Another positive

[Cypress]

I want to know more about it before I agree. Will these hunters and fishermen have to buy special permits, and will that money be used to manage the resources? Who is going to oversee the hunting and fishing to make sure that ppl are not taking more than what is permitted? Who's going to pay for those doing the oversight? Is this going to require that roads be built to allow access? If so, how what impact will that have on the area being considered? Will this activity make it unsafe for non-hunters/fishermen to visit these treasures?

The whole idea of a "wildlife refuge" is a large area set aside for -- wait for it -- wildlife. Unless strict rules are in place -- and ENFORCED -- there goes the wildlife. Alaska has a lot of experience with poaching and encroaching on its federally-managed lands. They also have stiff penalties for those who violate the regulations. Will the proposed hunting/fishing on these refuges be similarly regulated and will there be severe penalties for violations?

A guy who supports his sons gunning down leopards, murdering elephants, and shooting up giraffes is not a guy I trust to be a genuine advocate for wildlife conservation.

[Cypress]

I always look for positive things (at least in my eyes) administrations get behind. This might seem like a very small thing to most here but it is a very important thing to me. Without public land or land open to the public hunting and fishing is reserved for the aristocrats ... just the wealthy. I pray that it is never this way in this country.

This is something Trump supports that I’m happy about...

“President Trump opens 1.4 million acres up to hunters and fishermen...”

https://newsradiowrva.radio.com/blog...-and-fishermen

I doubt you have ever gone out of your way to make a pointed criticism of President Pussy Grabber. I would bet the odds are close to 100 percent that almost everything you post provides cover for Trump, or defends and supports him.

[Sailor]

I doubt you have ever gone out of your way to make a pointed criticism of President Pussy Grabber. I would bet the odds are close to 100 percent that almost everything you post provides cover for Trump, or defends and supports him.

What exactly does any of that have to do with what the OP is about?

[Cypress]

I don't believe a single word Trump says

The landmark Endangered Species Act is under relentless assault by Republicans.

The Trump family believes in murdering elephants and leopards.

Anyone attempting to make the claim that Republicans are better for wildlife conservation are the exact same people that attempted to claim Donald Trump was the flower-child peacenik candidate in the face of war-monger Clinton -- aka, such claims can only be made by the utterly deluded or the profoundly dishonest.

[MAGA MAN]

President Pussy Grabber..

Didn't get the joke lol?

[ThatOwlWoman]

A guy who supports his sons gunning down leopards, murdering elephants, and shooting up giraffes is not a guy I trust to be a genuine advocate for wildlife conservation.

I know, right? Anyone who thinks that all "sportsmen" can be trusted to follow the game regulations has never watched one of those game warden shows on cable. You know for every person they bust taking game or fish illegally, there are several more who got away with it. The majority are honest. As always, it's the assholes who ruin it for everyone.

Maybe this proposal might turn out to be okay. I want to see the actual thing and what changes, and which refuges as well, before making up my mind.

[cawacko]

What exactly does any of that have to do with what the OP is about?

Absolutely nothing. Cypress is just a b*tch. This board is over 95% name calling and trolling (which obviously I just did as well). You know the one person who doesn't engage in either? Leaningright.

And to your point LR specifically said he supports this legislation because he likes to hunt and fish. It's an issue he's passionate about. If someone wants to disagree with the legislation that is 100% alright. But Cypress is choosing to attack him personally and we know why.

[MAGA MAN]

I know, right? Anyone who thinks that all "sportsmen" can be trusted to follow the game regulations has never watched one of those game warden shows on cable. ....

Wow. When you get form your opinions of a diverse group pf people based on what you see on TV...

[MAGA MAN]

LR specifically said he supports this legislation because he likes to hunt and fish.

Yeah but that makes him a sportsman, and that TV show proves that those people cheat, trash the environment and kill animals just for fun...

[Cypress]

I know, right? Anyone who thinks that all "sportsmen" can be trusted to follow the game regulations has never watched one of those game warden shows on cable. You know for every person they bust taking game or fish illegally, there are several more who got away with it. The majority are honest. As always, it's the assholes who ruin it for everyone.

Maybe this proposal might turn out to be okay. I want to see the actual thing and what changes, and which refuges as well, before making up my mind.

The Devil is always in the fine print.

Anyone can propose a law that sounds good from the title - "No Child Left Behind".

I actually think game hunting is a valuable asset to wildlife management. I would rather have duck habitat preserved for hunting, than residential developments and parking lots being paved over our wetlands.

The downside is that game management is not neccessarily the same as wildlife management. I really do not think hunters had a lot to do with preserving the North American wolf, the bison, the spotted owl, or the California condor. Ducks, geese, and pheasant are not apex predator species. And it is the apex predators that really are a barometer of the health of an ecosystem.

I have no problem with game management and hunting. But I believe that is only a partial solution to maintaining and preserving ecosystems and sensitive wildlife.

[Cypress]

What exactly does any of that have to do with what the OP is about?

A statement of fact that posters like the OP aren't innocently "looking" for positive things from Trump, Obama, or Bill Clinton. They will support, defend, and provide cover for virtually everything Trump does.

Another positive
I always look for positive things (at least in my eyes) administrations get behind.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Wow. When you get form your opinions of a diverse group pf people based on what you see on TV...

I am a fisherperson; my late husband was as well as being a hunter. Over the years I've seen all kinds of abuses. And because ppl talk, heard of many more. Maybe you should come out of your cardboard box and get out in the woods. Oh yeah. You can't. Bears will eat you.

[Guno צְבִי]

I agree, based on his track record, you got to be suspicious, watch, along with the declaration there will be some hidden loophole that in two years the same land can be open for private development

And you got to laugh thinking that Trump, born in raise in NYC, gives a rat's ass about hunting and fishing, the only time he possibly did either was the last time he mistakenly stepped into a grocery store

he is throwing a sop to the rubes

[Cypress]

Absolutely nothing. Cypress is just a b*tch. This board is over 95% name calling and trolling (which obviously I just did as well). You know the one person who doesn't engage in either? Leaningright.

And to your point LR specifically said he supports this legislation because he likes to hunt and fish. It's an issue he's passionate about. If someone wants to disagree with the legislation that is 100% alright. But Cypress is choosing to attack him personally and we know why.

You don't know jack shit, stalker.

I am allowed to defend myself and to reciprocate towards those who were hostile to me in the first place, like the OP was.

[ThatOwlWoman]

The Devil is always in the fine print.

Anyone can propose a law that sounds good from the title - "No Child Left Behind".

I actually think game hunting is a valuable asset to wildlife management. I would rather have duck habitat preserved for hunting, than residential developments and parking lots being paved over our wetlands.

The downside is that game management is not neccessarily the same as wildlife management. I really do not think hunters had a lot to do with preserving the North American wolf, the bison, the spotted owl, or the California condor. Ducks, geese, and pheasant are not apex predator species. And it is the apex predators that really are a barometer of the health of an ecosystem.

I have no problem with game management and hunting. But I believe that is only a partial solution to maintaining and preserving ecosystems and sensitive wildlife.

One problem with hunters is that they want to manage an ecosystem for their benefit, not necessarily that of the creatures who live there. That usually means getting rid of the apex predators who they believe compete for the same game. The result is an imbalanced system that in many cases requires hunting in order to keep populations healthy and in check. Have you read about the changes in Yellowstone following the reintroduction of wolves to the ecosystem there? It's incredible.

https://earthjustice.org/blog/2015-j...-national-park

I agree with you.... Ducks Unlimited is one hunting group that has done amazing things for our wetlands preservation. There are plenty of others as well.