uk.environment.conservation

In article <5p9ms3tbq51vfpsop89va40r9qa0q7ggpc@4ax.com>,
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 20:49:00 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article ,
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>
>>>It seems to me the when the squirrel populations density increases,
>>>irrespective of what colour they are, the incidence of disease
>>>increases also. So if they kill greys and that means the reds
>>>increase in numbers then they're back to square one.
>>>
>>Are you talking about population size or population density. You seem to
>>have muddled them up?
>
>I'm talking about population density. An increase in numbers in
>confined areas
>
What "confined areas"?

>
>>
>>>I suggested this some time ago to the JNCC in as many words and got a
>>>reply that they weren't going to enter into a speculative discussion.
>>>I didn't think they did much else :-(
>>>
>>So they recognised that you were just speculating, too. Good.
>
>"Too"? So you accept their just speculating and don't know. That
>should not be a basis for the mass killing of grey squirrels.
>
No, Angus, JNCC recognised, just as I have (therefore "too"), that you
were speculating and weren't going to enter a speculative discussion.

>So, Dr Malcolm Ogilvie an adviser to SNh accuses the JNCC of just
>speculation about the spread of pox.
>
No, Angus, JNCC recognised, just as I have (therefore "too"), that you
were speculating and weren't going to enter a speculative discussion.

>That's a good one, Malcolm:-))
>
>Have you told them that?
>
No, Angus, JNCC recognised, just as I have (therefore "too"), that you
were speculating and weren't going to enter a speculative discussion.

--
Malcolm