Training And Experience Evaluation - Department Of Conservation: Fill & Download for Free

Yes.For example, in South Carolina, even with a six-month deer season and several doe days (days when female deer may be harvested), a single family farm can experience up to $25,000 of crop depredation due to deer.Farmers often face damage deer cause to a wide variety of row and forage crops, vegetables, fruit trees, nursery stock, ornamentals, and stacked hay. The purpose of the depredation permit is to allow the farmer to protect that investment. [1]South Carolina doesn’t have a population of animals (other than humans) that controls the deer population. A few hunters who spend many days in the woods do report occasionally seeing a black panther but the sightings are about one for two decades in the woods. They are so rare that the Department of Fish and Game state that they don’t exist.Unlike many Northern states where over populations would be reduced by starvation during winter if there was no hunting, deer in South Carolina would quickly become a major threat to farmers’ ability to provide food. They would also quickly become a safety threat as the larger numbers increased the deer vs. human accidents on roads and highways. With current harvest rates, deer vs. human accidents still cause considerable death and property damage.The N.C. Department of Transportation said there were 20,308 animal-related crashes in 2013. About 90 percent of those involved deer, and the crashes killed 18 people and injured more than 3,400. The S.C. Department of Public Safety reported 2,200 deer-vehicle collisions last year, with most of those in the north and northwest part of the state.[2]South Carolina has a high rate of poverty with about 1 in 6 residents living in poverty.[3] Deer meat (venison) is an important source of protein for families with limited food budgets. It is healthy, organic. and cost effective. Orphanages also receive donations of venison.[4]The economic contribution from 847,000 hunters and anglers in South Carolina spend $1.5 billion annually and support 40,005 jobs.[5]I’m pretty sure those 40,000 people and their families think that deer hunting is necessary.The estimated deer habitat that is available in South Carolina, the deer harvest rate in 2016 was 8.2 deer per square mile over the entire state.[6] Imagine that those deer weren’t harvested each year and multiplied. How soon would that increase of 8.2 deer per square mile x their offspring create devastation for farmers and road travel?Deer hunters also frequently harvest wild hogs. Many of the deer hunters hunt the hogs because they are there for deer already but might not hunt if it was only for the feral hogs. “The harvest of wild pigs in 2009 was estimated at 36,888 and the estimated population in 2010 is 150,000.”[7] Hogs can have several litters each year with a dozen piglets in each one. "[They cause] an estimated $115 million worth of damages in crop and non-crop land uses in South Carolina," Ben Powell, with the Clemson Extension in Conway, said.[8]“These destructive wild hogs have been known to tear through livestock and game fences and consume animal feed, minerals, and protein supplements. Not only do wild pigs feast on field crops such as corn, milo, rice, watermelon, peanuts, hay, turf and wheat, but they are also efficient predators and—when given the opportunity—will prey upon young livestock and other small animals.”[9]Hogs, if cornered, will attack people and their razor-sharp tusks can maim or kill.Residents may take a total 5 antlered bucks statewide annually. [10]Humans have hunted deer in North America for as long as humans have lived here. Humans are part of the natural population control of deer.This is an in-depth look at South Carolina although I could go much deeper and include stories about individuals I have known over the years who relied on their annual game harvest to feed their families. There are children who are taught the importance of following game laws when they learn to hunt that develops a lifelong respect for the law.In every state, there is a balance. The Department of Natural Resources in each state has a game management program that tracks the size of the deer population and determines the length of the season and the number of animals that can be harvested in ways that ensure the health of the herds. These are trained biologists. They are experts in their field.While some people might feel deer hunting should be stopped, it is an emotional stance, not one formed by education, evaluation of the facts, or the outcome that would occur if that were to happen.Hunters not only harvest animals and contribute to the economy in substantial ways, they also have the greatest vested interest in maintaining the health of the herds. In 1900, only 500,000 whitetails (deer) remained. Thanks to conservation work spearheaded by hunters, today there are more than 32 million.[11]When I lived in Idaho, we experienced a 100-year ice storm. Elk and deer were starving because they couldn’t break through the ice. It wasn’t PETA out there buying bales of hay and hiring helicopters to drop the food that prevented entire herds from starving to death. It was hunters and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, although the organization was still young at that point. Most hunters are also conservationists and they contribute significant sums to ensure that hunting will be around for generations to come.I don’t know what promoted this question. I don’t know if the OP is a vegan or a vegetarian. I don’t care. I have friends who have cattle ranches and the cows are harvested with a well-placed bullet to the head. If I had a choice between running free my entire life and being shot or being caged my entire life and then being shot, I know which choice I would make.Our world is made up of a lot of different people with a lot of different interests and passions. If someone doesn’t want to be involved in something, don’t be involved. But unless you have obtained the education and experience that makes you an expert at something, don’t try to stop others from doing something just because you don’t want to do it. Here is an example of when people went with their emotions instead of listening to experts:These pictures were taken in my brother’s backyard in California. He was very lucky the cougar was apparently not hungry when he walked under the tree completely unaware of the danger overhead.Let the experts decide and if you’re passionate about the subject, become an expert.If you’re on the sidelines, don’t follow the loud voice. Follow the educated voice—not just in this, but in all things. Or better yet, educate yourself. Ask why someone wants what they want and determine if your motives are aligned.The economic impact of sportsmen and women is enormous.[12]$86.9 billion economic impact680,937 jobs supported$5.4 billion state tax and fee revenue$6.4 billion federal tax revenueThe following are just two of many conservation organizations that are primarily supported by hunters:Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF)National Wildlife ConfederationYes, deer hunting is necessary.How many generations do you think it would take for conservation efforts to end if hunters stopped their support?How many people support dueling pistols? It was once an Olympic sport. I’m not saying it should return. Interest dies when there is no reason to be interested.I hope you get a chance to enjoy the great outdoors and a delicious venison steak.Footnotes[1] Deer Depredation Permits[2] It’s the season for Carolinas deer-vehicle crashes[3] South Carolina Report - 2016 - Talk Poverty[4] History | Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation[5] South Carolina | Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation[6] http://dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/deer/2016DeerHarvest.pdf[7] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiiuOa7xZTWAhVBQSYKHQ3UCGsQFgg-MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dnr.sc.gov%2Fwildlife%2Fhog%2Findex.html&usg=AFQjCNFR8xWmmRJeHZfxCZqQDAXnSJ_V7w[8] South Carolina considers controversial cure for huge wild hog problem [9] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiiuOa7xZTWAhVBQSYKHQ3UCGsQFghIMAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dnr.sc.gov%2Fwildlife%2Fpublications%2Fnuisance%2Fwildpigs.pdf&usg=AFQjCNF7Yqw-f4adw_kMOWibn9t0pQvJqg[10] http://SC Department of Natural Resources[11] 25 Reasons Why Hunting Is Conservation[12] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiY7PPezJTWAhUDwiYKHd4bB20QFgg1MAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nwf.org%2F~%2Fmedia%2FPDFs%2FWater%2FWOTUS%2520Econ%2520fact%2520sheet%25203252014.pdf&usg=AFQjCNG9jlmdsJ3Mo2L7Omjo6Odo6gMjcQ

Elizabeth Manning with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game wrote an article about this very topic in March of 2010.Tasers for Moose and Bears, Alaska Department of Fish and GameLaw enforcement officers have long used Tasers, generally known as electronic control devices, to safely subdue humans. But what about using them on wildlife?Some wildlife managers might have wondered about the concept, but until recently no one had seriously investigated using the electronic immobilization guns as a wildlife management tool.That attitude now could be changing due to groundbreaking work by Larry Lewis, a wildlife technician with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in Soldotna.Lewis’ work investigating the use of Tasers on wildlife, done in collaboration with other Alaska Department of Fish and Game biologists, appears to hold promise for adding Tasers to the tool kit of options used by modern wildlife managers.So far, “This is proving to be a good and useful tool,” Lewis said. “We’re going to keep working on it.”Lewis said he began his experimental work several years ago after a harrowing experience with an angry moose and a Taser gun prompted his curiosity.Lewis teamed up with other Fish and Game staff, including veterinarian Kimberlee Beckmen, research biologist Tom Lohuis and wildlife management biologists Neil Barten and Phil Mooney, to study the effect of Tasers on bears and moose.Based on positive results from that work, Lewis has since attended Taser International’s instructor, armorer and master instructor courses, written a state operating procedure for Taser use on wildlife and received approval to train department staff to use Tasers in limited circumstances.Fish and Game appears to be the first state wildlife agency in the country that has experimented with using Tasers for wildlife management.Lewis said the concept was met with skepticism and resistance at first, but appears to be slowly gaining some acceptance.“This was seen as unknown and uncharted dangerous territory,” Lewis said. “But since we’ve started this it has garnered a lot of interest from other states and management agencies.”Lohuis and Lewis both warn that it is “not a magic bullet.” But, they said, Tasers do appear to be a valid tool for some situations.In November, Lewis presented the idea of using Tasers on bears to a group of wildlife mangers who deal with human-bear conflicts at a conference in Canmore, Canada. Much to his surprise, no one scoffed at the idea. Instead, most managers appeared excited that Tasers might become another possible non-lethal tool available to managers who deal with human-bear conflicts.Lewis said he first became interested in the subject in June of 2005 when an Alaska State Trooper asked for his assistance with an ornery cow moose.“I had an epiphany while being chased by an angry moose,” Lewis said.The cow moose was upset because her two calves were trapped in an open four-foot deep basement foundation at a home construction site. She would not leave the area, even when Lewis tried using noisemakers and rubber shotgun ammunition.Finally, Lewis said he tried to drop a ramp down into the pit so the calves would be able to walk out on their own. But when he approached the calves, the cow moose charged him, jumping into the foundation, across it and back out.It then chased Lewis and the trooper three times around the patrol car.Both men were armed but rather than shooting the moose, Lewis said the trooper used his Taser to shoot at the moose across the hood of the patrol car. The Taser’s barbed, conductive leads hit the moose in the left front shoulder. Stunned and immobilized, the moose hit the ground immediately. The leads pulled free as the moose fell and it quickly ran off into the woods, staying there long enough for Lewis to extract the calves from the basement and for both Lewis and the trooper to retreat safely to the patrol car.It worked so well on the moose, Lewis began wondering if Tasers might be used in similar circumstances with moose, and in other situations, with bears or other animals.Working with Lohuis and Beckmen, Lewis studied the effects of Tasers on about a half dozen captive moose at the Moose Research Center in Soldotna. He is also working with Taser International to improve a design of the non-lethal weapon for use on wildlife.To evaluate how the Tasers affected the moose, Beckmen took blood samples and studied stress in the animals before and after they were hit with Tasers.“It’s not without cost to the animal,” Lohuis said. “But that stress doesn’t appear to be long-term. Our blood samples indicated the moose started to return to normal within 20 to 30 minutes compared to the 24-48 hours it takes a moose to recover from being drugged."The animals also did not react aggressively after being hit by Tasers. Instead, they fled.Lewis said Tasers have been used safely on humans for many years and are considered a “non-lethal” weapon. They work by zapping a person or animal with high voltage but low amperage electricity, much like an electric fence. That zap causes involuntary muscle contractions, essentially freezing them up, but does not affect the central nervous system. So people or animals can still breath and think but can’t move.The later work on bears showed that Tasers may also have some success on bruins as a hazing tool. A variety of electronic control devices were shot at two collared brown bears that commonly visited the Yakutat dump.After being shot at with the Tasers, the bears did not react aggressively but instead retreated quickly from the area. They did later return to the dump but showed a greater aversion to people than before they were hit with the Tasers, Lewis said.But how and when Tasers should be used on wildlife remains an open question. Lewis said he holds hope that Tasers might be used on moose for short-term incapacitation. For example, he recently used his Taser gun on a moose that had a chicken feeder stuck on its head. The Taser immobilized the animal for long enough to allow another biologist to pop the feeder off its head without having to drug the animal.“It’s basically like an electric fence in your hand,” Lewis said. “It’s not a panacea, but just another tool for managers to use.”Elizabeth Manning is an outdoor writer and an educator with the Divison of Wildlife Conservation at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. She lives in Anchorage.It should be noted that Taser International produced a wildlife specific device at one point. The device was seen at the 2010 SHOT show but does not appear in Taser's current catalog. The status of this wildlife specific device is unknown, but I suspect the device was discontinued due to lack of sales.

I hold a Masters degree in industrial organizational psychology. And I have done internal consulting for a period of 4 years for a Human Resources department in a major public research university. Since 2015 I have been working in a new discipline — executive coaching, leader development, and process improvement— in healthcare. (I love this work!)There's overlap between the discipline of industrial-organizational psychology and the discipline of human resources. They both are concerned with creating and maintaining effective organizations. That said, they differ in specific ways.Industrial-organizational psychology has two main areas. One is industrial psychology, which focuses on measurement, statistics, quantitative models. It emphasizes rigor and science. I would describe professionals in this area as "no nonsense", data driven, and conservative in their mindset. The other area is organizational psychology, which focuses on organizational development, new ideas, culture, and leadership philosophy. Professionals who enter this area of I/O psychology seem more liberal in their mindset, comfortable with ambiguity, and are attracted to "big picture" problems.Generally speaking, industrial-organizational psychology differs from human resources in the I/O psychology field's emphasis on science and metrics. I/O psychology people are the "geeks" of management. We like science. We like rigor. We design interventions or improvements for organizations on the basis of facts, research, and scientific methods. We can design tests that measure job-related skills or knowledge without being discriminatory or unfair to people in protected groups. So, as an employer, you can use these tests during the hiring process to make hiring decisions, knowing they are legally defensible and will hold up in court as a valid measure of skills and competency for the job.Human resources is a discipline that differs from I/O psychology in its very practical focus, by necessity. An HR expert is expected to know how to keep an organization compliant with state and federal laws. They do not necessarily need to study up on the science that much. They are there to administer the organization very well, and produce the business outcomes that are needed but having deep scientific training is not necessarily wanted or extremely helpful to an HR expert.Here is another way to contrast HR and I/O psychology. Look at your typical job posting for an "Human Resources manager" and compare it to the job posting for "Manager of Learning and Organizational Development". The HR manager is going to be held responsible for keeping the organization compliant with law, and administering benefits, compensation, etc. The HR manager cares a lot about equity and addressing inequity in compensation. The HR manager looks at the diversity of the workforce and tries to improve diversity. The Organizational Development manager will be expected to look a bit more broadly at organizational initiatives, including those initiatives coming from the executive level, and will design training and development programs that support the fulfillment of strategy.There are plenty of HR managers who can think strategically and partner with the top executives to implement strategy in the way an organizational development person would. But in my experience, those who are trained in the HR discipline do not engage too much in strategic work.We need good HR functions. They help to maintain a fair and equitable environment. A good HR function can hold both managers and executives accountable for being fair and just in the way they manage people. We also need good organizational development functions. In a large organization, it is hard to have the same department handling both HR and organizational development because the skills requirements are different.According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the United States Department of Labor, Industrial-Organizational Psychology was the fastest growing occupation in the United States in 2014. See the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics page on this, which reported in 2014 that industrial-organizational psychologists job will grow by 53 percent through 2022. And in 2014 these jobs had a median pay of $83,580.It is exciting to be part of a discipline like I-O psychology because organizations are recognizing they need us, which is causing growth in this occupation.Industrial-organizational psychology is a rewarding field to work in. If you get a Masters degree in this field, you can work in an HR function, or an organizational development & training function, or potentially work as a management consultant. Currently (in 2017) I work a consulting division for a county health system in California. As with any graduate degree, your success after graduate school depends on how hard you work, how fast you learn and adapt with each new job, how much you contribute to the success of others at work, and who you’re connected with. In the long run, it’s the strength of your professional network, and how much people trust you and your ability to produce results, that determines how far you go in this profession.***Update in 2019. It’s been a couple of years since I wrote this post initially. These years have given me time to evaluate the usefulness of this degree in industrial-organizational psychology. And looking back, I’m glad I got this degree!This degree applies to what I do now. My work in a county government healthcare department (over 2,200 employees) includes lots of creative projects that require the scientific training I received in graduate school. So, my responsibilities include: executive coaching; architecting new programs for leader development; architecting new 360 feedback assessment processes; designing competency models; and consulting on process improvement in healthcare. Most of these are touched on, to some degree, in a good graduate program in industrial-organizational psychology. The “consulting on process improvement in healthcare” competency is a new one that was not covered in my graduate program at all — I developed this competency thanks to my my managers and coworkers who invested their time to mentor me in this, in my present job. My graduate degree in industrial-organizational psychology has proven useful; without that degree, I could not do all of this specialized work I get to do today.