Nothing you said refutes anything in my post. You're still just taking individuals personal thoughts and actions and trying to connect them to HCU. There is nothing wrong with individuals having differing opinions on things that the organization is not designed to address.



The facts are still that some members individually would like to see box turtle collection banned and some members individually would like to see them collectable. HCU the organization has not supported either side, except to encourage members to participate in studies by reporting sightings, etc. That is support of science, not support of laws. Personally I think box turtles should be collectable in small yearly amounts and that there should be unlimited captive breeding and then what you want to do with them is up to you.



Some members individually support the idea of the white and black list and some members individually don't. HCU the organization has not supported either side except to inform members of studies that they can participate in. Again that is support of science not laws. I don't have strong feelings either way on the white and black list but I do believe in states rights to study and protect, if the data supports it, above and beyond the federal T&E lists. This is more a states rights issue to me than a herp issue. I believe in limited federal regulations and think the states should have more authority over themselves than the feds do because residents of states can control their own representatives more effectively than they can control the feds.



Some members individually hate commercial collection and some members idividually think it's good with reasonable bag limits. HCU the organization has not supported either side. Personally I am for limited commercial collection. In fast reproducing species with low commercial demand there is little if any need for studies, they should just track the numbers collected and sold. In species with slow or low reproductive stratagies I believe in low bag limits, tracking and fees to fund further study.



There is a very simple reason why HCU doesn't take stances on those issues and sticks mainly to informing members of ways that they can assist in studies. It's because those issues divide us and because science is needed to reach fair and reasonable conclusions. This is true whether HCU exists or not and destoying HCU would not make those issues go away. And it would not help studies get done, which face it, without those studies the default policy is going to be the precautionary pricipal. It has been said many time that HCU exists to promote recreational collecting and reasonable, data based conservation. HCU exists so that anyone, other feeling aside, can work together to promote those things.



There are other organizations out there that support commercial aspects of the hobby. Since HCU members are free to join those organizations there is no need for HCU to get involved in those issues.



I just don't think it's right for you to call HCU, the organization, a sell out organization, or a reflector of sell outs, when the organization itself has done none of those things you say certain members have done. And I disagree with you calling members hypocrites simply because they have differing feeling and practices regarding issues that HCU the organization doesn't even participate in. I think you should address those members personally and not by attacking HCU, which is just one organization out many that those people are actually members of, if you have issues with them. Now if you have issues with HCU's stances on recreational collecting that's fine. It's perfectly reasonable to attack HCU on that but so far I haven't seen you disagree with HCU the organization there.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

[ Show Entire Thread ]