Phil,

You are so funny! When are you getting your own TV show?

Again, it is precisely this sarcastic attitude and blowing off of the stakeholders opinion that makes PARC, academics, agency biologists and people that support them AGENDA pushers. An AGENDA pusher is someone who disregards the will of a large group of stakeholders for a supposed greater cause – their radical view of what conservation should be and in many cases, really, preservation. The view many academics and agency biologists hold just happens to mimic AR groups in many cases. At least most of the private stakeholders think so. This view is radical and extremist. The sky is falling! People who push an AGENDA go to far in their overzealousness to follow their beliefs. You say you just want to protect herps, me to. I have been working on herp conservation for over 20 years. But don’t you think you might want to put a little more energy into fighting habitat destruction, human population growth and the negative impacts of roads? Do you think?

Yes, I have an agenda. I know you don’t want to hear what my agenda is because you are a PARCer and I am a private stakeholder but for the sake of argument let’s run through it. I want data. Data, data, data not opinion, the precautionary principle or best available science. How about real science? I want fair regs. That means you have to solicit stakeholders responses and use them to make the regs. Not say you are taking comments only to throw them in the trash and do what you want any way. You get it? I want the door open to access new blood, new morphs and new localities. The door open. Not cracked or part way open but sustainable harvest open. Money is a part of life on earth. People need to make it because they need to spend it. Herps, both wild caught and captive born, need to be able to be sold. I want to be able to commerce across state and country lines without a complicated mess of laws and regs that are different from state to state and country to country. These laws and regs seem to be only designed to give an unfair advantage to law enforcement and make it prohibitively hard for private folks to commerce or pursue their hobby. That’s what I want. I want realistic bag limits based on data. That’s right data, data and data. Not the opinion of academics and agency biologists who don’t want folks collecting, keeping, breeding and selling in the first place. I don’t want regulation just to have regulation. You get it? I want regulation when needed. When needed means you have to provide sufficient, unbiased data. Again, data, data and data. Putting in regulation just for the sake of regulation is pushing an AGENDA. Oh and by the way I want UNBIASED data. I want OBJECTIVE data. I want GEOGRAPHICALLY RELEVANT data. I don’t want SKEWED data.

I beleive that I have given ample evidence in my posts, as real life examples, as to support my claim that many academics, agency biologists and those that support them are pushing an AR type AGENDA. My first example in the previous email was totally ignored by you. The boa and python ban was pushed by ACADEMICS and those that come from academia. Did you miss that? Do you have trouble reading? You must because it proves my point yet you are so hard headed and blinded by AGENDA you just can’t bring yourself to say that I was correct.

Welkerii
El Paso, TX

[ Show Entire Thread ]