Quote:
Originally Posted by FQ2
243plus thanks for your posts. Too much detail appears to confuse some of the members here.
Your argument is valid in my eyes, the others are just bashing you and getting emotional.
Valid points on both sides, some members here are just white noise.
|
Too much detail is typically baffling to most unfamiliar with the information. This is not necessarily a reason to suggest those in opposition to a viewpoint are wrong.
Let's consider the CWS document.
CWS is a membership based group of researchers. Activity and exposure of individual positions within the group is often masked by "majority" rules, in other words politics and biases.
The document Only discloses potential causes of concern, yet never the CWS membership views opposing stated concerns.
This tunnel vision, while potentially valid to degrees, often hides the full picture from view.
Bears and Bulls have been partially discussed. I'll talk about Bighorns, the sheep.
The document relies heavily on Festa-Bianchet's "research", a vigorous opponent to current Bighorn hunting regulations. The document includes all potential concerns, expresses all notes desiring further hunting restrictions, while excluding ALL recent data showing population growth, increased ram ratios and harvest.
The "artist" of this document has painted the picture they desire.
A true art connoisseur, can see the forced nature of the work.