mike rossi

Here is another video, same topic, but put put by the American Kennel Club. Many people do not realize it, but the AKC is one of the wealthiest business' in the USA. https://player.vimeo.com/video/166509419?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWkROaFpqZ3lPRGczWkRVNCIsInQiOiJoS0lwaXQzODZOcU9LQUtsOGtGNXR6NE9tdjlicE5vUXRBR0hGTzdhSHFVbGhuVXhpbDBIbTRYbGVteit2NTlaRjZNOG5FZjlVcnNjZDVORlFyR0c1VVgyc2VcL1ZQV0pVQ3c2VVI4b2xGUWs9In0%3D

And what you say is the same distance away from the topic as them, I am not happy about the monitor or administer of this site who put this post in this section to begin with, but that is another story.

Upcoming movie pushes back against the anti-bird dog movement, recommended by the AKC: http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/new-movie.html

One last comment on this for me: Just because the reference level is 5 micrograms does not mean a pattern showing an ELEVATION in venison eaters ( of .03 above non venison eaters) is not significant. Suggesting that a measurable pattern is insignificant is misleading and irresponsible..

PL: A lot has been uncovered or reported the last week or so. What we are finding is that are message is delivered better when we combine large blocks of information rather than isolate by specific topics, because those who read, do read on and it bypasses xyz… Bear with….. HCL: As most of you know, the last few years there has been bicameral legislation to ban hunting contests in NY. The media attention as well as the grassroots organizing of anti-hunters generated a lot of support for the proposal. The matter of hunting contests is outside the scope of NY Dove Hunting and is not part of our agenda. However, we want to point out the level of support needed to compel the Legislature. The organization Ban Hunting Contests in NY has collected 19.641 petition signatures and their Facebook page is followed by 2,582. Those numbers have two implications: 1) The antis in NY are still bigger and better organized than us. 2) We are shooting for 10,000 signatures – they are not able to move legislation with almost twice that number. That suggests 10,000 may not be enough for us. For whatever its worth, they also have double the number of Facebook followers as us; although we have a newsletter that is mailed to about 2,000 people, most of who are not following our Facebook page. I am not advocating for or against contests, and on a personal level I have no interest in participating in any. That is why in the third paragraph of the OP I indicated this: "The matter of hunting contests is outside the scope of NY Dove Hunting and is not part of our agenda. However, we want to point out the level of support needed to compel the Legislature." MI: The point I was trying to get across was the level of organization in of anti-hunters in New York. The specific target of my thread was dove hunting advocates, although, the message applies across hunting. As we continue to correspond with the downstate assembly once a month, we need all of you to continue working hard to get petition signatures. PS: It is early for us to start distributing our political endorsements and report cards, but I thought I would provide a preview of our political strategy. As with our other strategies, this will require help from as many people as possible. Inform us of candidates seeking to run for the Legislature; and help us get the word out about who the good guys and bad guys are when the time approaches. So far, we only received two replies (Link 1). In addition to the replies, we note the names of candidates who fail to reply. (Link 2). Stay tuned and check back as we add data to these links as we receive replies. Link 1: http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/candidate-responses-received.html Link 2: http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/candidate-responses-or-lack-thereof.html

Here is something else related to the activities of the antis in NY. I was reading the comments to an article by Brian Shapiro, who is the State Director of the Humane Society of the United Stares New York State. The article was an urge in a western NY newspaper to reject the cable restraint bill. Cable restraints are a form of trap similar to a snare. The Legislature did indeed reject the bill last week and the HSUS- New York State is thanking its members for showing up at Humane Lobby Day and undertaking other lobbying against the bill. They also are celebrating that they blocked it last year to. Those of you who pay attention to my posts or follow NY Dove Hunting are aware we have been stressing the importance of news editorials. Along the way we got flack and continue to, by people who claim letters by antis do not do anything and also that letters from hunters do not work either. We also stressed the importance of refuting letters with an anti hunting point of view.

You just made a room full of people laugh....

Yup there are over sea studies with the same conclusions. look em up.

Dove Hunting, Spying on Trapper's Convention, NAVHDA Bird Dog Training, and more... This page takes a moment to load... it's worth the wait. http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/anti-hunting-activity-in-new-york.html

By now you might understand the utility of the information we are sending you and why we are sending it to you. If you are still cursing us out or scratching your head because you are not quite there yet, please stick around! Below is a summary we compiled which reflects the central premises of anti-hunting activists both in general and specific to dove hunting. (In the future we will adapt this to pheasant stocking, Sunday hunting, and young forest management). Categories of arguments are grouped and typical premises of each category are listed. For your convenience the same information is attached to this email as a pdf file which can be downloaded and saved to your computer. Catalog of Arguments Frequently used by Anti-Hunting Organizations and Activists Hunter Attitude and Behavior Arguments 1. Lack of interest in retrieving doves. 2. Hunters do not retrieve or eat doves but rather use them for target practice. Comments made by hunters, outdoor writers, and hunting spokespersons which reflect that or can be construed as such, are frequently quoted by anti-hunters and the media. 3. Dove hunting practices are cruel/inhumane/unethical/immoral/unsporting 4. How hunting causes suffering to doves, for example wounding and not retrieving. Social Imbalance Arguments 1. Expanding hunting opportunity will contract opportunity for non-hunting activities. 2. Participation in hunting is shrinking and there is more revenue generated and greater participation in other outdoor activities. Policy should favor the majority. 3. Expanding hunting opportunity will make NY less desirable for non-hunting recreation which will result in lost revenue for the state and local economies. 4. The vast majority of hunters are middle aged or older Caucasian males. Power and Control Arguments 1. Decisions should be made by majority rule (voting). 2. Hunting policy is decided under a rigged system tainted by favoritism, politics, special interests, money, and abuse of power. 3. State wildlife agencies mismanage wildlife to accommodate hunters because hunting license revenue is their primary source of funds. 4. A pro-hunting culture exists within the DEC. 5. There is no anti-hunting representation on the Conservation Fund Advisory Board and the Fish and Wildlife Management Board. At least one representative of the Humane Society of the United States should be appointed to these boards to represent the interests of the broader public, not just hunters. Public Participation Arguments 1. Anti-hunters claim they are disenfranchised from the decision making process, the extent to which they are involved, the nature of their involvement. 2. Lack of transparency of the decision-making process exists. 3. Public notice was inadequate and therefore stakeholder participation was compromised. Arguments about the reliability of population estimates, monitoring, and information about mourning doves. 1. Science is not recent enough 2. Quality of science is inadequate or questionable 3. Need NY specific data 4. Imprecise population estimates 5. There is speculation surrounding dove management. 6. NEPA requires ESA, EIS before instating a dove hunting season and/or similar action should be taken prior to considering a dove season. Wildlife management is a failure/debacle 1. Management of doves and other wildlife is not working/failing/ineffective. 2. Animal-related problems are the result of human arrogance, intervention, manipulation or management. 3. Hunting causes imbalanced wildlife populations. Dove Hunting is not biologically justified 1. Management need does not exist because doves are not overpopulated or a nuisance species, therefore hunting is not biologically justified. Dove hunting will not generate conservation revenue or general economic activity. 1. Flawed economic report (flawed because of gross misinterpretation of data) 2. Participation in dove hunting does not require much money so it should not be allowed 3. Dove hunters do not buy electronic dog equipment so the economic impact of dove hunting is insignificant. 4. Dove hunting will only redistribute the effort but not increase license sales. 5. Dove hunting will have an impact on ticket sales for concerts and basketball games thereby hurting the economy. Lack of meat 1. A dove is too small to provide “sustenance”. Palatability 1. Dove meat has a bitter taste that requires heavy marinades 2. Crow tastes like wild duck and doves Doves as Symbols 1. Christian 2. Hebrew 3. Pagan 4. Military 5. Pacifist 6. Artist Picasso's painting of the Peace Dove. Public Safety 1. Dove hunting jeopardizes the safety of non-hunters recreating outdoors Maintain the Status Quo 1. Doves have not been hunted in NY for many years and that protection should remain in place. Assigning Characteristics to Doves 1. Peaceful, innocent, helpless, loving, devoted, cute, etc. Incidental Take of Protected Birds 1. Concerns are often raised about hunter’s ability or commitment to identify doves in flight 2. Persons self-identifying as “experienced” bird watchers, or indicate they study birds for a living (including several artists who characterize their livelihood as “study birds for a living”) indicate they personally have misidentified stationary doves with binoculars, and assert that an error is more likely when discerning birds in flight without binoculars. Miscellaneous 1. “I am not an animal rights extremist” “I am just a concerned bird watcher”. 2. ‘I am a hunter, but I oppose hunting doves”. 3. Orphaned chicks 4. Compare mourning doves with the passenger pigeon. 5. Pb ammunition 6. Hunters will shoot at doves flying near or perched on utility lines and damage them. 7. Writer indicates experience owning a dove or other bird as a pet, saving young birds. 8. Writer advocates teaching children and/or adults about coexisting with wildlife, animals were here first, compassion for doves, reverence for all life. 9. Eating meat is unhealthy or bad for the environment. 10. Amount of money spent by both sides or the government in fighting the matter. 11. Because I feed doves in my backyard people should not hunt them. 12. Hunters already have enough species to hunt. 13. Doves are the Farmer’s Friend because they control nuisance plants by eating seeds. 14. New York State Assembly Rule 3, Sec 1(f) requires the Fiscal Implications of Legislation must be determined. 15. Anti-hunters will often quote or paraphrase statements made by well-known persons, some of which were published over 120 years ago. The content of such statements is varied: opinion, outdated science, and often speculation that did not pan out over time. Characterization of Hunters 1. Real men do not hunt 2. Hunters are cowards 3. Hunters are feeble-minded 4. Hunters are inbred 5. Hunters are overweight or “paunchy”. 6. Hunters are backwards 7. Hunters are hicks 8. Hunters are Caucasian males 9. Hunters are an aging and dying breed that is going extinct, in with the new and out with the old! 10. Hunters are drunks 11. Hunters are non-athletic or “NARPS” – non-athletic regular person 12. Hunters can’t fist fight so they need guns 13. Multiple contexts of physical inadequacy, sexual inadequacy/etc. 14. Hunters have the “little man syndrome”. Core arguments-FD.pdf

This is about the status of pro-hunting legislation and the impact of the actions of Brain Shapiro, the State Director of the Humane Society of the United States - New York State. And it is about how so many hunters are still under-informed about the importance of grassroots lobbying, some of whom in expressing their skepticism discourage others from engaging, thereby working against efforts to get more hunters on board. I was also curious if the guy I quoted was a member here, because that same message is frequent on this site despite of efforts to quell it.. And, to be honest, one of the people who came to mind was Rob. And: like I said elected officials do indeed monitor newspapers etc. and what they read does impact their decisions. So it is important to respond to negative editorials, but with relevant facts.

Many people agree with you about that. However, the next best thing is to engage the issues with the politicians. In theory the very reason the system is set up this way is so elected officials enact the will of the people. It is a no brainer what happens when politicians hear from more anti-hunters or the messages of anti-hunters are more compelling. Instead of wishing for changes that are unlikely we should focus on what is real and might actually be achievable. For example, annexing NYC from upstate NY would eliminate a ton of policy disagreements. However, it is not likely to happen. Similarly it is not likely that the Legislature will hand authority over wildlife to the DEC or some new division of the DEC as you imply (a game department). As a matter of fact, non-hunters will have an increasingly prominent voice in how wildlife is managed and conserved as time goes on. What is real and viable; is for hunters to engage with the Legislature, but in a reasonable, professional and appropriate way.

I am not advocating for or against contests, and on a personal level I have no interest in participating in any. That is why in the third paragraph of the OP I indicated this: "The matter of hunting contests is outside the scope of NY Dove Hunting and is not part of our agenda. However, we want to point out the level of support needed to compel the Legislature." The point I was trying to get across was the level of organization in of anti-hunters in New York. The specific target of my thread was dove hunting advocates, although, the message applies across hunting.

I got news for you - you are not telling them anything they have not known for a long time. It is the hunters who are in the dark. This has been said over and over and in different ways. And it transgresses into other matters as well. This week I posted around 5 things going on right now, and in NY. Almost zero engagement on these posts from members of this forum. Absolute zero meaningful engagement from members of this forum. And, dont think we are not working on the bird watchers too - I wrote and distributed a long post to them this week not to conflate this with anti hunting, to let hunters speak to hunters, and that a legislative route is not likely to pass and is likely to cause an unintended reaction - unintended by everyone except the Humane Society of the United States - New York State and sadly some of the national pro-hunting organizations which also profit from a conflict. Now Yes, Andy Mason of the NY State Ornithological Association is already grandstanding on this video and sent out an e mail blast that they should push for a lead ban on WMU - he meant WMAs, shows how much he knows. But that is Andy Mason just being Andy Mason. I guy who doesnt work and leaches a good living off of poor people as a landlord and owner of rental property. Another arse with too much money and too little brain. And, part of Audubon NY's legislative agenda is indeed a lead ban. Just go to their website. But, that does not mean a lead bill will ever be introduced, much less passed into law. And it certainly does not mean every hunter who is opposed to lead ammo is seeking or endorsing a ban. The fact is, believe it or not, hunters have been lied to about lead ammo for a long time their is a need to provide facts to hunters so they can make an informed choice. A good analogy is tobacco use: Cigarettes are unhealthy. But they are not banned - smoking is a "choice". However, that does not mean the public should not be informed about the risks and impacts.

Excellent report, thanks for posting!

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865656746/Utah-militia-leader-tried-to-blow-up-BLM-building-feds-say.html?pg=all

NY Hunting Contest Legislation As most of you know, the last few years there has been bicameral legislation to ban hunting contests in NY. The media attention as well as the grassroots organizing of anti-hunters generated a lot of support for the proposal. The matter of hunting contests is outside the scope of NY Dove Hunting and is not part of our agenda. However, we want to point out the level of support needed to compel the Legislature. The organization Ban Hunting Contests in NY has collected 19.641 petition signatures and their Facebook page is followed by 2,582. Those numbers have two implications: 1) The antis in NY are still bigger and better organized than us. 2) We are shooting for 10,000 signatures – they are not able to move legislation with almost twice that number. That suggests 10,000 may not be enough for us. For whatever its worth, they also have double the number of Facebook followers as us; although we have a newsletter that is mailed to about 2,000 people, most of who are not following our Facebook page. As we continue to correspond with the downstate assembly once a month, we need all of you to continue working hard to get petition signatures.

Another thing: Don't allow this to high-jack this thread, But why is attention called to me in post 27? As if I am for it, others should go against it? The guy goes on for a full page, and then makes a quasi- ad hominun attack against me. It is almost impossible to have a rational discussion on this site and people attack things for no apparent reason. If the opposition was making valid points, that would be one thing. But they are just a sort of rebels without a cause or suffer from the Stockholm syndrome. One or two guys in NJ pretty much under-minded efforts to pass Sunday hunting there using their cell phones on a hunting forum. So, yeah, you can exercise some degree of control by coming on a forum and disrupting the flow of information, congratulations....

Dont worry Rob, this site fills a need of mine. People dont tend to pick on me face to face.

I don't doubt that.

Through blood vessels it could travel anywhere.

You and others can say I bring the rabbit around every post all you want. But the fact is the nature of the previous unsuccessful dove bills is much the same as the moose bill, the poaching bill, and the second crossbow bill. More striking is the lack of awareness about why the first crossbow bill passed and why the second one will be much harder to pass. Yet, when we introduce a another dove bill, which might fail, the naysayers will come out of the woodwork all indicating the circumstances surrounding dove legislation are unique, which in their mind is logic to oppose it or attack me and others who are seeking a dove season. Well, its not much different. Indeed there are some differences, but the underlying obstacle is exactly the same. I posted about the moose bill on Facebook with a commentary about how it relates to dove legislation. Someone commented, probably someone who is a member of this site; something implying that dove legislation is not looked at by policy makers, as to take a swing at me (not smart in any context).... I replied explaining to him the correct perspective, and he shut up. Probably just as likely it flew over his head like a dove. Fact is, when pro-hunting legislation fails, there is always one common denominator. Each different legislation has different factors, but the common denominator , is well common.... The same rule applies to legislation that passes, certain elements are always present.