 |
| Let me run free and eat snowy plovers |
The protesters gathered at the third of four informational open houses held by recreation area officials to discuss their voluminous dog management plan. While park officials inside the building explained the 2,400-page document, hundreds of people, some with their dogs, waved signs and shouted in anger at a proposed canine crackdown that they claim is "extreme" and unnecessary.
"I can't keep up with my dog but having a place for her to run around and let off steam is so healthy and makes me so happy," said Ilana Minkoff, who adopted a rescue dog after being diagnosed with cancer in 2006. "I will fight for her to have that space 'til the day I die because she's my angel."
The recreation area document analyzes six alternatives for dog walking in 21 areas of the 75,000-acre park, which includes portions of San Mateo, San Francisco and Marin counties. The preferred alternative would close off many areas to dog walkers and require pooches to be leashed in many others, including portions of San Francisco's Crissy Field, Ocean Beach and Fort Funston.
9 comments:
"Let me run free and eat snowy plovers" (under picture) - thanks, made my day!
These laws are a practice run for eventually banning humans from all designated "sensitive areas" in the name of "protecting species" that would become extinct under the name of "natural evolution" in certain areas. Some species just go bye-bye, on their own, or they move their asses to more "environmentally friendly" locations. Same as with humans. If you can't live in the big city anymore, move to the country, or you may die a quick death.
But, in order for government epa agencies to keep the brainwashed employed, they come up with these crazy false untrue "scientific" studies. They preach this crap to our children under the name of "science", in order to convince the uneducated, that what they do is true and important for the planet earth's future and well being.
Dogs are bad. People are worse. Bill gates says we need to kill them. Who believes this shit?
Why don't they concentrate on getting rid of the cockroaches and rats in San Francisco. Amazing how nothing will kill them. Those nasty buggers will eat anything.
Did you know that, some species that normally do not live at the beach ( like a frog and snake) can't survive on a beach environment? Just like a cockroach.
Create a puddle, throw a frog in it, and a snake will come. So will; squirrel, feral cats, fox, coyote, deer, couger, birds of prey, nature lovers, bird watchers.
Anon (1:02pm), think here's that Bill Gates quote you're looking for: Anti-vaccine groups kill children, 2/24/11. In other words, not vaccinating people spreads the targeted disease. Here's the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation website. Their beneficial, charitable outreach is international as viewed under "programs and partnerships" on the website, and that mission is: "Increase opportunities for people in developing countries to overcome hunger and poverty."
So, Anon 1:02pm, spend some time with the article and the website, and see if you can figure it out. Also, don't think anyone needs to defend "science". Science is based in discovery, methodology outcome and known fact, and should be void of belief systems and ideology.
BTW, Anonymous people why don't you separate yourselves from the pack, and google "gmail new account" to get a pen name. The pen name is also unidentifiable. And, you can easily reach your profile on blogger.com. You can even change your identity at will if you so choose.
Just don't check the first 2 boxes on your profile, and you will stay hidden. At times, using a pen name, I purposely leave those boxes check, so others can identify who made the comment.
Other times I post anonymously and remember to check those boxes. Then I log back in and hypocritically complain about anonymous posters.
Good to know.
Kathy got caught with her hand in the coookie jar posting anonymously so she could leave nasty comments critical of other posters. She got called out cuz she couldn't even do that right and then furiously backpedalled with the "i meant to do that excuse." Uh huh. Gee is her face red.
NOT ME OR MEEH, clearly I did NOT post under the above name, and generally if I use a pseudonym name there's a link-through (so that people can "consider the source").
You, on the other hand, have hidden behind an anonymous name, and probably followed the "hypocritical" action you accused me of. My guess is that you posted under my name, then followed-up with 2 anonymous personal defamation attacks on me, rather than focus on the article. Now what does that say about your character?
You may also not be aware there is a new internet law against "borrowing" another person's name to defame them. And, if you chose to attack me, it is likely that you also attack others, while also using the word that best describes you: "hypocritical".
There is an orange B that appears next to Kathy's name whether she posts as Kathy of Martians will eat the fat ones first. Look for the big orange B if you want to identify the real Kathy Meeh.
Thank you Todd. Sometimes there are so many people posting under anonymous that the comments get a little "run together" confusing. And, for those who feel they must be hidden, getting a pen name is easy enough (with or without identity).
Post a Comment