Aggressive Black Bear Drives Women From Bighorns Camp Before Shredding Tents

 

Aggressive Black Bear Drives Women From Bighorns Camp Before Shredding Tents

New And Notable Outdoors Gear: March 20 The good stuff, and what you need to know about it

 

New And Notable Outdoors Gear: March 20

The good stuff, and what you need to know about it

Questions hunters, fishermen, and public lands users need to ask political candidates. Addressing politicians in desperate times, part 2.

Something similar was mentioned on a companion blog to this one just the other day, that being that it was never the intent to make this a political topic blog.

But these are not ordinary times in Wyoming, or anywhere else.

Most real outdoorsmen, and by that I mean the sort of outdoorsmen who have the world out look that those who post here do, not guys with excess cash who are petty princes like Eric Trump, would rather be hunting or fishing, or reading about hunting and fishing, than thinking about politics.  But just like duck hunter (seriously) Leon Trotsky once stated; “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you,” and that applies to politics as well as war.

Trotsky.  Bad man, but he was a hunter and fisherman.

You might not be interested in politics, but politics is very interested in you.

And frankly, given the assault on everything hunters, fishermen, and the users of public lands hold dear, you don't really have the luxury, and that is what it is, of ignoring politics.

Nor do you have the luxury of ignoring your politicians.

Donald Trump was embarrassing his first term in office, but in his second unrestrained term in office, he and the Republican Party have been a disaster for outdoorsmen, nature, and the environment.  Last year there was a diehard effort by Deseret Mike Lee to basically sell off massive parts of the public domain. That effort was supported by all three of  Wyoming's Congressional delegation in spite of massive public opposition to it.  This year a Freedom Caucus member, Rep. Wasserburger, is trying the same thing in the state with state lands.  None of this should be any surprise as Freedom Caucuser Bob Ide, who campaigned on less government, more freedom, but who is a big landlord depending on the government to protect his property rights, sponsored an effort to grab the public lands the legislative session before that.

When put right to it, the Freedom Caucus hates government ownership of anything, and by extension, just flat out isn't really very concerned about the collective good on anything at all.  They're an alien carpetbagging force in the country, but the sort of dimwitted views they have on nature and land are being expressed all across the country.  Hunters, fishermen, farmers, ranchers, campers, hikers and other users of the land who had reflexively voted for one party or another based on some belief on what those parties held can absolutely no longer afford to do that.

Part of this is because politicians just flat out lie.  People who naively thought that Donald Trump was a supporter of the Second Amendment, and therefore supported "gun rights" are finding out right now that he never believed any of that. Why would he?  He's an old, fat, wealthy, New Yorker.  It's not like you saw him at the range, now is it?

But chances are, you haven't seen California Chuck Gray there either, have you?

So, some questions that you, dear feral reader, really need to ask your politicians.

1.  Do you have a hunting or fishing license right now, and if you do, can you pull it out of your wallet so we can see it?

It used to be standard in Wyoming and Colorado, and I bet other Western states, to see a politician dragged out in front of a camera for an advertising campaign wearing brand new hunting clothing and carrying a shotgun (interestingly, never a rifle).  It was a little fraud that we all participated in. We knew that the politicians would probably wet his pants if he had to fire the gun, but we took that as a symbol of support.

Don't.

Find out if they really share your values. Do they hunt, or fish? What's the proof?

And if they answer yes, find out what that means.  Does it mean the politician goes sage grouse hunting every year or does it mean that he waddles on to a pheasant farm once a year to shoot some POW pheasants?  Worse yet, does it mean that he went on a catered "hunt" in Texas with fat cats.  

How often does he go, where does he go, does he use public land to hunt?

Same thing with fishing.

If he doesn't do either, and regularly, don't vote for him easily.  Chances are he cares as much about hunting as Elon Musk does about marital fidelity.

2.  Do you use public land for anything, and if so, what?

Nearly every feral person worth his salt uses public land.  Does your Pol?  And I mean for anything. Hunting, fishing, camping, running cattle, photography, running nude through the daisies.  Anything.

And ask for proof.

If that proof is a photograph of a cleanly shaved pol with brand new clothing, it's proof he doesn't use it, or that she doesn't use it.

And if the answer is the typical "I love Yellowstone National Park", be very careful  National Parks are great, but a lot of them aren't really very wild until you get off the beaten path.  Going on an auto tour of Yellowstone and seeing all the geysers is great, but that's not proof of much.  And quite a few of the "I support public lands" political class limits that support to parks. Everything is fair game for development in their view.

3.  Do you shoot?

I don't expect every outdoor users to be a shooter, although in the West, if you are a user of wildlands and don't have a gun, you are a complete and utter fool.  Having said that, I'll be frank that I have known fishermen who had one gun, probably a revolver, that they carried in some places.  They probably went years between shooting it.  I don't regard owning a gun as a precursor to all feral uses of land, particularly by people who don't hunt, but who do fish, or camp, or hike (but if you do any of these things, please get a handgun and learn how to use it).  

A lot of people in the West vote for pols based solely on "I support the Second Amendment type statements".  Lots of people allowed themselves to be duped into voting for Donald Trump that way, although we never believed his claims to be a Second Amendment supporter.  We're sorry that we were so right.  Anyhow, ask them if they have a gun and if they shoot.

No matter what they really believe, they're going to say yes.

I'll note I've seen this question asked just once, and when I did the female candidate, a native Wyomingite with a rural background, went on to qualify that she was just familiar with .22s.  Okay, that's an honest answer. 

She was, I'd note, a Democrat.

You do need to follow up on the question.

Right now, if you asked this question of Chuck Gray or John Barrasso, they'd both undoubtedly say yes.  I don't know if either of them owns a firearm, but my guess is that if they do they own it in the way of people who have bought or been given a handgun that's gone in a drawer, and that's where it stays.  Ask for proof.  What do they own, where do they shoot, how often, and are there photos.  And not photos from a gun show, like Reid Rasner posted the other day.

Take them to the range and have them shoot a box of .375 H&H.  If they run to the SUV crying, they're out.

If they can't back this stuff up, I'd assume they really don't care about the Second Amendment. There are people who don't shoot at all who do care about the Second Amendment, but they're are rare as people who are interested in stock cars but don't follow NASCAR (this would describe me).  Not too many.

4.  Do they believe in man made climate change?

This gets to the land ethic. Educated people, and most politicians, are educated who say no really don't give a rats ass about the planet or they're engaging in diehard self delusion. They're comfortable with everything being destroyed as long as they're dead before it happens or they just can't face the hard task of addressing, correcting, and reversing it.  They're not worth voting for.

Aldo Leopold.

5. Do they have a land ethic?

I've known a lot of people who have a very strong land ethic. Absolutely none of them didn't make use of wilderness in some ways.

That's a big clue.

Anyhow, more than anything else, do they have a land ethic?  That is;

A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.

Aldo Leopold.

Do they support that?

A huge pile of Western politicians really don't.  Some, however, who would surprise you do.  This is a hard question to really explore, because an existential question isn't necessarily easy to question on.  In a collegiate debate, you'd just state the proposition and ask if they agreed, or didn't and follow up with examples.  That may be the best way to do it.

Nobody should vote for a politician who doesn't support the Land Ethic.

Last edition:

Addressing politicians in desperate times. A series.

Labels: 2026 Election, 2028 Election, Commentary, Democratic Party, Politics, Questions for politicians, Republican Party, Trailing thread

Go Ask Alice. A thread on hunting and fishing rucksacks.

Going out the door, elk hunting, with my medium sized Alice Pack.  You can see a comealong, an Australian fanny pack for additional storage, a Wyoming Saw, a small carrier for a gmrs radio, a first aid kid, and two canteen covers.  No, I don't pack all this stuff around with me while I'm hunting.  I'm pack this to the truck.

I used to date teenage queen

Now I carry an M16

I used to drive a Cadillac

Now I carry an Alice pack

1980s (and maybe earlier) Jody Call.

I have a long history with backpacks.  In spite of that, I'm very clearly not up on the latest and greatest backpack.

Indeed, in this category, I find myself in the same situation as other people who sometimes baffle enthusiasts, in that I use them, but I don't know that much about a topic for which there's a lot to know.  I'm that way, for instance, when I meet a hunter who doesn't know anything about firearms, really.  I meet these people semi regularly, they enjoy hunting a lot, but their rifle or shotgun is a mere tool, and often a cheap one.  

Fishing, upon which I'm frankly less knowledgeable, equipment wise, is the same way.  I'm not up on the latest and greatest fly rod, for example, but I do know a little about them.  Occasionally I'll meet somebody, however, who brings up fishing, but actually knows nothing at all about their equipment. 

They almost always only use a spinning rod.

Anyhow, I'm sort of that way on backpacks.

Enlisted man in he U.S. Army just before World War Two, wearing denim fatigues in the field so as to not dirty the service uniform.  He's equipped with a M1910 Haversack.

The very first backpack of any kind that I had was a M1910 Haversack, the Army issued backpack introduced in 1910, as the name would indicate.  That piece of equipment, shown fully packed above, was adopted that year and soldiered on into World War Two. 

What a miserable piece of equipment it is.

They were, in my assessment, an awful pack, or at least they had no ability to be used outside of the service.  The reason for my dim opinion of it is probably demonstrated by this video:

The Army must have had a similar opinion as they introduced a new set of backpacks during World War Two, none of which I'm going into, as this isn't a history of military backpacks.

Anyhow, as a kid I obtained a M1910 Haversack.  Without knowing for sure, my recollection is that an uncle of mine had purchased it right after World War Two, probably just as a thing to play with, and I got it from him.  That's a long time ago, and I could be wrong.  Since that time, as an adult, somebody gave me a second, completely unused, M1910 Haversack which was made during the Second World War.

That one remains unused, but the first one I did try to figure out as a boy.  It was pretty much hopeless.

Because I have always been really outdoorsy and wanted camping gear, my parents gave me a backpack of the full blown backwoods type when I was in my very early teens, or nearly a teen.  I don't know if its the correct term or not, but we called that sort of backpack a "frame pack", as they had, at that time, a lightweight aluminum frame.  I no longer have the pack, I think (although I might somewhere) and I feel a little tinge of guilt when I think of it.  My father, though  an outdoorsman, was not a backpacker and he didn't have much to go buy when looking for a pack for me.  And it was the early 1970s when everything was bicentennial themed.  It was a nice lightweight pack, but it had a really prominent flag motif to it  and I found that a little embarrassing.  I'm embarrassed now to admit that.

I did use it, although not anywhere near as much as I had hoped.  In your early teens, you can't drive, and that meant I didn't have that much of an opportunity to go places with it.  The number of years between age 12 and age 16, when you can, are very slight, but at the time they seem endless.  By the time I was 16 it didn't seem that I had much of an opportunity to backpack either.

I'll note here, although I'm taking it out of order, that later on a friend of mine gave me a sued Kelty backpack, which I still have somewhere.  It's like this one:

I have used it, but again, not nearly as much as I'd like, and not recently.

I still have, and will get to that in a moment, the frame from the first frame backpack that I noted in this thread.

The backpack I've carried the longest distances is the LC-1 Field Pack (Medium), or as it is commonly known, the "Alice Pack".

The Alice Pack came into U.S. military use in the late Vietnam War period.  As I haven't researched its history, I'll note that it appears that the Alice Pack was developed from the Tropical Field Rucksack.  The pack it started to replace one that had come in during the 1950s and was really pretty primitive, just being a big pen pouch rucksack about the size of a modern book bag that hooked into a soldiers webgear.

Given the history of Army packs, I guess it isn't too surprising that the Tropical Field Rucksack was regarded as a huge improvement and Alice came along soon thereafter.  I don't remember anyone being hugely fond of Alice Packs, however, when I was in the service.  Having said that, I don't remember anyone being enormously opposed to them either.

The entire time I was in I never saw one being issued with a frame.  Frankly, without a frame, a long march with Alice is a miserable thing.  I've marched as far as 30 miles with one, with no frame, and that didn't cause me to love Alice.

It did cause me to look for another pack, however, and I found a great one in the form of a REI nylon backpack.  

This is the same model of REI backpack that I own.  I'd post a photo of mine, which I still own, but the pack has been appropriated by one of my offspring.

While not a full-blown expedition frame pack, the REI pack is and was great.  It had internal metal stiffens that operate like a frame, and a belt, which makes a big difference.  The side pockets, moreover, are slotted to accommodate skis.  I've used it like crazy.  

As noted in the caption, it's so useful that its been appropriated, probably an a permanent basis, by my son.

At some point while I was at UW, and it may have been when I was in law school, I obtained a "book bag" for the first time.

How everyone carried school books up until at least the 80s.

It's odd to think of, but book bags just weren't a think until then. As I had a lot of books to carry while in law school, it became sort of a necessity as I walked to school and back, probably a distance of about two miles, I needed something to carry them.  I didn't want to buy a book bag dedicated for that purpose, so I bought a surplus German Army rucksack.  It was the same size and nearly the same configuration as the Alice Pack, but without the padded shoulder straps. They were just heavy cotton webbing.  I figured that after my time in lawshool was over, I could repurpose it, which in fact I did. I used it for a game bag, brining home a lot of rabbits with it, but even affixing it to my old frame to haul an elk with.  With hard use like that, it eventually blew out.

Some years ago, a sporting goods store here in town carried some surplus items, including Alice Packs complete with frames.  I bought two.

I wish I'd bought a couple of more.

I wasn't a huge fan of Alice back in the 80s, but with the frame, I am now.  I keep one packed with stuff for big game hunting, and another with stuff for bird hunting.  I've rucked into the mountains with Alice on my back so that if I shot a turkey, I could bring it back without having to carry it via armstrong.  And with the Alice frame, I can take the pack off and use the frame to haul meat, if I don't have equine assistance available.

All of which made me think that I sure wish I'd gotten a couple more of them.

Alice Pack I use for fishing and bird hunting to carry equipment.

Same Alice Pack. This is a later one after the service had adopted the Woodlands Pattern of camouflage.

But that sure isn't a popular opinion.

I have two Alice Packs that I use for outdoor stuff today.  One I use for waterfowl hunting and fishing.  I'll probably start using it for upland birds too.  That's all because, over time, I've found that I'm packing quite a bit of gear around and I need an efficient way to to do it.

This is the first posts I've ever put up on a gear topic.  I'll get into this more later, but basically, what I'm talking about here, is gear I take with me every time I go.  When I'm bird hunting what I take, besides my shotgun and shells, are gmrs radios and a knife.  That's about it unless I"m waterfowl hunting, in which case I often take my waders.  Not a lot of gear, actually.

When I'm big game hunting, however, I take is my gmrs radios, binoculars, some food, water, often some soda (I never take beer hunting, fwiw), game bags, knives, saw, and a come along.  And I need a pack with a frame, in case I have to use the frame to pack something out.  

At one time, I carried my radio gear and some binos in an outdoor bag.  But I still took an Alice.  Now I find myself transferring everything to the Alice as I don't want to carry too many things if I can avoid it.  

So I thought it would be handy to have another one.  I posted something on reddit about it and what I found is that Alice's are hugely unpopular with the outdoor community.

Well, I can see why.  It's not a modern camping backpack. . . but I don't want to drop a couple of elk quarters into my nice backpack.

My good backpack.  It  was a gift from a friend who was concerned that I didn't have a good, modern, backpacking pack.

And frankly, with a frame, I'm finding that old Alice isn't so bad.  

Related threads:

The History of the Backpack

Walking

Lex Anteinternet: Saturday, September 17, 1910. Speed ball.: 

Wyoming Catholic Cowboys - raw and real: Sons of Mary 2025

Wyoming Catholic Cowboys - raw and real: Sons of Mary 2025: The time of year to hang out with the brothers, rolled back around. Not much new, lounge, recreate, eat, and converse. Though it sounds simp...

Going Feral: New provision in Senate budget bill could put Wyoming public lands up for sale.

Going Feral: New provision in Senate budget bill could put Wyom...: New provision in Senate budget bill could put Wyoming public lands up for sale : Land sales would raise federal revenue and open up parcels ...

Frankly, for Wyomingites in general, and more specifically for the users of public lands (hunters, fishermen, outdoor recreationist, ranchers), this ought to be it in regard to political support.

If anyone of our three Congressional reps vote for this, they shouldn't receive our votes after this. 

USFS laying off 3,400.

How many will be in Wyoming isn't known.

It'll impact roads and campgrounds.

Lex Anteinternet: Monday, August 25, 1924. True then and now.

Lex Anteinternet: Monday, August 25, 1924. Ratifying the Dawes Plan...: 

The Cheyenne paper pointed out that summer was drawing to a close.

Motor Camping Equipment. . . from the summer of 1924.

 From the Cheyenne newspaper, August 3, 1924.

As I drive a Jeep, I actually have an "auto tent" fixed to my Jeep rack right now.  It's not as nice as this one, however.  And I have something like the luggage carrier for it, but it sits on the bumper hitch and I don't use it very much.