Alta said:
I wasted too much time today looking into this and exchanging emails with the journalist who wrote the article. Sounds like it wasn't poor wording and this lawyer really believes that it is illegal to kill coyotes in Texas unless the coyote poses a direct threat to livestock, poultry, pets or humans. Sounds like he is not backing down from that stance. It is such a bad take, horrible reading of relevant statutes and basic common sense that it is mind blowing. As a lawyer he would do well to learn that being a lawyer doesn't always make you right. Sometimes the best course of action is to admit when you are wrong and move on as well.
Interesting. I emailed the reporter twice this morning as follow ups to my initial email yesterday.
Crickets.
Some of this has to fall on the reporter. If the validity of his source is questioned, one would think that he would look into it further and make a necessary correction in his article. The reporter has been given facts that negate his source's claim. It has been suggested that he verify the attorney's statement with TPWD. Yet he chooses to keep the misinformation in the public realm.
Almost as if he is purposefully attempting to fill a false narrative to promote an agenda.
And folks wonder why there is so much distrust with the media.
Gig 'em! '90