I don't think it's a mixed message because no hunting and no discharge are
different. No discharge would include target shooting.
On Tuesday, November 17, 2015, Geo Kloppel wrote:
> I was curious to know if DEC had made revisions to hunting regulations
> with respect to
I was curious to know if DEC had made revisions to hunting regulations with
respect to jurisdictional conflicts about waterfowl hunting. But DEC websites
still seem to be giving waterfowl hunters mixed messages about the validity of
local "no hunting" ordinances. For example, on this DEC web
...@list.cornell.edu
[mailto:bounce-119905115-3493...@list.cornell.edu] On Behalf Of Geo Kloppel
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 10:04 AM
To: CAYUGABIRDS-L <cayugabird...@list.cornell.edu>
Subject: [cayugabirds-l] DEC Mixed messages?
I was curious to know if DEC had made revisions to h
Kohlenberg
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 10:26 AM
To: geoklop...@gmail.com; CAYUGABIRDS-L <cayugabird...@list.cornell.edu>
Subject: RE: [cayugabirds-l] DEC Mixed messages?
As I pointed out, in the email I bounced to the list, the 2005 city court
challenge upheld the right of NYS to regulate lak
gt;
Cc: CAYUGABIRDS-L <cayugabird...@list.cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: [cayugabirds-l] DEC Mixed messages?
Hi John, Gary, David and all,
Then every municipality, village, town, city, county, borough, etcetera that
wanted to get out from under the state's exclusive authority to regulate
hunting could