Come Get Me EPA!

[Hoser John]

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS... I'm still lookn' for a good woman who has lost a good man and needs help playing with his toys... glad to hear your home safe and sound Russau and not carbonized by fires...John

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Monty]

Once upon a time a hard working farmer had to depend on harvesting game to supplement their income and provide food for their family. Therefore, in several places the deer were harvested with no control over the numbers taken nor was there any seasons. Ergo, deer became almost extinct in some areas. It was the hunters themselves that caused the state government to control seasons and populations and all this is provided with taxes on arms and ammunition and licenses. At present there are more deer in the USA than there was when the pilgrims landed in New England. It was because of the hunters themselves that certain game has been saved from extinction and now are often found in huntable numbers. Aligators are another species along with deer that was saved by the actions of the hunters alone, and the tree huggers have constantly harassed the hunters, and tried to treat animals as people rather than wild animals that they are. Monty

 

[dances for eels]

Sorry, Monty, but that's simply not true and is a re-write of history. It took commercial business interests, academics, biologists, local and state lawmakers, the federal government, and a few concerned hunter/sportsmen to restore the alligator to it's habitat and to sustainable numbers. Unfortunately, the majority of hunters had to be dragged along by the process.

In Louisiana, alligator numbers dropped about 90% from the late 1940's to the late 1950's. Laws developed slowly: you can only take a 4' gator (no increase in population), you can only take a 5' gator (no increase in population), there is a total ban ( no increase in population--but the price of skins goes up and hunters paid the small fine rather than stop hunting). It took larger fines and jail time to finally get the numbers moving in the right direction.

By 1960, alligator populations were at a record low and lawmakers weren't being lobbied by hunters but by commercial interests because of the industrial demand and value of alligator skins. And of course, in 1967, the alligator was put on the list of rare and endangered native wildlife.

By the way, I'm certainly not blaming all hunters; it must be in the DNA of our tribe to consciously destroy things that help sustain us, including a creature whose ancestors go back 200 million years. Daniel Boone supposedly took 99 bears one season; could he have got by on 98? Probably.

 

[Monty]

It's easy to see who has been endoctrinated by the tree huggers. I was speaking of the financing that goes into the limiting of hunting numbers based sound scientific studies by our federal and state conservation commissions. The vast majority of monies that finances these studies and conservation measures is paid for by hunters and fishermen who make use of the conservation of our wildlife. Of course those who are not into hunting or fishing also benifit, especially those who like to camp, hike and "commute with nature". Those of us who do enjoy the "blood" sports are preserving the heritage of our forefathers who founded our nation. In Boone's day there was sense of urgency to perserve game animals or birds and fish as the population was low and the idea of conservation was not even thought of as we seemed to have an unlimited supply of thos animals that made it possible. Fortunately since the late 50s especially, conservation of our wildlife was in the forefront mainly because industry, factories , mining and the like was pushing into their habitat and destroying it. Such is the case today. Loss of habitat has been more responsible for the decline of our wildlife than hunting ever was. In many cases , habitat once home to wildlife will no longer support an unimited or a not controlled population that has resulted in suffering and starvation for many of our animals. Oh well, I could go on and on, but I realize I am not going to open any eyes who refuse to see, or change the attitude of those who think otherwise, so I guess I am preaching to the choir? Monty

 

[Goodyguy]

I cant believe folks go out and kill the poor animals to eat when they could just buy meat at the grocery where no animals are harmed. (dumb blond joke)

 

[dances for eels]

Monty, I have participated in wild pig studies around Tremont in the Smoky Mountains, crawled in bear dens in Wisconsin to count, weigh and tag young bears, walked backroads in Minnesota and Wisconsin doing carnivore (wolf) track counts, hunted raccoon with a great bluetick hound, hunted deer, turkey, quail, dove and Bigfoot and enjoyed eating all but one of those. So now you know a smidgen about my indoctrination.

In your first post, you said: "Aligators (sp) are another species along with deer that was saved by the actions of the hunters alone." That's simply not true and I tried to explain why. I have participated in "scientific studies by our federal and state conservation commissions" as you mention in your second post which is why I responded in the first place.

I must admit that I'm having trouble following some of your reasoning: "in Boone's day there was sense of urgency to perserve (sp) game animals or birds and fish as the population was low". I'm guessing you meant "NO sense of urgency" and that the population of humans was low, which brings us back to a point about the conservation of wildlife: why kill more than you need? Maybe it's just who we are---we need to work on that.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Sorry, Monty, but that's simply not true and is a re-write of history. It took commercial business interests, academics, biologists, local and state lawmakers, the federal government, and a few concerned hunter/sportsmen to restore the alligator to it's habitat and to sustainable numbers. Unfortunately, the majority of hunters had to be dragged along by the process.

In Louisiana, alligator numbers dropped about 90% from the late 1940's to the late 1950's. Laws developed slowly: you can only take a 4' gator (no increase in population), you can only take a 5' gator (no increase in population), there is a total ban ( no increase in population--but the price of skins goes up and hunters paid the small fine rather than stop hunting). It took larger fines and jail time to finally get the numbers moving in the right direction.

By 1960, alligator populations were at a record low and lawmakers weren't being lobbied by hunters but by commercial interests because of the industrial demand and value of alligator skins. And of course, in 1967, the alligator was put on the list of rare and endangered native wildlife.

By the way, I'm certainly not blaming all hunters; it must be in the DNA of our tribe to consciously destroy things that help sustain us, including a creature whose ancestors go back 200 million years. Daniel Boone supposedly took 99 bears one season; could he have got by on 98? Probably.

I think you are confusing hunters with poachers. I cant speak for La. but in the Everglades, it was the commercial alligator poachers that brought the alligator to the brink of extinction and it was the money raised by hunters taxes that paid for law enforcment. These guys were not sportsman. They slaughtered animals for profit.

I cant explain why we have bad hunters. I work for FWC and I know for a fact we have hunters that kill way more than their share. IMO they make us all look bad.

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

Monty, I have participated in wild pig studies around Tremont in the Smoky Mountains, crawled in bear dens in Wisconsin to count, weigh and tag young bears, walked backroads in Minnesota and Wisconsin doing carnivore (wolf) track counts, hunted raccoon with a great bluetick hound, hunted deer, turkey, quail, dove and Bigfoot and enjoyed eating all but one of those. So now you know a smidgen about my indoctrination.

In your first post, you said: "Aligators (sp) are another species along with deer that was saved by the actions of the hunters alone." That's simply not true and I tried to explain why. I have participated in "scientific studies by our federal and state conservation commissions" as you mention in your second post which is why I responded in the first place.

I must admit that I'm having trouble following some of your reasoning: "in Boone's day there was sense of urgency to perserve (sp) game animals or birds and fish as the population was low". I'm guessing you meant "NO sense of urgency" and that the population of humans was low, which brings us back to a point about the conservation of wildlife: why kill more than you need? Maybe it's just who we are---we need to work on that.

I think he meant AFTER Daniel Boones day. I see your point its true the alligator was not saved by hunters actions alone but you cant blame good hunters for the problem.

As long as we refuse to control our own human population, we will be forced to regulate hunting and share in the spoils. Hunters that cheat the system in place by taking more than their share are making us all look bad. The Daniel Boone days are over and wildlife law violators need to be put in jail instead of a pat on the wrist..

 

[kuger]

Monty, I have participated in wild pig studies around Tremont in the Smoky Mountains, crawled in bear dens in Wisconsin to count, weigh and tag young bears, walked backroads in Minnesota and Wisconsin doing carnivore (wolf) track counts, hunted raccoon with a great bluetick hound, hunted deer, turkey, quail, dove and Bigfoot and enjoyed eating all but one of those. So now you know a smidgen about my indoctrination.

In your first post, you said: "Aligators (sp) are another species along with deer that was saved by the actions of the hunters alone." That's simply not true and I tried to explain why. I have participated in "scientific studies by our federal and state conservation commissions" as you mention in your second post which is why I responded in the first place.

I must admit that I'm having trouble following some of your reasoning: "in Boone's day there was sense of urgency to perserve (sp) game animals or birds and fish as the population was low". I'm guessing you meant "NO sense of urgency" and that the population of humans was low, which brings us back to a point about the conservation of wildlife: why kill more than you need? Maybe it's just who we are---we need to work on that.

Dances,I appreciate your "view",as well,especially coming from somebody that has hunted(has seen both sides)However,remember Teddy Roosevelt?He was one of the greatest hunters of all time and did a great deal to preserve all wildlife for future generations.He set aside Yellowstone Park...the first National Park in the Nation.
Also Hunters and fishermen are who pay the bills for the Enforcement of laws and the biologist's to study(something that is being ignored as of right now,because politicians are being paid off and the outcome is all ready determined before the biologist ever steps foot in the field)Also hunter based groups raise hundreds of thousands of dollars a year that goes directly back to wildlife,not to mention the hands on work done ie.wet lands restoration,water tanks placed in areas wher drouth has left habitat without water,the list goes on and on.I my self have worked with and for the Government in predator control to protect endangered species,and other animal populations because of the lack of control by other means(all wildlife has to be controlled)I have removed problem bears and lions(more than you could imagine)they are killed,as is the law for good reason.Once a problem always a problem,and when one is translocated you run the risk of spreading disease,putting an animal in an unfamiliar setting or another animals domain in which they will fight for and both subjects will usually die from infection(I have seen all of these occur)those animals I kill are "wasted",if a controlled hunt was to take place for hunters,those hunters would pay,and the take would be utilized.People better wake up and understand that these groups like HSUS,PETA,Etc. do not drop a single dime for anything to with OUR wildlife.....thats a FACT!

 

[kuger]

.....I must add....I have been about as prolific a hunter as anybody could be,my whole life,as was the 8 generations before me.I dont need the meat as of the last few years(have our own beef)and am thorouly disgusted with my states lack of empathy or responsibility for our deer herds....they are all about the all mighty dollar,and allow hunters to harvest two bucks a year.Our herd can not take this and the large mature bucks we used to pursue are now a thing of the past.For these reasons I no longer hunt deer here,but instead hunt poachers,unfortunatly our Game Dept. is understaffed and refuse to go after the Asian's that are market hunting our deer and bear.It boils my blood to no end.....they are wiping out our wildlife and nothing is being done,yet more is being takin from the honest guy

 

[vini]

EPA 2013 fiscal year buget got set back 1.7 billion this year but it still leaves them about 7 billion to play with................August ICMJ magazine update it also says bill includes language and policy rider to prevent them from spending funds to EXPAND there jurisdictions to ALL waterways and imposing BONDING REQUIREMENTS to hardrock mining, BUT THATS WHAT THEY WANT hopefully someone keeps this agency in fark"n check.......we'll see but we the people know what there goals are, TO CONTROL AS MUCH AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN.