Reply
Wed 27 Jun, 2007 07:09 am
America's Most Radical Anti-Hunting Organization
Attempting to Take Major Step Toward Goal of Banning All Hunting
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other radical hunting ban organizations are attempting to capitalize on raw emotion to take a major step in Congress toward their primary goal of ending all hunting species by species. They are taking a page from the incremental playbook of the gun ban crowd.
HSUS is attempting to amend H.R. 2643, the House Interior Appropriations Bill, to effectively prohibit Americans from hunting polar bears from healthy and sustainable populations in Canada. As all sportsmen know, hunters provide the funding and motivation for wildlife conservation worldwide. There is no better example of this than the modern polar bear conservation efforts.
Contrary to HSUS' emotional and misleading claims, the proposed amendment will not reduce the number of polar bears killed by hunters in Canada. The Canadian government, based upon principles of sound science, will continue to issue bear tags to native populations. Those tags will continue to be filled by native subsistence hunters and hunters from other nations. The amendment will, however, reduce funding for polar bear conservation by significantly decreasing the revenue raised through tag sales.
While only a small number of American hunters will ever have the opportunity to hunt polar bears, this is a critical issue for every U.S. hunter. HSUS' Wayne Pacelle said it best when he boasted, "We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped." Today it is polar bears but they will be going after the species you hunt tomorrow. They have already campaigned to stop the hunting of doves, black bears, cougar and deer in numerous jurisdictions throughout America.
The vote on this anti-hunting amendment is likely to occur within the next 24 hours. Please act now to save the future of our time honored hunting heritage. Call or email your Congressman and ask him or her to vote "NO" on the Inslee Polar Bear Amendment to H.R. 2643.
Why would anyone want to hunt polar bears?
So you are Fred Bear or an inuit?
Re: HSUS Takes a Major Step Towards Banning all Hunting
cjhsa wrote: As all sportsmen know, hunters provide the funding and motivation for wildlife conservation worldwide. There is no better example of this than the modern polar bear conservation efforts.
I dont think so!
We need reasonable management tools for all wildlife, not hunting bans.
Would I like to hunt a polar bear? Absolutely, just like my Dad's friends Fred and Bob who filmed a hunt for ABC back the 1960's. Fred took a polar bear with a bow - I dare you to try.
Where would people get thir polar bear rugs from? ow about their polar bear coats? And I'm sure there's other things made from polar bears!
So there are all those news reports about polar bears being endangered because of habitat loss due to global warming, and you want to go out and kill some more. Some conservationist.
Absolutely. Population management is essential to the survival of any species, and it has been proven for over 100 years. Global climate change is constant but you global warming nuts have only been around for a few years. You really need to grow up.
Anybody recognize these two bear killers?
I see among your other lacks that you know nothing about climate change either.
Actually I do. All geological evidence points to a coming ice age, or cooling period. The most likely cause of "global warming" is sunspot activity, not CO2. But you just keep listening to old Al. He invented the Internet, after all.
As long as there is no bi-polar bear huntin'...
Al never claimed that. Know anything about Milankovitch cycles? That's the ice age determinant. It's not geological. Sunspot activity is not the cause. Solar variability has been factored in, since at least the IPCC's SAR, and it ain't what's doing it. Matter of fact, since we've had accurate satellite sensors which can measure solar output directly instead of relying on proxies (like sunspots), there's no evidence of solar variability as a major contributor, despite the denialists. The polar ice cap has decreased by about 20% in the last decade. The Greenland ice cap doubled its historical rate of melt in the last decade and a half and has now tripled it. That ice cap has been there since at least the last 400000 years (4 ice ages and interglacials) (which is the farthest back we can accurately measure it). It'll likely be gone by the end of this century, perhaps sooner. It's not sunspots. We've mucked with the environment. We're largely to blame.
What, you're worried you won't get your trophy before polar bears make the critically endangered list and are driven to extinction, is that it? I repeat, some conservationist.
No, I'm worried about people like you and the socialist political agenda behind your "global warming" creed.
hate to tell you this, friend, but you've been brainwashed. You've bought into Exxon Mobil's public relations campaign which provided most of the funding for the right wing "think tanks" which have politicized what is a scientific question for the last fifteen years. Even Exxon has realized they were wrong and have stopped the funding. The debate is largely over. Some of the largest industrial players in the country have asked the Bush administration to deal with the issue and come up with a climate change policy that takes the science into consideration. The government has ignored them. That's capitalism, bud, not socialism that's asking for action. The science has convinced basically the rest of the world and the rest of the country except the Bush administration and those who cling to its coattails. It's not "socialist", whatever you think that means. It's hapening. Deal with it. I don't give a sh*t how you deal with it, whether you propose a "capitalist" way or a "socialist" way or whatever else, as long as somebody does something effective.
And I repeat, the arctic habitat that the polar bears live in is vanishing. And you want to hunt them. Some conservationist.
Au contraire on all points....
I think you should move to China... get a job for 3-cents/day making styrofoam cups... then complain to their government about being environmentally unfriendly...
The only true conservationists for the past 100 years have been those that manage wildlife and habitat, not those that simply bitch and ban...
Any idea, cjhsa, what 'habitat' means in Latin? (Hint: third person singular, present, indicative of habitare.)
Ah, yes, the old "If you love your country, leave it" argument. Sorry, cj, I'm not going. It needs protection from the people who want to rape it.
So, you think it needs protection from the people who've been managing wildlife and game habitat, with TREMENDOUS SUCCESS, for the past 100 years? That the game laws and license fees on the books that have allowed this to happen need to be abolished because it offends you that some people enjoy hunting, and eating meat?
I mean, comon, spit it out user...
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace