Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Obama is responsible for that agency then how does he get credit for the Navy Seals killing Obama? The buck stops with him. Do you think he didn't have input over this matter in an election year. Yeah right.
Because Obama is Commander in Chief of the US military, and the "go-ahead" for the mission was his decision to make.
On the other hand, Obama is not AFAIK directly involved in US Fish and Wildlife Service decisions.
It's always legal to kill all animals, under certain circumstances, and a wildlife protective agency has wide latitude to authorize a kill.
I have bats living in the attic of my apartment building, and they came around to spray something in there to drive them away (molesting is the same as killing, in terms of wildlife protection). I phoned wildlife officers, they said they are not protected if they are determined by the proper authorities to constitute a health hazard..
Bald eagles are not any more or less protected than bats or bluejays, since they are no longer on the endangered species list. Their Conservation Status is "Least Concern", which affords them the lowest level of protection.
It's always legal to kill all animals, under certain circumstances, and a wildlife protective agency has wide latitude to authorize a kill.
I have bats living in the attic of my apartment building, and they came around to spray something in there to drive them away (molesting is the same as killing, in terms of wildlife protection). I phoned wildlife officers, they said they are not protected if they are determined by the proper authorities to constitute a health hazard.
Bald eagles are not any more or less protected than bats or robins, since they are no longer on the endangered species list. Their Conservation Status is "Least Concern", which affords them the lowest level of protection.
Yes, as far as I know, I would be entirely within my rights to shoot one if I saw it carrying off one of my chickens or ducks or cats or baby goats.
I think they're more interested in what they can pull out of the local rivers than they are in my animals, though. I've never seen any indication they're any threat to me or mine.
I'm pretty sure the OP started this thread thinking he/she was going to get all sorts of support and backslapping kudos for starting it from all the other Obama haters, and except for one or two, it totally backfired.
It not only didn't devolve into a bunch of nasty name-calling about President Obama - and maybe Mrs. Obama - it ended up with a bunch of us getting a good laugh at the OP's expense.
Exactly!
It shows the complete hypocricy ruling America at the moment.
I love the staunch 'pro-lifers" who go out hunting moose etc or wanting to wage war on other countries...............
"Once a breadbasket for the nation, the cutoff of irrigation water to the Central Valley has destroyed agriculture and tens of thousands of jobs as a tradeoff for the endangered fish. Now, however, voices of sanity in Congress have begun to speak on the man-made economic and agricultural disaster, as Rep. Devin Nunes builds support for his Sacramento-San Joaquin Water Reliability Act:"
Treaties are Federal, this is a SCOTUS decison over a state's actions
Huh, are you suggesting the SCOTUS decision isn't binding on a Federal level?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.