Received: from mailsorter-104.bryant.webtv.net (207.79.35.94) by postoffice-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:33:06 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]> Received: from mailtod-222.iap.bryant.webtv.net (mailtod-222.iap.bryant.webtv.net [209.240.199.86]) by mailsorter-104.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97) with ESMTP id UAA05375; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:33:05 -0800 (PST) Received: (from production@localhost) by mailtod-222.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/mt.gso.26Feb98) id UAA03882; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:33:05 -0800 (PST) From: [log in to unmask] X-WebTV-Signature: 1 ETAsAhRB7kfg7HrIMtq/Fd4Xyvu3NaBRxAIUSgKAQ+4I5stGoHH44wklTNgaV8Q= Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 22:33:05 -0600 (CST) To: [log in to unmask] (Lynn Scheu) Cc: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Fwd: Saving the State Shell of Texas Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]> In-Reply-To: Lynn Scheu <[log in to unmask]>'s message of Sat, 16 Jan 1999 21:56:10 -0500 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV) Thank you for your response. I appreciate it very much. Please do not think that I am doing this for sentiment only. I believe that if the Lightning Whelk is indeed in danger of becoming extinct a law should be passed to protect it. No matter what the reason ! I also would not want to eat one, but to each their own. There may be those that do. People also ate the turtle, that I would find disgusting to eat, But it was done. Now there is a law protecting them for various reasons. I am sure the person with the Parks and Wildlife Department survey has a reason for their statement. I would hope that a department such as that would not say or report this without researching it out. I know that there are other states that have such laws governing the protection of certain shells for various reasons. Yes, I know of Mr. R.Tucker Abbot. My Mother knew him quite well. IF the Lightning Whelk were being killed for SCIENCE it would be another story. However if the shrimpers ( or anyone else ) is killing it for other reasons, then trashing the shell in the process, that too is another story. The fact that it is a STATE shell should alone be enough reason to protect its species if it is being destroyed. It could be the enviroment, it could be the shrimpers, it could be collectors of seashells. Whomever, or whatever the reason, again I repeat if it is in danger then it is up to our government to pass a bill to protect it and place a reasonable fine on those that do not obey the law. Thank you so much for your input. This is what I wanted. No matter if agreed upon or not. I value your opinion..