Petition to Ban All Interstate Transport of Wildlife Would Cripple U.S

5 Likes

And your hamburger is next on the ban list should this prevail.

6 Likes

GOOD THING NO ONE IS MENTIONING >> BRUCELLOSIS <<

1 Like

That’s why I switched to Beyond Broccoli, made from Prime Rib😉

8 Likes

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

1 Like

@MitchR >>> I am in favor of hiring the handicapped and emotionally challenged
But not when it comes to controlling laws.
IE: the DEP Introduced Fisher cats into the largest state forest within my state to control the gray squirrel population. Perfect example of stupidity not having the foresight to know that Fisher cats are like chainsaws for all small game to include turkeys, pheasant and, any animal that is many times their own size.
PS: seems like U.S.P.S. Employees are the cut from the same fabric. Left overs go to FedEx. ( our tax dollars at work for us )

1 Like

Harvesting a certain proportion of various wildlife has always been an intrinsic part of maintaining the health of that wildlife. When indians (sorry, Native Americans) took down an animal, they honored that animal by apologizing for their death and explaining why it was necessary for their death. No part of the animal was wasted. Most hunters hunt for meat for their families to eat. Harvesting a buck with a nice rack is, for most hunters, icing on the cake. License fees, the Pittman-Robertson Act, etc. go to buying and maintaining habitat that promotes the continued good health of all wildlife. Further, out-of-state license fees are generally higher that those for in-state hunters, resulting in MORE $$ for this purpose. Banning interstate transportation of the results of a successful harvest renders out-of-staters useless as a funding mechanism for the furtherance of this desirable goal. When is the last time you heard of users of kayaks, bike trails, etc. voting for an excise tax on their equipment (NOT sales tax) to be used for preservation and maintenance of habitat and wildlife? This was the Pittman-Robertson Act, which was avidly supported by hunters and sportsmen.

A few years ago, a woman called 911(?) or the highway department to complain about a “deer crossing” sign, apparently displayed some distance before a corner. She felt that the sign should be moved some distance down the road on a straightaway where the deer could cross “safely”. It sounds to me that she found a job at the Center for Biological Diversity or The Natural Resources Defense Council.

4 Likes

Yes, I, too, prefer my veggies processed into delicious meats before consuming. I prefer Top Sirloin. :sunglasses:

3 Likes

I’m just helping the vegans, and vegetarians. My dinner, was eating their dinner.

5 Likes

On one hand, I can see where it might make sense because distance physical geographic features can isolate populations to keep disease contained within a certain region. Thing is, there aren’t many geographic barriers at state borders. In many cases, without signs, you wouldn’t even know you’ve crossed state lines.

1 Like

Random question: Can a vegan ethically eat a carnivorous plant?

2 Likes

Has the carnivorous plant eaten today?

1 Like

Except for migratory waterfowl, the feds have no control over wildlife.
All wildlife in the property of and under the jurisdiction of the states.

Like a lot of other overstep by the feds, the States need to start reasserting States Rights.

The Constitution is mainly a document to restrict the Federal Government. So much of what comes out of Washington today is unconstitutional.

1 Like