What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • #21
from what i understand these ppl arent doing this because of the bird they are doing this because of the gov't...................have to say if i was in their shoes i would do the same thing................

if it were me personally and you made me aware of the endagered woodpecker i would go out of my way to keep some trees on my property that would be ideal for the species but if the guberment starts talking that they are going to declare my property a protected area and suddenly i will have no input on what i get to do with my own land such as building a greenhouse or what ever...........im sorry, screw Big Brother the trees are going ASAP and something else will be planted in their place.........
 
  • #22
Lol, When someone says I can't do something it makes me want to do it anyway out of spite lol. I see what you're saying.
 
  • #23
has oothing to do with that...................ive seen the BS that has gone on to save one lil fish on some short lil creek cause its found nowhere else...............species like that are doomed to extinction anyways.............

telling me what i can and cant do with my property because of ONE SINGLE SPECIES of wood pecker is idiotic...............im more apt to help if yah give me options........in a case such as this you are giving the land owners no options..........bet if they would have proposed something different tahan listing it as a protected area the trees would still be standing............heck you prolly could have got the neighbor hoods protecting the trees on their own............after watching the trainwreck over introducing wolves to the lower 48, cant see the guberment being able to handle saving a woodpecker........
 
  • #24
has oothing to do with that...................ive seen the BS that has gone on to save one lil fish on some short lil creek cause its found nowhere else...............species like that are doomed to extinction anyways.............

telling me what i can and cant do with my property because of ONE SINGLE SPECIES of wood pecker is idiotic...............im more apt to help if yah give me options........in a case such as this you are giving the land owners no options..........bet if they would have proposed something different tahan listing it as a protected area the trees would still be standing............heck you prolly could have got the neighbor hoods protecting the trees on their own............after watching the trainwreck over introducing wolves to the lower 48, cant see the guberment being able to handle saving a woodpecker........

Lower 48... You Alaskan?
 
  • #26
No, he's from Montana and meant to say lower 47.
 
  • #27
they introduced them to Montana, Wyoming and Idaho.............lower 48 is less to type :grin;
 
  • #28
No, he's from Montana and meant to say lower 47.

Heheheh I am just not used to hearing that phrase down here. When I lived in Alaska it was the way to discuss the rest of the US. :) Almost made me homesick there.
 
  • #29
if it helps any i do alot of chatting with Alaskan hunters :grin:
 
  • #30
from what i understand these ppl arent doing this because of the bird they are doing this because of the gov't...................have to say if i was in their shoes i would do the same thing................

if it were me personally and you made me aware of the endagered woodpecker i would go out of my way to keep some trees on my property that would be ideal for the species but if the guberment starts talking that they are going to declare my property a protected area and suddenly i will have no input on what i get to do with my own land such as building a greenhouse or what ever...........im sorry, screw Big Brother the trees are going ASAP and something else will be planted in their place.........



That's pretty much what I was trying to say. It's not about the bird. It's about their right to do what they want on their land (or the lack of in this case)
Andrew
 
  • #31
In light of recent discussion (must admit, only skimmed the article), I must amend my earlier statement to "line 'em up and smack their writs."

Line up the people who make these decisions and shoot THEM instead.
 
Back
Top