00:00:04
Speaker 1: Welcome to the News Show.
00:00:06
Speaker 2: Today, we’re going to talk about armadillos spreading leprosy. What we’ve got, some good news for hound hunters Alberta, and some troubling news for Wyoming wolf hunters. Steve gets the scoop on the latest in grizzly bear management. A Jeopardy contestant exposes himself, but not in the way that you might think.
00:00:24
Speaker 1: And Nate has a segment about.
00:00:25
Speaker 2: A record carp that Brody is very, very skeptical about.
00:00:31
Speaker 1: And with that we’re onto our news news now.
00:00:37
Speaker 2: If you can’t tell from the past thirty six seconds, Steve is out again today. He’s still up in the High Arctic adventuring around. He posted a photo of a giant cod that he caught, which made all of us very jealous. So I’m hosting today joined by Seth Spencer, Cal Nate and Brody. Steve will be back soon soon, but we’ve made maybe got one two weeks. Two weeks from now, he’ll be on the News Show. So you know, if you don’t like this program, when Steve’s not here hanging there, we’ll fix you up.
00:01:11
Speaker 1: It might be better, it might be better. We’ll see how today go Yeah, Spencer.
00:01:16
Speaker 3: We have two meat Eater store events happening. The first one is August thirteenth at the Milwaukee meat Eater store from six pm to eight pm. I will be hosting a game of trivia at the store. There will be prizes for first, second, and third place. The grand prize is a one thousand dollars gift card. Yeah, somebody say, wow, yeah, we got you got to be there in person. You gotta be there in person. Everybody who shows up that night. It’s a fifteen percent discount that’s only good for that night. In the store. You can have teams up to four people playing. Randall takes that very seriously. Nobody try to sneak in there with.
00:01:57
Speaker 1: Five hard cap.
00:01:59
Speaker 3: Nobody using cell phones. The event is free, but you need to sign up ahead of time to reserve a spot. Go to the medeater dot com slash Events Again August thirteenth at the Milwaukee store from six pm to eight pm. Then on August fifteenth, we are opening the med Eater store in Minneapolis at fiftieth and France. It’s the grand opening That Saturday, Me, Clay, Brent, and Tony will be there from ten am to two pm. First one hundred and fifty people get a gift, and there will be prizes giving away every hour. That’s at our Minneapolis store grand opening August fifteenth, And if you miss me there, I think I’m gonna go to the Twins game that night. It’s two dollars beers, so I can’t miss that. I’d be losing money by not going. So you can find me at the Twins game. If you don’t see.
00:02:52
Speaker 1: Me at the grand O, that’s like normal baseball.
00:02:57
Speaker 4: Beers, are they?
00:02:59
Speaker 3: Well, I would guess up there the Great North, they would have Miller lte Coors Light, Bush Light.
00:03:05
Speaker 1: Yeah, all of your favorites. What’s the format for the trivia game?
00:03:10
Speaker 3: I think it’s gonna be twenty questions. We’ll probably do four rounds of five questions, take a slight break, bring your scorecards up to me so we can grade those, and we’ll get updates after every five questions.
00:03:23
Speaker 1: Very nice.
00:03:23
Speaker 3: What do you think of that?
00:03:24
Speaker 1: I like it. I like it.
00:03:25
Speaker 2: It’ll move quickly, but I think in person trivia game, it’s only fun if you can get a running score.
00:03:32
Speaker 3: Doors open at six first trivia question is gonna be read at six point thirty. You need to sign up ahead of time the medieater dot com slash events fun Stuff.
00:03:41
Speaker 2: Speaking of fun stuff, I am pleased to announce that the latest edition of Meat Eater’s American History, Volume four is going to drop on October twentieth. So this is the official announcement that that is forthcoming release on October twentieth. This is Meet Eaters America History the Alaskans eighteen ninety six to nineteen forty one.
00:04:05
Speaker 1: It’s going to.
00:04:06
Speaker 2: Cover trappers in the interior of Alaska between the Klondike Gold Rush and World War Two.
00:04:13
Speaker 3: This is dog.
00:04:15
Speaker 2: Sleds, riverboats, bears, moose, caribou, lots of fish, and trapping fur bears for the fine fur market. This is a period of history that Steve got really into just in his extracurricular reading, and he decided that this needed to be the subject of our next book. I didn’t know that much about it, and the more I read, the more fascinating it was. So keep your eyes peeled for that. And if you haven’t listened to the first three, let me encourage you to do so. You don’t have to listen to them to enjoy volume four. But highly encouraged, highly recommend.
00:04:50
Speaker 3: Its volume four done.
00:04:52
Speaker 1: No, okay, no, thanks for resking that.
00:04:55
Speaker 2: Yes until twenty Yeah, we got we got to turn the files in a little before that.
00:05:02
Speaker 1: But uh, it’ll get done. It’ll get done. I have every confidence.
00:05:07
Speaker 5: That time period you probably get some good insights into adaptive technology. Oh yeah, creeping into the wilderness.
00:05:15
Speaker 1: Early outboard motors.
00:05:17
Speaker 2: Guys just getting so mad at outboard motors that they just sing them or throw them on the sandbar because they’re not worth it. That still happens in there. The Ruskies are in there for a little. They sort of are in there for the prehistory. Lots of surplus military rifles, as you might imagine in like the twenties and thirties, lots of guys just it’s it’s like.
00:05:41
Speaker 1: A very different sort of modern story. I mean.
00:05:44
Speaker 2: The funny thing is when you look at this, these these people are living in a world that resembles Lewis and the Lewis and Clark era in a lot of ways.
00:05:53
Speaker 6: Like Undiscovered Frontier.
00:05:55
Speaker 2: They’re in places that they don’t have maps for there, they’re hunting and fishing for their own food, they’re making some of their own clothes. Like it’s a very primitive hard scrabble existence. But at the same time, like the Empire State building is being built, there’s like professional.
00:06:11
Speaker 4: Baseball, and that’s wild to think about it.
00:06:14
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it’s like a really interesting contrast between what’s happening and the rest of the country and what’s happening inti Alaska during the first couple decades of the twentieth century.
00:06:22
Speaker 3: That’s the White fang Era as well. If you liked that book that was published in nineteen oh six, it’s about that part of the world in the eighteen nineties.
00:06:31
Speaker 2: Yeah, Jack London was We talked a little bit about Jack London in one of the chapters when we’re describing the gold rush. But if you don’t have a sense of scale for how many people flooded up into British Columbia Yukon Territory in Alaska during the during the days of the Klondike gold Rush, it’s unbelievable, just a flood of people. And then some of them stuck around and you know, they didn’t make a ton of money trapping, or they didn’t a ton of money mining for gold, but a lot of them turned to trapping as a way to support themselves.
00:07:04
Speaker 1: And so that’s really the story of this book. So that’s what I got.
00:07:09
Speaker 3: October twentieth.
00:07:10
Speaker 2: October twentieth, keep your eyes peeled and now your news.
00:07:20
Speaker 7: We’re going to talk about alpha gal and treatments for it. So if you hadn’t heard recently, Steve hosted Burkhard Bilger on the Interview Show to cover ticks and alpha gal. If you don’t know what alpha gal is, it’s not a gen Z term for boss women or something like that.
00:07:35
Speaker 4: Good one.
00:07:36
Speaker 7: I’ve we had a lot of comments about that that people were confused.
00:07:39
Speaker 1: On before they listen to the episode. Yes, now they know.
00:07:42
Speaker 7: It is a tick bite induced syndrome that causes an allergy to red meat and dairy products.
00:07:47
Speaker 1: It’s pretty mysterious.
00:07:48
Speaker 7: Bill Gates may or may not be involved, but at this point the treatments are minimal. But we had a lot of comments and people write in with stories about successful treatments through acupon, which personally I’m very skeptical of, as is Steve and a couple other people. But we had really interesting response to it. So we’re gonna read off one. Hey, Steven Mediata Krue just finished listening to episode nine O eight about alpha gal syndrome. It was a great episode on topic that hits close to home for anyone who spends serious time in the woods. I wanted to follow up on the brief mention of acupuncture as a potential treatment. I have two close friends, both very down to earth, blue collar guys, who developed severe alpha gal allergies over the last three years. One of them actually had a near fatal anaphylactic reaction after his doctor recommended that he slowly reintroduced red meat into his diet. He ate a can of Vianna sausages and ended up in a life.
00:08:40
Speaker 3: Slowly Yeah, I know that would be my choice of Like, I might only have red meat one more time in my life.
00:08:47
Speaker 1: Let’s eliminate me. I like his style. I’ll be honest. I like his style.
00:08:57
Speaker 2: It would have been really boring if he like cooked up a little bit of Hamer in a pan.
00:09:01
Speaker 1: No, this is good.
00:09:01
Speaker 7: Well, his friend, the other blue collar guy that he mentions, couldn’t even be in the kitchen when his family was cooking bacon without his face and body breaking out in hives.
00:09:10
Speaker 1: He’s desperate for a solution.
00:09:12
Speaker 7: A coworker mentioned that his brother, an acupuncturist in Charlotte, North Carolina was using a technique to target alpha gal. Both my friends were very skeptical, but they decided to give it a shot. Unbelievably, after just one session where a needle is inserted into their ear, both guys were completely cured. It’s been a while now and neither has had a single allergic reaction since. Both are back to eating meat without any issues. I know this is far fetched and sounds like pseudoscience, and I wouldn’t believed it myself. I haven’t seen it happen to two of the biggest skeptics that I know. I just want to share these real world success stories as another perspective on a disease that affects so many outdoorsmen.
00:09:46
Speaker 1: Nate Dotson man, Wow, I’d like.
00:09:49
Speaker 6: To see a blood test from those dudes after they had.
00:09:52
Speaker 7: Yeah, so we’re not going to go super deep in this, but there’s an interesting, a very interesting study on PubMed about It’s like a a very well done study on acupuncture and on for alphabet treatment and the results are very interesting. So if you’re dealing with this, check it out.
00:10:09
Speaker 1: Yeah. I read that. I read that study.
00:10:12
Speaker 2: Uh, acupuncture confuses me. Same, I don’t understand it. Me neither, But a lot of people think it works for them or it works for them, And I think when it comes to health stuff, who are we to say?
00:10:27
Speaker 1: If it helps there.
00:10:28
Speaker 3: You go, Yeah, if you had a red meat allergy, that’s the kind of thing you just like throw the kitchen sink at yea.
00:10:33
Speaker 8: Yeah.
00:10:36
Speaker 1: Yeah.
00:10:36
Speaker 2: If you told me I could cut off my left arm, elbow down, forearm down, I don’t know.
00:10:40
Speaker 1: I’d give it a shot. What about shoulder down? Yeah, yeah, probably probably.
00:10:46
Speaker 9: Keep the shoulder though for some recoil the red red swim game, the red meat allergy.
00:10:50
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean like i’d keep I’d try every tool in the toolbox. All Right, we’ve got another email here. This is a Chettiquot question, and the fellow writes, Hi, Steven Crewe, So right off the bat, we’ve screwed this one up, Hi crew, longtime listener, first time writer. I’d appreciate if you guys weighed in on this one. In Illinois, nearly all public waterfowl sites assigned blinds through an in person lottery for the whole season. To enter, you show up on a designated day in July with your ID in a current or previous year’s hunting license and a waterfowl stamp. A DNR officer writes your name on a slip and drops it in a raffle tumbler. If your name gets drawn, you pick from the open blinds. Then you turn in a form listing up to four hunters, and each of them has full hunting rights to that blind. You can only be listed on one blind in the entire state per season, and there’s no hunting outside the marked blinds. My partners were out of town at a wedding, so I went alone to the site that I hunt every year. Normally, it runs clean. A name gets read, you call the blind you want, and of a second name from a group that already one gets drawn, they just say pass and step out. That protocol usually means everyone who shows up leaves with a blind. Before it started, I did a rough headcount. If every group of four took one blind, everyone there goes home happy. Around the fifth draw, an obvious non hunter from a group that had just one got called, He turned and chuckled to his buddies and went and grabbed another blind. Then it happened four more times. Five groups took multiple blinds to lock everyone else out. That only put one name on each extra blind so no other group could join. End result is that me and at least three other groups walked away with nothing. I honestly don’t know whether it be mad at the DNR, the first group that set the president, or my hunting partner’s college buddy who decided to get married yesterday. So here’s what I’m chewing on. One do I have a right to be pissed? Or am I just a sore loser?
00:12:51
Speaker 5: Two?
00:12:51
Speaker 1: Whose fault is it really that this happened?
00:12:54
Speaker 10: Three?
00:12:55
Speaker 1: What would you do in this situation? Four? Any solutions to make this involuted process suck less?
00:13:03
Speaker 5: You have a right to be pissed for sure?
00:13:05
Speaker 1: Yes?
00:13:06
Speaker 5: Uh. And there was no attempt to like talk to the single groups and and fill those open spots. That’s the That’s what I’m conjuring in my brain. There’s individuals in those other blinds, my versus full capacity in those blinds.
00:13:23
Speaker 1: Yeah.
00:13:23
Speaker 2: My test for this would be are those blinds going to be sitting empty during hunting spit? And if they are, that is a huge red flag and that’s a non starter.
00:13:32
Speaker 1: This this is messed up.
00:13:34
Speaker 6: If they’ve got non hunters, they’re trying to claim stuff like they should be checking licenses, yeah, you know when these draws are happening.
00:13:43
Speaker 1: Yeah.
00:13:44
Speaker 2: I also wonder too, in situations like this, you can’t really get if people are doing if people are playing by.
00:13:56
Speaker 7: The rules, don’t hate the player, hate the game.
00:13:58
Speaker 1: Yeah, but in this case, it seems like the outcome.
00:14:02
Speaker 5: That well, there’s the intent right right.
00:14:04
Speaker 2: It seems like the outcome that the state wants is not is not the outcome that’s going to play out in the in the field, right And so I’m hoping that they have some sort of system where they figure out how many days you hunted out of these blinds, and like if they’re not getting used, you know, maybe you’re ineligible the next year something like that.
00:14:24
Speaker 5: Brody brings up a good point right on paper, what’s the difference between a hunter and a non hunter? Do you have a license? Well, I guess that makes you a hunter?
00:14:32
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, so yeah, I mean because you could ultimately you could end up with the same outcome. I guess if you had all these groups there and half of the groups were just lazy asses that would get a blind with every intention of hunting it and then not hunt it that season, Like you could still end up getting screwed just based on the relative different commitments of each group.
00:14:57
Speaker 1: But this seems egregious.
00:14:59
Speaker 9: Yeah, put like a signing box at the blinds, right, and when you when you haunt them, you sign in and whatever. At the end of the year, they look like, Oh, the people won this blind only hunted two days or something or whatever. Zero days hunt zero days. You’d like, yeah, you’re not eligible for the name.
00:15:16
Speaker 6: People like commit to certain days on the calendar and if they don’t show it, like if they’re not going to be there, they relinquish those days and other people can get them somehow, like some kind of system where you have access to a blind that’s not getting used.
00:15:31
Speaker 3: I think Drew needs to fight fire with fire, and he needs to like bring his nine year old daughter and neighbor and a couple folks in his universe that can help him maybe put the odds in his favor.
00:15:44
Speaker 1: Maybe a range of a field trip for the local senior center.
00:15:47
Speaker 5: I am laughing.
00:15:49
Speaker 1: The church bus out there, that is the.
00:15:52
Speaker 5: I always say, like the most dangerous people in America or retirees, because they got a lot of time, some disposable income, and if and if they really want to focus on something they can right hammer. Yeah, but it like we’re in this like deregulation period in America right now. And I do laugh at the conversation that we just had. It’s like, Okay, well, how do you fix people being jerks? Right, It’s like, well, we’re going to have a representative government system and then everybody, you know, it’s like, I mean this, we just need people to follow the intent of the system. And if you’re not there to do that, yeah, stay the hell out.
00:16:34
Speaker 2: I Mean, one way that I could see this being somewhat mitigated is if you made the groups declare who’s in their group beforehand. Right, Like it seems like there’s five sort of four solo individuals there, each putting their name in separately, and then they so maybe just have you have to declare that this is group A, group B, Group C.
00:16:57
Speaker 9: Well on the slip that they pull out, just have every.
00:17:00
Speaker 2: Wanted to have all the names and then those people, yeah, exactly, you have to you have all the names there, and then those specific names can’t get drawn.
00:17:08
Speaker 9: I could see where people that hate waterfowl hunting and get involved in this to try and get some blinds.
00:17:13
Speaker 5: They’re a good bird watching spot. But even on like non draw public water relatively close to here, like forever, there’s been this highly competitive deal where it’s like, okay, there’s these blinds that are like historic blinds on the waterway. The young dude in the group goes down at midnight, camps out in the blind all night, and then the older guys roll in just before shooting light with coffee and breakfast sandos, And that kid’s been there shining a head lamp at every other group that’s come out to hunt the blind. Yeah, you know, and it’s like and then on really competitive days there’s three young dudes that pin down three different lines to keep other people out and then they only hunt one blind.
00:18:04
Speaker 1: Yeah, it’s like the arms race.
00:18:06
Speaker 2: I think it’s it’s there’s no way of getting rid of all the gamesmanship and this stuff. But when the gamesmanship starts to overtake the real point of why you’re out there, that’s where it ruins it for me, when like you’re thinking more about how to beat the system than you are just like, how are we going to get out.
00:18:25
Speaker 1: On good day?
00:18:26
Speaker 6: Not just how to beat the system, it’s how to screw over your fellow hunter It’s like, is that really what we want to be doing?
00:18:32
Speaker 1: You know, yeah, there’s always going to be those people.
00:18:35
Speaker 6: I know, I know, Drew, Just.
00:18:37
Speaker 2: Why don’t you talk to your local DNR access person and just read there take their temperature on this. You know, maybe you could work towards a solution next year that makes it a little bit better.
00:18:52
Speaker 1: Now it’s time for the news. Just starting out. Did I get Did I do that right? Never mind?
00:19:05
Speaker 3: What is that?
00:19:07
Speaker 1: It sounds like I thought that, but then I thought maybe there was more.
00:19:10
Speaker 5: Tweety bird being.
00:19:13
Speaker 11: It’s like an old timey newswire morse code thing that I morphed into a nuthatch that’s tweeting at the same time as the Morse code. And then and then it gets eaten by something really good, really good.
00:19:24
Speaker 1: Brody doesn’t like it?
00:19:26
Speaker 9: Did you?
00:19:27
Speaker 1: I mean I like it.
00:19:29
Speaker 6: I just didn’t get the bird part.
00:19:30
Speaker 1: That’s fine. Uh.
00:19:32
Speaker 2: To start off our news, excuse me to start off the news for the week. We have an interview that Steve has pre recorded with David Wilms, and they are going to talk about UH and get to the bottom of some of the headlines that you might have seen lately on grizzly bear management.
00:19:48
Speaker 12: Joined now by Dave Wilms, the Associate vice president of the National Wildlife Federation, certified attorney and undisputed on Endangered Species Act issues, undisputed expert on grizzly bear management. He’s here to tell us what exactly does.
00:20:11
Speaker 10: It all mean?
00:20:13
Speaker 12: What we’ve been reading the news about changes to grizzly bear management in the Rocky Mountains with particular implications to those three states that have grizzly bear populations Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho.
00:20:32
Speaker 10: Thank you for coming on.
00:20:33
Speaker 4: Dave, Thanks for having me. Always good to see you.
00:20:36
Speaker 10: So, so what’s up? What is going on? This is this is this is always a difficult issue to follow.
00:20:41
Speaker 12: It’s it becomes very there’s a lot of details, a lot of things change and get undone through litigation.
00:20:49
Speaker 10: So like, where are we at right now? What’s new? Yeah?
00:20:53
Speaker 13: I mean the big news story is about a week ago the governors of Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana I held a press conference with Secutor of Interior Doug Bergham to announce a new rule involving grizzly bears. And they just call it the four D rule. But for folks that don’t know what the four D rule is. Section four sub Section D of the Endangered Species Act gives the Fish and Wildlife Service a lot of flexibility to write rules that allow some level of take for different take meaning you know, injury to an animal, lethal removal of an animal, you know, harassing an animal. Not harassing that’s the wrong word, but you know, you know, dealing with conflict issues to come up with grizzly bears. Giving some flexibility to do that by writing this rule for threatened species that exempt those things from what are called take prohibitions. Normally, if you were to harm or harass or do anything to these grizzly bears, you’d be violating the Endangered Species Act because they’re listed. So this is to exempt certain activities management activities from the take prohibitions of the Endangered Species Act. That’s at the high level.
00:22:07
Speaker 10: Yeah, So give me an example of an activity.
00:22:10
Speaker 12: What actually happened that we might start seeing more of that we weren’t seeing before.
00:22:16
Speaker 13: Well, I mean, I don’t know if you’re going to see new activities. I think you’re in some ways you’re formalizing old activities.
00:22:24
Speaker 4: So like tons of credit to.
00:22:27
Speaker 13: Wyoming and the Wyman Game and Fish Department and their large carnivore team. They’ve been doing a lot of on the ground management at grizzly bears and people just don’t see it for decades, and they’ve been consulting with the Fish and Wildlife Service. And if they have a grizzly bear going out and harassing livestock or killing livestock and they need to deal with that bear, they need to haze it off, or they need to translocate at someplace else, or if it just keeps getting worse, they actually need to there needs to be lethal removal of the bear. Then they coordinate with a Fish and Wildlife Service and do that. This rule formalizes that relationship, is the way I would describe it from the Wyoming perspective. It would formalize that relationship in rule and formally authorized through this rule the states to take on these on the ground management activities, and that conflict resolution is a big piece of it, but it could be some of the scientific research. It could be if you have a bear that’s struck by a vehicle, for example, and it’s injured on the side of the road, it seems pretty simple. You should be able to dispatch that bear right well, the way the Endangered Species Act writes, you wouldn’t be able to be a violation of the Act to do that.
00:23:43
Speaker 4: So this would allow a state agency.
00:23:46
Speaker 13: Personnel authorized personnel to go and deal with that injured bear without having to necessarily wait for somebody from the Fish and Wildlife Service to authorize it or come out and do it for example.
00:24:01
Speaker 12: I understand what you’re saying, but I feel like there’s got there. There has to be more to the story than just formulizing something that’s already happened, or else it wouldn’t have been. Why is it being treated like a significant change or a significant piece of evolution?
00:24:17
Speaker 4: So, I mean, that’s a great question, and.
00:24:23
Speaker 13: I guess the best way to describe it is, look at all the criticism that’s happened over the last fifteen to twenty years. One of the big complaints that you see when you talk about grizzly dlisting, right, we’ve tried twice to delist grizzly bears. People come up in arms over grizzly dlisting, and one of the big things they cite is this distrust for the states, the state legislators, the governors, the state state agencies, and I don’t think the public broadly knows that states have been very involved with grizzly bear management and recovery for now fifty years. And one thing this rule does. It does a couple of things I think are really important. One is it formalizes that relationship. And it formalizes the fact that states have an active role in management of grizzly bears and recovery of grizzly bears. So that’s one piece of it. I don’t think the public knows, and so this formalizes that and says, we’re recognizing what an amazing job the states do and and formally, you know, creating this role. Another thing I think it does is it creates a roadmap for you know, if you can make a rule like this work where you’re if you meet certain and the way this rule is written by the way, if you meet certain benchmarks there are, then the state can take on additional responsibilities of management. Okay, the way it’s written, the states have pretty much already met those benchmarks because they’re they’re tied to two jet demographic objectives like what are the what’s the population distribution, what’s the overall population, all the things that have been met for twenty years. So if you tie it to that, then they’re automatically going to be able to step in and do those things. But it also creates a roadmap that you could use for other species and other places that maybe haven’t reached those benchmarks yet. So this is I look at this as a rule as it’s an incentive for states to really lean in on listed species and push towards recovery and taking back management of them even while they’re still listed.
00:26:26
Speaker 4: So in that regard, I think it’s a pretty big deal.
00:26:30
Speaker 13: But I think it’s also important that there are things this rule doesn’t do that are floating around out there on the internet, you know, because people are all armchair quarterbacks and armchair lawyers and all those things and tell you what this rule does and doesn’t do.
00:26:44
Speaker 4: And there’s a lot of misinformation out there too about this rule.
00:26:48
Speaker 10: Is it safe to say that.
00:26:53
Speaker 12: Since this has been attempted, since dlisting has been attempted twice and both times that they’ve pushed the US fish and while their service has moved to delist grizzly bears, it was blocked in the courts and usually the greatest thing that they would use as public leverage was the idea that there would be hunting licenses issued for grizzly bears. Then that really unnerved a lot of grizzly bear protectionists, and so they got the dlisting beat. Is it safe to say that this is rather than trying to undo or rather than trying to delist in one fell swoop, this is just a necessary step toward that objective in order to alleviate some of the immediate pressure that would be felt if they tried to dlist again.
00:27:48
Speaker 13: Right now, I think that’s right, I think, And also another way to think about this is think of this as an insurance policy of sorts. Right, So you put this rule in place that creates the authorities for the states to go out and do the on the ground management, to go do the respond to conflicts to One thing they can’t do is they can’t they still have to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service before they do any lethal removal. They can’t just go out and gill a grizzly bear. But all this other management stuff they’ll now have the ability to just go do under this under this rule, And so the insurance policy. I call it is, say, six months from now or a year from now, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposes to delist grizzly bears.
00:28:32
Speaker 4: What’s going to happen.
00:28:33
Speaker 13: We’re going to have lawsuits filed like we always do, and it’s going to get tied up in the courts. Well, while that is playing out and being fought, you still have the States largely managing the bear like under this rule.
00:28:47
Speaker 4: Now, it doesn’t go as far as I wrote.
00:28:50
Speaker 13: A book chapter three or four years ago where I proposed something like this structure, only I went a lot farther with it, and I actually said, you should just inc orperate the post delisting management plan of the States into the four D rule. And if that means authorizing leak author like allowing a hunting season to occur while it’s listed, that you could theoretically do that. Obviously, this doesn’t go that far. This doesn’t authorize a hunting season. My theory back in the time was you could have this species be effectively delisted, but it’s list still listed, but effectively managed as though it’s delisted, and then let the courts play out, and you’ve got this insurance policy. Well, this has most everything except that piece, the hunting piece, like most everything else is included in that.
00:29:39
Speaker 4: So it’s almost this.
00:29:41
Speaker 13: The folks on the ground don’t have to watch the pendulum swing with the litigation. They just see, you know, the states out there doing the management. And then over the longer term, those those groups that distrust the states and say they can’t do it. Well, now you have this body of evidence building formally building through these annual reports that this forty rule requires from the states. You have a body of evidence annually building showing what the States are doing to manage the bear, the grizzly bears successfully, and I think that can be blunt future litigation.
00:30:14
Speaker 12: Oh yeah, that’s great, because that’s the claim is that, oh, if they delist grizzly bears, the states are just.
00:30:21
Speaker 10: Gonna go whole hog kill them all.
00:30:24
Speaker 12: And then you point out, why would that benefit the states to manage the grizzlies in a way that they’re back on the endangered back under ESA protection, the state has no incentive to tank bear populations. Of course, they’ve been shooting themselves in the foot if they tanked bear populations. So as you’re saying that this gives an opportunity to demonstrate that the states have no interest in imperiling grizzly bear populations.
00:30:50
Speaker 4: That’s right.
00:30:50
Speaker 13: You can see how it’s playing out with wolves. For example, you’ve probably seen in Wyoming the proposal to now reduce the wolf quota by over half this year because wolf numbers are down from disease and other things have caused them to depress. So they’re adapting and adjusting because frankly, the state doesn’t want to see wolves relisted either. They don’t want to see grizzly bears relisted. So you’re gonna end up with this body of under this four D rule and the reporting that comes out of it, I do believe, and one of the best things they’ll come out of it is you’re going to see the proofs in the pudding, and you’re going to see that the states are able to show we’re doing it, bears are still recovered, and at least blunts arguments against the distrust of the state agencies, which I think has been one of the, like you mentioned, one of the biggest obstructions to not being able to get them delisted. You’ll never satisfy everybody. There are people out that are just like, I don’t care if they’re recovered, they should stay protected under the ESA because I never want to see them hunted in any way.
00:31:45
Speaker 4: Or something like that. Right, that’s going to be out there.
00:31:48
Speaker 12: I got one last question for you, Yeah, were you involved in shaping this? And would you be able to say if you were involved in shaping this?
00:31:58
Speaker 4: All I can say is years ago.
00:32:03
Speaker 13: So I’ve written there’s a there’s a book out there called the Codex. It’s a it’s the worst titled book ever, but it’s called the Codex of the Endangered Species Act, Volume two. I contributed a chapter to that where I laid out this exact idea of of increasing authority to the states under a four D rule. And I’ve been working on that for years prior, you know, going all the way back to my time working for the Governor of Wyoming on on some essay stuff.
00:32:31
Speaker 4: So this is an idea. There are other.
00:32:34
Speaker 13: People that have been talking about this too. This is an idea that I’ve definitely honed in on on grizzly bears in particular, and I’ve presented the idea to the serve to service leadership over the years at different conferences and so forth. So Did I have a hand in writing it? Absolutely not, I didn’t you know, that’s the service they do that. But I definitely, I definitely fleshed out an idea that seems to show up in the rule. I won’t take credit for it, but it’s it.
00:33:01
Speaker 9: It.
00:33:02
Speaker 4: There’s some there’s some mirroring of some of the.
00:33:05
Speaker 10: You’re potentially an intellectual father of this.
00:33:09
Speaker 4: There you go. I like that. I like that way.
00:33:12
Speaker 10: I was going to ask you one more question.
00:33:14
Speaker 12: It would be such pure speculation, and it was going to be I’ll do it anyways.
00:33:18
Speaker 4: Okay, it’s a.
00:33:20
Speaker 12: Two part question. No, it’s a one part question. If you had to crystal ball it, it’s just a wild guess. We’re giving your room for a wild guess in your lifetime. In your lifetime, do you think that you will see the implication of a grizzly bear hunting season in Montana, Wyoming or Idaho? Like I mean, we’re actually it actually goes through and happens in your lifetime. If you had to say yes or no, and it’s just a wild ass guess.
00:33:59
Speaker 13: Uh, can I say it depends on what the serve. The reason I say that is I actually believe that as the service moves forward, the fish model service moves forward with proposed delisting rule if they decide to do that, what that says, and what lands are incorporated by that, And this might be a longer conversation for us someday, but we’ll determine whether they’re ever delisted in our lifetime or not. And I think it could go one of about three ways. So I would love for it to happen, and I’m hopeful that it happens, but I just I can’t give you the I can’t do the you wanted, the yes or no, And I can’t just like say yes or no. I can only say it depends. Although I can say it has happened in our lifetime because the first for D rule, written for grizzly bears in nineteen seventy five, or maybe it was a year or so later, allowed hunting of grizzly bears out in the Bob Marshall outside of Glacier, and that continued until the early nineteen nineties.
00:35:06
Speaker 1: I think it was.
00:35:07
Speaker 4: It was shut down in nineteen ninety one, but anyway.
00:35:12
Speaker 13: It’s been It’s been written into forty rules in the past, so in our lifetime as a threatened species. They’ve been hunted, but they in the future. All I’ll say is I hope.
00:35:23
Speaker 10: So okay, but you’ll give it a big depends.
00:35:28
Speaker 13: A big depends and you can use depends as in the adult diaper or whatever, because it’s like, that’s what this whole thing is.
00:35:36
Speaker 12: Man, Dave Wilms, thanks for coming on again. Dave Wilms from the National Wildlife Federation always is great for giving a very even keeled, measured, unemotional take on contentious wildlife issues and issues of corner crossing and other things.
00:35:54
Speaker 10: So again, thank you, Dave.
00:35:56
Speaker 4: Yeah, you bet.
00:35:57
Speaker 1: Thanks Thanks Steve, that’s a great interview, gentlemen.
00:36:01
Speaker 4: What you think?
00:36:02
Speaker 1: David texts me.
00:36:03
Speaker 7: Followed up he wanted to redo his final take that Steve asked about.
00:36:08
Speaker 3: Good because I didn’t really like his answer.
00:36:09
Speaker 7: No mean neither, and he said, and I think he’s still kind of given a a Steve would say a law dog and answer, but he’s a lawyer. You can’t blame them. Said, if I had a crystal ball on whether we’d see hunting in the three States in our lifetime, I stand by my saying it depends. But it’s more than what the FWS decides to do with delisting. It depends on what courts do, It depends on what Congress does, it depends on what.
00:36:28
Speaker 1: The states do.
00:36:29
Speaker 7: But I’d also say I sure hope we see it. Not because I want to hunt them necessarily, but because if they are recovered and that’s how the states want to manage them, then hunts then that’s what should happen. Grizzly bears and gye have been objectively recovered for more than twenty years. The Services tried to delist them twice. If we want to continue touting the success of the ESA, then we have to be willing to delist recovered species and trust that states will do everything they can to make sure that they never need to be listed again.
00:36:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, I had I had the same thought. Like when he was describing at the end what his crystal ball prediction was, I did have the same thought that sort of bubbled up in my mind, is like, well, I would like to hunt them. I will apply for a tag if it happens. But on the like just the big picture, how cool would it be if an animal that was endangered is all of a sudden a renewable resource in the way that we think of.
00:37:25
Speaker 6: It worked as intended and people and people acknowledged that it worked.
00:37:32
Speaker 5: Bill, we got to pull the map up here so folks who are watching can understand what we’re looking at this. You cannot look at this in a vacuum and be like, Okay, this idea on its own makes sense. On its own, it absolutely makes sense. But there’s all these surrounding factors. And what I would say, folks who aren’t keen to this idea of returning the bear to state management need to understand is currently, and for many, many years, grizzly bears have been getting shot and killed a bunch like more than anybody would guess in the states of Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana, primarily conflict resolution.
00:38:24
Speaker 3: You have number like how many a year.
00:38:26
Speaker 5: I haven’t looked today. I can’t remember what I think.
00:38:29
Speaker 6: I recently heard fifty in Montana.
00:38:32
Speaker 5: So when I went down to trapping grizzly bears, the trapping seasons the first week of July, and we had a big winner that year.
00:38:44
Speaker 1: And trapping for collaring purposes, trapping.
00:38:47
Speaker 5: Live trap for research YEP, longest longest bear population study.
00:38:53
Speaker 1: Just to make that clear for the listeners.
00:38:56
Speaker 5: There were just in the state of Montana, there were twenties six bears killed and by the first week of July with a big winner, right. And I bring up the big winner because they’re not active until later on in the season, so they’ve been out for a relatively short amount of time. Montana had already killed twenty six grizzly bears, right, And it’s like, cause, well, it’s just the hunters that are killing grizzly bears. Vehicle mortality, bear on bear mortality, and then conflict mortality or your big factors. So moving the grip the bear to state management is not all of a sudden gonna cause bears to be shot, right. They already are being shot, whether you like it or not.
00:39:42
Speaker 1: And I think that’s the thing.
00:39:44
Speaker 6: As soon as people heard grizzlies being managed by the states, there’s this like knee jerk reaction like, oh my god, they’re going to have a hunting season, right, yeah, like they’re gonna kill them all, which is like, not what’s happening at all. There’s not going to be a hunting season for grizzlies next year.
00:40:01
Speaker 1: No.
00:40:02
Speaker 5: In fact, the state of Montana we have a five year run built into our grizzly management plan. So no matter what, even if it’s like, yeah, do whatever you want, we would be marching five years down the road towards a grizzly bear hunt. So look at the map. You have the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem, the NCDE. On the north end of that is Glacier Waterton National Park, no hunting, and it’s a national park federal management. In the middle of that, you have the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex, and then jump down to the Gye the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in the middle of that Yellowstone National Park. This idea that it’s just going to be the state’s managing bears, I think is very disingenuous. There’s always going to be collaboration because you have basically two giant spawning areas in the middle of both of these populations. There’s always going to be an inner agency grizzly bear task force that operates within the parks. And then you have just the current state of things, which is the States are doing the vast majority of boots on the ground management of the bear right now and last year and the year before, all the way back into to the seventies when the when the grizz was listed as threatened.
00:41:40
Speaker 6: Yeah, and in those those are the six distinct population segments for grizzlies in the lower forty eight. It’s the ones around Glacier and Yellowstone obviously that like, that’s where all the bears are, right the one to the west there, the Bee that’s the bitter Root. There might be a couple of bears in there right now, the Cabinet Yak and the Selkirk, the red and the purple ones. There’s bears there, not, you know, not as big of a population the one over in Washington Northern Cascades. There’s probably not a single bear in there in the lower forty eight right now. They’re like in Canada, they’re around and there’s.
00:42:24
Speaker 4: Only a couple of them. Yeah.
00:42:26
Speaker 6: So like those smaller populations I think would probably be managed more towards the ESA line of things versus like, yes, a more liberal state managed.
00:42:40
Speaker 5: I think those are really on this map to show that these are areas conducive to having sustainable grizzly populations. The bitter At, I don’t believe there’s an established population. They’re meaning that there’s sows and bores producing cubs every year.
00:43:06
Speaker 1: Probably will be.
00:43:06
Speaker 2: But there’s definitely bears that get encountered, yes, and tear golf courses, and some of which are are sows.
00:43:14
Speaker 5: But those are bears that are moving in there, either from the Cabinet Yak which is again to the West Glacier National Park or the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem, and this greater conversation of like population connectivity to provide long term genetic viability, meaning like we got enough in the soup to where the ingredients keep getting mixed around and you’re not going to have a one ingredient soup, right, so a shallow.
00:43:47
Speaker 1: G tom.
00:43:49
Speaker 6: We’re getting to the Northern Continental Divide in the Greater Yellowstone kind of Lincoln Up.
00:43:55
Speaker 1: Well, I thought I thought that they confirmed one this year.
00:43:57
Speaker 4: They may have that move.
00:43:59
Speaker 5: They may have moved.
00:44:00
Speaker 9: Yeah, I’m pretty sure. Well I’m pretty sure to like a male and a female from each side bread and produce cubs this year.
00:44:07
Speaker 4: Nice.
00:44:08
Speaker 5: I would still call that like a big anomaly because of just all the like the biggest grizzly bear in the state was killed on one of the highways in between those two there, you know, so like wildlife corridors with wildlife crossings. All these things could be done to help improve that and make it not an anomaly, which I think would be a good thing for all sorts of wildlife, not just grizzly bears, but right now, like the fringe area around Yellowstone and Glacier and the Bob and the Bitter Rut and the act that habitat is largely there because it is in a wilderness designation, a Wilderness Study Area designation, a designated roadless rule designation, and all of those things are under some form of review. Some people would say attack during this administration. So again, like looking, I think it’s great that the bear goes back to state management. However, I want to hunt the thing. I’m the only person at the table who’s been able to apply for a grizzly bear tag in the lower forty eight because I was living in Idaho the last time this happened, and we got nineties, we got to apply.
00:45:30
Speaker 6: No, it was a couple of years ago, a couple of years ago, right, and then yeah that one.
00:45:36
Speaker 5: Yeah it would be I mean’d be like nine years ago now, yeah, But.
00:45:41
Speaker 3: How did that go down? They after the applications were submitted, they killed it.
00:45:45
Speaker 5: Right, Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah, they didn’t get to Don malloy and Missoul Looks shot her down.
00:45:50
Speaker 6: They didn’t get to a point where they ever drew anything either. Wyoming issued tags, that’s right. Yeah, I did a dozen of them, I think.
00:45:58
Speaker 5: Yeah, And I think I think I went through the draw to not draw. But that was the framing of the federal decision to relist, was this historic range and habitat connectivity to mark actual recovery. So long story, short is, if you are like me and you want to see a huntable and sustainably huntable population in perpetuity of grizzly bears, which I think would be just amazing and something us people with big lumps of fat on our shoulders called brains, should be heavily invested in, then you should be advocating for wilderness and roadless and proper forest management as well as expanding wilderness because that’s the stuff that these low fecundity critters such as grizzly bears need to have sustainable hunting populations.
00:47:08
Speaker 2: And you know what my takeaway from that interview was, David Wilms should do our jobs.
00:47:14
Speaker 3: He’s good.
00:47:15
Speaker 2: I think we should just have him do this because he’s way better at it.
00:47:19
Speaker 1: But we’ll carry on well.
00:47:21
Speaker 5: Because he says I might I might not even want to kill a grizzly bear or hunt a grizzly bear. Come on, Dave.
00:47:27
Speaker 3: Some of the distribution map we saw there crosses over into tribal land specifically like the Blackfeet Reservation and the Crow Reservation. I could see where they are potentially the first ones who like get to do a hunt when, when or if that becomes available. We’ve seen that in the past with some of the bison they’re allowed to take.
00:47:48
Speaker 5: If I could wave a magic wand they’d be doing those hunts inside the parks, sure, historical hunting grounds.
00:47:53
Speaker 4: Yeah, totally see.
00:47:55
Speaker 3: Anyway, I feel like we have when we talk about this story, we haven’t covered that, Like they’re going to be a person at the takee who made some heavy input.
00:48:03
Speaker 1: That’s a great point. That’s a huge omission.
00:48:07
Speaker 2: So speaking of Wyoming, this is a story that was reported by Mark Hines the Cowboys State Daily. Although I actually saw this post that I will reference here in a minute, just popped up in my feed shocking.
00:48:24
Speaker 1: Two weeks ago.
00:48:25
Speaker 2: Steve covered the story about a pack of wolves known as Molly’s Wolves moving out of Yellowstone and into the Shoshone National Forest in Wyoming. There, obviously they can legally be hunted, and this is one of the original packs in the park. It’s a pack with a lot of history with the wolf watching crowd, and now that they are in the National Forest, they are susceptible to hunting. I believe that season open September fifteenth, and when Steve was reporting on it, the sort of underlying question was is this going to be a big flashpoint for hunter and anti huntunter conflict? Well it is, then this is the post I saw that is the subject of this story. But there is a social media influencer in Austin, Texas who has now offered a ten thousand country Yeah, ten thousand dollars reward for the identity of any hunter who kills a member of Molly’s Pack during the upcoming hunting season.
00:49:23
Speaker 1: He basically just wants to docks whoever takes one of these wolves. Yeah. Public shaming, condemnation I.
00:49:32
Speaker 2: Think is the word that he used. This guy’s name is Jonas Black. Since we’re sharing names, Jonas Black is his name, and he claims to support fair chase hunting, and he says, I’m not an anti hunter, but he says that Molly’s pack is basically like zoo animals. He claims that this will be like shooting a dog, and so he wants to get the word out that anybody who shoots one of these will have their identity made clear to the world.
00:50:04
Speaker 3: Are those of the words he used.
00:50:05
Speaker 2: It’s like shooting a dog, yes, do, he says, yeah, So he’s a dog trainer.
00:50:10
Speaker 1: He’s a dog trainer.
00:50:11
Speaker 2: And I think I saw that he became interested in wolves after that story from twenty twenty four where the guy ran over the wolf with the snowmobile and brought it into the bar and took photos on it.
00:50:23
Speaker 1: I saw that bar this summer.
00:50:25
Speaker 5: Oh, I’ve been in there. Yeah, you know, since he seems giant chicken Fred’s day.
00:50:29
Speaker 6: This guy seems to encourage social media discords. Then you know, hit him up.
00:50:35
Speaker 1: No, let’s not encouraged bad behavior.
00:50:38
Speaker 2: This is and this is like the other side of this story is that Montana and Wyoming both have laws in place to keep the identities of wolf hunters confidential because there is such a potential for harassment and threats from the anti wolf hunting crowd, and so that’s you know that the states themselves won’t reveal identities of individual wolf hunters, But there is nothing illegal to my knowledge about a private party learning the identity of the hunter and making that public, even if the obvious outcome will be harassment and probably threats of violence.
00:51:11
Speaker 7: Why is he all hot and bothered about like hunting on the strip for ELK Like those would be fall under the same the Las Vegas Strip, I’m sorry, just north of the Park.
00:51:22
Speaker 5: Oh, because this guy is all for fair chase hunting so long as it’s not something he really really likes.
00:51:31
Speaker 2: Right right, So this is this is discouraging. I think he’s got he’s got like some graphics, some AI generated graphic that’s like a logo for protect Molly’s pack, And I don’t know, I hope it doesn’t discourage anyone, but it seems like.
00:51:48
Speaker 4: Hey, how how would he get the info of who he.
00:51:52
Speaker 1: Wants someone to snitch?
00:51:53
Speaker 7: No?
00:51:53
Speaker 9: Hey, people is going to get killed and he ain’t gonna know about it.
00:51:59
Speaker 6: It would be like if Randall had a tag and Spencer is like, man, I could make ten gees here.
00:52:05
Speaker 1: Yeah, that’s that’s what he’s hoping for.
00:52:07
Speaker 2: It’s like you find out that a buddy of a buddy shot one of those wolves, and then you get.
00:52:11
Speaker 5: Let’s go seth.
00:52:12
Speaker 2: I’ll split it with I was gonna say, I’m going to buy a Wyoming wolf tag, go down there, and then call myself in.
00:52:19
Speaker 5: The fallacy also is like Molly’s Pack is the static thing. It’s the same. It’s the same group of Disney characters that started the whole deal.
00:52:31
Speaker 6: But they’re not in Disneyland anymore cal but.
00:52:34
Speaker 5: Also within Disneyland, they’re they’re eating each other. Yeah, and like all he’s got to do is call any state agency and be like, are hunters the most effective tool when it comes to wolf management? And they’re gonna be like, no, absolutely not. Wolves kill the most wolves.
00:52:55
Speaker 1: Yeah.
00:52:56
Speaker 5: Secondarily, like trappers do a much better job than hunters.
00:53:01
Speaker 4: Yeah, It’s like.
00:53:03
Speaker 2: I don’t think I don’t think we need to go down these hypothetical scenarios because I don’t think this guy’s going to be calling any game agency to learn more about the situation.
00:53:12
Speaker 3: Phil Is Yellowstone more of a disney Land or a disney World?
00:53:16
Speaker 11: You would say, ooh, I’d say disney World because it has three or four kind of prominent features that attract the biggest populations, kind of like Disney World has four theme parks that are squad across and you kind of have to navigate how to get there. You gotta deal with traffic, transportation.
00:53:32
Speaker 3: Okay, yeah, make that adjustment, another huge omission in our.
00:53:38
Speaker 2: So I have the obviously that is a not a very heartening story for our community, but I’m going to balance that out. I also saw a headline this was in the CBC that Alberta hunters will be able to use hounds this year to hunt black bears in certain wildlife management units that have what they call conservation caribou conservation areas. And I was surprised to see this because I feel like Canada in some ways is like Oregon or Washington, where it seems like hunters are really under attack, and you see a lot of headlines about opportunities being rolled back. Specifically, the the one that came to mind first was the British Columbia doing away with its grizzly bear hunt. So yeah, they’re bringing back hound hunting to hunt black bears. And the concern is that some of these caribou herds in Alberta aren’t doing well, and the mortality rate of newborn caribou is the concern there, and predation obviously plays a huge factor in that. So there’s again a lot of outcry from annie hunting groups, the usual concerns about hounds chasing non target species and grizzly bear conflict and stuff like that. And it’s obviously clear from a lot of the commentary on the CBC side that there’s a lot of misinformation about hunting and bear hunting in particular. But nonetheless, I thought it was good to shine spotlight on some.
00:55:10
Speaker 6: Well, that stat you got in here about Minnesota’s pretty.
00:55:13
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, this is cool.
00:55:15
Speaker 2: So this is I mean, this is one thing that I think a lot of people focus on wolves when they think about impacts on ungulates, but black bears are hugely effective predators of calves of ungulates. And there’s a specific study in Minnesota that showed in years when spring bear hunting took place, there was a sixty eight percent lower proportion of bear predation on moose calves during those spring hunts, with no compensatory increase in wolf predation, meaning like it wasn’t just zeroed out by someone else gobbling up all the calves. So I think that one involved that one involved a tribe. I can’t recall the details on it, but it was mentioned in some of the coverage of this story, and so I dug it up and took a look at it.
00:55:59
Speaker 1: But yeah, it’s uh black bears. I mean, you see it too if you.
00:56:05
Speaker 2: Hunt around here like they’re they’re keyed in on onl calves for sure, Spencer.
00:56:13
Speaker 3: Once you take it from here, uh, I was this is a couple of weeks ago. I was making dinner in the kitchen and my wife was in the living room watching Jeopardy. Uh, and I heard something happen to where I went in the room. I was like, you got to rewind that. I need to hear that again. And it was during the part of the show that like comes after the first commercial break, maybe it’s second where they just get a little fun fact about the contestants are like, so, Randall, you met Johnny Depp’s sister in an elevator one time, right, tell us about that. And then Randa would talk about how he was at a Halloween party and met Johnny Depp’s sister and everyone got a good laugh out of it.
00:56:50
Speaker 1: Did you come up with that beforehand or do you just rip just just going off me?
00:56:53
Speaker 3: Johnny Depp sis, it’s a good rift. So I heard during one of these little characters intros something that got my attention, and we are deep in YouTube prison right now for the clips that I’ve shown in the past that get dinged for copyright, whether it’s from like ace Ventura or showing the man get flipped over by a bison and Yellowstone, So we can’t show the clip today. Phil and I are going to act it out instead. I’m going to be Ken Jennings. Phil is going to be the contestants around he See.
00:57:26
Speaker 2: The thing is is it’s a better experience if we show the clip, but then we can’t make money off of.
00:57:31
Speaker 3: It, and then we get we get thrown deeper into YouTube prison, which is like maybe the deepest we’ve ever been right now.
00:57:40
Speaker 1: Because some of the clips we’re in right now it’s bad.
00:57:42
Speaker 3: And then I also need the crew to help us out because there’s a there’s some parts where the audience laughs, so please laugh along just to give everyone the full experience, but like a very appropriate Jeopardy audience kind of laugh.
00:57:54
Speaker 6: Can you play the Jeopardy song without getting dinged.
00:57:59
Speaker 1: Phild. It depends how much parity there is.
00:58:01
Speaker 3: Find out YouTube is our biggest hater. Spotify they’re like okay with it? And Apple podcast, right philm.
00:58:10
Speaker 11: Well, now we’ve got video on Apple too, So there’s a whole another cannon.
00:58:13
Speaker 3: Word anyway, all right, here here is the seaton. Owen Harrington is from Chicago, Illinois, a union organizer and PhD candidate. And I’m told a pretty big deal in the state of Vermont.
00:58:26
Speaker 11: Well, for one beautiful year I was ken In twenty thirteen, I caught the largest bowfin recorded in the state of Vermont.
00:58:33
Speaker 4: It’s a fish for those in the know.
00:58:34
Speaker 3: I assumed.
00:58:36
Speaker 4: Sweet.
00:58:39
Speaker 11: I wasn’t entered in this tournament, but my friend was and I was fishing with him and I said, hey, you want to enter this under your name? Don’t tell the game board. And I won the state tournament for that year. We won one thousand dollars and we split it and I got my first analog synthesizer with that money.
00:58:54
Speaker 3: Wait, I thought they gave you an analog.
00:58:58
Speaker 1: It was a big surprise.
00:58:59
Speaker 3: You went out bought one.
00:59:01
Speaker 11: Oh, I did buy one. I still haven’t. I hope the game warden doesn’t take it away.
00:59:06
Speaker 3: No, if he’s watching now, I think the statue of limitations is expired.
00:59:10
Speaker 5: Is that what you think?
00:59:12
Speaker 3: Okay see nicely does to that. So he admitted if you didn’t catch it there, he caught a boufin, gave it to a buddy who was entered in a bofin tournament, and that buddy won and got the one thousand dollars grand prize. This happened in twenty thirteen. I checked the Vermont Master angler records for twenty thirteen, and to enter a master angler bouffin, it needs to measure twenty eight inches if you were an adult angler, or twenty three inches for youth anglers. There were ten master angler Boffin entered in twenty thirteen. Owen did say that his was the biggest in the state. I don’t know how literal he was being, but the biggest in the state that year was a thirty two incher caught by Robin hurens In and it was caught on Lake Sham Plane at four pm on June twenty ninth. So I don’t know that Robin was the person who entered it. I have googled to my wits end trying to find the tournament that would give a thousand dollars grand prize for a boffin in Vermont. There are not many of them, and I found what I thought was the actual event, the Lake Champlain Father’s Day Derby. So I sent them the clip and I asked if it was their tournament. Here was the response quote, Hi, Spencer, I’m aware of the episode. One thousand dollars would not have been the prize for largest boffin at our twenty thirteen tournament, but I planned to do some digging. We certainly can’t have individuals who were involved in the twenty thirteen fraud, or anyone whose involvement would compromise the integrity or reputation of fishing competitions participating in our events. So it was not them, but they are looking into it to see if they could.
01:00:50
Speaker 1: Track down Well, yeah, because it wouldn’t.
01:00:52
Speaker 5: It is not necessarily exclusive to that fish, right, there’s like big fish prize, the most weight, There’s all sorts of variables.
01:01:03
Speaker 2: As I understand that email, he’s simply saying one thousand dollars wasn’t the prize for that? Maybe maybe so and so is inflating the amount.
01:01:12
Speaker 10: That he wants.
01:01:16
Speaker 3: So when fishing lawyers on this. When fishing tournatio crimes happen, they’re usually prosecuted as fraud or theft, and in Vermont those crimes are considered felonies if they exceed nine hundred dollars. This is a one hundred dollars beyond what it needs to be a felony.
01:01:33
Speaker 1: Are you putting a man in jail right?
01:01:36
Speaker 3: Any crime?
01:01:36
Speaker 11: I mean, we know that the Jeopardy writers watch the media.
01:01:41
Speaker 3: That would be my little tidbit if I was on Jefforby, like, well, actually, you guys, still a question it. So, as Ken mentioned, the statue of limitations will likely protect Owen, and he’s correct. The statue of limitations in Vermont for felony fraud is one thousand dollars. Now, there is some wiggle room with what’s called discovery. And I don’t understand this well enough to know if it would apply in this case. But discovery would be like if a doctor did surgery on you and then you realized a year later that they messed something up and you’re now in great pain. I think the statue of limitation starts at Discovery. Once you realize that the doctors stuff in this case, I don’t think discovery would apply. Maybe it would if the tournament now just learned that they had fraud committed against them, But I don’t know. Nobody probably cares enough for a thirteen year old crime for one thousand dollars. But Karma got him own got second place. He only won fourteen hundred dollars that day, and he lost to the Jeopardy Super Champion Kleb who won that episode with nineteen thousand dollars, and nobody got Final Jeopardy. Right, But we’re gonna solve this. We’re gonna figure out what tournament had one thousand dollars taken from man Spencer.
01:02:49
Speaker 6: That’s like hard hitting.
01:02:51
Speaker 3: I want to rue Crime Investigating Jury the second place person to get their thousand dollars prize who was actually entered in SETH.
01:02:59
Speaker 5: You’re a tournament angler, what do you what would you recommend the punishment be here?
01:03:03
Speaker 11: And what analog synthesizer would you buy with your winnings?
01:03:06
Speaker 6: Yeah?
01:03:06
Speaker 4: I don’t even know what the hell that is.
01:03:10
Speaker 11: Oh no, all the all the sins that I used to on which are which were two we’re all digital.
01:03:14
Speaker 3: It’s like a keyboard that you know the sound of a baseball.
01:03:18
Speaker 5: Yeah, it looks like a neck tie.
01:03:19
Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly where. I mean.
01:03:22
Speaker 9: That kind of stuff happens unfortunately quite often in tournaments and people just get in a lot of trouble over it.
01:03:30
Speaker 1: Like there was there was a recent one where.
01:03:32
Speaker 9: Allegations of a guy trying to buy a big fish from his co angler and it blew up. It’s they’re always like big stories when they come out, you know, to buy it.
01:03:45
Speaker 7: Was it for less or more than the prize amount?
01:03:49
Speaker 9: I mean he offered like five hundred bucks or something for like if he would have caught I don’t know. It’s a long story, but the the co angler caught a fish that if the butt, if the guy you know driving the boat would have caught it, he would have won that potentially won the tournament.
01:04:09
Speaker 3: And yeah, if you have information and what tournament this could have been reached out to Trivia at the Meat eater dot com Live an update in the future on Owen’s thousand dollars that.
01:04:18
Speaker 1: He stole crime stoppers.
01:04:20
Speaker 2: We should just have a crime stoppers company. Seth Morris speaking of Seth Morris and fishing. You’ve got some interesting news to report.
01:04:30
Speaker 9: Bringing more fishing to the news desk. Here a new study challenges assumption about forward facing sonar. A landmark experimental study suggests one of fishing’s most debated technologies may not increase catch rates after all. And you know, forward facing sonar has just been a huge topic the last couple of years. So this, this is this was very interesting to me. U. For years, ford facing sonar has been at the center of heat debate amongst angler’s, tournament organizations and fisheries managers. Critics have argued that the technology gives anglers an unfair advantage and could accelerate over harvest of popular sport fish, while supporters have maintained that its benefits have been overstated.
01:05:25
Speaker 4: I definitely see both sides of the argument.
01:05:28
Speaker 9: But there’s a new study that was done by the University of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and the University of Wisconsin Madison, and they did a long term, randomized controlled experiment examining how ford facing sonar actually affects recreational fishing, and their findings are not probably not what people expected.
01:05:59
Speaker 1: So this.
01:06:02
Speaker 9: Published in Fisheries researched followed four experienced anglers fishing Wisconsin’s net I think it’s pronounced Nebish Lake throughout the summer of twenty twenty five. By alternating access to garment life scope forward facing sonar between two teams while standardizing equipment, fishing efforts, and conditions, researchers isolated the effects of the technology itself. Rather than catching more fish, anglers using forward facing sonar actually caught fewer small mouth pass than angler’s fishing without the technology. Researchers found catch rates declined by approximately zero point six y four fish per hour when anglers had access to forward facing sonar. The technology did provide I had one measurable advantage. Anglers using forward facing sonar caught slightly larger fish on average, about one inch larger.
01:07:11
Speaker 1: H Yeah, that’s what I.
01:07:14
Speaker 6: Would wonder if, like I got a lot of questions, there’s.
01:07:19
Speaker 5: A lot of hole, I’ll say, there’s a lot of holes.
01:07:22
Speaker 6: Were they just out there trying to catch as many fish as they can or were they targeting large fish?
01:07:27
Speaker 1: You know what I mean?
01:07:29
Speaker 9: Well, it goes on to say, like so the these during the study, they had GPS trackers on the angler, so they could see what anglers were doing. The GPS tracking showed anglers using forward facing sonar spent significantly more time searching for fish than actually just casting, which makes sense staring at the screen. Yeah, boats moved more slowly, covered less water, and made more frequent directional changes while using the technology, which makes total sense. Because as you’re going and scanning you see a fish over here, you’re gonna make a ninety degree angle and go, you know, go over and try to catch that fish.
01:08:08
Speaker 2: I would be I would be more interested if they maybe they did did they did they count the number of casts per fish like that?
01:08:18
Speaker 9: I would say people using forward facing sonar a castid way less.
01:08:23
Speaker 3: It’s also, this is only four anglers in one lake.
01:08:26
Speaker 1: Like you said, there’s a lot of I still think it’s interesting.
01:08:29
Speaker 9: Yeah, it’s I mean, it’s the only it’s the only study that’s ever been done on the effects of forward facing sonar.
01:08:35
Speaker 6: Yeah, it’s interesting if nothing else to show you how people fish when they’re using it.
01:08:40
Speaker 9: Yeah.
01:08:41
Speaker 5: Yeah.
01:08:45
Speaker 9: So it goes on to say the study also found no evidence. This is one thing I don’t agree on. The study also found no evidence that anglers became substantially more effective as they gained experience with the technology over the course of the summer. I think if you follow the Best Master Elite Series at all, you’ll know that these these younger kids that spend a lot of time with forward facing sonar are just so good at it.
01:09:14
Speaker 3: Is the Elite Series where they flip a coin to determine which tournaments have in which one they don’t.
01:09:20
Speaker 9: This this past season was the first time they ever did that. They flipped the coin for every event to determine if it was forward facing or no forward facing, and it was basically a split schedule.
01:09:32
Speaker 4: Huh.
01:09:34
Speaker 9: So I don’t know, these researchers should should take a look at that, just the data from that from this year of the Elite Series, to compare tournaments with with forward facing and without.
01:09:46
Speaker 2: Yeah, that would be a great That would be a great Like I’d imagine there’s a lot of data from that lot.
01:09:54
Speaker 1: All those boats are tracked. There’s a lot of guys that really.
01:09:56
Speaker 9: Expect The good thing about that is the data is there. Just had to go look at it.
01:10:01
Speaker 6: But this really contradicts what you found with the billfish thing.
01:10:06
Speaker 1: Yeah, way up, that’s the thing.
01:10:08
Speaker 9: So this this is a small mouth bass study, as Rayndall and I experienced a couple of weeks ago up in Canada on Lake of the Woods, we would spend a lot of time musky fishing without any sort of electronics other than.
01:10:22
Speaker 4: Just two D.
01:10:25
Speaker 9: And then we would go out in the evenings with live scope and catch a musky. Yeah, you know, but also the time, the hours of the day where we were fishing were arguably the best hours of the day to catch a musky. But it was just you at least knew that you were casting to fish with live scope.
01:10:48
Speaker 5: Yeah, And that’s the question, right, is like what because there’s a lot of small mouth fisheries too, where if you’re casting, you’re going to be catching small amount Yeah, they’re just going to be smaller. So the game becomes like, Okay, how do I change up my rig, presentation, approach tactics to get through the small fish and target the big fish.
01:11:13
Speaker 4: Yep.
01:11:15
Speaker 5: But you’re still fishing yep. And then when the live scope comes in, you’re just not going to waste those quote unquote waste those casts. Yep.
01:11:24
Speaker 4: Totally.
01:11:26
Speaker 9: That’s like on Lake of the Woods, you could pull up to any offshore reef and you’re going to just catch a bunch of walleye. But if you want to catch a thirty inch thirty plus inch walleye like you would like you would use live scope out over a basin and target suspended fish that you could only unless you were trolling and just happen to catch one.
01:11:49
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yep.
01:11:50
Speaker 9: So that that’s an example of like how your fishing style would just completely change by using the technology.
01:11:58
Speaker 5: I remember when we were doing one of the fishing I think you were there, Seth, but we were filming for doss boat and any second I could, I just had a line in the water, like yeah, and cod, all sorts of just completely random fish because that was I was just trying to catch fish.
01:12:17
Speaker 1: Yeah, that’s that’s the joy of fishing is a.
01:12:20
Speaker 5: Lot different than trying to catch the fish.
01:12:23
Speaker 4: Yeah, right, which is yeah, trophy the trophy fishing.
01:12:30
Speaker 5: Yeah.
01:12:30
Speaker 1: Anything more on that, No, I think I.
01:12:34
Speaker 9: Think it’d be interesting too, And I hope that they do more studies on like different species and and you know anglers involve anglers that have a lot more experience with it.
01:12:47
Speaker 1: There’s more research to be done.
01:12:49
Speaker 9: Totally, but it’s just interesting that they this is like the first piece of you’re the first study that has come out forward facing so onar and and.
01:13:01
Speaker 4: Yeah, they didn’t find a lot of concerns with it.
01:13:05
Speaker 1: Great work up next Brody has leprosy.
01:13:11
Speaker 6: Not yet, but if I go to Florida and wrestle and armadillo, I might get it. Leprosy cases in Florida are on the rise, and armadillos are to blame. If you don’t know what leprosy is is that like, there’s descriptions of this disease that date back three to four thousand years in India, China, Egypt. A disease that’s frequently mentioned in the Bible associated with extreme social stigma because it was highly contagious and incurable. People believed it was a punishment from God. During the Middle Ages, they would set up these leopard colonies and force people to go into these colonies to kind of separate them from society. These people were declared legally dead, so they basically had no rights. The cause was unknown until eighteen seventy three when a Norwegian physician named Gerard Amour Hansen I hope I’m pronounced gearhard gearheart anyway. A Norwegian doctor discovered the bacterium mico Bacterium lepree. So that’s the cause of bacterial disease, and before effective treatment, the disease would cause nerve damage, loss of sensation in the hands and feet, severe deformities, and blindness in advanced cases. In the nineteen forties, antibiotic treatments came around and they were able to cure the disease. And today, like in the United States, it’s very rare. It’s still pretty common in other parts of the world India, Brazil, Indonesia, Africa a couple hundred thousand cases a year reported, but again very rare. Here in the United States. Percent of people have a natural immunity, making infection uncommon after exposure. Symptoms can take a long time to show up, up to twenty years to appear after exposure. So what do armadillos have to do with it? Like, how how did they armadillo’s in the United States become carriers of leprosy? The nine banded armadillo, which we do we have a picture of that.
01:15:32
Speaker 4: Yeah, I’ve been showing stuff.
01:15:34
Speaker 1: Okay, cool, Yeah, that was just showing.
01:15:36
Speaker 2: Yeah, there is what leprosy symptoms look like.
01:15:40
Speaker 8: They’re the only wild animal in North America that maintains like they’re a carrier of this bacteria, and so they’re like a wildlife reservoir.
01:15:53
Speaker 6: Scientists still don’t know exactly how this ended up happening, but the leading theory is that leprosy was brought to the Americas by European colonists in the fifteen hundreds, and at some point they transferred leprosy to the armadillos, who are now transferring it back to humans.
01:16:14
Speaker 5: See how Yeah, I’d kick the lab out of the bed, cuddle up with that.
01:16:19
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, it looks like an animal that should have rosy.
01:16:23
Speaker 6: Pretty a pretty interesting well on. One detail that supports this strain. That supports this idea is that the armadillo strain is a very close match to the strain from humans, so it suggests that the bacterias build from people into armadillos. An interesting thing why armadillos are like a good reservoir for this thing is they have a body temperature of ninety one to ninety five degrees, so lower than people, and this bacteria actually grows kind of poorly at a normal human core body temperature. So that’s that’s pretty interesting. Ten to twenty percent of wild nine banded armadillos are carriers. Yeah, it’s pretty wild. So Florida had seventeen reported cases of leprosy so far in twenty twenty six. It’s an upward trend. Twenty six reported cases in twenty twenty five, twenty twenty twenty four, so it’s like slowly been on the rise over the last few years.
01:17:26
Speaker 9: Are all those cases directly related to messing with They don’t.
01:17:29
Speaker 4: They can’t.
01:17:29
Speaker 6: They can’t necessarily confirm that, but they believe that the majority of them, some some might be people bringing it in they traveled internationally, and but they do believe that that some of this is coming from armadillos. Florida officials want to like maintain this isn’t like some widespread epidemic. The overall risk remains low and the disease does not spread easily. But you shouldn’t handle live or dead armadillos. And they think that the bacteria can also be kind of like transmitted into the soil from armadillos, So you should wear gloves while gardening or you know, messing around in the dirt, and you should wash a bunch. The greatest, highest risk stuff would obviously be handling or capturing live armadillos, skinning or butchering them, or eating them. Now I’m gonna jump ahead a little bit. I got some some other stuff going on here, but I’m gonna I’m gonna dress the eating thing. Where did I put that? I had it in here somewhere, maybe I cut it out anyway, I remember what I was gonna say. Like, Internationally, there are places where armadillos are eating, like down in Central and South America. But there is also a history of in the United States of people eating these things, particularly during the Depression. They were called hoover dogs and people would eat then still happens now and then. Different states have different like management strategies for armadillos as far as whether they’re a game animal or not. Most of the time they’re not considered a game animal, so you can you can go out and grab yourself an armadillo if you really want to. So that’s what’s going on in Florida. But Florida’s not alone. I did a little extra research, and we get about one hundred and fifty to two hundred and fifty cases of leprosy annually in the entire United States, and again some of those could be coming from people who are traveling and brought it back. But this this kind of armadillo human crossover thing they believe has happened in Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. So keep an eye out for those armadillos.
01:19:51
Speaker 10: You don’t.
01:19:51
Speaker 6: You don’t want to be getting this disease. It’s a nasty one.
01:19:54
Speaker 2: And Florida seems to be like twenty twenty five percent of all the cases nationally, and Florida is increasing. That’s why it’s in the spotlight right now. Interesting, I don’t think Florida when I think armadillo’s. Maybe either this is the blind spot for me. You had another one?
01:20:11
Speaker 4: Yeah?
01:20:12
Speaker 6: Does that?
01:20:12
Speaker 4: Does that?
01:20:13
Speaker 9: Bacteria just live on the skin of those.
01:20:16
Speaker 6: Things and they carry it internally. I would assume.
01:20:21
Speaker 5: Brady’s at the range of the army.
01:20:24
Speaker 6: So like they go that nine bandit, armadilla goes pretty far north. But the majority of the leprosy cases, for whatever reason, are in the southern southern tier there.
01:20:35
Speaker 7: We had them running around in Savannah and they are surprisingly fast. I thought it was a slow animal.
01:20:41
Speaker 6: Yeah, they’re cool. They’re cool looking little critterical.
01:20:43
Speaker 1: Man of the worst thing walking on your tree stand.
01:20:45
Speaker 7: Oh you think it’s a big gant so loud, so loud, and you can’t see them.
01:20:50
Speaker 3: Yeah, there is at least one armadillo in South Dakota. There was, despite it being outside of the range. I had a buddy who’s a farmer who was houlding cattle I think from Oklahoma that also had some hay with it in the trailer. And when he got back home and unloaded it and armadilla came running out of the haypile. So there was one there shortly. I don’t know if he made it through winter.
01:21:10
Speaker 6: And yeah, if you want to really like creep yourself out, like I didn’t want to show the pictures here today, but you can look at like some pretty gruesome pictures of what leprosy can do to you. It’s it’s rough, man.
01:21:21
Speaker 3: This says it’s completely curable, though treatment takes six to twelve months, and after the first few doses of medication you are no longer infectious.
01:21:31
Speaker 4: Boy, six to twelve months, it’s a long time. It is a long time.
01:21:34
Speaker 5: The first time I heard about this, I tried to catch I was in the act of hand catching an armadillo in Texas got yelled at you.
01:21:43
Speaker 1: Want to get I didn’t really say that.
01:21:46
Speaker 5: Yeah, I of course it was like yeah, and they’re like no, it was a real thing. I’m like, no, it is not. And then I was like, oh damn you google.
01:21:57
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, yeah, I feel.
01:21:58
Speaker 2: Like that’s how I hear about uh armadillos and human interactions. It’s like people catching them by hand.
01:22:05
Speaker 5: Yeah.
01:22:06
Speaker 6: Yeah, people keep them as pets. It’s a handful. Like I said, well, we’ll eat them. Their their meat was described as a like rabbit, like dark darker.
01:22:17
Speaker 5: You had a couple of like you get rid of the rototiller in the garden, just let those suckers turn things over.
01:22:22
Speaker 3: Yeah, they call them the Texas speed bump. What would that be like if you like ran one over?
01:22:28
Speaker 9: Man?
01:22:28
Speaker 6: I can tell you one time brings back horrible memories, Spence, because one time I ran over a turtle by mistake. What kind it’s a It was like I think it was a painted turtle. But the noise was gruesome, Like we were rolling kind of slow and the window was down and I imagined the.
01:22:47
Speaker 1: Noise to be sure I was.
01:22:49
Speaker 9: I was one time coming back from Fort peck roal late at night, like fished all day and came back and on ninety there in between, uh, big Timber and Livingston come around on them bens and here comes two raccoons out in the middle of the road.
01:23:07
Speaker 4: And it was like.
01:23:07
Speaker 9: I I applied the brakes, but I could I wasn’t swearing line of me. I hit both up, both tires and one hit each tire in the front, and it was like I was probably going seventy five miles an hour and it was like hitting a freaking speed bump.
01:23:24
Speaker 5: So listeners right in, let us know what is the worst sounding animal to hit? All right, speaking of hits, Nate’s got a quick hitter to wrap us up here.
01:23:37
Speaker 7: Yeah, this is a segment we’re calling old news when we miss something in the news cycle but we still want to talk about it. What we’re gonna do is we’ll go way back to an old timey news item, talk about how it relates, see how that piece is aged, and then bring a full circle to where we’re at today. In this case, we’re covering the unofficial official heaviest common carp cotton US.
01:23:58
Speaker 1: But buy a brit.
01:24:00
Speaker 7: So quick history going back to eighteen seventy seven my old stomping grounds in Baltimore. Fish populations are taking due to over harvest and water quality decline. Wildlife officials are looking for a solution to fill the protein gap left by this decline. Enter Spencer F. Baird, the first director of the United States Fish Commission. He looked across the pond at the bountiful and popular common carp population populations of the UK and began the effort to import them. By nineteen hundred, common carp are ubiquitous throughout the US, primarily due to state and federal efforts to introduce them and their natural resilience and fagundity. So that takes us to this old timey bulletin if you’ll pull that up Phil released by the Department of Commerce the US Bureau Fisheries, And if you’re listening, it’s exactly what you imagine. It looks like it’s printed on some real nice card stock.
01:24:47
Speaker 3: Are you gonna do an old timey voice?
01:24:48
Speaker 1: Dude? I want to do that Shane Gillis voice he does. Can I do it?
01:24:52
Speaker 4: Yeah?
01:24:52
Speaker 1: Please read it? That’d be great. Eat the carp.
01:24:55
Speaker 2: The carp discovered America in eighteen seventy seven, He found the land to his liking. He multiplied and filled the waters with his kind. He is now big, abundant, and useful. He converts useless vegetation and small animals into meat. The meat is wholesome and nutritious. It contains as much protein as sirloin’s steak mmmm. It is easily digestible. It can be cooked in such a way as to remove the muddy taste. It can be boiled, baked, made into.
01:25:21
Speaker 1: Croquettes or fish loaf.
01:25:22
Speaker 2: Carp jelly, an ancient Swedish dish, is delicious. There are millions of carp in the United States. The last sentence shows that forty three million pounds were marketed in one year. Nearly all of this came from a few states in the Middle West. Somebody ate those forty three million pounds of carp. Therefore, the carp must.
01:25:42
Speaker 10: Be good to eat.
01:25:43
Speaker 1: Said carp is good to eat.
01:25:45
Speaker 2: Carp has not only been eaten, but has been cultivated in Europe for centuries.
01:25:50
Speaker 1: Europeans know how to cook it. Catch the carp by the carp, cook the carp properly, and eat it. Eat the row.
01:25:56
Speaker 2: Can the row make carp jelly? Can the fish smoke it too. For more information, recipe is right to the United States Bureau of Fisheries, Division F Washington, d C.
01:26:06
Speaker 4: Got it.
01:26:06
Speaker 1: I wish, yes, so good. I wish I would have had this for the cart video.
01:26:09
Speaker 4: Yeah, did you.
01:26:09
Speaker 1: Realize we released the cart video.
01:26:11
Speaker 7: That’s one of the reasons we were rolling this. I’m sure the suits will be super happy.
01:26:16
Speaker 5: Yeah.
01:26:17
Speaker 1: I would like to point out Randall did not prepare top of that. It says please post conspicuously.
01:26:26
Speaker 6: So yeah, that the cart propaganda machine was going strong again.
01:26:31
Speaker 1: Randall was not prepared for this. He just pulled this out. So that was that’s good.
01:26:35
Speaker 2: I always wanted to do like a a propaganda movie voiceover propaganda film from World War Two.
01:26:42
Speaker 3: Hey there, g I you know in nineteen eleven what was happening in Alaska?
01:26:46
Speaker 1: For your audio book nineteen eleven? Wash?
01:26:49
Speaker 2: That was James Carroll’s first year of trapping. Oh the river off Porcupine, not the context.
01:26:55
Speaker 6: I wasn’t eating cart.
01:26:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, that’s that’s the book Steve did. His book is one of the Steve Reid’s books. So you ain’t got to mm because it was James Carroll’s book. Is first ten years in Alaska.
01:27:07
Speaker 1: Yeah.
01:27:07
Speaker 7: Sorry, no, we’ll return to the claims made by this well not we won’t go line by line, but basically all of those things are wrong. If you want to see if the meat is wholesome, you can refer to Steve’s carp A La Beart beer episode that just launched on YouTube.
01:27:21
Speaker 1: It’s great.
01:27:22
Speaker 7: Uh, Doctor Randall’s heavily featured in it. The recipes. I think we might need to try carp jelly for the next one, because if calls that out specifically twice millions of carp most carp are used for uh. Most commercial carp are used for fertilizer or they’re exported, and they claim it must be good to eat because so many are getting eaten.
01:27:41
Speaker 1: So I looked up a couple of reviews on the Food Network.
01:27:43
Speaker 7: There’s two restaurants that are famous for their carp both in Omaha, Nebraska.
01:27:47
Speaker 1: Yeah this Joe Tests. Yeah, people like Joe Tests.
01:27:50
Speaker 7: So we’ll read two reviews, a highlight and a.
01:27:52
Speaker 3: Low light carp ribs they serve there.
01:27:55
Speaker 7: There’s a couple of things just Lisa Underscore seven to one five stars. Love this place. Go for the carp not the mac and cheese. This is an old time cafe with amazing potatoes. Don’t think of it as a Michelin restaurant, but it has the best fish, best potatoes, and really awesome cole slam. Robert c on the other hand, one star. Don’t believe what you see on TV. Tried the two piece fried carp. One was the rib section, which was good but seasonless. The other was the tail with barely any meat and looked very unappetite.
01:28:23
Speaker 6: You need to dress something here real quick. Yeah, restaurants often call fish something that it’s not. And there’s a bunch of different kinds of carp, So what kind of carp are these restaurants serving?
01:28:34
Speaker 7: Allegedly common carp which we’ll get into because apparently the Asian carp doesn’t taste quite as good.
01:28:39
Speaker 6: Yeah, and then there’s buffalo too.
01:28:41
Speaker 5: Well, yeah, buffalo is not a carp, right, cart right, but it gets mixed in.
01:28:45
Speaker 1: It does get mixed in.
01:28:46
Speaker 5: But I’ve eaten several pounds of the quote unquote silver carp and it is tasteless, like there is no flavor to them.
01:28:58
Speaker 3: So it’s just like a positive you though, when it comes.
01:29:01
Speaker 5: Most people, it is an extremely positive renew right because like you fry it and it tastes like.
01:29:06
Speaker 1: It’s like tofu.
01:29:07
Speaker 6: Yeah, it’s like like.
01:29:10
Speaker 1: Whatever you put on that integration.
01:29:12
Speaker 2: Point out too that I looked at the comments on your carp video, and everybody is quick to point out that there are cultures all over the world that have very delicious ways of preparing carp. Although like it seems like there’s a great deal of variability when it comes to different species and also the water that they’re coming out of, in the temperature of the water.
01:29:33
Speaker 7: And that’s that’s We’ll skip through some of the Asian carp stuff and just focus on common but it seems that the for good carp cultivation you got to be real dialed in on water quality, which they are in the UK and France. So for any diehard trivia listeners out there, you may know that I don’t know jack about fishing. So when I was doing this research, I found it extremely surprising that there’s like a big, dedicated carp community out.
01:29:57
Speaker 3: Here that loves them.
01:29:58
Speaker 1: They’re badass fish to catch.
01:29:59
Speaker 7: And they treat them as like a naturalized fish. Here in the States, thoughts.
01:30:04
Speaker 6: I don’t think they treat them as a naturalized fish. I think there’s.
01:30:08
Speaker 7: There’s there’s websites of guys who but.
01:30:10
Speaker 6: Like I fish a lot, seth fish is a lot. We don’t treat them like a net for sure.
01:30:15
Speaker 7: I think there’s some carp apologist out but I.
01:30:17
Speaker 9: Think there are people that have flats boats in this valley focused on cars to go fish.
01:30:24
Speaker 5: Carp memorable fish flats boats, Yeah, yeah, yeah.
01:30:29
Speaker 2: My most memorable fish fight on the Little Miami River growing up was a big.
01:30:33
Speaker 1: Ass carp that just just ran. Ye just took out drag cool fish.
01:30:39
Speaker 5: And yeah, for like fly fishermen in Montana.
01:30:42
Speaker 6: The bone fish who always break, how many people are like, oh yeah, trout took me into my back.
01:30:51
Speaker 5: In the back of your guess because you don’t know how to fight, you know, but you hook into a car that’s going to take you into your back and it’s like a really cool Yeah, yeah, it’s fun.
01:31:03
Speaker 3: I caught one in downtown Denver on the Platte River and on my four weight that was like the best flight I’ve ever had on a fly rod.
01:31:12
Speaker 5: Yeah, very cool. I will I will tell you like the I was blown away by by how like highly edible the carp were in Tennessee. That was that was on Lake, Kentucky Lake and excellent. Oh my god, you’re crazy fishery in general, but the carb situation there’s way out of hand. And I was fishing with Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency and they have a bumper pole, deep fat frar that they take places and they just show people how tasty carp is. They’re like, any way you want to catch it, shoot it whatever, But it’s awesome food too.
01:32:00
Speaker 4: We should get those guys on the next video.
01:32:02
Speaker 5: Yeah, for sure, we can make that happen.
01:32:03
Speaker 9: They probably wouldn’t recommend carp all all beer though, Yeah, they’d recommend carp and beer.
01:32:09
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, fried carpon.
01:32:10
Speaker 2: Beer’s what’s this giant carp photo I’m seeing?
01:32:14
Speaker 7: Yeah, this takes us to the current US carp record. Craig Budo, reporting on a very own media dot com, turned me onto the story and staid, we had talked to this guy, so I call it Scott Lennox, expecting to get a few laughs about catching a monster fish that nobody cares about, and boy was iron. Scott comes from a long line of dedicated trophy carp fishermen with adventures from UK, France, Cyprus and now California and UK trophy cartfishing. It’s like akin to red stag hunting. Those guys. They’re dedicated carp ponds with decades old fish that have names and histories, an entire industry built around them.
01:32:50
Speaker 5: Cartman will take reservations, yes it yeah.
01:32:54
Speaker 1: It’s very exclusive.
01:32:56
Speaker 7: Guys will take ten day trips to France, paying thousands of dollars in the hope to catch like Big John or Eric’s common Arnold or something like that. And so after Craig or I’m sorry, Scott moved to California and finding a distinct lack of the trophy carp industry, he began his journey to become a backcountry carp fisherman.
01:33:13
Speaker 6: And I’m not kidding, manlain that part to me.
01:33:16
Speaker 7: This guy will backpack into lakes and rivers with a full setup to fish for carp for six days straight, seven days straight, in the hope to catch a monster. He’s got scouts out, he’s got a whole carp community that trades intel and are finding the good lakes and his on this specific trip.
01:33:35
Speaker 1: Dude, this dude is so. This guy’s more clothing. The first trip, he.
01:33:42
Speaker 7: Took a a beach chair and an umbrella and sat by his polls around and then eventually he was like, I can’t do this for six days at a time. And he’s he’s upgraded to a cot and a tent and you know your normal future.
01:33:57
Speaker 6: Well, i’ll tell you why he doesn’t have competition’s so surprising.
01:34:04
Speaker 1: So two things on a competition front.
01:34:06
Speaker 7: He will not give up his spots, not because he doesn’t want to engage other carp punters, because he doesn’t want bow fisherman coming in. It’s killing this big carn. Yeah, he’s very, very sensitive, and he treats a carp like a dude would treat like a big old sturgeon. Like he’s so invested in caring for that carp and putting it back. I mean, it’s it’s amazing. So on this trip he goes out catch His goal is to catch a thirty pounder. On day three, he’s get skunked for two days. Day three he hooks into a fifty pounder. Doesn’t have any evidence or proof, he doesn’t have a certified scale, just snaps a picture. His buddy comes out. He’s on like hot standby for a big carp alert. His buddy comes out has the official scale and Scott gets a sixty four pound carp, which beats the current US record by two pounds.
01:34:51
Speaker 1: This, this photo shows all that is.
01:34:54
Speaker 13: Man.
01:34:54
Speaker 1: He’s just a just good, good beard, good fish.
01:34:57
Speaker 4: If he pulls the scale off those and like makes a necklace or.
01:35:00
Speaker 7: No he doesn’t, he doesn’t do anything to it. He let’s just he wants it to be as.
01:35:04
Speaker 6: Healthy and get its exactly.
01:35:07
Speaker 7: His brother, who’s a big tournament carp guy in the UK, bought his flights the next day to come to the California and target big backcountry carp.
01:35:17
Speaker 1: So the UK, this is great, It’s amazing.
01:35:20
Speaker 2: Phil we gotta, Phil, we gotta go to Cyprus for carp fishing and one of the few international Benegan’s locations.
01:35:27
Speaker 4: Sign me up.
01:35:29
Speaker 2: All right, well, I think that does it for this week. Tune in next week. We’ve got some out of town guests coming to take over the news show. That’s right, Brent Reeves, Tony Peterson, Maggie Huddler, Jordan Sillers and Mark Kenyon. Although no longer an out of town guests, I suppose just a guest, they are taking over the news desks. So tune in and then the week after that Steven Marilla will be back here.
01:35:55
Speaker 1: Thanks for watching.
Read the full article here