HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post

01-28-2003 | 04:26 PM

#12

TJD

Fork Horn

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 381

Likes: 0

From: Sussex WI

RE: NRB meeting

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quotequote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Your opinion is yours but your attack on the DNR is wrong. They do know more than you do.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote> You must have owned a lot of Enron stock, logs. I'm certain from reading this post that you would just merrily go along buying because "experts" like Jeffrey Skilling and the like told you it was a great idea. If the DNR is so "expert" in this regard, they should have no problem presenting facts to back up their "expertise". Yet they present nothing more than contradictions and half-stories. So far, that is exactly what you have done as well, logs.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>OK, it is just you and I here debating this and your upset because you don't understand complex subjects.
You apparently can not distingish the eradication zone, the DNRs goal there from a regular deer season and the objective of total management.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote> Hmmm? <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> can not distingish the eradication zone, the DNRs goal there from a regular deer season and the objective of total management<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote> Now who is reading between the lines? Do they offer courses in "DNR Interpretation" that only you have taken?

As for the first part, since you did not address even one single fact addressed in my previous post regarding the DNR's own stance on the subject of baiting, you must be talking about yourself with regard to complex subjects. Tell you what, between interludes at work saying "You want fries with that?", give it a try. Complexity to you must be trying to think outside the box, and actually question what the DNR says. Really, its simple. First they say one thing and then do another. It's there as plain as day. The DNR's own words! Yet here it is you that is trying to read between the lines and place allusions as to what the DNR "means" now with regard to the CWD zone. One thing I agree with you on is your admission of your getting childish. I guess I should have expected as much from someone so firmly entrenched in the Amen Chorus of the DNR. Or maybe it's those hormone treatments. Problems with hot flashes?...Try another Doctor. Oh that's right! You believe the first story you hear...

But hey, keep showing us why someone as unarmed as you should bother to fight a battle of wits. You have a choice: present facts to back your positions...which you have failed to do so far..., or continue posts like the ones above that make it seem as if you are writing on the bathroom wall in high school. The choice is yours; I'll make rebuttals either way. But since you've decided to slide down the slope of the latter...

If it wasn't so sad, I'd get a good laugh out of the DNR's actions and your defense of them. Basically they have contradicted themselves at least twice
1. DNR in July: "We need to ban baiting because we think it can increase the spread of CWD."/DNR now: Allow in in "The Zone" so that our 2.5% infection rate can grow.
2. DNR in July: "You actually have a better chance of seeing and killing deer WITHOUT baiting."/ DNR now: Baiting is needed in "the zone" to increase the harvest.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> Now same situation but now we want to harvest all the deer on these three parcel and we have month to do accopmlish it. This is being done because some deer have a deadly illness and there is no know why to contian it. The land owners are allowed to kill all the deer. layzhunter hunts over his feeder and kills all the deer in 3 months. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
Your post about the three hunters also CONTRADICTS the very points the DNR made in the release last July regarding the baiting issue. If you'd care to retrieve the entire thing and look for yourself, be my guest. And take a dose of your own advice...assuming of course you care to read what you yourself have written...DON'T TRY READING BETWEEN THE LINES OR READ ANYTHING INTO IT! Got it? Let's start with this key line. <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The difference in success rates among gun hunters with and without bait is negligible.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote> GOT IT??? "AMONG HUNTERS WHO BAIT"!!! Had to make that big like the words in those "See Spot Run" books might get to read in a couple years. Not "not effective for the overall hunt" as you wrote. The effect is "negligible" for hunters that bait. So for a "negligible difference" in success, tell us how baiting will work, contradicting the findings of your almighty DNR? In or out of the Zone. Go for it!

Proof, not little stories, parables....PROOF! Here's a big word for you...might wanna ask an adult what I mean...give us some statistics to show how this will increase the harvest in the zone. Tell us how you will contradict the DNR's own parables about how baiting actually decreases your chances of even seeing deer by making them more nocturnal. Tell us how smart it really is to increase the chance of an increase in incidence of CWD by potentially increasing deer-to-deer contact thru baiting. And by the way, we are gonna hold ya to your own standard...can't read anything into what's written. The DNR is contradicting their own lines, Zone or no Zone. Plain and simple. Unless of course you are prepared to admit that the DNR made up their own facts back in July. You make the call! Either they were right in July, or they are wrong now. You make the call

Want some more facts? The DNR did everyting they could to alienate hunters in the zone. Want proof? Look at the harvest figures in the area, even with all of the special dumb-hunts starting in the Summer. Call that a success? Even close? A whopping 8,000 deer out of how many they wanted to get? 25,000. Yeah, the DNR has done such a magificent job that the harvest was right about what it was last year, even though there were an additional 60+ days to hunt with firearms. WOOOWE! Want some input as to how "open to the public" the DNR has been with regard to CWD? How about the poll in early November showing that only about 1/3 of landowners in the Zone were going to cooperate with the DNR's slaughter. This after six months of trying to "sell" hunters on their plan. Great sales job there, huh? Not that you are one to ever let facts confuse you, but try asking some of the people on this board who live in the zone about how "open" the DNR has been? Ask guys like Nub or others? Or are you afraid of the answer? By the way, you yourself have presented NOTHING in the way of facts. I can guess why...they don't support your contentions!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The 8,000 deer killed in the eradication zone are the equivalent of a yearly fawn crop in the area, said Tom Hauge, the DNR's director of wildlife management. That means the number killed so far will likely be replaced when does give birth this spring. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Gee, what a success! With all that "openness", what went wrong?

Edited by - TJD on 01/28/2003 19:07:38

Reply

0