|
Author
|
Topic: Reliable source
|
Rich Higgins
unknown comic
|
posted March 01, 2010 10:33 AM
Hi Leonard, howz it goin".
Your source is unreliable.
On the Higgins deal, I have heard that he wants Safari Club to recognize the coyote as a game animal, or something that would elevate the coyote's status from a nongame nonfurbearing unregulated species to something that might require tags and seasons, down the road and something I am very much opposed to, in principle.
Rules and regulations will be determined by the elected officers and directors. Not by me or any one else.
My position on the issue is clear. I do admire and enjoy coyotes. However something that my admirers neglect to include when fabricating gossip about seasonal protection is also in the post PM post from 2006 that clearly states:
quote:
Provisions would have to be included for the inevitable depredation permits that MUST be issued on demand. An offending coyote cannot be rehabilitated or retrained. They cannot be transplanted elsewhere because experience has shown that a coyote that was problem in one area will be a problem in the next.
The only recourse is permanent removal.
My current and official position on coyote management is the same as AZG&F. Ron Day is the predator biologist for the dept. He is also an avid predator caller and a member of Arizona predator Callers. Ron gives a dynamite powerpoint presentation on antelope and deer fawn mortality due to coyote predation. He tells us that of the 37 management units in the state with deer and/or antelope in 19 of them fawn survival is below maintenance levels due to the coyote.
Four units fawn survival may be close to zero.
The three large Az. clubs will encourage our members to continue to target coyotes in those areas year round. We will organize and promote hunts in those units to coincide with fawning and puprearing. Other possible management tools are being explored in cooperation with the dept.
Ron Day will be the featured speaker at the PVCI meeting Tue. March 2. All are welcome to attend.
IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 01, 2010 11:20 PM
Unreliable or not, I don't see where the essence of my post is inaccurate? You aren't denying it, near as I can tell, just stating that you wouldn't be the one writing the regs, which I did not charge, and I also said my information was second hand. That doesn't mean it is worthless, or baseless. However, when you say the source is "unreliable" that tend to suggest that it is untrue. I am personally against any state or federal agency or organization laying out rules, regulations, seasons and bag limits. If you are advocating for any change or upgrade in status, then (I believe) you will get the biologist wennies calling the shots and they will inevitably complicate coyote hunting if given the chance. In CA, not all F&G personal are sportsmen. In fact, in position of authority, they can be quite harmful to our (HM membership) interests. Why stir the shit? Coyotes do not need protection.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31449 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich Higgins
unknown comic
|
posted March 02, 2010 06:24 AM
I've stated my position several times in the past.
Apparently the statements are unclear to some.( Paul, Steve?) ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
To Leonard's Source,
I do not support a change in the coyote's management status.
I do not support a change in any other state's game laws.
IPCSCI has NOT discussed any management or conservation issues.
I DO support year round coyote population suppression efforts in management units where coyote predation is a threat/problem.
Leonard's Source, if comprehension is still a problem (it's OK to move your lips when you read)
please feel free to E-mail me.
IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 02, 2010 08:47 AM
In the interest of clarity, why don't you state your position one more time, for all the comprehension challenged, who missed it previously?
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31449 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Andy L
HI, I'M THE NEW MODERATOR OF THE CENTRAL MISSOURI FORUM, PULL MY FINGER!
Member # 642
|
posted March 02, 2010 10:39 AM
Would you old coots knock it off....
--------------------
Andy
Posts: 2645 | From: Central Missouri | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 02, 2010 10:47 AM
Yeah. lol
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31449 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
R.Shaw
Peanut Butter Man, da da da da DAH!
Member # 73
|
posted March 02, 2010 01:04 PM
When I think of the Safari Club, I think of big game. You know..lions and tigers and bears..oh my.
And when I think of big game, my thoughts lead to Africa, big horn sheep hunts, guides and expensive rifles. Which in turn makes me think money.
So as not to be disappointed.....
Calculate your dues:
If you are not an SCI member now:
Resident of USA, Canada, or Mexico - ($55 national + $20 chapter = $75)
Outside of USA, Canada, or Mexico - ($80 international + $20 chapter = $100)
If you already belong to SCI:
but do not belong to a chapter now - (application + member number + $0) You will be contacted. $20 chapter dues will be collected later when the charter is approved!
and you do belong to another chapter - (application + member number +$5 for dual chapter processing) You will be contacted. $20 chapter dues will be collected later when the charter is approved!
Make all checks payable to "Safari Club International"
Send your completed chapter application and your check to:
IPCSCI
c/o Gary Clevenger
PO Box 822
Acton, CA 93510
I am not afraid to donate money and I will continue to support organizations more on my level. Such as...
FTA
MO Trappers Association
TX Trappers and Fur Hunters
These folks see furbearers for what they are and have no intentions of elevating them to 'trophy' status.
Randy
Posts: 545 | From: Nebraska | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich Higgins
unknown comic
|
posted March 02, 2010 02:29 PM
quote:
In the interest of clarity, why don't you state your position one more time, for all the comprehension challenged, who missed it previously?
Sure Leonard, anything for a friend.
To Leonard's Source,
I do not support a change in the coyote's management status.
I do not support a change in any other state's game laws.
IPCSCI has NOT discussed any management or conservation issues.
I DO support year round coyote population suppression efforts in management units where coyote predation is a threat/problem.
Leonard's Source, if comprehension is still a problem (it's OK to move your lips when you read)
please feel free to E-mail me.
IP: Logged
|
|
Andy L
HI, I'M THE NEW MODERATOR OF THE CENTRAL MISSOURI FORUM, PULL MY FINGER!
Member # 642
|
posted March 02, 2010 03:06 PM
Dont you old farts make me come down there and mediate this thing with a Louisville Slugger.
--------------------
Andy
Posts: 2645 | From: Central Missouri | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 02, 2010 03:15 PM
I'm old and slow.
quote:
I do not support a change in the coyote's management status.
RESPONSE: This, on the surface, seems a straightforward position, once you define "coyote's management status" ?
quote:
I do not support a change in any other state's game laws.
RESPONSE: So, we can conclude that there is nothing afoot by anyone, of your knowledge, that WOULD change any status, in any state?
quote:
IPCSCI has NOT discussed any management or conservation issues.
RESPONSE: Then, other than management or conservation issues; exactly what is IPCSCI's interest, or involvement with respect to the coyote?
quote:
I DO support year round coyote population suppression efforts in management units where coyote predation is a threat/problem.
RESPONSE: Then, would it be reasonable to conclude that you do not support year round coyote population efforts.....in management units where no predation problems are identified?
COMMENT: This is really like pulling teeth. I see so much ambiguity in your responses that I really cannot figure out exactly what you want? I could read your answers and shrug; nothing different, no controversy, and yet, (forgive me) you use caveats and obtuse language that (to me) tends to suggest deceit and/or obfuscate. Why?
Good hunting. LB
edit: Andy, I welcome your "INTERVENTION" if it would shed some light on the question. So far, I don't see a specific denial?
[ March 02, 2010, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31449 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoeF
resides "back east"
Member # 228
|
posted March 02, 2010 03:58 PM
Rich, you have stated what you do not stand for.
What are you campaigning for?
Posts: 646 | From: Midwest | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted March 02, 2010 05:52 PM
The assumption here is that SCI's interests lie only with the lowly coyote. I don't take what I have heard or seen so far as to indicate that at all. Thus, the name IPC where the P stands for Predator, including such noble "trophy" species as the wolf, cougar and bear.
Now, with that in mind, my interest in what SCI is doing here has to do with the fact that they are a well entrenched conservation/ hunter's rights organization with a long and storied history of success in that arena which BTW, sets them apart by light years from either of the other two "national groups".
Consider that with the fact that both Field & Stream and National Geographic went to newsstands this week with wolves on their covers and stories about the first wolves legally killed in a long time in this country and the political ramifications of same. Are the Missouri Trapper's Association and the Texas Fur folks going to carry the clout to lobby on behalf of those who seek a regulated, managed season on the large predators and convince federal lawmakers that scientific management should trump feel-good public sentiments?
As I see it Leonard, I don't know that Rich could give you an answer that wouldn't lead you to parse his words and insinuate his intentions based upon someone else's interpretations. I consider his reply to be pretty much straight forward, but if you have issues with which words he chose, I suppose he'll better explain himself and I'm betting that he will.
I seriously doubt that SCI is interested in only a bunch of mangy coyotes. As I understand it, the hunters went to SCI with the request, not SCI coming to them in search of more money.
[ March 02, 2010, 05:53 PM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich
2,000th post PAKMAN
Member # 112
|
posted March 02, 2010 06:38 PM
Leonard,
You know what? I do believe that your memory is almost as good as mine. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
--------------------
If you call the coyotes in close, you won't NEED a high dollar range finder.
Posts: 2854 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrossJ
SECOND PLACE: PAUL RYAN Look-a-like contest
Member # 884
|
posted March 02, 2010 08:56 PM
So Lance, how was your wolf season this year in KS?? Seriously, what is a national organization going to do for coyote hunters? There always seems to be diversion from the simple questions asked. What is SCI's intentions. And, as far as state organizations go, it has ALWAYS been the state groups that have lobbied and changed legislation here for the better of trappers and hunters. In the positive changes that have taken place here, NTA or FTA had nothing to do with them. It was members of our state OFBA...period.
Rich, why the condescending attitude? That in it self creates suspicion. Those of us living in areas that are primarily private land, only stand to loose from the growing popularity of predator hunting. As it stands now, coyotes here are classified as furbearers with a status of ‘vermin’. Meaning, the season is open year round. What needs fixing?
Maintain
--------------------
A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move a body.
Posts: 1025 | From: on a water tower | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 02, 2010 09:08 PM
quote:
As I see it Leonard, I don't know that Rich could give you an answer that wouldn't lead you to parse his words and insinuate his intentions based upon someone else's interpretations. I consider his reply to be pretty much straight forward, but if you have issues with which words he chose, I suppose he'll better explain himself and I'm betting that he will.
I seriously doubt that SCI is interested in only a bunch of mangy coyotes. As I understand it, the hunters went to SCI with the request, not SCI coming to them in search of more money.
Look Lance. I am not parsing words. I simply cannot understand the man's position based on his responses, thus far. It seems that he is advocating something, but he isn't telling us what it is? My source is unreliable, I get that much. Explain why.
So, "hunters went to SCI with the request". What hunters. What request? I'm not understanding these political statements. I'm totally in the dark. If what I was told is incorrect, then a denial is helpful, but it looks like there is something not being said? What the hell else can I do besides parse words, or more correctly, I'm just reading the tea leaves and trying to figure out what's going on?
Whatever it is, I'm assuming it is not a very popular position? Therefore, it could be a segment of "hunters went to SCI" with some proposal that does not have support across the board from those that could be affected by decisions and policies? So, being forced to parse again, I have to speculate that some hunters would likely disagree with the mysterious proposals or whatever they are called? Maybe trappers or fur hunters, other than those that hunt coyotes strictly for sporting purposes, maybe they might not be in agreement with these proposals that nobody but Higgins and Lance know what it is but are afraid to say?
This shit is starting to annoy me.
Good hunting. LB
edit: besides, Lance. You are insinuating that my sole purpose is to disagree. That's unfair and insulting. We apparently have different interpretations of "straightforward"?
[ March 02, 2010, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31449 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
R.Shaw
Peanut Butter Man, da da da da DAH!
Member # 73
|
posted March 02, 2010 09:28 PM
quote:
Are the Missouri Trapper's Association and the Texas Fur folks going to carry the clout to lobby on behalf of those who seek a regulated, managed season on the large predators and convince federal lawmakers that scientific management should trump feel-good public sentiments?
I would hope not. Our wolf numbers in MO are pretty low right now.
quote:
I seriously doubt that SCI is interested in only a bunch of mangy coyotes
The following species are already listed with the SCI. I always considered them predators.
Brown Bear
Mountain Lion
Grey Fox
Red Fox
Bobcat
Coyote
quote:
As I understand it, the hunters went to SCI with the request, not SCI coming to them in search of more money.
More money??? Go to a SCI Convention if you want to see the one of the largest gathering of millionaires in the US.
In 1965 when I started trapping here where some of the conditions.
Season opened December 1 and ran until January 10.
Now it opens November 20 and runs till January 31.
We had no otters and now we not only have a good population but also a season to trap them.
Cable restraints/snares where illegal, but now are legal after certification.
These are the types of things I am talking about that come-about from state organizations working with state wildlife departments. No trophies, no skull measuring, no white tipped tails.
Randy
Posts: 545 | From: Nebraska | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
4949shooter
SECOND PLACE HIGGINS (MAGNUM P.I.) LOOK A LIKE CONTEST
Member # 3530
|
posted March 03, 2010 03:33 AM
What I get from this is the SCI is supporting partial coyote seasons (as opposed to year long seasons) in areas deemed to be "non depredation" areas.
If this is correct then I will ask the question why would we need any season at all on coyotes?
Why would the SCI support such a thing?
How does this help the rights of hunters?
Posts: 2274 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
4949shooter
SECOND PLACE HIGGINS (MAGNUM P.I.) LOOK A LIKE CONTEST
Member # 3530
|
posted March 03, 2010 03:38 AM
quote:
More money??? Go to a SCI Convention if you want to see the one of the largest gathering of millionaires in the US
For some reason I keep getting emails from the African Professional Hunters Asociation inviting me to their dinners in NY City.
At $250 a plate I usually take a pass.
Edit: Sorry off topic. Back to the issue...
[ March 03, 2010, 03:45 AM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posts: 2274 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
fgf4
unknown comic
|
posted March 03, 2010 04:47 AM
quote:
More money??? Go to a SCI Convention if you want to see the one of the largest gathering of millionaires in the US
Aren't we missing the point here?
Why is the above statement not a good thing! I think it's a damn good thing to have on our side!The more big dollar people we have on our side just equates to more clout the way I see it.
The more money the more connected most are as well, that's also a good thing when we want to pass legislation and protect our sport.
We can do something to gain a hold on what we have or we can just bitch at each other and how bad all these org's are and let everything be taken away from us by well organized groups of anti's... give it a break guys and start helping here. No state org has the power to stop anything if the public wants it passed. If you believe any org can save your hunting rights then join them, join every one of them! What is the matter with trying to do what is right for our sport?
I get really sick of hearing the negatives before anything positive can even get started. How many of you that are bitching and pointing fingers have even gone to the "IPCSCI" website and read the info there? How many of you are members of a hunting org or even the NRA?
Problem is, we think of ourselves as having some grand meaning by whining away on these websites but our numbers are almost 0% of the sportsmen in the United States alone.
If you don't want to help save our rights than get the hell out of the way so those of us that are trying can get something done... RANT OVER! ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted March 03, 2010 05:01 AM
"So Lance, how was your wolf season this year in KS?? "
Diversionary, Geordie. Sadly, you're right that national organizations do little for the local fights. But, that's always been the nature of NTA - reactive posturing due to lack of money and lack of clout.
Rather than wolves, of which we have none, let's talk mountain lions. In the past fifteen years, at least three different lions have been killed or found dead near Kansas while Kansans have claimed for longer than that that they've been seeing them. And KDWP insisted all along that they weren't here, even though they're a native species. Of those three, two were in MO and the other was found dead along the KS/ OK border. In the past three years, one has been killed in KS near Medicine Lodge along the OK border, and a second one was verified near Wakeeny in NW KS. Because KDWP has finally admitted that they're here, some people are concerned and some people are interested in managing them from the get go. Right now it is illegal to shoot one unless it is actively engaged in causing property damage, and then only to be killed by the property owner. I believe that IA is the only state that allows them to be shot on sight. At this time, a bill is before the KS legislature to allow for a hunting season on big cats. I don't see the Kansas Fur Harvesters chiming in on either side, nor will I expect to. It would be nice to have a recognizeable national group to step up and advocate on behalf of predator hunters who would support such a season, but we don't have that.
Idaho held their first wolf hunt last year and the whackos are up in arms. Again, read about the events that have happened since those first kills in either F&C or NG. The F&S article outlines how the supposed management plan falls woefully short of what will be needed to protect their elk herds, and even that is under fire. It would be nice to have a recognizeable national organization there to advocate on behalf of predator hunters who see the need for this.
Kansas last year almost lost the use of snares on public ground because of one isolated incident. KFHA's position was to not defend snares because they didn't want to make waves. At the request of a small group of people, I took the point and appeared on a state wide radio call-in show and confronted the lies and mistruths that were being disseminated about what happened in this incident, snaring and trapping. This was, IMO, where the tide turned in our favor. Being proactive takes money and aligning oneself with a group of millionaires seems to be a good way to find those funds - sorta like insurance.
Moreover, look at the name for national groups National TRAPPERS Association. It's all about trapping, and as much as I love trapping, the fact remains that trappers are a dwindling demographic. Even our own state group has abandoned its original intent to represent the fur hunter in order to focus on trappers. In many states, callers have no representation at the legislative level. We're left to stand around waiting to see if and when good things happen to us. Groups like NPHA cannot lobby for callers. SCI can.
Predators and their control will come under increasing scrutiny in the next few decades and to me, based upon the logic that it's always better to gain your momentum while traveling downhill, now is the time to get organized in our defense - and defending rights is the litmus test I apply toward whether a group gets my support or not - and bring the different groups together under one common umbrella. SCI has the footprint necessary, and the organizational structure, to claim its credibility here whereas other national groups don't.
The International Predator Callers already exists.
SCI already exists.
SCI already recognizes all the various predators we hunt so what changes here?
No one anywhere is advocating any changes in coyotes or a season for them, and any suggested changes that you guys keep reading into Higgins' words may apply only to those eastern states where seasons are restrictive but don't allow for increasing depredation issues. I can't say much on that except that from Rich's comments, now we have others believeing that he's advocating seasons on coyotes. He says he isn't. Leonard says he isn't being argumentative. I say he sounds like he is. Sitting down and forcefully crossing your hands across your chest and pouting that you don't like the expansion of calling isn't going to change the fact that it is growing. You're the only ones entitled to enjoying the "sport" because you got here early? Maybe those who were doing this ten years before some of you started calling looked upon you as a crowding intrusion. It's much more prevalent now than it was ten and fifteen years ago, so did those guys who called when it was relatively uncommon east of, say, Arizona, have the right to be annoyed at some of you because you joined in because it was "popular"? We have more callers in my area now than I've ever seen. Can't complain because I'm one of the people that has been promoting it thru my writing. At the same time, we have more coyotes than I've ever seen in my life right now. We ended this season with more coyotes/sq. mile than what we usually start with. Something going on there.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrossJ
SECOND PLACE: PAUL RYAN Look-a-like contest
Member # 884
|
posted March 03, 2010 05:11 AM
Hey Numbnuts. Thats very much the same mantra you were preaching over at PM.....right up till Mock, Berry and the rest of the frogmen threw you under the bus. Right there, you have a small group of people with their hands on the purse strings all chanting 'good for the sport'.
Sorry Nut, I will remain cautiously optimistic in regards to keeping my rights to hunt predators. I don't think the sky is falling yet.
Maintain
Oh yeah......Rant getting warmed up.(insert dumb ass smiley here)
--------------------
A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move a body.
Posts: 1025 | From: on a water tower | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Andy L
HI, I'M THE NEW MODERATOR OF THE CENTRAL MISSOURI FORUM, PULL MY FINGER!
Member # 642
|
posted March 03, 2010 05:43 AM
Im about this close to locking this thread.
Ok, couldnt resist that. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) (dumb ass smiley)
Mo already has a season on coyotes. Closes, they claim, for turkey season, but it runs pretty good for the bulk of whelping. I dont see a problem at all. Fur hunters and people that give a shit are done anyway for the winter. Makes the road hunters park their trucks for a while and gives the bitches time to get the pups up and eatin at least.
I would personally rather see people just leave it alone. However, I know some places have problems. Here in MO, IMO, we have one of the best Dept of Conservation anywhere and we dont have a problem I can see. Things just keep getting better on all levels, kind of like Shaw was saying. So maybe Im being selfish.
Now go get em Geordie.
--------------------
Andy
Posts: 2645 | From: Central Missouri | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TOM64
Knows what it's all about
Member # 561
|
posted March 03, 2010 06:00 AM
All I know is all the millionaires are leasing up all of our private land. That makes it pretty hard for a poorboy to hunt. Doubt if they care if Joe Blow hunts coyotes, heck them is trophy's now, ought to be just for those who can pay enough for em.
3 orginazations started just this year to help me kil coyotes and get the credit I deserve. Make check payable to... give me a break.
Posts: 2283 | From: okieland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Andy L
HI, I'M THE NEW MODERATOR OF THE CENTRAL MISSOURI FORUM, PULL MY FINGER!
Member # 642
|
posted March 03, 2010 06:12 AM
Tom, thats the truth. Ive only leased one place in my life and we got it, what I discovered later, cheap and kept it for ten years. The old man that owned it died and the boys leased it for much more than we could afford. Sad situation. I tried to find a place to take my boys deer hunting in North Mo the last two years. For the money I had spent for 1250 acres, I might get a 100 acre tract, if I could find one. Not worth a shit to hunt pass through deer.
Money talks I guess.
--------------------
Andy
Posts: 2645 | From: Central Missouri | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
4949shooter
SECOND PLACE HIGGINS (MAGNUM P.I.) LOOK A LIKE CONTEST
Member # 3530
|
posted March 03, 2010 07:23 AM
CDog,
You are one of my favorite people here, but Rich Higgins said this (twice),
quote:
I DO support year round coyote population suppression efforts in management units where coyote predation is a threat/problem.
Thus it sounds to me like he does NOT support year round hunting of coyotes in areas where depredation is NOT a problem.
This equates to an infringement upon the year long coyote hunting seasons some of may enjoy (not in NJ). If I am off base about this perhaps Rich Higgins could elaborate..
Posts: 2274 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
