The Northern California Fly Fishing Board

I know political posts are not welcomed here but I feel that this has a bearing on us fishers.

The Humane Society supports a YES vote this prop. They're all hooked up with PETA. Their agenda is to put an end to all fishing and hunting. Also end pet ownership as we know it. f this Prop passes, I think this is one way they will get their foot in the door and then be on thier way to acomplish their goal of ending fishing. Most people here in rural farming counties are against it. Anyone want to kick this around??

Concur with ya Berms!

berms wrote:
I know political posts are not welcomed here but I feel that this has a bearing on us fishers.

The Humane Society supports a YES vote this prop. They're all hooked up with PETA. Their agenda is to put an end to all fishing and hunting. Also end pet ownership as we know it. f this Prop passes, I think this is one way they will get their foot in the door and then be on thier way to acomplish their goal of ending fishing. Most people here in rural farming counties are against it. Anyone want to kick this around??

I'm not sure how I feel about this proposition...but I wonder if I might make a plea for sources, a plea for facts.

Statements like .."they're all hooked up with PETA..." Who? The Humane Society or the Prop 2 Folks? How are they hooked up? Whose goal is it to end fishing? PETA?, Prop 2 folks?, The Humane Society? If some or all of the above have that as their goal, how does this Proposition further it?

Just wondering. I've read some facts/opinion from UCD expressing concern over the financial aspects of this, particularly the cost of eggs vis a vis competing with neighboring states where these controls don't exist and frankly, that's important. But, show me some facts - it seems there are plenty of on both sides of the issue and no need for the slippery slope arguments by either side.

Sorry if I have offended anyone but given the baloney being tossed about on a national level these days, I'm just tired of the hyperbole. Can anyone argue dispassionately about anything anymore?

Has anyone ever watched the show on FX called "30 Days?" Great show. They did an episode about animal rights where they had a North Carolina avid hunter move in with a family of PETA folks in California. After his experience, he'll still hunt, but he also became a bit of an activist for more humane treatment of farm animals after he saw what sure looked like animal abuse on some farms.

I could really see where he was coming from. I'm a pretty solidly left leaning guy, but the whole PETA movement makes me want to punch someone... I pretty much find their whole line of thought to be about as stupid as it gets. I see it as a sign that we as a nation are too well-off when we start caring more about if someone is the "owner" or "master" of a dog instead of the health and well-being of the actual people in our communities.

Still... I like the idea of free-range chickens and humane treatment of animals... it doesn't mean it is a slippery slope. It does feel like the ballot measure might be too great a shock to the system though... it would be great if we could encourage farmers to move in this direction without a law being created that could cause all sorts of havoc and mayhem. The impacts of forcing folks to go this route seems like a real problem... not exactly what the state needs from a financial perspective.

I'm going to vote against this ballot measure probably... but what I will do is buy Prather Ranch meat when I can find it (http://prmeatco.com/mission.html), and I'll buy eggs from free range chicken, organic milk and so on. We actually have the tools ourselves to move agriculture in the direction we might want it to go... it's the pocketbook and you can cast a vote with it a lot more often than you get to vote for ballot measures or Presidents.

B-

bon54> don't get the Humane Society of the United Staes confused with the local Humane Society. Read "The Highjacking of the Humane Movement: Animal Extremism." And read the voter information guide starting on page 16 for more info and facts.

Google "PETA Humane Society" for the connection between The Humane Society of the United States and PETA. Look at the Humane Society of the United States website, then look at the PETA website. I'm not going to give you a bunch of info and facts...I'm just trying to stir people into learning more about how "baloney" gets passed off as the right thing to do.

This prop is not only aimed at egg producers but they (egg farmers) seem to be taking the brunt of the criticism, Also veal cattle and pregnat sows. If chickens are allowed to have a space/cage where they can "fully extend their limbs", the cages would have to be about at least three times larger. The farmer would have to make his operation about three times larger, at a huge cost and have the same production. Or, go with fewer hens with larger cages and still incur a cost for larger cages and get less production. It would also allow the hens to lay eggs in their own droppings which leads to salmonella poisoning. You should educate yourself the best you can and come to a conclusion on your own. As for the fishing and hunting end of it, if this bill passes, it's just one more nail in the coffin of hunting and fishing. That's how I see it. Unfortunatley, I think there are too many people who won't educate themselves and blindly think a yes vote is the right thing to do. I put my money on this bill passing. But I'm voting aganst it. Bonniville> I hope I didn't offend you, you didn't offend me. Happy voting!

There is a big jump from "bigger cages for chickens" to "nail in the coffin for hunting and fishing." Every side does the "slippery slope" argument, but it's kind of hard to see the slope on this one... I can't see the logical progression from changing ag practices to "you can't hunt or fish."

I'm going to vote against it, for other reasons, but I still don't see the tie to hunting or fishing.

Hunters and fisherman are harmed a lot more by Playstations than legislation. Kids don't get out and fish or hunt as much as they used to. We are more disconnected from the natural world. If you aren't in nature, you don't undersand it, don't value it... and if you don't understand the nature of the problem, you can't understand the solution... or something along those lines.

Not a "big jump" at all. the "yes on prop 2" people are allinged with HSUS. HSUS is alligned with PETA. PETA & HSUS doesn't want us to rip lips or kill bambi. If this prop passes, it's another feather in the cap for animal extremists. They won't stop at bigger cages for farm animals. They would like us to all be Vegans!

I would like to think all sportsmen would oppose this prop 2. How can one go out and rip lips or hunt down wild animals, yet fell sorry for farm animals that are raised for us to eat? Some of my friends agree that chickens don't need to be in larger cages but then they say they aren't comfortable with veal cattle being stuffed into cages so small they can't turn around. I don't see the difference. Either you are OK with it, or not. I don't see the slippery slope here.

For a second there, I thought I was on the retriever training board.....Glad to see you mentioned the very distinct difference between HSUS and local Humane Societies.

In a "normal" year, I think Prop 2 would probably pass. However, this year it has two major things going against it:

1) The price of eggs has already risen to well over three bucks a dozen, and in these economic times, folks may be looking at making a decision between feeding their families and ensuring chickens are raised in a "humane" manner (I'm guessing the opponents will bombard the airwaves soon with this theme). My guess is that many people who would ordinarily automatically vote "yes" will take a second look at this.

2) With so many propositions on this ballot, and the realization by many folks that our past initiatives have played a major role in the State's current financial conundrum, voters are much more inclined then normal to vote no on any type of measure.

Just be sure to get ready for 2010 when we're going to see some very substantial infrastructure bonds. And of course, don't forget the Governor's special initiatives for next year.