The moose and caribou are counting on you!
The moose and caribou are counting on you!
which prop is concerning predator controll?? and which way favors the moose and caribou?
...Jackie Bushman is a TOOL
NO on Measure 2!! And if you are going to be in the field the 26th you can vote absentee in person starting the 11th! It is getting late for all other primary voting meathods but you can also vot via fax though you sacrifice your privacy to do it. All the methods to vote absentee are explained on this web page
Get out and vote people! Take a friend, offer to bus all of your friends to this, if you are military make it a point to get your coworkers out there make it a point to release your troops to go and excersize the rights they fight for! REMEMBER STARTING MONDAY THE 15th THE POLES ARE OPEN FOR YOU TO MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!!!
.....this thread to the politics threads now.
The mining prop is "ballot box biology" ... the same thing you (we) are against in the airborne hunts. So, its ok to "ballot box biology" for the fish, just not wolves?
I have actually read the full wording of the props and it looks like PETA could have wrote them both.
By the way, I am VERY in favor of airborne wolf control. Just can figure out how the mining prop is justified. Lotsa emotion, little fact.
Correct me, please. I just WON'T vote on emotional commercials only. I hope I'm not the only one.
No on 2 leaves more avenues available to the Fish and Game folks when it comes to predator control. When you read the verbage of the initiative it can be very confusing. My wife and I read the voting guide together every time stuff like this comes up to make sure we understand the language of the initiatives. I'll be voting no across the board.
Measure 4 statement of costs in the voters guide holds the key to this measure:
Laws for the sake of laws, just what we need more government!"This initiave appears to contain language that does not differ significantly from existing water quality standards"
Measure 2 ties the hands of game managers and even the title is misleading and slanted to tug at the heart strings of the uninformed voters. If it passes I think that it could be locked up for a good long time by filing a Disfranchisement lawsuite on the part of hunters (which are the most affected population) due to the choice of puting the measure durring the short season instead of attaching it to the Nov election. A victory there may get it thrown out all together as it should be. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disenfranchisement
If you want to read on the measures yourself you can see them here
Measure 2: This is a measure to prevent the Fish and Game's ability to use arial hunting techniques to control preditor populations in areas where the prey are struggling and liberal bag limits on the preditors have failed to reduce their numbers. I don't think that restricting our professional game managers' ability to do their job is a good idea in terms of cost or science. I will be voting no.
Measure 3: This measure in effect outlaws private campaign funding and establishes a $9 per person annual tax on all residents to fund all local candidates' bids for election. It would either prevent free speech in disallowing private parties to run private ads supporting candidates or it would not prevent it and we have the status quo with private companies supporting their candidates outside the public campaign funding limits. Either way I don't think it's a good idea. If candidates can't raise the financial support they need to get elected, then they probably don't have a grasp of the issues that the public supports. The claims about it reducing curruption are false. We already have laws against curruption. I will be voting no.
Measure 4: The clean water innitiative is another (there have been many) attempt by California environmental groups to stop the Pebble mine. The innitiative doesn't specify the quantity of hazardous material that would not be allowed. Instead it uses vague language and attempts to define hazardous materials that "may affect human health and salmon spawning". Title 10 of CFR 49 specifies what is hazardous and in what quantities. Nothing in the measure looks to address any newly discovered problems with mining that are not already heavily regulated. It will further restrict any changes to all large mines which will have to renew permits in the future. I will be voting no.
As for game management, all three can have an effect in the future. Measure 2 has a direct effect. Measure 3 indirectly affects game management by setting a precident that we are creating more laws and government to keep from having to enforce the current ones. Measure 4 does the same and if broadly applied, if you pollute an animal with lead and or copper, then you would not be allowed to hunt.
my dad made a good comment today about ballot measures
they are usually put forward by people who can't get the bill passed in the legislator and normally for good reason so he almost always votes no on them
I'll be voting on Aug.26th, you can bet you large scale, toxic, mine on that. I'm also sure there are plenty of people on this site that will be more than willing to cancel my vote out.