh_JNnQhHYdiPP-kIbzjsyYAnMTA1Td1T0PuanmOCGB6T0Nxt57msufaFhZSYLf/s1600/P9161172.JPG"><img alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZJ-7LB7XdRrtmM3i6kinYrMiOsHEXKdjqhkK0g6A2LPulmHtmh6hh_xFpEZ5rvby2IthCUjcSKsil4Jh_JNnQhHYdiPP-kIbzjsyYAnMTA1Td1T0PuanmOCGB6T0Nxt57msufaFhZSYLf/s320/P9161172.JPG" border="0" /></a> </div><div style="text-align: center; clear: both;"><span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">Fresh rub on tree from rutting bull elk, seen on the last day of the hunt</span></div><div align="center"><span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">This and other photos by Ben Pena</span></div><div align="left"><span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);"> </span><br /><br />I returned from my first elk hunt a week ago, in the Frank Zirkel Wilderness in Colorado.<br /><br />There was a last minute change of plans, as my normal hunting partner in these types of adventures, Rita Juran, was unable to go on the hunt. She was able to recruit another one of her fellow Minneapolis firefighters, Ben Pena, to go on the hunt. It worked out very well as Ben is a very experienced hunter and many grades above yours truly when it comes to navigation/orienteering in the Rockies. It was his first elk hunt, but he has spent lots of time in the Big Horn Mountains of Wyoming hunting mule deer, as well as helping a hunting buddy scout for elk there. His skills with USGS maps, GPS, and compass, and using these tools to match to physical features in sight of you was a huge help to hunting. Ben also had a constant awareness of how differing directions of slopes have a huge effect on weather and amount of sunlight and thereby the vegetation, as well the usual direction of storms and wind hitting mountain sides, which greatly affects the amount of deadfall. Mentally adjusting to the terrain as a midwestern deer hunter used to being in what is generally flat terrain with dense woods and some open fields was a huge challenge.<br /><br />We started by hiking in on the Swamp Park Trail, to the South Fork Mad creek canyon, where we camped. It was over three hours, and a good section of it rugged uphill hiking. For the next day and a half, we hunted the woods and meadows near there, as well as climbing up a steep canyon open hillside to glass down into the canyon. We saw elk sign, including where bulls had rubbed trees, but they appeared to be a couple weeks old. While camped there and hunting we saw mule deer, blue grouse, and black bears. One night returning from hunting, we walked right up on a large boar, who took off quickly. Normally we saw the bears climbing up and down a steep open ridge presumably heading and returning from feasting on the numerous berries and other vegetation close to the creek. Seeing the bears was great for me, because I had never seen them out hunting, even though they are numerous in Minnesota. That open section of canyon hillside allowed for easy observation of their comings and goings.</div><div align="left"> </div><div align="left"><br /><br /></div><p style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn7_GSNC57663mfdHPWzwQzNnMiP5UOR9nH15Yr1gfIqZBatDKDpuKMMj0Z7UX-7Yuc8VjXkbHvX4LCWULbl-64esEROME8OddrCSApjU5jHW8H_WxVbL0vUNIfxXnkAb3G6k1dhf7FNTQ/s1600/P9141155.JPG"><img alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn7_GSNC57663mfdHPWzwQzNnMiP5UOR9nH15Yr1gfIqZBatDKDpuKMMj0Z7UX-7Yuc8VjXkbHvX4LCWULbl-64esEROME8OddrCSApjU5jHW8H_WxVbL0vUNIfxXnkAb3G6k1dhf7FNTQ/s320/P9141155.JPG" border="0" /></a></p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn7_GSNC57663mfdHPWzwQzNnMiP5UOR9nH15Yr1gfIqZBatDKDpuKMMj0Z7UX-7Yuc8VjXkbHvX4LCWULbl-64esEROME8OddrCSApjU5jHW8H_WxVbL0vUNIfxXnkAb3G6k1dhf7FNTQ/s1600/P9141155.JPG"><div align="left"> </div></a><p></p><div style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" align="left"> </div><div style="text-align: center; clear: both;" align="left"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);">This open ridge allowed for frequent bear sightings at distances of 800-900 yards</span></div><div style="text-align: left; clear: both;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"></span><br /><br />We quickly concluded that the elk had to be higher up, as the weather was warm and the sign was old, and we had heard no bugling of bulls or mewing of cows. We later talked to a party that years before had killed a good bull in those very meadows at the same time of the season, but they weren't there this year.<br /><br />We relocated to a spot nearly a thousand feet higher, so we were at 8,700 feet instead of 7,800. On the way we met a group of hunters from Kansas who had a large camp and horses. They said they had seen some elk and but that the elk were not bugling as much they normally were at this time of year. We heard this from another party later in the hunt a well. While none of us are trained elk biologists, the most common belief was that there is massive amounts of green grass around this year due to the snowy winter and wet summer, combined with the relatively warm weather we were experiencing, made the elk less active. Elk have thick skin and seek cool places, and eat green grass. In the normally dry climate of the Rockies this forces elk to seek small pockets of moist areas in late summer and early fall. This year, green grass is abundant.<br /><br />Ben dissented slightly, he thought the elk were more cautious due to the hunting pressure, which was significant for elk, even though from the point of view of whitetail deer hunting, hunters were few. Even though we were in a wilderness area inaccessible to motorized transportation, the area was used by elk hunters and some others. Mostly people were traveling on horseback.<br /><br />After relocating, we did see more elk sign on a steep hill covered by dark, thick timber that plateaued to a meadow and pond at the top. We found an elk skeleton and skin, evidence of a kill by a bowhunter early in the season. We also finally heard an elk bugling after dark, an encouraging sign. The next morning we intended to hunt the same pond, but navigating through the thick timber and deadfalls in the moonlight and minimal use of headlamps, we ended up a couple hundred yards to the left on a steep hillside of pines, aspens, and green grass. We missed our spot but were also in good elk habitat, but saw nor heard elk that morning on that hill and some ridges further away. We spotted another elk camp with horses, who we talked to later in the trip, a group of hunters from Iowa.<br /><br />Even though we hadn't seen any elk yet, we decided our camp was in a good spot and that afternoon and evening, Ben, using his great endurance and navigational skills, and went on a "re-supply" mission. He walked all the way to our previous camp where we had hung some dried food, and then to the truck. He returned after dark, at 11 pm, after about 7 hours of walking. Other than an encounter with a bear that quickly took off running, no mishaps.<br /><br />In the next morning's moonlight, during one of the many moments we took to stop and listen and look at openings in the dense woods, we experienced one of the bigger thrills of the trip. Above us, we saw an animal that was as big as a deer and a similar color, but running lower to the ground, with the soft pitter-patter of paws skipping across the boulders for maybe five seconds...a cougar.<br /><br />Later that morning, we finally encountered an elk. We were working a ridge line slowly and quietly, and heard a bugle of a bull in front of us, but we weren't sure of the distance. Ben thought a half a mile, I thought a third of a mile, but it turned out to be much closer. We approached as quietly as we could, making a few cow calls. We walked slowly, taking each step with great care, but our caution was not enough. Suddenly, there was the motion of a large animal running away from us, snapping large branches and twigs, brief glimpses of antlers, and the brief view of a hind quarter disappearing over a high point...we had spooked the bull. My heart pounded and I shook with nervousness and excitement, but he was gone.<br /><br />During a later more reasoned moment, we concluded the swirling winds of the ridgeline had brought our scent to the elk, which sends them packing a long distance.<br /><br />We were hopeful we would start seeing more elk, and that night we planned and prepared for going much deeper into the backcountry to some distant meadows with our entire camp on our backs. We could hunt and then set up camp wherever we ended up, hopefully near an elk kill. Then we could travel back or start packing out a kill the following day and start heading for home.<br /><br />It began to rain that night at dinner, but it was what my daughters refer to as "pitter-patter rain", and it was raining when we woke up at 3 am. We concluded it would soon pass, but we were wrong. At 5 am, we were ready to take our tent down after packing all the rest of our gear and eating our standard breakfast of coffee, muesli, powdered milk, and a couple slices of pre-cooked bacon. The rain had now increased in intensity, and we decided to head for our tent and re-sort our gear in the packs so that what needed to stay dry would be packed separately from what could get wet. From that point on, we were stuck in the tent for a full twelve hours, just keeping our essentials dry. I watched the clouds thicken and the rain intensify, at several points visibility went down to a mere two or three hundred yards. You could not see across the canyon and the entire sky and surroundings were gray. I wrote several times in my journal about the rain, more than once about the rain appearing to finally break, but then showers would re-develop over the mountains to the north. However, finally the showers with each wave were less intense and there were very brief glimpses of sunshine. At 5:30 that afternoon, when the sky was finally breaking, we went out to hunt nearby. During the hunt we endured a last shower, but as sunset approached the sky was finally blue. We saw no elk but hoped the next day would bring an increase in elk activity as the temps had cooled.<br /><br />In the pre-dawn, we packed up our tent and food and began the day's hunt. We found a good area not far from an area where we had hunted before, with a grassy meadow below a steep aspen ridge, and heard a bugle in the direction we were travelling, some distance off. Then we heard the boom of a muzzleloader not that far away. Shortly after we met the hunters from Iowa, who told us that shot had been just emptying a gun, but one of them had shot at a cow an hour earlier, but missed. They had experienced less elk activity than in years past, and had killed nothing this year, which was uncommon. They were packing up and leaving that day but gave us a few points of where to go. We headed in the direction of where they suggested and found a remote meadow and low-lying wet areas surrounding it. There we saw excellent sign of the bull, including the tree the rutting bull had stripped of bark with its antlers (above), very fresh tracks, and scat. We called, but to no avail.<br /><br />After finishing working that area, we walked up high, hoping to use the higher ridges to cross about a mile and a half of ground and reach a trail that would take us back, while doing some hunting on the way. As it turned out, it was a much tougher route than anticipated, and involved climbing up several hundred feet in elevation, then walking down and up a steep canyon with tons of deadfall, thereafter another steep ascent and descent. We were getting concerned about reaching the trail before dark, but suddenly, there it was. At this point we had walked twelve hours with short breaks for rest and snacks, carrying about fifty pounds on our backs as well as carrying our bows in our hands. After the demoralizing feeling I'd had just minutes earlier, when I'd given up on hunting, now all of a sudden, on the trail, I would be willing to shoot an elk again. It would involve many hours of work to bone and pack out. In the back of my mind, I thought, there'd be delicious fresh meat, we'd make a fire, and camp out near the boned-out meat and pack it out in the morning.<br /><br /></div><div style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" align="left"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2l2H6rRGKMcQQ2ZVTJhccrXlH4gpAhPaX8XhF9IygkKPoYpHHlzsddue0naB2qBXMJw44up5Qc6uK7fVZISOecIUzN9CIXTOZxdyW99y2hlUfNNu654muVE2WF3xZy3iNtwsLtyyzXGgX/s1600/P9161180.JPG"><img alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2l2H6rRGKMcQQ2ZVTJhccrXlH4gpAhPaX8XhF9IygkKPoYpHHlzsddue0naB2qBXMJw44up5Qc6uK7fVZISOecIUzN9CIXTOZxdyW99y2hlUfNNu654muVE2WF3xZy3iNtwsLtyyzXGgX/s320/P9161180.JPG" border="0" /></a> </div><div style="text-align: center; clear: both;" align="left"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Trudging through steep dark timber...</span><br /><br /><br /></div><div style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbMul3DE_wsY4BjEqLrTny5I632DttyOZVYN52lp0Fcyfn3392CwgJjb1fNEJrwOcrkPID2Q3geN0Epxc9DoYsX0_MR6mwrQFxoCvSLogqeIylK94M6MwW9MpxuIGVaQd-oOCPK86z4u7I/s1600/P9161191.JPG"><img alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbMul3DE_wsY4BjEqLrTny5I632DttyOZVYN52lp0Fcyfn3392CwgJjb1fNEJrwOcrkPID2Q3geN0Epxc9DoYsX0_MR6mwrQFxoCvSLogqeIylK94M6MwW9MpxuIGVaQd-oOCPK86z4u7I/s320/P9161191.JPG" border="0" /></a> </div><div style="text-align: center; clear: both;" align="center">Joy at reaching the Luna lake trail !<br /><br /></div><div align="left">As we walked the trail with a spring in our step relieved that we wouldn't be stuck outside at night not sure where we were, Ben, a few steps ahead of me, suddenly saw elk about a hundred yards in front of us. We quickened our pace and started cow calling, hoping to draw them to us and cover our approach. One cow went in a different direction than the others, and looped around behind us, into a draw that we had just walked through. Ben saw her and advised me to get ready to shoot as she walked into the opening. My "training" as a hunter kicked in, I knocked an arrow, and as she walked broadside into the clearing, she stopped and I aimed and released the arrow.<br /><br />It was a clean miss, (or "non-hit" as the positive psychology people want you to say) hitting a downed tree in front of her. She heard the noise of the arrow, and quickly trotted off. I had made a common mistake that hunters make in terrain like that where you at one moment are in thick, gnarly timber, where small openings create the effect of over-estimating distance. Conversely, once you come upon an open draw, and look at a large animal, you underestimate distance. We hadn't had time to get out our rangefinders, it had happened so fast. I thought the cow was 40 yards away, at the limit of my range, but it measured 60 yards away when measured on the rangefinder. Ben was impressed with the fact that I didn't skip a beat and drew and released an arrow with fifty pounds of gear on my back after walking a grueling 12 hours. Had I been less tired, or more experienced at elk hunting, I would have walked closer to the draw to cut the distance while she approached, or let her pass and stalked. My movements would have been hidden by the small aspens and pines at the edge of the draw.</div><div align="left"> </div><div align="left"><br /><br /></div><div style="margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" align="left"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlp-E8bwuBfsbT8lhi3wmM2UKkQhTsU5GqmnTF4hJt9wxDXw_4tgjmg0CMgR8VGEgZjzkTqz3iXWrU1io3a2P7U_x-rEz51e6-TX9UIbszQlMHcLR9wENntD6huGfpL840xKqFIscQnysR/s1600/P9161194.JPG"><img alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlp-E8bwuBfsbT8lhi3wmM2UKkQhTsU5GqmnTF4hJt9wxDXw_4tgjmg0CMgR8VGEgZjzkTqz3iXWrU1io3a2P7U_x-rEz51e6-TX9UIbszQlMHcLR9wENntD6huGfpL840xKqFIscQnysR/s320/P9161194.JPG" border="0" /></a> </div><div style="text-align: center; clear: both;" align="left"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The first arrow released on a cow elk fell short</span><br /></div><div align="left"><br />The hunt was a "non-sucess" in terms of putting meat on the table, but was a great adventure and huge learning experience and deepened my commitment to both elk hunting and protecting backcountry. Being in wilderness is not only a challenge, it is a relief. A relief from noise, a relief from the pressures of everyday life, a relief from cell phones, a relief from the omnipresent media. Wilderness hunting teaches you don't need that much sometimes, simple meals will do, along with a dry place in the tent to sleep.</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-6816984002061196332011-04-10T15:00:00.000-07:002011-04-10T16:44:28.087-07:00I still hate the NRA, but felt their pull the other day<div style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><iframe height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dmg_zMuQEDk?fs=1" frameborder="0" width="425" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"></div><br />From : NRAVideo<br /><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">Here I am writing about gun politics again, which I wish I wasn't. The necessary discussion of the topic is usually a distraction to advancing hunting interests. The readers of this blog know that I would love to see a political and cultural consensus around guns that constructs a system of regulations and supports around private gun ownership that minimizes the negatives effects of private firearm ownership and maximizes the positives. I have long considered the NRA and the gun rights movement's large influence within our hunting community a huge negative, a glue that holds together various conservative forces and interests whose politics are ultimately anti-hunting due to their opposition to conservation.</div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"></div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">They also are part of a powerful right-wing coalition whose social policies accerbate social trends that are negatively affecting all sorts of outdoor activities, hunting probably the most. The dog-eat-dog rat race society they have contructed has given families less time and put more pressure on them to put their kids into all sorts of activities that will ensure them more notches on their resume for good colleges. Of course, the hope is that the good college education will secure them good careers in a world where there is an ever-declining pool of good jobs. Outdoor activities, especially time-instensive ones like hunting, are actually a detriment to this "achievement ladder". This is in spite of the fact that outdoor activities like hunting, angling, bird watching, hiking, camping, cross-country skiing and numerous activities not listed here have great benefits to our health, environment, and society.</div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"></div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">However, I felt the NRA's appeal the other day when investigating one of their bizarre claims about the Obama administration I had seen on another hunting blog. The claim was that Secretary of State Clinton "welcomes UN gun ban". I have seen references and heard conservative hunters and gun owners I know talk of this, of course I assumed it was deliberate misinformation or simple tea-party paranioa. In fact, both are. They are referring to the UN Small Arms Treaty, which would essentially oblige signers to establish proper controls on firearms between nations. The focus of the proposed treaty as presently drafted is on military small arms. The website "The Truth About Guns", which appears to be an independent "pro-gun" website, debunked the NRA's and GOA's (Gun Owners of America) claims as fear-mongering and fund raising ploys. The US is the only rich nation in the world that has not signed on to the treaty. Signing nations include such high-private firearms ownership countries like Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland. The idea that these nations would be supporting a "global gun ban" is absurd.</div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"></div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">One of the main organizations supporting and pushing the treaty is the International Action Campaign on Small Arms (IANSA). Overall, the organization is doing a lot of good work on such issues as fighting against the escalation of armed conflicts through illegal gun trading and the use of child soldiers in the third world. The campaign was long headed by Rebecca Peters (2002-2010), an Austrailian gun-control activist who successfully led a campaign in the 1990s and early 2000s to ban numerous firearms - handguns, ALL semi-automatic rifles and shotguns (including those designed for hunting) , and, even more incredibly, pump-action shotguns. Above is a link to the first part of a debate on youtube between her and the head of the NRA, Wayne Lapierre, it is in four parts. It was posted by the NRA, so I'm sure it is selectively edited to make Peters look her worst and Lapierre his best. However, it is worth watching all parts as there are unbroken clips of Peters making such outrageous statements that all semi-automatic shotguns and rifles should be banned on the basis that they are not needed to kill a deer. She also says there should be a drastic reduction in private firearms ownership acoss the world. She tells an audience member that the abolition of pistol shooting as an acceptable, common sport in the U.K. was needed, as handguns are only good for killing human beings. She says. "I feel bad for you, but take up a different sport". It is important to note for Americans that even when England had pistol-shooting as a sport, it is a nation that has long had a system of strict gun control. I can't spell out the details, I am confident people had to jump through some significant hoops to get handguns at that time. </div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"></div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">There is one astounding claim made by Lapierre in the debate, quoting Peters being for banning every rifle that can shoot more than 100 meters. He said she said it on CNN in October 2003, which I have been unable to verify even though I've combed the CNN website for transcripts. They don't appear to go back that far. The social consequences of Peters' ideal gun regulations are horrible. Despite her claim to the contrary, they are anti-hunting. In particular, her ban on semi-autos is an attack on women hunters, who often need to use weapons with less recoil. Semi-autos fill that need for them. Of course, if she is for banning guns that shoot more than a hundred meters, that is banning all hunting rifles. Her attack on handguns, even for sport shooting, is driven by a belief that they are morally evil things. </div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"></div><br /><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">It is disgusting that she gets to use IANSA, which is doing other good work all decent people should support, such as campaigning against the use of child soldiers and fighting to ban cluster bombs, issues that affect people in poor countries, to advance her radical anti-gun agenda. Another shame of that debate was that Lapierre got to be the defender of Joe hunter and gun owner, which of course he is not. At one point in the debate, they was a discussion of good and evil, and whether the line between good and evil was always real clear, which Peters claimed it was not. Lapierre, revealing his own extreme gun ideology, said, "good people know that a firearm will protect them". A gun is a powerful tool that could be used by someone good, to protect themselves, under certain situautions and conditions. Of course, with the radical anti-gun ideas Peters was spouting, Lapierre didn't have to be held to account for the dangerous consequences of his "guns are good" beliefs to the audience. In addition to her advancing her extreme policies, that was the other detriment of her performance in the debate.</div></div>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-27553967901623799152011-03-19T09:00:00.000-07:002011-04-02T08:09:26.295-07:00Letter to "The Progressive" responding to Ruth Coniff on gun politicsI make no secret that I think the NRA is ultimately an anti-hunting organization and that hunters who are serious about our future should call them out and set to work on forming a different gun politics in this country. The NRA's extreme gun politics trump all else, when faced with choosing between expanding, (not just defending), gun rights and conservation initiatives that are critical to hunting, they will throw hunting interests under the bus. <br /><br />Typically the way this plays out in electoral politics is they will support Republican candidates who favor expansion of guns into more aspects of daily life over a Democrat who does not favor the expansion, but the Dem is supportive of conservation efforts that are good for hunting and is generally supportive of private firearms ownership. <br /><br />Additionally, the NRA takes a lot of forays into other issues, and often they are directly at odds with what the hunting community wants or is ultimately in our interest. For example, take a look at this article from <a href="http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/nra_stands_for_not_really_an_ally/C41/L41/">New West</a> on the NRA's opposition to the designation of Brown's Canyon in Colorado as wilderness area, on the basis that wilderness designation would close the canyon to ATV use. Organized hunting interests in the area that had something to say on the subject wanted Brown's Canyon to be designated wilderness for that very reason. The ATV use and abuse in the canyon was disrupting elk hunting and damaging their habitat, yet the NRA cynically argued that they were defending disabled and elderly hunters, yet they produced no one in either category to publicly support their position. <br /><br />Having said all that, I can understand why the NRA's baiting of liberals as anti-gun works with average hunters who don't share the NRA's views on guns and how and when they should be regulated. The fact of the matter is, a significant minority of the progressive community is ignorant of guns and the shooting sports. These progressives are ambivalent about hunting, or don't view hunters and hunting as constituencies and activities that should be actively supported, even if they think hunting should be a legal activity. Additionally, they have a substantial part of their political base that is anti-hunting. So, when a progressive writer or legislator takes a strong position on stricter gun laws, it often makes many of us deeply suspicious. <br /><br />The most recent column by Ruth Coniff, the political editor of "The Progressive" magazine, which I subscribe to, is a case in point. As a Wisconsin resident, Ruth is not anti-hunting, she told me in a phone conversation. She has written columns strongly supporting stricter gun regulation and is very critical of the NRA, as she was in her most recent column praising the progressive stances of the freshman class of Democrats in the U.S. house. I can't provide a link to the column, that portion of the magazine is not online. But, my response below gives you a sense of the content as far as guns and gun politics is concerned: <br /><br />"The general point of Ruth Coniff's piece on the positives of the new class of congressional Democrats moving leftward I agree with. However, her discussion of guns and gun politics is very misinformed and naive. I am an avid hunter and our family owns seven firearms, and like many gun owners, I have no time for the NRA. I generally support stricter gun regulations on the federal level, especially if they are combined with government support for shooting sports. However, many regular gun owners not affliated with the gun rights movement are rightfully suspicious of the likes of Coniff and the freshman class of Democrats she celebrates. They are either ignorant of or ambivalent towards shooting sports and a large part of their political support base views guns simply through the prism of crime, suicides, and accidental shootings. They think of shooting sports as a value-neutral or even negative activity. <br /><br />Coniff quickly reveals her own ignorance about firearms. She repeatedly calls assault rifles 'automatic weapons', or what would be referred to commonly as machine guns, which they are not. They are a class of semi-automatic weapons designed for military purposes. Many hunters use semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, but they are commonly limited to five rounds, and don't have higher-capacity detachable clips like assault rifles. Hence, like many mainstream gun owners, I support much stricter regulation of the ownership of assualt rifles and high-capacity clips and oppose their use in the field for hunting on the grounds of hunting ethics. While such a mistake may seem minor to non-gun owners, it is easily exploited by the NRA to scare gun owners who disgaree with the NRA's extreme gun politics into their camp. Questions are raised in the minds of moderate and liberal gun owners about what kinds of restrictions would be placed on firearms they own if urban non-gun owning legislators and activists were to control gun policy in America. <br /><br />For example, Congresswoman Karen Bass, former speaker of the California state assembly, comes from a state that has lots of gun regulations, and is from the southern, urban part of the state that produces legions of anti-hunting activists. While Bass herself never has supported anti-hunting legislation, hunters and other mainstream gun owners are not a constitutency that are a priority for her. She and the other Democrats Coniff praises come from the east and west coasts, where antigun and antihunting sentiment is much higher than in both liberal and conservative areas of America's heartland. If progressives are serious about weakening the power of the NRA and winning stronger gun regulations. they need to make it clear they support shooting sports as positive activities, regardless of their personal attitudes towards firearms. Legal, regulated, hunting in particular has environmental, health, and social benefits, and hunters are often a key support base for conservation efforts."Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-9162036746954577632011-03-12T12:24:00.000-08:002011-03-13T19:56:06.970-07:00Back to Outdoor Blogging, After the Other Half of My Political Identity Interfered for Awhile<div align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzRrgxM9YvYFOL4lfEajQsjcHVpdZCIlpVGaLcz_6R8nnu4pxHv2RSqF6D-yUoSExuCAH8KfLB_H5LazB6dUignhrTp8MRstgxe4xpv1T0RhcgB_36Z7MZrLkw5awLg76ElPwI6AJc3Jq7/s1600/No+hunting+no+nothing+sign.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 269px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5583761755736453378" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzRrgxM9YvYFOL4lfEajQsjcHVpdZCIlpVGaLcz_6R8nnu4pxHv2RSqF6D-yUoSExuCAH8KfLB_H5LazB6dUignhrTp8MRstgxe4xpv1T0RhcgB_36Z7MZrLkw5awLg76ElPwI6AJc3Jq7/s320/No+hunting+no+nothing+sign.jpg" /></a> </div><div align="center"><span style="color:#cc0000;">Expect more signs like these with conservative power at the Minnesota legislature </span></div><br /><br />I'm back to outdoor blogging, as the other half of my political identity - that of a trade unionist and union reformer - took over for awhile. There was an election for delegates to the International Teamsters Convention in my Teamsters Local 320, ballots were counted March 4th and I was part of a winning slate. What it took to win was not only good issues, such as reducing the top leadership's outrageous pay packages while the membership of public employees, like other workers in this economy, suffer pay freezes, furloughs, and benefit cuts -but a lot of hard work as well. It's been said that the winning side in politics usually has a bigger mouth than the other side, be it money for media or boots on the ground organization. Our side had the latter, which meant many people, including myself, spending a lot of time visiting worksites and calling people to get out the vote.<br /><br />Of course, there's been the massive attack on collective bargaining in Wisconsin, so I've spent some time on that attending support events, and plan on being at another today.<br /><br />However, I have managed to keep up on outdoor politics in Minnesota, and the picture with the conservative movement in charge isn't pretty. There are massive attacks on hunting and angling interests at the state legislature. The worst is probably HF 332, an egregious piece of anti-hunting legislation, which would mandate the DNR not increase acreage of publicly held land. Additionally, there are attacks on the funding recommendations for the use of lottery money, and the outdoor heritage fund, which is constitutionally mandated to fund wildlife habitat. The legislature is also refusing the DNR's proposed hunting and fishing license fee increases, even though the game and fish fund is getting depleted and the increases are supported by hunting and fishing organizations.<br /><br />We had our problems with the Democrats in charge, but through our efforts and coalition-building we were able to fend off most of the attacks on our interests. However, the GOP victory has empowered voices within the Democratic party who are anti-public land, and thereby created a powerful alliance to attack hunting and angling interests. A powerful push-back is needed, as well the building of a long-term movement of progressive sportsmen and women to preserve our hunting and angling heritage and opportunities.Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-55040873477331928642011-01-09T06:21:00.000-08:002011-01-09T07:26:52.290-08:00Hunting and Skiing in the tracks of my ancestors<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtVUoZuFBUjPMHXtj48wM0wF3h6nWCh8K1YoydpYSqfDVE62dRQ4vRXsJi7Mt9agmQWMIbUqtwxWUAYz6mCLB3PBFZYHChJFWIT9SKBAZyR-IGA67wvugA52yJXcsyLs3LHgx0INmn0wwg/s1600/Pjulk+close-up+on+Dec+27th+hunt.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 240px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5560200669046092306" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtVUoZuFBUjPMHXtj48wM0wF3h6nWCh8K1YoydpYSqfDVE62dRQ4vRXsJi7Mt9agmQWMIbUqtwxWUAYz6mCLB3PBFZYHChJFWIT9SKBAZyR-IGA67wvugA52yJXcsyLs3LHgx0INmn0wwg/s320/Pjulk+close-up+on+Dec+27th+hunt.jpg" /></a> <div align="center"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></div><div align="center"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></div><div align="center"><span style="color:#000099;">Hunting gear being hauled in a pulk</span></div><br /><br /><div align="center"><span style="color:#000099;">photo taken by Erik Jensen</span></div><br /><br /><p></p><p>On Dec 27th, with the aid of cross-country skis and what is called a pulk, which is a sled for hauling loads, I managed to get out for one last hunting trip before the archery deer season ended. With the deep snow we have in most of Minnesota, deer are moving much less. However, it was a day that was part of the late-December warm spell. Often deer increase movement on those days in the winter.</p><p><br />I decided to do it partially out of a desire to combine a couple of my favorite activities : hunting and cross-country skiing. I also had a desire to use the skis as my Norwegian and Sami ancestors had used them quite a bit: as an aid in hunting.<br /><br />I still haven't arrowed a deer with a bow, so I had hoped to accomplish that and get some more venision in the freezer. The supply we have is being quicly eaten.<br /><br />It was at a local property owner's land in the northern exburbs of the Twin Cities, so no great wilderness adventure. However, the movement of gear across deep snow, as well as a quick scouting mission, was helped greatly by the use of the skis. My one disadvantage was that the skis I own are like most skis you now buy for what is called "touring" skiing: they are thinner than the older skis people used. Of course, these modern skis are much faster in groomed trails than the wider skis once commonly used, but my friend's place of course had no groomed trails, so the skis sunk deeper in the snow.<br /><br />I managed to fairly quickly get the gear to my stand after seeing the few deer tracks that were visible anywhere in that patch of woods and field. I also was able to make a brief run to another area where I often hunt to look at deer trails there with the advantage of the snow.<br /><br />I settled in and hunted from a stand I have permanently set up on deer travel route. I was prepared to hunt on the ground if need be, but there was the most activity near that stand, so using the stand was the best option. I hunted for just under two hours and saw no deer. From the point of view of hunting success, it was a bust.<br /><br />However, it was useful for expanding the use of my pulk, which I originally acquired for hauling my twin daughters when they were very young on fairly short x-country ski trips on days of moderate winter weather. With some work, I may be able use the pulk with wheels for walking deep into public forests where there are only foot-trails, depending on terrain. Then, when there's snow on the ground, take the wheels off and use it for its orginal purposes, whether for hunting with the aid of x-country skis or snowshoes, or hauling loads on longer ski-touring trips.</p>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-83642016918238915022010-12-31T14:00:00.000-08:002010-12-31T15:53:20.561-08:00Hunting organizations and the Quality Family Time movement: Get Together !Of the many factors influencing the slow decline of hunting, angling, and other outdoor activties, one of the most powerful is the ever- increasing competition for children's (and thereby families' time) through the paricipation in adult-organized sports, band, and other extracurricular activities. A huge motivation for parents to enroll children in these activities is the feeling that these activities are part of an "achievement ladder" that will help children get better career prospects later in life. Additionally, the collective competitive pressure that both children and families feel to agree to more practices and events, including increasing practices on many days of the week and weekends, makes if hard for many parents to set limits.<br /><br />There has been a growing movement in opposition to this overscheduling of families by family advocates/family social scientists. Bill Doherty, a family social scientist at the University of Minnesota has been giving presentations on the negative effects of this trend on children and parents. In the Twin Cities suburb of Wayzata, the parents organized a movement for a day every week when there would be NO sports, band, or other extracurricular activities to improve family time.<br /><br />The intense scheduling of extracurricular activities are greatly influencing the decline in hunting and angling participation. Being involved with recruiting youth to hunting, and a parent of children that are just starting to consider organized activities, it is striking how powerful the pressure is to participate in lots of them. A young hunter I mentored over the past several years missed last season and was only out for opening morning of deer season this year for these very reasons. Luckily, although he hasn't shot a deer yet, he has had several close encounters, including a shot at a buck this past year, that he's hooked.<br /><br />The issue of overscheduling needs to be addressed collectively, both through a movement and legislation. Given that hunting especially is being negatively effected by this, being the most time-intensive activity of outdoor pursuits, hunters and their organizations should support the Quality Family Time movement. Given that hunting is a great way for families to spend uninterrupted blocks of time together, the family advocates should in exchange actively support/endorse hunting as a positive family activity.<br /><br />For many hunting and angling organizations, this is "far afield", even though they are acutely aware of the issue through recruiting youth to hunting and angling. Most of what is referred to as the "hook and bullet" crowd usually focuses politically on securing places to hunt and fish, the details of regulations that affect access to places to hunt and fish, as well management of species pursued. There is also frequently "coalition work" with non-hunting and angling conservation/environmental groups to advance legislation that both constituencies consider important. None of this work is off-base, it makes perfect sense. However, broader discussions need to take place about the social trends affecting hunting and angling. If particpiation is low, less of a support base will exist to back up these advocacy groups.<br /><br /><br />It may be a leap for family advocates as well. I haven't conducted any formal or informal polls, but research by Mark Damian Duda at Responsive Management suggests that higher levels of education in America is associated with anti-hunting sentiment. Typically these advocates are urban and highly educated, which would make them more likely to view hunting negatively or as a value-neutral activity.<br /><br /><br />But the reality is, both groups have something to gain through such an alliance. We are against powerful social trends, we need all the resources we can get in this fight.Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-69997010530385205592010-12-17T17:45:00.000-08:002010-12-17T18:01:05.496-08:00Thanks to neighbors combining resources and deep snow, some of the best hunting is at the end<div align="left"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijgFAZkd6cAzA35xlsm3isUDrUOFWWaEjwrJfhq5bmMdTRaaJlwJDa2IXqR3d5lfgwrNbDa_bLjsUHQWIXdvV9kq7SVbnXPUeDoBS3-2MXD4LRBqvcOAEqRiQpW32LO9b42wRboI9tLkat/s1600/Pheasant+hunt+with+Eric+Balzer+Dec+4+2010.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 292px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5551827138370231314" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijgFAZkd6cAzA35xlsm3isUDrUOFWWaEjwrJfhq5bmMdTRaaJlwJDa2IXqR3d5lfgwrNbDa_bLjsUHQWIXdvV9kq7SVbnXPUeDoBS3-2MXD4LRBqvcOAEqRiQpW32LO9b42wRboI9tLkat/s320/Pheasant+hunt+with+Eric+Balzer+Dec+4+2010.JPG" /></a></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center"><span style="color:#000066;"><span style="color:#000099;">Trouncing through the snow can have its rewards</span> </span><br /></div><div align="center"><span style="color:#000099;">Photo taken by Therese O'Fallon</span></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><br /><br /></div><p align="left">The hunting season is drawing to a close. While there is still a couple weeks of deer archery and pheasant hunting left, the chances for getting out again are slim.</p><div align="left"><br /></div><p align="left">After an initial dry run of four weeks of seeing no deer archery hunting, I had some exciting experiences. I finally put it all together archery hunting in late October, only to have the buck jump my string. I put some meat in the freezer during rifle season, nothing dramatic, I shot two fawns in a managed unit late in the season.<br /></p><p align="left">Then, the dynamic of hunters bringing different resources to a hunt, and new snow, brought a really great late-season pheasant hunt. On December fourth, my neighbor Eric and I went pheasant hunting at the farm of one of my family friends near Hutchinson, MN. The place is only hunted by neighbors who hunt each other's land and sections of swamp. Eric brought his dog, Brody, who wasn't intended to be a hunting dog, but has turned into one. Eleven inches of new snow brought birds that were holding very tight. After flushing an intial covey of at least fifteen birds, we flushed birds for the next two-three hours in the frozen swamp. The first flush quickly produced two kills, and after working the huge swamp, we had a couple more, and had missed a few others. Working our way back to the woods, a nice flush set up and we had the fifth, one short of our limit. We downed our sixth in the woods where we started.</p><div align="left">It was a beautiful day, the fresh, powdery snow making a patch of hardwood forest invaded by buckthorn a mystical place. The dog had to work hard in the snow, but with all the action, Brody was regularly re-energized. We left a bird for our host, who took pictures and served us coffee and brownies before we left. It was a fitting end to a hunt that Eric decribed as something he hadn't experienced since he was in South Dakota as a teenager.<br /><br /></div>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-62026988081861495272010-12-08T18:35:00.000-08:002010-12-17T17:22:17.565-08:00Maureen Dowd vs. Sarah Palin : who's more anti-hunting ?In today's New York Times, liberal columinst Maureen Dowd belittled hunting as an unfair activity to animals as part of a critique of Obama's agreement with the GOP. The agreement extended for two years a Bush tax-cut for the rich in exchange for extended unemployment benefits. Likening Obama to a helpless caribou being shot by Sarah Palin as part of her outdoor show, Dowd laid bare her contempt for hunting.<br /><br />It was a particularly gross piece of cultural warfare coming from a member of the anti-hunting left, with its caricature of hunters and gun owners as a nutty right-wing monolith. One of the few things that Palin has ever said that I liked was "hunting is a great way to get organic, free-range meat". This was dismissed by Dowd.<br /><br />While I'll probably never see Palin's show, I couldn't help but think of the irony of her loving caribou hunting in the Alaska wilderness, something a lot of us hunters in lower forty-eight can only dream of, and her anti-wilderness and anti-conservation policies. Palin is a strong supporter of drilling in ANWR, which would lead to a decline in caribou populations by breaking their migration corridor, leading to fewer hunting opportunities.<br /><br />The entire article got me thinking, whose more anti-hunting ? Dowd, who would protect the environment but greatly restrict or ban hunting, or Palin, whose personal love for hunting has no impact on her broader politics, whose environmental policies would destroy ever increasing areas of wild places to hunt and fish ?Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-89406736360142268732010-11-26T06:30:00.000-08:002010-11-26T08:02:22.687-08:00Conservative movement up to its usual anti-hunting politics in Iowa after voters approve conservation amendmentSixty-two percent of Iowa voters just followed Minnesota's lead, and voted to allocate 3/8th of a percent of the next increase in the state sales tax for conservation. Unfortunately for Iowa's sportsmen and women and the environment, the Iowa state constitution does not allow the people of Iowa to vote to tax themselves more. Only the legislature can increase taxes. Iowans can vote to place in the constitution that a certain percentage of a future tax increase will be allocated to a specific purpose. In the recent election, the Republicans took over one half of the state house and the governorship, and consistent with 2010 anti-tax conservative dogma, are refusing to raise the sales tax. It is contrary to popular will, as most Iowans' understanding was that the tax would be raised would if they voted yes.<br /><br />Of course, there is talk of taking the money from "other sources". We had that discussion in Minnesota. When people have to choose between their kid's school (or their health care, transportation, and public safety services, for that matter), and conservation, the immediate need of protecting the existing public service trumps conservation. There is this right-wing trick: "I'm for conservation, not tax increases", as one Iowa Republican legislator said in the Des Moines Register. The result of this politics of pitting important and needed public services against a pro-hunting and angling conservation initiative means support collapses for conservation. The conservation initiative has to be a new revenue source, a new tax. There's no getting around it.<br /><br />Now that the GOP is in power in a number of state governments and controls half of congress, with a rabidly anti-public sector, anti-government tea party movement as a core of its base, we will see new attacks on hunting and angling interests as we are seeing in Iowa right now. We have problems with some progressives, generally in the Democratic party, who view hunting as a value-neutral activity, rather than a positive activity that deserves government support. With the conservative movement, we are dealing with an ideology that will assure hunting's continued decline.Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-77189210915970220912010-10-30T09:45:00.000-07:002010-12-17T17:00:42.579-08:00Mark Dayton, the pro-hunting candidate, Emmer, the anti-hunting candidate who loves huntingA recent story in the Star Tribune stated that no candidate in the upcoming governor's election has a lock on the "outdoor vote", although it offered no scientific polling, and reiterated the common belief that the hunters' votes are largely conservative and Republican. It did quote a number of leaders of hunting organizations stating the group is "up for grabs".<br /><br />If there is really a shift going away from the Republicans on the part of hunters, it reflects that we have a truly pro-hunting candidate in Mark Dayton. Dayton is personally connected to our activity, he continues to like bird hunting, a pastime he grew up with. He owns firearms, and supports the right of private firearms ownership while rejecting the extreme gun politics of the NRA.<br /><br />These personal connections are helpful, but a long history of support for conservation and environmental measures, as well as a commitment to fund the DNR, unwavering support for the Legacy Amendment "seals the deal". Dayton, unlike some liberals, understands our concerns and the fact that outdoor activities, including hunting, motivate people to give time, money, and political support to conservation. An abstract commitment to the environment doesn't necessarily translate into boots on the ground resources.<br /><p>Some of Dayton's positions should raise concerns amongst conservationists, such as his unwillingness to directly defend the DNR's new lakeshore protection rules which were nixed by Pawlenty. Dayton instead talks about the need for the DNR to listen to what the community wants. This was a case of just that - advocates of environmental protection and regular lakeshore owners demanding the government take action to protect lakes from a small group of wealthy owners who were destroying shorelines and hurting aquatic life by destroying the natural cleansing of rainwater that shoreline vegetation performs. To his credit, Independence party candidate Tom Horner did defend the lakeshore rules at a forum held at the Game fair in August. </p><p>Dayton also has close relationships with many Northeastern MN legislators who often take positions at odds with conservation and the hunting lobby. This includes the support of Bob Lessard, who to his credit, was a driving force behind the Legacy Amendment. However, he is part of the hunting community that sees wilderness protection and hunting and angling interests as conflicting. In talking about his political career, Lessard told the story of his first campaign for public office, where his opposition to putting a river under the protection of the Wild and Scenic Rivers designation was his primary motivation.</p><p>However, the overall package that hunters get with Dayton is very good. His main opponent, Tom Emmer is an avid hunter, whose main appeal to sportsmen and women is "I'm one of you", is actually the anti-hunting candidate. Contrary to the position of every hunting organization in the state, Emmer not only opposed the Legacy Amendment, he tried to repeal it after the voters passed it. His extreme anti-government views will adversely affect hunting in many ways. He will oppose other conservation measures and the aquisition of more public land. Since he wants to balance the massive budget deficit with no tax increases, that will lead to further attacks on PILT, the Payment in Lieu of Taxes that local governments get from the state when land gets aquired by the state. This will put in overdrive the anti-public land aquisition movement that is gaining traction in both parties. Given his allies, especially the NRA, Emmer will push for more unfettered ATV access and use on public lands. </p><p>Most importantly, Emmer's tea-party politics would accelerate social trends that are adversely affecting hunting. His attacks on working people will lead to less income for average families, and research complied by Ducks Unlimited from the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service show that when family income drops below $40,000, families are very likely to quit hunting. He will weaken trade unions, which will lead to less time off for workers, and hunting is a time-intensive activity. I can say for a fact that my good vacation benefits as a unionized worker have made it possible for me to participate in great hunting opportunities.</p><p>No matter who the governor is, lots of hunting organizations internal politics in Minnesota will be influenced whoever that is. Emmer will approach hunting as a question of cultural warfare, with extreme gun rights politics and likely emphasis on animal rights organizations as a main threat to hunting. This will make it much more difficult for us in the hunting community to have the kind of conversations that we need to be having but aren't. Children and their families today are under heavy pressure to participate constantly in activities that are part of an "achievement ladder": sports, band, arts, and other organized activities that will lead to better education and career prospects. This trend is negatively affecting what is often called "quality family time", a rising concern of many, and a movement to stop and/or contain this trend is being lead by prominent family social scientist Bill Doherty and other family advocates. Hunters and their organizations need to be acting in alliance with these advocates, as hunting and other outdoor activities are great ways for families to spend uninterrupted blocks of time together. Under a Dayton administration, such discussions and alliances would be possible and even likely, as his support for hunting, fishing, and other outdoor activities would be about the benefits to society - family, health, and conservation. Such discussions would be alien under a tea-party, cultural warrior governor like Emmer. </p><p></p>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-57309000419021726272010-10-10T20:05:00.000-07:002010-10-10T18:19:40.192-07:00Jensen Family Rocky Mountain National Park Backcountry Trip<div align="center"><span style="color:#ff0000;"></span><br /></div><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 240px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5526581965923670434" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSEhfoOiDdAHkAlg9D2nYII1R-6EN5kJssrFDz1JYWZ5jIf-n3PfyYi-HPcAC75ROZXmbxZS2VaPWAyIRfpxqcd9oYIeF9zETQBUJLV_o32ANiSkL6SgJK0IwrnJJYLUzWus6j2HegN8bZ/s320/Theresa+and+Natalie+with+packs.jpg" /><br /><br /><p align="center"><span style="color:#000099;">Looking grubby after hiking back down Forest Canyon</span><br /></p><br /><br /><p align="left">In early September, our family took a trip to Rocky Mountain National Park, which included two days of car camping and two days of backpacking. The backpacking part required almost two miles of a rugged canyon hike to get to our camping spot. Our backcountry stay included fishing the upper Big Thompson River. The trip was successful on pretty much every measure. </p><div align="left">In the lead-up to the trip, my wife Paula and I wanted to make sure our twin daughters, Theresa and Natalie, didn't have bad experience, that it wouldn't be too much. We started with non-car camping two years earlier, at age three years and twenty months, but that was much more tame: a half-mile walk on an old logging road to a yurt in the Porcupine Mountains wilderness in the Michigan's upper peninsula. We could carry them for short stretches. For this trip, they would have to carry their own packs 1.7 miles. </div><br /><div align="left">I called the backcountry office of Rocky Mountain National Park many months in advance, asking where to take two almost six-year olds in area that included some fishing. They gave me a few options, the Big Thompson sounded the best, so we reserved that early.</div><br /><div align="left">Wilderness writers have said this about kids on backcountry adventures: even fairly young children act more mature, not less, once they are out on the trip. That is due to the fact that they have a role, or a job, as well as some freedom to explore. Our experience bore that out. </div><br /><div align="left">The main challenge for the girls was that even the smallest packs on the market that I could find, Deuter Fox 30, were a little too big for them when loaded. The packs weren't totally snug to their back the way they should be, but at least they'll be able to grow into these packs. We did lighten their load some on the way down, carrying some heavy rain jackets and other items for them. The way back they carried only their sleeping bag, their plate, utensils, and stuffed animal. Still, even on the way up, in between complaining about the weight of their packs, they said things like "I feel big", "I feel like I'm ten [they're sixth birthday was October 9th]". Of course we stopped in the canyon and they played in massive boulder formations where the girls saw favorable fairy habitat. </div><br /><div align="left">Our family overall worked better on the trip. My wife Paula noted that we had only had one argument the entire vacation, and that was on the drive home. We experienced no child meltdowns that we sometimes experience at home. </div><br /><div align="left">When we first arrived at our Moraine Park car-camping site, the girls talked about the views, the steepness, which they had never seen before. The second night, as we were getting to bed, I heard what I thought was a bull elk bugle, over the ridge. Then another, I was sure, and it was closer. He came over the ridge, with a cow, finally stopping fifty yards from the campground to tear up the ground with his antlers. </div><br /><div align="left">Theresa and Natalie had seen this many times on elk hunting videos, but now saw it actually happen, which they can describe in detail.<br /><br />They asked to go fishing at a river near our campsite. The second time out, they were successful, and each bagged native cuttthroat trout, fish you have to release in Rocky Mountain National Park. Their only disappointment was not being able to catch a trout that they could eat, such as a brook trout. The water is so clear, Theresa was able to observe this beautiful fish rising from the bottom to snatch food and resume resting in slower current.<br /></div><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKeUSsz5SXFpeutzBkYyR2N8u7sFQxfpl2fEKT7HuLF-96h4k3rsWK02b8IIEUKpMeJbXYku6YzQf1A2O8FNvOR1VMqDScfdFm9Ya-MKfEdct7epRBGHxlyDmujlB1GSOs6RsJnU7FpLqq/s1600/Natalie+w+cutthroat.jpg"><img style="WIDTH: 243px; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5526582614396509986" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKeUSsz5SXFpeutzBkYyR2N8u7sFQxfpl2fEKT7HuLF-96h4k3rsWK02b8IIEUKpMeJbXYku6YzQf1A2O8FNvOR1VMqDScfdFm9Ya-MKfEdct7epRBGHxlyDmujlB1GSOs6RsJnU7FpLqq/s320/Natalie+w+cutthroat.jpg" /></a> <span style="color:#ff0000;">Natalie handling her first cutthroat</span><br /><br /><br /><div align="left">It is true that kids get homesick after awhile, so it's a good idea to not make the trip too long. However, when we returned home, one of their teachers called at the end of their first day back, to say that they talked about their trip all day, and that it was all positive. My wife Paula prepared a small booklet of pictures for each of them, which they enthusiastically showed to their classes. </div><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEienJAofQ9XNWjHOYXCbhoQJ3IrHs8JSnbTREZUozCmig6-ypnzvyfTEQwrd30k3H4yk5GbGMneKphB4XD2F4CbVmYoVwA5fUsRA98BbHkH1WvYWX3b5JU_qHT3n56F9_392TxvjlxbXrsr/s1600/Theresa+fishing+Big+Thompson.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 320px; FLOAT: right; HEIGHT: 240px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5526587982822713138" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEienJAofQ9XNWjHOYXCbhoQJ3IrHs8JSnbTREZUozCmig6-ypnzvyfTEQwrd30k3H4yk5GbGMneKphB4XD2F4CbVmYoVwA5fUsRA98BbHkH1WvYWX3b5JU_qHT3n56F9_392TxvjlxbXrsr/s320/Theresa+fishing+Big+Thompson.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br /><p><span style="color:#ff0000;"></span></p><br /><br /><p><span style="color:#ff0000;">Theresa fishing the Big Thompson with her dad</span><br /><br /></p><br /><br /><div align="left">A really important foundation has been built - the seed for future outdoor adventures, the idea of enjoying oneself without the luxuries that even car camping has to offer, the skills and knowledge for hunting and fishing in more difficult places to get to, places that hold bigger fish and more game, the knowledge of topography and climate and how it changes with the landscape. Confidence and self-reliance. An appreciation of quiet places and their value whether one is pursuing a huge elk or trout, cross-country skiing, or just walking through and enjoying beautiful country.<br /></div>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-56493005859923425872010-09-16T12:45:00.000-07:002010-09-16T19:53:44.646-07:00Michelle Bachmann's flip-flop on the Legacy Amendment displays the conservative movement's anti-hunting politicsIt is a major contention of this blog that the conservative movement of the present is anti-hunting. Michelle Bachmann, the sixth-district right-wing congresswoman, just proved it better than anyone could with her recent flip-flop on her previous public support for the Legacy Amendment. According to the Star Tribune, she told outdoor journalist Ron Schara in a public questioning forum in August at the Game Fair that she supported the Legacy Amendment, the fractional increase in the sales tax passed by Minnesota voters in 2008. One-third of the revenues go to wildlife habitat projects, and a large share of the money goes to cleaning polluted lakes and rivers, a major concern of hunters and anglers. Her campaign booth had a large "vote yes" signs in 2008, according to leaders of hunting and outdoor groups. Bachmann in fact stated she supported the amendment because of the involvement of family members with hunting.<br /><br />Now, following a typical line of conservative Republican attack, she is labeling her Democratic opponent, Taryl Clark, "taxing Taryl", in part for Clark's support of the Legacy Amendment. Bachmann is denying that she ever supported the Legacy Amendment, despite the statements of prominent Minnesota sportsmen Don McMillan and Ron Schara that she had made supportive public statements. Neither McMillan nor Schara could be counted as liberal from their past public record.<br /><br />The Legacy Amendment is already at work, restoring prairies and wetlands, cleaning polluted waters, and stopping vast tracts of forests from being developed and subdivided. All projects are open to public hunting and fishing under the state constitution. Lack of access to good habitat to hunt is a major factor in the decline of hunting across America, it's even starting to affect Minnesota hunters, a state with lots of public land and a high hunting participation rate. Public money is needed to reverse this, private efforts won't be enough. But don't tell that to today's conservative movement: they hate taxes and any government action more than they love hunting. Teddy Roosevelt, America's greatest conservationist President, whose actions were driven largely by his love of hunting in wild places, would be a pariah in the Republican party of today, labeled a socialist along with Barack Obama.Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-82251938109062209342010-08-20T19:26:00.000-07:002010-08-20T19:42:00.567-07:00ATV abuse, the scurge of our hunting community<object style="BACKGROUND-IMAGE: url(http://i3.ytimg.com/vi/BKUgEjbSGQM/hqdefault.jpg)" width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BKUgEjbSGQM?fs=1&hl=en_US"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><br /><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BKUgEjbSGQM?fs=1&hl=en_US" width="480" height="295" allowscriptaccess="never" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Watch this YouTube video, "America's Backcountry", from Backcountry Hunters and Anglers that includes a powerful indictment of ATV abuse and oversuse on America's public lands</span><br /><br />If there is anything about hunting in America today that is inconsistent with the entire tradition and every argument that hunting is a positive activity that has environmental, health, and social benefits, it's the ATV overuse and abuse that is rampant among a certain set of hunters.<br /><br />ATVs are often used by young, able-bodied hunters to transport themselves to their deer stands. ATVs are even used as part of the actual hunting experience, turning it into a mechanized and sedentary activity.<br /><br />ATVs are taking over our hunting culture. ATV advocates in Minnesota state government have crafted regulations that created large loopholes in the law against shooting at animals from ATVs, mostly by allowing uncased guns on ATVs in areas where you are hunting. The machine is now being used to hunt grouse by some hunters. Due to complaints from non-motorized grouse hunters, the DNR tried to tighten up the rule this last year, only to meet legislative resistance.<br /><p></p><p>There are constant reports in the outdoor press from the Rocky Mountain west of ATV abuse. The most outrageous I've read so far was that a number of ATVs were used in a bison hunt, to surround the animal and then shoot it execution-style. This was in an area in Utah that was off-limits to ATVs, a bowhunter who had drawn this rare permit to hunt wild bison went to an area seeking solitude and a great hunt with traditional bowhunting equipment. He met noise, environmental destruction, and "hunters" who might as well have bought their meat at the grocery store.<br /><br />Hunting as an activity that strengthens families and creates community is destroyed by this, as riding a loud machine is not exactly quietly walking through the woods with your dad or sibling, whispering and talking about where to look or what route to take to find birds. The argument that hunting is an activity that fights obesity is true, but not when it's motorized. Riding an ATV isn't exactly cardiovascular exercise. Creating an ever-expanding lattice of trails for loud machines that tear up woods and fields and disrupt wildlife and emit pollution runs counter to a strong conservationist tradition that many hunters are rightly proud of. Last, but not least, is fair chase. Not only has this been a principle of hunting ethics for decades, it maintains hunting's public support.<br /><br />ATVs are negatively affecting the habitat of many animals, including those we love to hunt. A number of studies by wildlife agencies have been conducted on radio-collared elk, and elk will avoid, year-round, areas that are regularly frequented by motorized traffic. One study showed that an area as large as a half-mile from such trails is avoided on a permament basis by elk. This is a lot of habitat for prime game animals to destroy all because someone wants a thrill or doesn't want to walk, ride a horse, and/or use other pack animals such as donkeys or lamas.<br /><br />The same studies show that hunters on foot or horseback don't disturb elk the way ATVs do.<br /><br />One study has been conducted on mule deer that concluded there are fewer large mule deer in the west due to ATV overuse.<br /><br />Powerful economic interests and many ATV riders have stifled action by public land managers that would rein in these abuses, even though the vast majority of public land users are non-motorized. Fortunately, there is a new, growing, and energetic organization of sportsmen and women organizing for needed reform of motorized use and for protection of wilderness and roadless areas, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers ("BHA"). I'm a proud and active member. BHA successfully fought for reforms of financing of Colrado's ATV program to allocate more money for enforcement, not just increased trail construction. In Minnesota we lobbied and brought attention to the grouse hunting rule that the DNR proposed during the last legislative session. </p><p>Other actions include BHA helping pass legislation protecting Montana's Rocky Mountain front from oil and shale development. In MN, we are lobbying for stricter regulation of a proposed copper mining project near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area.<br /></p><p>We are working with other wilderness hunting advocates to establish a late October rifle deer hunt in the interior of the Boundary Waters. The interior is often inaccessible during the regular rifle season in November, as the lakes freeze early that far north.<br /><br />If you want to preserve good hunting and fishing opportunities, join BHA at <a href="http://www.backcountryhunters.org/">http://www.backcountryhunters.org/</a>. If you use an ATV, limit your use. Save some greenhouse gas and burn some calories and walk to your stand if you are physically able. Only use your ATV to retrieve downed animals or haul heavy stands or equipment, and stay on established trails. Use one ATV per group, instead of one for every person, as I've seen in some camps.<br /></p>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-15478567606422310982010-07-26T21:25:00.000-07:002010-07-26T21:25:00.492-07:00A "grand bargain" on guns ?After many years of involvement with hunting and shooting, as well as following debates over gun control and gun rights, I think when you cut through all the smoke, there are four general pre-dispositions or political positions people have regarding guns. The main two we hear a lot about in the media, whether they are ever accurately described or reported, are: "pro-gun", and "anti-gun". As far as I can tell, being pro-gun means you believe guns are morally good things, regardless of place, political or social context, or who is allowed to have them. If criminals, terrorists, or mentally unstable people have them, the answer is to bring in more guns to the situation, simply arm the "good guys" more, rather than focus on restricting access to firearms for certain people. The result of putting this belief into law would be an increasing weaponization of more and more aspects of daily life.<br /><br /><br />Then there is being "anti-gun". This position is that guns are made to kill, thereby it is best to restrict them extremely or eliminate them from society, and only allow the military and police to have them. They are morally evil things as they are an instrument of death. They are used by murderers, terrorists, and unstable people to more effectively inflict harm. Parts of the Chicago and Washington, D.C. gun ordinances are anti-gun, as they seek to so severely restrict the use of firearms, through imposing significant extra costs and inconvenience for their use, in addition to background checks and licensing requirements. This position has in common with the "pro-gun" position that its judgement about the nature of guns cuts across time and space and social and political contexts. As an otherwise intelligent person told me recently when I consider guns a tool, but a powerful one that not anyone should be allowed to have : "Guns aren't a necessity, so they are not like a jackhammer or a drill".<br /><br /><br />Another is pro-gun control that is not anti-gun. This position views guns as dangerous to society if not properly regulated, but that guns are not in and of themsleves morally evil. While it is distinguished from being anti-gun, it also doesn't in particular see benefits to society from private firearms ownership and shooting sports. It is something you can personally choose to do as long as you follow the proper rules.<br /><p>The position that I hold is to support a system which regulates private firearms ownership AND supports the shooting sports. This position is never discussed in the mainstream media. It recognizes that there can be dangers to society from private gun ownership that is poorly regulated, but also strongly supports shooting sports, especially hunting, as there are benefits to society from these activities.</p><p>This position forms a unique program, which I have been referring to as a "grand bargain" politically. It would require that advocates of stricter gun control support measures that help the shooting sports, such as money for shooting ranges, firearms safety education in the public schools, and affirmation of shooting sports as positive activities. In exchange, gun owners would have to actively support stricter gun control, or more accurately, regulations to keep guns from some people that shouldn't have them. </p><p>There is potentially a large constituency for this approach, and Minnesota is the place to try. We have a high firearms ownership and hunting participation rate, with a history of progressive politics. A large swath of gun owners here have pragmatic views about guns, aware of the satisfaction they gain from their proper use, as well as the death and mayhem guns can be used for in the wrong hands or from unsafe practices and storage. </p>Then the question is, what should be in the "grand bargain" ? On the "control" side, I'd say closing the gun show loophole is a no-brainer, strong state authority to close crooked gun dealers who allow repeated straw purchases, and possibly a system of licensure to be a firearms owner. The license would be a training requirement, people who took their hunter safety training would be covered. Lastly, tougher safe storage regulations, especially in homes where there are children. A possible rule would be that ammunition be locked, which would be an affordable requirement. On the "support" side, a short mandatory firearms safety course in all public schools, with full firearms safety as an after-school program where there is interest, run by the DNR. Money will be needed for the the safety training, and to support access to shooting ranges. A tax should be levied on the firearms industry's profits. It should be put into a dedicated fund controlled by the DNR to pay for the classes and give grants to shooting ranges for upkeep, as well as even buy ranges that go on the market or get offers from developers. This could have stopped Moon Valley range, my former favorite shooting range, from being sold off. The fund could also help boost 4-H and high school shooting leagues.<br /><p>This is a starter, and any such arrangement would be be the result of lengthy negotiation and discussion. There will be sticky issues which require a lot of research and debate. A perfect example is : when should people be allowed to sell or lend guns privately, with no background check ? One bill authored in the legislature closed the gun show loophole and required all guns be sold through some institution that requires background checks, with only immediate family exempted. What about friends or people you know or more distant relatives ? There are cases of people lending or selling guns to people they knew, confident the person was not unstable, and the gun was then used in a murder or suicide. On the other hand, I recently lent a gun to someone I have hunted with for several years who I know already owns firearms. This is a common activity amongst hunters who would feel unduly restricted if it were prohibited or forced to go through some time consuming process. Responsible gun owners and anti-gun violence activists who see the importance of shooting sports will have to craft proposals that address both these situations.</p><br /><p><br /></p><br /><br /><br /><p></p><br /><br /><br /><br /><p></p>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-76614634928147345252010-07-13T12:45:00.000-07:002010-07-19T19:26:43.220-07:00The most pro-hunting law in at least a decade, and conservatives voted noOne of the most interesting questions raised by the 2008 Minnesota Legacy Amendment was: what does it mean to be "pro-hunting"? Historically, it has meant believing going into the woods or marshes to kill animals and then eat them is morally acceptable, part of the chain of life. Access to places to hunt was assumed to be a non-issue, a given. However, increasingly, lack of access to good places to hunt is a big factor in the decline of hunting. At this present time, when evaluating a a group's politics or a law on whether it is pro-hunting must also include whether the group or law supports access to places to hunt.<br /><br />By this measure, the Legacy Amendment, a fractional increase in the sales tax passed by Minnesota voters, was the most pro-hunting law passed in Minnesota in at least a decade. It has provided a huge boost to future hunting opportunities by dedicating millions of dollars to wildlife habitat every year. Another part of the Legacy Amendment, the clean water fund, is also helpful to hunting and fishing, by cleaning polluted waters. The parks and trails funding is related to hunting in that those areas provide opportunity for outdoor activity. Both consumptive and non-consumptive outdoor enthusiasts are likely to use these areas. The only part of the Legacy Amendment that did not directly help hunting was the arts section. I would argue that the alliance was politically necessary, and that the arts and hunting actually share something in common, but that is a topic for another day.<br /><br />The amendment passed by 56% of the vote (voters who don't mark that section of the ballot are counted as "no" votes), and it is telling looking at where the votes came from. The most liberal areas of the state gave it the largest "yes" votes. The 5th congressional district, Minneapolis and surrounding suburbs, the most liberal, passed the amendment by well over 2 to 1, the 4th, Saint Paul and the surrounding suburbs, was close behind. The general pattern was that conservative areas of the state gave it the least support, with general vote totals right around 50% support. The sixth district (Michelle Bachmann's), the 2nd (John Kline's), and the 7th (represented by Collin Peterson, a conservative Democrat) gave the amendment the least support. The one interesting difference was that the 8th district, always solidly Democratic, was also one of lowest levels of support. One explanation may be that that area contains massive tracts of public land, and numerous beautiful lakes, many probably thought the spending might not benefit them or wasn't needed. It is hard to say. The 1st district, the southern part of state that includes Rochester, and the 3rd district, the western Twin Cities, both historically moderate politically, gave the amendment solid support, but well behind the more liberal areas. Statewide exit polls showed Democratic voters gave it overwhelming support, three to one, independents split 50-50, and Republicans voted two to one against. The Republican party officially opposed the amendment, as did the Taxpayers League, a right-wing outfit run by an ex-GOP legislator.<br /><br />The liberal urban districts who voted overwhelmingly for the amendment obviously didn't only do so because of the pro-wildlife elements that helped hunting. They did so because of the general pro-environmental package, and that progressive voters are more willing to pay higher taxes than moderates and conservatives. Progressive voters are also more likely to be in favor of arts funding.<br /><br />The political right in the hunting community are quick to label progressives as "anti-hunting". While a number of avid hunters with conservative-leaning politics campaigned for the amendment, (Bud Grant is a prime example) the election results reveal that as an overall group, conservative voters aren't willing to do what it takes to keep a thriving hunting culture. While elements of the progressive base don't like hunting (demographic studies indicate a smaller majority of the liberal base is supportive of hunting as an activity than conservatives), as an overall group, the progressive voters are the most pro-hunting group of voters when the considering the complete definition of being pro-hunting.Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-75194706689528170762010-07-09T20:48:00.000-07:002010-07-13T20:21:20.820-07:00Pass on the hunting culture !<div align="center"><span style="color:#000000;"></span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9i0Lq01uHt9kUnV00n7nwl6eabxvC7Ac2LH7FukiANEBpOgVzf74ouHUfwhPil2zQeq9CcfhlWywpID9h8uUvHD2GWt7l-KPiYsZyht9T4SgTSXu0GE2_1ZG3KJfynM3JWvAl2CvNEqeV/s1600/Theresa+and+Natalie+on+rifle+range.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 240px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5492119588431816082" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9i0Lq01uHt9kUnV00n7nwl6eabxvC7Ac2LH7FukiANEBpOgVzf74ouHUfwhPil2zQeq9CcfhlWywpID9h8uUvHD2GWt7l-KPiYsZyht9T4SgTSXu0GE2_1ZG3KJfynM3JWvAl2CvNEqeV/s320/Theresa+and+Natalie+on+rifle+range.jpg" /></a> <span style="color:#cc33cc;">Theresa and Natalie Jensen their first day at the gun range in June,</span><br /></div><div align="center"><span style="color:#cc33cc;">shooting their Red Ryder BB gun. Natalie had the quote of the day</span><br /><span style="color:#cc33cc;">"Dad, your fire gun [.50 cal muzzleloader] made my tummy shake !"</span></div><br /><br /><div align="center"></div><br /><br /><div align="center">Picture taken by Erik Jensen<br /></div><br /><br /><p>I've been raising my twin daughters, Theresa and Natalie, who turn six this fall, in the hunting culture. They have eaten deer meat since they were just past their first birthday, and seen deer butchered every year since they were two. They have watched many hunting videos, mostly for deer and elk, and Natalie has been out hunting with me. I did have to use unorthodox methods to get her out in the field. Two years ago this fall, we were staying at a family friend's place near Hutchinson around halloween, a great time for bow hunting for deer. The girls then and now love everything to do with fairies, and Natalie liked wearing her pink costume with wings. She wanted to go out on the evening hunt, but refused to take off her fairy costume. I realized that an adult male's camoflage shirt, (I had a couple extra) is twice the size of a four year-old, with room for fairy wings to boot. The pink was concealed, problem solved. Natalie stuck it out for 45 minutes in the blind, working the bleat call and watching and listening. She saw my elevated awareness, and my eyes "playing tricks" when I honed in on something I hoped was a deer but soon realized it wasn't. She heard the pheasants, other birds, and distant shotgun fire from duck hunters on a nearby lake. She said "Dad, when are we going to do that ?" </p><p>Recently, I took them to the gun range for the first time. As you can see I had to stick with the pink theme. I am having trouble with one of Natalie's future wishes for a deer rifle: a purple stock. I do hope she grows out of it, only time will tell.</p><p>Last year, the same weekend and same farm, the girls didn't want to go out due to colder fall weather. But they did come out midday on the day we left, helping me take down my deer blind and we looked at buck scrapes. This fall, Theresa, Natalie, and my wife Paula are starting a new family tradition as the girls enter kindergarten: MEA weekend is "family hunting weekend". It's in the latter period of October, when bow hunting for deer is good, as is various kinds of bird hunting. </p><p>In 2005, I started taking a friend's son hunting when he was thirteen. After coming with to support his son a couple years later, the father started hunting.</p><p>Recent research led by Mark Damian Duda for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, suggests that an adult, usually a parent, investing their time in helping a young person learn hunting skills is one of the most important factors in whether a person becomes a future hunter. The study suggests that a large swath of us hunters who don't think it is "worth it" to invest their time in teaching youth in their lives to hunt. While there are many factors in the decline of hunting that need to be taken on through political alliances and social support structures, the lack of mentoring is something that we can have an impact on easily, right in our own immediate or extended family or circle of friends. </p><br /><p></p>Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8767228090781202428.post-3344576009443633702010-06-22T18:38:00.000-07:002010-07-05T09:27:24.729-07:00<strong>Why I'm Starting this Blog</strong><br /><br />I'm an avid hunter and angler with progressive politics who is deeply concerned about the decline of hunting and the signs that fishing is on a downward trend as well. Lately I've read lots of analysis on what it will take to counter these trends, and it won't be easy. Powerful economic, social, and demographic forces are working against the future of hunting especially. As a progressive outdoorsman, I've long felt that the insular, sometimes highly conservative politics projected by numerous hunting publications, businesses, and organizations, and of course the NRA, as well the mainstream media's embrace and sometimes caricature of that projection left out a significant base of hunters - progressives. There are many good conservationist hunting organizations, I'm a member of a couple, but due to corporate funding and a diverse membership, or a "niche" focus, they have to be too cautious in their broader politics. After getting more involved in efforts to fight for hunting interests politically, as well as helping others take up the tradition, it has also become clear to me that the insular and/or conservative politics not only don't speak for many of us, they are also the enemy of the future of hunting. It is not that we shouldn't be concerned about the animal rights movement, or certain segments of the population, often liberal-leaning, that disparage hunting as an activity. We should be unapolegetic in our advocacy that hunting is a positive activity in so may ways. Hunting is an excellent means for families to spend quality time together away from the distractions and hyper-competitiveness of modern society. Hunting builds a political base for conservation efforts, probably the greatest example of this was the Presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, who protected 320 million acres of forests and prairies from development. His action was primarily motivated by his love of hunting in wild places. Even conservative hunters will put money and time on the line, even going so far as to raise their own taxes, however reluctantly, to pay for conservation projects that benefit hunting, other outdoor activities, and the environment as a whole. These projects often are an important source of support for rural communities. Hunting is especially beneficial for kids, as it teaches them patience, observation, safety skills, self-reliance, and how to not be physically comfortable and still enjoy oneself. It teaches them to appreciate and understand the natural world and the inter-connectedness of all life.<br /><br />Hunting has health benefits as well, especially done with little or no motorized assistance. Wild animals are a healthy source of lean, organic protein.<br /><br />Having said all that, what research exists shows the Ameican people overall need little or no convincing. The American public overwhelmingly, in general, still supports hunting. However, even with that support, fewer of us are heading into the woods or onto the waters to hunt or fish. The decline is driven by urbanization, lack of access to places to hunt, lack of time, and competition from other activities, especially amongst youth. Most hunters take up hunting as youths. Our media-drenched and commercialized culture that teaches quick gratification and a need to be stimulated all the time are clearly working against hunting, fishing, and other outdoor activities.<br /><br />All of these problems are either created or made more difficult to counter by insular, conservative politics in our ranks. We need access to quality habitat for hunting, such places cost money for the government to buy or get easements for, as well as manage and/or restore. However, the fundamental core of conservative politics in 2010 is hatred for collective action and solutions to problems, in particluar, hatred for government and taxation. On this fundamental level, conservatism is anti-hunting. Urban sprawl is also lengthening the time it takes for many of us to get to places to hunt. Controlling urban sprawl through planning and public transportation draws the delusional cries of socialism or communism from the tea-party base. Yet any slowdown in urban sprawl would help preserve places to hunt and fish. These are more obvious examples of conservatism's anti-hunting policies. Research I've read by rural sociologists and a consultant to wildlife agencies also conclude that hunting is a not an activity that just happens, it is a tradition that needs a social support structure to be continued and passed on. Present American conservatism is almost sociopathically individualistic, rejecting the idea of social support structures. Such an ideology being influential within our ranks makes it hard for us as a hunting community to forge alliances with other groups that ultimately have a common interest with us. This goes beyond forging alliances with non-hunting and angling environmentalists. There is a history of such alliances, we have a recent successful example here in Minnesota with the Legacy Amendment. We need to go beyond that and be reaching out to advocates for quality family time, youth advocates, educators, and nutrition/wellness advocates. There is already an encouraging effort of reaching out to slow food advocates and bringing them into hunting. Jackson Landers, who lives in Virginia, runs a blog called "The Locavore Hunter", and is soon coming out with a book called "Deer Hunting for Locavores".<br /><br />As odd it as it may sound at first blush, we also need to be reaching out to some gun control advocates who may be willing to support firearms safety education being offered in public schools, access to affordable and accessible shooting ranges, and affirm the mainstream shooting sports as positive activities in exchange for hunters' support for stricter gun regulations. The NRA's outsized influence within hunting publications, businesses, and organizations make such a "grand bargain" on gun politics difficult or impossible to achieve - even though fundamentally necessary for the future of hunting. While the NRA continues to win political victories, fewer Americans are engaging in recreational shooting, be it for the purpose of hunting or the enjoyment of mastering the skill of handling firearms.<br /><br />It's not that you'll never read a hunting, angling, or other outdoor adventure story here. My main interests are hunting for members of the deer family, normally whitetails, with bow, rifle, and muzzleloader. I have participated in one wilderness moose hunt, one of the great experiences of my life. I now have a special affection for wilderness hunting based on that experience, and am working on a wilderness elk hunt for next year. I love fly-fishing for trout, but of course pursue other species with spinning gear. I also have spent many hours in the marshes pursuing waterfowl, and walked the woods with a shotgun pursuing grouse. However, the main focus here is giving voice to progressive sportsmen and women and applying our thinking to preserving and advancing hunting and angling. I hope to bring in various sources and voices from here in Minnesota, but also from "far afield", even from outside the United States.Erik Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10372160434846430835noreply@blogger.com3