greg334
Veteran Expediter
Layout,
I do see how it will effect me, but I don't buy into the fear mongering that has been used on every issue that has been environmentally centered.
There is a positive and a negative side to this, but to me there are two simple solutions, one is to close the canal completely and the other is to help build a small cottage industry to fish and market them. Both of those involve priorities and these priorities on this issue seem not as important to the masses then say health care or climate change. Our congress, which represents us, falls for a pseudo-science of global warming but fails to consider the impact on what one type of fish will do to millions of people? I would say yes. You and I both know that no one wants to confront Levin or Stabenow on this issue while more important things are on the forefront, and because they do actually care a lot for the state, they will get reelected and reelected based on the work they have done for the state - which doesn't include jobs or the negative impact that this fish will have on all of us. Instead Levin for example has pushed through an amendment to solve the Great Washington District of Columbia Taxi Cab Crisis because he claims he lives there - and the people who elected him fall for it as something he has done right.
If there was a time for everyone directly effected by this fish to come together and actually send a message to congress and Obama it is now but they won't - will they? Want to join me in helping this out?
The other possible solution is to use the billions of dollars that we give to universities and other institutions of higher learning to demand they find a solution to decrease, if not kill off the population of that fish without effecting others - instead of studying the mating habits of the college freshman.
If you want to believe that we can destroy our ecosystem, then man made global warming is also a fact but the truth is we can only do so much damage and destroy only so much because nature seems to have a way to equalize things out when left alone. Much like the idea that we must restore specific fish to specific rivers and streams, it seems a little futile when it doesn't matter what fish live in the river.
Or better yet when an area is devastated by a natural disaster, like Mt St Helens erupting, the eco system came back pretty well and after these non-professional people who were not the biologist and the botanist said to the public "leave it all alone and watch what happens" the biologists and the botanist were screaming that we must do something to save the area, save the wild life and to save man. But to their surprise there was life after the massive flow of lava killed everything in its path as the people said there would be.
I agree we must preserve things, but not for our children, that is too selfish. We must do it because it is the right thing to do. We must first follow the need to preserve and protect our ability to decide what's right for things we own, not be told to do it.
Do you know if there is a licensing requirement by the Illinois for this fish to fish them?
By the way when I was over that way, I had some of it - if it is prepared right, it's pretty good eats.
I do see how it will effect me, but I don't buy into the fear mongering that has been used on every issue that has been environmentally centered.
There is a positive and a negative side to this, but to me there are two simple solutions, one is to close the canal completely and the other is to help build a small cottage industry to fish and market them. Both of those involve priorities and these priorities on this issue seem not as important to the masses then say health care or climate change. Our congress, which represents us, falls for a pseudo-science of global warming but fails to consider the impact on what one type of fish will do to millions of people? I would say yes. You and I both know that no one wants to confront Levin or Stabenow on this issue while more important things are on the forefront, and because they do actually care a lot for the state, they will get reelected and reelected based on the work they have done for the state - which doesn't include jobs or the negative impact that this fish will have on all of us. Instead Levin for example has pushed through an amendment to solve the Great Washington District of Columbia Taxi Cab Crisis because he claims he lives there - and the people who elected him fall for it as something he has done right.
If there was a time for everyone directly effected by this fish to come together and actually send a message to congress and Obama it is now but they won't - will they? Want to join me in helping this out?
The other possible solution is to use the billions of dollars that we give to universities and other institutions of higher learning to demand they find a solution to decrease, if not kill off the population of that fish without effecting others - instead of studying the mating habits of the college freshman.
If you want to believe that we can destroy our ecosystem, then man made global warming is also a fact but the truth is we can only do so much damage and destroy only so much because nature seems to have a way to equalize things out when left alone. Much like the idea that we must restore specific fish to specific rivers and streams, it seems a little futile when it doesn't matter what fish live in the river.
Or better yet when an area is devastated by a natural disaster, like Mt St Helens erupting, the eco system came back pretty well and after these non-professional people who were not the biologist and the botanist said to the public "leave it all alone and watch what happens" the biologists and the botanist were screaming that we must do something to save the area, save the wild life and to save man. But to their surprise there was life after the massive flow of lava killed everything in its path as the people said there would be.
I agree we must preserve things, but not for our children, that is too selfish. We must do it because it is the right thing to do. We must first follow the need to preserve and protect our ability to decide what's right for things we own, not be told to do it.
Do you know if there is a licensing requirement by the Illinois for this fish to fish them?
By the way when I was over that way, I had some of it - if it is prepared right, it's pretty good eats.
