As was stated by the FoA activist in your article, the FoA would rather see a species become extinct than to build sustainable numbers through conservation, breeding and research, made possible by the monetary suppport gained through legal and regulated hunting. If not in Texas, where would she believe it to be acceptable....NO WHERE. It's not about conservation with these goofs, it's only about furthering anti-hunting propaganda and their platform. They are free to voice an opinion, but their activist actions, risking the future existence of the very species they claim to want to preserve, is ludicrous.
They may gain some tempoary traction, but I believe their lack of scientific backing AND their illogical view will eventually undue them. As my mom used to say, "they would cut off their nose, just to spite their face." Let's just pray that an activist judge, or one politically motivated, does not get the case.
Rory Steidl
As was stated by the FoA activist in your article, the FoA would rather see a species become extinct than to build sustainable numbers through conservation, breeding and research, made possible by the monetary suppport gained through legal and regulated hunting. If not in Texas, where would she believe it to be acceptable....NO WHERE. It's not about conservation with these goofs, it's only about furthering anti-hunting propaganda and their platform. They are free to voice an opinion, but their activist actions, risking the future existence of the very species they claim to want to preserve, is ludicrous.
They may gain some tempoary traction, but I believe their lack of scientific backing AND their illogical view will eventually undue them. As my mom used to say, "they would cut off their nose, just to spite their face." Let's just pray that an activist judge, or one politically motivated, does not get the case.
Rory Steidl