Urgent Urgent Dealine by April 11 2008




Wailer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2004
Messages
156
Reaction score
0
AB 2502,has passed through commitee. It now has to pass through Assembly.
 

strip

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 25, 2001
Messages
60
Reaction score
4
From a fishing aspect this is a great deal for the public. But since you posted on the waterfowl page I'm looking at it from a duck hunting stand point. This deal can only mean trouble for the many public land hunters who already access two of the the islands with little or no restrictions. The term ecological preserve makes me cringe because I think of Consumes. D.U. D.F.G B.L.M ect. all supplied funds to that project and basically excluded hunters from the area. Prospect in the short term would be a plus in the access collum but the amount of people who are now very well aware of this little gem will make that area interesting to say the least come duck season. I predict fist fights and worse when and if they open that up. It was bad enough when it was limited to boat hunters but if guys can access over the levees. The numbers will triple in my guesstimation.
 

Wailer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2004
Messages
156
Reaction score
0
I first like to say any one can make a difference, thanks for your input! If this passes all the way through, this will provide an additional safe have for all waterfowl (thats what we want) right!!!!. This will provide areas for fishing and hunting, better habitat. Its a win win for the bird, and hunters between yolo basin wildlife area and the North delta, there will be more birds in the area for us local hunters and fitter birds for southern hunters.
 

Orygun

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Messages
7,276
Reaction score
67
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
It was bad enough when it was limited to boat hunters but if guys can access over the levees. The numbers will triple in my guesstimation.[/b]
That's what happens when you make a public area more public. Folks are gonna have to learn how to share. You can start decreasing pressure by taking all the budding pugilists down to the pokey for the morning.
 

strip

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 25, 2001
Messages
60
Reaction score
4
Opinion are like ...... and we all have one, here's mine. No we don't need any more safe havens. The birds have huge areas that they are unmolested (refuges, private property with no access and limited or no hunting, nature conservancy, ECOLOGICAL RESERVES, state parks, ect). I am a "local" to this area as well and lack of birds really has never been the problem. Access is the key, and my main concern is that public hunting access to an already accessible area will be limited or denied when the government steps in. As far as sharing, we have never seen worse ethic's and sportsmanship than out at prospect. It was getting dangerous.
 

abreojo

Active member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
I don't know anything about the proposed Delta reserve, but all the current "Ecological Reserves", "Recreation Areas" and "Conservancies" I know of either prohibit hunting outright or severely restrict it. The people pushing the creation of these designated lands - including the new Eastern Sierra Conservancy are not hunters nor are they thinking about hunters when they create these things. At least they are not thinking about us in a good way.

We all have a stake in conserving as much habitat and open range as possible, but all the politically popular designations are bad news for hunters. Personally I wouldn't take any propaganda about creating any kind of reserve at face value.

I would want a lot of assurances written into the law designating hunting (and adequate hunting access) as a primary use before I signed on.
 


Top Bottom