JohnDBarrow

This holds some promise too, a double cab version would even be sweeter:

It will then have to be a good preowned gas-only Tacoma 4-cyl. for me with a double cab and full 6-foot box. There is absolutely no logic in the new automobile and light-duty truck market whatsoever. God only knows when the automobile industry will truly get its chit together. This is from the days when Toyota had perfect sense. Dollars and cents. 1979-1980 television commercial.

I need something to haul my German Shepherd, my camping gear, my canoe and my deer when I go hunting. How much money do I need to give to Big Oil at the pump for accomplishing this endeavor? If the newfangled Ford Maverick truck had a 6-foot box and Toyota build quality along with nice folks at the Ford dealership, it would be a pure win for me. Ford has a great energy-saving idea that I wish Toyota would improve upon real soon. It would be no more challenging to build an electric pickup truck with solid-state batteries than an electric passenger automobile. I want a personal vehicle that is mother-earth-friendly but also worth a damn for working capacity and room. They just have to improve the energy efficiency of pickup trucks considerably.

So, it makes absolutely no sense to buy one. For automobiles, the new Corolla Hybrid can top 50 MPG highway. The new Tacoma truck hybrid gets even worse MPG than it's pure gas counterpart while the Corolla car hybrid gets much better MPG than a pure gas Corolla. Ford's Maverick hybrid truck can top 42 MPG highway. The only trouble is, it's a Big Three product.

I'm not dissing anything. I'm an American. I'm only relaying what is being offered by Toyota Motor Company right now for us American consumers. According to Toyota's corporate website, Toyota's new 2025 pure gasoline Tacoma in 4-cyl motor actually has better MPG highway than its new hybrid Tacoma. 26 MPG vs 22 MPG so please try to figure that one out. It seems like hybrid cars, like Prius and Corolla, on the other hand do much better than their gas-only counterparts on gas. What is the point of buying a more expensive hybrid truck if it even gets $hittier gas mileage? I thought the whole notion of hybrid was to reduce fossil fuels consumption. Until Toyota offers us Yanks those solid-state battery trucks that can go 500+ miles on a single charge, there's not much I can do about it. Toyota breakthrough: What are solid-state batteries and why do we need them? | New Scientist

For American new-car market. No thrifty little Scout truck as promised. Tacoma truck prices ever soaring. Still no plug-in battery electric trucks. Of course, I don't want plug-in battery trucks until they can compete with fossil-fuels-burning trucks with similar load capacity, trailer-pulling capacity, highway speeds and range. The promised solid state batteries were supposed to make this a reality. We asked for it, Toyota, when shall we get it? Gladly, base-model gasoline Corollas have not jumped up in price for 2025.

I agree. Businesses best serve the public when the public holds them. Why did stupid Americans vote otherwise to privatize utilities then complain about big electric bills? Americans are indoctrinated that capitalism is always a "good" thing.

Apparently, the government did nothing about it. Apparently, some people favor acting upon emotions over sound reasoning. I can see my remark with the word "conservation" in it got scrapped.

I live in middle America where the plains are swept with winds almost nonstop. I figured my local grid is powered by clean and green wind turbines. I figured my posts here are brung to you by clean renewable energy. The wind, it seems, is the solution to pollution. As Bob Dylan once sang, "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind."

My thread involving sensible wildlife conservation was just locked. It just goes to show how far emotions vs hard facts and truths have infiltrated academia. I just don't know what warm-and-fuzzy stuff to post at this site that makes others here feel good.

This following video is a testament to brain-dead idiots in Pinko anti-American state capitol buildings who don't know a Walker treeing hound from a Walker Colt.

Science is human technical knowledge. It can be applied for good or evil purposes. I thank those very much who've applied science to bring me the air conditioner in my home and the one in my automobile so I don't die of a heat stroke or an asthma attack on very hot days. I appreciate those who are applying science to try to make cancer a thing of the past. I appreciate those who are applying science in the name of getting mankind off fossil fuels for good by substituting those nasty, dirty finite things for clean and safe renewable energy means. I deplore those who have applied science to create weapons of mass destruction to cause widespread death and suffering. I appreciate those who are applying science to try to protect Americans from possible nuclear attacks from evil nations abroad.

The video above is the best way I have found so far to show how hunting can be applied as a feasible tool to manage wildlife wisely in my own humble opinion.

Hunters generate revenues for game wardens, state biologists and conservation officers and such to operate in the United States of America through game licensing and tag fees. Explosives would create a fire hazard in forests. Well-placed bullets from proper centerfire rifles are much more humane than poisons. Hunting bear and other fur-bearing animals with hounds is a romantic adventure. Hunters have to pay states for the privilege to enjoy such romantic pursuits. The cry of speaking Walker treeing hounds in the woods below a treed bear or cougar is a joy to hear echoing through the trees. All of that helicopter stuff would just be a tax-payer burden. All of that burnt helicopter fossil fuel would not be Mother Earth friendly unless the flying machines were to otherwise run on biofuels from corn or green hydrogen, perhaps. The explosives would also destroy valuable trees, for you tree-huggers! The nose of a trained Walker treeing hound (moreover, a pack of them) is quite keen and efficient. This natural sniffer can home in on a bear or a big cat like a heat-seeking missile. Otherwise, these animals would be as evasive as Bigfoot to try to track.

Harvesting animals unlawfully is POACHING. Harvesting animals IAW game regulations is NOT poaching. If scientists determine that so many animals must be harvested for the good of the species or the environment, then so be it. I am a deer and dove hunter myself. I strictly follow the game laws. If the animal in question was lawfully taken, I don't care what legitimate business the pelt is involved in. I would mount a standing full-body bull giraffe in my private hunting lodge if I were to have the wherewithal to lawfully take one in an African safari perhaps if it were a rogue bull putting local villagers in danger. Naturally, I would want the airplane and the safari vehicles for my safari adventure to be powered by renewables to be in good conscience. Also, if an animal or two must be killed for conservation efforts, I believe in giving law-abiding sport hunters first crack at it. Hunters generate revenues through game tags, ammunition sales and licensing fees that go toward wildlife management. Having only government officials to cull herds creates an unnecessary taxpayer burden.