My cat sits under the bird feeder with a bib and a knife and fork in his paws. He is just being a cat.

There is a difference between "I have windows on my house and once and a while a bird is killed" and "We have created a large toxic pond that works as an attractive nuisance to kill many birds quickly."

Regulating giant toxic ponds is NOT the same as having a cat no matter what the Oil & Gas company tells you.

Wow, that was a cheesy appeal to emotion.

Legislation clearly aimed at industry, yet "ZOMFG, They're coming to take UR Kittehs awawargamble...."

yanoosh: My cat sits under the bird feeder with a bib and a knife and fork in his paws. He is just being a cat.

We have a red tailed hawk that watches our bird feeder nearly every day. I suppose by the logic in the article the hawk is a danger to migratory birds and should be fined.

SphericalTime: That shouldn't be "Some Bird Guy," it should be "Some Oil & Gas Company Employee."

Nice ad homenim.

your blog sucks

Slingshots with steel ball shot work really well on aggressive mammals.

Summary:

The feds are attempting to use a law from 1918 that will prevent oil firms located in ND from having open pits of oil around their drilling locations. Clearly, their next move is to come for your windows and cats.

Also, here's an anecdote about how the US Fish and Wildlife Service fined A LITTLE GIRL!!!!

Clearly, the Migratory Bird Act is for commies, child haters, and pedophiles.

Purdon was appointed by President Obama in 2010, a move that was immediately questioned as favoring politics over experience.

/nice job fartbongo?

Clearly he should have picked his buddy who raises horses.

/shocked and appalled at this unparallelled display of political nepotism... truly

*sigh* If I have to keep the cat indoors, the yard will be littered with coconuts...

Ponds might be required but they don't need to be open-air.

Put a tent over it.

Rapmaster2000: Summary:

The feds are attempting to use a law from 1918 that will prevent oil firms located in ND from having open pits of oil around their drilling locations. Clearly, their next move is to come for your windows and cats.

Also, here's an anecdote about how the US Fish and Wildlife Service fined A LITTLE GIRL!!!!

Clearly, the Migratory Bird Act is for commies, child haters, and pedophiles.

The Migratory Bird Act, should by and large, be replaced with something a little more to the point and not something that will get little children in trouble for having a "feather collection" from their walks on the beach.

You shouldn't need to use it to keep oil companies from being douchebags. That just creates bigger problems down the road.

And yet, according to the article, no one has actually been convicted/found guilty of this law. So story is, a few overzealous prosecutes have attempted to use the bird treaty to stop polluters. So OMG, your cat is guilty!

So, anti Obama-administration propaganda taking big swings at environmental legislation while it's at it?

I didn't see anything in there about homeowners being prosecuted because their cats were catching migratory birds, and only a tenuous stretch at best could construe it as such.

MindStalker: And yet, according to the article, no one has actually been convicted/found guilty of this law. So story is, a few overzealous prosecutes have attempted to use the bird treaty to stop polluters. So OMG, your cat is guilty!

Well, it is a Heritage Foundation site. What did you expect?

Thank God we have fair and balanced reporting from objective sources like The Heritage Foundation. Oil & Gas Companies simply don't have the resources within their threadbare budgets to afford proper legal advice, public relations, representation in policy decisions or setting the story straight for posterity.

Hopefully this government employee will be required to repay the taxpayers for the full costs of prosecution in this case.

I was wondering what the next thing I should be OUTRAGED about was!

Thanks conservative America.

Overcriminalization in environmental law continues to be a problem, as prosecutors and federal agents pursue more and more innocent acts as being worthy of criminal punishment.

A lot of these so-called criminal acts are nothing more than accidents or ignorance of the law--the cost of doing business in our resource-intensive world.

Like the Gulf Oil Spill. I suppose the eco-freaks want someone prosecuted for that too.

GameSprocket: MindStalker: And yet, according to the article, no one has actually been convicted/found guilty of this law. So story is, a few overzealous prosecutes have attempted to use the bird treaty to stop polluters. So OMG, your cat is guilty!

Well, it is a Heritage Foundation site. What did you expect?

I'm sorry mam, but Mittens must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Reserve pits have been used for, like, a hundred years or something like that, and AFAIK, haven't been demonstrated to be a big contributor to avian decline. If North Dakota would mandate the use of bird balls or bird netting during migration, accidental bird deaths could be reduced to a vanishingly small number, as has happened elsewhere. Not a fan of heritage.org, but as TFA pointed out, there are no prosecutions for bird deaths caused by wind turbines, which most certainly occur with some frequency. Agriculture kills untold numbers of wild birds every year, and cars, and trains, and aviation, and structures, and so on.

If you want to regulate toxic pools, why not just make a law to regulate toxic pools? Why try to shoehorn this into a criminal poaching charge? Legislatures are there for a reason; you shouldn't need to "creatively" apply laws.

So, it's not "some guy", it's "seven oil and gas companies".

And it's not "windows and a cat that killed a backyard bird", it's "giant ponds of toxic sludge that killed 28 protected migratory birds".

And it's not "you're a criminal" it's "you're not a criminal because the attorney already lost the case in question with the courts citing previous similar decisions".

Jesus but right-wingers are pathetic. Even when the truth of the matter supports their opinion they still feel compelled to lie about it for some reason. Absolutely insane...

SphericalTime: That shouldn't be "Some Bird Guy," it should be "Some Oil & Gas Company Employee."

This pretty much. I read paid oil company shill defends waste dumping practices.

Idiotic emotional appeal. Terrible writing. Thanks.

But here's the silver lining. The author's name is Joe Luppino-Esposito.

Joe Esposito... Joe Esposito... from where do I know this name?

Aha!

http://youtu.be/3jYcW1nEsGk

Enjoy.

Oh balls. Now with clicking action:

Link (new window)

MindStalker: And yet, according to the article, no one has actually been convicted/found guilty of this law. So story is, a few overzealous prosecutes have attempted to use the bird treaty to stop polluters. So OMG, your cat is guilty!

Not even overzealous prosecutors. This is probably just a rule like taking a pen home from the office can be considered stealing thingy that's in most employee handbooks. It's used to get rid of the bad guys quickly and easily, but is completely ignored for 99.9% of the rest.

SphericalTime: Carousel Beast: SphericalTime: That shouldn't be "Some Bird Guy," it should be "Some Oil & Gas Company Employee."

Nice ad homenim.

Only if you believe that "Oil & Gas Company Employee" is an insult.

WRONG

stuff: If you want to regulate toxic pools, why not just make a law to regulate toxic pools? Why try to shoehorn this into a criminal poaching charge? Legislatures are there for a reason; you shouldn't need to "creatively" apply laws.


You are talking about a systemic problem here. It happens to every law at every level of government. Where have you been?

Cherry-picking trivial bullshiat like this that is a dog whistle to anti-government tards and is not the best way to bring attention to the issue.

canyoneer: Not a fan of heritage.org, but as TFA pointed out, there are no prosecutions for bird deaths caused by wind turbines,

The prosecution for the pit failed and the judge threw it out. If the administration for some insane reason decided to persecute a wind turbine, the judge would throw that out too because president has already been set. So you are in effect saying, "They tried this guy I like for this crime 50+ years ago. They must not be trying this guy I don't like because he is their friend, its a conspiracy!"

A company was investigated for something of which they have absolutely no chance of being convicted! Oh noes!

If DAs were fired every time charges they laid were dismissed, we'd have no DAs.

I suspect if I was the DA for North Dakota I'd be bored out of my mind too.

MindStalker: The prosecution for the pit failed and the judge threw it out. If the administration for some insane reason decided to persecute a wind turbine, the judge would throw that out too because president has already been set. So you are in effect saying, "They tried this guy I like for this crime 50+ years ago. They must not be trying this guy I don't like because he is their friend, its a conspiracy!"

I read TFA. Obviously this guy is wasting tax dollars with this kind of prosecution, and I said nothing of the sort. Why do people have to make sh*t up?

Splinshints: So, it's not "some guy", it's "seven oil and gas companies".

And it's not "windows and a cat that killed a backyard bird", it's "giant ponds of toxic sludge that killed 28 protected migratory birds".

And it's not "you're a criminal" it's "you're not a criminal because the attorney already lost the case in question with the courts citing previous similar decisions".

Jesus but right-wingers are pathetic. Even when the truth of the matter supports their opinion they still feel compelled to lie about it for some reason. Absolutely insane...

Show us the data of the attempted and failed procecutions of the wind farm companies for all the killed migratory birds from wind turbines. Until then, the right-wingers are justified in being pathetic about the pathetic left-wingers' attempts at discrimination.

MindStalker: canyoneer: Not a fan of heritage.org, but as TFA pointed out, there are no prosecutions for bird deaths caused by wind turbines,

The prosecution for the pit failed and the judge threw it out. If the administration for some insane reason decided to persecute a wind turbine, the judge would throw that out too because president has already been set. So you are in effect saying, "They tried this guy I like for this crime 50+ years ago. They must not be trying this guy I don't like because he is their friend, its a conspiracy!"

You can't argue with arguments like that.

/lulz

Mods, please properly mark all heritage links so I don't have to subject myself to that level of retardation.

canyoneer: MindStalker: The prosecution for the pit failed and the judge threw it out. If the administration for some insane reason decided to persecute a wind turbine, the judge would throw that out too because president has already been set. So you are in effect saying, "They tried this guy I like for this crime 50+ years ago. They must not be trying this guy I don't like because he is their friend, its a conspiracy!"

I read TFA. Obviously this guy is wasting tax dollars with this kind of prosecution, and I said nothing of the sort. Why do people have to make sh*t up?

It's in the Libtard Manifesto. Chapter 7. Make Sh*t Up - It works.

The "Migratory ... Birds... TREATY ... Act."

: \

: /





"See those birds? They got conned, too."

namegoeshere: *sigh* If I have to keep the cat indoors, the yard will be littered with coconuts...

Do you have an issue with European swallows in your neighborhood? Not from Mercia, by any chance?

If you also bleach your face and wear a mask, then you're a smooth criminal.

machodonkeywrestler: Mods, please properly mark all heritage links so I don't have to subject myself to that level of retardation.

If only there was some way people could set their own computer hardware so as to not allow pages being fed to it from specific websites so that people can take ownership of their own activities.

canyoneer: MindStalker: The prosecution for the pit failed and the judge threw it out. If the administration for some insane reason decided to persecute a wind turbine, the judge would throw that out too because president has already been set. So you are in effect saying, "They tried this guy I like for this crime 50+ years ago. They must not be trying this guy I don't like because he is their friend, its a conspiracy!"

I read TFA. Obviously this guy is wasting tax dollars with this kind of prosecution, and I said nothing of the sort. Why do people have to make sh*t up?

You you complaining that we hadn't prosecuted any of the wind turbine corporations. Maybe I was misinterpreting your statement, but it sounded awfully like a complaint.

MindStalker: You you complaining that we hadn't prosecuted any of the wind turbine corporations. Maybe I was misinterpreting your statement, but it sounded awfully like a complaint.

You you should not try to read so much into simple statements and manufacture arguments out of thin air. Maybe sometimes a statement just means what it means.

Subby:
Some bird guy to hide a Heritage site? Screw you.

Are you lazy? Do you have no imagination? If so, just copy and paste the first few lines of the article into the submission form and pat yourself on the back for getting a green.

In my area, cats off leash are rounded up by the counties. That cuts down on the cat problem to a large degree.

Benjimin_Dover: It's in the Libtard Manifesto. Chapter 7. Make Sh*t Up - It works.

See, this is what's wrong with this country. You people are taking sides in a battle between idiots. Seriously, which one is better? The oil company with open air toxic ponds, or the useless bureaucrat trying to make a name for himself by twisting the law in a frivolous bid to make a name for himself? They're both indefensible.

One is allowing an unknown number of birds (we only know the number of migratory birds) to die because there is no law to prevent it. The other is trying to punish a company for not breaking the non-existent law he hasn't been tasked with enforcing by inventing a connection to another unrelated law. Taking a side in this just makes the other idiot think that what he's doing is acceptable.