Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Wallyboss wrote:What ministry are you talking about Banannie?? I hope that you are not talking about MNR. When is the last time that you saw an MNR vehicle around. I have fished Petrie all Winter and I haven't seen a warden this year. They don't even have money for regulation checks I don't think that they will start checking for garbage. I agree with you that something needs to be done but hoping for the MNR to do something is wishfull thinking.
We all know that the Ministry, no matter what Ministry it is, does not have the funding that is needed in order to do EVERYTHING that is needed in order to protect our Natural Resouces and environment. So let's put this one to bed as there is not much we can do about it to convince the government to inject more funds into those areas. There is just not enough to go around. This is the same case for everything. Do they care....of course they do....would they expand programs to deal with these issues if they had the proper funding....of course they would. I know a few of them, and they are great people who really do care about our Natural Resources, however they are limited in what they can do.
This is where we can help by taking action ourselves and letting people know where the problems are....which is what Richard is communicating.
muskymatt wrote:.............
The city does it, the people do it, the residents do it...so lets all do it.....what kind of sensible logic is that???????????
The arguments to the idea of this thread are so freekin juvenile it's pathetic...
Way to go FH.......bash people without even offering a reasonable solution to the problem.
blah blah blah
Matt, I think you know that these responses to this discussion is not the views or responses of Fish-Hawk. This is the major problem that I face every day. I need to deal with the opinions of the entire population who frequents this site and engages in discussion. Fish-Hawk is NOT bashing people, nor do we allow bashing of people as part of our <a href="http://fish-hawk.net/hawktalk/viewtopic ... 2548">CODE OF CONDUCT</a>. Any bashing done is stricly the views and actions of the people who participate on this board. There are obviously some personal disputes between some members on this board who need to take their battles elsewhere. Fish-Hawk is not a place for personal attacks just because you may not like someone or something they stand for. Sure, you can voice your disagreement with something, but everyone is entitled to an opinion, and on this board as long as that opinion is respectful of others opinions, then I'm good with it.
hey bobber let do this for one area..that sound like a good thing for the sport the site and for the nature.
lets do this.
joco.
Absolutely, this is a great idea and you don't need me to organize it. This is something you can do yourselves simply by posting where and when on this board and inviting people to lend a hand and help out.
Fish-Hawk is "your" board, with content and organization available from the people, to do with what you want to. I, and the moderators who graciously help me out, are just here to make sure the discussions are clean, respectful, and appropriate for all audiences.
If someone wants to organize a clean up day, by all means, please use this board as a communication tool to set it in motion and get the job done. Kudos to anyone to accepts this challenge and gits 'er done.
muskymatt wrote:I still don't see why a workable FH community effort can't be considered and proposed instead of continueous back patting for negative replies.
Or is that how we should all reply????
No that's not how we "should reply". The former is the better solution indeed.
On one final note for this thread.....before I lock it and save for posterity. :hs
I have been away for a few days and I'm just catching up on the recent activity here on the site. I have just spent the last hour reading and cleaning up 3 pages of irrelevant replies, and I'm sure I missed a few more as well.
Folks, the intent of Richard's note was to make people aware of what he believed he witnessed as a result of the ice fishing season ending. While the title of the post probably left people thinking that he was actually serious about suggesting the "banning ice fishing", this was not the case, however some thought it an opportunity to jump all over him.
In this case, taking that opportunity, for whatever reason, was not warranted, and the manner upon which his message was approached was out of line. If anyone has a problem with anyone else within this community, for whatever reason, please TAKE IT ELSEWHERE to resolve. Fish-Hawk is NOT a stage for people to take in order to talk down to others and ruin perfectly good discussion about topics of interest which affect us all.
If any of the membership on this site believes that Fish-Hawk is a useless tool with ridiculous discussion and adolecent behavious, then you simply need to look in the mirror to see what the root causes are of this perception. Yes, I realize that statement may be harsh, but it's the truth.
Just imagine a world where there were no personal attacks while sitting in front your keyboards against those who you may or may not like for whatever reason. If you don't quite understand what someone else was saying, or think you understand but can't believe what you're reading, a simple question may help clear the situation up. Something like....."Richard, are you really suggesting that ice fishing be banned, or what this just a way to get our attention on an issue which you wanted to bring to the table?". I'm sure that would have been a better way to approach the question and get clarity on the topic's intent.
For those of you who can't resist replying without taking personal shots at the opinion of others, keep it up, and you will no longer be welcomed here. Our Zero tolerance policy is in effect, and I will not have the few who don't respect our Code of Conduct, ruin the intent of this site for others who actually want to use it in a positive manner.
Richard, thanks for the post and identifying a problem that I'm sure we've all seen. The question of what to do about still needs to be answered, however I have read a seen a lot a great initiative to at least address in the short term. Hopefully through this discussion, more people are now aware of the effects of litter, and may at least think twice before throwing that pop can into the woods the next time.
Guys, please think a re-read if you need to BEFORE replying...particularly if your reply is going to be sarcastic or disrespectful. I know there are a lot of different personalities out there, and different people express themselves in different ways, but please keep in mind that this is an open Public forum which can be seen by the World. How do you want the world to perceive you? Some may care, others may not, that's your choices, but keep in mind that myself and the moderators must re-act in the manner which best suits the values and conduct of Fish-Hawk, and we try to be as consistent as we can. We won't always get it right, but doing nothing can be worse.
