Irish Deer Society "member" convicted of dumping deer carcasses.

foxshooter243

Royalred wrote: »

Hiya,

All I can say is wait for the final outcome. Do you always belive whats in the papers ?
I've met hunting folk from all over, I trust my instincts when sizing up people as well as taking stock of their achievments. If Im proven wrong, so be it.

Royalred

JW is that you?:eek:

Royalred

Hiya Deerhunter 2.

I could be Derek the Detective, Larry the Lamp or Shine on it Sean. Privacy seems to annoy you. Actually I'm retired. not that its any you business.
As for lies, I go on instinct as well as judging a person by what he has achieved.
If I'm wrong then so be it. I was wrong once last year too.! or was it the year before.

Royalred.

Royalred

Used to shoot on my own but had to join force to stay in some areas. Does the Galway farmer actually own his sporting rights or just believe he does cos he has 'Title Absolute' I know a few Clare land owners that thought the same but when push came to shove they could'nt a hunting license on thier own land.
As for the Europe gig and changing the law. Mostly rich guys get the hunting in the likes of Germany and Austria. Farmers there get together, form a lease area, get the best price by tender. They get compensation for damage caused by boar, deer and even rabbits from the HUNTERS who already paid for the lease. The only ordinary guys that hunt these areas are invited by the rich guys who dont have time to get the cull figure agreed by the farmers and the wildlife wardens. If thats not enough you have to pass very difficult hunting theory tests before you start. There are licenses for everything and for each different district too. Maybe we dont have it so bad here after all.

Royalred.

Royalred

Maybe, is that Ken the snook,
Royalred.

thedragon

Royalred wrote: »

Used to shoot on my own but had to join force to stay in some areas. Does the Galway farmer actually own his sporting rights or just believe he does cos he has 'Title Absolute' I know a few Clare land owners that thought the same but when push came to shove they could'nt a hunting license on thier own land.
As for the Europe gig and changing the law. Mostly rich guys get the hunting in the likes of Germany and Austria. Farmers there get together, form a lease area, get the best price by tender. They get compensation for damage caused by boar, deer and even rabbits from the HUNTERS who already paid for the lease. The only ordinary guys that hunt these areas are invited by the rich guys who dont have time to get the cull figure agreed by the farmers and the wildlife wardens. If thats not enough you have to pass very difficult hunting theory tests before you start. There are licenses for everything and for each different district too. Maybe we dont have it so bad here after all.

Royalred.

If your crew had there way it,d be the very same over here.If your goin around pissing people off all the time you need to keep your house in very good order otherwise the slightest slip up and your hit with your very own book.

thedragon

J. Ramone wrote: »

Really?
I find the above very hard to believe. From the newspaper report the details of exactly what was dumped were clearly stated in court. Were these details not contested? Perhaps you could confirm if any defense was made. Were the details clarified on Mr. Wood's behalf?

As a one time acquantance, how could you be so sure of the real facts? Friend of a friend or close friend as suggested?

Why cant you answer the question from J.Ramone. Not a very hard one to answer since you know so much about the whole thing.Dont give half an answer just answer the question in full,how do you know so much unless you were there?

kakashka

From experience i find that the so called top men in IDS are so arrogant and self righteous that they are actually very easy to spot!!!

Grizzly 45

thedragon wrote: »

If your crew had there way it,d be the very same over here.If your goin around pissing people off all the time you need to keep your house in very good order otherwise the slightest slip up and your hit with your very own book.

+1 on that.
Doing that kind of messing in Germany,be it a poaching forest ranger,suspicion thereof,or somone fku actin around with deer carcasses by dumping them in a river or water course,would create such a storm of beuraccy and trouble ,you would wish you were never born.
BTW Royal Red ,you can get into shooting in Germany in a Revier with the consortiom that shoots there by pulling your weight and doing alot of the work that is required over the year there.Like game and head counts,fencing,winter feeding,tree stand building,etcetc etc.It's 90% work over the year and 10% shooting,more work than an average Irish shoot would do in a year,they do in a week.So hunting over there is a lifestyle choice,not a hobby.

Sparks

Some of the silly name-calling deleted because it'd be nice to have a discussion thread instead of a kindergarden playground argument.

Royalred

Why dont you guys join the IDS or the WDAI instead of bitching about people who are obviously trying to manage deer correctly. Most of the members in both organisations are doing their best to do right by deer and still hold onto huntings ground by sticking together.
There will always be a few in it for the wrong reasons. Maybe you could change that instead of moaning.
Royalred

Royalred

Your right Grizzly but its still expensive, I'm on a shoot over there only cos I can swap shoot visits with two German hunters. I could'nt afford it otherwise. All my spare time doing simular stuff here, counts. high seats, etc for years. Have more time now though. Your spot on. They had poaching problems on their ground last Xmas for the first time in years. If they are caught there is no messing. These things are reported and followed up quickly there.

Royalred

Deerhunter2

Royalred wrote: »

Hiya Deerhunter 2.

I could be Derek the Detective, Larry the Lamp or Shine on it Sean. Privacy seems to annoy you. Actually I'm retired. not that its any you business.
As for lies, I go on instinct as well as judging a person by what he has achieved.
If I'm wrong then so be it. I was wrong once last year too.! or was it the year before.

Royalred.

fare enough, sorry wrong of me to invade your privacy, wish i was wrong as seldom as you.:)
if you just said you were a close friend instead of a lad that met him at a game fair once. it was fairly obvious to any deerhunter over this way, that IDS tent is an interesting place alright.

Royalred wrote: »

Used to shoot on my own but had to join force to stay in some areas. Does the Galway farmer actually own his sporting rights or just believe he does cos he has 'Title Absolute' I know a few Clare land owners that thought the same but when push came to shove they could'nt a hunting license on thier own land.
As for the Europe gig and changing the law. Mostly rich guys get the hunting in the likes of Germany and Austria. Farmers there get together, form a lease area, get the best price by tender. They get compensation for damage caused by boar, deer and even rabbits from the HUNTERS who already paid for the lease. The only ordinary guys that hunt these areas are invited by the rich guys who dont have time to get the cull figure agreed by the farmers and the wildlife wardens. If thats not enough you have to pass very difficult hunting theory tests before you start. There are licenses for everything and for each different district too. Maybe we dont have it so bad here after all.

Royalred.

not well upon his shooting rights or how they work but i don't think it's a good way of getting the local farmers on your side, dumping a load of deer on their land and stoping them from controlling them when they do damage.

as for the europe gig, is that not what the IDS are attemptin with takin control of HCAP and their IFA deal, except it costs them nothing and they don't have to pay the farmer for the damage that the deer they realeased do, to get some huntin then you have to join the IDS and if you don't your branded a poacher. and sure don't we already pay for coillte lettings, why not pay farmers, they usually have mor deer anyway.curious why is ther so little poaching in your german ground?

thedragon

thedragon wrote: »

Why cant you answer the question from J.Ramone. Not a very hard one to answer since you know so much about the whole thing.Dont give half an answer just answer the question in full,how do you know so much unless you were there?

Hey Royalred,Ill give you another crack at this one!!!

Try and deal with this before ya go any further,your actually starting to get interesting,or am I just becoming gullible.

neilsbreak

Crested wrote: »

Have you an interest neilsbreak??? Funny that you were asking about this last November in your previous posts a few days after the Warden found the carcasses?

On the ball Crested!! Complete coincidence, I swear :cool:!! No really it was. Got some answers to that threads questions here though!

Royalred

Paul Woods pleaded guilty, The warden gave his piece. Woods solicitor protested it was not true. Judge made an example. Nows there is an appeal. Your right I met Woods over two years ago at a Game Fair. Heard him at HCAPs WDAI and at other meetings. Fair play to him he puts the time and effort in. By the way the WDAI and IDS are only two of a lot of organisations that make up the Deer Alliance. Only the Deer Alliance runs HCAP, The NPWS, Garda, NARGC, IFA, and others are in it too. So to say the IDS runs HCAP is wrong.
He will still be guilty after the appeal but it should be seen fairly. The sentence at the Clifden court was over the top. On another point, if this case highlights the disposal of skins what do we do. Knackery's charge between 30 and 70 euro depending on weight of a skin. The antis can crank this up.
RR

thedragon

Wood pleaded guilty,his solicitor said it wasnt true.What sort of S**te is that.So his solicitor was now calling Wood a liar,that he didnt do it.
Im going to bed its getting late.

Royalred

Hi Dragon.
So I have to spell it out. You must be tired. The solicitor responded to what the Warden said. It s not true. Bloody Hell, Anyhow have a good kip.
RR

Deerhunter2

did you see the photos, i did, and the judge did too, there's several sets being passed about. it wasn't just skins and bones, it was 2 deer broke up, the full back legs are visable and what was he doing dumping it in plastic bags and leaving the bags, it was proven that he had been doing it for a while, and why the hell did he dump beside a stream. he knows better than that, yes everybody has to dispose of their skins and bones but you don't dump them beside a stream in plastic bags, christ the corrib is bad enough as it is. if you are going to preach to the rest of the country you need to practice what you preach and you don't alienate yourself from a large part of the community, hunters depend on farmers all over ireland for hunting ground, its not in hunters interest to try and push farmers about doesn't matter what shooting rights say, his actions reflect on us all and the antis will love it too. it said in the paper that the estate only shoots 10 deer a year for the table, that includes, there trophies, cull stags, does and fawns what happened to culling females to control the herds numbers?
how many hcap courses did the gardai, ifa,npws, nargc members run and how many did ids members run? do you have to join ids to do a hcap run by them? or is it just encouraged.

Grizzly 45

[.curious why is ther so little poaching in your german ground?

Couple of reasons
To aquire firearms in Germany it is not an easy task,legally that is.

German hunters as I said before have made a lifestyle choice to be hunters ,it is not seen as a hobby as shooting is over here.That means you as a hunter and your co hunters who have a Revier[reserve] are going to be out in it at least three times a week,at all odd hours of the day and night,in all weather doing,counts,making and mending,planting ,vermin patrol,dealing with farmers and foresters etc.So you are going to get to know and be known by everyone in the district who uses the forests,as the public do have the right to roam thru as well.[Talk to me how much fun that can be during a driven shoot:eek:.]
So basically,you will get to know the locals their dogs,animals or cars pretty quickly.And if you are on good terms with all, your network will filter back if there is anything odd going on in the woods.

Locals poaching isnt that much of a problem anymore,or even roving gangs.It was a huge problem in post war Germany from the defeat to well into the early 1960s.Quite simply due to people literally starving in the ruins of the Reich,and plenty of loose military weaponary still lying around,corruption,blackmarkets,and US GI's being fed up eating C rations.
There were regular gun battles in the woods in those times of hunters,foresters,GIs,and still even bandits of on the run SS,criminals and others.
That actually allowed German hunters ,and this order still stands today.German hunters were allowed to shoot poachers on sight!
That has been modinerised nowadays to arrest on sight!It is still one reason German hunters can still carry openly handguns in their reserve for self defence or arrest.
Most problem is the car poacher.This is somone who uses a 4wd with high power lights to blind game on the road and ram it with the 4wd.Thing is,even hitting a deer with your car in Germany is a reportable motoring accident.So doing that and making odff with the carcass puts you in deep trouble.
Next up is the East Block crowd.As the EU expanded intp Poland and Rumania and further East ,it has allowed all sorts to pitch up here and all over Europe,bringing with them the access to illegal firearms.Many of these are criminals who have survived jails and regimes that would horrify and kill us.So they arent to bothered by our "easy" laws on ownership, poaching,or anything else for that matter.

Finally,it is a different life outlook over there than here.Its considerd a criminal activity,and one that must be properly investigated.The idea of the getting one over or" likeable rouge" doesnt really wash well over there.

Royalred

Enjoyed your piece on hunting in German. Learned a lot. Yeah, poaching is not taken seriously here. Not enough rangers outside the national parks. The Guards etc see poaching as a low priority too. Only the guys minding theirg ground are active.
RR

Royalred

There are a lot of photos going around. Are they all from the same dump site ?. Lots of dumpsites all over Galway and in Coillte forests. What about the road kills and the deer shot from the roads and falling out of sight in drains. There are lots of those photos too.
Plastic bags are all over the place and no body should dump like that. Your right the Antis will love this and you are right that you have to practice what you preach. As for HCAP I think you miss the point. All the organisations that make up the Deer Alliance meet to update and discuss a lot of issues such as the HCAP test etc. The WDAI and IDS set up locations etc and courses so that hunters can take the HCAP exam and the range test. They are encouraging and helping members to learn and pass it. Both organisations take non members on these courses too. The Deer organisations have always talked to NPWS, IFA, Coillte and others for obvious reasons. Nothing wrong with that. You seem to be on the outside looking in with what I think are unfair ideas. Like I said before most of the people in the WDAI and the IDS are sound and helpful.
RR

kakashka

Royalred wrote: »

Hi Dragon.
So I have to spell it out. You must be tired. The solicitor responded to what the Warden said. It s not true. Bloody Hell, Anyhow have a good kip.
RR

So what the hell did Woods plead guilty to!!!

Sparks

Royalred wrote: »

There are a lot of photos going around. Are they all from the same dump site ?. Lots of dumpsites all over Galway and in Coillte forests.

You would be required to presume that the photos shown to the court were demonstrated to be photographs of the incident in question. That's rather a basic premise. And if those photos are described in the reports of the case as being of two deer dumped by a river, then that's pretty much the point you're arguing against; not what the latest round of gossip is, because that's neither here nor there.

And btw, the offences of others is not an acceptable defence in court or even in polite company.

kakashka

Royalred wrote: »

There are a lot of photos going around. Are they all from the same dump site ?. Lots of dumpsites all over Galway and in Coillte forests. What about the road kills and the deer shot from the roads and falling out of sight in drains. There are lots of those photos too.
Plastic bags are all over the place and no body should dump like that. Your right the Antis will love this and you are right that you have to practice what you preach.
RR

I doubt very much it was the first time Woods used this spot to dump

kakashka

kakashka wrote: »

I doubt very much it was the first time Woods used this spot to dump

Sorry point already made by DeerH 2

Royalred

Jeez Dragon. you have a short memory. Read the earlier blogs. Two skins and some bones, ! Remember.
RR

Royalred

I agree. Woods solicitor tried to argue that about the evidence saying it was'nt true but the judge had none of it. Hense the appeal. Anyway all will be revealed in time I suppose.
RR

Sparks

Royalred, firstly the word is "posts", blogs are something completely different.
Secondly, the "two skins and some bones" description seems at odds with the court report - and frankly, I'd give more weight to the court report, at least there I know there's a penalty for incorrect reporting (namely that the reporter loses their privileged status and can be sued for libel).

Sparks

Royalred wrote: »

I agree. Woods solicitor tried to argue that about the evidence saying it was'nt true but the judge had none of it.

You agree with what?
And What was Woods' solicitor trying to argue?
It's hard to follow what you're saying Royalred, when you don't press the Quote button to reply to a post.

Hense the appeal. Anyway all will be revealed in time I suppose.

Actually, no, it's been revealed already. An unheard appeal does not cast doubt on the outcome of a case, only an appeal which has been heard and upheld does that.

Royalred

Hi Sparks.
I was just making the observation that,unfortunately, a lot of rubbish is dumped in lot of places but I see you point now. Thanks.
RR

Royalred

Sparks wrote: »

You agree with what?
And What was Woods' solicitor trying to argue?
It's hard to follow what you're saying Royalred, when you don't press the Quote button to reply to a post.


Actually, no, it's been revealed already. An unheard appeal does not cast doubt on the outcome of a case, only an appeal which has been heard and upheld does that.

The appeal stays the effect of the conviction until the appeal is heard. No one said the reported was wrong. He reported what he heard in court. <Libel edited out> I agreed with your reference about photographic evidence. The point being that no right to examine/rebuke them was given after the Warden used them. I talked to people present on the day so I have take it on face value.
RR

Sparks

Royalred wrote: »

The appeal stays the effect of the conviction until the appeal is heard.

But it does not alter the verdict unless it is heard and upheld.
Which means that comments made on the basis of the verdict are fair comment (ie. we won't be sued for libel because someone says Woods was out of line).

I agreed with your reference about photographic evidence. The point being that no right to examine/rebuke them was given after the Warden used them. I talked to people present on the day so I have take it on face value.

So you can't say that there was no right to examine or refute them (there would never be a right given to one side in a case to rebuke the evidence of the other side, and you'd have to have been on the legal team or be Woods himself to be able to say there was no right to examine them because of how discovery works in Irish law).

Kramer

Sadly, the WDAI did not condemn the actions of, or distance themselves from Mr.Wood at last week's AGM .
The matter was brought up but quickly shot down (pun intended ) by the chairman who cited "sub judice" :rolleyes:.

Was this an innocent mistake or does Mr. Wood have friends at the top of the WDAI too?

thedragon

Royalred wrote: »

Jeez Dragon. you have a short memory. Read the earlier blogs. Two skins and some bones, ! Remember.
RR

My memory serves me fine,my first findings,before I was later corrected here was that Wood had only dumped a few bones and a bitta grolloch,I would have seen this as no big deal at all and I taught the man was very wrongly chastised.I later found that I was totally wrong on this as Id been very misinformed.I felt very sorry for the man and even took it on myself to post here in his defence.I was put right on it very quickly by people here that had a lot more insight in the incident.

Valmont

Ok. I can't decipher the 12 pages of cryptic posts from a community of hunters who obviously know each other in real life so could someone please answer this question for me:

Did he leave the guts of the deer or the entire carcass? Or what did he say he left versus what the court says he left?

Thanks.

Vegeta

Valmont wrote: »

Ok. I can't decipher the 12 pages of cryptic posts from a community of hunters who obviously know each other in real life so could someone please answer this question for me:

Did he leave the guts of the deer or the entire carcass? Or what did he say he left versus what the court says he left?

Thanks.

It looks like his defenders here are saying he left skin and bones

Others are saying they have seen the photographs (the ones used in court) and it was partial carcasses and plastic bags , near a river.

emcor

Kramer wrote: »

Sadly, the WDAI did not condemn the actions of, or distance themselves from Mr.Wood at last week's AGM .
The matter was brought up but quickly shot down (pun intended ) by the chairman who cited "sub judice" :rolleyes:.

Was this an innocent mistake or does Mr. Wood have friends at the top of the WDAI too?

Kramer - Sub Judice is a legal term that means under judgment, and an appeal is pending in this case; so to be fair to no comment should be made by anybody until this has run the course. If the AGM would not discuss the issue then the chairman of meeting is spot on in my view.

Vegeta

emcor wrote: »

Kramer - Sub Judice is a legal term that means under judgment, and an appeal is pending in this case; so to be fair to no comment should be made by anybody until this has run the course. If the AGM would not discuss the issue then the chairman of meeting is spot on in my view.

Yeah and you and the chairman are incorrect, see Sparks comments on this already.

If all of this conversation was still Sub Judice it would not be here.

emcor

Vegeta wrote: »

Yeah and you and the chairman are incorrect, see Sparks comments on this already.

If all of this conversation was still Sub Judice it would not be here.

I saw them and did not agree completly. I was replying to the charachter called Kramer who was implicit in suggestion that by WDAI not discussing the the case at AGM displayed a favourable bias towards Woods. I feel that the chairman was correct in refusing to discuss it until all facts are available and outcome of the appeal is available; especially in light of the consequenses arising from thsi case. By not doing so would be contrary to the rule of fair play, premature and irresponsible in my view. By the charachter called Kramer demanding discusion/action in absence of full facts in my view raises the question of ulteriator motivation

Lets not forget that it was the charachter called Kramer who started this thread off with some typically sensationlist reporting from the galway independant

Vegeta

emcor wrote: »

I saw them and did not agree completly. I was replying to the charachter called Kramer who was implicit in suggestion that by WDAI not discussing the the case at AGM displayed a favourable bias towards Woods. I feel that the chairman was correct in refusing to discuss it until all facts are available and outcome of the appeal is available; especially in light of the consequenses arising from thsi case. By not doing so would be contrary to the rule of fair play, premature and irresponsible in my view. By the charachter called Kramer demanding discusion/action in absence of full facts in my view raises the question of ulteriator motivation

Lets not forget that it was the charachter called Kramer who started this thread off with some typically sensationlist reporting from the galway independant

I am not commenting one way or the other on the IDS or WDAI.

I am stating that this case is not Sub Judice. We would not allow this discussion to take place if it was, contempt of court etc etc. The thread would have been deleted asap.

That is my point and nothing more.

kakashka

Carcasses.read up.

crowsnightmare

kingfisher77 wrote: »

nature recycles..!! these deer only live to 12 or13.. who cleans there carcasses then??wen they drop dead? mother nature..
do the fox hunters bring them home?? wat about all the birds which arnt picked up?? do u bring home vermin and dispose of it ?? no.. left were it died... dumping??? 3000k fine??:eek:

DEER are not Vermin !!!!!

emcor

crowsnightmare wrote: »

DEER are not Vermin !!!!!

No they are not. And I dont believe anybody has suggested otherwise. Analogy made is corralation between basis of conviction and that of people leaving shot vermin in the field which majority of people tend to do. This could have consequenses for the majority of irish vermin shooters and farmers.

kingfisher77

Sfinn wrote: »

I've no intention in entering a whos right whos wrong scenario or defending any group or individual. All i will say is that i have actively engaged private fisheries for the last 20 years in pursing a common goal which is inclusive of the local population. Once fisheries owners recognise the advantages in having the local club on board the animosity disappears. You will always have those who will abuse it and they need to be dealt with. It is the same in every sport. However, i feel its all about respect and understanding where both parties are comming form.

When it comes to shooting rights/access it has been a different story. Its a legal nightmare, especially along the western sea board and i have found that certain estates are not as accommodating as others. Branding people as poachers instead of engaging them i believe is loutish behaviour. I believe as the saying goes a converted poacher to game keeper is worth two in the bush. :cool:

if you live in the west you know weres the private shooting rights and fisherys are!, and how to get a ticket,
if you give everybody a free go therel b none left for the paying tourist and hows the fisherys or shoots gonna survive with no income to replenish ar upkeep these resourses.

thedragon

I see Mr Wood has his usual column in this months Shooters digest. I intentionally took a look in the newsagents to see was he still writing in it,when I saw that he was, I immediately put it back on the shelf and said to myself, thats it, never going to buy that magazine again. It wasnt a bad read from time to time but if thats what they rely on to fill the pages its sad day for anyone who gets it.

kakashka

Strange!!whats the deal with that?

Deerhunter2

thedragon wrote: »

I see Mr Wood has his usual column in this months Shooters digest. I intentionally took a look in the newsagents to see was he still writing in it,when I saw that he was, I immediately put it back on the shelf and said to myself, thats it, never going to buy that magazine again. It wasnt a bad read from time to time but if thats what they rely on to fill the pages its sad day for anyone who gets it.

thats the last time I'll be buying that rag, talk about showing hunters in a bad light, its not the first time they have had a person convicted for bringing our sport into disrepute writing with authority in their pages, total disrespect for irish hunters and the law. what does this say for irish hunting?

kakashka wrote: »

Strange!!whats the deal with that?

he has no shame :mad:

thedragon

kakashka wrote: »

Strange!!whats the deal with that?

I think there hoping this whole thing is just one big bad dream and if they ignore the facts then the whole thing might will just all go away. Id say when they take at look at there sales for the month they may think just differently. Ill never buy it again anyway.

jwshooter

thedragon wrote: »

I think there hoping this whole thing is just one big bad dream and if they ignore the facts then the whole thing might will just all go away. Id say when they take at look at there sales for the month they may think just differently. Ill never buy it again anyway.

have you in your 3 years of hunting ! not sure about deer stalking ever shot a deer ?
you posted that you were only hunting 3 years on the 5-5-09 .
on "what do you get from this forum"

then to add credit ability to your ramblings you posted on this thread 15-6-09 that you were stalking over 25 years.

pretty hard to ignore the facts !

i would think your problem is not with what woods did ,
as his cold room could have stop working and he lost the carcasses this happened to me .there is a number of reasons why this happened but thats not important .

you problem is he is trying to manage a large area and keep the poachers out ,trying to do some good for deer in a small way like IDS,WDI,wildlife rangers etc.

if lads held fire on young stags and learned how to manage our deer they would be in a far better state than they are now.

J.R.

thedragon wrote: »

I see Mr Wood has his usual column in this months Shooters digest. I intentionally took a look in the newsagents to see was he still writing in it,when I saw that he was, I immediately put it back on the shelf and said to myself, thats it, never going to buy that magazine again. It wasnt a bad read from time to time but if thats what they rely on to fill the pages its sad day for anyone who gets it.

Haven't a clue about the deer carcasses incident...only what I've read here...and I don't do deer hunting so am definitely not qualified to comment but I was just wondering, after reading the above post, could the article written have been sent to the publishers prior to the incident being made public?

The matter first came to light here during the first week of June.....would the publishers have to have articles in early to allow editing and publishing of the magazine to have it on the shelves for the beginning of July? .........could this article have been typeset and magazine layout prepared prior to release of this information?............if publishing a magazine can you pull an article at the last minute if matters / information change????.........not sure what the ultimate deadlines are........time factor.........editing.....typesetting.....time needed for printing / distribution etc..........just a thought!