Home > environment > Cat killer no good for California commission

Cat killer no good for California commission

Daniel Richards, president of the California Fish and Game Commission, is facing an onslaught of criticism after he was snapped showing off a dead mountain lion he shot in Idaho.  Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom is the latest to demand his resignation.

The photograph, which was apparently included in the $7,000 fee Richards paid so that he could tree and shoot the puma, outraged conservationists and animal lovers around the state. Forty Democratic state Assembly members have called for his resignation.

Richards bagged his trophy in Idaho, where hunting mountain lion is legal, but Newsom pointed out that sport hunting of the big cats has been illegal in California since 1972, when Gov. Ronald Reagan signed legislation banning the sport. The ban was twice renewed by California voters.

“While not in California at the time, your actions call into question whether you can live up to the calling of your office,” Newsom wrote to Richards. “I do appreciate that you did nothing illegal in Idaho, but it is clear that your actions do not reflect the values of the people of California.”

  1. Ponder z
    February 28, 2012 at 6:06 am

    It must be nice to afford to pay these fees to hunt, (Legally). Other than that its his own personal choice. Newsom can shut the hell up, and keep his liberal whinny opinion to himself. Lets dig into Newsoms privet life. Newsom should keep his focus on destroying this state. We now have more people working for the state than we do in privet industry. We have as many people on public money as are paying income tax. Businesses are fleeing this state every day, to avoid the expense of doing business here.

  2. just middle class
    February 28, 2012 at 6:57 am

    So, doing something legal should cost you your job? Just silly, but welcome to California.

  3. February 28, 2012 at 7:10 am

    If it’s legal, it must be a really great idea.

  4. Steve
    February 28, 2012 at 7:12 am

    Keep the story but please take down this photo, Heraldo. Its sick enough that people “trophy hunt” predators rather than hunt for the table. Having to see the fruit of that perverted killing recreation is another drop of poison to the heart.

  5. Mitch
    February 28, 2012 at 7:21 am

    The photo is the story. Words alone won’t capture the man’s “bravery.”

    I’ll never understand the courageous studs who go into the woods completely unarmed to capture big cats protected by machine gunners. Such cojones! Such machismo! Such intelligence!

  6. 06em
    February 28, 2012 at 7:33 am

    So, doing something legal should cost you your job?

    Nope. Being an a-hole who kills such an incredible animal – not for meat or because it attacked you, or killed your livestock, but to derive some sort of pleasure from it – should cost you your job.

  7. Dan
    February 28, 2012 at 7:42 am

    “So, doing something legal should cost you your job?”

    Having Mr. Richards in a leadership
    position on the Fish and Game Commission,
    reminds me of when RR appointed James Watt
    Secretary of Interior.

  8. 713
    February 28, 2012 at 7:45 am

    Apparently, there is a slight difference between Idaho and CA:

    “In California, emphasis is placed on protecting important habitat, on responding to public safety incidents and on improving public awareness of mountain lions as the state wildlife agency tries to deal with the pressures caused by a human population of over 35 million. By contrast, in Idaho with a human population of less than 1.5 million, there is more emphasis placed on providing diverse hunting opportunities and on managing mountain lions in conjunction with prey species, including bighorn sheep, deer and elk. In Idaho, specific mountain lion harvest quotas are used to adaptively manage mountain lion hunting within large regions or smaller units of the state.”


  9. Rob
    February 28, 2012 at 7:46 am

    It is not about whether it was legal or not. Shooting wild animals for sport or for trophies is what a coward does who loves killing wildlife with his guns. This guy should be removed from his position and someone that actually cares about wildlife, not killing it should replace him.

  10. Rob
    February 28, 2012 at 7:49 am

    Although killing wildlife for sport is legal in some places, it’s not normal. These hunters who kill these animals for sport have no respect for the animals they are killing. If they did, they wouldn’t be killing them in the first place. Hunters like Mr. Richards do not care about wildlife, only killing it. Hunting nowadays is nothing more than a cowards sport. Why should killing wildlife ever be considered a sport in the first place? There is nothing sporting about shooting a natural predator for sport or for a trophy.

  11. Gil Yule
    February 28, 2012 at 7:53 am

    I think a federal law, “if you kill it, you eat it” is way over due.

  12. just middle class
    February 28, 2012 at 8:22 am

    Braised rabid skunk, yum!

  13. Plain Jane
    February 28, 2012 at 8:40 am

    Because killing a rabid skunk to prevent it spreading rabies and put it out of its horrific misery is the same as killing a healthy cougar for fun, JMC?

  14. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 9:15 am

    One of the hallmark signs of serial killers is that they derive pleasure from killing animals. How is this any different?

  15. Symptomatic
    February 28, 2012 at 9:23 am

    The head of the Fish and Game Commission has given us a little peak into his agency. Fish and Game has gone completely off its mission and now F&G employees protect the moneyed interests that destroy fish and wildlife habitat.

    I feel sorry for those few who still want to work toward the mission of preserving wildlife but are restrained from doing so by politics. More and more, the agency is populated by slick talking biostitutes and cowards who hide out behind their desks and collect a paycheck for doing nothing.

    The F&G Commission has the wrong priorities and Richards’ actions in Idaho are nothing compared to the way they have sold out fish and wildlife and their habitat here in California.

  16. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 9:24 am

    I am in an extended family of hunters and ranchers. They can’t wait for deer season. I think they are wonderful people otherwise, but I can’t understand the love of stalking an animal for the purpose of killing it. Those who do it for the meat and are low income have more of an excuse. The puzzle for me is why they enjoy it.

  17. just middle class
    February 28, 2012 at 9:25 am

    PJ, just responding to the kill it and eat it statement.
    So hunting is leading to serial killing, oh how extreme can we get?
    Rural folks have been killing predators for generations and have not become serial killers.

  18. Plain Jane
    February 28, 2012 at 9:42 am

    Killing diseased animals, those which are preying on your livestock, threatening humans or for food is not even remotely in the same category as killing animals for fun, JMC. If you had the tiniest bit of perspective you wouldn’t need this explained.

  19. Thorstein Veblen
    February 28, 2012 at 10:03 am

    Am I the only one who thinks California was better off when mountain lions were hunted and numbers kept in check?

    But it is the law, in the California constitution by voter initiative. Agree it seems more than insensitive for the guy charged with preventing Cali citizens from hunting these animals to go off somewhere else and do it himself. Maybe next he’ll go to Alabama and spotlight a doe, using a shotgun.

  20. Bolithio
    February 28, 2012 at 10:16 am

    That’s some fallacy Symp.

  21. Mitch
    February 28, 2012 at 10:22 am


    I’ve always assumed that hunters enjoy hunting for the same reason that people enjoy sex, are often selfish, and eat fatty, salty junk food.

    That is, it’s baked into our evolutionary history.

    Of course, being conscious beings in addition to evolved animals, we are capable of being unselfish, engaging in and enjoying non-procreational sex, restricting our intake of fatty, salty junk food.

    We can also notice and comment upon mean-spirited “recreation” like hunting for pleasure, bullfighting, and professional boxing. We shouldn’t expect, though, to convince anyone who engages in any such behavior that it is not perfectly lovely. Pappy always did it.

  22. February 28, 2012 at 10:22 am

    Yet Mike Thompson was recognized as Federal Legislator of the Year by the hunting lobbyist group Safari Club International http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safari_Club_International#Polar_bear_imports ; and he received the Hunting Heritage Award from the same group that supports the shooting of endangered polar bears for trophy hunting. Amazing. Check out HR 991 if you want your eyes opened to the hunting fans.

  23. Plain Jane
    February 28, 2012 at 10:46 am

    I ate venison regularly growing up and still love it but killing a wild deer isn’t justified, in my mind, to satisfy my craving without need. I have no problem eating “domesticated” deer, elk or buffalo any more than cows, pigs, chickens or rabbits. If I needed the meat I would hunt, but killing any animal for sport is so beyond the pale of everything I believe that it is sickening and a little scary to me,

  24. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 10:50 am

    What a real man. A SICK SICK SICK man. As I write this, rich ass hunters with a few hundred G’s to spend as payola are shooting cheetas and all kinds of endangered wildlife in africa as well…too many pictures of them showing off their trophies have scarred my mind to even dig up the links.

    Bag and tag these fuckers. Take away their paycheck and kickem to the curb…let them fight it out with the human wildlife on the streets.

  25. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 10:52 am

    “That’s some fallacy Symp.”

    …says Bolithio, a “forester” responsible for clearcutting.

  26. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 11:00 am

    What an insight into the real workings of Fish and Game. He should be fired immediately.

  27. Mitch
    February 28, 2012 at 11:13 am

    FWIW, I should have placed “Pappy always did it” in quotes. I was not referring to my Pappy. You can’t do much game hunting in the subway.

  28. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 11:22 am

    Wow! This bloodthirsty Chickenshit bureaucrat goes to Idaho to kill. He is the head of Fish and Game here in my state? I don’t want him collecting a check on my tax dollar.

  29. February 28, 2012 at 11:37 am

    It is important to remember that in Idaho outfitters use GPS tracking signals and hounds to chase these terrified cougars. Once the animal is up the tree- it’s like shootin fish in a barrel from there. How sporting…..Ethics and fair chase hunting have been replaced with high tech weaponry to give hunters unfair advantage. Mr Richards has the fifth and deciding vote on the commission. Why do you think wolves are not protected under the ES in California- Richards is a trophy hunter and trophy hunters hate predators. They think all wild game belongs to them…. how selfish.
    SCI- don’t even get me started. These clowns think their money can buy any animal they want. Lions will be extinct in Africa in 20 years. all that will remain will be canned lions bred for the bullet- that’s what SCI is all about. They know the price of every animal that they kill but the value of none

  30. Somewhat friendly
    February 28, 2012 at 11:39 am

    R U people all nuts?

  31. Plain Jane
    February 28, 2012 at 11:49 am

    My pappy hunted around here his whole life, Mitch, but without a single trophy or even picture of his prey. It wasn’t for glory but for food. His opinion of people who killed for fun or trophies can’t be expressed politely.

  32. Richards is Despicable
    February 28, 2012 at 11:50 am

    In the past I have often times disagreed with Newsom but not in this case. President of Fish and Game slaughters wildlife. Fish and Game should be culled of employees such as Daniel Richards. His duplicity should not be tolerated.

  33. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 11:51 am

    “R U people all nuts?”

    Yea, whatever you want us to be champ. This guy’s department doles out $300 tickets to kids who catch a fish or two around here. My buddies got popped for catching ONE fish last year without a permit, on their way back to the truck after an otherwise nice day on the river. “my kid’s just learning” “tell it to the judge, here’s your ticket.” Meanwhile the head if the cop’s department pays to commit a statewide crime…in another state.

  34. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    The fine in CA for killing a mountain lion is only a little more than this asshole paid to “legally” kill one out of state:

    c) Any violation of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars ($ 10,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. An individual is not guilty of a violation of this section if it is demonstrated that, in taking or injuring a mountain lion, the individual was acting in self-defense or in defense of others.

    What a bunch of hypocrites!

  35. Symptomatic
    February 28, 2012 at 12:17 pm

    AND..this guy’s department doles out incidental take permits like Santa with candy canes.

  36. tra
    February 28, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    Who appointed this guy?

  37. Carla Baku
    February 28, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    When mountain lions attack people, we are horrified. When we attack them, we call it sport and take smiling photos with the beautiful dead animan, and animal that treasured its life every bit as much as I treasure mine. Aaah, humans.

  38. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    “AND..this guy’s department doles out incidental take permits like Santa with candy canes.”

    yep, it’s sick any way you look at it, especially in killing “animals” for these reasons. The “fines” might as well be incidental permits. Looking into what people are paying in fines for killing mountain lions that they argued were “threatening” them while they were “hunting deer” and such, they range from $500-1000. It’s sick. They are sick in the head by every definition of the term.

  39. February 28, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    Who appointed this guy?


  40. tofu jesus
    February 28, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    So if you gamble in Nevada or in an Indian Casino, should you also be fired? How about you people smoking illegal pot? Should you go to Club Fed?

  41. Plain Jane
    February 28, 2012 at 12:56 pm

    or a teacher who confines their pedophilia to countries where its allowed?

  42. tra
    February 28, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    So Schwarzenegger appointed a trophy hunter as President of the California Fish and Game Commission. Probably on the same day he appointed that dapper gentleman, Mr. Fox, as the President of the Henhouse Protection Commission.

  43. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 12:59 pm

    I know of people who like to hunt in Africa and they go after animals such as zebras and monkeys in addition to the more traditional gazelle or wildebeast. Here is a website that I find a upsetting but a testament that this behavior is popular:


  44. Bolithio
    February 28, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    Come on TRA! What a hippy bubble you all live in! Its the Department of Fish and GAME for christs sake. News flash: Idaho, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Alaska are all big game states where hunting is built into the fabric of their lives. It my not be your cup of tea, its certainly not mine, but deal with it! Just because you live in one of the most liberal – isolated communities in the world doesn’t mean everyone else is wrong!!

    The link and post by 713 is what really matters. You may not like it, but the majority of wildlife biologists hunt. Sure for food. But excitement is a big part of it and has been since the fucking cave. Hunting for sport has a long tradition in human culture. CA over hunted lions to the brink of extinction. In the 1970s when we realized that many of our species were headed that way, we had the foresight to enact laws to conserve the species we had left. It worked great.

    The other states, well, they had the foresight to not hunt their species to the brink and responsibly manage their wildlife. Thats why there is still hunting there, because wildlife biologists – hunters or not – are smarter than you think.

    DFG issues all kinds of permits to kill animals. From salmon (OMFG!!!!) to deer, duck, quail, bear, elk, and so on. You guys seriously didnt know that this is one of their primary functions? Where do you think they get most of their revenue to fund projects that improve and enhance the habitat for these species?

  45. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    Yep, the Dept of Fish and Game IS about hunting. It’s about conservation, ecology, and yes, hunting. The “recreational” use of our animals. See this from their website: (The recreation part is hunting and fishing):

    About the California Department of Fish and Game:

    The Mission of the Department of Fish and Game is to manage California’s diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological values and for their use and enjoyment by the public.

    The Department of Fish and Game maintains native fish, wildlife, plant species and natural communities for their intrinsic and ecological value and their benefits to people. This includes habitat protection and maintenance in a sufficient amount and quality to ensure the survival of all species and natural communities. The department is also responsible for the diversified use of fish and wildlife including recreational, commercial, scientific and educational uses.

  46. tra
    February 28, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    From my point of view, hunting for food is one thing, but “trophy hunting” and hunting for “sport” are something else entirely.

    I can understand people wanting to hunt or fish for food, and I don’t begrudge them their enjoyment of the challenge and the feeling of accomplishment they get in the process. But to kill a mountain lion just as a trophy, or just for the excitement of killing? Really?

    O.K., if the law says you can do that in Idaho, then you can do that in Idaho — but no, if you put that low a value on the lives of wild animals, then I don’t want you to be President of the California Fish and Game Commission.

  47. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 1:49 pm

    Bolithio, a logging rep, writes: “You guys seriously didnt know that this is one of their primary functions?”

    You want us to think you’re seriously reading what’s being written? What he did is illegal in the state of his employ for a variety of reasons. What he demonstrates is a considerable double standard.

    And as several personalized footnotes within this thread demonstrate, most of us understand it to be a very disgusting standard in and of itself to begin with. Borders are lines in the sand, get it? This is one planet with one wildlife and ecosystem that’s been fucked in the ass well enough already by folks like you.

  48. Cupid used a bow
    February 28, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    I think maybe Mitch is onto something. More sex for the hunters and they’d be less interested in hunting? Of course, more people would take up hunting then.

  49. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    1:49- that”s why he went to another state, where it was legal. I don’t condone, but his job involves working with hunting. Why is killing one thing okay but not another? I don’t like killing anything, but he didn’t break any laws, and his job supports legal hunting in his own state. He went outside his state to do legal hunting there. There are reasons why some animals can’t be hunted without cause, and it has to do with numbers and the individual state’s needs.

  50. Rob
    February 28, 2012 at 2:23 pm

    People are not mad whether he broke the law or not. They are mad because this coward went to another state to shoot an amazing animal for sport or for a trophy. Has nothing to do with being legal or not. Hunters who kill wildlife with their guns for sport are COWARDS.

  51. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 2:28 pm

    But his job involves supporting the ” recreational sport” of hunting. Read their website. I hate hunting, by the way.

  52. Mitch
    February 28, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    Better that recreational hunters keep hunting then engage in further procreation. The last thing we need is for them to bring up children.

  53. Bolithio
    February 28, 2012 at 2:34 pm

    Cupid used a bow says:
    February 28, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    I think maybe Mitch is onto something. More sex for the hunters and they’d be less interested in hunting? Of course, more people would take up hunting then.

    That reminds me, have any of you guys seen the trucker girl silhouette on many trucks around here that has a full rack of antlers for a head? Now that is sick. LOL

  54. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 2:49 pm

    2:23, I read that people are mad for all of the above. The double standard and the senseless killing. Any way you look at it, this guy is a born loser, and will die a loser.

  55. tofu jesus
    February 28, 2012 at 3:38 pm

    Indoor pot grows are for COWARDS! You should have to grow your pot outside in a field!


  56. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    It’s okay for Obama to direct biologists to kill small winged creatures:


    But legal hunting for sport isn’t.


  57. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    So true 3:59. The hypocrisy is rampant!

  58. Mitch
    February 28, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    4:25, 3:59,

    I usually try to be polite, but your stupidity is simply awesome.

    I have no problem with people who hunt for food. I have no problem with eating meat. People who hunt mammals for entertainment are either cruel or unthinking. I’d truly like to see the big cats offered an opportunity to shoot back. My sympathies are more with the cats than with the SOBs.

  59. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 5:12 pm


    I usually try to be polite, but your stupidity is simply awesome.

    Big cats lack the opposable thumbs and forefingers with which they would need to use a firearm. However, they do have teeth and nails with which they have used to attack/kill humans (many were small children).

    Although I personally wouldn’t want to hunt lions for sport, I am glad that the state of Idaho has studied the issue scientifically and has set strict limits on the hunting of that game (amount to be hunted, time of year, sex of the animal, area to be hunted, ect.) I am also happy that the head of a commission to protect the values of the hunting/conservation community in California is a sport hunter himself.

    Also, since you set your limits on hunting mammals for entertainment, does that make it okay to hunt any other animal for fun? Such as salmon, or crab, or duck, or eagles. Are these people cruel or unthinking? Just because an animal has hair, lives on land and gives live birth, you believe they are worth more than any of the other creatures on earth?!? That is cruel Mitch. Very cruel.

    As I said before…………Hypocrites

  60. Eric Kirk
    February 28, 2012 at 5:23 pm

    Another volley in the culture wars.

    Don’t get me wrong. While I don’t oppose hunting if you eat what you kill, I’ve never understood the appeal of letting your dogs run prey up a tree while you pick it off from the ground. The dogs do all the work and take all the chances, and then you get the kill, photo-op, and glory. I have no problem banning the use of dogs for anything other than tracking and retrieving game. Using them to force an animal up a tree doesn’t seem sporting.

    But while the practice does not sit well with my urban liberal sensibilities, there are plenty of people across the country, and even to some degree California, who will ask, “what’s the big deal?” Death is part of the life cycle, and we have to kill to eat and sometimes to survive. To most people, even today, hunting is seen as part of the natural order.

    The point is, I see this as a mirror image of the conservative small town who would run a female teacher out of town for having extra-marital sex in violation of their sensibilities. Because one hunts, it does not follow that he doesn’t care about wildlife. Supposedly, the cats are killed as part of a predator management plan. I lack the biological expertise to judge whether the management is appropriate, but assuming it is, you can argue that it’s to everyone’s benefit to charge a hefty fee to let someone enjoy what has to be done anyway.

    If he hadn’t taken the picture and distributed it, it probably wouldn’t be an issue. Not as big of one anyway. But to my sensibilities, the lion looks too magnificent to kill. And certainly to strut over the killing.

    Anyway, just food for thought.

  61. anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    It all comes down to one phrase: “Never eat anything that has a face.”

  62. Face
    February 28, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    Killing for the sake of killing is repulsive to the majority of people. Slapping the label “recreational” on the activity does not make it less repulsive. California citizens don’t want cats hunted because they are not killed for food but just for trophies. They had been hunted to near extinction and citizens voted to stop the killing.

    Yeah, what Richards did was legal in Idaho, but it reveals his attitudes. The mind set of a trophy hunter is not compatible with current opinions of Californians. Hunting and fishing for food is one thing. Killing for recreation, the shear thrill of it, is another.

  63. Not A Native
    February 28, 2012 at 6:25 pm

    Wish I could get my mind around what the arguments are about here. Charges of ‘hypocrisy’ flying in two directions. Charter of DFG agreed, but totally opposite interpretations of how to implement it.

    Best I can make out is some are sympathetic and supportive of continuing the tradition of eradicating varmits on sight. Others want to eliminate varmits whenever they cause some inconvenience, discomfort, or fear.

    All I know is, whenever a mountain lion is seen in Arcata, Fortuna, Mckinleyville, Korbel, Kneeland, Honeydew or Garberville, it gets media publicity. And everywhere the public’s reaction is pretty much the same. A call to do whatever it takes to reliably remove the animal from human sight.

  64. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    Richards had the animal butchered and brought it back with him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    What now?

  65. February 28, 2012 at 7:00 pm

    You should not shoot an animal you are not going to eat.

  66. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 7:04 pm

    Tell that to the Obama administration! See thread 3:59 Somoa.

  67. walt
    February 28, 2012 at 7:16 pm

    When that Great White Hunter Dick Cheney shot his lawyer friend in Texas, should he have eaten the lawyer? Or only if he died?

  68. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 7:39 pm

    Richard you lost your mind dude? Jane , I understand as she is simply full of what ever BS the lib spin requires. Mountain Lion is very good to eat. Not that ,that is the issue. Most of you rightoues fools never kill what you eat at all. Many of the groovy veg head tree sitters went straight to burger king in Fortuna when they got their breaks for a Whopper. Saw it first hand. Cali needs a roving cat hunt as their population needs controled in specific areas at specific times. Mr. Richards shows the right understanding to adress this issue. Newsome is a scum bag that eats fine prime rib and all the exotic trimmings at his big shot dinners. Bet you a ten spot Jane old girl that this phony never kills what he eats. I do Jane. Always have. So did popa. I’m not trying to harsh on you but till you have watched calves,lambs,puppies and entire deer herds wiped out by mountain lion over populations you are just talking lib spin. Cats have a very special place in the wilds and we need to support them. But!, just as we manage other species we also need to manage the big cats.

  69. Bolithio
    February 28, 2012 at 8:10 pm

    Tell that to the Obama administration! See thread 3:59 Somoa.

    I think what people are saying is do not kill for no reason. Thats a good ethic to live by. When you see a trophy hunter its hard not to question where the line is between ‘sport’ and poaching. Allot of people hunt bears around here. Although people eat them, I question their motives sometimes. Still DFG issues tags every year for people to tree bears with dogs and shoot them. Just like many northwestern states with many kinds of animals.

    Poaching is technically simply breaking the law, steeling from the State. But it conjures up visions of tigers and elephants right? We have hunted much greatness into extinction. We are fortunate that our culture has shifted in the direction of conservation (as slow as it may feel sometimes). CA enacted laws to protect threatened animals, as well as adopt the methods of wildlife management as a policy.

    Using the tools of science, we can now better manage populations of animals in world where – like it or not – the pre-existing condition is never going to return. Just vectoring alone is an unstoppable force that demands wildlife management. From the russian boar to the barred owl.

    Until our culture decides to become Buddhist monks and harm nothing, we are faced with the challenge of balancing our interaction with the natural world. You may not like hunting, or death, but I find comfort that unlike most wild places in the world, our country regulates hunting using a form of the scientific method. As all sciences, wildlife and ecology are evolving.

    To expect that our pioneer culture, with that background we have, should instantly become ecotopia is completely unreasonable. Considering our barbaric history, I feel damm lucky that we have had such dramatic cultural change and that I happen to live here.

  70. anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 8:10 pm

    So I say again, “Never eat anything with a face.” Just like you would not like to be eaten by a larger mammal, you should refrain from eating smaller ones. Have empathy with ALL living beings as they all deserve a long and healthy life.

  71. 713
    February 28, 2012 at 8:35 pm

    They are hunting the cougars in idaho as part of a management plan. This is to protect the elk, deer, bighorn sheep,etc. What is wrong with that? How is that different from killing the barred owls?

  72. Farcical
    February 28, 2012 at 9:50 pm

    7:39, what theater of the absurd do you belong to?

  73. February 28, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    I just find it ironic that nobody seems to care about Mike Thompson being recognized as Federal Legislator of the Year by the hunting lobbyist group Safari Club International http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safari_Club_International#Polar_bear_imports ; and he received the Hunting Heritage Award from the same group that supports the shooting of endangered polar bears for trophy hunting. Check out HR 991 if you want your eyes opened to the hunting for killing sake.

    I have a history of hunting, so I thought I better add a post about eating what you kill. I have ate bear, wild pig, deer, moose, elk but never Mountain Lion or Cougar. Not many have a taste for that in the hunting world.

  74. February 28, 2012 at 9:59 pm

    9:58 was me

  75. Anonymous
    February 28, 2012 at 10:04 pm

    Farcical. That says it all about you. 7:39 is spot on.

  76. February 28, 2012 at 10:11 pm

    It’s a really sick activity. Use a pack of dogs to chase an animal whose whole environment has been polluted and destroyed up a tree. Then when it’s cornered and helpless, some big-shot walks up (or probably motors up on his ATV) and kills it in cold blood.
    It’s disgusting. It’s beyond cowardice. It’s anti-life. It’s anti-nature.

  77. February 28, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    Eric Kirk Said: “I see this as a mirror image of the conservative small town who would run a female teacher out of town for having extra-marital sex”

    That’s pretty humorous Eric. (really) Back in the late 1800s school teachers that were brought into rural Mendocino County were usually married before that school year was out. I guess the men figured that they were “fair game”. Married women couldn’t be teachers, so education suffered. Kind of a catch-22. Education worked a lot better after they gave up and allowed married women to be teachers.

  78. February 28, 2012 at 10:28 pm

    Of all the hunting that is done…uh…legally; “Cat” hunting has got to be the most cowardly and unethical. No place for it in a modern society. “Management Plan?” So slaughter is all you can come up with? Jeez, no wonder we have permanent, endless, multi-lateral wars on every front. The people at the top are savage brutes who have not yet evolved beyond greed and self-interest.
    Not only do they murder the majestic in nature, they murder the innocent children of their own species in the name of some abstract economic necessity.

  79. February 28, 2012 at 10:30 pm

    My GG Grandfather, Benjanin Franklin Branscomb, was on the school board. I suspect he had a lot to do with the “married teacher is okay” rule.

  80. Mitch
    February 28, 2012 at 10:45 pm

    Thanks, Eric @ 5:23. Good points.

  81. Just Watchin
    February 29, 2012 at 5:28 am

    I figured by now someone would have found a way to blame George W. Bush for this!

  82. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 7:46 am

    I have trouble with the use of dogs to tree animals and then shooting them.

    But I can remember growing up in Humboldt County when they had “government hunters” that got bounties to kill mountian lions! There were so many of them.

    Despite what anyone (pro hunting or anti hunting)the “thinning of the heard” in most/all states is determined by bioligists and conservationist.

    Maybe they have too many mountain lions in Idaho! Attacking cattle, pets, and maybe people?

    Gavin Newsom is one of the things wrong with California.

  83. Largo
    February 29, 2012 at 8:50 am

    I can’t understand these shit-eating-grinning morons, posing with their kill. “look at me, I killed an animal with a high-powered rifle, woo-hoo”

    They could never work in a slaughterhouse, they be Facebooking photos all day.

  84. Just Watchin
    February 29, 2012 at 9:35 am

    I don’t see any blood in the picture. Maybe he chased it down and was just giving it a big hug.

  85. February 29, 2012 at 9:43 am

    I don’t think so. The majority of trophy hunters are anti-predator. There is the paranoia/selfishness factor in the trophy hunters mind where they see predators as a threat to the game herds. Wolves coexisted for hundreds of years before the trophy hunter came along. Richards has the SCI mentality where all animals are seen as a commodity

  86. sharpei
    February 29, 2012 at 9:55 am

    The next time there is an Aaron Bassler situation this guy should take his rifle and his camo and his orange cap and his grin and volunteer to track the (alleged) killer alone through the Mendocino thickets.

    Now that would be far more sporting, wouldn’t it?

  87. chip
    February 29, 2012 at 10:05 am

    “It is not about whether it was legal or not.”

    Rob, I respectfully disagree. The great thing about the USA is how our laws help govern a civilized society. Are all laws good? Of couse not (slavery for example). But the point is that if you, personally, don’t agree with a law does not mean that all other Americans agree with your point of view. Perhaps you should move to Idaho and start a movement if you feel so strongly…

  88. February 29, 2012 at 10:25 am

    For those interested, this is on KQED right now: http://www.kqed.org/radio/listen/

  89. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 10:41 am

    Bolithio, the logging rep, writes: “like it or not – the pre-existing condition is never going to return.”

    Thanks to people who think like you.

  90. tofu jesus
    February 29, 2012 at 11:12 am

    So anyone who donates money to PeTA is just like this guy. PeTA’s “shelters” have a 99.4% kill rate.

    Somehow that doesn’t seem fair or right.

  91. Jon Brooks
    February 29, 2012 at 11:14 am

    Another viewpoint;


    Sorry for the long link, but I don’t know how to shorten it.

    Disclaimer: I’m a member of this organization, and hunt deer and some birds here in HumCo.

    As for Richards, it seems like awfully poor judgement. Though not illegal, there are some things you just shouldn’t do when you are in a high profile position of authority. Makes me wonder if he’s suited to be chairman of FG.

  92. February 29, 2012 at 11:18 am

    Gee whizz Jon-
    Here comes the “anti hunters” straight out of the SCI or NRA handbook. This is not an anti-hunting event trying to remove Richards- this is anti “slob hunting”. Richards is the fifth and deciding vote on the commission and he has been blocking leg like giving wolves ES protections…..Don’t wolves deserve protection from predator haters and ranchers?

  93. tofu jesus
    February 29, 2012 at 11:20 am

    Why wouldn’t he? He followed the law, and did everything right. As for the bullshit about how he doesn’t follow the hearts and minds of Californians, just remember, Californians voted to pass prop 8.

  94. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 11:58 am

    Our state has voted twice that we do not want mountains lions hunted. This man is in charge of our state agency. This is an outrage. So he goes to another state to kill the very animal that he is supposed to be protecting in California. It shows that he is not suited for the job. It also shows the contempt he has for the animals and the tax payers of California

  95. Eric Kirk
    February 29, 2012 at 2:14 pm

    Killing for the sake of killing is repulsive to the majority of people.

    Is it?

  96. Eric Kirk
    February 29, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    Many of the groovy veg head tree sitters went straight to burger king in Fortuna when they got their breaks for a Whopper. Saw it first hand.

    If they bought Whoppers then they weren’t “veg heads.” Of course, with locally owned restaurants available throughout Fortuna, I doubt your claim. I suspect you saw some granola looking tourists and mistook them for activists.

  97. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 3:45 pm

    Newsom is the one that should resign!

  98. Former Humboldt resident
    February 29, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    I am home sick today and decided to read some of this because it is an issue going around the Capitol.

    Of all the comments, I think Jon Brooks said it best. The hunting/fishing lobby should be furious with Richards for putting himself in this position.

    Whether you agree or disagree that it is nobody’s business what he does as long as he follows the law is not really the issue. He was deliberately taunting those who hold power in California by posing with the dead lion and allowing it to be published. Saying, “I’m glad it’s legal in Idaho” is just more fuel on his fire. He has a reputation for taunting the enviro/animal rights lobbies.

    And in the end, what has he accomplished? He is likely to be removed, and the hunting/fishing lobby will lose one of theirs from the Commission.

    Richards could have killed that lion without any publicity, and nobody in California would have known about it most likely. But he wanted to be “in your face” about it. And like Jon said, it was extremely poor judgement. And like I said before, the fishing/hunting lobby should direct their anger at Richards.

  99. Just Middle Class
    February 29, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    Most of the voters in California are urban and would vote for any measure to protect a wild animal, initiatives like this are easy to pass, all you have to do is have a picture of a cute animal. Mountail lions are very common and are increasing their range due to their protection and are conflicting with people in the urgan rural interface. Remember the couple hiking in Prairie Creek? I bet they don’t feel bad about the hunting in legal areas.

  100. Former Humboldt resident
    February 29, 2012 at 4:27 pm

    But the fact remains, Just Middle Class, that humans are more at risk when mountain lion populations are low. Mountain lion attacks on humans in this country are extremely rare, and even more rarely fatal. Do you know how many fatal mountain lion attacks have been recorded in California in its 162-year history as a state? I’m pretty sure you can count them on one hand.

    Deer are like a thousand times more lethal to humans than mountain lions because they run onto the highway in front of your car. Deer-caused auto accidents kill and maim large numbers of humans every year in this nation

    In California, the mountain lion is the only natural, non-human predator of deer left. The wolves are gone. So are the grizzlies. Black bear do kill some deer, but not much. They are omnivores.

    So in truth, JMC, culling the mountain lion population would cost more human lives.

  101. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 5:34 pm

    OMG! more lib BS. Kill cats that need to be managed. Period.Stop with all your touchy feely crap that is meaningless. You’all make me puke!!!!!

  102. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    Honestly, who is above all this who eats meat? Wearing leather? Car seats are leather? As against killing as I am, I eat meat daily and use the other products as well. The big picture shows we are hypocrites.

  103. Anonymous
    February 29, 2012 at 9:15 pm

    What’s his motive?

  104. You 'all
    February 29, 2012 at 10:41 pm

    “OMG Kill cats that need to be managed. Period.Stop” .

    Anonymous, I did stop. Reading your rants. “Whopper, lib spin, scum bag, crap, puke BS.” How well you argue your position.

  105. March 1, 2012 at 3:49 am

    Conservatives make me puke. They put their self centered interests above healthy ecosystems always…..Typical. This is not about mountaqin lions folks. It is about who calls the shots in Cal about environmental/animal issues. Once Richards is thrown out on his head the state can focus on animals like wolves that need protection. Geez- I wonder if slob trophy hunter Richards has anything to do with wolves not having protection in cal…… These anonymous posters are cowards

  106. RefFan
    March 1, 2012 at 8:49 am

    There are no wild wolves in California so why should there be any protection given??

  107. RefFan
    March 1, 2012 at 8:51 am

    Oh, Except the one thats being tracked that had come down from Oregon this last year.

  108. Anonymous
    March 1, 2012 at 9:09 am

    William u b a dumb ass at best. This dst is 60% + dem and most of us hunt and understand managment. That you don’t is obvious. Ca is full of ignorant voters like you that just may destroy all the environment while they sing its prasies. Very sad that the blind really do lead the blind.

  109. mike
    March 1, 2012 at 9:30 am

    These anonymous cowards who are afraid to post as their real name are hilarious. Let’s have a “harvest” season on hunters since they seem to think management of wildlife is necessary. Let the coward hunters try to hunt something that can shoot back.

  110. March 1, 2012 at 9:41 am

    Well lookee here- we got a conservative “flat earther” calling me a dumb ass….You “sportsmen” (all laugh here) are always whining about game herds. These animals co existed for hundreds of years before you idiots deciding you would try to control everything with your “wildlife management” which is “slob hunting” for “we need our hunting opportunity” You sportmen have never had it so good- but I’ve got a news flash- state by state people with just as much passion for wildlife will be replacing your “say” in wildlife management decisions….Got it coward flat earther?

  111. Bolithio
    March 1, 2012 at 10:28 am

    Regardless of what people think about hunting, sport hunting, or whatever, the real decisions of wildlife management are not made by them [the hunters]. You think sport fisherman are setting the limits for salmon fishing? No. That same is true of all animals that are hunted legally in this county. That is what sets us apart from countries where there are serious poaching problems.

    And speaking of out rage, how come the people all pissed off about this don’t get angry at sport fishing? Salmon/steelhead are actually endangered species!!!

  112. Anonymous
    March 1, 2012 at 11:07 am

    There are journals of what California looked like when the Europeans got to California. It was written that there were large herds of antelope, deer and thousands of bears. We all have heard about rivers so thick with fish you could walk across the river on their backs. Where are they now. Gone. Why ? Humans the most wasteful and destructive creature to ever roam the earth. Having someone showing such contempt for animals and the people of California is an example why this planet is id dying. This Richards fellow is a perfect model of the worst of the human species.

  113. High Finance
    March 1, 2012 at 12:45 pm

    The solution is to have all the humans leave the planet ?

  114. larry
    March 1, 2012 at 2:57 pm

    113 comments andno one has mentioned the disposition of the Mt. Lion itself! I hope he ate the entire cat while still in Idaho because its illegal to import any part of a Mt. Lion into the state of Ca., no matter how legal the “harvest” was! That means no meat, no bones, no skin, nothing mounted, nothing notta. If any part has been transported into Ca. it would constitute interstate transport of contraband a violation of the Lacy act and that Federal!!!!!!!!

  115. Rob
    March 1, 2012 at 3:02 pm

    i cant believe they want to fire this man for going on a legal hunt california is out of control and all this bleeding heart hippies responding do you know for a fact it was not eaten? maybe be these congressmen should spend time getting rid of all the bleeding hearts and make california a better place

  116. larry
    March 1, 2012 at 3:07 pm

    PS. If he didnt eat the cat and simply left the carcus in the field,that may constitute what known as “wanton waste of game” another serious violation of Fish and Game law. Just woundering?

  117. Jon Brooks
    March 1, 2012 at 4:44 pm

    For me, its not the issue, but he says he ate it;


    I tend to agree with the ‘higher standard’ test, and Richards flunks that one. Belligerent after-the-fact behaviour doesn’t help either. He’ll be gone next January when his term ends.

  118. level hunting field
    March 1, 2012 at 5:24 pm

    Mike says: “Let’s have a “harvest” season on hunters since they seem to think management of wildlife is necessary. Let the coward hunters try to hunt something that can shoot back.”

    Better: Let them hunt without their guns. How about hand to paw combat?

  119. 713
    March 1, 2012 at 6:46 pm

    “This is the same Legislature that didn’t react when one of its members was caught by police with a prostitute in his car, parked alongside a busy Los Angeles highway, or when another crashed her state-issued car while driving recklessly, injuring two people.

    More recently, this is the same Legislature that didn’t respond when a member was nailed for shoplifting, or when another carried a loaded pistol into an airport security checkpoint.

    As for Newsom, a politician who had an affair with his top campaign aide’s wife shouldn’t moralize.”
    Dan Walters

  120. Matt
    March 1, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    I personally don’t have a problem with hunting deer, elk etc for food, as long as it’s done ethically and respectfully. Killing creatures for “fun” however, is in my opinion sadistic and psychopathic.

  121. Anonymous
    March 2, 2012 at 10:07 am

    I signed a petition on the Huffing Post to get rid of Richards.

  122. Anonymous
    March 2, 2012 at 10:18 am

    Richards has complete contempt for the citizens of California.

  123. High Finance
    March 4, 2012 at 7:53 am

    Such hate from the “compassionate” left !

    You would destroy a person’s career because he legally hunted an animal that, if not him, would have been hunted by a paid government hunter to thin out the mountain lion population.

  124. Anonymous
    March 4, 2012 at 11:55 am

    Destroy his career??? As a Coldwell Banker big bucks developer?

    High Fi, you are such a bleeding heart. So much sympathy for the 1% who are downtrodden and abused.

    If Richards position on the F&G Commission pays, it is a pittance compared to what he rakes in via his Coldwell position. Is serving a couple years on a commission a career?

    As usual, HiFi flaunts his ignorance and lack of thinking skills.

  125. High Finance
    March 5, 2012 at 8:52 am

    So the 1% are fair game for any slimeball attack 11.55am ?

    If my compassion makes me a bleeding heart conservative so be it.

  126. March 5, 2012 at 9:12 am

    Compassion, heart, and conservative are never mentioned in the same sentence. If you said, heartless, callous, and conservative know we’re talkin

  127. March 5, 2012 at 9:14 am

    Sorry, should be now, I was laughing so hard at your comment I forgot to spell for a minute. We are still trying to figure out the modern day conservatives defective gene pool, and how you actually pump blood through your veins without the use of a heart

  128. Anonymous
    March 5, 2012 at 9:24 am

    They believe they are genetically adn divinely superior, that some people have greater god given talent to earn. That poor people are poor because they are dumb or lazy, that god wants it that way, that the government SHOULD give the richies tax relief because then they will in turn bless the dumbys by creating blue collar jobs. They believe that a great divide between the haves and have nots is about being smart, hard working, and “having the fruits of their labor blessed”. Listen to the good strict father he will guide you well and divy out crumbs as you deserve and punish you for stupidity as you deserve and he will be blessed an enter the kingdom of heaven.

  129. Anonymous
    March 5, 2012 at 9:28 am

    The above mentality was very clear in the OLD Hi Fi’s posts and RA eluded to it in his radio interview. Anyone who understands the strict father psychology, know Hi Fi changed mid to late last year.

  130. March 5, 2012 at 9:29 am

    This is at the same time that they are bashing minorities, gays, women, elderly, children immediately after they are born…….did I leave anyone out? Oh and animals, they are the easiest because they can’t fight back. Frickin cowards

  131. Mitch
    March 5, 2012 at 9:30 am

    The old HiFi was kind of fun; the new one just harrumphs a lot.

    I think the old one knew there were two sides to things, and enjoyed being outrageously one-sided. The new one is completely boring.

    If they’re sitting in the same human being, I hope he recovers.

  132. High Finance
    March 5, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    Like I have said before, if there are two Hi-Fi’s they are both smarter than you guys.

    Libs like to think success is because of graft or luck. That working hard & long, planning ahead, making short term sacrifices for the long term good has nothing to do with it.

    That attitude is why you are poor and will always remain so.

  133. Donald Trump
    March 5, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Well, graft and luck are pretty darn helpful too. And don’t forget that an inheritance can provide a slight advantage. But we self-made wealthy folk take satisfaction in having made it on our own.

  134. Plain Jane
    March 6, 2012 at 6:43 am

    Which is why guys like HiFi are so insistent about leaving as much wealth as possible to their kids, even ignoring the environmental price of that wealth. Despite their protestations that wealth is built on hard work and sacrifice, they know the surest way to financial success is choosing the right parents like they did.

  135. HaterMotivator
    March 6, 2012 at 8:23 am

    Stalk him, Tree him, Shoot him….Problem solved!! A-hole deserves to be on unemployment

  136. High Finance
    March 6, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    You cannot possible continue to pretend you aren’t consummed with wealth & class envy anymore PJ.

  137. March 6, 2012 at 12:28 pm

    High finance- other than being a blowhard, what time do you have to be at work at the slaughterhouse?

  138. Fact Checker
    March 6, 2012 at 12:29 pm

    I charge my customers absolutley as much as possible and I pay my employees as little as legally possible. My employees also are “consumed with wealth & class envy”. It is rather pathetic. Why don’t they inherit a gas station like I did?

  139. Plain Jane
    March 6, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    If you were 1/10th as smart as you think you are, HiFi, you would understand that it is possible to oppose economy / democracy destroying wealth accumulation without the slightest bit of envy. Since your favored policies crashed the economy while concentrating wealth, that smear no longer works. Calling yourself “High Finance” when you are so incredibly ignorant of economics is symptomatic of your delusion.

  140. High Finance
    March 6, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    Yeah right PJ, tell that to your choir but the rest of us are too smart to fall for that bull.

  141. Anonymous
    June 11, 2012 at 1:36 am

    If you eat meat you hunt some know it others are to ignorant to admit it. A burger at the drive threw is hunting just the lazy man’s way hound hunting is the hardiest hunting i’ve seen and i’ve seen my fair amount. The government will do what hunters don’t with less regards for nature usda has trapped 60 plus golden eagles sense the out law of hounds in oregon and washington. They use leg hold traps and snares baited with dead animals that eagles try to feed there young with and are trapped then die you thank hound hunting is bad what about the government trappers after hound hunting is outlawed, watch what you wish for people.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s