The Silent Majority

[welsh]

If you wonder why discussions become disrespectful, look to your own behaviour.

Read my post again, the thing you quoted. Then read your response. You're putting up a straw man, again. I never said anything about people lobbying for a change, yet you demand I provide examples -- and suggest I don't know of any, thereby accusing me of lying.

Erecting straw men is a dishonest form of argumentation. It's disrespectful to the people you're talking to. Don't make a habit of it and then complain when people respond to your disrespectful behaviour in kind.

[MikePal]

the are two great examples you won't "accept". The spring bear hunt. It took how many years before the liberals felt safe enough to undue it? Do you really think they undid it because of our lobbying? Or because the middle had not only come to see the need first hand, our more accepting/on our side? Seriously?

The spring bear hunt was re-instituted, according to the EBR..due to public safety concerns....nothing about Liberals.

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) heard increasingly from Ontario communities that they are concerned about conflicts with bears. In response, in 2014 and 2015 the ministry implemented a two-year spring bear hunting pilot program in eight Wildlife Management Units (13, 14, 29, 30, 36, 39, 41 and 42) to see if it would have effects on human-bear conflicts.

Why would that be questioned...and unless you have proof otherwise, I'm sticking with what appears to be a legitimate reason and recorded fact.

To many with preconceived paronia and not enough spending time to learning and accepting the facts...

[MikePal]

I never said anything about people lobbying for a change, yet you demand I provide examples -- and suggest I don't know of any, thereby accusing me of lying.

"To win support on specific issue" ..."this is something that has happened in the past"..

Straight forward, no strawman..as I said before, I'm not being confrontational ..just looking for an example..not a dance around the question. If you don't have an example, that's fine, just say so.

[welsh]

"To win support on specific issue" ..."this is something that has happened in the past"..

Do you know what "lobbying" means? Do you think that lobbying for something has an equivalent meaning to supporting something?

This is the kind of dishonesty I'm talking about. Here, you double down by citing something I wrote as if it means something it clearly does not. Why would I even bother continuing to discuss this seriously with you?

[MikePal]

Why would I even bother continuing to discuss this seriously with you?

Like I said..if you don't have an example to support your comments, just say so..save you the effort of dancing around the question.

[JBen]

Ok Mike your right. Policitians, the MNR and or other ministries are to be taken as straight up and straight forward honest people who never lie, never blow smoke, never spin things to suit their purposes. And it wasn't because they knew they were in trouble and might need some Northern ridings, and they also didn't know the back lash from the same GTA ridings that fell hard for orphaned Cubs back in 1999 was going to be minimal, because they were a little wiser, more on our side, and it was a good political move.

I thought you had a better handle on politics but I guess not. No wonder the province is in the shape it's in. You know, once upon the very same admin said "wind farms would provide tens of thousands of jobs". Another ministry said, "auto insurance premiums will be reduced by 15%", another ministry said too many Cubs were being orphaned.

The f act that it took 16 years, during which they ranged further and further south. To the point where for the last 5 years, bears were entering the GTA with regularity. And more that was predicted....

Your "proof" carries about as much weight as a goose feather. Or do you only cite that as "proof" to the contrary when it suits your purpose which none of can figure out given so much.

But do note, in their presser "concerned residents" aka people in the middle. Aka people in the middle, non hunters you claim as being irrelevant, got on board. Accepted many things hunters, the OFAH and more predicted. Aka as Welsh has repeatedly tried to say.....

i am am quite literally stunned you take politicians words as gospel. I'm surprised you aren't arguing the Liberals didn't in fact do anything "wrong" with the gas plants, or deleted emails, because well. They say so

[JBen]

Oh and Mike. The "pilot program" which was limited to just a few WMUs, and residents only. The MNR claimed it was to measure the impact spring hunting would have on bear populations.

Anyone and their uncle saw right through that. Most of here did. Because we knew such a limited data set would show nothing. And guess what...stats from the pilot were useless. But it sure did give them time to measure which way the winds were blowing, especially in the GTA their strong hold where the loss of a couple ridings......

but the MNR said it was to measure how much impact such a small, hunt/data set. So that must be so

[MikePal]

I thought you had a better handle on politics but I guess not.

We weren't talking politics...I was actually surprised, we almost got thru a full discussion without the Liberals being mentioned until your post...LOL..

You said the Liberals reinstated the bear hunt...I pointed out the MNR documentation (ie the goose feather) says the spring bear hunt was reinstated due to public safety concerns and included a link to the document that initiated the change in the law...maybe the feather was turned into an old fashion pen

What are you posting to support the premise that the Liberals initiated it ? Unsubstantiated statements are worth about as much as 'goose droppings'...LOL

[MikePal]

Good night folks ....it's been a slice ..LOL...

[JBen]

Lol, jeez Mike.
this entire discussion and topic is all about politics. In part some of us have been saying that, a lot.
first and foremost politicians do what their polling says to do. Which way the winds are blowing. Secondly, they say what they think they need/have to say to get elected. It's a rare, rare day when we actually get unfiltered honest to goodness truth and honesty.
Decisions that affect hunting, fishing the MNR have long and now are all about politics. And what comes down from the top, is based very largely on the winds. Not what we are lobbying for or fighting to prevent. Ontario, due to the make up of ridings and the choke hold Toronto/GTA has on QP, is a little special (Toronto is special alright) it permeates everything. Especially the MNR/hunting/fishingn

if 3 seats in the GTA are worth 1.3b and breaking laws over....lol bears in North, or Coyote mutts are nothing. And for the record I do suspect there's a good chance. Now that they know there's no backlash from the middle in the GTA over the spring hunt.....a bone to mollify the antis...makes very good political sense for them.