Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Jackson, CA
    Posts
    1,001
    Thanks
    31
    Thanked 49 Times in 47 Posts
    Just talked to a guy who runs bears here in CA. He just put his house on the market because of the new law. Pretty sad if you ask me.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Crestline, CA.
    Posts
    317
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 13 Times in 13 Posts
    I grew up in southern cali and really want to die and be buried here with the rest of my family....but man, all these new laws (Hunting and Gun) make me want to move out and die happy somewhere else!!

  3. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    I know how you feel Cowboy, I am only 38 but my wife and I are buying a place in MT and will leave as soon as the youngest graduates from high school. This state is too far gone to right itself.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Jose, California
    Posts
    572
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 44 Times in 43 Posts
    California has some awesome and beutiful country and holds some wonderful memories for me. The politics are dissaopinting here at times in California though and hearing more hunting restrictions, well it just saddens me. Not just for California today but more for what other states might find years down the road if more anti hunting views and hunting regulation restrictions should spread more and spread to other states. I can hunt out of state, or move to a more hunting friendly state which I do and probaly will one day but the real question is, will our future generations be able to hunt and how much will anti hunting views or regulations spread to other states?

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Kevin,

    I have an acquaintance who is high up in DF&G, he is a good guy, pro hunter. He will be the first one to tell you that the anti hunting lobbyist are close to completing their objective, and their is nothing that we as hunters can do to stop them. They even want to change the name of DF&G to Cal Wild. Pretty sad.

  6. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sebastopol, Ca
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
    Pretty sad state.
    I am headed out as soon as possible.
    Our state has become a third world country in some parts. The politicians have screwed everything up.

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    96
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Buck8541 View Post
    Kevin,

    I have an acquaintance who is high up in DF&G, he is a good guy, pro hunter. He will be the first one to tell you that the anti hunting lobbyist are close to completing their objective, and their is nothing that we as hunters can do to stop them. They even want to change the name of DF&G to Cal Wild. Pretty sad.
    Already did it. Our illustrious Governor signed the bill last week.
    Patron Life Member, NRA; Life Member RMEF, SCI, NAHHC, NSRPA

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    1,428
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 45 Times in 44 Posts
    The name change?

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Crestline, CA.
    Posts
    317
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 13 Times in 13 Posts
    Yep it was in the Riverside Press Enterprise news paper, this morning, announcing the name change.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Jose, California
    Posts
    572
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 44 Times in 43 Posts
    Starting Jan. 1, California's Department of Fish and Game will become Department of Fish and Wildlife.

    Just my opinion, not to talk politics but the money spent to change the name would have better be spent easing the state's lingering budget deficit.

    I've read that the department projects the name change will cost more than the Legislature's upper estimate of $300,000, mostly to redo the department's website and computer systems. The current letterhead, uniforms, license forms, vehicle logos and other remnants will be used until they're exhausted, then replaced in the normal cost of doing business.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •