Roundup 150 || Wildlife Surveillance, Food Sovereignty, And More With CSF’s Fred Bird!

Summary

Blood Origins Podcast Episode Summary

Episode: Roundup 150 || Wildlife Surveillance, Food Sovereignty, And More With CSF’s Fred Bird!
Host/Author: Blood Origins Inc.
Release Date: April 16, 2025

---

Introduction and Guest Introduction

In the 150th episode of Blood Origins, host Ashley welcomes Fred Bird from the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation (CSF). Fred serves as the director of the Eastern States for CSF and is also the host of the Sportsman's Voice podcast. Ashley expresses her admiration for CSF's work and recounts their first meeting at the WTF convention, highlighting Fred’s impressive ability to swiftly navigate through complex legislative topics without relying heavily on notes.

Notable Quote:
Ashley: “I was incredibly impressed by how quickly you ran through all of the different bills and things that were going on. We met at the NWT of Policy reception and you gave an overview of legislation...I was like, who is that guy?”
(00:51)

The Role of CSF and Legislative Initiatives

Fred Bird elaborates on the dynamic nature of legislative work, emphasizing the continuous efforts required both at the federal and state levels. He underscores the importance of CSF’s role in bridging the gap between policymakers and the sportsman's community, ensuring that wildlife conservation and hunting rights are adequately represented and protected.

Notable Quote:
Fred Bird: “There’s so much moving and shaking not only on the hill, but in the state levels...that are directly affecting people in our space.”
(02:55)

Key Legislation Discussed: Alabama House Bill 509

A significant portion of the discussion centers around Alabama House Bill 509, a controversial piece of legislation that challenges the public trust doctrine by allowing private ownership rights over deer, effectively opposing the principle that wildlife belongs to the public. Fred and Ashley express deep concerns about the bill’s implications for wildlife management and conservation.

Notable Quotes:
Ashley: “This would codify into law the very opposite of the public trust doctrine...it prohibits the testing of captive deer and establishes deer as personal property.”
(16:05)

Fred Bird: “Legislation like this unnecessarily hampers the ability for the Alabama Department of Conservation to adequately manage the spread of CWD.”
(17:46)

Challenges and Community Dynamics in the Sportsmen's Community

Fred discusses internal challenges within the sportsman's community, including differing opinions and the necessity for education to align various factions towards common conservation goals. He highlights the importance of maintaining unity to effectively oppose detrimental legislation and promote science-based wildlife management.

Notable Quote:
Fred Bird: “Sometimes we meet at an impasse in our own community...education does work and we'll just keep continuing to work with the wildlife agencies.”
(22:25)

Current Issues: Maine's Conservation Efforts and Food Sovereignty

The conversation shifts to Maine, where political turmoil threatens ongoing conservation initiatives. Fred outlines efforts to secure constitutional amendments that guarantee the right to hunt and fish, aiming to extend these rights to food sovereignty, which ensures individuals can harvest their own food. He emphasizes the strategic importance of these amendments in maintaining healthy wildlife populations and resisting political adversities.

Notable Quotes:
Fred Bird: “Maine's a complete dumpster fire...we're trying to get to 25 states to update their constitutions with the right to hunt and fish.”
(23:56)

Ashley: “Food sovereignty statute is just as important as a right to hunt and fish...it’s becoming harder and harder for people to choose what they eat.”
(26:14)

Pennsylvania Court Decision on Wildlife Surveillance

Ashley introduces the pending Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision regarding wildlife surveillance and property rights. The case examines whether game wardens can surveil private property without a warrant or probable cause. Fred provides context on the legal precedents and the potential implications for hunters’ privacy rights and law enforcement practices.

Notable Quotes:
Ashley: “Hunting clubs challenged the right of the state wildlife agency to injure their property without a warrant...there's a lot of nuance in this case.”
(30:35)

Fred Bird: “If this goes and flips over 100 years of precedent, we're looking at something different, potentially redefining Fourth Amendment rights.”
(33:10)

North Dakota's Senate Bill 2137 and Supplemental Feeding

Fred addresses the recently passed North Dakota Senate Bill 2137, which concerns the use of supplemental feed for hunting. CSF opposes this bill, arguing that it undermines the Game and Fish Department’s authority to implement science-based wildlife management policies, particularly concerning baiting practices that can exacerbate issues like Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD).

Notable Quotes:
Fred Bird: “This bill strips the North Dakota Game and Fish Department of their ability to promulgate rules regarding hunting...it’s problematic.”
(38:51)

Ashley: “Supplemental feeding is essentially baiting...this undermines science-based wildlife management.”
(38:51)

Conservation and the Role of Hunters

The discussion highlights the critical role hunters play in conservation, emphasizing that hunting is a preferred method for wildlife management. Fred articulates how hunters contribute to habitat preservation, funding through licenses, and maintaining healthy wildlife populations. He advocates for science-based approaches and the necessity of legislative support to sustain these efforts.

Notable Quote:
Fred Bird: “Hunters play a role in that...we are the preferred method in that management...it leads to healthier herds and flocks.”
(26:45)

Collaboration Between Blood Origins and CSF

Ashley and Fred discuss the synergy between Blood Origins and CSF, noting how both organizations complement each other in advocating for conservation and hunting rights. They mention potential future collaborations, particularly in addressing international issues related to trophy imports and wildlife conservation efforts beyond national borders.

Notable Quote:
Fred Bird: “It’s incredible what you guys have been able to do here at Blood Origins and the light that's been shown upon international issues.”
(30:35)

Conclusion and Final Thoughts

As the episode concludes, Fred encourages listeners to support CSF’s initiatives by following their podcasts, subscribing to newsletters, and participating in conservation efforts. He reiterates the importance of collective action in preserving hunting and fishing rights and ensuring sustainable wildlife management.

Notable Quote:
Fred Bird: “Enjoy your hunts, shoot straight, know your target was beyond it...tag your gobblers and be safe.”
(53:30)

---

Key Takeaways

• Legislative Vigilance: Active engagement and awareness of state and federal legislation are crucial for protecting hunting and fishing rights.

• Public Trust Doctrine: Maintaining wildlife as a public resource is essential for sustainable conservation and preventing privatization.

• Food Sovereignty: Ensuring the right to harvest one’s own food is integral to both personal freedom and wildlife management.

• Science-Based Management: Decisions regarding wildlife should be grounded in scientific research to effectively address challenges like disease management and population control.

• Community Unity: Collaboration among conservation organizations, legislators, and hunters fosters a stronger defense against detrimental policies.

---

Resources Mentioned

• CSF Website: congressionsportsman.org
• Sportsman's Voice Podcast: Available on major podcast platforms
• Blood Origins Podcast: Available on iTunes, Spotify, and other platforms

---

By providing a comprehensive overview of the episode, this summary encapsulates the critical discussions surrounding wildlife surveillance, legislative challenges, and the pivotal role of hunters in conservation, all while highlighting Fred Bird’s insights and the collaborative efforts between Blood Origins and CSF.

Transcript

[Fred Bird]

Fishing trips anywhere, anytime. Fishingbooker.com want to plan your next fishing trip without the hassle? FishingBooker.com is the best way to find and book a fishing charter anywhere in the world. Whether you're chasing trophy fish or just looking for a family day on the water, fishingbooker makes it simple, fast and secure. With thousands of experienced guides, verified reviews, and 247 customer support fish, FishingBooker takes the guesswork out of planning. Visit fishingbooker.com and book your trip today. FishingBooker fishing trips made Easy.

[Mike Axelrod]

So there's a reason why I started Blood Origins, and that reason is simple, is that I wanted to convey the truth about hunting.

[Fred Bird]

It brings awareness to non hunters that it's more than just killing animals.

[Ashley]

How do I start it? Brittany? My name. Does my hair look okay?

[Mike Axelrod]

My name is Mike Axelrod. Start again. Yeah, I hated it too. Braxton, you said something in the car to me. You said that you were living on borrowed time. There's a perception around who hunters are, what we're supposed to be. And a feminist that works for a non profit, that is a hunter that has only eaten wild game from the last 20 years is likely not the thing that people think about when it comes to a hunter.

[Ashley]

All right, so we are live this morning and I have a special guest because Robbie is on the road again. And I am joined this morning by Fred Bird with the Congressional Sportsman's Foundation. Fred is host of the Sportsman's Voice. And you are also the director of the Eastern states, correct?

[Fred Bird]

Yes, ma'am. That is all very true.

[Ashley]

Okay, fantastic. So I love csf. I love this organization. I love Jeff Crane. I love all the people that work for you guys. I've been involved with you all through many different hats that I have worn over the years. And I'm so glad to be getting to know you. I've loved watching the work that you've been doing. We actually met in person at the WTF convention, which was so much fun. And I was incredibly impressed by how quickly you ran through all of the different bills and things that, that were going on. We met at the NWT of Policy reception and you gave an overview of legislation and different initiatives and, and you ran through these things faster than I think I've seen anybody give a policy overview. And I don't think you used any notes. And I was like, who is that guy?

[Fred Bird]

It's, you know, I mean, you can appreciate this, right? I mean, when you get, when you're talking policy, it's, it's super wonky that particular venue, you're in a room with a lot of volunteer leaders. There's some policy folks in there, but I mean, you can quickly lose an audience. Right. So you try to keep it as high level and you know, getting, getting the points across. But yeah, it's, it's a challenge because there's so much going on, there's so much moving and shaking not only on the hill, but in the state levels, as you and I have talked about offline. And you know, that's, that's where the rubber's meeting the road and a lot of this stuff that are directly affecting people in our space.

[Ashley]

Right, right. Especially this time of year.

[Fred Bird]

Yeah.

[Ashley]

I mean, it's almost dizzying how many things are, are moving. And speaking of things that are going on, I was just complimenting you when you popped on the camera about your. It looks like that's maybe your home office, is that.

[Fred Bird]

It is, yes.

[Ashley]

And you're in New Hampshire, right?

[Fred Bird]

Correct.

[Ashley]

So I know most people listen to us, but we do have a few people who watch us and it's probably worth popping on and just seeing Fred's very cool office. You have all sorts of species hung behind you. I've seen some sheds, I see some books. I'm just very impressed with this, this situation you've got going on. It's inspiring me to fix up my own digs.

[Fred Bird]

I'm fortunate and lucky to have a space large enough to collect all my, my, my knickknacks, my memorabilia. I call it my, my museum to fred. Only because Mrs. Berg would prefer it all stay contained and not spread throughout the house. So out of a healthy respect for a happy marriage, I do exactly that and it creates a backdrop. So.

[Ashley]

Right. We, we do a lot in the name of healthy marriages. It's turkey season here in Mississippi and my husband is a fanatical turkey hunter. And people ask me, you know, have you gone out? And I said, no, it's one of the only species I don't hunt because our marriage is so much healthier that way.

[Fred Bird]

Well, I mean, at certain parts. I mean, as long as, as long as your husband or your wife is not opposed to you rolling out of bed at 3:30 in the morning, or maybe you just sleep on the couch the night before. You can get a lot of that done before the responsibilities of the day kick in.

[Ashley]

So he gets to go so much more if I do not go, if I'm watching the kids first. So I get deer season and he gets turkey season and split up the other Ones, but it works a lot better that way. So I'm enjoying seeing all these pictures of everybody else harvesting their turkeys. But yeah. So, okay, where in New Hampshire are you?

[Fred Bird]

So I'm, I'm on the southeastern side, one of the more populated parts of the state and kind of close to the, the university here. Unh. So I'm, I got the best of both worlds. I'm about a hour or so from the mountains, the White Mountains that run the, the Appalachian Trail, Appalachian mountains corridor. And then I got the beach 20 minutes and then turkey, turkey wise, I'm positioned very nicely to southwestern Maine. So I'm only about a 20 to 25 minute hop over the border. And I can buy more tags there too and enjoy running around Maine because things are, things are all good. Turkey, turkey wise in the, in the northeast here.

[Mike Axelrod]

Look, guys, I'm a hunter, right? And when I go hunting, I like to figure out how to get my trophies back home as expeditiously as possible. Well, you don't have to look much further than safari specialty importers. We know that trophy importation can be quite a headache. That's why safari specialty importers strives to make it as easy and hassle free as possible. They have access to a bonded warehouse. You won't be charged storage fees, and you get a dedicated team that's readily available and will update you at every step in the process. They'll even go one step further. Safari specialty importers is working with us at Blood Origins and they are going to donate $100 from every shipment that they work with to conservation projects that include anti poaching, community development and wildlife conservation. At the end of the day, choose to spend your money with a team that's dedicated to you and is dedicated to helping show how hunting is a great conservation model. Hassle free logistics, fuel and conservation go with safari specialty importers. Did you know that in 42 states it is 100% legal to buy a suppressor and protect your hearing? Silencer Central pioneered the simplified silencer buying process. It allows you to buy a suppressor online or over the phone. You go through all the paperwork with a certified expert and that suppressor ships directly to your front door. I don't even believe it, but I've done it and it's come to my door. You can buy a suppressor and have it shipped to you. They offer the best in service, a suppressor expert to make sure you get the suppressor you want. And from there they take care of everything. They take care of the paperwork the applications to the atf. They even set up a free trust if you want one. And if you don't have the money, put down an interest free payment plan. It's incredible. You get access to your own customer portal online. It tracks your progress. So why not go get started today? Go to silenceessential.com or call 866-811-6536. And with today's fast approval times, you're actually going to be shocked at how quickly your suppressor arrives at your door. Bushnell has been a longtime supporter of Blood Origins. And in keeping with the spirit of our collaboration, we've come up with an amazing idea. Bushnell is eager to help you get set up for conservation success. That's right. They want to help you. The conservation and research community is dominated by good people doing good things and investing significant time and effort for the benefit of habitat and the species. So what do you need to do? Pretty simple. Send us your conservation story and or your conservation wish could be managing whitetails. It could be understanding your environment or species or something else related to conservation. What would you be able to do if you had a great trail camera setup? We will select the best story every other month and send you a camera bundle, cell camera, normal SD camera, SD cards as well as optics, everything you need to get set up for success. I can't wait to see what you submit. You can email [e-mail] DM US, message us whatever you want. We are not hard to find. Good luck.

[Ashley]

Okay. Very nice. It sounds like you're strategically positioned up there.

[Fred Bird]

Indeed.

[Ashley]

Okay, so tell me a little bit about. Well, just tell me a little bit about what's going on with csf, your role, and then we'll start hitting some of the news and some of these things that are pretty important going on around the country.

[Fred Bird]

Sure. Well, I mean, like, like you said, it's a busy time of year right now. Some of our states are, are journeying. Some, I think, I think Louisiana is just coming in.

[Ashley]

Yeah.

[Fred Bird]

We have others that are tightening things up. We've seen a lot of crossover dates. So legislation that made that is starting to move and take action. And we're waiting to see what gets to governor's desks, what doesn't. And then things will be buttoning up here right before, just after the official, you know, summer solstice. So, yeah, no shortage of work. Things are busy on the hill. Obviously a new administration comes, new, new challenges, new policies, you know, whatever that that is. And our federal team is working Those issues as, as we speak. As you may know, we built out a, a forestry portfolio and we are our. Used to be our Southeastern director, John Colclaser now manages our forestry policies. A senior manager there. So we've stepped into that forestry policy head on. And John's doing a hell of a job working with federal and state agencies to, to build that out.

[Ashley]

Yeah. And I love you guys did that. I've worked with John for a while and he's fantastic. So I know that's going to be a great program. So one of the things that I love that CSF does and has done I think so, so very well is help organize the state sportsman's caucuses. I think I attended my first NASC maybe back in 2012. I mean they were really, really, they'd only been doing it a few years and some states had a pretty big representation and some states had just a few and it has gotten so big. So I love this program that you guys do. And I don't know how many of our listeners out there or how many hunters in general, I think people are probably aware, you know, that there are contingencies of sportsman legislators. But, but you guys really are the organization that gets in there and helps these legislators with their organizational caucuses, with their bylaws, with whatever they need, whatever support that they need. And you kind of bring in the other groups and that is just something that I am continually thankful for for you guys. I don't know about other parts of the country, but at least down in the southern states, you're instrumental and you provide support staff that helps them. And we've got some really powerful sportsman's caucuses in these states.

[Fred Bird]

Yeah, no doubt. I really appreciate you bringing that up, Ashley, and highlighting the work of the state level caucuses because you know, again, as we were saying, a lot of the rubber really meets the road in those state houses. I mean it's the sexy stuff you see on your given, you know, legacy media news channel that's happened on the Hill. Everyone kind of can, can see that what goes unnoticed is that work that's happening in your state capitals. And to, to an unfortunate degree, you know, it's, it's hard enough for most people to know who their federal policymakers are in Congress. Right. It, it's exacerbated at the state level. Most people don't even know who their district rep is or assemblyman, whatever it's called in your state or your state senator. These people are down there or in there making policy on your behalf. And in the sporting community so much that directly affects what we do in our own states, or even if you're a traveling hunter angler, it really drives home the point of knowing who those people are, being involved, or at the very least, knowing. There's a sportsman's caucus in your State House. All 50 states, as you referenced, are represented. And we do have staff that work with those caucuses. Some are more active than others and, you know, we're bringing those other ones along. But those legislators, as we often talk about, they can't know everything, right? So if they're sitting on a fishing game committee, a natural resources committee, and they're getting legislation coming across their desk, these folks are looking for people to help them along. That's certainly what we do. We can provide that information along with our in state partners and folks like you and give a voice to the sportsman. Often, you know, it kind of goes unseen. It's behind the, behind the curtain, if you will. But rest assured, we're there and we've been doing it for a long damn time.

[Ashley]

Yeah, no, you really have. And you do a good job of bringing all the partners together as well. I mean, if you attend, if these legislators attend annual nasc, which is national association of Sportsman's Caucuses convention, every single sportsman's group, pretty much every NGO conservation group, a lot of the manufacturers, I mean, ammo companies, you've got fishing companies. I mean, it really is a convention of all of the players in the sportsman's conservation and wildlife world so that the resources are there for these legislators. So I know we have some legislators who listen to this. And if you're not involved in the sportsman's caucus, I encourage you to get involved and, and also to our listeners to know that when we put out action alerts and that when CSF puts out action alerts, I, I encourage you to go to CSF's website and sign up for the. Their emails because they do a great job of keeping everyone updated by region and by state on different bills that are moving through. And they help us a lot. We help them. We work with our partners, we work with bha, with trcp, we work with all these different groups. And so it really is a collective community trying to make sure that the best bills are put through that will keep our hunting and fishing rights going and make sure that they're strong. So just thanks, thanks for doing that. And I wanted to just highlight some of the work you guys are doing.

[Fred Bird]

Thank you for saying so.

[Ashley]

Okay, so we've got some stuff that is Moving through. We've got always good stuff, bad stuff, alarming stuff. There, There is a bill that I think is to me, and I know you guys are heavily involved and have written a letter and this is not one of your specific states, but that you guys have written a letter coming out against this bill. We have another coalition letter that has been written that the National Deer association has headed up. TRCP is on that, Wildlife Society is on that. Boone Crockett is on that. And we are talking about Alabama. There is a bill that actually has more co sponsors than I thought it would have gotten on it. And it, it's just a little worrisome to me. This would be Alabama House Bill 509 and I know you guys have probably talked about it in your, in your meetings. This bill essentially would codify into law the very opposite of the public trust doctrine, which is, is just crazy to me that something got that many co sponsors in the House. So this bill for our listeners would prohibit state wildlife agencies from prohibiting the transfer of captive deer, prohibiting the testing of captive deer, and would establish by law that deer possessed by a licensee are the property of that person. So this goes against everything that we know and love about the North American model of wildlife, the public trust doctrine, which says that all wildlife belong to the public, not any one person. I mean we've got legal precedent, we have judicial decisions all over the country. I mean it's just so crazy to me. What, what, what do you think, what do you think's going on here?

[Fred Bird]

CWD is just like, man, I, I, I wish I at times I could be like Neo in the Matrix and just like lay down and get plugged in and try to get it all. Because there's so many competing thoughts on it, science even on it. And you know, sometimes it really depends on the motivations besides some of those studies and who's, who's buying and paying for it and where it's coming from. Ultimately, at the end of the day, the legislation, it unnecessarily hampers the ability for the Alabama Department of Conservation, not Natural Resources to adequately manage the, the, the spread of CWD and establish that deer possessed by game breeder licensee are the personal property of that licensee. You know, in some of our testimony, Mark Lance, who is our assistant manager in that, in the southeastern region, as he testified, you know, there's already a setup for some of this, some of the protections. There's their management zones that are, establish a 25 mile radius from a positive detection and things that are in place to prevent this. I'm not sure why people would want to move their critters that they're overseeing. Why, if there's a. If it's problematic in your area. This is already spreading through the southeast. It's spreading, I mean, quite frankly, across the country. Why would you want to exacerbate that anymore if you can control that and then not participate in that spread?

[Ashley]

Right. Well, I mean, I think it comes down to money. I mean, why are you breeding deer in the first place? You know, why are you keeping them captive? I mean, unless you are growing them just for your own purpose, personal consumption and harvest. And, and we're not against personal property rights. You know, we're not against people putting up fences on their property. If you take care of them, if you take care of the resource, which to me includes allowing the agency to help you do that. But if you're. If you're trying to move them, if you're breeding them with the aim to move them around to sell them, I mean, that is. That completely comes down to. That's money. You know, we're turning our natural wildlife resource into a commodity. But. But even taking CWD out of the game, like, let's pretend it doesn't exist, I mean, these people are saying we don't want the wildlife agency to have any control, any oversight, any rights over anything to do with our property. I mean, this is, you know, once. Once we put up this fence, everything in there becomes ours. And, and, and that's just not what the North American model of wildlife management stands for. That's not how it works. That's not how we have recovered so many species. That's not why we have so many species and healthy populations. I mean, we have them because we have established for so, so long that wildlife belongs to the public. And, and that wildlife agencies hold them in trust for the benefit of the public. So this is incredibly concerning, concerning to us, concerning to all of these organizations that have signed on against this bill. The Senate has not taken action on this. The House did move it out of committee on a voice vote, which is very concerning. The Sportsman's Caucus chair, I believe, allowed that to move out of that committee. And I think his reasoning was that, well, we need more negotiation between the breeders and the. The agency, but there's just not much wiggle room on this that I see. So we're hoping that the Senate will hold the line. And we're watching this very, very closely. But I think that, you know, when you turn it into a CWD Bill, then you, you get all sorts of controversy because there's, you know, people that are going to be CWD deniers, people that don't believe it's spreading, they don't want to look at the science, they don't want to know it. Um, and, and they don't believe that we want more hunting, which we do. You know, we're trying, we're trying to make sure there's healthy population so that people can hunt more. We want them to hunt more. We want them to help thin the herd. Um, but if you take it out of the equation, this bill really has nothing to do with CWD and everything to do with the public trust doctrine and the North American wildlife.

[Fred Bird]

It should be highlighted to take this moment an opportunity. You know, you referenced a co chair there for that legislative Sportsman's Caucus. And, you know, not, not all the time do we line up with, with our members and our leaders. Right? So, you know, from our standpoint and our staff, we do our best to educate and advocate our positions and what we think is best and all the time is that, is that heard? So. Right. Sometimes we meet impact. We're at an impasse in our own community. You know, again, you, you just said this, this stuff is wrought with, with controversy and, and competing factions and ideas and how do you get past it?

[Ashley]

And, and I can actually think of several occasions over the last four or five years where the overall Sportsman's community and, and you guys, and, and us. And at the time I was with a different organization. We, we were at odds with one of the, you know, one or more of the Sportsman's Caucus leaderships. I actually can think of another. And I'm not going to call anybody out right now, but I actually can think of an occasion where they were educated and changed their mind and change their position. So, you know, education does work and we'll just keep continuing to work with the wildlife agencies and try to get the best available, you know, knowledge and science out there. Is there anything you wanted to highlight that you are working on up in the Eastern states right now that you wanted to talk about?

[Fred Bird]

You know, I, I hate to speak any stuff into existence. I mean, right now I'm in a good spot. Things are, things are somewhat quiet, I will say. And we've highlighted this on, on the Sportsman's Voice podcast. Maine, if you have not been paying attention, because it's even hit the national news, Maine's a complete dumpster fire. So where we have some good stuff going on up there, we'd like to See, advance. Because of the toxic partisanship that's going on in Augusta, we're afraid that that stuff's not going to advance. I'm talking about right to hunt and fish proposal. There's a chance to amend the state constitution there. There's a lesser, more powerful statute amendment that would. So a couple years ago, Maine updated their state constitution with an amendment to guarantee food sovereignty right, and in that language was the right to harvest. At the time, the definition of harvest only included hunting. It is less angling, as well as trapping or traditional methods. Right. So this lesser bill, sponsored by Democrats, so I, you know, if the first one doesn't go, maybe this one goes because of that partisanship, would update that definition of harvest to include angling and trapping specifically. So you would have this de facto right, the hunt and fish, but in statute only. It's not as strong as a constitutional amendment, which we would like to see happen. Obviously, we're trying to get to 25 states. We're trying to get to 50 states as it concerns right to hunt and fish and get every state constitution updated there. That's going to be a lift in certain parts of the country. Other parts of the country, like West Virginia, for example, this is perennially brought up. And because certain folks, certain leadership in that state think there's no threat to hunting and fishing, they. They just look at you and say, well, why? Why would we need this? Right? Well, because political winds shift and you're not always going to have a friendly state or populace to this. And, and as we saw during COVID so many people move around the country and they bring bad ideas with them. And they look at a beautiful mountainous state like West Virginia, say, oh, I can get out of Southern California or New York City and settle in the wilds of West Virginia. And then all of a sudden, West Virginia is not West Virginia anymore. Right. So.

[Ashley]

Right. No, that's. You're so true about that. Okay. I love this idea of food sovereignty. I mean, to me, that statute is just as important as a right to hunt and fish. I mean, because we should be able to have the right to harvest our own food if we want to. I mean, that's like a basic human right, only it's really turning into not. I mean, it's becoming harder and harder and harder for people and. And to choose what they eat and to know what's in it.

[Fred Bird]

I mean, look at. I mean, look at what's going on right now. Let's say you're part of that 80. Excuse me, that doesn't participate in what we're doing. Or rather 90 plus percent, really, there's that 10 that hit our guts. We don't need to acknowledge them too much. When they go to the grocery store, they buy their, their pink meat, whatever it is, never giving a thought to it. Well, I might surprise folks to know that so much of our beef industry comes from out of the country. And when you're looking at, you know, this idea of tariffs and what does that look like at the marketplace? I mean, we're not talking about little trinkets and tchotchkes coming out of China that are going to be raised 125%. Now you're looking at beef imports that feed your family that are coming from presumably bad actors. At least they're not friendly to us. Right, Right. And that's where your food's coming from. Meanwhile, you and I and our families, not that we're high and mighty about it, but it's just we have that ability to go out and do so by prescription of the state agency with our licenses and legally take healthy protein from the land. And I mean, I guess if you parse some of it out, maybe it's a little more expensive than your truck ground 93% lean. But I'd rather take that and go out there and do that myself, knowing where it's coming from than having potential bad actors supply my family with the food at 125% more on it. Right. So like all this stuff goes into it. You start thinking about, it's like, hey man, this, this, this hunting thing or fishing even. I mean, just fishing z more accessible and a cheaper buy in. You can go catch a lot of fish. That's a good deal for your family.

[Ashley]

Oh, 100. So it was easier to pass the food sovereignty statute than it was the right to hunt and fish in Maine. So that happened first.

[Fred Bird]

Okay, that did, that happened first. There was a state supreme court challenge last year that, that brought a lot of this up and the, the changing of, well, the proposal redefining what harvest means. So a couple things that play in Maine. One, they don't have hunting Sunday hunting at all. Complete prohibition on Sunday hunting. Just like Massachusetts are only two states in the entire country that have the outright prohibition. So these factions that don't want Sunday hunting think that if you guarantee people the right to hunt and fish, Sunday hunting comes with that. That's not true. That's not the case. The prescribed language that we set forth and that has been tested going back a decade and a half, almost two Decades and even to the first state to do it in Vermont in the 1700s, yields the right and the authority to the state agency to prescribe season dates and what they think is best for their state. So in this instance, if Inland Fisheries and Wildlife still decide, yeah, we don't want to have Sunday hunting by this language that has passed that would not be ceded to the state constitution amendment, they would still have that authority to manage that.

[Ashley]

That's right.

[Fred Bird]

It's, that's, it's a, it's a false flag in there in Maine. And that was like the biggest concern about it. And then all, then there's the, you know, the bad press that comes with trapping. If we're being completely candid. As a trapper, myself and a big supporter of our friends at NTA and FTA and our state organizations, you know, there's, there's some branding that comes with that that we got to update when we're talking about trapping. So the trappers might get a little, you know, butthurt about trapping is not specifically mentioned in this language. It yields it to traditional methods of take. Okay, so let's get the win where we can get the win. Let's not die on a small hill that quite frankly we don't have the population of conservationists and trappers to, to support or fund or get behind. We just not there. So, you know what, do you want to get the win, the big win, or do you want to like have this self gratifying little hill to climb and die on?

[Ashley]

Don't give up the good for the perfect.

[Mike Axelrod]

Right, Right.

[Ashley]

Yeah. No. Okay, that's fantastic. Okay. There is one thing that is going on up in your neck of the woods. The Pennsylvania court decision, which is so intriguing to me. We're watching this closely. So this has moved all the way up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and they heard oral arguments last week. They have not handed down a decision. It'll probably be some time before they do. Basically, these hunting clubs challenged the right of the state wildlife agency, their law enforcement officers to injure their property without a warrant or probable cause to do surveillance or check. And you know, at first when I read this, I'm like, well, I mean, yes, I have the right to enter, but I mean they really do probably need some kind of probable cause. I mean like I'm going back or then. And this is coming from a former practicing attorney. There's a lot of nuances in this case. I mean, you know, when you read it, you're thinking at first, well, these guys just don't want to be checked. But then you start looking at some of the incidents that were happening. I mean, it was really kind of borderline. It sounded at least a bit egregious. I mean, almost like they were harassing them. So, you know, unfortunately, I think that, you know, 99.9% of our law enforcement officers and our game wardens are fantastic. But then of course, you know, some of the, you've always got some bad seeds that are out there and maybe some people abusing their power. And I'm wondering if this was a case of some of these guys just got crossways with each other. I don't know. I mean, but reading into this, I mean, there's a difference between setting up cameras to surveil someone trying to catch them doing something, something when there is no probable cause and they haven't done anything to be caught. I mean, to me that's, that's not okay. Um, you know, I think they might, these, these hunting clubs may have a chance to win this. Um, at the same time, if you have a property situation going up where for instance, you have a high fence, that requires certain regulatory checks that doesn't require probable cause. So I think that's a regulatory issue, you know, So I think there's going to have to be different levels. I, you know, I don't know. I mean, you read the articles about this. What, what do you think? I mean, I, this is just so crazy to me. And, and there's a lot of issues kind of tied into it.

[Fred Bird]

So open fields doctrine is, it's, it's sticky, right? I mean, you have precedent that goes back to the, the 1920s, almost 100 years old, Prohibition era findings. Right? So, you know, you, you have your fourth Amendment that guarantees your right and you need that probable cause and lawful search and seizures. And that standard's been challenged over the years, over almost 100 years. And Supreme Court keeps coming back to it that your private property is your private property, it's your house that you're dwelling. And then this like zone, like immediate measurement that goes. I forget the legal term. It starts with a C, you'll forgive me, but it's like, you know, a little buffer zone around your house that that's what you can reasonably expect not to be invaded.

[Ashley]

Right.

[Fred Bird]

Reveals doctrine, says, and especially when it comes to wildlife. And as we talked about earlier, you know, these public resources are held in public trust. The critters don't recognize or understand political boundaries. Right. So they are moving to and fro throughout the landscape and our state agency law enforcement officials need to be able to, to do what they do and manage those resources, right? So you have a large track of land or hell, even me, I mean I got my little two and a half acres here in Seacoast New Hampshire, public open fields doctrine would apply to me. On my two and a half acres I have my house and the immediate area around it. But on my back 40, I suppose if a Fish and Game officer wanted to go back there and if for whatever reason they needed to do that, surveil or whatever, they, they had that right by, by a Supreme Court to do that. Now there's a large libertarian streak that runs through the hunting community. I'm not ignorant to that and maybe even I do off hours subscribe to some of that. And it does get my hackles up. And as a property owner, private property owner, and I'm like, well who, who the hell gets the right to come on my property and surveil or hang equipment, right? And I guess, you know, because we have this, this precedent and we'll see what happens in Pennsylvania, right? Because obviously if this goes and flips that over 100 years of precedent, we're looking at something different, potentially going to the Supreme Court in the United States and redefining what that means and revisiting what is authorized under the Fourth Amendment. I suppose if I'm walking out my back 40 and I find a fishing game camera, I find any trail camera that's not mine, I'm seasoned, right? And I'm calling local law enforcement. Well, I'm calling Fish and Game because I know what that equipment is ideally and I'm going to start with them and, and let them start to suss it out. And then if they work through local law enforcement and if they come on, say, yeah, that's ours. Okay, now we're gonna have a conversation, right? What I like about New Hampshire law enforcement and a lot of the fishing game I deal with here in the Northeast is they're more about education. So you have this public relationship, this public way these guys and gals deal with the sportsmen and women, the public at large, because they're, they're also performing law enforcement duties outside of fishing game. Well, you have a heavy handed group that, you know, that was the, the articles we read for pgc that it's got to be an outlier, right? Because most of those guys and gals are out there doing the same exact thing. They're not trying to make cases on little gotcha situations like I, you know, where's your license? It's in my truck. Well, you got to go get it. You got to have it on you. Right. Almost feels like entrapment and why were you there in the first place?

[Ashley]

Right.

[Fred Bird]

It seems like a situation like that, the officer would be more smart to say, hey, take this as an education stance, opportunity. You need to have it on you. Please make sure. Here's the why go back, get it, have a good hunt, and you probably have a different outcome. You'd probably have a different situation. Just trying to line up citations is. Seems silly. And anyway, I guess I get back to. I think up here in my states where I frequent, I think they do it right now, if you're. If you're an offender over and over again, you're going to get hemmed up. But, yeah, this is a tough one.

[Ashley]

I think that for the most part, they handle it really well down here. And I have heard of some situations where wardens were setting up cameras. And then I also heard that they were going to be required to have warrants to do so in the future, that there were complaints, and that that was internally handled. So it'll be interesting. I. I don't think that you sh. I don't think they should be able to set up cameras on somebody's property unless there is probable cause to do so.

[Fred Bird]

And I. I feel like most of the time there probably is. And it. Again, you're the. You're the legal expert. This I'll yield to you. But is. Is probable cause. Is that PC enough? Just to say because of the nature of fishing, game, law enforcement and what they manage and what they do is species that they manage moving back and forth across property lines. Enough probable causes that we just, we're just trying to monitor.

[Ashley]

Yeah, I don't. I do not think so. I also think there could. You could see a problem if people just started riding on their neighbors to commit trouble. I mean, look, it's a hard job. I feel for these wildlife management.

[Fred Bird]

Not easy.

[Ashley]

No, it is. It is definitely not easy. Gosh. Okay, we will move along to North Dakota. This one, we have updated you guys on those three CWD bills moving through. Two of them got killed, and then one of them did pass Senate Bill 2137.

[Fred Bird]

Well, all right, we'll. We'll pick it back up here. I've gone from co hosting Blood Origins News Roundup to hosting. So here we go. As Ashley was discussing before the power went out there in her neck of the woods, she was talking about Senate Bill 2130. 7. This is a use of supplement feed for hunting in North Dakota. Now this is passed, it's eligible for the governor to sign. We at csf, we oppose this. We asked that the, the members respectfully oppose that bill. It would strip and does strip the North Dakota Game and Fish Department of their ability to promulgate certain rules regarding hunting. It undermines the state agency's ability to adopt and implement any policy that prohibits the use of supplemental feed for the hunting of big game animals on private land in North Dakota. The state agency is the authority best suited to make science based wildlife management decisions and should accordingly retain the ability to promulgate rules pertaining to hunting and wildlife. So a couple things here. So they, a little wordsmithing going on, supplemental feeding. We can all read between the lines here. This is baiting, right? So from our standpoint, and we always prefer that the professionals are the ones making the rules and the ones who are able to adjust as they need to and not legislate these things, these folks are hired, they are gathered, they are, a team is formed in the, in the, in the state fishing game, or dnr, whatever it's called in your area, to, to bring mission delivery. And part of that is the management of that wildlife and how pilot wildlife is management through season setting, through rule setting and baiting or supplemental feed in this instance falls under that. So, you know, it's. This is one of those things for us that we need to make sure that professionals that have been vetted have gone through a hiring process that we are trusting to do this, have that authority by taking that away and not subscribing to science based wildlife management is problematic. Certainly without getting into the CWD side of things. You know, there, there is that quotient not outlined here, but I know that's, that argument has been made as well when it comes to this, this issue of baiting, supplemental feeding of, of cervids especially, and how problematic that that could be. Again, whatever the science is bearing out. So to say that people on private property can do whatever they want is not science based. It's not in the interest. Because if, you know, if, you know, going back to Pennsylvania, 84% of that state is held in private land. So much of the Northeast is held in private land. So in North Dakota, if you know of any of us with these states that have this high concentration of privately owned land, if we're doing whatever the hell we want, who's managing it, and if the rules are different for private landowners, then the public spaces that are managed or owned outright by the agency to manage. We have two standards and you simply cannot do a good job and manage herds and flocks in such a way. So where this is eligible for the governor's desk, certainly here at CSF we will be submitting a governor's veto request. We'll be asking for that to make sure it goes no further and hopefully we can stop it. And that's, you know, getting back to our organization and what we provide. You know, Ashley and I were talking about what goes on on the Hill in the state houses. We kind of have, well, I kind of, we do have this like three legged stool if you will here, CSF and you know, our legislative Sportsman's caucus of the state, our Congressional Sportsman's caucus on the Hill and then our governor's Sportsman's caucus so that, that kind of completes this complete support system and this relationship, this ability to go to our governors with our, with our caucuses or just as ourselves as a representative of the community and, and request support or opposition to such issues like we have here in North Dakota. It's helpful certainly and, and it gives us some clouds and backing to go when we go to them. You know, we're not just, you know, one angry hunter who's, who has something to say. Not that that's not important, but certainly we come with some backing here. Now the governor in North Dakota, Kelly Armstrong is a member of our gsc, our Governor Sportsman's Caucus. So I, I imagine our folks, Jake Gould, who's our representative over there, will be in touch with the governor's office looking for support on that and, and hopefully again we can stop that at the governor's desk. I think Ashley also wanted to touch upon the idea of bear hunting coming back to Florida and I was definitely looking to be more responsive than leading that conversation, giving me. She's more closer to that and certainly evolved. And on our end, Mark Lance again our assistant director, assistant manager rather in the, the Southeast states is, is intimately involved in this especially behind closed doors. So I guess I'll say to this is again, come back to the standard of science based wildlife management and letting the folks that manage that stuff in Florida make those decisions. It's, it's a, it's a PR nightmare sometimes, especially in Florida when it comes to these large predatory species, large fluffy critters. And I know the Blood Origins audience has heard this many times or this line of thought and the complexities of these conversations and treating something that has been Disney fied, that has been kind of lampooned in black bears or any bears or wolves, that they're these soft, cuddly critters that we can all just get along. And in fact, this is a resource, this is a population of wild game managed species that can have human conflict and it's at the detriment to both man and critter. Certainly we don't want to see bears tangling in the suburbs and then being put down as habituated bears. We don't want that. We don't want little kids getting hit or someone getting out of their car getting, getting attacked by bears either. So all that to say, you know, they, they brought back the hunt, they, they hit their quota pretty quick. I, I'd imagine that speaks to the amount of bears in Florida. If you're, you're opening a season and shutting it down just as quickly because you've already hit your quotas. You know, look to look at, look at examples like Louisiana and what they were able to do and you know, the, the success story, the recovery of Louisiana black bear and they were able to bring back a, a hunt for the first time last year, albeit very minimal, but they're working towards opening that up. Florida, you guys have the population, you, you have a manageable species there that needs to be brought in. And you know, we talk about the North American Model Wildlife Conservation and one of those seven tenants, seven sisters, is that hunters play a role and we are the preferred method in that management. Not only is the state not having to hire contract folks to come in there and do that mitigation at a huge cost of the taxpayer, we're paying for the licenses, we're paying for the opportunity to go out there. We pay for our own equipment, we pay for our own travel, we provide that service. Do we get adventure out of it? Absolutely. Do we get some damn good meat out of it? Absolutely. There's a trade off there. But ultimately we're playing, we're playing a role in that, in that process. It's a symbiotic relationship that we have and ultimately leads to healthier herds and flocks. And in this case, Florida should be bringing back that hunt, should be bringing back science based wildlife management in the form of hunting being instituted as the preferred method and, and, and making those opportunities available. So I'm sure, I'm sure Ashley had more to say on the topic. If, if I had Mark Lance here, I'd let him speak more to it as far as maybe what's going on and how things are moving. But rest assure, as that situation plays out, both In North Dakota and Florida. I have no doubt Ashley will bring you those updates. Certainly we will bring you those updates on the Sportsman's Voice podcast. We got. We do a weekly roundup just like Blood Origins does. I think we both fall on a Wednesday. What's cool about you guys at Blood Origins and what you're able to hear is sometimes different than what we're doing as mentioned. You know, we're, we're, we're operating at the state levels here in the States where you guys are going international. And Robbie does a, a damn good job of covering things in Europe and Africa, Australia. It's, it's a, it's incredible what you guys have been able to do here at Blood Origins and the light that's been shown upon, you know, international issues. Not that we don't deal with international issues, but a lot of those come by way of things like Big five trophy import bands and things like that, which we are working currently, unfortunately, right now in the state of New York. And I'm sure you guys are aware of that by way of Robbie and Ashley's reporting. And I'm sure if that picks up and grows legs, there may be future collaboration between the Sportsman's Voice and Blood Origins podcast on that. And I have no doubt Robbie will be all over it. So as I was saying, I think we both drop on Wednesday, so you guys can always check us out. You don't have to listen to us on Wednesday if you're, if you're hanging here, obviously you're, this is your, this is your podcast. And I know Ashley and Robbie appreciate you tuning in. Come check us out and we'll give you a different, a different look at policy that complements what's going on here at Blood Origins. No doubt give you kind of a bigger 360 picture and you can, you can check the program out at your leisure. It's generally 30 to 45 minute weekly news update, kind of like this one here. As we were approaching roughly 45 minutes or maybe a little over. And we do a feature podcast release, a feature episode every other Thursday. So do feel free to check that out. As Ashley mentioned earlier, our website is chock full of great information and resources. All free to you if you decide to go over to congressional sportsman's. Congressional sportsmen.org Congressional sportsman.org There you can sign up for the Sportsman's Voice newsletter. That is the print complement to our audio feature in the podcast. You get those updates every Monday night and Tuesdays. If there's a holiday or something that interferes with our Monday publication. Typically around the 5:00 Eastern hour, those will hit inboxes and then we have a feature called Tracking the Capital or Tracking the Capitals. You can go in there. Takes about I think a minute or so to create a profile and you can sign up for whatever alerts you want in whatever state or states you're looking for specific legislation. You can go in and get those, those alerts as legislation's moving through and pick out what's important to you. We also have a collection of what we call our issue briefs. So things like Open Field doctrine, cwd, things that we've covered here, Ashley and I, before the lights went out there in Mississippi. You can see Congressional Sportsman's Foundation's positions on all of those issues. It's very well curated and serves as a resource for you, the general listener or if you're a legislator tuning in and you've never heard us but you, you tune into Blood Origins, we can be a resource to you as well and, and, and encourage you to do so. So I want to thank Ashley, thank you Robbie for trusting me to sit in a big seat and help co host and then host the Blood Origins podcast. It's a treat. It's pretty cool here. And again, just thanks for the opportunity to talk to you all and share share what we got going on over at CSF as I always do and when I sign off, I encourage you if you're a first time listener, you're listening on whatever platform, itunes, Spotify, Iheart, there are opportunities for you to subscribe, follow rate, do all that. It helps us get the Blood Origins message out which is an important one. Gets the CSF message out, which is important. So if you you are new to the CSF podcast, please follow subscribe. There's five stars. Hit those five stars, fill them in. We do appreciate it. Both of our programs appreciate that working within the algorithmic happening somewhere in the ones and zeros, whatever that looks like. But your interaction helps push these products forward and ultimately get out some really important messaging and stories to be told. No doubt we'll call it good there. Thank you guys for, for listening, for tuning in and allow me to be a part of your day as as a co host here on the Blood Origins Podcast. Look forward to meeting some of you over at the the Sports's Voice podcast and continued success and all the great work Ashley and Ramy are doing here on Blood or guys, have a great week. If you're out there in the turkey woods, enjoy, shoot straight, know your target was beyond it. All the firearm safety tenants ultimately get home safe. And I hope you guys are are feeling tags on gobblers. Good luck out there. Be well.

[Mike Axelrod]

Well, that's it for today. I appreciate you listening as always. Leave a review, share it with your friends, and most importantly, do what's right to convey the truth around hunting.