To: tom paine 2
This would be one law I disobey, if moles were ripping up my yard.
To: tom paine 2
Jeepers, what's wrong with Hav-A-Hearts (or however they spell them)?
3 posted on
01/22/2002 6:06:38 AM PST by
mewzilla
To: tom paine 2
Gary Nordquist turned to explosives. Last summer, after failing to drive his moles out by piping car exhaust into their holes, Mr. Nordquist tried mole mines fashioned from pill bottles, gunpowder and nine-volt batteries. The devices were designed to blow up . . .Gosh, I hope nobody at the BATF reads The Wall Street Journal . . .
4 posted on
01/22/2002 6:09:04 AM PST by
Crowcreek
To: tom paine 2
Typical urban liberal nonsense! I say save the moles! Rural folks ought to start breeding moles by the truckload and start dumping them in urban/suburban areas at night. That'll fix 'em!
7 posted on
01/22/2002 6:36:19 AM PST by
FormerLib
To: tom paine 2
Two words:
fox terrier.
Foxies absolutely love a mole diet--and while initially they destroy your lawn going after the beasties, the moles eventually quit the area.
To: tom paine 2
They dug their own hole, so they will have to settle for what they did to themselves. I have no pitty.
To help out these rouge states, I will contact the EPA and the ATF for them. Introducing gasoline into the ground is a big no-no...big fines. Making your own bombs calls for and Reno type ATF seige. We can pull their snipers out of retirement for this just cause.
12 posted on
01/22/2002 6:50:21 AM PST by
Deguello
To: tom paine 2
recently took to flooding mole holes and beating the escaping animals with her garden hose A baseball bat works better.
To: tom paine 2
All yes, the state of Washington, which loves Fidel Castro and all animals over humans. This PETA agenda now endangers all animals and humans who have walk amid the dangers of the mole holes!
To: tom paine 2
this makes me happy. I hope to hell government will learn the stupidity of such laws. Won't happen, but I can dream, can't I?
To: tom paine 2
This is precisely what happens when people in crowded urban areas are allowed to vote on measures which will not affect them, but rather affect people living in sparsly populated rural areas. It is also what happens when people who have no understanding or knowledge of wildlife management are allowed to dictate such at the polls.
A similar thing happened in Colorado a few years ago. The people were swindled by a very effective advertising campaign into passing a ban on the spring bear hunt and the use of dogs in bear hunting as "cruel to the bears." People who don't hunt and had never seen a bear outside of the zoo lined up to vote for this measure.
Now there are freaking bears everywhere and the Division of Wildlife has to come out and shoot them regularly. As there is nowhere to relocate them, it is a "1st Strike Your Out" policy.
20 posted on
01/22/2002 9:44:59 AM PST by
Drew68
To: tom paine 2
Notice the media bias in this article? Blaming those nasty Republicans, who are merely trying to look out for their rural constituents, too.
The best hope for halting the mole madness may be the Washington Legislature, which has been asked -- with the Humane Society's blessing -- to exclude moles from the trapping ban. Last year rural Republicans blocked the move, claiming a double standard that would allow wealthy suburbanites to trap moles but prevent ranchers from trapping coyotes preying on livestock. The bill may have a better chance this year, because more sympathetic Democrats have taken control of the legislature.
To: tom paine 2
There was a similar measure on the ballot in Oregon in November 2000. Fortunately, in Oregon, the voters had the good sense to reject it.
25 posted on
01/23/2002 4:34:31 AM PST by
B Knotts
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson