collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”  (Read 209010 times)

Offline konradcountry

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2016
  • Posts: 1014
  • Location: SouthWest
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #630 on: September 25, 2018, 05:20:39 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #631 on: September 25, 2018, 05:53:32 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21190
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #632 on: September 25, 2018, 06:30:32 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #633 on: September 25, 2018, 06:37:11 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
I'm not saying that wolves should be listed under the ESA. But KC's post essentially boiled down to wolves shouldn't be protected in the US because there's lots of them in Canada.

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21190
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #634 on: September 25, 2018, 06:38:16 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
I'm not saying that wolves should be listed under the ESA. But KC's post essentially boiled down to wolves shouldn't be protected in the US because there's lots of them in Canada.
:tup:
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline konradcountry

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2016
  • Posts: 1014
  • Location: SouthWest
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #635 on: September 25, 2018, 07:22:13 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
I'm not saying that wolves should be listed under the ESA. But KC's post essentially boiled down to wolves shouldn't be protected in the US because there's lots of them in Canada.

No my post boils down to the point that the environmental lobby deceives the public into believing that an endangered species is one that is endangered of becoming extinct. I didn't share my own opinion on whether or not there should be protections.

I guarantee that there would be far more support for wolf hunting in Idaho if the environmental lobby described their efforts as bringing the wolf back to Idaho even though it isn't at risk of becoming extinct due to the fact that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

I actually support some protection for wolves in the US and Idaho. I don't think they should be called endangered because there isn't an Idaho subspecies. The wolves they brought in were from Canada.

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9115
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #636 on: October 21, 2018, 05:54:07 PM »

Offline Sitka_Blacktail

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 3318
  • Location: Hoquiam, WA
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #637 on: October 22, 2018, 05:04:33 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
I'm not saying that wolves should be listed under the ESA. But KC's post essentially boiled down to wolves shouldn't be protected in the US because there's lots of them in Canada.

According to this, (https://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/rs%5Fcaribou%5Fboreal%5Fcaribou%5F0912%5Fe1%2Epdf) there are 34,000 woodland caribou in Canada It also states that 300 are needed to sustain a local population so without an influx, the Selkirk herd is probably doomed. By the reasoning that because there are plenty of wolves in Canada, there doesn't need to be wolves in the lower 48, there apparently doesn't need to be woodland caribou either.

"Based on the best available information, the current overall number of boreal caribou in Canada
is estimated to be approximately 34,000 individuals (Environment Canada, 2011b). This number
is based on mean local population size estimates as provided by the provincial and territorial
jurisdictions. (Environment Canada, 2011b)."
A man who fears suffering is already suffering from what he fears. ~ Michel de Montaigne

Offline Sitka_Blacktail

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 3318
  • Location: Hoquiam, WA
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #638 on: October 22, 2018, 05:12:38 PM »
Trump cuts regulations between western states and water supply: ‘I hope you’ll enjoy the water you’ll have’     :tup:

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2018/10/21/trump-cuts-regulations-between-western-states-and-water-supply-i-hope-youll-enjoy-the-water-youll-have-685578?utm_source=Push%20Notifications&utm_medium=BPR

So this is what you want for the Northwest?  Maybe you'd like to pump Northwest water to California to help out? Do you care if more water is used by industry at the cost to salmon and other fish? What if it means less water for farmers?
A man who fears suffering is already suffering from what he fears. ~ Michel de Montaigne

Offline Special T

  • Truth the new Hate Speech.
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 24823
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • Make it Rain!
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #639 on: October 23, 2018, 11:15:15 AM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
I'm not saying that wolves should be listed under the ESA. But KC's post essentially boiled down to wolves shouldn't be protected in the US because there's lots of them in Canada.

A large part of my issue with Wolves and the ESA Per say is the fact that Sub species  are protected in many other animals like the woodland caribou. The argument that wolves from the Mackezie valley are the same kind as were down here is ignored.  If the subspecies argument is ignored on wolves and at the same time hyped, IE mexican Red/grey wolves then im more inclined to say the ESA is a scam.
In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself. 

Confucius

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9115

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #641 on: October 29, 2018, 11:25:58 AM »
Victory: Activists’ effort to worsen overcriminalization ends with a whimper

https://pacificlegal.org/victory-activists-effort-to-worsen-overcriminalization-ends-with-a-whimper/?fbclid=IwAR3ioVCy6fYFzCVxj-feyiB5Imx1xTfQwcvEzJ2dzjTY9h5hHg26JlLxmj8
This puts the Clinton Era McKittrick Policy back into effect. Note that the 9th Circuit didn't say McKittrick was legal/illegal, it just say the group that sued DOJ over it didn't have legal standing.

I posted about the McKittrick Policy last year and many on here were actually against it. Under McKittrick the government has to prove you knew what you shot. So if you shot a woodland caribou and you told officers "oh I thought it was an elk" unless the government can prove otherwise (texts, statements to others, etc.) you cant be prosecuted under the federal ESA. It simply created an "out" and for those "in the know" all they had to do was lie. In this example the government would have to prove you knew what you shot was a caribou. So if you see a bunch of wolves and know they are wolves and decide to pull the trigger but tell officials you thought they were coyotes you can't be prosecuted.

State endangered species laws do not have a "knowingly" aspect and simply have to prove you killed the species.

https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214888.0.html

Offline Skyvalhunter

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Posts: 15706
  • Location: Sky valley/Methow
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #642 on: October 29, 2018, 11:44:09 AM »
Interesting
The only man who never makes a mistake, is the man who never does anything!!
The further one goes into the wilderness, the greater the attraction of its lonely freedom.

Offline konradcountry

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2016
  • Posts: 1014
  • Location: SouthWest
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #643 on: November 07, 2018, 02:24:02 PM »
The Green Scam is telling people that the wolf is endangered but not mentioning that there are 60 thousand of them in Canada.

Of course environmentalists will respond that *their* definition of endangered includes the location. But they won't mention this to the public and will make it sound like the last wolf pack is in Idaho.
I don't think the majority of the public thought the last wolf pack in the world or N. America was in Idaho. The ESA is America's law it doesn't matter if the species is doing well in other countries.

A lot of guys on here care about the Selkirk Caribou, should they not be protected under the ESA because hey there's a lot of caribou in Alaska and Canada?
The Selkirk caribou are Woodland caribou. There are 27 in existence. Quite a differences from wolves of which there are easily ten times more than that in Washington state alone.
I'm not saying that wolves should be listed under the ESA. But KC's post essentially boiled down to wolves shouldn't be protected in the US because there's lots of them in Canada.

According to this, (https://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/rs%5Fcaribou%5Fboreal%5Fcaribou%5F0912%5Fe1%2Epdf) there are 34,000 woodland caribou in Canada It also states that 300 are needed to sustain a local population so without an influx, the Selkirk herd is probably doomed. By the reasoning that because there are plenty of wolves in Canada, there doesn't need to be wolves in the lower 48, there apparently doesn't need to be woodland caribou either.

You can argue for caribou or wolf protections in the US without making it sound like the species itself is threatened by extinction. This is what environmentalists have done and it is deceptive and dishonest.

But environmentalists know that it's much harder to argue against wolf hunting if the public knows that there are 60 thousand of them on the other side of the border.

Offline wolfbait

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Posts: 9115
Re: The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”
« Reply #644 on: November 27, 2018, 05:05:09 PM »
LANDOWNERS HAIL PROPERTY RIGHTS VICTORY AT SUPREME COURT IN FROG HABITAT DISPUTE

https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/27/supreme-court-dusky-gopher-frog/?utm_medium=email

 


* Advertisement

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal