00:00:02 Speaker 1: From Mediators World News headquarters in Bozeman, Montana. This is Cal's weekend review, presented by Steel Steel products are available only at authorized dealers. For more, go to Steel Dealers dot com. Now here's your host, Ryan cal Callahan. 00:00:22 Speaker 2: Several of you sent me a story a few weeks back about a python that was surviving in an Oklahoma trailer park by eating pet cats. The snake and albino reticulated python had grown to be thirteen feet long, and the pest control expert assigned to remove the critter compared its girth to Mike Tyson's bicep. Because I know you're wondering, the Internet agrees that the baddest man on the planet has biceps or pythons measuring seventeen inches in diameter. That's one fat snake. Anyway. I reached out to the pest control expert, a fellow by the name of Trevor Bounds, and he gave me a few more gory details. Apparently the python had been the pet of a former resident of the trailer park. No surprise there. The snake escaped its enclosure and got into the walls of the home, But rather than fess up and call pest control himself. This guy just moved away. Here's where things get interesting. According to Bounds, the snake owner also had a quote rat room in the home where he bred rats, presumably to feed to his python. When he moved away, the python had a field day in the rat room, which is likely how it grew to be so large. Then the snake made a nest under one of the homes and got his fifteen minutes of fame on the international news. Bounds told me he didn't end up catching the snake, but he heard later that quote one of the eight other snake owners in the trailer park captured the snake and kept it as a pet. So there you go, the mystery of the cat eating python has been solved. I'll be waiting for a call from whoever hands out Pulitzers for journalism this week the crime desk legislation in the mail bag. But first I'm going to tell you about my week. In My week has been super interesting. I joined Mule Deer Foundation in Oklahoma. Oddly enough, not the snake in a trailer park part as far as we know, But you know the park that's covered in spines and sand burs and stuff. That I'll be digging out of my elbows, knees, legs, thighs, forehead for a long time. Up until now, I had never spent any appreciable time in the state, which is famous for the dust Bowl, among a lot of other things. Turns out the Sooner State is super interesting with lots to appreciate. First, thank you to Dane for taking me out to the Oklahoma City Shooting Ranch, which is an absolutely phenomenal facility. Helped me dial in a new scope on the weather be three oh seven and as far as folks in that city go, the only other person I met was a great dude who happened to be bartending named Floyd Hatcher. If you live in that town and you need some help learning jazz piano or drums, check him out. He's an Army artillery veteran with a degree in jazz classic combination. I know military is full of them. I'm sure another thing I didn't know, and maybe you don't know either. Oklahoma is one of two states in the US with a native population of both American alligators and mule deer, which is pretty darn awesome. I love mule deer. I think they may be the best animal representation of the Western United States, and they taste great. Our adventure in Oklahoma was in the Panhandle region. Another fun fact about the Panhandle, which is that long, skinny part that sticks way out to the west. No matter where you are in the Panhandle, you're going to be less than thirty four miles north or south from another state. Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas, Missouri, and Arkansas are its borders that's running west to east. Kids. We filmed this adventure the country was really fun and you'll get to see it all. An upcoming project we have with Mule Deer Foundation coming out this winter. One fun tidbit I'll give away right now. I scope myself, which if you don't know, is when the shooter and croaches on the scope of a rifle and the recoil drives the hard edge of the scope subjective into the shooter's face, which is my face in this case. It can cause a pretty good little cut, or a lumpurn bruise, or a combination of all of them, depending on the severity. The last time I did this, I was seventeen, maybe just barely eighteen. High school football was over, so I met up with the old outfitter and spent the week skipping school, helping out in el camp, and hunting. When the clients went home, we found two bowls. The day before I had to get back to school for the very important attending of our end of season football banquet ol Hellgate Night Alumni here. Apparently I thought nobody would miss me in class, but everyone would miss my delinquency if I skipped the football banquet. Well, to make a long story short, and the process of putting a great five point bowl on the ground in a late November snowstorm, I'll never forget, I repeatedly pounded my scope into my face trying to force a not perfect shooting angle. Showed back up to school with a half moon gash over the intersection of nose and right eye, which you just don't get being sick at home. Hope everyone has been having a great season. Hope to see out at the media live tour. Don't forget to hit the back country Hunters and Anglers pint nights where you can qualify for free tickets to the show and a seat in front of everyone for meat eater or trivia. You know I'll be easy on you game on suckers. Moving on to the crime desk, Missouri's Operation Game Thief is offering a twenty thousand dollars reward for information leading to the conviction of poachers who shot and killed the bull elk. The elk was found by a deer hunter near Klebzig Mill in Shannon County. It still had its antlers and none of the meat had been removed. They are only a couple hundred elk in Missouri, which is why the state's Operation Game Thief is offering a reward large enough to buy the recipient a new car, a legal guided elk hunt, or forty high quality hunting jackets from first Light. You could outfit your entire extended family with that kind of cash. Just a little Christmas advice for you. The National Park Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish are also seeking the public's help with identifying those responsible for illegally killing a bull elk at Bandalier National Monument. The elk was killed within monument boundaries in late September, and authorities still haven't been able to catch the subjects. The National Park Service is offering a five thousand dollars reward and New Mexico's operation Game Thief will add to that if a poacher is convicted. When you think of international crime rings, I bet drug running, firearms smuggling, and human trafficking come to mind. Now, according to a new report from INTERPOL, you can add wildlife crime to that list. The International Criminal Police Organization released a report recently concluding that environmental and wildlife crime has become one of the world's largest and most profitable crime sectors. Black market wildlife products generate about twenty billion dollars. As we cover frequently on the show, these goods included things like bear paws, gall bladders, turtle shells, and even dinosaur fossils. Sturgeon are also frequently targeted by poachers. The large prehistoric fish are threatened or endangered in many parts of the world, but they're often killed so their eggs can be harvested and sold as caviar. Caviar can be legally sold when it's from farm raised fish, but a new study found that half of caviar products from four European countries are illegal. Researchers looked at caviar products from Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia and Ukraine and determine that half come from wild caught sturgeon. To add insult to injury, some of the products aren't even caviar. One Romanian dish called sturgeon soup, for example, was made from European catfish and nile perch. Bottom line fishing pun intended. If you plan on buying animal products from the internet, be sure you know where they come from, or, better yet, don't buy animal products from the internet. You may not be able to harvest your own caviar, but you still have tons of opportunities to gather your own groceries right where you live. If you don't choose to go to the legal route, you might end up like two men from Alabama and Georgia who are being charged by the FEDS for conspiracy, smuggling, and money laundering. Prosecutors allege that between twenty sixteen and twenty twenty, fifty three year old Tony Jones and seventy four year old John Waldrup illegally imported nearly eight hundred taxidermied bird mounts. These included eagles, falcons, parrots, woodpeckers, and grouse. If convicted, this dynamic duo faces over forty years in prison. Thanks to listener Anthony Crowe for sending that one. In a Kansas poacher is paying a fine and forfeiting his rifle after the coyote he shot turned out to be a mule deer. Last December, game wardens were called out to a rural area and Graham County after a landowner reported hearing a rifle shot near his house. Warden spoke with the shooter, who said he'd shot at a coyote from the road. It's illegal to kill coyotes on someone else's property without permission in Kansas, but the wardens let him go, presumably with some kind of citation. However, those wardens didn't drop the case. They brought out a canine officer named Creed that spelled Kried, not like the band. Creed promptly found a two forty three casing near the road. A short time later, Creed discovered a freshly killed mule deer in the landowner's field. The poacher was forced to pay fifteen hundred dollars fine and forfeit his rifle. Big thanks to listener Scott mackenzie for sending us that story and the last one for you. The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources recently charged a man after he admitted to shooting and killing someone's hunting dog. The man was hunting deer in the central part of the state when he saw a dog on his property. The dog was part of a deer drive and had been released about six miles away. The South Carolina DNR doesn't say whether the man knew the dog was part of the deer drive, but they believe he shot the dog on purpose. It is illegal in South Carolina to kill a dog just because it enters another person's property. If convicted, the man will face a maximum fine with five hundred dollars and thirty days in jail. It's frustrating to have your deer hunt broken up by a dog, but good grief, you're just playing with social fire right there. Moving on to the hunter harassment desk, a federal appeals court issued a ruling last month that might make it easier for anti hunting activists to harass hunters in Wisconsin. This one hasn't gotten a lot of play in the outdoor media, but I think it should. Back in sixteen, the Wisconsin state legislature passed a law tightening the restrictions on how and where animal rights activists could impede the legal activities of hunters. Harassing hunters has been illegal in the Badger State since nineteen ninety, but the revisions clarified that anti hunters were not permitted to quote, maintain a visual or physical proximity to a hunter, or approach or confront a hunter. It also prohibits some one from electronically recording a hunter using audio or video. According to the statute, these activities constitute hunter harassment if they show continuity of purpose and are intended to impede or obstruct a hunting or fishing related activity. In other words, it's not illegal to film someone hunting, but it is illegal to do so if that filming obstructs a lawful hunt, whether by impeding the movements of a hunter or scary off game. This all seems pretty straightforward, but not according to US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. A three judge panel ruled two to one last month that those three provisions are unconstitutional because they are vague and overbroad. Specifically, the court said that the law fails to explain how close someone can be to a hunter before they are guilty of engaging in unlawful interference. They also said the law is overbroad because it prohibits audio and video recording activities that are normally protected under the First Amendment. Animal rights activists, they say, film hunters because they want to contribute to the public discord, and the law creates a chilling effect on this constitutionally protected activity. The court also ruled that the law violates the First Amendment because it engages in viewpoint discrimination. The judges noted that the law prohibits recording hunters only when those recordings are intended to disrupt a hunt, not when that recording is made for other purposes. This, they say, singles out one viewpoint and discriminates against it, which is illegal under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. It's worth noting that this ruling does not strike down Wisconsin's entire hunter harassment law. Wisconsin hunters probably shouldn't be concerned about hordes of anti hunting activists swarming through the woods with camera crews in tow. The court only struck down those three phrases about maintaining visual or physical proximity, confronting hunters, and videotaping hunters. If someone intentionally interferes with a hunt they can still be charged under the Wisconsin law. Responsible hunters know that you always follow the law, you always treat animals with respect, and you take all the meat out of the field. This is just basic stuff, and I feel like kind of a jackass reminding you of this, or just even saying it. Doing the right thing is doing it even when nobody's watching right. What this whole lawsuit suggests, though, is that there are people who are trying to find other people slip up, either intentionally or unintentionally. Either way, they're going to be painted in the light that suggests that hunters are sloppy, immoral, doing things for the wrong reason whatever. Forever, hunters have been very good at policing our own ranks. I don't think that's ever going to change. Over the last probably four weeks, I've bumped into hunters that are absolutely like brand spanking new, but they're trying to get things done on their own, and because we're a bunch of tough dudes hunting, we're not very forthcoming with the information that we don't know all there is to know. Right, those are great opportunities to jump in, be super friendly, help out and get them on track for their next hunt where they can be a little bit more pro So I know you're already doing this. That's why we got a great community here at Cal's Week in Review meat eater in general. So just keep it up, all right. Moving on to the legislative desk. Speaking of court rulings, a judge in Montana made the controversial decision last week to significantly shorten the state's wolf trapping season until further notice. As we cover in episode two thirty three, animal rights groups recently filed a petition claiming that wolf trapping unintentionally harms grizzly bears. Since grizzly bears are still on the endangered species list, they claimed that Montana's wolf trapping season violated the Endangered Species Act. Last Monday, US District Court Judge Donald Molloy agreed, at least for now, and issued a preliminary injunction ordering the trapping season to be significantly shortened. Rather than start on Monday, November twenty seven and run until March fIF fifteen, the season will now run from January first to February fifteen in most of the state. Judge Molloy said that the plaintiffs, the flathead Lolo bittera citizen task force, and wild Earth guardians had established serious questions about the impact of the trapping season. Animal rights groups claimed that twenty one bears have been caught in traps in the state, but the real number is likely higher since grizzlies are strong enough to pull themselves out of wolf traps. But attorneys for the state of Montana pointed out that those twenty one reported cases date back to nineteen eighty eight, they weren't all from wolf traps, and most of the traps were set by biologists, not members of the public. They said. The only confirmed case of a public wolf trapper with an incidental catchup a grizzly was in twenty thirteen, in a time outside the current trapping season, meaning that the state has already adjusted its season to prevent whatever happened in twenty thirteen. Despite this evidence that wolf trapping is no serious threat to bears, the judge decided to truncate the s in this year. The state of Montana plans to appeal the decision and will keep you posted as things develop. If you were planning wolf traps in Montana, check with Fish, wildlife and parks and make sure you know the updated season dates in your area. Furthermore, if you're wolf trapping in Montana, right in and let me know your thoughts on accidentally catching a grizzly bear versus a wolf. How have regulations changed in the state to address incidental take What frustrates with me here is that this ruling implies that trapping is just like a blind bottom fishing right where you put like a kernel of corn on the bottom of the river and anything that swims by and wants corn can have it. That's just not how it works. There's a lot of skill, a lot of preparation that goes into targeting the exact species, and this implies that that's not the case, and that's frustrating to me. Good trappers are a rare breed. In another update to a story we've covered previously, the Bureau of Land Management decided last week to ban the use of so called cyanide bombs on all BLM land. As we cover in episode two twenty two. These cyanide devices, known as M forty four's, have been used for decades around livestock to kill coyotes and other predators. They contain a small spring loaded charge of sodium cyanide powder that kills whatever sticks its nose close enough to investigate. Pet dogs have accidentally been killed by the devices, but no humans have ever died due to cyanide bombs. Still, seventy six groups, including the Humane Society and Project Coyote, submitted a petition to the BLM asking that the M forty fours be banned. Last week, the BLM agreed M forty fours will no longer be permitted on any BLM land, which expands state restrictions already in place. There is also a bill in Congress known as Canyons Law, which would ban the devices on all federal public lands. Over in Utah, the state is considering a change to how it rewards hunters who turn in poachers. Most states offer some kind of monetary reward for reporting wildlife crimes, but Utah's system gives hunters something they want even more than money, access to great hunting spots. The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources rewards tipsters with permits to hunt in coveted units, and about a dozen of these special permits are issued every year. The proposed changes to this system would sweeten the pod even more. They would allow hunters who turn in multiple poachers in one year to receive multiple permits. Hopefully this doesn't change to vigilantiism. Some of those permits would be able to be transferred to family or friends. This change will adequately reward hunters who, for example, report a group of illegal hunters and aid in multiple prosecutions. Utah's Wildlife Agency may be considering positive changes, but I can't say the same for its senators. Over in Washington, d C. The US Senate is considering a bill authored by Utah Senator Mike Lee that would make it easier for states and local governments to buy public land and at below market value. This is not a new attempt by Senator Lee. The bill is ostensibly designed to make it easier for Western states to acquire land on which to build more housing. The housing is supposed to be low income. In reality, it's just going to give away public land without building any houses at all. The houses that do get built on rich folks find a way to get rich, and it's going to cost us all our public lands freedom. Okay. The Houses Act, which stands for helping open under utilized space to ensure shelter, would require the Secretary of the Interior to approve applications by state or local governments to purchase federal public land if that land is eligible for disposal under any other applicable law. If the land is not already eligible for disposal, the Secretary will be required to issue a determination within one year. Several types of federally protected land are not eligible under the Houses Act, including national monuments, national parks, and national recreation areas. But that's still US millions of acres of other types of federal land, including BLM land, that would be up for grabs. If the public's land is sold and covered in neighborhoods, taxpayers should at least get the fair market value, right, that's our land. That makes sense, while not under Senator Lee's bill, which includes a convoluted system that requires the Secretary to offer parcels at below market value. The fair market value is multiplied by potential tax revenue, but then divided by the tax revenue of the land had it been sold for that amount. The result is a number well below what the property would have gone for on the open market. It's also unclear whether this bill would even create very many new homes. The bill requires the purchaser of the land to use eighty five percent of its residential development, as well as open space, green space, or quote allowable community amenities. According to the bill, community amenities can include things like grocery stores, hospitals, and recreation facilities. It's possible, in other words, that public land could be under the Houses Act that doesn't end up housing anything or anyone. Now, there's a mechanism in place that makes the Houses Act redundant anyway. It's called the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act, which already allows for the exchange of specific, low value, isolated parcels of public land where it's necessary. This process is slow, and it has safeguards in place to make sure our public lands aren't parceled off for frivolous things. Senator Lee's bill destroys many of those safeguards. And no one who values our public lands wants to see a good open space destroyed at a faster rate than it's already being done. All right, that soapbox a little bit at the end. Mark that down as an opinion piece. Okay, moving on to the mail bag. Listener Michael Wroteen wrote in with a clarification about a segment we did in episode two twenty nine about a three legged bear who downed three cans of white cloth. The Florida Wildlife biologists we quoted said that the bears don't seek out alcohol, but McCall doesn't believe that's correct. He said, quote, bears don't seek out generic alcohol. They seek out Rainier beer. As evidence for this fascinating scientific claim, the Call sent me an article from two thousand and four about a black bear who passed out after drinking thirty six cans of Rainier. The bear managed to break into several coolers at a campground in Washington State and helped himself to the contents. According to a bookkeeper at the campground, the bruin totally ignored all the cans of bush and went straight for the good stuff. If anyone else has fun drinking stories with bruins, you know where to find me. Askcl that's Ascal at themeateater dot com and we'll get to the bottom of this mystery together. The bear bottom. That's all I got for you this week. Thank you so much for listening. Remember to write in let me know what's going on in your neck of the woods. On top of that, Christmas is ripping around the corner. Don't get caught with your pants down. If a tree falls across the driveway, you know on an old saint, it can't pull up in his sleigh. So go to www dot steel dealers dot com. Find a local, knowledgeable steel dealer near you. They're gonna get you set up with what you need and they're not gonna try to send you home with what you don't. Thanks again and I'll talk to you next week.

Save this episode