# Shame on California!



## one hunting fool (Sep 17, 2007)

anyone have any ideas what we can do to help Daniel Richards?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... 15005.html


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

He broke no law. Wow. I would think he could win a Federal Lawsuit for violation of his civil rights. :twisted:


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

KALIFORNIA!

Maybe an email, or letter writing campaign? Of course that would require someone on that end that had a brain, common sense, and moral standards that aren't skewed. Ain't gonna find that combination very often in the People's Republic of Kalifornia.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

WOW! F***ing California libs. I find it pretty amazing he even ATE it.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

I think only the people of their state have the knowledge and understanding to pass laws regarding their state. We, people from another state, need to just shut up and stay out of California's business. Us people that live way East from California just don't understand what is going on in their state. These important issues need to be handled by local Californians, not a bunch of outsiders from Utah.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

BPturkeys said:


> I think only the people of their state have the knowledge and understanding to pass laws regarding their state. We, people from another state, need to just shut up and stay out of California's business. Us people that live way East from California just don't understand what is going on in their state. These important issues need to be handled by local Californians, not a bunch of outsiders from Utah.


I agree completely, and I would support any inclination that California may have toward seceding to prevent any outside intervention.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

> ....following the uproar generated by photos of a smiling Richards holding aloft the lifeless corpse of a dead mountain lion.


I love persuasive writing. The writer was already trying to create bias against the guy in the first paragraph



Lieutenant Governor Newsome said:


> While not in California at the time, your actions call into question whether you can live up to the calling of your office


By their logic, anyone holding a government position cannot visit Las Vegas and gamble in a casino or an "escort" because this would be grounds for resignation / termination because these things are against the law in the state of California


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

This stinks to high heavan! I lived and hunted in Calif for 30 years, and this type of thinking is one of the reasons I left and came back to my roots in the Rockies. With the prevailing attitude in that state, I'm afraid the man is going to be ousted, no matter what type of email campain is initiated. Hunters are outnumbered there by those who follow this mindset by a huge number. HSUS has been very vocal for a long time that Calif would be their starting point to end hunting in this country, and they are the ones backing this deal with heavy $$ and public display. The NRA has an action alert out, but I think only Cali residents will have any impact, if any on the outcome. Sad, sad, sad!


----------



## one hunting fool (Sep 17, 2007)

Bax you nailed it. weather or not you feel any wrong doing is done, this artical sure makes it feel like Daniel is the most unethical person in the world.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

stillhunterman said:


> This stinks to high heavan! I lived and hunted in Calif for 30 years, and this type of thinking is one of the reasons I left and came back to my roots in the Rockies. With the prevailing attitude in that state, I'm afraid the man is going to be ousted, no matter what type of email campain is initiated. Hunters are outnumbered there by those who follow this mindset by a huge number. HSUS has been very vocal for a long time that Calif would be their starting point to end hunting in this country, and they are the ones backing this deal with heavy $$ and public display. The NRA has an action alert out, but I think only Cali residents will have any impact, if any on the outcome. Sad, sad, sad!


This attitude is VERY prevalent there! And it's not new nor is it confined to just cougars, condors or other endangered animals. My first big game archery kill was a small coastal mule deer doe in the hills above Malibu (Yes, I said Malibu) in '74. The laws required me to validate the kill with a signature from an officer or an elected official of a local, state or federal agency. I dropped the animal with a rope down off the small cliff where I parked off the Pacific Coast Highway and then loaded it in the trunk of my car so I could take it and my tag to the Leo Carrillo State Beach Ranger's office just up the road. When I got there, I found two young guys who had seen me handle the doe on the PCH and were reporting to the ranger that there was a deer poacher in the park (I wasn't) and they were giving him my description and license number. They, and the ranger, got all excited when I drove up and, I guess they figured they had me! Fortunately, I had a proclamation with me and was able to resolve the situation, though it wasn't friendly. None of them had any idea there was a legal hunt going on and they were more than somewhat ticked that I was allowed to shoot a deer in LA County. Even the ranger was p#*#*ed that he had to sign my voucher which I had to return to the state.

There are parts of California where hunting is more accepted, but not many. And, unfortunately for the commissioner, the anti's FAR outnumber the hunters and the neutrals statewide. It certainly is sad!


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

*&^YT )(&^ %$#@! 

I love the cabin fever season.

Wonder if Mr. Richards has any mountain lion recipes?


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

As soon as I got into the article I got thinking about Nevada gaming, pretty good point he makes in his letter to the legislature. What a load of bull!


----------



## rvrrat (May 23, 2011)

As I pass time on a business trip I thought I'd see what was new here and glad to see the whole Dan Richards situation in CA has made waves out of the State. California is a battleground where the environmentalists have a stronghold and as a resident I see what's happening and it disgusts me. Mr. Richards has definitely hightlighted himself and it started to make me wonder if it might have been a good thing to finally get it all out in the open. I think many in CA hunt and fish and don't know what the environmentalist groups are doing and what their agendas are. This situation and the articles finally put out about the Humane society and their involvement in the Dept of fish and game has opened our eyes. The internet has of course helped. Funny that a guy on refugeforums.com attached the link to the San Fran Chronicle that had the typical response along with a poll to vote on removing Richards. Well once he posted the link the votes swung around to support Richards, bet they didn't see that coming. sfgate.com, click index, then polls. Hopefully this is the start to put some effective resistance against the ignorant, emotional anti's.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Welcome to the forum rvrrat and out of the land of fruits and nuts. From your IP address it sounds like a fairly exotic business trip! Have a good trip!


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

rvrrat said:


> As I pass time on a business trip I thought I'd see what was new here and glad to see the whole Dan Richards situation in CA has made waves out of the State. California is a battleground where the environmentalists have a stronghold and as a resident I see what's happening and it disgusts me. Mr. Richards has definitely hightlighted himself and it started to make me wonder if it might have been a good thing to finally get it all out in the open. I think many in CA hunt and fish and don't know what the environmentalist groups are doing and what their agendas are. This situation and the articles finally put out about the Humane society and their involvement in the Dept of fish and game has opened our eyes. The internet has of course helped. Funny that a guy on refugeforums.com attached the link to the San Fran Chronicle that had the typical response along with a poll to vote on removing Richards. Well once he posted the link the votes swung around to support Richards, bet they didn't see that coming. sfgate.com, click index, then polls. Hopefully this is the start to put some effective resistance against the ignorant, emotional anti's.


rvrrat,
I agree with most of what you are saying. California is to the HSUS as honey is to bees: it is a breeding ground for their anti hunting agenda. Unfortunately you are also right about Cali hunters (and fishermen/women), they are so uninformed and in the dark to many of the issues that effect their heritage (not so different than most hunters across the country). Often times it's events like this one that begins to open a lot of eyes. Hopefully for California hunters' sake, that will be the case here.

One more thing. Don't for a minute think that the anti's are ignorant, they are not. They are well informed, cold and hard calculating, experts at emotional manipulation and misinformation. It's the followers of these organizations that are ignorant. Were it not for the apathy of modern day sportsmen, these groups would have a much tougher time putting their agenda into the public mainstream. When will we ever learn?


----------



## rvrrat (May 23, 2011)

I meant ignorant as in no clue as to proper science based wildlife management. The people running these animal rights groups are definitely slimey and not to be trusted, just look how slyly they snuck into the CA fish and game, and now in Hawaii. As for an exotic business trip, I'm an airline pilot with many layovers in Sao Paulo, Brazil. I stay right in the middle of a city of 20 million people, not that great so I have lots of hotel time to read the forums.


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

Welcome rvrrat.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

rvrrat said:


> As for an exotic business trip, I'm an airline pilot with many layovers in Sao Paulo, Brazil. I stay right in the middle of a city of 20 million people, not that great so I have lots of hotel time to read the forums.


Much more exotic than where I am sitting...Have a good trip!


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Do you think anti's are clever enough to realize that high predator populations are a great way to take game away from hunters? Less game = less hunters. And even the hunters will support the LE if it gets bad enough. (option 2) I think there are anti's in more places then just California F&G. I think they exist in most F&G's across the west. And many anti's are in the USFW. I think there are anti's out there and they themselves don't even know they are one. Have you ever heard that cougar don't effect mule deer populations. Then heard an anti fret about human activity causing problems for wildlife. Such as OHV's, shed hunting or roadkill. Or even a coal mine in Southern Utah.


----------



## drsx (Sep 8, 2010)

rvrrat said:


> I meant ignorant as in no clue as to proper science based wildlife management. The people running these animal rights groups are definitely slimey and not to be trusted, just look how slyly they snuck into the CA fish and game, and now in Hawaii. As for an exotic business trip, I'm an airline pilot with many layovers in Sao Paulo, Brazil. I stay right in the middle of a city of 20 million people, not that great so I have lots of hotel time to read the forums.


I lived in Brazil and speak Portuguese. Let me know if ya need any help with the language 

E seja bem vindo nosso forum!


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

Looks like Commissioner Richards is safe... Well done to all the California sportsmen that stood up and spoke on his behalf.

http://napavalleyregister.com/sports/co ... 963f4.html


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

The anti's are working hard!


----------



## AF CYN (Mar 19, 2009)

Amazing. I appreciate the commissioner's gutsy response, however. Good for him.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I wonder if the legislature will revize their standards and practices and introduce a conflict-of-interest code that will bar them from gambling in Nevada. It is after all the logic for their argumnet.......... OH THE HYPOCRACY!

My brother is going to run for state legislature in California after his board of education term is up. I wonder what kind of crap he will get because he is a hunter?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

MadHunter said:


> I wonder if the legislature will revize their standards and practices and introduce a conflict-of-interest code that will bar them from gambling in Nevada. It is after all the logic for their argumnet.......... OH THE HYPOCRACY!
> 
> My brother is going to run for state legislature in California after his board of education term is up. I wonder what kind of crap he will get because he is a hunter?


I think it depends on where he lives and what his platform is. If he runs on his record as a member of the Board of Education, he should do well. However, in California he's going to get crap no matter who he is or what he does, so maybe being a hunter won't matter that much. I hope he gets elected because they could sure use him.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

I came from a part of California where we hung deer in the Ag mechanics shop in HS and hunted doves behind the football field. There are hundreds of thousands of good, conservative, outdoorsmen in California and they do a pretty good job holding their own most of the time. They still offer over 100,000 deer tags in California and there are still areas where you can buy two deer tags over the counter and actually see deer. Yes, there are alot of problems there that I am glad we don't have here, but kudos to the rogue sportsmen of California. I hope this guy continues to stick it in their face and cause heartburn amongst the starbucks patrons in Berkeley.--------SS


----------



## stillhunterman (Feb 15, 2009)

SS,

Sounds like the Susanville and north areas. It's funny, the years I hunted the X and C zone up there, guys would be bringing their bucks home in full view on their vehicles....down south a ways in the A zone, or where the guys had to drive through the "bigger cities", the deer were all wrapped up and coverd most of the time...and that was in the 70's and 80's...

I too hope Mr. Richards continues to voice his opinion LOUD and Clear!


----------

