Ten Bears
New member
Sorry Oak, this is a trotline, and I'm waiting for more bites then that.
Another reason to avoid welfare beef!
- Thread starter Ithaca 37
- Start date
Ten Bears
New member
Well DANR, a trotline (often confused with and mispronounced as troutline) is an anchored line with a float attached at each end and several baited hooks along the line.
OAK, start with reading this site. http://www.doi.gov/budget/2004/04Hilites/BH55.pdf
Please pay close attention to the Budget overview.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 12:06: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>
OAK, start with reading this site. http://www.doi.gov/budget/2004/04Hilites/BH55.pdf
Please pay close attention to the Budget overview.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 12:06: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>
Where do you suppose that money comes from, Ten Bears? Have you ever heard of The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (1937)? How about The Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (1950)? How about The Wallop-Breaux Amendment (1984) to the Fish Restoration Act? Read up on them and then tell me if hunters are supported by "welfare" money.
http://laws.fws.gov/lawsdigest/fawild.html
http://laws.fws.gov/lawsdigest/fasport.html
http://southeast.fws.gov/news/2001/n01-004.html
Oak
http://laws.fws.gov/lawsdigest/fawild.html
http://laws.fws.gov/lawsdigest/fasport.html
http://southeast.fws.gov/news/2001/n01-004.html
Oak
Ten Bears
New member
Here's a link to the BLM's proposed budget for 2004. Somebody show me where they're missing 50 million for range or grazing.
http://www.doi.gov/budget/2004/04Hilites/BH05.pdf
http://www.doi.gov/budget/2004/04Hilites/BH05.pdf
Ten, remember DOI doesn't include the USFS.
From your link above:
Requested FY04 budget for Range Management - $70,180,000
Rangeland Management:2004 efforts will focus on rangeland health activities including rangeland assessments and evalutations, livestock grazing, monitoring, permit renewals, and grazing administration.
Oak
From your link above:
Requested FY04 budget for Range Management - $70,180,000
Rangeland Management:2004 efforts will focus on rangeland health activities including rangeland assessments and evalutations, livestock grazing, monitoring, permit renewals, and grazing administration.
Oak
Ten Bears
New member
Yes, that is the budget request, now find lease revenue amount.
DJ, PR, and the other excise taxes don't foot all the bills.
Check out $67.1 million permanent, and tell me it's not.
Maybe you can find a source that will say how much each brings in a year to support the $1,285 million budget.
DJ, PR, and the other excise taxes don't foot all the bills.
Check out $67.1 million permanent, and tell me it's not.
Maybe you can find a source that will say how much each brings in a year to support the $1,285 million budget.
So a "trotline", is like a long line... Thanks for the lesson... Now I will not make that mistake again... You still haven't told me what you're fishing for....
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 16:40: Message edited by: danr55 ]</font>
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 16:40: Message edited by: danr55 ]</font>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Yes, that is the budget request, now find lease revenue amount.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Have you read anything I've posted? Or is it just that your reading comprehension is poor? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Requested FY04 budget for Range Management - $70,180,000
Rangeland Management:2004 efforts will focus on rangeland health activities including rangeland assessments and evalutations, livestock grazing, monitoring, permit renewals, and grazing administration.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>There it is in black and white. The link you provided doesn't break the budget down any further than that. If you want that figure, find a different link. As far as the FWS budget, not all that money is spent on hunting and fishing. If you would have actually read the whole link you provided, instead of one paragraph, you would know that. I suspect you know it anyway and just like to argue. I can't get the link to work now (my PDF is screwed up), but I know it said something like 76% of that $67.1 million goes to resource protection. That's ALL resources. Maybe you weren't aware that "fish and wildlife" doesn't just include what gets hunted and fished.
From one of the links I provided above: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The $293 million is provided to states based on receipts for the first 9 months of sales in Fiscal Year 2000, which ended June 30. Additional funds will become available after receipts for the July-to-September 2000 quarter are calculated.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hmm, 9 months of DJ/PR funds provided $293 million for the FWS to give to the states. That sounds like a lot more than your $67.1 million.
I'm done arguing with you unless you come up with something better. You have only proven my points.
Dan, I know exactly what he's fishing for. I'm humoring him this one time.
Oak
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 17:03: Message edited by: Colorado Oak ]</font>
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Have you read anything I've posted? Or is it just that your reading comprehension is poor? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Requested FY04 budget for Range Management - $70,180,000
Rangeland Management:2004 efforts will focus on rangeland health activities including rangeland assessments and evalutations, livestock grazing, monitoring, permit renewals, and grazing administration.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>There it is in black and white. The link you provided doesn't break the budget down any further than that. If you want that figure, find a different link. As far as the FWS budget, not all that money is spent on hunting and fishing. If you would have actually read the whole link you provided, instead of one paragraph, you would know that. I suspect you know it anyway and just like to argue. I can't get the link to work now (my PDF is screwed up), but I know it said something like 76% of that $67.1 million goes to resource protection. That's ALL resources. Maybe you weren't aware that "fish and wildlife" doesn't just include what gets hunted and fished.
From one of the links I provided above: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The $293 million is provided to states based on receipts for the first 9 months of sales in Fiscal Year 2000, which ended June 30. Additional funds will become available after receipts for the July-to-September 2000 quarter are calculated.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hmm, 9 months of DJ/PR funds provided $293 million for the FWS to give to the states. That sounds like a lot more than your $67.1 million.
I'm done arguing with you unless you come up with something better. You have only proven my points.
Dan, I know exactly what he's fishing for. I'm humoring him this one time.
Oak
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 17:03: Message edited by: Colorado Oak ]</font>
Ten Bears
New member
DANR, it's more chumming then fishing.
I LMAO at the self worth some members exude here. Keep it coming OAK.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 18:15: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>
I LMAO at the self worth some members exude here. Keep it coming OAK.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-30-2003 18:15: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>
Ithaca 37
New member
Oak, Ten likes to make stupid comments to see if we'll respond. He enjoys trying to waste peoples time. Notice how he hardly ever posts more than a few words and never anything substantial? He doesn't mind appearing to be an idiot if it solicits a long response. That's how he gets his kicks----being a pain in the ass and spreading misinformation.
whitedeer
New member
Hook, Line, and Sinker Ten Bears.....He just can't resist opening his mouth......kinda like hoof and mouth desease snagged on the "trotline"......ROFLMAO....
Muledeer4me
New member
Whitedeer & Ten Bear's did you mean(hook line and stinker)?
Ten Bears set the hook and line and the stinker took the bait?
You boy's need to help me out here cause im real slow and my com com compr you know I just don't get a lot of this stuff.
Ten Bears set the hook and line and the stinker took the bait?
You boy's need to help me out here cause im real slow and my com com compr you know I just don't get a lot of this stuff.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Looks like Ten really proved that hunting is a welfare sport...
Ten Bears
New member
No more then public land grazing is a pure welfare cow farming.
BUZZ, you show me there are no " general tax" dollars in the USFWS (you have the sources, right).
http://www.ecoworld.org/Animals/articles/articles2.cfm?TID=197
BUZZ, you show me there are no " general tax" dollars in the USFWS (you have the sources, right).
http://www.ecoworld.org/Animals/articles/articles2.cfm?TID=197
Better yet, Ten, show me where it says that 100% of the USFWS budget goes to conservation of game and gamefish species.
From your own link above: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>First, at $50 million, it is the first time Congress has approved a substantial appropriation devoted exclusively to state wildlife management agencies. The struggle to secure funding that state agencies can use to manage all wildlife species started with the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act which has been on the books since 1980, but has never received any funding.
Second, the measure creates a new account under existing state wildlife funding law expressly for "species of the greatest conservation concern," language that is intended to target funds to non-game wildlife, the great majority of species that are neither hunted or fished nor threatened or endangered.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wow, the states got a one time squirt of piss that averages to $1 million per state. You're proving my point so far. Keep it up.
Oak
From your own link above: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>First, at $50 million, it is the first time Congress has approved a substantial appropriation devoted exclusively to state wildlife management agencies. The struggle to secure funding that state agencies can use to manage all wildlife species started with the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act which has been on the books since 1980, but has never received any funding.
Second, the measure creates a new account under existing state wildlife funding law expressly for "species of the greatest conservation concern," language that is intended to target funds to non-game wildlife, the great majority of species that are neither hunted or fished nor threatened or endangered.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wow, the states got a one time squirt of piss that averages to $1 million per state. You're proving my point so far. Keep it up.
Oak
BuzzH
Well-known member
Ten, you've lost your freaking mind, big time.
For Christ sake, how many license dollars are spent each year by game and fish departments to fund NONGAME issues?
More than the cool million that they recieved. The general fund should have to contribute, why should it (expense) all fall on the hunters and fishermen in the case of nongame species managment? Are we the only ones willing to shake the dust out of the wallet?
I'd say that every game and fish department in the country could function just fine on the dollars supplied by sportsmen if all they had to manage was huntable species.
Not only are you grasping at straws, but you're as full of shit as a christmas goose arguing that hunting is a "welfare" sport.
I do believe I have just about heard everything now!
For Christ sake, how many license dollars are spent each year by game and fish departments to fund NONGAME issues?
More than the cool million that they recieved. The general fund should have to contribute, why should it (expense) all fall on the hunters and fishermen in the case of nongame species managment? Are we the only ones willing to shake the dust out of the wallet?
I'd say that every game and fish department in the country could function just fine on the dollars supplied by sportsmen if all they had to manage was huntable species.
Not only are you grasping at straws, but you're as full of shit as a christmas goose arguing that hunting is a "welfare" sport.
I do believe I have just about heard everything now!
cjcj
New member
i just had welfare beef for dinner.[filet mignon] on the barbeque, with garlc toast and a salad does this make me a bad boy?
JoseCuervo
New member
CJCJCJCJCJCCJC
Unless you specifically ordered beef from Welfare Ranchers it is doubtful that your beef destroyed the environment, so your consicence should be clean, and hopefully you enjoyed your meal.
Welfare Ranchers provide a small percentage of the Nation's beef, (although they do a HUGE amount of the damage on Public Lands), so it is unlikely your steak or your actions are worrisome. Please, enjoy more beef tomorrow, since Beef is a commodity, and I supply beef to the Market, your increasing demand puts $$$$ in my pocket.
Got Beef?
Unless you specifically ordered beef from Welfare Ranchers it is doubtful that your beef destroyed the environment, so your consicence should be clean, and hopefully you enjoyed your meal.
Welfare Ranchers provide a small percentage of the Nation's beef, (although they do a HUGE amount of the damage on Public Lands), so it is unlikely your steak or your actions are worrisome. Please, enjoy more beef tomorrow, since Beef is a commodity, and I supply beef to the Market, your increasing demand puts $$$$ in my pocket.
Got Beef?
Ten Bears
New member
Look at that, I got strikes from two of my favorite fish, OAK & BUZZ.
That particular sight lists the species that will be benefited, and the list includes elk, and a few species of migratory waterfowl.
Are you two aware that 20 states found a portion of their fish and game agencies from general funds? I'll go back and look for my source.
Using your same analogy though, "welfare ranchers" are only costing the goverment about a million bucks a year for each state, and that's if that cost can be attributed completely to grazing alone.
Here DANR, let me reset the line with some new bait. That fishing trip wasn't bad. Get that thing back in the boat, you have no idea what's swimming around in these waters.
That particular sight lists the species that will be benefited, and the list includes elk, and a few species of migratory waterfowl.
Are you two aware that 20 states found a portion of their fish and game agencies from general funds? I'll go back and look for my source.
Using your same analogy though, "welfare ranchers" are only costing the goverment about a million bucks a year for each state, and that's if that cost can be attributed completely to grazing alone.
Here DANR, let me reset the line with some new bait. That fishing trip wasn't bad. Get that thing back in the boat, you have no idea what's swimming around in these waters.
Similar threads
