Thank you David for stating most clearly and fairly what this bill is about. Then saying simply let your legislator know which way you feel about the bill. Please read David La Puma's email on this topic. Then read the actual bill as presented in several emails. David La Puma <[email protected]> wrote:Let’s stop the witch hunt.
The bill is about OWLS, not ducks, not a moose, or a goose, not a bee nor a flea… OWLS. The banning is of LURING and was written as such because BAITING implies capture, although Baiting could have just as easily have been used. The OBJECTS being banned are animated (live) or inanimate (fake lure) which implies live, dead or fabricated mice, etc. Not playback, not iPods, not your best impression of a Barred Owl. OBJECTS are clearly stated in the bill. It should be noted that MANY places already ban playback- like USFWS lands, and many National Parks, and many private preserves such as High Island, Texas, for instance (run by the Texas Ornithological Society). The bill is about baiting (luring) owls for non-scientific reasons. If you’re against that, then please contact your representatives and support the bill. If you’re for that, then please contact your representatives and oppose it. But please, don’t fall downy he slippery slope trap… an owl baiting (luring) bill has NO relationship to banning duck calls, freedom of speech, public indecency laws, or your ability to hop on one foot while birding. Good Birding David ----------------------- David La Puma Ornithologist Madison, WI [email protected] ---- Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html
