Very disturbing pgc supports concept of birth control
01-22-2010, 09:43 AM
#31
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Nice cover gino Way to "veil" your insults. But 1 million hunters didnt complain about contraception and pgcs newfound acceptance, most arent even aware and you know it. It was I.
It also wasnt 1 million hunters who spoke of the pavillion when you chose to insult. Again, it was I.
Besides even if you point to bashing us in general as hunters....This IS a hunter message board, not a peta board where hunters go to be bashed. IF one of them came here saying things youre sayng theyd be here about 5 minutes total before being shown the door.
It also wasnt 1 million hunters who spoke of the pavillion when you chose to insult. Again, it was I.
Besides even if you point to bashing us in general as hunters....This IS a hunter message board, not a peta board where hunters go to be bashed. IF one of them came here saying things youre sayng theyd be here about 5 minutes total before being shown the door.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:17 AM.
01-22-2010, 09:48 AM
#32
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"What part of "Always" didnt you understand?"
I understood that ALWAYS doesnt mean ALWAYS when there is a "but" involved! lol. Youre kidding me right? Thats the best you have to address this atrocity pgc is once again committing?
"Oh yes, Gino is correct, Alt did predict this. Rest assured that the 92% will agree to whatever it takes if the 8% cant get it done. The current approach is a sensible way of getting out in front of something that will inevitably come up."
But isnt it a tad bit odd huge majority of other states dont agree (according to shissler findingss). Oh thats right, thats our fine pgc, always leading the way! lol. Youre argument also holds no water because we DID get "it" done. Pgc said reduction was successful, so only see your lack of a point.
Pgc supports contraception and its 100% unacceptable. The suggestion was made by the staff to have a "procrontraception" policy. We will see what our "fine" boc is made of. IF they have any semblance of hunter representation at all in them, this will be voted down. But that will do nothing to "purge" the commission of these "people".
I understood that ALWAYS doesnt mean ALWAYS when there is a "but" involved! lol. Youre kidding me right? Thats the best you have to address this atrocity pgc is once again committing?
"Oh yes, Gino is correct, Alt did predict this. Rest assured that the 92% will agree to whatever it takes if the 8% cant get it done. The current approach is a sensible way of getting out in front of something that will inevitably come up."
But isnt it a tad bit odd huge majority of other states dont agree (according to shissler findingss). Oh thats right, thats our fine pgc, always leading the way! lol. Youre argument also holds no water because we DID get "it" done. Pgc said reduction was successful, so only see your lack of a point.
Pgc supports contraception and its 100% unacceptable. The suggestion was made by the staff to have a "procrontraception" policy. We will see what our "fine" boc is made of. IF they have any semblance of hunter representation at all in them, this will be voted down. But that will do nothing to "purge" the commission of these "people".
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:19 AM.
01-22-2010, 09:53 AM
#33
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
"What part of "Always" didnt you understand?"
I understood that ALWAYS doesnt mean ALWAYS when there is a "but" involved! lol. Youre kidding me right? Thats the best you have to address this atrocity pgc is once again committing?
"Oh yes, Gino is correct, Alt did predict this. Rest assured that the 92% will agree to whatever it takes if the 8% cant get it done. The current approach is a sensible way of getting out in front of something that will inevitably come up."
But isnt it a tad bit odd huge majority of other states dont agree (according to shissler findingss). Oh thats right, thats our fine pgc, always leading the way! lol.
Pgc supports contraception and its 100% unacceptable. The suggestion was made by the staff to have a "procrontraception" policy. We will see what our "fine" boc is made of. IF they have any semblance of hunter representation at all in them, this will be voted down. But that will do nothing to "purge" the commission of these "people".
I understood that ALWAYS doesnt mean ALWAYS when there is a "but" involved! lol. Youre kidding me right? Thats the best you have to address this atrocity pgc is once again committing?
"Oh yes, Gino is correct, Alt did predict this. Rest assured that the 92% will agree to whatever it takes if the 8% cant get it done. The current approach is a sensible way of getting out in front of something that will inevitably come up."
But isnt it a tad bit odd huge majority of other states dont agree (according to shissler findingss). Oh thats right, thats our fine pgc, always leading the way! lol.
Pgc supports contraception and its 100% unacceptable. The suggestion was made by the staff to have a "procrontraception" policy. We will see what our "fine" boc is made of. IF they have any semblance of hunter representation at all in them, this will be voted down. But that will do nothing to "purge" the commission of these "people".
The suggestion was made by the staff to have a "procrontraception" policy
Where's your proof of this allegation? Sorry but I really doubt that thats is true but if it is please show us.........
Last edited by BTBowhunter; 01-22-2010 at 09:56 AM.
01-22-2010, 09:58 AM
#34
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"If thats bashing then you need to go back and clean up your posts and remove all ecoextremist and similar references."
Course we both know that was nothing more than an attempt to take the attention away form ginos always inappropriate comments.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:21 AM.
01-22-2010, 09:59 AM
#35
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"Where's your proof of this allegation? Sorry but I really doubt that thats is true but if it is please show us"
Sure. No problem. I guess you missed both statements:
The most recent: PENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSION
POLICY MANUAL
Natural Resource Conservation
2.30 Actions
E. Fertility Control Agents
Where safe and appropriate, hunting always is the primary method used to manage wildlife populations in all environments. The Game Commission recognizes that species overabundance in localized or isolated areas is often largely influenced by landscape features and human manipulation of the environment, and these factors may not be easily modified. Therefore, when hunting methods are not adequately controlling wildlife populations, the Game Commission considers alternate methods that complement current
management efforts including properly approved and registered fertility control agents. Fertility control agents are only to be used in conjunction with hunting and other wildlife management methods because contraception alone cannot reduce wildlife populations to healthy or socially acceptable levels.
Application of any wildlife fertility control will be based on appropriate science and species population biology. Educational efforts to disseminate information on scientifically sound solutions for reducing problems with overabundant wildlife, including limitations of wildlife fertility control will be made available to the public. If fertility control agents prove to be safe, humane, and effective methods for resolving human-wildlife conflicts associated with overabundant species, the Game Commission may authorize their use.
Recommendation: The Executive Director and staff recommend the Commission approve this policy statement."
AND Previously;;
"Given the unproven nature of these drugs to control or manage a free-ranging deer population, any Game Commission guidelines for their use will be designed to rigorously test this drug in real world circumstances."
I dont think we need any explanation. Its pretty clear. You can make any excuses you like about lawsuits and antihunter demands etc.... But that doesnt explain all the other states DO NOT support this. What does that say about pgc? I think it says quite a bit. Not that most of us are surprised.
Sure. No problem. I guess you missed both statements:
The most recent: PENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSION
POLICY MANUAL
Natural Resource Conservation
2.30 Actions
E. Fertility Control Agents
Where safe and appropriate, hunting always is the primary method used to manage wildlife populations in all environments. The Game Commission recognizes that species overabundance in localized or isolated areas is often largely influenced by landscape features and human manipulation of the environment, and these factors may not be easily modified. Therefore, when hunting methods are not adequately controlling wildlife populations, the Game Commission considers alternate methods that complement current
management efforts including properly approved and registered fertility control agents. Fertility control agents are only to be used in conjunction with hunting and other wildlife management methods because contraception alone cannot reduce wildlife populations to healthy or socially acceptable levels.
Application of any wildlife fertility control will be based on appropriate science and species population biology. Educational efforts to disseminate information on scientifically sound solutions for reducing problems with overabundant wildlife, including limitations of wildlife fertility control will be made available to the public. If fertility control agents prove to be safe, humane, and effective methods for resolving human-wildlife conflicts associated with overabundant species, the Game Commission may authorize their use.
Recommendation: The Executive Director and staff recommend the Commission approve this policy statement."
AND Previously;;
"Given the unproven nature of these drugs to control or manage a free-ranging deer population, any Game Commission guidelines for their use will be designed to rigorously test this drug in real world circumstances."
I dont think we need any explanation. Its pretty clear. You can make any excuses you like about lawsuits and antihunter demands etc.... But that doesnt explain all the other states DO NOT support this. What does that say about pgc? I think it says quite a bit. Not that most of us are surprised.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:21 AM.
01-22-2010, 10:09 AM
#36
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Back to the topic....
Guess audubon is once again getting what they want.
"Mainstream environmental groups including the Audubon Society and the Sierra Club have endorsed hunting, either instead of or in combination with birth control, in places where animals are seriously harming ecosystems or spreading Lyme disease."
Seriously harming ecosystems? Hmm. According to audubon that the entire state including our gamelands. Thats a rather vague reference.
Another interesting tid-bit....From the epa gonacon fact sheet:
"P
Guess audubon is once again getting what they want.
"Mainstream environmental groups including the Audubon Society and the Sierra Club have endorsed hunting, either instead of or in combination with birth control, in places where animals are seriously harming ecosystems or spreading Lyme disease."
Seriously harming ecosystems? Hmm. According to audubon that the entire state including our gamelands. Thats a rather vague reference.
Another interesting tid-bit....From the epa gonacon fact sheet:
"P
otential risks to non-target organisms resulting from the proposed registration of GonaCon are not expected to exceed the Agency’s concern levels."
Gee I feel much better! lol.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:22 AM.
01-22-2010, 10:17 AM
#37
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
The suggestion was made by the staff to have a "procrontraception" policy
Sorry but your requote from the deer chronicles has no such suggestion and no such referral to a "procontaception" policy.
So do you have any real proof or not?
01-22-2010, 10:25 AM
#38
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Was a very convenient ad on the right hand of this page. Glaring example of all these "safe" products only to find out later they are anything but; Also interesting how things like this are so poorly judged ahead of time and they actually go DIRECTLY into the human body!
http://www.youhavealawyer.com/yaz/in...Feh_5QodhR9lyw
So which do you prefer in your venision steak? A little garlic salt? Or a liberal spritz of gonacon? lol.
I dont think hunters support this new pgc policy. I dont think the majority of the states residents would either. They are prohunting for the mostpart and I think they are more than reasonable enough to agree with us that this is extreme, unnecessary, nonhunter friendly, and actually kinda nasty to top it all off. lol.
Maybe you were posting while i was posting (SEE POST #35). The proofs in that post and as i said previously, its not debatable. If you think that it is, then find someone else who believes likewise to debate it with. Id prefer to stick to the facts instead of discussing self manufactured completely unsupported damage control for 10 pages when the facts are as stated right there as plain as the nose on our faces. Pgc has made their policy known, and i disagree with it strongly.
http://www.youhavealawyer.com/yaz/in...Feh_5QodhR9lyw
So which do you prefer in your venision steak? A little garlic salt? Or a liberal spritz of gonacon? lol.
I dont think hunters support this new pgc policy. I dont think the majority of the states residents would either. They are prohunting for the mostpart and I think they are more than reasonable enough to agree with us that this is extreme, unnecessary, nonhunter friendly, and actually kinda nasty to top it all off. lol.
Maybe you were posting while i was posting (SEE POST #35). The proofs in that post and as i said previously, its not debatable. If you think that it is, then find someone else who believes likewise to debate it with. Id prefer to stick to the facts instead of discussing self manufactured completely unsupported damage control for 10 pages when the facts are as stated right there as plain as the nose on our faces. Pgc has made their policy known, and i disagree with it strongly.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:38 AM.
01-22-2010, 10:44 AM
#40
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"vigorous real world testing"
IS Something they support And IS use.
"Application of any wildlife fertility control will be based on appropriate science and species population biology"
Application? Hey wait a minute...Isnt that a synonym for... U-S-E. lol.
Would any of this be said if there were a NO USE policy? lol. Unreal.
IS Something they support And IS use.
"Application of any wildlife fertility control will be based on appropriate science and species population biology"
Application? Hey wait a minute...Isnt that a synonym for... U-S-E. lol.
Would any of this be said if there were a NO USE policy? lol. Unreal.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 10:46 AM.