Free: Contests & Raffles.
you guys are here to capitalize on a problem and make a quick buck doing it.
Idaho... You think its name calling when its pointed at you but when you call names or accuse people of things you justify it.
Quoteyou guys are here to capitalize on a problem and make a quick buck doing it. Who exactly do you think is making money on this issue? Do you see any advertisements on my website? I haven't made a dime from any of these articles, and have actually spent hundreds of dollars driving to and from various meetings around the state. I care. That's why I'm doing this. Bruce Barnes and others have literally spent thousands of dollars trying to stay involved and help the animals they respect.So again, who is making a "quick buck" on this?
Hey, idahoTROLL, here's a fun little quote for you:“There probably needs to be another species of bacteria that comes in before the treponemes that allows them entry into the cells.” You know who said that? WDFW veterinarian and epidemiologist Kristin Mansfield yesterday at the Forest Practices Board meeting in Olympia.So is this other species of bacteria safe for human consumption? Which bacteria is that exactly? And does that mean WDFW is now aligning with the many members of their own Technical Advisory Group who believe these bacteria are secondary or even tertiary to larger environmental factors including our forest practices?Would you like to hear those again? Okay, great!“[Treponemes] are possibly playing a role, but they’re not the entirety,” said Jennifer Wilson, a research microbiologist with the USDA. “I buy the fact that it’s acting like a novel introduced disease. I’m just saying this treponema data does not support that,” said Tom Besser, a specialist in Veterinary Microbiology and Pathology at WSU.“I also have a little bit of a concern because the treponema hypothesis still requires an initiating event… Until you figure out what that triggering event was you’re not going to be able to really understand the disease,” said Dr. Anne Fairbrother, an Ecotoxicologist with Exponent Engineering and Scientific Consulting.“You’re mentioning lots of different bacteria. That’s one piece of the puzzle… but there are other things that seem to be missing in the puzzle. Big pieces. The big pieces are the environmental factors and why this particular region and not other regions,” said Dale Moore, an expert in preventive veterinary medicine at WSU.And don't forget this one:Dr. Paul Kohrs, Acting State Veterinarian with the Department of Agriculture, stated that “something must be done different down here with forest practices” and added that “it needs to be explored.”IdahoTROLL, you know who has been the single biggest detriment to solving this hoof disease problem: WDFW
Quote from: idahohuntr on July 09, 2014, 06:00:23 PMQuote from: bbarnes on July 09, 2014, 03:05:28 PMNo liberal environmentalist here just a very successful hunter,that's NOT against logging but concerned about toxins being spayed.I would love to take you to my propertys,and show you how timber grows just fine without the chemicals.Ive seen the demise of the states elk herd, with the current practice of if a littles good a lot is better.Get a clue about what's going on and quit surfing trying to antagonize the public,that's trying to raise awareness of the ineptness of the people in charge.If it wasn't for us raising the concern at the WDFW commission meeting in Moses Lake three years ago, they would have done NOTHING.Whats your contribution to the problem,besides over selling tags in the state? That's only added to the problem by running the elk to death, from September 31 until January 31.It used to be elk was done in the second week of November and then 4 days of late buck and HUNTERS were out of the woods.We need common sense seasons not a bunch of STATE employees trying to get retired doing as little as possible.Im for live animal testing to see what going on here.Remember they have only put 54,000 dollars, in to the BIGGEST WILDLIFE problem the states ever had.whats your suggestion I've heard lots of criticism no solution LETS HEAR IT. EAT THE SANDWITCH So you want to end herbicide use, end hunting seasons because they are too long, end government employment...did I miss anything?Despite your attempts at spreading vasts amounts of misinformation WDFW is on a solid path to handling this disease as best they can while trying to better understand causes and effects on wild elk populations. My solution is to support their efforts and provide rationale feedback on ways they can improve. Your solution seems to be one where you paint yourself as some sort of savior of elk while personally attacking anyone who does not share your view of the problem or potential solutions. It all revolves around you trying to get your 15 minutes of fame. WDFW has 15 independent experts providing guidance on a very complex problem and you do nothing but confuse the public with your lies and misinformation which causes WDFW to have to spend time and money dealing with your garbage. Holding their feet to the fire is one thing...what you are doing is counter-productive and damaging to the states wildlife resources. I could care less how many popularity contests you might win in various settings, the fact is you are a detriment to solving this problem. You are a disgrace to how sportsmen should interact with state wildlife agencies and your total lack of respect for everyone that doesn't share your view point must make it hard for anyone with any real authority to take you seriously. Belittling the P-man isn't helping your viewpoint, you tried that with me on the wolf section and it didn't work there either. I don't know about everyone else, but I grow tired of how you look down your nose and belittle your fellow hunters when they don't carry your water.
Quote from: bbarnes on July 09, 2014, 03:05:28 PMNo liberal environmentalist here just a very successful hunter,that's NOT against logging but concerned about toxins being spayed.I would love to take you to my propertys,and show you how timber grows just fine without the chemicals.Ive seen the demise of the states elk herd, with the current practice of if a littles good a lot is better.Get a clue about what's going on and quit surfing trying to antagonize the public,that's trying to raise awareness of the ineptness of the people in charge.If it wasn't for us raising the concern at the WDFW commission meeting in Moses Lake three years ago, they would have done NOTHING.Whats your contribution to the problem,besides over selling tags in the state? That's only added to the problem by running the elk to death, from September 31 until January 31.It used to be elk was done in the second week of November and then 4 days of late buck and HUNTERS were out of the woods.We need common sense seasons not a bunch of STATE employees trying to get retired doing as little as possible.Im for live animal testing to see what going on here.Remember they have only put 54,000 dollars, in to the BIGGEST WILDLIFE problem the states ever had.whats your suggestion I've heard lots of criticism no solution LETS HEAR IT. EAT THE SANDWITCH So you want to end herbicide use, end hunting seasons because they are too long, end government employment...did I miss anything?Despite your attempts at spreading vasts amounts of misinformation WDFW is on a solid path to handling this disease as best they can while trying to better understand causes and effects on wild elk populations. My solution is to support their efforts and provide rationale feedback on ways they can improve. Your solution seems to be one where you paint yourself as some sort of savior of elk while personally attacking anyone who does not share your view of the problem or potential solutions. It all revolves around you trying to get your 15 minutes of fame. WDFW has 15 independent experts providing guidance on a very complex problem and you do nothing but confuse the public with your lies and misinformation which causes WDFW to have to spend time and money dealing with your garbage. Holding their feet to the fire is one thing...what you are doing is counter-productive and damaging to the states wildlife resources. I could care less how many popularity contests you might win in various settings, the fact is you are a detriment to solving this problem. You are a disgrace to how sportsmen should interact with state wildlife agencies and your total lack of respect for everyone that doesn't share your view point must make it hard for anyone with any real authority to take you seriously.
No liberal environmentalist here just a very successful hunter,that's NOT against logging but concerned about toxins being spayed.I would love to take you to my propertys,and show you how timber grows just fine without the chemicals.Ive seen the demise of the states elk herd, with the current practice of if a littles good a lot is better.Get a clue about what's going on and quit surfing trying to antagonize the public,that's trying to raise awareness of the ineptness of the people in charge.If it wasn't for us raising the concern at the WDFW commission meeting in Moses Lake three years ago, they would have done NOTHING.Whats your contribution to the problem,besides over selling tags in the state? That's only added to the problem by running the elk to death, from September 31 until January 31.It used to be elk was done in the second week of November and then 4 days of late buck and HUNTERS were out of the woods.We need common sense seasons not a bunch of STATE employees trying to get retired doing as little as possible.Im for live animal testing to see what going on here.Remember they have only put 54,000 dollars, in to the BIGGEST WILDLIFE problem the states ever had.whats your suggestion I've heard lots of criticism no solution LETS HEAR IT. EAT THE SANDWITCH
I have no doubt that idahohunter understands science and scientific methods, but I am seriously starting to doubt his understanding of its use in the development of environmental regulations or public policy.
Quote from: Coastal_native on July 09, 2014, 07:51:38 PMI have no doubt that idahohunter understands science and scientific methods, but I am seriously starting to doubt his understanding of its use in the development of environmental regulations or public policy. Developing environmental regulations and public policy is far more art than science in most instances. But I would contend that environmental regulations (and associated public policy) should be rooted in good science. If the public wants a solution to hoof rot, or supports policies that reduce disease in wildlife, then passing environmental regulations banning certain herbicides that do not cause hoof rot seems like bad policy Science can tell us at what concentrations of toxins we start to see effects in wildlife, humans etc. Science does not tell us how much or how close to those levels we should allow commercial timber companies or ag producers to get in applying them to forests and fields. Those risk based assessments and tolerances are the foundation of public policy. Its why we see differences in the allowance of GMO crops in Europe vs. USA...its not that the science between these countries really differs...its the policy/social tolerance etc. that differs. Science does not = policy...it merely informs policy makers. Can you clarify where you think I am missing the boat on the link between science and policy?
Quote from: idahohuntr on July 09, 2014, 09:11:05 PMQuote from: Coastal_native on July 09, 2014, 07:51:38 PMI have no doubt that idahohunter understands science and scientific methods, but I am seriously starting to doubt his understanding of its use in the development of environmental regulations or public policy. Developing environmental regulations and public policy is far more art than science in most instances. But I would contend that environmental regulations (and associated public policy) should be rooted in good science. If the public wants a solution to hoof rot, or supports policies that reduce disease in wildlife, then passing environmental regulations banning certain herbicides that do not cause hoof rot seems like bad policy Science can tell us at what concentrations of toxins we start to see effects in wildlife, humans etc. Science does not tell us how much or how close to those levels we should allow commercial timber companies or ag producers to get in applying them to forests and fields. Those risk based assessments and tolerances are the foundation of public policy. Its why we see differences in the allowance of GMO crops in Europe vs. USA...its not that the science between these countries really differs...its the policy/social tolerance etc. that differs. Science does not = policy...it merely informs policy makers. Can you clarify where you think I am missing the boat on the link between science and policy?It was supposed to be an insult, but too passive aggressive I suppose . I think you understate the fact that science can be good or bad and can be heavily influenced by personal bias or politics. I'm sure our personal experiences in working with scientists and observing the relationship between science, management, and policy are drastically different. At least that's what I gather from reading your posts. i.e. you have way more faith in the system than I do.
