Very disturbing pgc supports concept of birth control
12-19-2009, 10:58 PM
#22
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Not even close. But your pot strirring post qualifies. Nice seeing you try to stir the pot further after having seen the other thread with btb's personal attacks.
Sorry, but I'll not bite on that quite obvious trolling attempt.
Sorry, but I'll not bite on that quite obvious trolling attempt.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-19-2009 at 11:13 PM.
01-21-2010, 10:13 PM
#23
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
For the few who didnt believe when pgc said they supported gonacon, does this new statement make things a bit clearer for you? How you like the ecoextreme commission now fellas?
"Given the number of deer-human conflicts in many communities across the Commonwealth and the public interest in improved urban deer control, many citizens and public officials and managers likely will view this new product as a viable option for their deer management issues. The Commission staff has reviewed the existing agency policy manual and found it silent with respect to these products. To promote a clear public expectation as to Commission policy relative to the use of fertility control agents in the Commonwealth with respect to wildlife population control the following policy statement was formulated and is presented for adoption.
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."
With everything going on, its WAAAAY past time to show these jokers the door.
"Given the number of deer-human conflicts in many communities across the Commonwealth and the public interest in improved urban deer control, many citizens and public officials and managers likely will view this new product as a viable option for their deer management issues. The Commission staff has reviewed the existing agency policy manual and found it silent with respect to these products. To promote a clear public expectation as to Commission policy relative to the use of fertility control agents in the Commonwealth with respect to wildlife population control the following policy statement was formulated and is presented for adoption.
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."
With everything going on, its WAAAAY past time to show these jokers the door.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-21-2010 at 10:18 PM.
01-22-2010, 08:31 AM
#26
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Morgantown WV USA
Posts: 108
WHat's the difference between sharp shooters and conception?
If hunters can't/won't get the job of wildlife management done then it is time
to look to other "tools".
Alt tried to warm you guys 10 years ago in his tours but some where too clueless to get the message.
WV Gino
If hunters can't/won't get the job of wildlife management done then it is time
to look to other "tools".
Alt tried to warm you guys 10 years ago in his tours but some where too clueless to get the message.
WV Gino
Last edited by solocamcan; 01-22-2010 at 10:48 AM.
01-22-2010, 08:55 AM
#27
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
QUOTE]"WHat's the difference between sharp shooters and conception?'
[/quote]
contraception is deemed a "hot button" antihunter issue, and rightfully so. There are so many reasons to be against it i dont even know where to start... I know the "safety" proclamation was made, but who would like to inject the next deer they take before they fry it up with some onions?.....Its safe, till ten years from now when we cant figure out where our third testicle came from, of its found traces of the substance lead to "only" a 5% greater risk of other health issues... Its another foreign substance going somewhere it shouldnt!
Sharp shooters = dead deer. No infertile polluted masses roaming the woods. Sharpshooters arent as far separated from "hunting" either.
This also opens the door WIDE for antis, as this is a DREAM come true. Ive posted the links where theyve screamed, begged wailed for it. Ive also shown appropriate response of other states management agencies....NO SUPPORT.
Hunters have gotten the job done. And where hunting isnt permissible, sharpshooter etc. can do it just fine. With this borderline antihunting agency in control, I dont think anyone is surprised this has arisen and been embraced at elmerton for the mostpart.
Alt said alot of things that didnt come true. Even some of the pgc supporters speak of how extreme and ridiculous his views were. But then again, who would know better than he, what type was in control? Noone took him seriously on the issue of birth control etc. Because it was so extreme. But he knew exactly who was running this show.
Nice touch, the bashing again. Two posts in a row that youve made. First Im a loudmouth in the audubon thread now stupid. 2 for 2. Ive seen people banned here recently for less, so you might wanna rethink your debate strategy. 
But to address your issue, I guess other states management and biologists were all too stupid as well. Seeing as they still have in most cases higher deer densities and higher hunter satisfaction than ours...and get this.....They DONT support contraception in most, or if you believe shissler...ANY other state.
[/quote]
contraception is deemed a "hot button" antihunter issue, and rightfully so. There are so many reasons to be against it i dont even know where to start... I know the "safety" proclamation was made, but who would like to inject the next deer they take before they fry it up with some onions?.....Its safe, till ten years from now when we cant figure out where our third testicle came from, of its found traces of the substance lead to "only" a 5% greater risk of other health issues... Its another foreign substance going somewhere it shouldnt!
Sharp shooters = dead deer. No infertile polluted masses roaming the woods. Sharpshooters arent as far separated from "hunting" either.
This also opens the door WIDE for antis, as this is a DREAM come true. Ive posted the links where theyve screamed, begged wailed for it. Ive also shown appropriate response of other states management agencies....NO SUPPORT.
"If hunters can't/won't get the job of wildlife management done then it is time
to look to other "tools"."
to look to other "tools"."
"Alt tried to warm you guys 10 years ago"
"in his tours but some where too stupid to get the message.f"
But to address your issue, I guess other states management and biologists were all too stupid as well. Seeing as they still have in most cases higher deer densities and higher hunter satisfaction than ours...and get this.....They DONT support contraception in most, or if you believe shissler...ANY other state.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-22-2010 at 08:59 AM.
01-22-2010, 08:59 AM
#28
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Where safe and appropriate, hunting always is the primary method used to manage wildlife populations in all environments.
What part of "Always" didnt you understand?
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.
A situation was on the Pittsburgh TV news just last night. Churchill Boro is asking for sharpshooters to take out some deer. Of course the tube boobs reporting the thing called it hunting. They followed up by interviewing a resident for her opinion. She wants someone to shoo them deeper into the woods! lol!
When Fox Chapel had a problem, they were told to try a controlled hunt first. They started a bowhunting program which is still in effect and still working today. While it proved effective, it wasn't quite enough. Only then did the PGC approve the sharpshooters. To this day, the sharpshooting still isn't done in parts of the Boro where bowhunters are doing the job.
Allegheny County Parks are another example. The PGC told them to do a controlled hunt first. It's working.
This proposal simply lays the goundwork for the same type of procedure when some municipality tries to go right to contraception without first working toward a successful hunting program. It gives the PGC a workable way to say NO.
To say that the proposal shows support for deer contraception is like claiming that a guy who puts up a tent did it becaues he wants it to rain. The PGC is simply being realistic by preparing for something that may come their way.
01-22-2010, 09:27 AM
#29
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Morgantown WV USA
Posts: 108
>Nice touch, the bashing again. Two posts in a row that youve made. First Im a loudmouth in the audubon thread now stupid. 2 for 2. Ive seen people banned here recently for less, so you might wanna rethink your debate strategy.
I have not bashed a single member of hunting.net in my last two posts. My comments were aimed at no one in particular. Ypu guys reffers to the PA sport hunting community.
There are members of the almost 1 million licensed hunters in PA that my comments do hit dead on.
It would be like banning someone who stated " there are corrput politicians".
WV Gino
I have not bashed a single member of hunting.net in my last two posts. My comments were aimed at no one in particular. Ypu guys reffers to the PA sport hunting community.
There are members of the almost 1 million licensed hunters in PA that my comments do hit dead on.
It would be like banning someone who stated " there are corrput politicians".
WV Gino
01-22-2010, 09:33 AM
#30
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Yep, Ginos comments singled out no one. Lets not get carried away here.
If thats bashing then you need to go back and clean up your posts and remove all ecoextremist and similar references. The recent banning was for squarely directed personal attacks and flaming from what I saw. The mods have thankfully started clamping down here and the member(s) who ignored the warnings got banned.
If thats bashing then you need to go back and clean up your posts and remove all ecoextremist and similar references. The recent banning was for squarely directed personal attacks and flaming from what I saw. The mods have thankfully started clamping down here and the member(s) who ignored the warnings got banned.
