<\/p>\n
00:00:04
\nSpeaker 1: Welcome to the news show. Today. We’ve got Spencer reporting on the most reported on story in the world, the old timer who got tossed by a buffalo. And Yellowstone. We’ve got wolves and Yellowstone have left Yellowstone and that’s got Yellowstone wolf lovers panties in a bunch. The Trump administration has made changes to the Endangered Species Act. And if you’re guessing that it wasn’t to make it strong and more effective, you’re onto something. Colorado’s dumb fur band has died, but they replaced it with something not quite as dumb. Is the perpetuation of daylight savings time good or bad for outdoorsmen? How can you make money betting on wildfires? And more? But first our news? Yes, I’ll tell you about our news. That’s good. Bill. Listen, you want to you like you want to talk about workplace drama, Hm, workplace drama. This, this represents tremendous workplace drama.<\/p>\n
00:01:07
\nSpeaker 2: I’m not aware.<\/p>\n
00:01:09
\nSpeaker 1: Oh the bear grease bib, Yeah, what’s the drama. Clay fought for years for these BIPs. I think relationships were ruined over these BIPs because Clay stuck to his guns. He would he would accept nothing less than perfection. If you’re a bit man, we stand up. You see me a good bill?<\/p>\n
00:01:31
\nSpeaker 3: Look great? Here you go.<\/p>\n
00:01:34
\nSpeaker 2: The important parts.<\/p>\n
00:01:36
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, I’m not trying well.<\/p>\n
00:01:37
\nSpeaker 4: You can see the main The main part of a bib is the top is attached to the bottom.<\/p>\n
00:01:43
\nSpeaker 1: Put camera the bear grease bib look zippers like it’s all in reverse. Come looking at a camera. Zipper side pockets. Okay, you can run them like you can run them Southern style. We just run around like that. Zip them up, flexible. They got chaps running from ankle up. It’s the ultimate bib. It’s the greatest product we’ve ever made. And and like I said, a lot of fighting, a lot of fighting.<\/p>\n
00:02:13
\nSpeaker 5: I had some household drama over these. I brought him home. And I have a pair of three Xcel car heart overalls that I do all my car work in, and I brought these huckers home to do that in. And my wife said those are too nice to do car working. But now I did car work in them.<\/p>\n
00:02:29
\nSpeaker 1: But she wants she wants to be her dress bills. Yeah, I asked her, like, can I wear these to church? She didn’t answer. I think that if you had those other church, I would say I’d like this man to step up to the pulpit. I think he’s got something that he should share with the congregation.<\/p>\n
00:02:46
\nSpeaker 2: Also, you’re not a three XL. What are you doing with three XL bibs at home?<\/p>\n
00:02:50
\nSpeaker 1: Oh? I got this from the third store. They’re just like a big pair of bibs.<\/p>\n
00:02:53
\nSpeaker 4: You do you’re working?<\/p>\n
00:02:54
\nSpeaker 1: These are?<\/p>\n
00:02:54
\nSpeaker 5: I think they run a little bit big because these are your original ones.<\/p>\n
00:02:58
\nSpeaker 1: I’m running around in a medium, which is right right right where I should be for a pair of this is a large. I’m six four, big guy two twenty.<\/p>\n
00:03:05
\nSpeaker 2: See claylay is telling people on Instagram they run a little big. So if you get in your pair, keep Clay’s words.<\/p>\n
00:03:11
\nSpeaker 1: It depends if you like to put them on over a bunch of stuff. This is the best listen, This is the ultimate deal. This is what I’m live in. From now on, I.<\/p>\n
00:03:17
\nSpeaker 5: Will say I throw these on, like in the morning, I climb a tree and shoot from my saddle before work and I just throw these on over my work clothes, climb the tree.<\/p>\n
00:03:25
\nSpeaker 1: Good to go.<\/p>\n
00:03:25
\nSpeaker 4: Because you don’t want to get your T shirt dirty.<\/p>\n
00:03:27
\nSpeaker 5: Well, I wore a T shirt today, but usually have nice pants on. Yeah, dude, people know about my dress up games.<\/p>\n
00:03:32
\nSpeaker 1: This is some rock These are rocks out bibs. I like them.<\/p>\n
00:03:37
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, I gotta get me some, Oh, dude, just like durable.<\/p>\n
00:03:41
\nSpeaker 1: A lot of fighting. They’re available now.<\/p>\n
00:03:44
\nSpeaker 4: That’s what we want to emphasize above all else.<\/p>\n
00:03:47
\nSpeaker 1: There’s a lot of fighters, a lot of fighting between. It got like, it got emotionally.<\/p>\n
00:03:52
\nSpeaker 2: These were built with anger.<\/p>\n
00:03:54
\nSpeaker 1: I’ve got emotion.<\/p>\n
00:03:55
\nSpeaker 4: I’m picturing an Instagram ad. Just like Clay fucked these bibs. It got emotional. A lot of fighting. And here that after after five years of fighting.<\/p>\n
00:04:07
\nSpeaker 2: I think it’s seven. I thought Clay said twenty.<\/p>\n
00:04:09
\nSpeaker 1: Years of fighting, being like not like that, like this.<\/p>\n
00:04:15
\nSpeaker 3: For the for the ignorant misspect. Here, what’s the difference between a bib and an overall?<\/p>\n
00:04:21
\nSpeaker 1: I use them interchangeably.<\/p>\n
00:04:22
\nSpeaker 4: It’s interchangeable.<\/p>\n
00:04:23
\nSpeaker 3: I didn’t know if there was a practical difference.<\/p>\n
00:04:25
\nSpeaker 2: If I had to say a difference, I feel like an overall maybe like goes all the way.<\/p>\n
00:04:29
\nSpeaker 4: To sleeves cover all.<\/p>\n
00:04:31
\nSpeaker 1: That’s great product too. My wife’s got a lot of cute little overalls these days.<\/p>\n
00:04:36
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah, that’s the thing. My wife’s got a parado overall.<\/p>\n
00:04:40
\nSpeaker 4: Overalls are cute.<\/p>\n
00:04:42
\nSpeaker 1: Oh yeah, she’s got some real cute She’s not running around these. She was, she’d probably caught it, she’d do something to she’d modelm.<\/p>\n
00:04:48
\nSpeaker 6: She’s not gonna start working on the truck.<\/p>\n
00:04:51
\nSpeaker 1: No, she just runs around being cute in her little overalls.<\/p>\n
00:04:53
\nSpeaker 5: Now and then it’s only a differentiation between coveralls and bib overalls.<\/p>\n
00:04:58
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, you can get them now, and you gotta go get him, because here’s the deal. All that fighting, if they bombay is getting so if you got to bring peace to the workplace, blow these bibs out of the water, get them, love them. Clay wins, I win. Everybody’s happy. A lot of fighting. Nate’s got a hot tip.<\/p>\n
00:05:27
\nSpeaker 5: For you or cold tip because I had neuro virus this weekend and spend a lot of time in the show.<\/p>\n
00:05:34
\nSpeaker 1: Got oh, dude is miserable.<\/p>\n
00:05:36
\nSpeaker 5: Not as miserable as when I got it after the Mile High Hunting Show and spent an hour and a half plane flight in the bathroom.<\/p>\n
00:05:44
\nSpeaker 1: But this weekend, you’re.<\/p>\n
00:05:45
\nSpeaker 2: A two time neuro virus happened.<\/p>\n
00:05:47
\nSpeaker 1: I think I’ve had three times.<\/p>\n
00:05:48
\nSpeaker 4: You gotta eat more bad stuff I’ve had, hold up, just strengthen the system.<\/p>\n
00:05:53
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, that’s probably good point.<\/p>\n
00:05:54
\nSpeaker 6: You weren’t frequenting taco bell.<\/p>\n
00:05:56
\nSpeaker 1: No, not surprising virus, I know, but it could have been.<\/p>\n
00:06:00
\nSpeaker 5: No, our whole social group got it, so it pretty sure is nora virus. Anyways, I’m a little skeptical of western medicine or western medicine curious, and I don’t believe in the overutilization of the medical system. And so instead of going to the doctor when I have stuff like this, I just do every hour and a half, I get in the shower and sit there for half an hour, kind of soak it out hydrotherapy. But eventually, after the seventh or eighth shower rotation, the shower gets prett uncomfortable. So I thought to myself, what could I put in here to make the shower more comfortable? And lo and behold, I had a sleeping pad. So I blew that sucker up, threw it in there, and you made my eighth, ninth, and tenth shower of the evening far more enjoyable.<\/p>\n
00:06:40
\nSpeaker 1: Do you measuree that you’re sort of washing away the sickness?<\/p>\n
00:06:43
\nSpeaker 5: I don’t know if it’s this I’m washing it away or I’m steaming it out.<\/p>\n
00:06:47
\nSpeaker 4: What I’m concerned about whenever I think of air mattress is I think of all the crevices, you know, like there’s crevices in there. To me, that would be ripe. For say, if some duke got in there, there’s not in there shatting.<\/p>\n
00:07:04
\nSpeaker 1: Themselves, you’d be surprised.<\/p>\n
00:07:10
\nSpeaker 5: So if you find yourself on your seventh or eighth shower rotation of the evening, uh, blow up your sleeping pad and sit on that sucker.<\/p>\n
00:07:16
\nSpeaker 4: Get a shower stool available at a common drug store.<\/p>\n
00:07:20
\nSpeaker 1: I like that idea. It’s at dude. I don’t take baths, but if I did, I’d say this is not comfortable.<\/p>\n
00:07:28
\nSpeaker 2: The CDC says norm virus is very contagious. What are you doing here, Nate?<\/p>\n
00:07:34
\nSpeaker 1: I stayed home yesterday.<\/p>\n
00:07:34
\nSpeaker 5: I was clear on Sunday and I stayed home yesterday.<\/p>\n
00:07:38
\nSpeaker 1: I’d also just love the game I got. I got our news. Here’s the deal. There’s a place called Matt’s Reel Repair m A t s not to Te’s Matt’s Real Repair. I’ve been using them for years. Those guys. If you got a fishing reel that needs work, those guys are the best guys on the planet in their business. Nicest dudes in the world, did.<\/p>\n
00:08:04
\nSpeaker 6: You send us altis there or something I.<\/p>\n
00:08:06
\nSpeaker 1: Send my I send every year I send reels in the mass reel repair if you get if a real gets to where they’ll call you be like you’re throwing good money after bad.<\/p>\n
00:08:16
\nSpeaker 6: It’s done. You got to give it up.<\/p>\n
00:08:19
\nSpeaker 1: Every couple of years, I take my reels and send them in for like I write it. You put a little form, I put down clean, lubricate, fix what’s broke.<\/p>\n
00:08:27
\nSpeaker 6: Like taking your car in for a tune up or whatever.<\/p>\n
00:08:30
\nSpeaker 5: Oil.<\/p>\n
00:08:30
\nSpeaker 1: But I’ve been running some dial with saltis reels for for way over a decade in the salt. In the salt just the nicest guys man, just like you know, you call over there like hello, That’s what I like. It’s not like press one two. Okay, we’re gonna do we gotta we gotta do some crashes. But the audience has a love hate relationship with corrections. Some people love them, some people hate them. We’re gonna try to shorten it up. So we brought in a thing to time it.<\/p>\n
00:09:05
\nSpeaker 5: What’s the winner get nothing right now? We’re just we’re just rounding up corrections.<\/p>\n
00:09:10
\nSpeaker 1: Oh yeah, no, you’re not gonna win nothing right now a long time ago. Guy made us this interest O meter. Can you put this? Can you put he put my shot on the screen.<\/p>\n
00:09:21
\nSpeaker 4: H get the Diary of Sleeping Pad off the Okay.<\/p>\n
00:09:25
\nSpeaker 1: A guy made us this interest on meeting. Yeah, there you go. I’m gonna walk through some corrections very quickly.<\/p>\n
00:09:33
\nSpeaker 4: Okay, this was listener Ryan Thomas, who created the meter.<\/p>\n
00:09:38
\nSpeaker 1: Who created the meter?<\/p>\n
00:09:39
\nSpeaker 2: Than you got three red dots, yellow and three green, So seven levels of interest.<\/p>\n
00:09:44
\nSpeaker 5: And the way this machine functions is we all have a terminal with a dial and it averages those lights average our interest in said topic. And so Steve will spend about a minute covering a correction, and we’ll all weigh in with our dial on how inch should we are in the top one wins.<\/p>\n
00:10:03
\nSpeaker 1: Guy named Troyer writes in a couple of weeks back, you guys mentioned new shirts with tr on him. Love the idea, but you guys called him Teddy, and that would have made the man bristle. He did not appreciate the nickname. Well, there are reports that in political sphere he did not mind if a stranger called him that. As supporters of the man, I personally use tr or Theodore proper as it has been said that he never permitted himself to be called teddy.<\/p>\n
00:10:41
\nSpeaker 3: All right, they’re turning their dials.<\/p>\n
00:10:43
\nSpeaker 1: I’m moderately interested in that.<\/p>\n
00:10:45
\nSpeaker 6: I’m not turning mine.<\/p>\n
00:10:45
\nSpeaker 3: Now, Okay, who’s this guy?<\/p>\n
00:10:50
\nSpeaker 1: The venison? The guy? This is something dude from the UK. What’s his name? I can’t remember his name. Let me start by expressing this is about Yanni’s report on Wimbledon, the tennis contests, serving venison to lower their carbon footprint, dropping beef, picking up venison, which we covered, Feller says, let me start by expressing my genuine admiration for the Meat Eater brand, your team, and everything you do for hunting and conservation internationally. The reason I felt it was worth writing in that Meat Eater has earned enormous credibility with hunters around the world. When you speak about a country or a hunting culture, people listen. That is why I felt compelled to reach out after listening to your recent discussion regarding Wimbledon, venison and the UK landscape. The venison served at Wimbledon is sourced from the Royal Parks. This is managed park venison, not wild shot deer. While quotes in the article note that eating venison helps control deer populations, causing ecological destruction. Eating park venison does absolutely nothing to reduce Britain’s booming wild deer population. Trained hunters in the UK are legally permitted to sell wild venison directly into the food chain, yet only one major supermarket chain regularly stocks genuine wild British venison. Most stock imported or farmed venison because of public perception, the market finds park or farmed labels more palatable than wild, despite wild being the more ethical, sustainable choice.<\/p>\n
00:12:45
\nSpeaker 4: That they’re now they’re now serving wild venison in National Health Service hospitals.<\/p>\n
00:12:50
\nSpeaker 1: I know, but here’s the deal. I was gonna say that too, but it ran out of time. Oh, I thought that was for you to add it in.<\/p>\n
00:12:57
\nSpeaker 4: Well, I thought we could have got I thought we could have rid of Interestingly, you have to see genuine progress left.<\/p>\n
00:13:05
\nSpeaker 1: British vedicine is now even being served in several NHS hospitals as part of an initiative to promote sustainable, locally sourced knows exactly.<\/p>\n
00:13:18
\nSpeaker 6: The kind of So now my interest has fallen because it went on too long.<\/p>\n
00:13:22
\nSpeaker 7: But I know if it were me, I would have cut out all this stuff about how not you his genuine admiration for the brand, and I like that enormous credibility.<\/p>\n
00:13:34
\nSpeaker 1: Favorite part.<\/p>\n
00:13:34
\nSpeaker 6: All right, we were at a five out of seven, then Brody brought it down to a four and he’s still in the in the lead.<\/p>\n
00:13:40
\nSpeaker 2: Here he achieved yellow.<\/p>\n
00:13:41
\nSpeaker 1: We covered a piece where in Alabama h O and Alabama brought in the Feds to kill the bunch of geese that were bugging them, and we’re like, what I was saying, I was saying, just don’t start the time again. This is background. I was saying, it seems a little severe to call in the FEDS to kill some geese. There’s gotta be another way. That’s just my comment as a guy that doesn’t know anything about this HOA guy writes in he wants to remain anonymous. I am a wildlife biologist with USDA’s Wildlife Services. I would like to add some insight on the HOA geese issue. First, some information was left out of the podcast segment, including previously used non lethal harassment and the severity of their situation. According to Heritage Plantation, they have invested over twenty five thousand dollars using coyote decoys lasers, shoreline fencing, and the introduction of swans. For over ten years, they have been conducting egg oiling. This blocks the egg pores, preventing oxygen, installing embryo growth. In addition, they were also denied by the City of Madison to use trained dogs, so they tried a lot. Over the past year, sixteen geese and seventy five percent of the swans have died from illness, and one hundred percent of the carcasses tested positive for avian influenza who. One important thing to note here is that they most likely they were dealing with a resident population. This means they remained there year round. These situations are very common in urban and suburban areas. In fact, in places that I have worked on goose issues are conveniently also where the DNR chooses to band geese. Every single banded goose I have lethally removed were banded and the exact place I shot them, with examples of some birds being banded almost ten years ago in the same spot. This is all to say it is extremely hard to harass resident geese, and it seems to me that they have exhausted almost every other method besides installing a wire grid across the pond. Here’s just gets interesting as to the method of lethal removal. Roundups are just the most efficient way. They’re conducted during the summer molt. For euthanasia, most programs utilize CO two gas chambers. Takes about ten to twenty seconds to kill a goose. I saw a comment saying that geese can hold their breath for forty five seconds, but that doesn’t matter because CO two is older. Listen, they don’t know to hold their breath. They hold their breath. I got a bad feeling.<\/p>\n
00:16:34
\nSpeaker 5: Guys, one, two, three, we’re out.<\/p>\n
00:16:39
\nSpeaker 1: We’re a A.<\/p>\n
00:16:39
\nSpeaker 3: We’re a six out of seven. There for the interest.<\/p>\n
00:16:41
\nSpeaker 4: Also, I just jammed it up.<\/p>\n
00:16:44
\nSpeaker 1: I forgot my Minnesota wolve. Nate reviewed compensation programs for wolf killed livestock. My hearing aid equipped ears perked up when Nate said wolf advocates were the original source of Wisconsin’s wolf composition funding. Here’s where it gets tricky. When wolves are being managed by the state DNR Department of Natural Resources through hunting and trapping. State law requires wolf depredation payments come from wolf hunting, trapping licenses and license application fees. However, when wolves are being protected under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The money for wolf depredation payments comes from Wisconsin’s Bureau of Natural Heritage and Conservation. So if you’re allowed to hunt and trap them, hunters pay depredation. If you’re not, it comes out of a totally different fund. Man.<\/p>\n
00:17:43
\nSpeaker 6: That’s a nice tight correction there.<\/p>\n
00:17:45
\nSpeaker 1: Pat closes with this thought. Pat has often said deer make people stupid. He elaborated on that. Elaborated on that deer make people stupid, wolves make people mad, Turkeys make people happy. That sucker up. Lastly, this is the final final mention on whether it is okay to refer to weed smokers as dope smokers.<\/p>\n
00:18:12
\nSpeaker 2: I’m pad achieved yellow there.<\/p>\n
00:18:14
\nSpeaker 1: So you got.<\/p>\n
00:18:16
\nSpeaker 6: Well, yeah, yeah, yeah, you got okay.<\/p>\n
00:18:18
\nSpeaker 1: Last one light green. Last one the most important one. I’m writing into defend Steve and correct the angry dope smokers about the use of the term dope smoker. First, I want to establish my bona fides. Listen carefully. This is the most this is the most credentialed dope smoker in the world. I want to establish my bona fides. I lived my entire life in the foothills of northern California and was a self proclaimed stoner. Through most of my twenties and thirties. I spent many croptobers as a trimmer, getting paid in wait for my services. In addition, after recreational cannabis use was legalized in California, I was the director of product development for two of the largest and most well known cannabis brands in the state. My job there was to select the best weed, build supply chains for manufactured products like oils, vapes, and edibles, and then bring those products to market.<\/p>\n
00:19:20
\nSpeaker 6: That’s I bention that guy had a subscription to High Times.<\/p>\n
00:19:23
\nSpeaker 1: Now onto the topic at hand. Is the term dope smoker acceptable? The answer is yes. Perhaps the best supporting evidence for this comes from the band’s Sleep, who are of the undisputed creators of stoner rock genre. In nineteen ninety eight, Sleep released the album Dope Smoker, which I listened to you cup. Just a quick intro to Dope Smoker.<\/p>\n
00:19:53
\nSpeaker 3: Was I did I get right here?<\/p>\n
00:19:55
\nSpeaker 1: Let me know what You’re ready?<\/p>\n
00:19:56
\nSpeaker 3: Yeah, Okay, give me a sick.<\/p>\n
00:19:58
\nSpeaker 1: In nineteen ninety eight, Sleep released album Dope Smoker, which contains only one song title Dope Smoker. That’d be an ep The song is a sixty three minute epic tale about a pilgrimage made by weed priests known as Weedians, across the mystical desert. The purpose of their pilgrimage to cast seed of Eden onto the nurtured desert soil of Zion, creating a permanent, spiritually elevated sanctuary dedicated to continuous cultivation and smoking. He’s losing me.<\/p>\n
00:20:35
\nSpeaker 4: This is great now.<\/p>\n
00:20:37
\nSpeaker 1: The band spent four years writing and recording the song. Here’s how it starts. I was hooked. That’s good, Phil, Okay great. They spent four years writing and recording the song album. Both the title and content of Dope Smoker were so important to Sleep that when they’re label London Records threatened to drop them over it. In nineteen ninety six, The band went to court lost, then leaked the album themselves two years later.<\/p>\n
00:21:10
\nSpeaker 3: That’s great.<\/p>\n
00:21:11
\nSpeaker 1: He goes on to say, I dare any offended dope smoker out there writing into the media to podcast to tell the members of Sleep that the word which caused them to fight a year’s long legal battle with London Records, effectively bankrupting them and then causing them to break up for fifteen years is somehow a pejorative. Keep up the good work into all the dope smoking hunters and angers out there, stay high. I was right.<\/p>\n
00:21:44
\nSpeaker 2: He achieved a five and a half on our scale, flickering on six.<\/p>\n
00:21:49
\nSpeaker 1: So who won the man?<\/p>\n
00:21:52
\nSpeaker 6: I think that is a sixth though, isn’t it?<\/p>\n
00:21:54
\nSpeaker 4: Is it just a bad No?<\/p>\n
00:21:56
\nSpeaker 5: It’s like flickering, you know for someone who just gave him a little bit.<\/p>\n
00:22:00
\nSpeaker 1: Engineers got he’s got. We got a couple of mods. Yeah, yeah, before we go back to prize given, we got a couple of mods. Buffalo flips. Old man onto the news, all right.<\/p>\n
00:22:18
\nSpeaker 2: A viral video from July tenth showed an old man getting thrown what’s been said, eight feet.<\/p>\n
00:22:23
\nSpeaker 1: In the air.<\/p>\n
00:22:24
\nSpeaker 4: I don’t know.<\/p>\n
00:22:25
\nSpeaker 1: I believe he was.<\/p>\n
00:22:27
\nSpeaker 2: Yes, he looked like a dope smoking man who could use some bear grease bibs. I would say, throw, yes, yep, uh thrown eight feet in the air by a bison Yellowstone. It was sixty five year old Carl McDaniels from a small town north of Seattle. He was in the park with his grandson, and the two were on a walk at a campground near Yellowstone Lake when they spotted a running bison who was putting on a show. The bison rutt goes from June to September, so they’re kind of peak that time period. Carl and his grandson U lingered for a second to take some pictures, and then the attack happened. Play the video Phil.<\/p>\n
00:23:10
\nSpeaker 4: For audio listeners. There’s two individuals mm.<\/p>\n
00:23:13
\nSpeaker 1: Hmm, yeah, the old timers running one of those beards that goes down and he’s running one of those beards it goes down to your nipples.<\/p>\n
00:23:22
\nSpeaker 5: And he’s got suspenders and jeans.<\/p>\n
00:23:24
\nSpeaker 2: And a grandson who’s wearing a Miami Dolphins. Ryan fitzpatri to Ryan Fitzpatrick, Jersey bison is wallowing. He’s now on his feet. This white pickup, it was later said it was trying to haze the bison, didn’t work.<\/p>\n
00:23:38
\nSpeaker 1: The pickup honked the very poor operation.<\/p>\n
00:23:41
\nSpeaker 2: They said that the pickup honked at the bison and maybe that’s like what got thordison on its feet. Actually, so it was doing the opposite of what it intended.<\/p>\n
00:23:50
\nSpeaker 4: Uh.<\/p>\n
00:23:50
\nSpeaker 2: The the bison and the man are playing ring a on the rosie with some trees and then this is where the attack happens.<\/p>\n
00:24:02
\nSpeaker 1: Oh oh god.<\/p>\n
00:24:05
\nSpeaker 2: Quite a video man captured by a photographer who was at the campground at that point. Can you imagine if he didn’t if they like, wasn’t a dude with a really high powered camera, like?<\/p>\n
00:24:15
\nSpeaker 6: Did the bison just walk off after that?<\/p>\n
00:24:17
\nSpeaker 2: Immediately after the attack, some good samaritans, including the cameraman who stopped filming, They hazed the bison until it moved away from Carl, and because they were in a popular area, emergency vehicles got there within ten minutes. The man is hurt, but okay. His femur was broken in four places near his hip. The accident happened on a Friday. He had surgery on Sunday right here in Bozeman, and he was standing again on Monday. Carl said it wasn’t the bison that hurt him. It was the ground sure, So it wasn’t the impact from the bison. It was coming down that caused that broken femur. Now, the National Park Service says you need to stay twenty five yards away from bison. Is on their website, It’s in all their re materials. They also say one hundred yards away from bears, wolves, and mountain lions. Carl estimated that he and his grandson were one hundred yards away from that bison, so they were bear distance four x what the National Park Service says. Normally, when these things happen, the reaction from the general public is like, Wow, what an idiot. You know, he sure deserved that. Go team Bison, you know, get those more on tourists. That hasn’t been the case here. And when I watched that video, I don’t have that reaction either, Like the dude seemed like he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he didn’t linger too long. And the way that video begins, you’re watching the kind of encounter that happens in Yellowstone thousands of times a year, where someone’s just like watching a bison from what would be considered a safe distance, and usually it doesn’t happen like this where the bison actually attacks him. Do you guys feel the same way? Did you see something different?<\/p>\n
00:25:54
\nSpeaker 1: No? But I never, like, I never think that the person was dumb for even creeping up on stuff.<\/p>\n
00:26:02
\nSpeaker 6: Pettingam.<\/p>\n
00:26:04
\nSpeaker 1: Listen, I’m like, guy, you know, I like to get in there. I’ve never think you, guys, you never try to sneak closer to something.<\/p>\n
00:26:18
\nSpeaker 6: Of course I have, but I’m not gonna try and pet, but I think what Spencer’s getting now is true.<\/p>\n
00:26:22
\nSpeaker 1: Like this guy, no, he didn’t have I’m not mad at him, and I never do that. I never do that. I never do that thing like Oh, what a dummy.<\/p>\n
00:26:31
\nSpeaker 2: But that’s like eighty percent of the online reaction normally when when this happened, normally people are like, boy, dude had it coming.<\/p>\n
00:26:38
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah.<\/p>\n
00:26:38
\nSpeaker 4: I feel like the reaction to this one is very different than what you usually see.<\/p>\n
00:26:42
\nSpeaker 6: That thing was gonna get him no matter what. It went through those trees. Yeah, and that old guy’s pretty spry.<\/p>\n
00:26:48
\nSpeaker 1: He was.<\/p>\n
00:26:50
\nSpeaker 2: There was multiple moments where I’d have been like, oh, I’m safe now, like the thing is over, and then the bison like keeps going after him.<\/p>\n
00:26:56
\nSpeaker 5: That dude was hitting the Nazis zombie moves.<\/p>\n
00:26:59
\nSpeaker 1: I don’t know what that means. No, are you gonna add anything to this that Ida.<\/p>\n
00:27:08
\nSpeaker 2: Had to take.<\/p>\n
00:27:09
\nSpeaker 4: Oh, I was just gonna say, Like he starts out what looks to be a very safe, conservative distance from the bison, that truck goes through, blows its horn. They start moving off as soon as the bison starts moving towards them, Like, I don’t know that there’s anything in there that I’d second guess. And then the other thing too, is like you never really see the grandson get away.<\/p>\n
00:27:29
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, but you sort of get.<\/p>\n
00:27:31
\nSpeaker 4: The sense like he when the grandfather comes around the trees, he kind of stays there and does the cat and mouse thing with it, and I kind of wonder if he’s like trying to distract the bison.<\/p>\n
00:27:41
\nSpeaker 2: The grandfather said that was the case. He told his son to run to her grandson to run to the amphitheater, and that he was going to try to distract him.<\/p>\n
00:27:49
\nSpeaker 6: So he just ran. We couldn’t see him.<\/p>\n
00:27:50
\nSpeaker 2: Yes, the distraction worked a little too well though, as we saw in the video. No, of course Carlson.<\/p>\n
00:27:55
\nSpeaker 1: Gett a hundred yard vibes off that.<\/p>\n
00:27:57
\nSpeaker 2: I didn’t think so either, But that was what the quote said. Is distance Now.<\/p>\n
00:28:00
\nSpeaker 1: The guy the hazer, Yeah, then the hate’s finally about this. The dude who suppose he hates it from a truck even though he’s in a truck. He gets scared. Yeah, he got out of it, runs away in his truck.<\/p>\n
00:28:15
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, like right here, right here, you can see he’s like trying, you know, he’s trying to distract the bison.<\/p>\n
00:28:21
\nSpeaker 1: I think, Oh, look at that. That’s a bad that’s a bad ASSCT Again.<\/p>\n
00:28:25
\nSpeaker 2: Multiple times, I’d be like, Oh, it’s I’m safe. You know, I’ve evaded the bison.<\/p>\n
00:28:29
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah, I want to draw that bon I want to draw that bison tag and get that one.<\/p>\n
00:28:34
\nSpeaker 1: I don’t know him. Here’s something I don’t know. Okay.<\/p>\n
00:28:35
\nSpeaker 2: Of course Carl survived, but I went to one of my favorite books, Death in Yellowstone, to try to put the attack in perspective. There have been two bison related deaths in Yellowstone. The first was from July twelfth, nineteen seventy one, almost fifty five years ago to the day when Carl was attacked. That’s when Marvin Schrader, a thirty year old from Spokane, Washington, was at the Fountain Paint Pots with his wife and three kids. Marvin wanted to get a picture of a solitary bison that was loafed in a meadow. Marvin got to within twenty feet of the bison when it got up and charged him. The bison’s horn pierced the man’s liver just before it lost him twelve feet in the air. Marvin’s family watched him groaning on the ground for a few minutes until he died.<\/p>\n
00:29:20
\nSpeaker 1: You’re doing fatalities.<\/p>\n
00:29:22
\nSpeaker 2: Fatalities too, ever, guessed much higher, much higher fatalities. So that was nineteen seventy one. The second fatal bison attack happened twelve years later in Hayden Valley. Again, it involved a solitary bison during the rut. It was July thirty first, nineteen eighty three. Twenty one year old French visitor Alaine Dumont wanted his picture taken with a bison. He got to six feet away when the bison turned and gored him, throwing him ten feet in the air. Dumont’s injuries included a punctured kidney, punctured stomach, torn colon, damaged spleen, and four broken ribs. Dumont survived long enough to see a doctor, but later died from an infection because of the ruptured spleen. So those are the two fatal.<\/p>\n
00:30:12
\nSpeaker 1: Spleen is mine hurts now?<\/p>\n
00:30:15
\nSpeaker 2: Now all three of those events share some similarities. It was a singular bull bison during the rut, which again is happening right now, specifically in July. Each victim was either taking a picture or getting their picture taken with the bison, including modern day Carl. And my last thought is this book made me aware of something that I hadn’t really considered before, and it’s that humans have always been stupid. I think there’s maybe like this shared thought among people today that we’re like more disconnected from nature and our cell phones are making us dumber and common sense isn’t common anymore, and I think people maybe carry some even guilt about just like how dumb the modern man is. This book will make you realize that people have been doing dumb things and dying in spectacular ways, but.<\/p>\n
00:31:03
\nSpeaker 1: They’re not doing one hundred and fifty years, who’s not all kinds of hot buffalo hide hunters got killed. It’s like the world’s like a slightly dangerous place.<\/p>\n
00:31:13
\nSpeaker 2: I’m telling you this book. If you read, if you look at this book and look at all the deaths that have happened in Yellowstone over the last one hundred and fifty years, your takeaway will be like, oh, man, people have always been stupid. People are always trying to like take a cool picture, or impress a girl, or win a bet, or you know, like ignore bad weather, ignore an animal’s behavior that’s been happening for the last one hundred and fifty years, for as long as people have been recording this stuff. And I feel like we just kind of assigned that to folks in twenty twenty six, like, look at how stupid we are collectively. This book will tell you otherwise, we have always been stupid, and it’s like, you know, maybe our species has a chance. Here’s the best evidence of this whole thing. In the nineteen eighties, Yellowstone averaged six bison related injuries per year. In nineteen eighty three alone, there were eleven injuries. Today it’s less than two a year, despite there being literally twice as many bison in the park and twice as many visitors. So we’ve we’ve cut we’ve cut down injuries because they’ve they they they control, they control people’s freedoms. I don’t think so.<\/p>\n
00:32:21
\nSpeaker 1: I think they’re better rules.<\/p>\n
00:32:24
\nSpeaker 2: They’re just better at telling people like, hey, don’t get to six feet from a bike people’s freedoms.<\/p>\n
00:32:29
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, Americans are a trigger happy lot. We like to get in there, We want to mix things up, and they make it like you can’t mix anything up in there.<\/p>\n
00:32:39
\nSpeaker 3: Yeah, they should engrave that on that.<\/p>\n
00:32:44
\nSpeaker 6: I knew Spencer was headed for troubled waters on this one. When I found out that the View also covered this story, Oh.<\/p>\n
00:32:51
\nSpeaker 1: Dude, my wife pointed out this story to me, and we don’t like, we don’t traffic in the same news source.<\/p>\n
00:32:57
\nSpeaker 2: They didn’t talk about the two bison fatalities though, And again, humans have always been dumb. Humans have always been doing stupid things in dangerous places.<\/p>\n
00:33:07
\nSpeaker 1: I’m just very slow to condemn someone for having to mix up with wild animals.<\/p>\n
00:33:14
\nSpeaker 2: Like specifically the thing when it comes to taking the best picture, like taking a selfie that has been going on for as long as cameras have existed. There are so many deaths in this book because someone is trying to get the right picture.<\/p>\n
00:33:25
\nSpeaker 5: I feel like your book might have the opposite of survivorship bias. You’re only going to highlight the things that went crazy bad.<\/p>\n
00:33:32
\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, but that’s why it’s fascinating.<\/p>\n
00:33:34
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, if you made a whole uh normal everyday things going normally.<\/p>\n
00:33:42
\nSpeaker 2: It’s sad because every character that gets introduced in this book, you’re like, well, I know how this ends, so they’re gonna die.<\/p>\n
00:33:50
\nSpeaker 1: I got a book about hunters dying called Dying to Hunt Montana m It’s you can’t it’s it’s too painful. The gunshot section, it’s it’s it’s just like the writer’s too good, sparse. You cannot read it. You cannot read it. The amount of people jumping, crawling under fences, going over fences. And I don’t read it being like dummy, dummy. I read it like dude, world’s slightly dangerous place. But you still gotta get out there and mix it up.<\/p>\n
00:34:19
\nSpeaker 6: Hmm.<\/p>\n
00:34:22
\nSpeaker 1: Randall, you’re gonna do the changes to the ESSA. But should I start with the World’s most misleading headline or do you want to end with that?<\/p>\n
00:34:28
\nSpeaker 4: Let’s start with it, Okay, Phil, I said this. Did you see that email?<\/p>\n
00:34:32
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, I’ve been Yeah, this is big news. We’re a little just because of our recording schedule, we’re a little late to the game and talking about this, but it’s not going anyway anyway. Randall’s gonna lay out some changes the Trump administration made to the Endangered Species Act. But in amongst all the reporting, those great wildlife reporters at the Washington Post run an article about these changes, and you see a couple of manatees floating there, humanatees hanging out, and it says Trump administration allows killing of species threatened with extinction, which one might reasonably assume. Good, lord, they’re hunting manatees.<\/p>\n
00:35:16
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, we were sharpening our harpoons.<\/p>\n
00:35:20
\nSpeaker 1: I was already on the road, yeah, headed to Florida when I realized that this was a very misleading photo. But in all seriousness, like I said up top, if you’re guessing that they want to make the endangered species egg not as effective, you’re correct. Yeah.<\/p>\n
00:35:39
\nSpeaker 4: And this is one of those cases where there’s a headline and you think, God, this is this seems ridiculous. Surely it’s not a big deal. The headline is both wrong, but this is also a big deal.<\/p>\n
00:35:53
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah. They just wanted to find a way to take something that was very wonky, yeah and hard to understand and make people click on it by making the impression that it’s now okay that Trump is saying you can hunt manatees.<\/p>\n
00:36:05
\nSpeaker 2: Right, And it worked because that screenshot, the hyperlink was purple. So somebody clicked on that and read I don’t know who that came to.<\/p>\n
00:36:11
\nSpeaker 1: That came from me. I clicked right away. Yeah, Yeah, I clicked knowing it was dumb, but I still clicked it.<\/p>\n
00:36:17
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, it was I clicked on it just to make sure I got my tag application in on time. So the Force, I’m sorry, the Fish and Wildlife Service and Noah. So the Department of Interior and the Department of Commerce issued a rule on July fourteenth, and the rule is called rescinding the definition of harm under the Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act, at the most fundamental level, makes it illegal for anyone to take. And these are when I when I say the word with that emphasis, that’s from the law to take endangered species without authorization from the government. And in section three nineteen, the term take means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, killed, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct. So the word take is defined by ten different terms. And so this, as I said before, in the rule, they’re rescinding. How the word harm under that umbrella of take has been commonly understood for the past several decades. So harm until this rule change, the operational definition of harm included destroying an animal’s habitat if destroying that habitat or altering it impairs essential behaviors such as breeding. And one example that I found in my research from a I believe is an article in Vox. I can’t recall exactly where, but building a hotel on top of a beach where sea turtle’s nest, right like, because that is going to impair the ability of species to recover. That is considered take under the Endangered Species Act.<\/p>\n
00:38:09
\nSpeaker 1: In this.<\/p>\n
00:38:11
\nSpeaker 4: In this rule change, the administration does not offer a new definition, but it refers to a descent made by Justice former Justice Scalia. The late Justice Scalia in a case known as Babbitt v. Sweet Home that also had to do with the Endangered Species Act and habitat, and in his descent, Scalia said that essentially everybody knows what take means. It means when you deliberately go out and kill an animal, and so there’s no way that you could understand take to include destroying that animal’s habitat.<\/p>\n
00:38:47
\nSpeaker 6: By descent, you mean he was on the losing end of a decision.<\/p>\n
00:38:50
\nSpeaker 4: That’s exactly right. So so in that case, Scalia was not. The court actually ruled that conserving habitat or I should say, destroying habitat, falls under the definition of takes. Scalia disagreed with the majority, But the administration is going back and using his words to argue that, in fact, destroying habitat in a way that will harm the species does not constitute take. Now, the way that this works, essentially is there was a change two years ago in the way that administrative rulemaking works, like when Congress passes a law saying you can’t take an endangered species and then gives you ten words. Traditionally, historically, the agency themself has been able to define what harm means, right, and as long as the Court found that their definition was reasonable, then the agency could use that definition. Two years ago, the court repealed that was called the Chevron doctrine, or is up to the agencies to find reasonable understanding of the law. After the Chevron doctrine was overturned by the court, Now the Court has sort of claimed the power to interpret the best meaning of these laws. So essentially what’s going to happen in September is that harm the word harm will no longer explicitly include actions that will destroy habitat. You could build a hotel in that example. You could build that hotel on the beach where the sea turtles nest. And as long as you’re not intentionally killing individual sea turtles or their eggs, you’re fine.<\/p>\n
00:40:42
\nSpeaker 6: Shut down a logging operation because they’re spotted owls around.<\/p>\n
00:40:46
\nSpeaker 4: That’s exactly right.<\/p>\n
00:40:47
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, so.<\/p>\n
00:40:49
\nSpeaker 5: You’d have to drop a tree on a spotted owl.<\/p>\n
00:40:52
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, the part, that’s the part. And again the Administration is quoting Scalia’s understanding of the word harm, and what Scalia says is that it has to be an affirmative act directed immediately and intentionally against a particular animal. It’s not an act or omission that indirectly or accidentally causes injuries to a population of animals. So this sort of fundamentally undermines the purpose of the Endangered Species Act. And what’s interesting too, is that it’s clear that Congress intended the Endangered Species Act to cover those habitats. In the Endangered Species Act itself, it talks about conserving the habitats that species need to survive. It says the purpose this is from the law itself. The purposes of this Act are to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved. So, in short, the Administration is saying that harm doesn’t encompass those habitats, even though Congress specifically calls out habitats. And then the law also has provisions to permit incidental take, like if you’re going to do a project that would harm habitat that’s needed by an endangered species, you can work with the government to offset whatever incidental take you might have. But because harm is no longer going to encompass that, it’s unclear what will happen with those types of projects, Like if incidental take or or habitat destruction is not considered harm, it’s very unclear like how that will move forward. And this is probably going to long story short, this is probably going to end up in the Supreme Court. They’re basically the administration has basically said harm under the Endangered Species Act no longer no longer encompasses destruction of these habitats, and so like, it really removes a big chunk of what the Act is supposed to do.<\/p>\n
00:43:12
\nSpeaker 6: So if it’s going to end up in the Supreme Court in the meantime, do they get to operate under this new definition of harm or.<\/p>\n
00:43:21
\nSpeaker 4: Well, there’s lawsuits that have already been filed, I believe, but I don’t know whether the court will issue an injunction to stop the administration from putting this rule into effect. But as of right now in September, this rule takes effect whereby habitat destruction is no longer covered under the definition of harm, which is hard to wrap your mind around, but that’s sort of where we are.<\/p>\n
00:43:48
\nSpeaker 1: Man. These guys got a case of the ass against Yeah.<\/p>\n
00:43:54
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, and it’s you know, it’s one of those things like I feel like every every person in our community that cares about wildlife and cares about habitat and wild places, like we can all acknowledge that the Endangered Species Act has been weaponized in some instance. It’s like there’s ways to improve it, right, but to do away with this chunk of it, which seems awful important if you want these species to survive, Like it’s it’s kind of taking it an act to the whole thing when when I think most.<\/p>\n
00:44:26
\nSpeaker 6: Well, I don’t think it’s that the concern is with wildlife. Yeah, the concern is with for sure, development and energy extraction and stuff like that.<\/p>\n
00:44:34
\nSpeaker 1: For sure.<\/p>\n
00:44:35
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah. It removes a lot of roadblocks to things like as you say, development.<\/p>\n
00:44:40
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, there are some real significant pain points in the Danger Species Act, I mean most the most obvious example of that is the way wolves and grizzlies have been handled where in the case of grizzlies for decades, you have decades where grizzlies have reached recovery status as defined when they were listed, but people block the d listing because they view it as my favorite Animal Protection Act. That sort of thing creates a lot of ill will towards the Endangered Species Act, where people just look at these ridiculous examples of people weaponizing the ESA. It creates all kinds of animosity towards the essay, and then you get actions like this. I’m not trying to blame certain people for it as well, I’m saying then you get people that are like, all right, I’m done with the whole damn thing.<\/p>\n
00:45:38
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, it’s a polarized I mean, it’s a legitimately polarizing topic because of the way that it’s played out in contemporary politics, especially like in the West here. But man to say that the whole thing is rotten is maybe a step too far.<\/p>\n
00:45:57
\nSpeaker 1: One point about it, And there’s one hundred ways to get into this. Yeah, only two percent of the species that go on the Endangered Species Act come off because of recovery. Two percent things come off because they didn’t deserve listing in the first place. Things come off because they’re extinct. Things. Two percent there’s some big examples, bald eagles, whatever. Two percent come off because it worked. So that’s another thing. People will look and be like, well it doesn’t work anyways.<\/p>\n
00:46:29
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, you know, yeah, yeah, I mean it’s one of those things too. It’s just like governance is messy. You write a law with the best of intentions, and it can be used in any number of ways through litigation and all kinds of stuff. To you know, there’s tons of different perspectives on the ESSA, But like just getting rid of harm, including habitat, is wildly sort of like a huge like leap in imagination.<\/p>\n
00:47:03
\nSpeaker 1: Like let’s say, for for some reason, just you already made it this point, that’s why I double make it. Let’s say there’s a there’s a particular cliff face, and there’s a type of swallow the nests on that cliff face, and it’s the only place though swallows ever nest. Some guy says, I want to blow that cliff face up. Historically’d have been like, well, you can’t blow that up, because that’s an endangered swallow. The nests on that cliff face now would be like, Okay, wait till all the swallows are off, right, then you can blow the cliff face up. That way, you’re not technically taking any of the swallows.<\/p>\n
00:47:39
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah.<\/p>\n
00:47:40
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah, It’s not like the people who crafted this actually believe that destroying habitat is not quote harm.<\/p>\n
00:47:47
\nSpeaker 1: Like they know they’re being cute, right yeah.<\/p>\n
00:47:49
\nSpeaker 4: Yeah.<\/p>\n
00:47:51
\nSpeaker 1: So. Uh.<\/p>\n
00:47:52
\nSpeaker 2: Something that got my attention was Randall saying that Noah is under the Department of Commerce, which I didn’t know and I never considered where it was rolled up in the government. I knew it wasn’t DOI, but I googled why would it be under Commerce? It was created in nineteen seventy, Noah was and the most famous driving reason for Noah’s placement was a political feud between President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of the Interior, Wally Hickel. Following the nineteen seventy Kent State shootings, Wally wrote a public letter criticizing the Nixon administration, criticizing their handling of the Vietnam War demonstrators and urged the president to listen to the youth. Furious with Wally’s public defiance, Nixon chose to punish him by stripping the proposed Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency from the DOIS purview. Instead, he had in the agency to the Commerce Secretary. Maurice stands a loyal ally. So that’s how we got to where Noah is under the Department of Commerce, which when you hear, you’re like, well, that seems weird, and there’s a reason why it is so wed.<\/p>\n
00:49:01
\nSpeaker 1: Ten soldiers and Nixons come, we’re fun. Oh I could do it.<\/p>\n
00:49:09
\nSpeaker 2: I know, Phil can. He just doesn’t want to. No, I can’t.<\/p>\n
00:49:13
\nSpeaker 1: That’s cool. I don’t mean that second. Oh, go on wildfire, make money on wildfires.<\/p>\n
00:49:23
\nSpeaker 5: No, we’re talking about daylight savings time and if it’s going to become permanent.<\/p>\n
00:49:28
\nSpeaker 1: This, this whole thing is so confusing to me. I got you.<\/p>\n
00:49:30
\nSpeaker 5: We’re gonna clear it all up. There’s did the farmers start it?<\/p>\n
00:49:33
\nSpeaker 1: Was it? Ben Franklin? Two hours? One hour? We’re gonna clear it all up.<\/p>\n
00:49:39
\nSpeaker 5: So right now, the House of Representative has passed the Sunshine Protection Act, which is not the first time they’ve they’ve brought this bill up. It’s a bill to make DST or Daylight Savings Time permanent.<\/p>\n
00:49:51
\nSpeaker 1: What does that mean?<\/p>\n
00:49:52
\nSpeaker 5: Daylight savings time permanent daylight savings time means one hunter’s legal shooting shooting light comes at seven oh five am and an others at nine to twelve in the same time zone, in this case Central time. This gives an extra hour of shooting daylight in the afternoon. And so the question we’re going to examine is the extra afternoon light worth it?<\/p>\n
00:50:12
\nSpeaker 4: Yes, all right, we got on and I’m already confused.<\/p>\n
00:50:16
\nSpeaker 1: I’m already confused, And I hope you’re not making the mistake of thinking that the numbers we apply to this somehow affects how many hours of daylight there are.<\/p>\n
00:50:25
\nSpeaker 5: No, It’s all relative to work hours. That’s what I’m talking about, Yes, because we’ll get into it.<\/p>\n
00:50:33
\nSpeaker 2: When I was in college, this is the one thing that got me to write an email to a politician was that when the time would change when it does, the bars would still stay open un till two am. But now the sun’s coming up an hour earlier. So I’m losing an hour of sleep now every time the clocks roll back. So I’m like, we got to get this fixed. We need that extra hour in the afternoon instead of in the morning, because I’m not going to leave the bars early to make it up for shooting light. So I’m looking out for those kids.<\/p>\n
00:51:02
\nSpeaker 1: The drinkers. Yes, okay, take it away.<\/p>\n
00:51:05
\nSpeaker 5: So to answer this question, we’re going to go way back. What is daylight savings and where to come from? A plain definition is that daylight savings time is the practice setting our clocks one hour ahead of standard time in the warmer months, so a given stretch of daylight lands later in the day. We moved the clocks forward one hour on the second Sunday in March and back one hour on the first Sunday in November. The origins of daylight savings time can be traced to Ben Franklin, though tenuously as US envoy to France. Ben Franklin published a satirical essay that Parisians could save sixty four million pounds of candle wax if people just woke up with the sun. He did propose firing cannons at dawn, but never proposed changing the clocks. Fast forward about one hundred years and George Hudson, a New Zealand postal worker and entomologist, proposed a two hour shift, primarily so he’d have more daylight to collect bugs after work.<\/p>\n
00:51:55
\nSpeaker 1: This little thing was ever observed this before with that Ben Franklin smart man. Some don’t know if families have noticed that this.<\/p>\n
00:52:03
\nSpeaker 5: Was October to March in the southern hemisphere, but same for us its oppos in the northern. He didn’t get a whole lot of traction until nineteen oh seven, when William Willett, an English builder, Royal Astronomical Society fellow and golfer, proposed a similar advancement, but in four twenty minute increments across the month of April and reversing that in September. The stated benefits were more recreation, time less crime, less energy. To Spencer’s point, people in the past being done this is a great example. We hate changing our clocks once. This dude proposed changing it four times over a month. The first official adoption is nineteen sixteen in Germany, which was an effort to conserve coal for the World War One war effort. This takes us, Oh yeah, Germany was the first one.<\/p>\n
00:52:49
\nSpeaker 1: That’s how this started, yep. Now grant other plots for world domination.<\/p>\n
00:52:54
\nSpeaker 5: I mean within months the rest of Europe adopted it for the same reason, so there seemed to be some merit there.<\/p>\n
00:53:00
\nSpeaker 1: Fast forward two years.<\/p>\n
00:53:00
\nSpeaker 5: Nineteen eighteen, the US adopts DSD for the same reason, but repealed in nineteen nineteen after the war amid public complaint, much of it from the agricultural community. I’d always thought that the agg community loved daylight savings time, like that was the whole point.<\/p>\n
00:53:14
\nSpeaker 1: It is not the case. They do not like it.<\/p>\n
00:53:17
\nSpeaker 5: Nineteen twenties, DSD becomes optional daylight savings time. There’s limited local adoptions, pretty patchy throughout the US. There’s all sorts of issues with trains and trick commerce and whatnot. Nineteen forty two, FDR institutes year round wartime, which is year round daylight savings for energy saving. In nineteen forty five, three years later, wartimes repealed. States and cities set their own rules again. It results in this patchwork and confusion peaks in nineteen fifty four when, for example, New England extends through October while all their states end in September, and then some go to November and some do one hour, some staggered, and so it’s a mess.<\/p>\n
00:53:52
\nSpeaker 1: They’ve delivered that for about.<\/p>\n
00:53:53
\nSpeaker 5: Twenty more years, and in nineteen sixty six the Uniform Time Act is passed, which standardized DST from the last Sunday in eight to the last Saturday in October. That said states may exempt themselves, which is how Arizona, Hawaii, and portions of Indiana were exempted. You’ll also notice when we look at these lines, there’s a creep the boundaries, creep where the western edges push to escape those late sunrises. Nineteen seventy four to seventy five, the same thing’s enacted during the oil embargo. They enact year around DST to save energy. There’s a ton of public backlash, specifically sighting kids going to school in the dark, and within eight months they roll it back to the standard six months, on again and off again.<\/p>\n
00:54:37
\nSpeaker 1: Just be clear here, when they’re talking about energy savings, they mean that it’s an hour less that you’ll spend dicking around your house at night with the lights on.<\/p>\n
00:54:46
\nSpeaker 5: It’s the lights on which we’ll get into and now it seems to be offset by AC and all the other things that take energy. Two thousand and five, the Energy Policy Act extends DST from the March to October, or i’m sorry, from April October to March to November. And that’s what we have today. And it was mostly energy related. The current Sunshine Protection Act introduced in the Senate originally in twenty eighteen, then again in twenty twenty one, then in twenty twenty two, has been reintroduced again here in the House in twenty twenty six and passed and sitting with the Senate. So there’s this long history of daylight savings and the ultimately the main critique is that it just needs to be the same across the board, whether it’s early or late whatever, just the end of the session.<\/p>\n
00:55:28
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah, why daylight? Why do they want to go with permanent daylight savings time versus permanent standard times.<\/p>\n
00:55:36
\nSpeaker 5: It’s basically a trade off if you want time in the morning or time at night.<\/p>\n
00:55:39
\nSpeaker 3: And that’s the question.<\/p>\n
00:55:41
\nSpeaker 1: Daylight in the morning. So they’re talking about I’ll just go take the perspective of the dumb guy out there, because that’s where I’m at on this. This means you don’t have to message your clock anymore. The goal is to never change the clock. Okay, yep, So just you are are you going to adopt the fall time for the springtime?<\/p>\n
00:56:04
\nSpeaker 4: Yes?<\/p>\n
00:56:05
\nSpeaker 1: I don’t care.<\/p>\n
00:56:06
\nSpeaker 5: Well, it’s are you going to adopt the permanent summertime or the permanent winter time? Because that’s when it changed that sixes. To me, I support the sole thing, So I think the whole clock change the thing is dumb.<\/p>\n
00:56:15
\nSpeaker 1: Agreed. Yeah, so I’ll tell you why later.<\/p>\n
00:56:18
\nSpeaker 5: Let’s let’s just clarify terms, because I think we need at this point. What we do currently is we switch twice a year, spring forward one hour and fall back.<\/p>\n
00:56:25
\nSpeaker 3: Everyone hates it.<\/p>\n
00:56:26
\nSpeaker 5: There’s been permanent standard time, which is what Steve’s talking about, where we stop switching. We keep the quote unquote natural clock, which has lighter mornings and darker evenings and happens to be recommended by most sleep scientists and the American Academy’s medicine. And then what the what Congress is passing is permanent DST, which is to lock the clocks one hour ahead forever, lighter evenings, darker mornings.<\/p>\n
00:56:50
\nSpeaker 4: Well until they changed it again.<\/p>\n
00:56:52
\nSpeaker 1: Kids out having fun riding their bikes all summer long at night, they need to get up in the morning.<\/p>\n
00:56:58
\nSpeaker 4: If I have one take away from your segments so far, it’s that it won’t be forever, It’ll be for twenty years.<\/p>\n
00:57:04
\nSpeaker 6: There’s a common.<\/p>\n
00:57:07
\nSpeaker 5: In one of the studies I read, it said it took us fifty years to get this standardized. What’s next so that said states can still opt out, which what they if under this rule they have to be in the same time zone. There’s a few other stipulations. But if you really hate this idea, your state can’t opt out.<\/p>\n
00:57:25
\nSpeaker 1: Would it be the Indianamal’s right? All or wrong? Or right? Are parts of it? Depends on what you think is important.<\/p>\n
00:57:32
\nSpeaker 5: Arizona’s Arizona, Hawaii and Hawaii the territories. None of them observe it because they’re near the equator and it doesn’t really matter.<\/p>\n
00:57:39
\nSpeaker 1: It’s just us.<\/p>\n
00:57:41
\nSpeaker 5: But it does matter significantly, especially for the groups that are at the two corners of the time zones, which we’re we’re going to talk about. The time zones themselves are an interesting little tidbit. So where where did these come from? Toy the pros and cons? We need to have a firm understanding of those time zones themselves, because the impact of this proposal is drastically different if you live, say in the northeast corner or I’m sorry, the northwest corner of North Dakota, which is the top northwest corner of the Central time zone, or Panama City, which is the far southeast corner of the central time zone. So these time zones came originally from the astronomical societies. Basically they wanted twenty four worldwide meridians, which is fifteen degrees apart, and that would that would collapse all these different railroad times into four time zones across the US Eastern Central Mountain, Pacific and ever. Every time zone is built around the central line of line of longitude where the clock is supposed to match. Noon would line up with that meridian perfectly, and so that’s why it’s in the middle of these time zones.<\/p>\n
00:58:43
\nSpeaker 1: That’s great.<\/p>\n
00:58:44
\nSpeaker 5: So instead of you know, like when you the time zone line that you’re basing it off, isn’t the split in between you know, Alabama and Georgia or wherever you’re split is it’s the center of that Generally, the farther east you go from that idian. So in this case, let’s take the center of the country and you’re going towards the edge of North Dakota. The the further east you go, the earlier the sun runs against your clock mh. The farther west you go so towards Florida, the later it runs against your clock. To put it simply latitude and longitude. Longitude east to west is when the sun crosses your clock. Latitude north to south is how long the day is. And both of those those get they they stack at those corners, the northwest and southeast corners. So Phil, if you don’t mind pulling up that first little slider guy that I’ve got, what we’re gonna look at is the two time zones for the for the you know, we can choose, well, which time zone do you guys want? Central?<\/p>\n
00:59:48
\nSpeaker 4: It doesn’t matter to me at all.<\/p>\n
00:59:51
\nSpeaker 5: Which one Central?<\/p>\n
00:59:53
\nSpeaker 1: Central is the largest, So click.<\/p>\n
00:59:55
\nSpeaker 5: On Central in this case Wilston, North Dakota, and Panama City, Florida, and you’ll see in December twenty first you’ve got a nine to forty two am wake up in North Dakota versus seven thirty five sunset. Isn’t that drastically different? But that wake up is crazy. Now if you go back, let’s let’s take it to let’s call it November seventh. What you’re looking at here, and this is how you can measure from a hunter’s perspective, you’d be eight forty nine am under permanent standard daylight savings time, which is you can’t hunt before work. And I’m only talking weekdays here, I’m not talking weekends. You’re not gonna hunt before work with an eight forty nine am sunrise.<\/p>\n
01:00:33
\nSpeaker 2: But I don’t think you’re hunting before work when it’s seventh exactly.<\/p>\n
01:00:36
\nSpeaker 5: That is my whole point is, I don’t think it matters because you know, take an hour off this you’re gonna go if if you sunrise shooting light isn’t until seven fifteen, you’re not gonna get that sit in before So I.<\/p>\n
01:00:49
\nSpeaker 1: Don’t know man’s gonna if you work here. People just do what they want all the time. Anyway.<\/p>\n
01:00:53
\nSpeaker 5: Yeah, now that said after work, you got great options six twenty eight sundown, so shooting ends at seven. Dude, you can sneak out of work at four, hop up in your tree stand.<\/p>\n
01:01:04
\nSpeaker 1: And you got two hours to hunt cat. You’re a dirty secret with you, please. I used to like when they switched the clocks for fall bow hunting, because you’d get out of school, your old man pick you up at school, rush you out to sit in the tree stand, and you just got to the magic hour that much quicker before it felt like you were up there forever. But then all of a sudden, you just rush out there and the minute you get in your tree, dude, it’s the magic hour. I think for I used to look forward to it because it shortened how long you had to sit in your tree before.<\/p>\n
01:01:40
\nSpeaker 6: He saw something I used to get like ninety minutes after school where you know, which was perfect.<\/p>\n
01:01:46
\nSpeaker 1: You’re like, because my be up there for a million hours. Yeah, you know.<\/p>\n
01:01:51
\nSpeaker 5: Well I’m sorry for the kiddies, but for the people who have nine to fives, I think this is great news. So what we’re demonstrating here, and you could do it across all the time zone you can check winter solstice all the things, but you guys get it there. The trade off is region regional, especially as you live on the far extreams of these time zones, and so so why it.<\/p>\n
01:02:11
\nSpeaker 1: Matters to everyone?<\/p>\n
01:02:12
\nSpeaker 5: There’s there’s very clearly documented associations with the time change. Specifically, there’s more car crashers, there’s less robberies, there’s more heart attacks, more strokes, there’s mood implications. I could go on, but ultimately, what does it mean for us as hunters and for hunters? There’s a few elements. Energy usage is the first one. There’s this argument that daylight savings time increases energy efficiency because you don’t have your lights on as long because the sun’s up.<\/p>\n
01:02:40
\nSpeaker 1: The jury’s out.<\/p>\n
01:02:41
\nSpeaker 5: It seems that the increased usage of home appliances in ac during peak heat hours throughout the year after daylight savings would actually offset that because lights have gotten so efficient with LED lights and whatnot, as opposed to heating up your oven at five o’clock when the sun’s still shining is going to be significantly more energy draining. And so it’s kind of a moot point from the rancher impact, because we love our ranchers here. The switch is what’s annoying. It seems like they don’t really care which ones which. It’s just like, choose one schedule. I want the milk truck to show up at the same time every day. I don’t want my cows to have to change twice a year for their schedule. Der vehicle collistion and that was that was actually a tough one for me to wrap my mind around, like why is that time really matter? But if you had like a morning routine, like your morning poop or something, and then someone said, oh wait, actually you need to do that an hour earlier today, twice a year it’d be super annoying to adjust all your routines and so take up smoke and I feel for the cows.<\/p>\n
01:03:35
\nSpeaker 1: Yep. Another interesting one is der vehicle collisions.<\/p>\n
01:03:38
\nSpeaker 2: This is a big one.<\/p>\n
01:03:39
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah.<\/p>\n
01:03:39
\nSpeaker 2: Man, if you’re a hunter, you’re like, oh, okay, now I’m convinced.<\/p>\n
01:03:42
\nSpeaker 1: Yep, we’re getting even even more dialed.<\/p>\n
01:03:44
\nSpeaker 5: So this is a study that covers one over one million collisions and ninety six million hourly traffic observations. Collisions are fourteen times more frequently two hours after sunset than before, which is pretty clear. The fall back shift puts peak tracks in the darkness at the time of the rut, which also sees more deer injuries year round. DST would prevent approximately thirty six and fifty deer deaths, thirty three human deaths, twenty fifty four injuries, and one point two billion dollars in costs annually. Permanent standard time, which would be Not shifting the clocks would make collisions worse at two point four billion dollars annually.<\/p>\n
01:04:24
\nSpeaker 2: Thirty seven thousand more deer out there walking around if we change the clocks, because they’re not getting hit by vehicles.<\/p>\n
01:04:30
\nSpeaker 1: Save big bucks, Save big bucks, Change good yeah, and you have a logo for that with a dollar sign and a big buck and then in little letters.<\/p>\n
01:04:41
\nSpeaker 4: Say take about the play on words. That’s great.<\/p>\n
01:04:44
\nSpeaker 5: And so finally, the ultimate question I wanted to answer is your hunt scheduled. You have weekends or weekends, but on a workday, if you’re trying to get in before or after, does permanent daylight saving time give you to give hunters more hours before or after and to trade off? And so Phil, if you can pull up that second slider, what we’re going to look at is total hunting minutes, which I defined as before from thirty minutes prior to sunrise up till eight am, and from four to thirty pm til thirty minutes after sunrise.<\/p>\n
01:05:13
\nSpeaker 1: So this is a workingmand’s schedule here. Yeah, there’s a working man. Yeah exactly.<\/p>\n
01:05:16
\nSpeaker 5: Like like I said, weekends or weekends, we’re just trying to sneak out after tea.<\/p>\n
01:05:20
\nSpeaker 1: Your schedule.<\/p>\n
01:05:20
\nSpeaker 5: Here you go, and in this case we’ll we’ll talk again North Dakota and Panama City and what we can do if you want to slide that towards November. Look at that that second though. The blue is your morning minutes that’s available. The Orange is your afternoon minutes, and so that top with the top row itself is standard time. The second row is permanent DST or daylight savings, and so you end up getting a few more minutes when you switch in North Dakota. If you’re down in Florida, it doesn’t really change. But then if you look at the full year, so under Williston the second set of bars, you end up with significantly more hours of sunrise under this system than you do understandard and you can you can apply that kind of across and again it’s it’s it’s greater at the northwest corner than it is in the southeast.<\/p>\n
01:06:08
\nSpeaker 1: And so there you go. I’m a big fan. I think it’s great. Hmm. Yeah. If I was alive a long time ago and someone would have brought this whole thing up in the first place, Ben Franklin whatever, like you know, we’re hanging out, I would have said, Man, let’s just no, let’s just focus on something different. Like this thing just seems like a headache. It’s gonna be hard to get buy in. It just feels arbitrary.<\/p>\n
01:06:34
\nSpeaker 5: It’s taken like one hundred years.<\/p>\n
01:06:35
\nSpeaker 1: It’s like stuff just the season. I like the seasons.<\/p>\n
01:06:41
\nSpeaker 4: Just no, if this sticks, it’ll be really interesting in like thirty or forty years to tell little kids about how we used to change the class twice a year.<\/p>\n
01:06:50
\nSpeaker 2: I feel like they’ve been talking about changing this though my whole life. This feels the closest it’s ever come. Because Trump said if it gets to his desk, he’ll sign it, and it would be a big win for Republic.<\/p>\n
01:06:59
\nSpeaker 1: Because he’s big. He’s a big ball hunter. What he gets off work, you know, his eyes up with the old tree.<\/p>\n
01:07:05
\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, I bet it happens this time. This is it. This is where we make the change permanent.<\/p>\n
01:07:11
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah.<\/p>\n
01:07:12
\nSpeaker 5: Man, we could go down through hunters, but we’ve gone on for a while.<\/p>\n
01:07:16
\nSpeaker 1: No, you’re good.<\/p>\n
01:07:18
\nSpeaker 2: I do like Nate’s note about upland retirees more daylight to hunt, fewer clock change health risks.<\/p>\n
01:07:25
\nSpeaker 5: I’m just saying that if you’re hunting upland birds, you’re probably retired, so none of this matters to you anyways, and you’re just less likely to have a heart attack with the black clock changing.<\/p>\n
01:07:35
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah, that’s good report. I’m with you.<\/p>\n
01:07:39
\nSpeaker 6: Back to Colorado, back on the fur band thing.<\/p>\n
01:07:43
\nSpeaker 1: It’s dead.<\/p>\n
01:07:44
\nSpeaker 6: They go anywhere Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission voted six to five that rejected the petition.<\/p>\n
01:07:53
\nSpeaker 1: That was sixt to five. There’s still five people.<\/p>\n
01:07:56
\nSpeaker 6: I mean, Polis has his people in there, right, they’re not going andwhere they actually put some new people on which we could.<\/p>\n
01:08:03
\nSpeaker 2: Talk about what if it would have passed, what if it went into action at that point or was there like another wow, yeah it.<\/p>\n
01:08:08
\nSpeaker 6: Would I mean there would have been exceptions to to think like flies felt hat stuff like that. But anyway, it’s it’s it’s done.<\/p>\n
01:08:17
\nSpeaker 1: It’s not happy good. I think I think we should take credit for that. We should.<\/p>\n
01:08:22
\nSpeaker 6: We got on commit One of the commissioners, Dallas May, said CPW did a survey in April and fifty seven percent of the public did not support that ban, so you know they went along with with what the people wanted.<\/p>\n
01:08:36
\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, sixty five is basically fifty exactly.<\/p>\n
01:08:41
\nSpeaker 5: This was.<\/p>\n
01:08:43
\nSpeaker 6: This was that original proposal by the Center for Biological Diversity that we talked about a bunch, But we’re moving on forty three of Colorado’s I know that feels that you should not be able to sell or buy a product to make from muskrat first. I mean, I’m not in charge of the survey. But if you think about where people live in Colorado, you know what I mean, Like that concentrated number of people on the Front Range that probably would have supported it.<\/p>\n
01:09:12
\nSpeaker 1: It kind of makes it. I would get just talking.<\/p>\n
01:09:14
\nSpeaker 4: I would have felt a lot better with a seven to four commissioned vote.<\/p>\n
01:09:18
\nSpeaker 6: This doesn’t matter.<\/p>\n
01:09:20
\nSpeaker 1: Story. I was down and I gave a talk down in San Antonio, Texas a weekend ago to Texas Wildife Association, And in my talk, I was joking with them about how everybody in Colorado always bitches about you people and buying all their land. I used to. But I’m like the way things are shaking out in Colorado. I would say that the more the merrier, they need more texts, they need more Texans to get that place straight back.<\/p>\n
01:09:51
\nSpeaker 6: There’s probably people from Colorado now that are moving to Texas because.<\/p>\n
01:09:54
\nSpeaker 4: They like the way things Austin.<\/p>\n
01:09:56
\nSpeaker 1: Oh yeah, left wingers, this is a controversial state I’m about to make. I don’t want to get political. You don’t say lefties don’t want to live in lefty states. Not anymore lefties want to live in righty states. The big lefty states lose population to the righty states. It’s so weird.<\/p>\n
01:10:15
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah, demographics.<\/p>\n
01:10:16
\nSpeaker 1: I try to live with someone bringing down my neck all the time. But you know I don’t want get political.<\/p>\n
01:10:21
\nSpeaker 6: Yep, all right, we’ll move on. They did have some options they could have gone with, which was keep the current regulations, ban the sale for products with exceptions, ban the sale of raw pelts with exceptions. That all seemed confusing, and they just got rid of the whole thing. The second thing that happened at this meeting was that because they couldn’t just let the fur bear thing go completely, is the Commission voted also six’ five to impose new daily bag limits on seventeen fur bear. Species now that basically what that means is trappers and. Hunters, like the coverage on THIS i felt like was kind of screwy because everything mentioned, trapping nothing mentioned. Hunting it was definitely like the coverage was aimed at like painting trapping a certain. WAY i felt LIKE i kind of left the hunting part of it out of. It but, anyway no more than two animals per species per. Day those species are, badger, bobcat, beaver, coyote, muskrat strip, skunk western spotted, skunk, raccoon red, fox, mink, possum pine, martin ringtailed, cat gray, fox swift, fox long tailed, weasel and short tail. Weasel that’s it. NOW cpw proposed a fifteen animal daily, limit which was largely a symbolic cat because very few trappers would ever reach that. Number of, course wildlife advoacy advocacy groups were, like, oh that’s way too. Many so they came up with a couple of different. Options eight animals a day for common species that are often considered like a nuisance for livestock, owners like, coyotes, raccoons red, foxes four animals a day for less common species like pine martin and. Mink, ultimately those options didn’t go. Through The commission adopted an even stricter, rule which was the two per species per. Day this isn’t, like this isn’t banning. Trapping you can still, trap kind of you?<\/p>\n
01:12:42
\nSpeaker 4: CAN i CAN i ask you a stupid, Question, yeah for like if you IF i were to say to you you can only harvest four animals a, day we’re talking about martin and. Mink how does? That how does that work out in? Practice because you’re going to have more than four traps out? THERE i, mean, like does a good day turn into a bad.<\/p>\n
01:13:06
\nSpeaker 1: Day, yeah what if you get? Six it’s, yeah it’s meant to like really up end your, deal like if you’re setting it like it would be that if you’re trapping muskrat in muskrats, possums there’s.<\/p>\n
01:13:16
\nSpeaker 4: No you don’t have, control there is no spe there.<\/p>\n
01:13:20
\nSpeaker 1: Is no species concerned about these. Species but it would mean that you’d be, like DO i make three sets, right trusting that one of those sets doesn’t pay?<\/p>\n
01:13:28
\nSpeaker 6: Off that’s what you would turn people into violators for.<\/p>\n
01:13:31
\nSpeaker 4: You it’s on its face it doesn’t seem crazy because people reach those, levels but it does kneecap you in terms of how it plays out on the. Ground if you want to stay in compliance.<\/p>\n
01:13:43
\nSpeaker 1: Normally what you do when you’re trying like a normal state that is, interested a normal state that is interested in like honest wildlife management does they when they look at a species that’s susceptible to over, harvest they create unit wide. Quotas right in the unit wide, quota everyone that gets, something say it’s a. Bobcat everyone who gets a bobcat calls a hotline or goes online reports their. Bobcat as you approach the unit wide, quota you give a twenty four hour or forty eight hour notice that the season is, closing or if you’re racing toward the, quota they might call it knowing that in the next forty eight hours the quota will be. Chieved that’s like a serious grown up way of handling this. Problem this is a way meant to like kneecap, people, yeah and prevent people from and basically criminalize normal activity based on.<\/p>\n
01:14:35
\nSpeaker 6: Nothing and to be, clear like even, bobcats which are regulated tightly in some, states like none of these species DID, Cpw like none of them are biologically, unsustainable, Right like even with no, limits the populations were doing.<\/p>\n
01:14:52
\nSpeaker 2: Fine.<\/p>\n
01:14:52
\nSpeaker 6: Right so it’s just like this vote is just like a broader trend In colorado towards restricting you, know things like mountain lion, hunting, wolf wolf. Restoration. Thing like it’s all part of this trend to like make it harder for people that hunt and. Trap, Now, like the thing about this is is that impact practical impact on people In colorado is probably not gonna Be there’s not probably not much to it because in nineteen ninety, Six amendment fourteen Passing, colorado which banned the use of leg hole, traps instant killed body gripping, traps, snares and poisons for a hunting and fit or for hunting and. Trapping so the only way you can trap In colorado is with live box. Traps is that what They? Yeah, Yeah and so like the practicality of like putting out a bunch of live, traps it’s just not, there like not, many there’s not many people doing it In. Colorado there’s very few high volume like commercial. Trappers so is this going to have a big? IMPACT i don’t think. So the IMPACT i think you would see is on hunters probably more than, trappers like things like shooting, coyotes you, know to a. Day so that’s kind of where it’s. At. Mark there’s some interesting info here From Matt, eckert who’s A Cpw deputy assistant. Director unlimited unlimited daily bag limits with live, trapping which is the only method of trapping, allowed and. Hunting harvest numbers gathered from harvest surveys far below the maximum allowable harvest that would be considered, Sustainable so they’re nowhere near again like endangering any of these. Species the agency sold twenty thousand burbar permits last, year eighty five percent end of those permit holders did not harvest an. Animal so, whatever that’s three thousand people with furbear permits harvested you, know at least one. Animal so it’s just like not a big thing In, colorado but it’s definitely like a statement from the commission to like just make it more.<\/p>\n
01:17:22
\nSpeaker 1: Difficult these people are such little like there’s such worms, too because they they have an. Agenda they have like an animal rights animal protectionist, agenda and over time they’ve abandoned like the peda. Approach the peda approach is sort of make noise socially, right make out landish claims higher celebrities to do little celebrity spokesman bits that doesn’t, work and they’ve gotten shrewd enough now or they’ve adopted this kind of language of wildlife management and they’ve infiltrated game. Commissions they’ve entered the political sphere and they start using the vernacular of people who sort of are invested in wildlife, management who understand wildlife, management and they can they’re achieving their. Ends they’re achieving their goals by. Masquerading, yeah and they’re undermining wildlife.<\/p>\n
01:18:18
\nSpeaker 6: Professionals they’re undermining like the effectiveness of the people that are actually doing like the boots on the ground and work and the and the work of collecting data like they’re they’re making it so like the guidance and advice of the agency is just like not. Valuable you, know a.<\/p>\n
01:18:38
\nSpeaker 1: Thing that’s something that brings up to. ME i want to preface this by Saying i’m not, there But i’ve always wondered about. This at what point would it? Be this is a question everybody has asked. Themselves if wildlife management in your, state are in this country in, general veers so off course and the objective of it is, lost at what point would you ever decide that you’re just going to do things the way that makes sense to you and effectively become a vigilanti, individual, meaning you, know if it got to where the mission was, lost would you ever, say we’ve strayed so far from like the conservation, objectives and we’ve strayed so far from anything that makes. Sense i’m just going to do my own, thing because BECAUSE i don’t trust these people, anymore And i’m not proposing anyone get. There BUT i always ask, myself because there is a, point like all of a sudden tomorrow they said all of a, sudden tomorrow the animal rights people gain their, momentum and there’s all a sudden this like federal, law and some federal law comes into place it is forbidden to consume wild, venison and it’s just against the. LAW i would at that point become a. POACHER i just. Would, YEAH i wouldn’t listen to. It if there’s a, thing you, know there’s but there’s all but that that applies to all kinds of. Things if it also became that free speech that’s like generally free speech is, PROHIBITED i would, BECOME i, guess a free speech vigilanti and all sorts of. Measures but like there’s a point at WHICH i would, say you lost. Me i’m kind of going on my own on this.<\/p>\n
01:20:24
\nSpeaker 6: One, Yeah and that’s the danger, AGAIN i think where like these agencies just can’t do their job the right way when they’re being guided by commissions that have a clear goal to go the other. Direction you, KNOW i don’t know.<\/p>\n
01:20:38
\nSpeaker 1: HOW i don’t know How colorado is going to pull back out of.<\/p>\n
01:20:41
\nSpeaker 2: THIS i want to give a silver lining to outdoors in there if there were to. Pass WHEN i lived In South, dakota there was a body of WATER i fished that flirted with the idea of going from the daily limit of four while eyes to. Three naturally people were against. It who, Fish but QUIETLY i was, like, well if this does, pass this will be a different definition of success all of a, sudden because if the if the limit is four and you come into the boat dock after a day of fishing and someone’s, like how’d you do you? Know catching zero walleye is basically the same as like bringing. Three it’s like did you get a limit or? Not, like, yep got my. Limit now if the limit is, less you’re more likely to be, like, YEAH i got my. Limit what a badass TRAPPER i? AM i, Thought BUT i thought that was like A they were saying that you now have a limit that you can get per. Day do you understand What i’m. Saying if the walleye limit was now three instead of, four everybody’s getting. Limits, Wow look how great ave anglers we are silver Lining steve knows he’s coming around the trapper who got a? Limit now that’s a. Trapper he’s so.<\/p>\n
01:21:57
\nSpeaker 8: Effective there’s gonna be a lot of great. Trappers, yeah such a good. Trapper they didn’t realize how lucky they are not too. Many There’s Trouble brun And.<\/p>\n
01:22:09
\nSpeaker 1: Yellowstone this is a Very western heavy. Episode we’re gonna run with it. Anyway Trouble brune And Yellowstone Wolf world concerning a pack of. Wolves so there’s a pack of wolves originally called The Crystal Creek. Pack, okay the pack has been in existence since, reintroduction so it’s thought to be the first pack that ever. Coalesced informed of, course all those original wolves in that original pack are all, dead but like as a sort of piece of, continuity the pack has kept. Going reminds me of ice living a house where none of the people on the lease lived in the, house but the house was kept chugging along with various people moving in and there was always four or five people in. There none of them were the original people that ever rented the place in the first. Place so from the rent from the landlord’s, perspective it was like the tenants there was through there’s no through. Line there’s no through. Line they had no idea who was living in that. House just the check came and it was like that. House so the wolf, pack they die and get, replaced but it sort of, exists all. Right it was originally Called Crystal Creek. Pack it was renamed After Molly, baby who was the first female director of THE Us fish And Wildlife. Service she actually died of cancer during the time of the, reintroduction so eventually they call this Pack Molly’s. Pack, okay here’s where this gets kind of. Interesting this pack has historically stayed put in the. Park they spent about ninety five percent of their time in the, park which means because the park’s just you, know full of, people park rangers and, whatnot they’re habituated to. Humans but they’ve now drifted out of the. Park they’ve drifted eastward into The Shoshone National forest In. Wyoming this is the area that has a lot of cattle. Grazing so there’s fear now that this beloved park, pack which is like a very like very much a tourist, attraction the tourist, attraction has moved out into the. Woods they’ve moved out into the Wild, okay and there’s cattle grazing. There so people are anticipating that this pack is going to start getting in trouble for killing.<\/p>\n
01:24:23
\nSpeaker 6: Cattle is that are they in the like trophy zone.<\/p>\n
01:24:29
\nSpeaker 1: During the trophy Zone now That broady brought it. Up i’ll, mentioned, well you’re. Okay wyoming has a area where they manage wolves as a trophy, animal as they made that terms. Goofy they manage wolves as a big game animal in the north west corner of the state and the rest of the state they manage them basically a. Vermin they run them, like which Is i’m not a huge fan of that at, all but but they have their, extremes whether they have they have two uni which demonstrate one of them is like sound, management and one of them seems feels extreme to. Me, however it’s a fear now that This molly’s pack is gonna start getting in trouble for killing. Cattle so the wolf protection it is like the park protectionist people the. Public they’re, saying, hey we need to go in and suspend grazing leases Intoshone National forests to prevent these wolves from having a chance to kill a cow and get in. Trouble all, Right so they’ve tried they’ve tried to bump they’ve tried to bump the wolves back into the park because they’re dending out of the park in a method they use to bump. Wolves is you actually send people in there to kind of hang out near the den site to try to apply a little pressure and get them to nudge back over toward the. Park they managed to move, them but not move them all the. Way and it feels as though as we’re speaking right, now right, now they’re over still in The National forest and they still got pups in The National. Forest this Is wyoming’s Hunt area. One they’re in a hunt. Area there’s a bad case of canine distemper in the, park which is trimming back the wolves real. Bad So wyoming already reduced the wolf quota in the trophy area by fifty, percent but in this area where This molly’s pack is hanging, out there’s currently from there’s currently planned to be a four wolf hunt quota in that. Area that season is going to run From september fifteenth To december thirty, first again four wolf quota in that. Area so now you’ve got wolf advocates and even some politicians From Jackson Jackson hole politicians Asking wyoming to actually come in and halt the wolf hunt In unit, one not to protect just some wolves in, general but to protect the.<\/p>\n
01:27:10
\nSpeaker 6: Wolves they, like they’re.<\/p>\n
01:27:14
\nSpeaker 1: Like it was not that they thought it was okay to, hunt but they’re, like, yeah we understand there’s a wolf hunt, there but now that someone might get the ones we know and, like we would like you to close. It they’re saying that to The State Game, commission and they’re trying to put leverage On Shoshone National forest to say no wolf hunting In Shoshone National forests here because some people’s favorite wolves are over. There they’ve tried this before and it hasn’t. Worked but these little, pressures like when some wolves were In, colorado they tried to Get wyoming to come in and, say, okay you can’t hunt along The colorado border for fear that you might kill one of those wolves that we all know about In. Colorado The Wolf project director In, yellowstones the guy Named Dan, staller he’s taking a rather circumspect view on the old, thing he. Said he said to a news agency that he’d hate to see an old alpha female like wolf ten ninety f lose her life to. Hunting that’s part of the world of the. Wolf, now it’s been part of the world of the wolf for over ten.<\/p>\n
01:28:23
\nSpeaker 6: Years, yeah and a lot longer before.<\/p>\n
01:28:26
\nSpeaker 1: That but they point out the ten ninety f is world.<\/p>\n
01:28:28
\nSpeaker 6: Famous is there any speculation on why they chose to leave the.<\/p>\n
01:28:33
\nSpeaker 1: Park there’s some people throwing darts at, it but. Speculation i’ve read some speculations that felt like they kind of whiffed of not really knowing what we’re talking. About it was that there’s been very mild winners. Here try this going. On there’s been very mild winners in the, park and so the animals in the park are in very good shape because there’s been wild mild winners and so they’re too hard for the wolves to catch. There but somehow a little over to the east And Shoshowny National, forests which is subject to the same weather, patterns you don’t know they move. Around they move. Around it’s an invisible line that they don’t recognize or know. About they move huge. Distances in, fact in a day’s, travel they could be back where they came. From it’s just they’re not aware of the. Line but it’s, like the takeaway on this is there is an inherent danger in the like in naming animals and creating individual personalities around, animals of trying to protect this one and not that. One this is the THING i often preach And i’m talking to When i’m talking about wildlife management to audiences that might not be familiar with the principles of wildlife. Management AND i always use the analogy of And i’ve used it here, before apologies for using. Again imagine that you have an a apple tree and it produces. Apples animal rights people are very interested in the. Apples they take a shine to the individual apples on that. TREE a mature wildlife manager takes a great interest in the tree because if you take care of the, tree it will always crank out. Apples animal. Writes people come oblivious to the tree because they’re so concerned about the individual, apples and those apples get, eaten those apples fall to the ground and die. Inevitably but that tree will crank for, hundreds well it’ll crank for a long. Time, yeah decades and decades will. Produce and so here you have people fixating on the apples that they, know the apple growing closest to their, house which they polish and look at and take pictures. Of and the tree is just kind, of you, know not of. Concern but when it’s you see this thing it happened to when you get, like you’ll get like an albino animal in a in an area and people it will put away for people to know That i’m albino, animal and they’re, like someone needs to come save the albino animal BECAUSE i know that. One, YEAH i recognize that. Individual and it just it creates a. Mess it creates a. MESS i can’t tell WHAT i hope happens here if they naturally move back into The, HONESTLY i think that that if they naturally move back into the park and it’s like crisis, averted you’d be. Disappointed, no it might be the best thing because it’s better for Wolf Lover’s.<\/p>\n
01:31:56
\nSpeaker 4: Animolf it might.<\/p>\n
01:31:56
\nSpeaker 1: Be the best thing because the state The national, forest and the state cannot. Capitulate this is my. Recommendation you can not.<\/p>\n
01:32:06
\nSpeaker 6: Capitulate, yeah like we, say the wolves don’t know where the boundaries of the park, are but there’s, boundaries, right so like they’re not in there, anymore maybe they should go back.<\/p>\n
01:32:18
\nSpeaker 1: In it’s like the state. Cannot i’m asking, them, like do. Not you cannot capitulate to the to the to the mob and say, okay we’re going to extend part jurisdictions way out into The National.<\/p>\n
01:32:31
\nSpeaker 6: Forest thing is you can’t manage park.<\/p>\n
01:32:33
\nSpeaker 1: Animals, yep they. Can’t they can’t give. In but if if the wolves move, back then the state doesn’t need to capitulate and they don’t need to deal with with what’s gonna happen when someone gets this this famous Lady.<\/p>\n
01:32:49
\nSpeaker 6: WOLF i think there’s some wolf unders already plotting for that.<\/p>\n
01:32:52
\nSpeaker 1: SEPTILE i know there, Are AND i don’t hate, you JUST i JUST i think that a lot of, WELL i think a lot of, managers federal, level state, level would if they move, back they’ll be, like oh my, god they Got, yep thank.<\/p>\n
01:33:13
\nSpeaker 4: God speaking of potential for really bad, stuff this this next segment could be the latest in an ongoing series titled Online. Predictions markets Are weird and seem bad for. Everything these are gambling sites where you can buy shares in an. Outcome it’s typically yes or no, Question and it could be will so and so win an? Election will so and so score? Touchdown will it?<\/p>\n
01:33:42
\nSpeaker 1: Rain and Will trump say a certain word.<\/p>\n
01:33:44
\nSpeaker 4: In, Topeka?<\/p>\n
01:33:45
\nSpeaker 1: Kansas?<\/p>\n
01:33:45
\nSpeaker 4: Yep will this disease spread into this other? Country will there be a hurricane in the next? Week and it’s a multi billion dollar. Industry the ones you’ve probably heard. Of our callshi and. Polymarket but there’s recently a story In High Country news reported By Kylie moore a couple of weeks. Ago she wrote about the relationship between wildfires and prediction, markets and she looked specifically at the twenty twenty FIVE la. Fires people spent one point two million dollars betting on twenty different questions about the outcome of those. Fires it was, like how many acres are the fires going to, burn where the fire is going to go when they’d be. Contained and in, fact she points, out there’s another site that’s launched Called wildfire With whys instead Of, eyes where it’s specifically about making predictions on. Fires and the problem, here as you might, guess is we spent a lot of time sort of as a, society like public, agencies, nonprofits all this stuff explaining how people what people need to do to prevent man made, wildfires because it’s pretty easy in the right, conditions for one individual action and to have devastating. Consequences and now there’s a financial incentive for someone to go out and perhaps leave a camp fire. Smoldering like like anything that people can bet, on someone’s going to find a way to nudge the outcome that they, want and so it’s just really weird that we live in a time now where you could have financial incentive for a wildfire. Spreading and it’s a big distinction between betting ON i looked at what else you can bet on and call you last. Night how many inches of rain will fall In houston In, july whether or not there will be an eight magnitude earthquake In california before the end of this, year how many hurricanes will be in The. Atlantic, like those are all things that you don’t have control, manipulated, Right and so there’s a reason like why it’s more problematic for an athlete or a referee to bet on sports than it is a guy sitting up in the. Bleachers but, again like this is out there right, now these markets justify it by saying this Isn’t they’re saying this is a type of crowd sourced, forecasting meaning that you can look at polymarket and see where the expert money is saying that fire is going to. Go and so it’s actually it’s actually provides the most accurate information to people because they can crowdsource all, this which is obviously like kind of a bullshit Hedge.<\/p>\n
01:36:33
\nSpeaker 6: Yeah how many billions of? Dollars is are they, making like those sites making off of gambling on these?<\/p>\n
01:36:39
\nSpeaker 4: Things, YEAH i mean the like there’s proposed legislation right now that prohibits betting related to, terrorism, assassinations, wars, crimes or gambling on people’s, deaths because obviously being able to gamble on those things creates perverse. Incentives but THERE i Bet randall gets hit by a golf.<\/p>\n
01:37:02
\nSpeaker 6: Club, YEAH i think of it this way perverse in, said it’s LIKE i Bet randall’s gonna get a two hundred inch buck this year and then lo and behold.<\/p>\n
01:37:10
\nSpeaker 1: He starts haunting his ass.<\/p>\n
01:37:11
\nSpeaker 4: Off, yeah or he goes IF i, could IF i could, bet IF i could bet a million dollars on whether or Not i’ll fall down the stairs, TODAY i will hurl myself from the third floor to the. First but wildfire has not yet like been among the things banned substances bands per proposed, Bands so just a. Weird we have enough headwinds in terms of wildfire prevention and fighting in this country. Currently we don’t need people gambling on whether or not that fire is going to spread to the next county because you know, what somebody might go out there with the can of gas and.<\/p>\n
01:37:49
\nSpeaker 1: Make that spread of the next. COUNTY i already share this with you with the prediction, markets you’re reading about all these kind of crazy bets about, whatever like you, know wars and famines. WHATEVER i was watching a movie called d’en bien. Fou it was about The. French it was about The french defeat by The vietmn which kind of ended up precipitating The American war In. Vietnam, anyways in this, movie there’s a there’s a betting, salon a, parlor a betting. Parlor it’s a big it’s a big plot in the movie where Everyone, French, vietnamese everyone is going into a bookie to place bets on what hills would fall and when The vietman would Overrun en bien fu including people who are, directly not directly involved in the, fight but people who are manipulating the actions of pertaining, people military, guys. Whatever so the idea of inside betting, nothing inside, trading betting on, out betting on things that seem almost you, know morally. Reprehensible, yeah this is not, New, no it’s just really bought kind of an age old thing to the.<\/p>\n
01:39:12
\nSpeaker 4: Forefront, yeah and it’s accessible to, everyone and it’s except like it’s it’s in your, pocket it’s right there and anybody can do.<\/p>\n
01:39:19
\nSpeaker 6: It and it’s just giving more options to people who got bad gambling, problems like to be able to bet on.<\/p>\n
01:39:25
\nSpeaker 1: Anything, Yeah i’m not worry about those. People you’re.<\/p>\n
01:39:27
\nSpeaker 6: Not, Well.<\/p>\n
01:39:30
\nSpeaker 1: I’m not a big like save you from yourself kind of. Guy, well but.<\/p>\n
01:39:35
\nSpeaker 6: That’s a through line on this that from The yellowstone thing you talked about.<\/p>\n
01:39:39
\nSpeaker 1: Earlier, YEAH i. Don’t, YEAH i. DON’T i don’t GENERALLY i don’t want to save people from. Themselves but it, is, yeah to to make it be that you can like profit by like building up a bet around a wildfire and placing the. Bet you, KNOW i get. It but it’s also like a difficult thing to, regulate like for the government to come say, hey no more bet. Making sure what’s which they?<\/p>\n
01:40:05
\nSpeaker 4: Do they, did they did for a really long.<\/p>\n
01:40:08
\nSpeaker 2: Time this administration likes these, markets though they’ve been like generally favorable towards. THEM a recent example of like a better who controlled his own destiny was at the Last Super bowl At Levi stadium In. California there was a streaker within hours of that, happening it came out that he PLACED i think it was a fifty thousand dollars bet on prediction markets that there would be a streaker during The Super. Bowl plus he got like ten buddies to do the same, thing and so they were like millions of dollars exchanged and made because this guy was, like, well, yeah there’s gonna be a, Streaker i’m gonna do.<\/p>\n
01:40:40
\nSpeaker 4: It if you’re that passionate about streaking and you’ve fully committed to do, it it would be silly to leave that money on the.<\/p>\n
01:40:46
\nSpeaker 1: TABLE i don’t know. THAT i don’t know that that’s the government’s, problem the Super bowl.<\/p>\n
01:40:53
\nSpeaker 2: Streaker maybe.<\/p>\n
01:40:54
\nSpeaker 1: Not, Yeah. OKAY i feel like if someone, said, MAN i was betting, on you, know whether it be a streaker at the Super, BOWL i lost some of my hard earned money and NOW i really feel LIKE i should have been protected by the. Government i’d be, like, BUDDY i don’t, know, man you’re betting on streakers at The Super.<\/p>\n
01:41:14
\nSpeaker 2: Bowl the other thing is if you outlaw, it somebody’s going to make it a thing, anyway market that the mafia will rise again and make all of its money off of. Betting if if you, know legalized gambling goes, away so like someone’s going to figure out how to do, it And.<\/p>\n
01:41:30
\nSpeaker 1: I’ll point OUT i, Mean i’m not totally hipped to current, law BUT i think arson is generally legal illegal, anyway, Correct so he’s already got one.<\/p>\n
01:41:39
\nSpeaker 6: Problem, yeah but they might really put the screws to you when it comes time to like issue a. Sentence if they’re, like you know you.<\/p>\n
01:41:48
\nSpeaker 1: Did, This, yeah they go to the jury like the son of a bitch bet on? It, yeah the streaker.<\/p>\n
01:41:55
\nSpeaker 2: He’s breaking the law too when he does.<\/p>\n
01:41:56
\nSpeaker 1: It what’s the law he’s?<\/p>\n
01:41:58
\nSpeaker 3: Breaking?<\/p>\n
01:42:00
\nSpeaker 1: Yeah all that. ONE i don’t know HOW i feel about. That should that be illegal probably in certain contexts streaking betting on.<\/p>\n
01:42:10
\nSpeaker 2: IT i also think it came out that that guy had, like wait a, minute this dude has has been a streaker before and maybe been well reported, on like this might have been the second time that he.<\/p>\n
01:42:23
\nSpeaker 6: Come out on. Top, financially just as.<\/p>\n
01:42:25
\nSpeaker 4: You pointed out with The buffalo, attacks people have been streaking long before the age of cell. Phones this is just something about.<\/p>\n
01:42:32
\nSpeaker 1: It that makes you want to go out trigger. Happy. PEA i mean that, metaphorically not just that they like to, shoot they’re just a it’s hard to control Them. Americans we’re out, there, yeah creeping up on.<\/p>\n
01:42:47
\nSpeaker 8: Wildlife Maybe carl had a.<\/p>\n
01:42:51
\nSpeaker 2: Call she bet on the number of bison injuries this year In. Yellowstone and now he just cashed the over, All.<\/p>\n
01:42:58
\nSpeaker 1: Right we’re. Done we got one hit On Bear’s. Ears we’ll keep this.<\/p>\n
01:43:02
\nSpeaker 5: Brief if you hadn’t read the, news The trump administration slashed the monument protections For Bears. Ears this is originally designated twenty sixteen Under President, obama and it was about one point four million acre monument under The Antiquities, act ostensibly to stop rampant looting across one hundred thousand plus acre or one hundred thousand native archaeological. Sites is backed by a five tribe, coalition et, cetera et. Cetera trump won slashed the monument in twenty, Seventeen Biden unfolier store in twenty twenty. One just a few weeks, Ago july, thirteen twenty twenty, Six trump two slashed it again down to about one hundred and twenty thousand.<\/p>\n
01:43:40
\nSpeaker 6: Acres and he did that by executive, Word.<\/p>\n
01:43:42
\nSpeaker 5: Yes by executive, order and it’s because of an interpretation he feels that or his administration him, whatever feels that he can reduce those based on a clause that says the Minimum it’s like the minimum amount or the least amount of space. Necessary the opponents to this say that you can create, monuments you can’t undo. Monuments so, basically, yeah it’s. Sorry the clause’s smallest area compatible and his rationale as it locked up critical mineral. Resources from a hunting, perspective it doesn’t really change the hunting management that’s still in the hands Of, utah but it does change the access because travel rules in a, monument it restricts you to motorize travel strictly on designated, roads protectic cultural ruins and. Whatnot without the monument, protections you can basically do whatever you can do ON blm, land which is a. Lot then there’s also an opening of a sixty day window for potential, mining oil and gas, leasing which will most likely happen in that. Area an interesting little the OPPOSITE i wouldn’t say, opposite but an interesting effect of this is that when this whole political kerfuffle went down in twenty sixteen With obama and then back and forth pre twenty, sixteen visitation was seventy five thousand people. Annually with national headlines and all the digital absent, stuff it drove visitation of four hundred thousand visitors last.<\/p>\n
01:45:04
\nSpeaker 1: Year that’s compared to.<\/p>\n
01:45:06
\nSpeaker 5: So you, know one hundred or, sorry at three hundred percent, increase compared to a twenty percent increase across The Utah Big five in that same, area and so that’s altered game, behavior that’s increased backcountry.<\/p>\n
01:45:19
\nSpeaker 4: Pressure it also calls into question the idea that people are locked out of their under. Monuments.<\/p>\n
01:45:24
\nSpeaker 1: Exactly that’s a good pointing, out except for the four The.<\/p>\n
01:45:33
\nSpeaker 2: Yeah trump’s quote was you can’t do. Anything you can’t go, hunting you can’t go, fishing you can’t do. Anything you can virtually not even walk on.<\/p>\n
01:45:40
\nSpeaker 1: It that’s that’s completely.<\/p>\n
01:45:41
\nSpeaker 2: False, yeah that Was trump’s quote as he like signed the.<\/p>\n
01:45:44
\nSpeaker 1: Paper but that was, like we’ve Covered we’ve covered every step of this thing for ten.<\/p>\n
01:45:52
\nSpeaker 3: Years for ten.<\/p>\n
01:45:53
\nSpeaker 1: Years ten years is a long, time but it’s not a long. TIME i think that when when you look at, THIS i think people often lose sight of the fact that this was first put in place Under. OBAMA i think in the in the popular, imagination this was like something dating back To Teddy Roosevelt theodore and this is likely in two, years this is likely to get undone. Again and an issue like, THIS i become interested is what does it take to have this stop bouncing The obama put it into, place it was Under trump undid, It biden put it back in, Place trump was undoing it. Again it’s that executive order.<\/p>\n
01:46:44
\nSpeaker 6: Thing, Man you’d have to get rid of that and have it be a Congressional, yeah they proclaim it to, be and then getting it undone a.<\/p>\n
01:46:51
\nSpeaker 1: Lot. Yeah part of the, issue and where this winds up plying to, outdoorsman as people follow this debate back and forth is part of the issue is like there’s this fear of losing hunting and fishing privileges on the monument. STATUS i don’t. Know the executive action on this becomes a little bit, silly AND i do wonder what steps it would, take and if it was gonna get like some kind of congressional, Designation i’m guessing that there would need to be a some serious. Gift there would need to be some serious debate and probably compromises. Made, yeah and it’s and it might not land At obama’s one point six.<\/p>\n
01:47:37
\nSpeaker 5: Yep and we have a late story coming in of the Med eater photo. Contest if you scroll down to the bottom of your, Screen, phil if you can pull up that first one on the media, website there’s contest that ended. Yesterday and these are the top three winners that’ll be chosen today when this podcast, launches and the winter will choose Two Moultrie edge four trail cameras with solar, packs one hundred Dollars Meat eater store gift. Card and so these are the three we’re looking. At first, one what are you see in there with that.<\/p>\n
01:48:12
\nSpeaker 1: Gator gator come to kill some.<\/p>\n
01:48:14
\nSpeaker 4: Coons who’s winning that fight or a bunch of coons coming to.<\/p>\n
01:48:17
\nSpeaker 1: Gang i’ve seen videos where they coming right in there and grab them.<\/p>\n
01:48:21
\nSpeaker 6: RACCOON i let that one gets my boat hands, down.<\/p>\n
01:48:24
\nSpeaker 1: Man then the second, one there’s a mountain lion getting ready to smoke a. Fawn, Yeah i’m betting on the. LAW i didn’t even see that. Fon, yeah that’s really interesting on the, line damn, man that’s From july.<\/p>\n
01:48:36
\nSpeaker 2: Sixth that’s the picture is only a few weeks.<\/p>\n
01:48:38
\nSpeaker 1: Over.<\/p>\n
01:48:39
\nSpeaker 4: Oh then there’s a guy that actually still be digesting parts of that fun.<\/p>\n
01:48:43
\nSpeaker 1: Does the guy that actually his trail camera actually picked up the moment his arrow entered the vital area on A michigan eight white tail.<\/p>\n
01:48:53
\nSpeaker 5: BUCK i like, that BUT i feel Like i’ve seeing stuff like that.<\/p>\n
01:48:57
\nSpeaker 1: Before because you could get, yeah that’s not like trail, Camy like you could just pull a still off a video and have.<\/p>\n
01:49:03
\nSpeaker 5: That my buddy’s got a picture of him and his dad in the stand and his dad is missing their target.<\/p>\n
01:49:08
\nSpeaker 1: Buck it’s, hilarious it’s, fine but it’s just it’s not trail. Cammy what do we? VOTE i vote for The.<\/p>\n
01:49:17
\nSpeaker 5: Gator, yeah all, Right Team.<\/p>\n
01:49:20
\nSpeaker 6: Gates i’d like to be standing there to see what. HAPPENS i kind of know what’s gonna.<\/p>\n
01:49:23
\nSpeaker 1: Happen but my buddy In louisiana has sent me these videos and the gator just comes up and grabs the raccoon into these corn. Feeders, no the raccoon’s, like what is? That what is? That all of a, sudden the walks off with the.<\/p>\n
01:49:40
\nSpeaker 4: RACCOON i like that the two are sort of hanging back. There i’ll get Him, bill.<\/p>\n
01:49:48
\nSpeaker 3: All.<\/p>\n
01:49:48
\nSpeaker 1: RIGHT i want to back up on. SOMETHING i don’t mean to be. LIGHT i don’t mean to be dismissive on the on the, monument The bearsiers monuments AT. Us at this, POINT i just feel that this is not this is not, done AND i think that in two years we’re probably gonna see another.<\/p>\n
01:50:11
\nSpeaker 4: Reversal, yeah another.<\/p>\n
01:50:17
\nSpeaker 1: Football, YEAH i think it’s gonna Be, yeah it’s gonna be Another it’s it’s like the it’s today’s ant, war even though ant war is still today’s ant, war tomorrow’s. Animar, Yes, yeah it’s gonna be one of those things that just it’s gonna be a long time till this gets, settled and it will not get settled through executive. Proclamations thanks for listening to The News. Show<\/p>\n<\/div>\n