mikez2

BST Users
  • Content count

    1,823
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mikez2

  • Rank
    1,000 Post Club!

Recent Profile Visitors

2,123 profile views
  1. I look at from the view that there are lots of foxes. This won't move the needle on their population. The benifit to the plovers is scientifically demonstrated, and typically much effort is made to target only foxes that hunt plover. I don't like animals killed but this is not really the cause to take up to champion animal rights. Especially not from a bunch of guys who have no trouble killing an eel or bunker - just for the fun of using it for injuring or killing a bigger fish.
  2. When all the beaches were undeveloped they had infinitely more nest spots. When no humans left trash to attract predators, drove over them, stepped on them or let their dogs kill them, they had much more success with nesting. They could spare a few chicks. Also, before humans, there were no coyote nor red fox on Duxbury beach. Both are recent invaders assisted by man. Also other predators like skunks, rats and herring gulls are much more numerous around humans.
  3. Yah, I'd want to see those FB posts and the one the cops sent. Don't get me wrong, these appear to be scumbags and if guilty deserve what they get. My issue is making a distinction between "targeting children" and selling to highschool age punks in the 'hood. And separate, the way certain news outlets are feeding the fear with misleadingly sensational headlines. I'm more interested where the stuff came from.
  4. One of the links I provided above breaks it down. They track every pair, watch where they feed, how many chicks they have, how many fail and why (when they can tell). Fox, coyote and crow seem to be biggest natural predators. Getting run over by cars and stepped on another way chick, eggs, and adults are lost. I believe they are required to reduce the "take" (any form of loss) by law. They could leave the foxes alone, let nature take it's course,..... .....but then need to shut the access road, the off-road accesd and all pedestrian traffic until the last chick flies south - let nature take its course.
  5. And I meant to add, it's a bad thing. Highschooler shouldn't have it, especially edibles. Legal products shouldn't be diverted. I really want to follow that case, from some reliable news source not re-qre-quoting eagle tribune. Would love to know the true story.
  6. Wasn't me called you a fool
  7. A mother claimed a 13 year got some. That's "targeting children" to the Tribune. One of those arrested was 20. I'm sure he had the highschool market. Those are not children. At all. It's Lawerance dude, 13 year olds sell smack. And weed isn't life threatening even though fools who want to believe it will take that rag's word for it. I'm much more interested in where all that prepackaged edibles came from. It sure look like diverted legal products.
  8. Eagle tribune fear mongering. I bet they said they were targeting children with life threatening narcotics. What a rag. I did find it interesting that the products appear to be smuggled commercial stuff from some other legal state.
  9. Highlights: 2017 68913 coyotes 2062 grey fox 1513 red fox 624845 redwing blackbirds 3357 killdeer 1701 redtail hawks 192 barn owls (fercrisake!) 584 kestrel 27 sandhill crane 21 downy woodpecker 451 robin 65983 northern pike minnows 2,307,122 native animals total killed by federal government in 2017 Most in support of human activity, mostly agricultural. Some were to protect other species. I'm not arguing right or wrong (my feelings are based on case by case. I agree alot, not always). I'm only pointing out, this is business as usual. Nothing new here except it's usually done on the Downlow. Somebody got pissed and leaked the Duxbury story.
  10. Go down and find the chart for how many and what species the feds kill. Over 23,000 beaver. That's alot of beaver. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/sa_reports/sa_pdrs/ct_pdr_home_2017
  11. It was an ammendment to the Marine Mammal Protection Act. It had to be approved by Congress. The same would be true of grey seals also. I don't know what it takes to push an ammendment through Congress but it's not a casual endeavor.
  12. I might be wrong but my understanding was even for the California sea lions, which are not threatened under the ESA (Marine Mammal Protection Act is different) there was a prolonged study and court decision. For at least one of the other species of seal or sea lion that is actually on the ESA, they were not allowed to kill. Going from memory, no more google time at the moment. Edit: I realize in my original remark I said "protected". I meant under the ESA. Marine Mammal Protection Act is also protection.
  13. Real interesting breakdown on what goes on with bird protection at the beach. It's a long read but super detailed, and specific to Duxbury. It's also old but after seeing claims of no data or hidden data, I'm finding more than I have time to read, simple google searches. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.duxburybeach.com/tech%20comm%20reports/DuxBeachEndangeredSpeciesReport2011.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj01vT2zZHhAhUNhuAKHfDqADcQFjAFegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw1HRvTD8fZF76rrVzwMIJk6&cshid=1553115729295
  14. My "go extinct" comment came after reading about 100 FB comments, all of which could be boiled down to people mad about beach closures, pretending to be mad for foxes. A few did say they hoped plovers would go extinct.
  15. According to the census I just posted above, there is a significant movement away from the outer cape by the plovers that corresponds with the increase in seals. The report makes no mention of the seals, that's my own observation. Unfortunately for you and 6000 other people who already made that suggestion today, the government does not usually kill one protected species to save another. Common species all day long, but protected species would take a court case and prolonged study. No way it would fly unless they exhausted all other options - like longer, stricter and wider spread beach closures. As it is, Duxbury could avoid killing fox by just keeping all humans and vehicles out. I'm guessing the fox lovers that use that beach wouldn't love foxes so much then.