The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

Guess I'm a bit of a 'tree hugger'......not fanatical....
My beef would be with those who 'cheat' by poaching, taking more than the
limit, setting traps...such as putting apples out to lure deer in...etc.
Not so much the true sportsman.
I personally have a pact with the local wildlife.
They don't try to eat me and I won't shoot them.
note: I do have relatives...especially inlaws, who love to hunt.


noah wrote in message
...
What brought about your negative response? I wasn't looking for a
fight, but I'm Irish.
noah

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
news:%eJ6b.380729$YN5.252223@sccrnsc01...
I was not making a judgment call on fish farming, I was making the
observation that it is common. I thought you said "we can't farm fish".
If you read the articles it highlighted the problems and possible
solutions.
If you are not willing to find better ways to harvest fish, it is time you
give up eating fish.

snip
I have, for that exact reason. I will still eat fish that I catch, but I
will not buy commercially produced fish. I don't expect it to make a lot of
difference, but it is the principle of the thing.

Mark Browne

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:06:48 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"noah" wrote in message
.. .

I wish that people could take a more objective view, but some can't,
or won't. What was that recent movie about "Nemo?" the little fish?
He was cute, wasn't he? Maybe we should ban fishing. :o)

Well, let's talk about whaling or bone fishing or fishing the **** out of
every species that becomes popular as it hits the plates of restaurants
across the land.

Unfortunately, we can't farm fish (other than Atlantic salmon that are
****ing up the wild species here in the NW) and genetically modify them for
increased production.

So, would you like to make your point a little more succinctly, or should we
group you with the "bring 'em on" crowd?

jps


I have absolutely no idea what your point or objection may be, and I
read your response twice.
Perhaps "succint" would be a good, universal idea.

noah

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

"noah" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:06:48 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"noah" wrote in message
.. .

I wish that people could take a more objective view, but some can't,
or won't. What was that recent movie about "Nemo?" the little fish?
He was cute, wasn't he? Maybe we should ban fishing. :o)

Well, let's talk about whaling or bone fishing or fishing the **** out of
every species that becomes popular as it hits the plates of restaurants
across the land.

Unfortunately, we can't farm fish (other than Atlantic salmon that are
****ing up the wild species here in the NW) and genetically modify them
for
increased production.

So, would you like to make your point a little more succinctly, or should
we
group you with the "bring 'em on" crowd?

jps


I have absolutely no idea what your point or objection may be, and I
read your response twice.


Don't worry...that's a common reaction most people have after reading one of
jps's posts.

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

Chris wrote:

This doesn't even deserve a reply.

......BUT....

Look man, I *DON'T* just go out and aimlessly blast any wild animal that I
see.
If I want to augment my family's suppliment of food, and it happens to be
turkey season, I will go out and get a turkey for us to eat. You eat turkey
at
Thansgiving, don't you?

I don't know of any hunter friends of mine that go out and blast animals for
the sport of it. There are rules and regulations, and a hunter can get
heavily
fined and maybe jailed for poaching.

Butch Ammon




If you look at what I wrote I was talking about those who kill animals for the
fun of it, not for the purposes of food. If you like to kill your own food to
save money or because you enjoy it I have no problem with that. I was talking
about those who kill a deer or any animal and just leave it for dead, and
plenty of people do that. Read more carefully next time.

Chris


Ya know Chris, Butch is a good guy. The fact here is that people who
hunt hear this junk that they are just going out to kill somthing all
the time. Myself and anyone I know who hunts eat what they get. In most
cases it is the only way to get the select types of meat. That not only
has a different taste but is not injected with drugs to make they fatter
bigger etc. I don't know anyone who would want to be in the same area
with some idiot that just wants to blast somthing.

You seem a reasonable guy, I am just posting this because hunters seen
to hear about the few who will abuse anything they can. What you are
saying you have a probelm with 99% of the hunter do as well..

Capt Jack R..

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

What was your point?


"jps" wrote in message
...
"noah" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:06:48 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"noah" wrote in message
.. .

I wish that people could take a more objective view, but some can't,
or won't. What was that recent movie about "Nemo?" the little fish?
He was cute, wasn't he? Maybe we should ban fishing. :o)

Well, let's talk about whaling or bone fishing or fishing the **** out
of
every species that becomes popular as it hits the plates of restaurants
across the land.

Unfortunately, we can't farm fish (other than Atlantic salmon that are
****ing up the wild species here in the NW) and genetically modify them
for
increased production.

So, would you like to make your point a little more succinctly, or
should
we
group you with the "bring 'em on" crowd?

jps


I have absolutely no idea what your point or objection may be, and I
read your response twice.
Perhaps "succint" would be a good, universal idea.

noah

It was aimed at your flip remard about "banning fishing" as if the
complaints of the environmentalists are wholly without merit.

If you care to concentrate for a few moments, I think my point was made
very
well.

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

Allright...but I'll be praying for you :-)

noah wrote in message
...
There are differences, to be sure, but the primary goal is the same.
Agree to disagree on the hunting issue?

Regards,
noah

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 18:54:32 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"noah" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:06:48 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"noah" wrote in message
.. .

I wish that people could take a more objective view, but some can't,
or won't. What was that recent movie about "Nemo?" the little fish?
He was cute, wasn't he? Maybe we should ban fishing. :o)

Well, let's talk about whaling or bone fishing or fishing the **** out of
every species that becomes popular as it hits the plates of restaurants
across the land.

Unfortunately, we can't farm fish (other than Atlantic salmon that are
****ing up the wild species here in the NW) and genetically modify them
for
increased production.

So, would you like to make your point a little more succinctly, or should
we
group you with the "bring 'em on" crowd?

jps


I have absolutely no idea what your point or objection may be, and I
read your response twice.
Perhaps "succint" would be a good, universal idea.

noah

It was aimed at your flip remard about "banning fishing" as if the
complaints of the environmentalists are wholly without merit.

If you care to concentrate for a few moments, I think my point was made very
well.



No need to get testy, my friend.
I think you missed a few stops on the trolley.
I happen to *be* an environmentalist, and put my money where my mouth
is, and I also hunt and fish.
I was responding to those who condemned hunting while being active
fishermen themselves.
The comment about banning fishing was mild sarcasm, as indicated by
Mr. Smiley " :o) ".

No need to insult. No, your point was confusing, as you
misinterpreted my statement.

.....what were we talking about?

noah

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 02:26:08 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:

Allright...but I'll be praying for you :-)


LOL!!! ...God knows, I need it!

Regards,
noah

The problem with these off-topic, political threads...
 

On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 15:39:57 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"noah" wrote in message
.. .

No need to insult. No, your point was confusing, as you
misinterpreted my statement.

....what were we talking about?

noah

Sorry, it just hit me the wrong way. You meant it as tongue in cheek, I
thought it was flip. I was thinking you were short shrifting the efforts to
protect fish and the hazards of commercial (netting and killing huge amounts
of unwanted sealife and overfishing species without regards to their
sustainability) and sport fishing (bonefish and other "sport fish"
depletion).

I know you're a level headed sportsman which is why I was concerned about
your comment.

Sorry.

jps

No need for sorry. One of the intrinsic problems of Usenet is that we
never (hardly ever) get to look the other person in the eye while
they're "talking". It is easy to misunderstand, and I have done it
myself.

Thanks for the reply.

Regards,
noah