Small Business of the Week - Bullhead Bear Farms

When I was a big kid, maybe 12 or 13 years old, I was struck by an entrepreneurial spirit.  I had had a taste of real work – picking okra for a truck farmer and push-mowing grass.  Facing a long row of okra with a peck basket was not an attractive career path.  I knew there were easier ways to earn money.  So, I decided to go into the possum business. 

My friend and I lured three of four possums into box traps with open cans of sardines.  We built a rather large cage of questionable durability and paired the possums off to do what possums do.  These were going to be our foundation stock – the basis for our possum empire.

I’m not sure who said, “Find a job you enjoy and you will never work a day of your life,” but I pretty sure he was a possum farmer.  No more grass-stained Chuck Taylors or prickly okra stalks for me.  Instead, I envisioned the inspiring words: “That’s a fine looking possum young man – How much do you want for him?”  It all begins with a dream.

But, like most budding business owners, we focused on the aspects we enjoyed most – catching and raising the critters.  We never gave much thought to the vitality of the possum market which surprisingly was nil.

Nowadays I am much older and wiser.  And since I am semi-retired, I have time for a new animal husbandry venture that I’m sure will be profitable.

My idea was generated by all this talk about deer.  There is a move to transfer captive deer to the oversight of the NC Department of Agriculture and away from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC).  Determined not to make the possum error again, I have been studying this bill’s progress.

First, semantics or word choice are important.  Those wanting to raise deer refer to it as “deer farming.”  One bill sponsor, Senator Brent Jackson, is quoted as saying, “Logically, it just makes more sense to have a livestock program placed in the same department as all the other livestock programs.”  The NCWRC and other conservationists prefer the term, “captive cervids.”  This seems to communicate that these deer are public trust resources that belong to the people as a whole and not a group of 37 individuals.  And of course “cervid” sounds much too scientific.  I’m sticking with “farming.”

Next, we need some folks who are okay with waffling.  In 2010, Agriculture Commissioner Steve Troxler said in an official press release, "Bambi is a pest."  Now Commissioner Troxler says, "It makes perfect sense" to move the oversight of captive deer to his department.  I like a man who is willing to change positions.  We will need more folks like that in our camp.

The deer farmers point to this as a growing agricultural enterprise.  I like that a lot.  “Economic development” and "job creation” are a hot topics.  Who can argue against putting money in people’s pockets?  Deer steaks, deer urine, big racked bucks for canned hunts – these guys have it figured out.  I hear there is even a budding market for deer semen (now there is a job to fluff your resume).  It all sounds as lucrative as ostrich farming.

We also need politicians willing to deal with the hard issues.  Representative Roger West’s possum bill has paved the way for abolishing wildlife laws when it is beneficial for us small business owners.  In spite of what some may say, we don’t need industry in western North Carolina.  We need principled men who are willing to expend their political capital to give us a week of unregulated access to possums.  Fingers crossed, but I hope those principles apply to other wild animals in the future.

So now for my big reveal.  If this deer bill passes it seems logical that other animals should follow (cue Ty Pennington and shouts of “move that bus”).  How does this sound? – Bullhead Bear Farm.  That’s right - I’m farming bears!  I plan to grow them out and slaughter them like beef cattle.  There is a strong Asian market for gall bladders and I know the tourists and mountain transplants will buy rugs and mounts.  Gosh, I bet ever piece can be sold.  I may even get back into possums.

But first, we have to get this current bill pushed through the NC General Assembly.  Then I can start building my bear fence. 

I wonder if there is market for squirrels.

Stripping the NCWRC

It seems that conservation in every form is under attack by legislation.  I suppose the mentality is that environmental laws are bad for economic development.  After all, the laws designed to protect our air, water, and forests must have a negative impact to those developers seeking to drain wetlands, emit pollutants in the air, and allow sediment to wash into our streams. 

Then there are all those pesky varmints.  The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission is working to conserve those critters like it is some kind of statutory mandate.  Wait, there actually is such a statute. 

Ding Darling
www.dingdarling.org

Back in the 1940s, there was a movement across the country to take conservation programs to the next level.  Folks like Ding Darling were concerned that the great restoration efforts begun by Theodore Roosevelt, Gifford Pinchot, and George Bird Grinnell were becoming too political and that conservation would suffer because of this intervention.  Building on a national model, the North Carolina Wildlife Federation was instrumental in initiating legislation that led to the creation of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) in 1947.

Darling's biography describes his frustration with petty political interference, and how he hoped that conservation could somehow be kept from the negotiated world of politics.  It was felt that creating a separate, autonomous agency would help keep politics from influencing the biological management of wildlife resources.  The NCWRC has founded on this principle of making decisions based on what was best for the resources.

Of course, politics have always been a part of any wildlife agency.  To think otherwise would be ludicrous and naive.  The NCWRC is no different.  The commissioners are political appointees.  Both state and local politicians often ask and receive favors that benefit their constituents. 

The current legislative body in North Carolina seems intent on breaking down the NCWRC stone by stone.  HB 574 was passed by the House and awaits action by the Senate.  The bill will remove all rules concerning opossums between December 29 and January 2 each year.  This action hopes to ensure that the Possum Drop can be conducted for a handful of folks in a crossroads community in Clay County.  It's not possums that are at stake - it the fundamental shift in how the General Assembly interferes with conservation efforts.

Then HB 760, the Regulatory Reform Act, had language inserted that would have stripped wildlife officers of their inspection authority.  This authority is unique to conservation officers across the country.  It allows them to temporarily stop people engaged in wildlife related activities to determine if they possess the required licenses and other equipment.  A later iteration removed the verbiage concerning inspection authority, but left language that states:

“Except as authorized by G.S. 113-137, nothing in this section gives an inspector, protector, or other law enforcement officer the authority to inspect weapons, equipment, fish, or wildlife in the absence of a person in apparent control of the item to be inspected."

Huh???

One has to wonder what the drafters of that language really want to address.  Are wildlife officers pilfering through hunters’ trucks while the hunters are in the woods?  That is already illegal.  Or maybe it is to keep those “jack booted thugs” from going into a hunter’s house to inspect his freezer without a warrant or permission.  It couldn’t be that – those actions are also illegal.  Could we be trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist?

What is easily discernible is the effect of such a law.  A wildlife officer could no longer check a trap that she suspected of being illegally set unless the trapper was present.  Or a marine patrol officer could no longer check for identification of nets until the fisherman showed up.  Many other situations come to mind where the conservation of wildlife resources, the NCWRC’s and Division of Marine Fisheries' mandate, would be adversely affected.

I suppose we could speculate on any number of reasons that one legislator has a beef with the NCWRC.  What isn’t questionable is the impact this legislator is having on an agency with a rich history of stewardship of the state’s wildlife resources.  

Warden Tales: The Great Deception

It wasn't long into my first assignment as a wildlife officer in western North Carolina that I realized that the government and its officials weren't held in high esteem.  This was in 1985 - long before the anti-government gained momentum on a national scale.  Many still talked of “the government taking our land” to form the Great Smoky Mountain National Park (while some land was taken through eminent domain, many were also compensated for their land).   The Trail of Tears wasn't some distant event from history - the Tsali access area kept history current.  And the US Forest Service was widely criticized for everything from cutting too many trees, not cutting enough trees, to locking up roads to inhibit access to “our land” (it was pointed out more than once that the “US” in the Forest Service name also spelled "us" – "that means the land is ours").

Sandwiched in with the park service and forest service, game wardens didn’t stand a chance.  Our sergeant warned us away from any socializing with anyone that hunted or fished.  “They will screw you over,” he warned.  Since everyone in the county seemed to hunt and fish that pretty much eliminated the prospect of finding a friend.

But, that first fall I found one family that was different.  They spoke in support of wildlife management and understood the benefits of successional forests.  I saw them often on the lake and up and down the trout streams.  They worked with the fishing club to establish brush piles for fish on the lake.  They were one of the few parties of bear hunters that didn’t go silent when we drove up.  Even the ole sarge admitted they were pretty good guys.

I had worked nearly a year when I saw the dad of this group and one of his grown sons out on the lake.  It was late spring and the smallmouth bass were turned on – everyone was catching them.  I was working from boat to boat when I spied my friends.  I had seen their licenses and safety equipment before, so I just pulled alongside to say hello. 

Nothing seemed abnormal.  They asked if I had seen many fish and what the other anglers were using to catch fish.  After several minutes I asked, “How ‘bout ya’ll? Are you catching anything?”  There was a moment of silence that was a bit uncomfortable for us all.

The daddy nodded to the livewell and said, “We’ve caught a few.”

I opened the lid and quickly assessed there were more than two limits.  A quick count aloud confirmed they were four or five fish over.

I figured there had to be a really good explanation.  Maybe one of the other brothers had been with them and they had just dropped him off.  Maybe they just lost count.  I couldn’t imagine them intentionally breaking the law.  They were my friends – almost to the buddy stage.  I guess the daddy could see the gears turning as I tried to make sense out of the situation.  He finally broke what seemed like a year of silence.

“I know it looks bad for us, but we didn’t intend on keeping ‘em.”

I guess I looked even more puzzled.

“You know how the fishing is pretty poor on the other side of the lake?”

I nodded.  Everyone knew that.

“Well, we are stocking these fish over there.”

As I write it now that explanation seems utterly ridiculous.  But at the moment, as my mind reeled, it sort of, in a weird way, made sense.  They had, after all, helped with all manners of restoration work to improve fish habitat.  They had given me violation reports on poachers.  They had even made me feel welcome in a county where there is no red carpet welcoming government officials.  I considered them friends.  Surely, I thought, they wouldn’t violate the law and then lie to me.

“This looks bad,” I offered more weakly than I liked.  “But, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.”  I pulled away uncertain of what just happened.

A few weeks later the uncertainty grew into clarity when an officer from the neighboring county called and told me he had charged the father/son duo.  He caught them pulling off the lake with a livewell of bass that once again exceeded the creel limit.  I guess they were shooting for genetic diversity in their “stocking.”

That episode swung me hard in the other direction.  I never really trusted anyone after that incident.  Years later that mindset led me to cite a mom out fishing with her family on Mother’s Day for not having a license – she should have known better and if she didn’t, well she did after “holding one.”  Or the time I thumbed through a Bible while searching a car, thinking what a perfect place that would be to hide marijuana.

I recall talking with an administrator who had received a compliant about a boating check about the complexity of a wildlife officer’s job.  I talked him through a routine boat check step by step beginning with the approach – 10 or more things that were taking place almost simultaneously.  I said, “And all the while, you have to wonder, is this guy going to try and kill me.”  He laughed and said, “Seriously, how often do you think that.”  I explained that survival dictated that every encounter be viewed that way because as sure as an officer drops their guard, the worse may happen.  Keep your head down literally or figuratively you'll never see it coming. 

Maybe it won’t be a life or death encounter.  Maybe the officer will roll up on their friend who feeds the officer a BS story that the officer believes and leaves him feeling foolish for the rest of his life.

************************************************************************

For an interesting look at the different types of wildlife officers, I suggest this paper by Craig J. Forsyth.