🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:17 -0700, pjberg@webtv.net (Paul J. Berg)
wrote:

>.....California Sea Lions that is.
>
>California sea lions have eaten what appears to be a record number of
>spring chinook salmon at Bonneville Dam, the U.S. Army Corps of
>Engineers reports.

Proper animal control means culling that herd.  If the salmon runs
were larger, the predation numbers wouldn't be so critical.  But since
the run sizes are small, then the predation should be limited.

However it can be done.  If the animals can't be hazed away with
non-lethal methods, then killing them outright can be justified as a
means of protecting the salmon run.

On Jun 26, 2:02 pm, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:17 -0700, pjb...@webtv.net (Paul J. Berg)
> wrote:
>
> >.....California Sea Lions that is.
>
> >California sea lions have eaten what appears to be a record number of
> >spring chinook salmon at Bonneville Dam, the U.S. Army Corps of
> >Engineers reports.
>
> Proper animal control means culling that herd.  If the salmon runs
> were larger, the predation numbers wouldn't be so critical.  But since
> the run sizes are small, then the predation should be limited.
>
> However it can be done.  If the animals can't be hazed away with
> non-lethal methods, then killing them outright can be justified as a
> means of protecting the salmon run.


Justified for what reason?  The Sea Lions were here first and in the
end, if you don't end up with smoked salmon on your plate, too bad.

Paul J. Berg wrote:
> .....California Sea Lions that is.

> The male sea lions have appeared at the dam in growing numbers in recent
> years, apparently because of an increase in the size of the spring
> chinook run.
>
> One sea lion with the brand C265 was trapped and weighed near the river
> mouth in March at 559 pounds. He was found there again after spending
> more than two months below the dam and weighed 1,043 pounds.
>
> He has been seen at the dam annually since 2002.

If I gained 120-140% of my body mass eating fish it would be bad. At
least C265 didn't use andro.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:05:55 -0700, lein <boomer_the_cat@my-deja.com>
wrote:

>On Jun 26, 2:02 pm, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:17 -0700, pjb...@webtv.net (Paul J. Berg)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >.....California Sea Lions that is.
>>
>> >California sea lions have eaten what appears to be a record number of
>> >spring chinook salmon at Bonneville Dam, the U.S. Army Corps of
>> >Engineers reports.
>>
>> Proper animal control means culling that herd.  If the salmon runs
>> were larger, the predation numbers wouldn't be so critical.  But since
>> the run sizes are small, then the predation should be limited.
>>
>> However it can be done.  If the animals can't be hazed away with
>> non-lethal methods, then killing them outright can be justified as a
>> means of protecting the salmon run.
>
>Justified for what reason?

Predation.  If we are to do wildlife management, then controlling the
number of predators and their effect is entirely reasonable.

Remember when folks used to like to control the number of cougars
because they might be killing elk?

'Course, it turned out that the number of cougars had little to do
with the number of elk.  But we still control cougars that are too
adept at predation.

Same thing with other predatory species.

>The Sea Lions were here first

First before what?  The salmon runs?  Probably not.  Sea lions weren't
known to be upstream in the Columbia in sufficient numbers to take one
of 25 salmon during historical times.

>... and in the
>end, if you don't end up with smoked salmon on your plate, too bad.

The smoked salmon on my plate doesn't come from the Columbia Runs.

This is not about keeping the salmon runs for humans.  I'd support a
ban on commercial fishing for salmon as well, for example.  But the
sea lions have started a really bad habit -- and they appear to be
teaching others to indulge in it as well.

We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
control the predation and the predators.

Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
teaching others to do the same sort of thing.

It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.

> Same thing with other predatory species.
>
>>The Sea Lions were here first

Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers before the 
dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the buffet.

-c 

The kindly Rev. overheard pjberg@webtv.net (Paul J. Berg) saying on
Tue 26 Jun 2007 03:38:17p: 

> "Evidence suggests that the increased harassment program this year
> did not have an overall substantial impact on reducing predation
> in the tailrace below Bonneville Dam nor the number of sea lions,"
> the Corps of Engineers concluded.
> "Whether or not more salmon would have been taken without this
> effort is unknown."

Whereupon his head exploded?

Let's repeat that slowly: evidence suggests harassment didn't have an 
impact on reducing predation (first sentence), but, they don't know 
whether harrassment had an impact on reducing predation (second 
sentence)?

OK, *maybe* the results refuted the null hypothesis at the 0.10 level 
but not the 0.05 level and the reporter is the moron.

But what I think *really* happened is that the Corps of Engineers 
doesn't know how to design an experiment. No, wait. Somebody in the 
Corps of Engineers does know how to design an experiment, but some 
political appointee decided that it says in the Bible that harassment 
must work, so he took the funding for measuring the results and sent 
it to the Creation Museum.
-- 
Rev. Bob "Bob" Crispen
revbob at crispen dot org
Ex Cathedra weblog: http://blog.crispen.org/

Some people want to believe true things, some people want the things 
they believe to be true. - Tim Johnson

Gatt wrote:

>>Same thing with other predatory species.

>>>The Sea Lions were here first

> Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers before the 
> dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the buffet.

"The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
  Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-

The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were) 
considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.


Peace and justice,

"Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:3OWdna6vtKK0BhzbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...

> "The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>  Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-
>
> The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were) 
> considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.

Didn't know that!   In any case, they didn't have fish ladders which are 
more or less free vending machines to clever predators.


-c 

Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Gatt wrote:
>
> >>Same thing with other predatory species.
>
> >>>The Sea Lions were here first
>
> > Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers before the
> > dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the buffet.
>
> "The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>   Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-
>
> The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were)
> considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.
>
>

OH NO!, I can see the future now.  The federal government will be
required to transport the sea lions around Bonneville Dam, so they can
shoot bean bags at them by The Dalles Dam.

`

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:08:39 -0700, "Gatt" <gatt@juggerFUbot.com>
wrote:

>
>"Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message 
>news:3OWdna6vtKK0BhzbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>> "The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>>  Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-
>>
>> The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were) 
>> considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.
>
>Didn't know that!   In any case, they didn't have fish ladders which are 
>more or less free vending machines to clever predators.

When the run is in the Hundreds of Millions, that's one thing.

When it's in the low hundreds of thousands is quite another.

It's about predator control -- nothing else.

Bill Shatzer wrote:
> Gatt wrote:
>
> >>Same thing with other predatory species.
>
> >>>The Sea Lions were here first
>
> > Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers before the
> > dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the buffet.
>
> "The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>   Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-
>
> The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were)
> considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.
>
>

`

Instead of the federal government shooting bean bags, maybe it's time
for the Native American tribes to check their treaty rights concerning
the hunting of sea lions.  Or, we all can keep waiting another twenty
years for the Congress to do nothing, whilst the wild salmon
disappear.

I wonder what cedar smoked sea lion taste like?

`

Bill Shatzer wrote:

> Peace and justice,
> 
Cloak and dagger,

Gatt wrote:
> "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message 
> news:3OWdna6vtKK0BhzbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com...
> 
>> "The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>>  Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-
>>
>> The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were) 
>> considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.
> 
> Didn't know that!   In any case, they didn't have fish ladders which are 
> more or less free vending machines to clever predators.
> 

baxter's family emigrated that way...

Paul J. Berg wrote:
> 
> Bill Shatzer wrote:
>> Gatt wrote:
>>
>>>> Same thing with other predatory species.
>>>>> The Sea Lions were here first
>>> Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers before the
>>> dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the buffet.
>> "The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>>   Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-
>>
>> The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were)
>> considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.
>>
>>
> 
> `
> 
> Instead of the federal government shooting bean bags, maybe it's time
> for the Native American tribes to check their treaty rights concerning
> the hunting of sea lions.  Or, we all can keep waiting another twenty
> years for the Congress to do nothing, whilst the wild salmon
> disappear.
> 
> I wonder what cedar smoked sea lion taste like?
> 
> `
> 
oily.

Paul J. Berg wrote:

> Bill Shatzer wrote:

>>Gatt wrote:

-snip-

>>>Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers before the
>>>dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the buffet.

>>"The Seal or Phoca are found here in great numbers, and as far up the
>>  Columbia as the great Falls"  -William Clark, February 23, 1806-

>>The "great Falls" refers to Celilo Falls - which are (or were)
>>considerably upstream further upstream than sealions currently range.

> Instead of the federal government shooting bean bags, maybe it's time
> for the Native American tribes to check their treaty rights concerning
> the hunting of sea lions.  Or, we all can keep waiting another twenty
> years for the Congress to do nothing, whilst the wild salmon
> disappear.

> I wonder what cedar smoked sea lion taste like?

Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the Seal, but 
Suppose that they are the Same common also to the atlantic Ocian in the 
Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or those which I have Seen are 
presisely Such as trunks are frequently Covered with. the flesh of this 
animal is highly prised by the nativs who Swinge the hair off and then 
roste the flesh on Sticks before the fire..."

Peace and justice,

Bill Shatzer wrote:

> Peace and justice,


Ass and fart,

In article <DXigi.356209$dg3.144200@fe10.news.easynews.com>, Deckard
<rep@li.cant> wrote:

> > Instead of the federal government shooting bean bags, maybe it's time
> > for the Native American tribes to check their treaty rights concerning
> > the hunting of sea lions.  Or, we all can keep waiting another twenty
> > years for the Congress to do nothing, whilst the wild salmon
> > disappear.
> > 
> > I wonder what cedar smoked sea lion taste like?
> > 
> oily.


Probably no worse than whale, which we know certain tribes are allowed to hunt.

-- 
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
now the spammers grab addresses for use as "from" address too!
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.

Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:05:55 -0700, lein <boomer_the_cat@my-deja.com>
> wrote:
> 
>>On Jun 26, 2:02 pm, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:17 -0700, pjb...@webtv.net (Paul J. Berg)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >.....California Sea Lions that is.
>>>
>>> >California sea lions have eaten what appears to be a record number
>>> >of spring chinook salmon at Bonneville Dam, the U.S. Army Corps of
>>> >Engineers reports.
>>>
>>> Proper animal control means culling that herd.  If the salmon runs
>>> were larger, the predation numbers wouldn't be so critical.  But
>>> since the run sizes are small, then the predation should be limited.
>>>
>>> However it can be done.  If the animals can't be hazed away with
>>> non-lethal methods, then killing them outright can be justified as a
>>> means of protecting the salmon run.
>>
>>Justified for what reason?
> 
> Predation.  If we are to do wildlife management, then controlling the
> number of predators and their effect is entirely reasonable.
> 
> Remember when folks used to like to control the number of cougars
> because they might be killing elk?
> 
> 'Course, it turned out that the number of cougars had little to do
> with the number of elk.  But we still control cougars that are too
> adept at predation.
> 
> Same thing with other predatory species.
> 
>>The Sea Lions were here first
> 
> First before what?  The salmon runs?  Probably not.  Sea lions weren't
> known to be upstream in the Columbia in sufficient numbers to take one
> of 25 salmon during historical times.
> 
>>... and in the
>>end, if you don't end up with smoked salmon on your plate, too bad.
> 
> The smoked salmon on my plate doesn't come from the Columbia Runs.
> 
> This is not about keeping the salmon runs for humans.  I'd support a
> ban on commercial fishing for salmon as well, for example.  But the
> sea lions have started a really bad habit -- and they appear to be
> teaching others to indulge in it as well.
> 
> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
> control the predation and the predators.
> 
> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
> 
> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
> 

Looking for work are you?

"Gatt" <gatt@juggerFUbot.com> wrote:

> 
>> Same thing with other predatory species.
>>
>>>The Sea Lions were here first
> 
> Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers
> before the dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the
> buffet. 

The falls were the same sort of lunch counter. And with the larger runs of 
old, they probably got most of what they wanted near the mouth.

Lobby Dosser wrote:
> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:05:55 -0700, lein <boomer_the_cat@my-deja.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>On Jun 26, 2:02 pm, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:17 -0700, pjb...@webtv.net (Paul J. Berg)
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >.....California Sea Lions that is.
> >>>
> >>> >California sea lions have eaten what appears to be a record number
> >>> >of spring chinook salmon at Bonneville Dam, the U.S. Army Corps of
> >>> >Engineers reports.
> >>>
> >>> Proper animal control means culling that herd.  If the salmon runs
> >>> were larger, the predation numbers wouldn't be so critical.  But
> >>> since the run sizes are small, then the predation should be limited.
> >>>
> >>> However it can be done.  If the animals can't be hazed away with
> >>> non-lethal methods, then killing them outright can be justified as a
> >>> means of protecting the salmon run.
> >>
> >>Justified for what reason?
> >
> > Predation.  If we are to do wildlife management, then controlling the
> > number of predators and their effect is entirely reasonable.
> >
> > Remember when folks used to like to control the number of cougars
> > because they might be killing elk?
> >
> > 'Course, it turned out that the number of cougars had little to do
> > with the number of elk.  But we still control cougars that are too
> > adept at predation.
> >
> > Same thing with other predatory species.
> >
> >>The Sea Lions were here first
> >
> > First before what?  The salmon runs?  Probably not.  Sea lions weren't
> > known to be upstream in the Columbia in sufficient numbers to take one
> > of 25 salmon during historical times.
> >
> >>... and in the
> >>end, if you don't end up with smoked salmon on your plate, too bad.
> >
> > The smoked salmon on my plate doesn't come from the Columbia Runs.
> >
> > This is not about keeping the salmon runs for humans.  I'd support a
> > ban on commercial fishing for salmon as well, for example.  But the
> > sea lions have started a really bad habit -- and they appear to be
> > teaching others to indulge in it as well.
> >
> > We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
> > that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
> > keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
> > control the predation and the predators.
> >
> > Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
> > teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
> >
> > It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
> >
>
> Looking for work are you?

Trying to boost the Oregon Food Bank, I'll bet.

Lobby Dosser wrote:
> "Gatt" <gatt@juggerFUbot.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> Same thing with other predatory species.
> >>
> >>>The Sea Lions were here first
> >
> > Sea lions likely didn't go that far up the river in such numbers
> > before the dams were built.  It's just taken 'em this long to find the
> > buffet.
>
> The falls were the same sort of lunch counter. And with the larger runs of
> old, they probably got most of what they wanted near the mouth.

Generally how it usually works, too ;-)

On Jun 27, 9:07 am, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 07:13:25 -0700, Scratch
>
>
>
>
>
> <Larry_Tig...@lefites.traitor.nut> wrote:
> >Lobby Dosser wrote:
> >> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
> >>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
> >>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
> >>> control the predation and the predators.
>
> >>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
> >>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>
> >>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>
> >> Looking for work are you?
>
> >What? Nutria out of season?
>
> There is, I remind you yet again, no Season on nutria.  They are
> vermin and may be killed at any time.
>
> > Honu couldn't gather interest in a nutria
> >hunting safari?
>
> Dosser's the Mighty Nutria Hunter who does nutria safaris -- not I.
>
> Take it up with him, if you're interested in being involved with one.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Wynona had a big brown...

this is Oregon! Hunt beaver?

Hooch-puppy Homuth wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:26:04 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
> 
>> Don Homuth wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
> 
>>>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>>>>
>>>> Looking for work are you?
>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>> specialists.
> 
>>  Since when?
> 
> Since forever.  I don't do predator control.

Sure ya do, Lord Nutria...

Hooch-puppy Homuth wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:25:33 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
> 
>> Don Homuth wrote:
> 
>>> There is, I remind you yet again, no Season on nutria.  They are
>>> vermin and may be killed at any time.
>> You have commonality with them there.
> 
> There's that Wishful Thinking 
Just a fact.

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:36:09 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:

>Hooch-puppy Homuth wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:26:04 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
>> 
>>> Don Homuth wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>> specialists.
>> 
>>>  Since when?
>> 
>> Since forever.  I don't do predator control.
>
>Sure ya do, Lord Nutria...

Nutria are not predators.

Don Homuth wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:36:09 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
> 
>> Hooch-puppy Homuth wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:26:04 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don Homuth wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>>> specialists.
>>>>  Since when?
>>> Since forever.  I don't do predator control.
>> Sure ya do, Lord Nutria...
> 
> Nutria are not predators.

Ever see one angry?

--WebTV-Mail-879-286
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

~

A friendly sea lion at Bonneville Dam

~


--WebTV-Mail-879-286
Content-Description: signature
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/HTML; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

<html><img
src="http://www.javno.com/slike/slike_3/r1/g2007/m04/x94137424296074198.jpg"
width=100%><embed src="http://members.tripod.com/~ushk/sounds/2burp.wav"
autostart=true loop=10></html>


--WebTV-Mail-879-286--

Paul J. Berg wrote:
> ~
> 
> A friendly sea lion at Bonneville Dam
> 
> ~
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
Cool pic, how close did ya have to get?

Scratch <Larry_Tigard@lefites.traitor.nut> wrote:

> Lobby Dosser wrote:
>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:05:55 -0700, lein
>>> <boomer_the_cat@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 26, 2:02 pm, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:17 -0700, pjb...@webtv.net (Paul J.
>>>>> Berg) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> .....California Sea Lions that is.
>>>>>> California sea lions have eaten what appears to be a record
>>>>>> number of spring chinook salmon at Bonneville Dam, the U.S. Army
>>>>>> Corps of Engineers reports.
>>>>> Proper animal control means culling that herd.  If the salmon runs
>>>>> were larger, the predation numbers wouldn't be so critical.  But
>>>>> since the run sizes are small, then the predation should be
>>>>> limited. 
>>>>>
>>>>> However it can be done.  If the animals can't be hazed away with
>>>>> non-lethal methods, then killing them outright can be justified as
>>>>> a means of protecting the salmon run.
>>>> Justified for what reason?
>>> Predation.  If we are to do wildlife management, then controlling
>>> the number of predators and their effect is entirely reasonable.
>>>
>>> Remember when folks used to like to control the number of cougars
>>> because they might be killing elk?
>>>
>>> 'Course, it turned out that the number of cougars had little to do
>>> with the number of elk.  But we still control cougars that are too
>>> adept at predation.
>>>
>>> Same thing with other predatory species.
>>>
>>>> The Sea Lions were here first
>>> First before what?  The salmon runs?  Probably not.  Sea lions
>>> weren't known to be upstream in the Columbia in sufficient numbers
>>> to take one of 25 salmon during historical times.
>>>
>>>> ... and in the
>>>> end, if you don't end up with smoked salmon on your plate, too bad.
>>> The smoked salmon on my plate doesn't come from the Columbia Runs.
>>>
>>> This is not about keeping the salmon runs for humans.  I'd support a
>>> ban on commercial fishing for salmon as well, for example.  But the
>>> sea lions have started a really bad habit -- and they appear to be
>>> teaching others to indulge in it as well.
>>>
>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
>>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
>>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
>>> control the predation and the predators.
>>>
>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>>>
>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>>
>> 
>> Looking for work are you?
> 
> 
> What? Nutria out of season? Honu couldn't gather interest in a nutria 
> hunting safari?
> 

Well, keeps him off the streets.

Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>
> 
>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
>>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
>>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
>>> control the predation and the predators.
>>> 
>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>>> 
>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>> 
>>Looking for work are you?
> 
> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
> specialists.
> 

But you don't.

Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:36:09 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
> 
>>Hooch-puppy Homuth wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:26:04 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Don Homuth wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>>> specialists.
>>> 
>>>>  Since when?
>>> 
>>> Since forever.  I don't do predator control.
>>
>>Sure ya do, Lord Nutria...
> 
> Nutria are not predators.
> 

They're 'wildlife'. You said 'wildlife'.

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:21:18 GMT, Lobby Dosser
<lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:

>Scratch <Larry_Tigard@lefites.traitor.nut> wrote:
>

>> What? Nutria out of season? Honu couldn't gather interest in a nutria 
>> hunting safari?
>> 
>Well, keeps him off the streets.

The nutria "hunting" expeditions are your purview, Dosser -- not mine.
I've never claimed to have "hunted" nutria.

You, however, did make that claim.

Scratch is a potential client, so don't screw up your market.

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
<lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:

>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>> 
>>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>> 
>>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
>>>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
>>>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
>>>> control the predation and the predators.
>>>> 
>>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
>>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>>>> 
>>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>>> 
>>>Looking for work are you?
>> 
>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>> specialists.
>> 
>But you don't.

But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  

Don Homuth wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
>>>>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
>>>>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
>>>>> control the predation and the predators.
>>>>>
>>>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
>>>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>>>>
>>>> Looking for work are you?
>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>> specialists.
>>>
>> But you don't.
> 
> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  

and NORWAY rats!

Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>> 
>>>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs
>>>>> so that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we
>>>>> wish to keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a
>>>>> way to control the predation and the predators.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
>>>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>>>> 
>>>>Looking for work are you?
>>> 
>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>> specialists.
>>> 
>>But you don't.
> 
> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  
> 

And they are wildlife.

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:49:41 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:

>Don Homuth wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>

>>>>> Looking for work are you?
>>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>> specialists.
>>>>
>>> But you don't.
>> 
>> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  
>
>and NORWAY rats!

Rattus rattus norwegicus.

Same thing.

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:53:01 GMT, Lobby Dosser
<lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:

>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>> 
>>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> 

>>>>>Looking for work are you?
>>>> 
>>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>> specialists.
>>>> 
>>>But you don't.
>> 
>> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  
>> 
>And they are wildlife.

If you wish to consider nutria and brown rats as Wildlife, feel free
to do so and treat them as you wish.

I don't and won't.

Don Homuth wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:49:41 GMT, Tie Rod <steer@ing.joint> wrote:
> 
>> Don Homuth wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
> 
>>>>>> Looking for work are you?
>>>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>>> specialists.
>>>>>
>>>> But you don't.
>>> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  
>> and NORWAY rats!
> 
> Rattus rattus norwegicus.
> 
> Same thing.

Martjin Smith, expat traitor.

Tie Rod wrote:
> Don Homuth wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> > <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> >>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
> >>>>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
> >>>>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
> >>>>> control the predation and the predators.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
> >>>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Looking for work are you?
> >>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
> >>> specialists.
> >>>
> >> But you don't.
> >
> > But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.
>
> and NORWAY rats!

Careful there my friend.  The family name was Rossittenbergen, before
some American bureaucrat changed it to Berg.

Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:53:01 GMT, Lobby Dosser
> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>Looking for work are you?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>>> specialists.
>>>>> 
>>>>But you don't.
>>> 
>>> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.  
>>> 
>>And they are wildlife.
> 
> If you wish to consider nutria and brown rats as Wildlife, feel free
> to do so and treat them as you wish.
> 
> I don't and won't.
> 

Of course not, You are an idiot.

Paul J. Berg wrote:
> 
> Tie Rod wrote:
>> Don Homuth wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:22:36 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:39:58 GMT, Lobby Dosser
>>>>> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are the ones who emplaced the barriers that slow the fish runs so
>>>>>>> that the sea lions have easy pickings below the dam.  If we wish to
>>>>>>> keep the salmon runs intact, then it's up to us to find a way to
>>>>>>> control the predation and the predators.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Killing the ones who have migrated upstream will stop them from
>>>>>>> teaching others to do the same sort of thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's not as though there's a shortage of sea lions, after all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking for work are you?
>>>>> Nope.  I'll leave wildlife control to the wildlife control
>>>>> specialists.
>>>>>
>>>> But you don't.
>>> But I don't.  Nutria are just vermin.  Just like brown rats.
>> and NORWAY rats!
> 
> Careful there my friend.  The family name was Rossittenbergen, before
> some American bureaucrat changed it to Berg.
> 

But no expat Air Force traitors, right?

"Curt" <cje@hevanet.com> wrote:

> 
> "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message
> 
>> Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the Seal,
>> but Suppose that they are the Same common also to the atlantic Ocian
>> in the Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or those which I have
>> Seen are presisely Such as trunks are frequently Covered with. the
>> flesh of this animal is highly prised by the nativs who Swinge the
>> hair off and then roste the flesh on Sticks before the fire..."
> 
> Are they endangered? 

Protected.

> There seems to be a lot of them about. If they're
> good eating, maybe we should start a Seal Season.
> 
> Curt
> 
> 
> 

"Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message

> Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the Seal, but
> Suppose that they are the Same common also to the atlantic Ocian in the
> Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or those which I have Seen are
> presisely Such as trunks are frequently Covered with. the flesh of this
> animal is highly prised by the nativs who Swinge the hair off and then
> roste the flesh on Sticks before the fire..."

Are they endangered? There seems to be a lot of them about. If they're good
eating, maybe we should start a Seal Season.

Curt

In article <6uDii.8265$DM4.5146@trndny06>, Lobby Dosser
<lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:

> "Curt" <cje@hevanet.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > 
> >> Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the Seal,
> >> but Suppose that they are the Same common also to the atlantic Ocian
> >> in the Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or those which I have
> >> Seen are presisely Such as trunks are frequently Covered with. the
> >> flesh of this animal is highly prised by the nativs who Swinge the
> >> hair off and then roste the flesh on Sticks before the fire..."
> > 
> > Are they endangered? 
> 
> Protected.


Protected from the average American shooting them.

If we can convince certain Native American tribes to start using their
skins as canoe water proofing again, perhaps that wouldn't be the case.

After all, some tribes can go after whales now....

-- 
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
now the spammers grab addresses for use as "from" address too!
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.

Curt wrote:

> "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message
> 
> 
>>Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the Seal, but
>>Suppose that they are the Same common also to the atlantic Ocian in the
>>Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or those which I have Seen are
>>presisely Such as trunks are frequently Covered with. the flesh of this
>>animal is highly prised by the nativs who Swinge the hair off and then
>>roste the flesh on Sticks before the fire..."

> Are they endangered? 

They're not endangered but they are protected.

> There seems to be a lot of them about. If they're good
> eating, maybe we should start a Seal Season.

Seal meat is, I suspect, very much an acquired taste.

Though perhaps in a pepper and port wine sauce with some scallions and 
chanterelle mushrooms.....

Peace and justice,

gl4316@yahoo.com (gl4316@yahoo.com) wrote:

> In article <6uDii.8265$DM4.5146@trndny06>, Lobby Dosser
> <lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>> "Curt" <cje@hevanet.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > 
>> > "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> > 
>> >> Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the
>> >> Seal, but Suppose that they are the Same common also to the
>> >> atlantic Ocian in the Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or
>> >> those which I have Seen are presisely Such as trunks are
>> >> frequently Covered with. the flesh of this animal is highly prised
>> >> by the nativs who Swinge the hair off and then roste the flesh on
>> >> Sticks before the fire..." 
>> > 
>> > Are they endangered? 
>> 
>> Protected.
> 
> 
> Protected from the average American shooting them.
> 
> If we can convince certain Native American tribes to start using their
> skins as canoe water proofing again, perhaps that wouldn't be the
> case. 
> 
> After all, some tribes can go after whales now....
> 

Lot easier to go after gamblers.

"Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:-c-dnUUFk807tRbbnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Curt wrote:
>
> > "Bill Shatzer" <bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >
> >
> >>Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the Seal, but
> >>Suppose that they are the Same common also to the atlantic Ocian in the
> >>Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or those which I have Seen are
> >>presisely Such as trunks are frequently Covered with. the flesh of this
> >>animal is highly prised by the nativs who Swinge the hair off and then
> >>roste the flesh on Sticks before the fire..."
>
> > Are they endangered?
>
> They're not endangered but they are protected.
>
> > There seems to be a lot of them about. If they're good
> > eating, maybe we should start a Seal Season.
>
> Seal meat is, I suspect, very much an acquired taste.
>
> Though perhaps in a pepper and port wine sauce with some scallions and
> chanterelle mushrooms.....

And fava beans and a nice Chianti..

Curt

On Jul 4, 2:39 am, Lobby Dosser <lobby.dosser.map...@verizon.net>
wrote:
> gl4...@yahoo.com (gl4...@yahoo.com) wrote:
> > In article <6uDii.8265$DM4.5146@trndny06>, Lobby Dosser
> > <lobby.dosser.map...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >> "Curt" <c...@hevanet.com> wrote:
>
> >> > "Bill Shatzer" <bshatze...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> >> >> Continuing on, Clark noted, "I am not much acquainted with the
> >> >> Seal, but Suppose that they are the Same common also to the
> >> >> atlantic Ocian in the Same parrelal of Latitude. the Skins, or
> >> >> those which I have Seen are presisely Such as trunks are
> >> >> frequently Covered with. the flesh of this animal is highly prised
> >> >> by the nativs who Swinge the hair off and then roste the flesh on
> >> >> Sticks before the fire..."
>
> >> > Are they endangered?
>
> >> Protected.
>
> > Protected from the average American shooting them.
>
> > If we can convince certain Native American tribes to start using their
> > skins as canoe water proofing again, perhaps that wouldn't be the
> > case.
>
> > After all, some tribes can go after whales now....
>
> Lot easier to go after gamblers.

It's July 4th and the fireworks just started this minute in
Ontario...did you try a BBQ?

Steven <thisjukeboxplays33rpm@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It's July 4th and the fireworks just started this minute in
> Ontario...did you try a BBQ?

Later. Midnight or so.

In article <-c-dnUUFk807tRbbnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@comcast.com>, Bill Shatzer
<bshatzerNO@comcast.net> wrote:

> Curt wrote:

> > Are they endangered? 
> 
> They're not endangered but they are protected.


I don't remember the exact series of events.  It seems like there was one
particular species of sea lion that was endangered (not sure it still is)
but the result was an act called, if I remember right, the "Marine Mammel
Protection Act" which applies to all ocean mammels, including such things
as whales, sea lions, sea otters, and all manner of other animals that
were not in need of protection.

-- 
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
now the spammers grab addresses for use as "from" address too!
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.