Like i said, not debatable and in that regard it doesnt matter what you or i think. It doesnt change what the policy is as stated. There are no longer any secrets, no need for conspiracy theories, no guessing games, and no more possibility of denial. They have a policy in place, the vote is in, the press releases made, and the cat is out of the bag.
What is debatable and what we are discussing is whether their pro-use policy is acceptable regardless of how its written up in our opinions. In mine its not.
As for quibbling over minor technicalities and meaningless details that are very open to interpretation and subject to change at a moments notice.....Sure why not; In other articles theyve also stated in areas not conducive to hunting or where hunting hasnt been or cannot be effective. I donno about you, but that sounds like an open to interpretation judgement call. Couple that with other areas WITH Hunting as in the situation you speak of, and id say they have quite a few plans for the stuff.
And thats just for starters. Once its in....Its in. Things have a way of "expanding" in use. Especially now that they have taken us past the "shock value" gently, and now they can utilize it since the policy is now in place. Something that was impossible previously. There is absolutely NOTHING stopping them from, say 5 years from now, using the stuff ANYWHERE by anyone they may choose to allow. No matter who likes it, not a thing could be done to stop it..... Just like our fine deer plan thusfar.
Of course we have nothing to worry about. We can trust the Pa game commission. lol.' Not as if they ever have or ever would screw over the hunters of this state or anything. They love deer. Theyd never do anything excessive where our deer herd is concerned! lmao..
