It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump administration wants to roll back the Endangered Species Act

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: testingtesting
What a bunch of flipping duck heads.
We should hunt them down like the evil dogs that they are.


I can tell that you are the kind of person who has a good heart because you really care about animals and are outraged at this news.

So how many slaughterhouses have you shut down? Been to McDonald's lately? Eaten any animal product that you didn't kill and prepare yourself?

Oh, I see. You're just like all those people who "care" so much about families being seperated... But only certain families. Those other families....and those other animals... can all go to hell, but you're fine with committing murder in order to preserve these other families and animals over here.

Nothing but fake outrage here. And fake caring which quite frankly is disgusting. You won't shed a tear for that poor cow or chicken who lives an entire life of misery. But a wild animal that's enjoyed a life of freedom is killed and suddenly it's a big deal? That's like defending the rich, and ignoring the poor.

Which by the way that's why Trump is doing this because they have made it so only people who are already rich or have connections can be successful. These regulations only hurt the little guy. The bigger guy can afford to relocate. The bigger guy can lobby to have the law changed just a tad. The bigger guy can afford to go a year with little to no profits if need be while they fight a legal battle. And etc etc.

You need to look into the specifics of these laws and see how much sense they actually make, and how much good they are doing before you get all worked up and talk about killing people.

That's just it with you people. You have no reasoning capability. All you know is:
1. I like animals.
2. This law protects animals.
3. I hate anyone who wants to remove this law.

That's literally all you're going by before your your decision. It's obvious.
edit on 7/29/2018 by 3n19m470 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
It's awesome how they post pictures and stories of animals that everyone will recognize and sympathize for, as if those are the animals that are specifically being targeted.

They aren't.

Looking at the actual wording from the actual article and actual quotes:



"We propose to remove the phrase, 'without reference to possible economic or other impacts of such determination'" the proposal states.

Another suggested shift in the policy would also end the service's practice of providing future "threatened" species with the same protections as endangered species automatically. Instead, protections for future threatened species will be determined by "the species' individual conservation needs."


It looks to me like the EPA would not just knee-jerk shut down projects and construction because of a single fish, turtle or bird in the area and environmentalists would be forced to present a more compelling case to place the animal on the list. This would also stop private land grabs by the EPA when the animal population naturally fluctuates due to wet/dry years, migration and predation.


Once again CNN over reacts and under reports.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

I've been againt any of the endangered speies nonsense ever the snail darter dust up. Trying to stop a dam that would benefit lots of people over a minnow (bait).

I can't see crying over loss of things that could eat us (lions, tigers, bears and sharks).

If they think a species might be important in the future bank it's DNA.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Some OP, OP.

DO a big emotional spiel about how evil ther other team is, then the supposed topic gets one sentence (or rather the thread title pasted) at the end. No context of what the "rollback" actually is or is not.

Some Outragemachine Post, OP.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

One endangered species does not deserve to be saved/rescued.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470

Idiot I do not eat endangered animals nor do McDonalds sell them.
Fake outrage my arse only trumpas Lumpas with no soul will back this.
Your president and anyone backing this is a prick who deserves a slap.
edit on 29-7-2018 by testingtesting because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: testingtesting

So when an animal dies, you'll let it go to waste and not eat it if its "endangered"?




posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: testingtesting

anyone backing this is a prick who deserves a slap.


Has anyone even yet read into what this rollback thingie actually changes?



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: testingtesting

So when an animal dies, you'll let it go to waste and not eat it if its "endangered"?



Pretty sure when an animal dies, other animals will not let it go to waste.

But, do they mount a trophy head on their wall?



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: testingtesting

So when an animal dies, you'll let it go to waste and not eat it if its "endangered"?



Pretty sure when an animal dies, other animals will not let it go to waste.

But, do they mount a trophy head on their wall?


So what if they mandate they donate the meat to local villagers. will that satisfy you?



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: testingtesting

So when an animal dies, you'll let it go to waste and not eat it if its "endangered"?



Pretty sure when an animal dies, other animals will not let it go to waste.

But, do they mount a trophy head on their wall?


So what if they mandate they donate the meat to local villagers. will that satisfy you?


Do you know this for a fact?

Actually, I support legal hunting backed by permits - - IF that money goes back to supporting the conservation of both animals and habitat.

There is really no such thing as "the wild" anymore for many of the larger animals such as elephants, giraffes, lions, etc. Today they survive because of human protection.

IF (big IF) - - permit money goes back into agencies that work to protect game animals - - - that is probably their biggest source of funding. Complaining about mistreatment - - does nothing. Money is required.

Does it? Does the permit money go toward protection of animals and habitat?

Or does it line pockets of unscrupulous conmen?



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   
LOL
More insinuative news. still fake news i believe.

No one has rolled back the endangered species act as a whole.

Certain aspects have been changed.

Many of you with sore knees may even agree with the changes but how would we ever know with such shoddy articles we as ats have to choose from when bringing forth news.

A few weeks ago i did read some articles on this and i did not find much in the scheduled rollbacks that i disagreed with.

To me the truth in this story just seems like another is the cup half full or empty test.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Bramble Iceshimmer

More species have gone extinct than currently exist. Think about that. It happens. We are not supposed to prevent every death or extinction. Think of where we would be if dinosaurs never went extinct. Can you imagine some environmentalist inventing or utilizing time travel in order to prevent the extinction of these "noble, graceful, beautiful beasts", and imagines they will be able to cuddle with a tricerotops like on Jurassic Park, only to vanish like Marty McFly or be eaten by the first dragonfly that buzzes by...

Like you said bank it's DNA. We need to be better custodians of the planet, but if we can't control what China and everyone else does, then what good is it doing for us to try to compete with the world, with one hand tied behind our back?

And what do you think will happen when America declines and China is the leader of humanity? What will happen to mother nature then? What is already happening to mother nature in China? Not to mention the human beings in China...

We cannot allow that to happen.

Nobody else has even come close to the level of respect for life and freedom as the United States has. Yes, even with all our sins, even as bad as people may think we are, THEY ARE WAY #ING WORSE!!

You want to save the planet? Ensure the United States has the most power to effectively influence other nations. Until they adopt a Constitution similar to our own, that ensures freedom and basic human rights, they are an enemy of mankind's destiny and cannot be allowed to take control.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: testingtesting

So when an animal dies, you'll let it go to waste and not eat it if its "endangered"?



Pretty sure when an animal dies, other animals will not let it go to waste.

But, do they mount a trophy head on their wall?



So what if they mandate they donate the meat to local villagers. will that satisfy you?


The logical move would be to transport live animals from thriving areas to areas that have been ravished by hunting and such.. That is if the goal is to restore areas quickly.

Then once areas are replenished it would be at that point to deal with meat in a meaningful manner.

It could be just as much of an adrenaline rush to capture alive such animals as it is too kill them.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470


Let me know when America starts embracing Tiny Homes and allows vegetable growing in front yards.

The biggest threat to wild animals is loss of habitat.


edit on 29-7-2018 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: testingtesting

So when an animal dies, you'll let it go to waste and not eat it if its "endangered"?



Pretty sure when an animal dies, other animals will not let it go to waste.

But, do they mount a trophy head on their wall?



So what if they mandate they donate the meat to local villagers. will that satisfy you?


The logical move would be to transport live animals from thriving areas to areas that have been ravished by hunting and such.. That is if the goal is to restore areas quickly.

Then once areas are replenished it would be at that point to deal with meat in a meaningful manner.

It could be just as much of an adrenaline rush to capture alive such animals as it is too kill them.


Not always reasonable.

10 of 11 relocated rhinos die as Kenya conservation bid backfires


NAIROBI, Kenya -- A tenth critically endangered black rhino has died in Kenya after being moved to a new wildlife park and the sole survivor has been attacked by lions, wildlife authorities said Thursday in what some conservationists have called a national disaster. The Kenya Wildlife Service's acting director has been fired and several other officials have been suspended after "clear negligence" was found in the rhinos' transfer last month from the capital, Nairobi, to Tsavo East National Park Rhino Sanctuary, wildlife minister Najib Balala said.

Preliminary investigations show the rhinos died from stress intensified by salt poisoning as the animals struggled to adjust to saltier water in their new home, Balala said.
www.cbsnews.com...





edit on 29-7-2018 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

let's not lose focus here with a another example of government failure.

It is obvious in the post that ther are holding someone accountable for failure to plan properly.

So rule one can be do not put rino's in the sea.



Eta after reading some articles it seems that 11 relocated rinos is not the extent of the relocation projects but is just one instance out of many relocation's in the last couple years.
edit on 29-7-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Reading comprehension test:

Read the title of the CNN article, then read the article with the embedded links. Really try to understand what the article says vs. what it tries to imply. Do they match?



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
There is no need to try and preserve a species that can not survive.
The vast majority of species on this planet die off and become extinct.
It's nature at work.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328


Then yall can get back to huntin bankers,ceo's,rich people,nazi's, and law abiding gun owners!


Sounds good to me! CEO's and other rich people are the biggest danger to the planet and freedom, or at least prosperity for normal people.


Hunting your fellow humans sounds good?

Gonna mount their heads on wall for trophies?




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join