The Harding County Alias has returned

[Anonymous]

LB: "Let me get this straight. SH accuses anyone of lying when they present facts that don't agree with what he wants the truth to be and then he has the nerve to question MY lack of integrity?"

I have never accused anyone of lying who didn't lie!

Your statement that COs can come on private land and do whatever they wanted is a lie.

Your statement that GF&P did everything they could to ground JJ is a lie.

You will not be able to defend either statement.

The statement that I blame all livestock losses on weather was a lie.

The statement that LB is the only private pilot RY will work with is a lie.


That's four lies. Now if you think you can defend any one of these statements, you just give it a try.

To the contrary, you are the one that makes opinions become fact.


LB: "Unfortunately for him, there are a whole lot of folks across the state who feel the same way."

Blamers have a way of finding eachother.


SJ: "Other states seem to be efficient with out the rule that requires the permit pilot to call the trapper before or after each hunt."

This is a "no brainer". If a trapper is working where a pilot has just been than that is inefficiencty and I totally agree that if a pilot and trapper are working the same area, it is to the producer's benefit that the pilot also know where the trapper is working.


SJ: "Maybe there should be a central calling point and each of them can call into it, which will be documented instead of taking one mans word against the other and losing a plane."

When the trapper and pilot are working the same area, they need to be talking to each other. It's that simple. In areas where this is not happening, efficiency is sacrificed.


SJ: "Maybe the permitted pilot should not be responsible for calling and the responsibility should be that of the landowner."

No way! Too many cooks spoil the stew. Only the pilot knows when the weather will be fit for flying. There is no reason in the world with cell phones that a pilot and a trapper cannot communicate.


SJ: "I do know it can be handled without having to call the trapper because most other states don't require it and evidently have been efficient, as they haven't changed to SD method."

To go backwards from an efficiency standpoint is absolutely ridiculous.


SJ: "When SH talks of us going to legislature in 2002 to change the aerial hunting it was because what we were changing was in state statute and could only be changed by legislature."

Oh, and what was that SJ???

Tell me, what was it that you were trying to change if it wasn't trying to not have the pilots contact the trapper. Let's hear it!


rancher: "I contact a private pilot to hunt, or I contact the trapper to hunt. I don't call them both in on the job, if ones doesn't get as many as I feel I need removed I might call the other to come in and finish it. Doesn't seem to bother either one who I call first."

Do you know that the trapper and the pilot are not communicating?

If they are not talking to eachother, they are not as efficient as they could be by working together. This is such a "no brainer".

Tell me rancher, how would you like it if you called me to kill your coyotes and I didn't show up in a timely manner. Later you found out that I was working an area that the pilot just flew because he was too lazy or too arrogant to call me???

Is that the kind of program you want?

Aerial hunting is highly regulated and will remain accountable to the public. The exception is landowners flying their own land and up to 2 miles onto the neighbor's land with permission.


To ignore the added efficiency of a pilot and trapper communicating just screams of bias.



~SH~

 

[SJ]

I think you need to read the legislative action taken in 2002. I'll give you a hint it is 4 miles now not 2miles. Maybe that will refresh your memory.


As far as the lies those are only your preceptions. I know of only one permitted pilot RY ever worked with. Because that is all I know does not make it a lie.

SH--Your statement that COs can come on private land and do whatever they wanted is a lie.

What and who stops them?

The rest are just your preceptions? I believe other wise and that doesn't make it a lie.

 

[Anonymous]

For the second time SJ, what was it that you were trying to change legislatively if it wasn't trying to not have the pilots contact the trapper. Let's hear it!

SJ: "As far as the lies those are only your preceptions."

Let's find out shall we?


SJ: "I know of only one permitted pilot RY ever worked with. Because that is all I know does not make it a lie."

Ok, fair enough. You were not intentionally trying to mislead (lie), you simply didn't know any better. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one. The fact is, RY worked with two other private pilots that I know of besides LB.


SJ: "What and who stops them?"

"Do whatever they want" suggests that they can conduct unlawful searches. LB even supported Knuppe and Logues statement's suggesting this. CO's cannot conduct searches of residences or buildings within the curtilage without a search warrant and they cannot conduct searches of buildings outside the curtilage or vehicles without probable cause. So no, they cannot "do whatever they want" and LB knows that yet states it anyway. That is a clear intent to mislead.


SJ: "The rest are just your preceptions? I believe other wise and that doesn't make it a lie."

You keep telling yourself they are just my "perceptions".

If you state that GF& P did everything they could to ground JJ while knowing about the letter Cooper wrote that was read in court, then that is a lie. There is no "perception" to it.

If alias states that I blamed all livestock losses on weather, that too is a lie. He knows I didn't say that because he was responding to my exact quotes. He just made it up because it sounded good.

You may get away with that in your GF&P blaming circles but you won't get away with it here.



~SH~

 

[SJ]

We were trying to keep from losing our planes.

 

[Liberty Belle]

SJ: "What and who stops them?"

SH: "Do whatever they want" suggests that they can conduct unlawful searches. LB even supported Knuppe and Logues statement's suggesting this. CO's cannot conduct searches of residences or buildings within the curtilage without a search warrant and they cannot conduct searches of buildings outside the curtilage or vehicles without probable cause. So no, they cannot "do whatever they want" and LB knows that yet states it anyway. That is a clear intent to mislead."

I swear, SH should be so dizzy from his spinning that it's a wonder he can stand upright. Hmmm. Maybe that explains a few things………

So far SH has never presented any law that would stop a "conservation officer" from trespassing on private property without the landowner's knowledge or permission. Never.

This has been our complaint from day one and until that is changed the lockout will continue no matter how many smoke screens SH and GF&P throw up to obscure what is really going on.

You will never convince me that GF&P can't do the neighborly thing and get permission from the landowner weeks, months or even years before they think they'll need it. If I need to go onto my neighbor's land for some reason I always call ahead unless it's an emergency, in which case I make sure he knows I was there and what happened. This is known as probable cause to officers of the law and would be allowed under SB122.

Some folks set themselves up as experts on issues they know nothing about and I don't have the inclination or the time to waste trying to talk to someone who refuses to hear the facts. If I were you SJ, I'd save my breath for something that really matters.

PS. I see that Sen. Apa's letter has been posted on www.sdlockout.com He sure backed up what Sen. Napoli said and shed the light of day on Sen. Adelstein's lies.