A Crack in the "Rock?"
01-29-2007, 04:21 PM
#61
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 99
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
As an insurance agent, you ought to know better than to misuse legal terms. Frivilous lawsuits (something that has serious meaning in the law) can result in sanctions against the filers and their attorneys, yet the judges did not use or imply the term "frivilous" anywhere in their opinion.
Perhaps you missed your calling and should be on the bench -- but you are not.
Perhaps you missed your calling and should be on the bench -- but you are not.
01-29-2007, 04:54 PM
#62
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
Sorry for getting off topic here but I have to respond to the discussion on elk.They do graze but they also browse and eat alot of the same foods deer eat.Obviously an elk is alot bigger and needs more food then a deer.It's OK for the elk to browse and destroy the habitat because it's in the name of tourism.
Here's a short clip from the PGC website,
Elk are primarily grazers, eating a variety of grasses and forbes. In winter, they paw through snow to reach grass, or turn to twigs, buds and the bark of trees. Among trees and shrubs, Pennsylvania elk seem to prefer aspen, red maple, fire cherry and blackberry. They also browse oak, striped maple, black cherry, Juneberry and witch hazel. They drink from streams and springs and, if necessary, during the winter they get water by eating snow.
Here's a short clip from the PGC website,
Elk are primarily grazers, eating a variety of grasses and forbes. In winter, they paw through snow to reach grass, or turn to twigs, buds and the bark of trees. Among trees and shrubs, Pennsylvania elk seem to prefer aspen, red maple, fire cherry and blackberry. They also browse oak, striped maple, black cherry, Juneberry and witch hazel. They drink from streams and springs and, if necessary, during the winter they get water by eating snow.
01-29-2007, 06:03 PM
#64
Host of Hosts
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Erie, Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,780
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
I love all the new posters weighing in! It's amazing how they all agree with one side of the debate
Even if the so-called figures that Ali gave Boop are 30-40% that still leaves 60-70% who must be happy with them. I'm no math major,but thats still a majority.
01-29-2007, 06:54 PM
#65
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
Doug has a good bit of knowledge on the forestry side of things.He spends alot of time scouting and surveying habitat.He even offers hunting spots to others.My post wasn't intended to and didn't hurt his credibility but it shows our disagreements on certain issues like reducing deer numbers in the name of habitat only to introduce elk in that area.This is one of those things I have to question.Doug and me don't disagree on the poor habitat in areas we're both familar with we disagree on how the deer numbers got so low in those areas.
Sorry again,back on topic with the orgs being discussed.
Sorry again,back on topic with the orgs being discussed.
01-29-2007, 08:19 PM
#67
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
Lord knows why I bothered, but did some checking on CH's comments on previous pages. Not unlike his insistence that it's 40% now and not 30 to 40%, his math on Delaware County's leaving thePFSC was off a bittoo. He cited 7,000 members. I asked and was informed they never listed more than 2,000 members prior to their withdrawal. His buddy Dave should've known that, as he was briefly the Delaware Co. delegate to the PFSC. Then again, perhaps not?
There was some previousmention about lots ofnew membersgravitating to the USP since their ill-fated lawsuit debacle. Greg Levengood (Chairman), stated in a recent issue of PA Outdoor News that "he was encouraged by the sportsmen's support his org garnered during the lawsuit, both with hundreds of new members and contributions to the group's legal fund."
So, I reckon lots amounts to hundreds with today's new math?
There was some previousmention about lots ofnew membersgravitating to the USP since their ill-fated lawsuit debacle. Greg Levengood (Chairman), stated in a recent issue of PA Outdoor News that "he was encouraged by the sportsmen's support his org garnered during the lawsuit, both with hundreds of new members and contributions to the group's legal fund."
So, I reckon lots amounts to hundreds with today's new math?
01-29-2007, 09:28 PM
#68
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Slower Lower Delaware 1st State
Posts: 1,776
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
ORIGINAL: White-tail-deer
I love all the new posters weighing in! It's amazing how they all agree with one side of the debate???
And - its all new and original - never heard before - until......
I love all the new posters weighing in! It's amazing how they all agree with one side of the debate???
And - its all new and original - never heard before - until......
01-30-2007, 06:07 AM
#69
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 576
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
crack in the rock vs a lost friverlous lawsuit...
crack in the rock vs a lost friverlous lawsuit...
crack in the rock vs a lost friverlous lawsuit...
think I'll take the crack in the rock. There's always crack spackle.
crack in the rock vs a lost friverlous lawsuit...
crack in the rock vs a lost friverlous lawsuit...
think I'll take the crack in the rock. There's always crack spackle.
01-30-2007, 06:34 AM
#70
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 23
RE: A Crack in the "Rock?"
ORIGINAL: LineHog
How about a Forest Hydrologist?
PENN STATE EXPERT BLAMES FOREST PROBLEM ON ACID RAIN, NOT DEER
"They can kill all the deer, but it will take a lot more than that to fix the forests," he said. "The problem is that nothing is growing well. In places where soils are not buffered by naturally occurring calcium, there is no regeneration of acid-sensitive tree species. I'm offering a different hypothesis -- the deer are not the main problem."
http://aginfo.psu.edu/news/may02/acid.html
ORIGINAL: Pointers
Not pretending. I've never heard one biologist say acid rain is not an issue. NEVER! However, the PGC is not in the business of managing rain, that's the DEP. Perhaps you should be posting your info for them. Better yet call you Rep and let him/her know that you'd like the DEP to file a suit against coal-burning companies and let the PGC do what they are supposed to, manage PA's birds and mammals.
2ndly, I've never heard anyone from the PGC say that the deer management plan is to "rid the land of them".
ORIGINAL: LineHog
Your funny...State'ssued. You can pretend it is nota issue or a cause. The deer did it and the solution is to rid the land of them.
ORIGINAL: Pointers
Why didn't the USP sue those mid-west coal burning companies instead of the PGC?
Why didn't the USP sue those mid-west coal burning companies instead of the PGC?
2ndly, I've never heard anyone from the PGC say that the deer management plan is to "rid the land of them".
PENN STATE EXPERT BLAMES FOREST PROBLEM ON ACID RAIN, NOT DEER
"They can kill all the deer, but it will take a lot more than that to fix the forests," he said. "The problem is that nothing is growing well. In places where soils are not buffered by naturally occurring calcium, there is no regeneration of acid-sensitive tree species. I'm offering a different hypothesis -- the deer are not the main problem."
http://aginfo.psu.edu/news/may02/acid.html