It is currently December 15th, 2017, 7:22 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 235 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 7th, 2017, 5:36 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm
Posts: 431
Quote:
If I'm following the news correctly, the proposed limits, which seem fairly reasonable as you state, were dismissed in favor of an all-out BAN on commercial collecting, which is what Nevada passed.

Or am I mistaken, and these are the new PERSONAL collection limits?


Those numbers are what NDOW biologist Jason Jones proposed for commercial collection limits and there's nothing reasonable about those numbers. In addition to the recommended quotas Jones wanted all collection prohibited every year during the top 5 most productive months for collection and also the state sectioned off with different key sections closed to all collection based on his analysis. He is as sneaky and dishonest as it gets. Jones placed a zero quota for the top five commercially viable species. The desert iguana, western chuckwalla, long-nosed leopard lizard, Great Basin collared lizard and desert horned lizard. These animals are part of the Species of Conservation Priority, as identified within the Nevada Wildlife Action Plan. In his proposal according to Jones data analysis on these species has indicated declining populations. As clearly demonstrated this is a bold face lie. Jones presented NO credible data that indicated declining populations for any of the listed species. According to Jones his "data" was all based on information he said was useless for reptile management !

At the end of the day the quota draft was nothing more then a red herring to satisfy the legal requirement's. Even in drafting a meaningless proposal Jones could not hide his unhinged activist mentality and self evident desire to prop up his career. Its been said that journalism is dead, perhaps science can be thrown into the grave alongside it. At least when it comes to the conservation business.

Ernie Eison

Hobby collections under Commission Regulation 17-02 remain unchanged.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 7th, 2017, 9:14 am 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
In the proposal, there was a ZERO QUOTA on five common species of lizards.

Incompetence is exhibited by the state wildlife agency employees that proposed a zero take on species whose populations in Nevada must number in the hundreds of thousand to millions.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 7th, 2017, 10:03 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm
Posts: 1146
Maybe the real question Richard, is how can it be that you are so competent and everyone around you is incompetent? Is this random chance or something you have cultivated through years of excellence?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 7th, 2017, 4:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
Richard F. Hoyer wrote:
In the proposal, there was a ZERO QUOTA on five common species of lizards.

Incompetence is exhibited by the state wildlife agency employees that proposed a zero take on species whose populations in Nevada must number in the hundreds of thousand to millions.

Richard F. Hoyer


They may be common but the average person wanting to buy a lizard to play with destroy the health of a desert iguana in a matter of a few short months. Same with the other guys if they ever manage to catch it again after it zips under the entertainment center.

Somebody knew this, others agreed. Goal Achieved = Competent!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 7th, 2017, 4:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
Animal welfare was a factor.

If you cant see that, or accept it thats your problem.

Every action....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 7th, 2017, 4:59 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
The scary "activist" lable is losing its power. That lable that doesnt fit a separate breed that dont belong to any groups, but are people who are knowledgeable beyond current numbers and include other factors as a determinate of protection.

Pressures change, human encroachment increases, a media portrayal of a particular species even in cameo fuels a whim market of Want.

Reptiles deserve protection to carry out their behaviors in their native situ. Other animals there deserve to eat them. We deserve to try to be a more generous kind.



edited to tighten up a couple grammatical errors. Perhaps others remain. I just post after I read the thread, dont spend hours composing a "Manifesto" :lol:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 8th, 2017, 4:46 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm
Posts: 431
The one thing that was made very evident by the responses was that the NDOW and biologist Jason Jones are guilty of every negative aspect portrayed of them by those who pointed to their unprofessional and unscientific, manipulative tactics and incompetence. As evidenced this clearly was no act of conservation as NDOW Jason Jones tried to portray it as.The undeniable facts have demonstrated this. If any further proof is needed. It can be found in the responses of those who poorly attempted to defend Jones and the NDOW. As can be read. These responses amount to nothing more then a series of personal attacks, frustrated childish trolling and off topic rants and efforts to whitewash over the facts. The responses show a complete failure to address any of the blatantly fallacious arguments found in NDOW Jason Jones work. It comes as no surprise that the bulk of this nonsense embarrassingly emanated from employees of state wildlife agency's and Jones personal friends in a duplicitous ploy to put a kindly face on a badly misguided and selfish policy.

Ernie Eison


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 8th, 2017, 5:38 am 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
WSTREPS wrote:
The one thing that was made very evident by the responses was that the NDOW and biologist Jason Jones are guilty of every negative aspect portrayed of them by those who pointed to their unprofessional and unscientific, manipulative tactics and incompetence. As evidenced this clearly was no act of conservation as NDOW Jason Jones tried to portray it as.The undeniable facts have demonstrated this. If any further proof is needed. It can be found in the responses of those who poorly attempted to defend Jones and the NDOW. As can be read. These responses amount to nothing more then a series of personal attacks, frustrated childish trolling and off topic rants and efforts to whitewash over the facts. The responses show a complete failure to address any of the blatantly fallacious arguments found in NDOW Jason Jones work. It comes as no surprise that the bulk of this nonsense embarrassingly emanated from employees of state wildlife agency's and Jones personal friends in a duplicitous ploy to put a kindly face on a badly misguided and selfish policy.

Ernie Eison



Gratuitous, overextended. With much projection.

You should see someone to work out your feelings about this.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 8th, 2017, 8:53 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm
Posts: 1146
It is known.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 8th, 2017, 8:32 pm 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
Jimi,
From within your 10/4/17 post, there are lots of ‘items’ upon which I could comment but will mention one. I noted the following irony and perhaps something to consider.

NatureServe’s has the 14 species of springsnails ranked at G-1, N-1 and S-1. “Critically imperiled (typically having 5 or fewer occurrences, or 1,000 or fewer individuals).” That implies those species are at risk of becoming endangered, that is, on the brink of pending demise.

In contrast and quoting the feds, for those same species, “----the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that 14 species of springsnails in Nevada and Utah, all have stable populations and distributions,---.”

Understand that stable populations = populations that are at equilibrium = are self sustaining populations. It can be noted the USF&WS also mentions the snail populations and distributions are similar to historic levels.

Given that the desert conditions and desert springs likely have existed for thousands of years, then these snail populations have also existed as small, self-sustaining, “stable” and 'healthy' populations for thousands of years.

So the USF&WS indicates those species of snails do not qualify as being either threatened or endangered which is just the opposite of NatureServe’s position of “critically imperiled” = endangered.

This is just one flaw in NatureServe’s reliance on the number of EOs (locality sighting information) in their ranking methods. It doesn’t allow them to recognize that species with small distributions and limited numbers can exists as healthy, unthreatened, stable populations that are not “critically imperiled”.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 9th, 2017, 11:27 am 

Joined: December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm
Posts: 1664
Quote:
So the USF&WS indicates those species of snails do not qualify as being either threatened or endangered which is just the opposite of NatureServe’s position of “critically imperiled” = endangered.

This is just one flaw in NatureServe’s reliance on the number of EOs (locality sighting information) in their ranking methods. It doesn’t allow them to recognize that species with small distributions and limited numbers can exists as healthy, unthreatened, stable populations that are not “critically imperiled”.


This is pretty simple, and you are simply mistaken. One of these determinations (FWS') is that federal regulatory intervention for these species is not required at present, because at the moment there's no need for it - there's no evidence of any current unmanaged existential threats. The other determination (states and NatureServe) is that the relative conservation status of these species is "about as rare as it gets" due to their extremely limited distribution.

There is no paradox. These species will always be at risk of extirpation. They will always require management, because at any time somebody could come along and do something to wreck the tiny little spot they exist. Right now, the states are responsible for that not happening. If the states screw that up, or otherwise get unlucky, the feds can step in at any time. They just decided they don't need to do that, for now.

Can you understand that both are right, at the same time? They are concerned with different dimensions of conservation. First comes assessment, then comes decision-making on what, if any, action is required.

I'm just not understanding what is so complicated about this. Maybe immersion in it has blinded me to the apparently myriad ways people can not "get it"?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 9th, 2017, 11:54 am 

Joined: December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm
Posts: 1664
Trying to answer some earlier stuff from Richard:

Quote:
I noted that for the Midget Faded Rattlesnake, roads and railroads are indicated as being a ‘threats’. Without speaking to the person or persons that consider roads and railroads as threats, I do not know their rational. Do you have any idea why roads and railroad would pose a threat to the Midge Faded Rattlesnake (or any other snake for that matter)?


Largely because a substantial fraction of their state distribution has been intensively developed for oil and natural gas extraction. See on Google Earth for example the southern Uintah Basin from about Duchesne to about Bonanza. Zoom into about 20,000 feet eye elevation and just pan around. Note the road and pad density over this ~60-mile wide stretch. The fluid minerals development is not the issue - it's the road density, and the traffic volumes on those roads (due to properties of this particular oil and lack of nearby refineries, materials are trucked out of here, not piped). Concolor are pretty well-known as communal brumators, with dens typically hosting a few dozen individuals. These individuals make seasonal migrations away from their dens. Based on some published and unpublished research, we think roadkill is an issue for this animal when & where road density and/or traffic volume are high. From both demographic and genetic perspectives - excessive roadkill (exceeding the population's replacement ability, which in concolor's case is pretty low) reduces and isolates populations.

Besides what has already been developed, there are vast areas which have been explored, and leased, but which await development.

As I have said before, there is no regulatory effect of being labeled an SGCN in our Wildlife Action Plan. However, on a voluntary basis, our partners at BLM and USFS can adjust development factors such as road and well-pad placement or density. Directional drilling and pad clustering are logistically, technically, and financially feasible options for developers of fluid minerals. Ones which can result in reduced impacts to wildlife, while enabling mineral extraction. It's a positive situation - better than doing nothing, and better than doing too much.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 9th, 2017, 3:46 pm 

Joined: December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm
Posts: 1664
Another question from Richard:

Quote:
I noted the Sonoran Mt. Kingsnake and Milksnake were listed. So here are some questions to consider.

With respect to the issue of ‘threats’, can you tell me what threats those two species face that are different from the threats faced in Utah by the Rubber Boa, Common Kingsnake, Gopher Snake ,Racer, Night Snake, etc.? Do those two species really have threats that are not the same for all or most species of snakes in Utah?

And for the threats that are the same as for most other snakes in Utah, is there any difference in the magnitude of those threats for the two tricolored snakes that are different from the other species?


You need to understand the "workflow" in producing the Wildlife Action Plan. First we had to build the SGCN list, because all the other required elements (content) flow from that (what habitats do they require, what threats or data gaps do they face, what actions could be taken against those threats and data gaps, etc etc).

Actually, let me step back for a second. There's no mandate for a state to write a Wildlife Action Plan. If a state doesn't have one, all it means is they're not eligible to receive State Wildlife Grant funding from Congress. If you do write one, there's a set of required elements (mentioned above), and some standards to indicate you've done a good enough job, or not. So there's an incentive, and a little guidance if you take the incentive, but there's no mandate. It's a relatively small incentive, in my state's case about $700K/yr (of a ~ $95M budget - https://wildlife.utah.gov/about-us/64-what-we-do/about-us/191-financial-overview.html). The difference is, we can use that money on things like studying or managing snakes and springsnails, whereas with almost all the other money we take in (virtually none of it being tax dollars BTW), we cannot.

Anyway, back to the tricolors and that workflow. The other species you mention (boa, king, racer etc) were not included as SGCNs so they did not get threat-assessed. I would guess the main anthropogenic population regulators are common across all snakes - outright habitat conversion, isolation of remaining habitat areas, degradation of remaining habitat areas etc. But again - we didn't look at racers, boas etc due to their being either N5's, or N4's with very broad distribution in the state. So again, we only threat-assessed the tricolors, since they were both ranked N4/S3 (the most-secure ranking to make it into our WAP).

If you look in the Appendix named "Threats by SGCN Look-up Tables" you can see that our assessors had nothing for pyro, and only Housing and Urban Development for milks (rated "Moderate" - not "High", and certainly not "Very High"). (What you can't see is that there were lots of Low-rated threats that got censored out of the doc - because ipso facto, they weren't worth mentioning in a broad shallow plan that attempts to discern priorities from...all the other crap that could distract you from your mission. Right? Get it? "Low means low.")

To me, for those 2 species a much more interesting thing to consider is another Appendix - "Data Gaps by SGCN Look-up Tables". Here's what it has for pyros and milks:

Pyro Mountain Kingsnake
Taxonomic Debate
Inadequate Understanding of Distribution or Range
Climate Change
Inadequate Inventory and Assessment Methods

Utah Milksnake
Taxonomic Debate
Inadequate Understanding of Distribution or Range
Climate Change
Inadequate Inventory and Assessment Methods

Again, these are data gaps - things to be clarified or developed. They are not threats. Note that for both, there are 2 items that field herpers can (and in Utah, they DO) help out with - improving survey methods, and finding more occurrences or localities. The other 2 items are more academic - they require more resources than individual private citizens can bring to bear. If we like, we can spend State Wildlife Grant dollars on these questions. Unfortunately, being N4/S3's means these species aren't going to rise to the top of the heap. That's OK, we aren't very worried about them getting petitioned for ESA listing, but OTOH clarifying e.g. what something even is (like, is taylori a "real thing"???) would seem to be a pretty important prerequisite to doing anything else. Such is life, such is wildlife management. Too much to do, way too little to do it with.

Hopefully this clarifies some things. It honestly feels silly to me, that some folks think there's something sinister, underhanded, or hard-hearted about a wildlife agency just trying to get organized about what it needs to do - and does not need to do. I mean, what's the alternative? Just run around and look busy? Pretend to know everything already? What? This is not about pleasing my superiors. This is not about job security. You guys have got that so, so, soooooo wrong. It's a joke really. This is about doing the best I know how to do, for as long as I can give it. Honestly, if someone thinks they can do better, and they can convince my chain of command of that - to hire them and give them my job - I'll step aside tomorrow. I don't have a replacement for myself in mind, which sucks. I always like to know I'm leaving something in good hands.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 10th, 2017, 5:29 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm
Posts: 431
So the actual point of discussion isn't lost in the typical sea of random minutia. For all the blowing. NDOW supporters comprised of state agency workers and NDOW biologist Jason Jones buddy's completely failed to address any of the blatantly fallacious arguments found in the NDOW and Jason Jones work. Basically skipping over it hoping no one would notice. White wash 101.

At one time the wildlife service was made up primarily of biologists who were also hunters people with "field experience" now the USFWS is increasingly made up of people lacking field experience with very different objectives. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has changed from an agency mostly concerned with game management and sport fishing to an agency that's wielding extraordinary power. A barrage of lawsuits and pressure from radical environmental groups has made it a very political agency run by business men. Where once Fish and Wildlife agency's were the arch enemy of radical and misguide special interest activism it has now become a partner. Its employed scientist all have learned that catering to the wants of these groups is very good for their careers, Making headlines has become just as important to a biologist career as peer reviewed publication.

For NDOW biologist Jason Jones his professional obligation is to present the Nevada Wildlife Board of directors with the best possible science based analysis of the situation. Its his job to do so ! There can be no doubt that he did not do this. His presentation was rife with fallacies and unscientifically concocted evaluations and no supporting evidence. The very opposite of what it should have been. WHY ? Jones showed exceptional incompetency in completely failing to present accurate and fact based information. Again. WHY?

Ernie Eison


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 10th, 2017, 6:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm
Posts: 1146
PREACH IT! To an audience of none.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 17th, 2017, 7:49 am 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
Jimi,
I had to interrupt my involvement in this ‘discussion’ as a number of other matters have taken my time. But I have continued to review the Utah Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) that identified a large number of non-game species, including some invertebrates, as ‘Species of Greatest Conservation Need’ (SGCN).

Frankly, I am at awe with the amount of thought and effort that went in to that project. It basically attempts to cover all aspects of what possibly could be involved with species deemed to be at risk or potentially at risk. Such a document stands out as stupendous accomplishment.

Secondly, if you read and understand Jimi’s post of Oct. 9th., you simply could not ask for a more open and honest attempt to explain the WAP document. For that I am very grateful this forum has such an honest and straight forward contributor.

So then why do I consider the Utah WAP document to be badly flawed? It certainly has nothing to do with the extremely complex and thorough ‘experimental design’ of the WAP project nor the unparalleled effort that was involved? But basic flaws there are which I will later explain.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 18th, 2017, 12:34 pm 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
Before identifying what I consider as shortcomings in the Utah Wildlife Action Plan (WAP), in order to create a broader understanding, some additional
factors need to be reviewed.

First, the reason wildlife agencies hire leadership and biologists with degrees in wildlife science or related fields is to use science-based methods for managing wildlife resources. All such individuals should understand that the use of personal opinion for managing species is unacceptable unless such opinion is supported by valid evidence. I doubt if there are any university departments of wildlife science, or any wildlife agency for that matter, that would openly advocate and condone the use of personal opinion to manage wildlife resources.

Secondly, In researching the issue of wildlife agencies listing species in various categories of conservation concern, I have found the wildlife agencies in Oregon, Nevada, and Utah have relied on NatureServe’s conservation status ranking results for identifying species of conservation concern. Thus, the methods employed by NatureServe needed to be reviewed.

That is, are NatureServe’s methods science-based, are their methods opinion based, or some combination thereof? What I have discovered unfortunately, is that NatureServe’s rankings of most species are based almost entirely on personal opinion. Many such rankings are completely void of having support from any valid, science-based evidence.

In my next post, I will provide the necessary support for those assertions.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 18th, 2017, 1:10 pm 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
As mentioned in my prior post, state wildlife agencies have relied on NatureServe’s conservation status accounts as if such results were science based. Sadly, nothing could be further from the truth!

In reviewing NatureServe’s methodology, there are multiple problems I could identify. However, that would take many pages to explain and document. I will point to just one of NatureServe’s major problems. NatureServe mentions, “The element occurrence (EO) concept is the linchpin of the work of the NatureServe network.” ( Element Occurrence Data Standard | NatureServe )

EOs or ‘occurrences’ essentially represent the locality sightings of species. I can only guess that the originators of that concept embraced the assumption that there was a positive correlation between the number of documented ‘occurrences’ and the relative abundance of species. And it seems they also relied on EOs to identify species’ distributions.

Such a concept has merit for easily observable species. Species of plant come to mind. But that assumption fails miserably for obscure species, species that have not been the subject of research or surveys, species that are highly secretive (mostly fossorial), and species whose distributions occurs in remote landscapes. In a prior post, I mentioned just how flawed the use of EOs can be both with respect to numerical abundance and distribution when I cited the example of the Common Sharp-tailed Snake (Contia tenuis) in Oregon.

Consider that most species have never been the subject of research. Consequently, there is no scientific information pertaining to ‘rarity’, ‘threats’, and ‘trends’ which are the three categories that NatureServe evaluates in ranking species. That being the case, in my research of NatureServe, it became clear that the organization relies almost exclusively on opinion rather than scientific evidence.

If anyone doubts my assertion, below I have copied the first sentence of an abstract of a paper published by NatureServe personnel.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Assessments for assigning the conservation status of threatened species that are based purely on subjective judgements become problematic because assessments can be influenced by hidden assumptions, personal biases and perceptions of risks, making the assessment process difficult to repeat.”

Acta Oecologica Volume 26, Issue 2, October 2004, Pages 95–107 Capturing expert knowledge for threatened species assessments: a case study using NatureServe conservation status ranks Tracey J. Regana, Lawrence L. Masterb, Geoffrey A. Hammerson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note where the authors state the conservation status of species are based purely on Subjective Judgments. For those not totally familiar with ‘subjective’ or ‘subjective judgment’, it means being influenced by personal feelings and opinions. It is the opposite of ‘objective judgment’ which is the examination of facts and valid evidence. Anyone can Google those terms for verification.

So when wildlife agencies identify and list species of conservation concern based of NatureServe’s conservation statue results, in effect they are managing species based on personal opinions rather than on valid, science-based evidence.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 18th, 2017, 7:56 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
The Utah State Wildlife Action Plan that you find so deeply flawed and an affront to unbaised, impeccable science is in the same state that your very close relative has his reptile business.

Readers should know this, as you seem to be hard driven to sway opinions.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 12:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
I am not expecting you to respond - you will as previous barrel through with another post - I am posting my questions as a sample individual of readership. I am not even 100% against collection, but if you are 'going after' individuals and agencies with such fervor and forethought, thumping Bias on the table it seems that you yourself would practice transparency with the same dedication to detail you demand of others.

As a sample individual that is why I am posting here, among many individuals you seem to want to influence with your posts and considerable respectability.

There is no attempt at connection or dialogue, just accusatory alienation from biologists and agencies you critique. Your simple and obvious omission is just as unhelpful.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 3:08 am 
User avatar

Joined: June 8th, 2010, 11:13 pm
Posts: 2400
Location: Greater Houston TX Area
Kelly Mc wrote:
There is no attempt at connection or dialogue, just accusatory alienation from biologists and agencies you critique. Your simple and obvious omission is just as unhelpful.


Richard and Ryan have detailed their rubber boa experiences and interactions with agencies extensively elsewhere on this forum.


Top
 Profile WWW 
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 7:40 am 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
I dont think that matters at all - but is convenient to not including it to this topic.

If I didnt read it before this, then many others didnt either, including many people who lurk regularly here.


His posts are designed to influence audience, otherwise he would be PMing them.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 8:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
Kelly Mc wrote:

Richard Hoyer has written more disproportionately and spent more time posting to - underneath it all - justify commercial collecting than any thing he has written on FHF about Sharp Tailed Snakes and Rubber Boas, of which he is an expert of highest standing. He has the same kind of issues with wildlife agencies about them, but its commercial collecting he is desperate to defend - in the name of perfect science.



Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 12:46 pm 
User avatar

Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm
Posts: 431
Richard F. Hoyers truthful analysis of the Natureserve system is well worth reading and considering. Its sad that once again we have another effort to discredit fact based content with innuendo and nothing more. Claims of bias are baseless if they can not be supported by factual information to demonstrate that the bias can be directly linked to dishonesty. That clearly has not been the case with Richard F. Hoyer. If anything this latest ploy to discredit Mr. Hoyer has backfired. The repeated attempts to distract from and make people second guess the validity of fact based content, in drive by fashion and without subsequent validation. Is the true indicator that someone has let personal bias dictate their actions before honesty. In this case the pot is far blacker then the kettle.

Ernie Eison


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 1:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
I'm right here, you can refer to me directly.

I dont feel the need to repeat myself but i simply and politely stand by my reasonable assertion of his and your own, bias on this topic, and every other one like it.

Now Im going to go back to thinking about Eyelash Vipers.

Thanks


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 3:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
Just a suggestion Ernie

WSTREPS wrote:
Claims of bias are baseless if they can not be supported by factual information to demonstrate that the bias can be directly linked to dishonesty.

Ernie Eison


You may want to look up bias in the dictionary as the junk that you made up there aint it.

And for an example you could use my posts, many throughout these forums where I openly express what could be interpreted as strong bias for including animal welfare as intrinsic in our involvement with reptiles and amphibians wild and captive.

And thanks again ;)


- Kelly McDougall


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 19th, 2017, 9:17 pm 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
Ernie E.,
As I have mentioned before, sometimes your ‘colorful’ (caustic) language has become the focus by others rather than the substance of what is contained in your messages. The same thing has happened to me in various threads on these forums. So it is to be expected when one tries to inform.

But I do admit I posses biases. But they arise after I had researched issues and have gathered sufficient information in order to reach a reasoned position. The issue of NatureServe is an example. Before I began looking into NatureServe and their methods, I was unknowing one way or the other about their conservation statue results.

Now after looking into that organization, I certainly have developed a strong bias as all I have discovered indicates the organization’s ranking results have virtually no credibility because such results are based on personal opinions.

But as I have mentioned in past post, I am not infallible and if someone can point out where I have erred, I have no problem with making amends. As for my views in collecting, the pet trade, etc., at least twice in this thread, I have mentioned by views such as in my 9/12/17 5:52 PM response to Bryan H.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 20th, 2017, 2:39 pm 
User avatar

Joined: June 9th, 2010, 3:03 pm
Posts: 431
There is definition and how that definition is applied to actual usage. The use of the word bias with a negative tone no matter how slyly inserted to imply that someone has shown a preconceived or unreasoned prejudiced. Only has merit when it can be demonstrated that the content presented has been in someway unfairly skewed. As seen the word bias can be used as a way of discrediting, creating doubt. A common ploy by individual's when the overwhelming facts cannot be ignored. They cannot factually support their view so they seek to lessen the credibility of the opposing view via innuendo without supporting detail. They claim bias!!!! Ether directly or subtly in a negative context,

But as demonstrated by Richard Hoyer bias can be positive and create a prejudice that leads to a greater truthfulness. As Richard Hoyer proved his so called bias is more akin to enlightenment and the result of research, study, and objective analysis. A wanting to disclose the facts and address issues in an unabridged and honest fashion. He has demonstrated that his claimed bias is based on a well educated view and the integrity of presented evidence, the credibility of content.

Ernie Eison


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 20th, 2017, 3:57 pm 
User avatar

Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm
Posts: 1146
You guys are just the best!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 20th, 2017, 4:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
Finally I made it to Ernie's A List. Awesome!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 20th, 2017, 5:13 pm 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
EE,
My strengths lie elsewhere than with the use of the English language. I likely took undue liberty in my use of the term ‘bias’. Perhaps it would have been better had I mentioned that after researching NatureServe's 'methods' and 'conservation status results', I then formed an ‘unfavorable’ view.

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: October 20th, 2017, 5:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
You're smart Ernie - and you know it. You have an encylopedic reef of knowledge that is rich and real through years of close hand contact. But this war you are in has made you lose the ability to self reflect. There is a shift happening and it aint from the 'activists' there is a mosaic of factors one biggie is the internet and the ability of thousands of people to see what before only a few were privy to. That is only one though, but its huge.

Population dynamics arent the only thing that matters anymore. What happens to the taken, or 'ecologically dead' is exposed. Because they are Alive. When people see living animals in a bucket die for petty reasons or a snake spending its entire lifetime in a box shorter than an average human footstep, they see it as Unfair. And its not a bad thing so you will never win.

Because it is not a bad thing to have compassion, you will never win.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: November 1st, 2017, 4:04 pm 

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 12:14 pm
Posts: 490
I have been away for awhile due to having hip replacement surgery on 10/24.

I have a correction to make. I erred in my second post of 10/18/17 when I indicated that all three authors of the paper I cited (abstract given) as being NatureServe personnel. The two subordinate authors are affiliated with NatureServe.

I contacted the senior author, Dr. Tracey J. Regan in Australia, and found she is not affiliated with NatureServe.
In her reply, Dr. Regan mentioned, “The paper you refer to focussed on attempting to map the decision process Natureserve scientists go through when doing status assessments.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Oct. 9th., Jimi mentioned, “I'm just not understanding what is so complicated about this. Maybe immersion in it has blinded me to the apparently myriad ways people can not "get it"?” In an attempt to bring about an understanding of my position, I produced two posts on Oct. 18th.

So Jimi, did the information in my two 10/18/17 posts bring about any understanding or are you still mystified’?

Richard F. Hoyer


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: November 1st, 2017, 5:31 pm 
User avatar

Joined: June 7th, 2010, 5:20 am
Posts: 529
... guess im on a FH role .. but kelly ... this may be one of the most succinct & insightful posts ive evr seen in this moshpit of what passes for dialogue ... & i appreciate you setting the thesaurus-ophisaurus aside & just stating it as it is ... caveat i havent read any of the previous pages...i like to read backwards & oft quit when im bored ... which is situation normal ...

ewe goe grl ...

[ Kelly Mc
Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-NePostPosted: October 20th, 2017, 5:14 pm
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 3978
Location: San Francisco, California
You're smart Ernie - and you know it. You have an encylopedic reef of knowledge that is rich and real through years of close hand contact. But this war you are in has made you lose the ability to self reflect. There is a shift happening and it aint from the 'activists' there is a mosaic of factors one biggie is the internet and the ability of thousands of people to see what before only a few were privy to. That is only one though, but its huge.

Population dynamics arent the only thing that matters anymore. What happens to the taken, or 'ecologically dead' is exposed. Because they are Alive. When people see living animals in a bucket die for petty reasons or a snake spending its entire lifetime in a box shorter than an average human footstep, they see it as Unfair. And its not a bad thing so you will never win.

Because it is not a bad thing to have compassion, you will never win. ]


till the next hoax ... may this buttress your thesis ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uejh-bHa4To

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyCEexG9xjw


edit : Richard, we & the charina peeples all wish you well & full & speedy recovery ... I'm betting "conch" does too ... peace out / john gunn

couldnt find the pix in my chuckfolder ... so haft2 leave the url ... a classic & a toast to you & all the thoughtful thinkers ...

damnit the url wouldnt post so subb this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMmTkKz60W8

saw a beautiful female merlin (or male peregrine) @ sunset 2nyte pumping out to the west into the setting sun ... salud y mas velocidad : }

& just for a minute, if jj is the prohibitionista that ran away years ago to mehicoe w/ mr sonora ... heheh ... y am i knot surprised at his recent good fortune ? w/o knowing hymm .. im betting anudda lost rich whyte boi from s. cali getting his com-uppance ... mommy could never let hymm fail ... i hope im wrong, ... aye haf2 doubt it
shame on eweboi ... not that i give a damn about hymm or comm collecting ... that doesnt matter ... but lets see what he proposes to his commission about Bromus or Eques or the cattle & sheep everywhere on public lands we own ( 90%+ of nevada) ... ah yes ... there they are ... & i hear the crickets chirping ... : (


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: State pushes to tighten wild reptile collection rules-Ne
PostPosted: November 1st, 2017, 10:07 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 18th, 2011, 12:03 pm
Posts: 4034
Location: San Francisco, California
thesaurus-ophisaurus :lol:

Ive missed you Regal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 235 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: