Less Access = Less People = Less Probability of getting Caught

[Ten Bears]

In order not to keep staying from the topic here. I will refer all further arguments about Stealhead & Salmon tothe topic: "Stealhead are Salmon."

Unless BUZZ or ERIK have some way of somehow linking stealhead or salmon to access & poaching, please take that debate to the other topic thread. This thread is about: Less Access = Less People = Less Probability of getting Caught

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, Does this mean that you're not going to be straying off topic with any more of your looney tune posts? BTW, "steelhead" is spelled with two "e"s.

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, this means I will be "policing" my topics, and as you have yet to post anything here even closely related to the topic at hand..... Please take your fish comments to the appropriate topic thread. BTW, I don't see you trying to correct MOOSIE's spelling, and when was your spelling ever perfect?

The topic here is: Less Access = Less People = Less Probability of getting Caught . For those that would like to refute the topic, it is NOT "Less Access = Less People = More poaching."

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten Beers, You oughta at least try to spell your topics titles correctly. I'm glad to see you're going to be policing your looney tune topic. Good luck. Does this mean you're going to be our SI cop?

 

[Ten Bears]

YRH, I see changing your moniker didn't improve your intellect any. Please take your fish comments to the appropriate topic, but when you do, please also bring your lunch and your materials.

 

[ELKCHSR]

LOL gunner...
You were the biggest whiner when I was running a little off topic, now it is you that can't seem to stay focused?
Lets not be a hypocrite now.. It’s either one way or the other and you can't seem to make up your mind which way you will go...

 

[Ten Bears]

Ten Beers, You oughta at least try to spell your topics titles correctly. I'm glad to see you're going to be policing your looney tune topic. Good luck. Does this mean you're going to be our SI cop?

No, I don't plan on being the SI "cop" that's DEL's job.

Keep it on topic. If you can't refute the topic, move on. When did MOOSIE start requiring proper spelling? hump

 

[Nemont]

Okay I spoken to the local fish cops and the biologists here. They are unaminous that your equation is incorrect. What you need to drop from the equation is the "less access" part. Everyone of them said that their jobs would be easier and the game laws easier to enforce if there was less access. They also said that the rate of catching and prosecuting poacher would not decline with less access. If you drop the the Less Access part then maybe what ever it is you are trying to say would make sense.

Nemont

 

[ELKCHSR]

???
Your arguments are getting very stale, can't find any thing else in life?
All well, I have pictures yes, but I also can show others exactly where the pictures were taken, non are in the wrong, and no amount of insipient babble on your part will change that.
You need some new material my friend, your stand up comedy routine is failing in a bad way and you are losing your esteemed audience...
But then again, I do have pictures and am proud to show that I live a full life and don't have to hide behind any one or any thing. Unlike some that are so ashamed of who they are, they won't or can’t let any of their personal life out into the open, just in case they themselves get caught up in the very lies of their own lives, the lies they accuse every one else of, for that I am truly sorry for you...

 

[Ten Bears]

NEMONT & all, Less Access(fewer roads or more road restrictions) = Less People (access controls are used in reduce human activity levels) = Less Probability of getting Caught (fewer people does not always = more poaching (not the topic), but does reduce the amount of people present to witness/report poaching = greater comfort to those that will poach).

For those demanding numbers because I used the word "probability" please refer to the following definition. In this case I used the word probability in place of the word "likelihood."

prob·a·bil·i·ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prb-bl-t)
n. pl. prob·a·bil·i·ties
The quality or condition of being probable; likelihood.
A probable situation, condition, or event: Her election is a clear probability.

The likelihood that a given event will occur: little probability of rain tonight.
Statistics. A number expressing the likelihood that a specific event will occur, expressed as the ratio of the number of actual occurrences to the number of possible occurrences.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=probability

YRH please do go buy your own dictionary.

 

[YourRoyalHighness]

Ten Beers,
You made the claim that you knew one probability was greater than the other, and now you are weasling away from it, claiming you didn't know which three syllable word to try and BS us with.

Again, how do you calculate the higher probability on any single act of poaching, based upon proximity of roads?

And, which is more frequently poached, trophy or meat animals?

 

[Ten Bears]

Ten Beers,
You made the claim that you knew one probability was greater than the other, and now you are weasling away from it, claiming you didn't know which three syllable word to try and BS us with.

Again, how do you calculate the higher probability on any single act of poaching, based upon proximity of roads?

And, which is more frequently poached, trophy or meat animals?

YHR, if you can't refute the topic, please don't attempt to detract from it. Keep on topic. As far as which word to use, according to the definition, my choice was just fine.

If you'd like to discuss which is poached more "meat or trophy," start your own topic.

 

[Ten Bears]

YHR, if you can't refute the topic, please don't attempt to detract from it. Keep on topic......

 

[Ten Bears]

YRH, it would be my hypothesis, if you care to refute it, do so, but bring your proof not you personal attacks.
YHR, if you can't refute the topic, please don't attempt to detract from it. Keep on topic.

 

[MattK]

Cheese- can you put that in English? Ooops...I hear the SI cop....

TB- Any replies to Nemont who is "on topic" with fish and game backup.

Nemont- I also spoke to a game warden here. After he was done laughing, he told me access is the largest problem. Too many roads to patrol.

 

[ELKCHSR]

So Matt...
Does that make it less probable of getting caught, because of more roads, or because there are not enough game wardens to patrol every where?
So it actually makes it more probable, (proportionate wise any way), to get away with back country poaching with even less people to see what you are doing?

 

[Nemont]

Probability of getting Caught is difficult to ascertain and most likely is neither a function of access nor more or less people but rather a function of where the fish cops choose to concentrate their enforcement effort. Ten Bears, You said stay of topic so I quit pointing out all the research that says access=more poaching. I then bumped into my neighbor who works over at the F&G and invited him in for a beer. He has worked in Colorado, Washington, Alaska and now Montana as a Warden. He said that there is no correlation to the three.

Nemont

 

[Erik in AK]

aw c'mon Ten, you know after 70 or so posts these threads almost always stray into esoterica

 

[Ten Bears]

NEMONT, is your neighbor a state or federally? I have spoken with game wardens here, and many agree with the concept (idea, thought process). Unfortunately for MATTy, he was probably still caught up on the ideaology of Less Access = Less People = MORE Poaching (wouldn't that be embarassing, trying to get an opinion on a topic you didn't even understand?). He never could get passed that, even though it isn't the topic.

NEMONT, another consideration to think about is: If poaching is "detected" at a higher rate in roaded areas (research seems to say so, but as I indicated wilderness poaching has never been on agency agendas for study, it wouldn't fit with the road closure agenda), is it a measure of opportunity for the poachers, a measure of others in the area that witness or discover the acts, or both?

 

[Ten Bears]

No further refutes? Good. BUZZ & MATTY know what this was all really about.