Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Wolves are great for target practise
3 years ago  ::  Mar 02, 2012 - 10:35PM #1
solfeggio
Posts: 9,191
In Montana, the wolf population continues to grow, even though 166 of them were killed in the state's first hunting season since the federal government, in a moronic decision, decided to lift protection of the species last year.

www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/02/us-wo...

In Idaho, hunters and trappers have killed 322 wolves.  And the government hopes to remove protections for wolves in Wyoming as well.  Great Lakes wolves will also lose protection.

www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/22/us-wo...

What the federal government and the hunters and trappers fail to realise is that wolves play an essential part in the maintaining of mountain ecosystems and are an integral part of America's natural history. 

Of course, ranchers, farmers, and those thrill killers that call themselves 'sportsmen' disagree, because they have always seen predators like wolves in competition with them for control of the territory.

abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/story?...

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/03...

www.physorg.com/news135005962.html

And, anyway, it's great fun to kill wolves whenever and however you can. 

Humans have always been in competition with predators, of course, so this is nothing new.  But, of course, the cattle herds are what this is all about, and we all know how important that beef on the hoof is in the American diet.  Ranchers can't let wolves bother those all-important cattle.

Conservation groups have sued to restore protections.  Let's see how far they get. 

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/environm...

       
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 03, 2012 - 12:24PM #2
Marcion
Posts: 2,883

How dare you identify wolves with target practice. Humans are better targets than wolves.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 03, 2012 - 12:52PM #3
farragut
Posts: 3,997

And we don't waste wolves. Their pelts are excellent for our cold-weather wear.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 11:27AM #4
vra
Posts: 6,403

If there's anything we should have learned over the centuries is that if we screw around with Mother Nature, she has a tendency to screw us back in return.  I spend about 1/3 of my time each year at our place in the U.P., and I've seen three wolves over the last several years, and I think they're a welcome addition to the area because of the balance of nature, and I feel the same way about eagles, hawks, coyotes, humans, etc.  


OTOH, I also do believe that thinning the population of some species may be necessary.  I don't hunt, but thinning out the deer herd through human, wolf, and coyote intervention is necessary unless they just starve to death.  Would I rather be shot or starve to death?  Definitely the former, however my wife wants to do that to me now.  ;( 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 7:22PM #5
jane2
Posts: 14,295

Mar 5, 2012 -- 11:27AM, vra wrote:


If there's anything we should have learned over the centuries is that if we screw around with Mother Nature, she has a tendency to screw us back in return.  I spend about 1/3 of my time each year at our place in the U.P., and I've seen three wolves over the last several years, and I think they're a welcome addition to the area because of the balance of nature, and I feel the same way about eagles, hawks, coyotes, humans, etc.  


OTOH, I also do believe that thinning the population of some species may be necessary.  I don't hunt, but thinning out the deer herd through human, wolf, and coyote intervention is necessary unless they just starve to death.  Would I rather be shot or starve to death?  Definitely the former, however my wife wants to do that to me now.  ;( 




More than a little wisdom there.


J.




 

discuss catholicism
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 9:59PM #6
Marcion
Posts: 2,883

In Virginia we have periods where the deer herds are thinned and the venison given to charitable organizations. It is more humane for them to be harvested than starve to death.


However, when the deer wipe out my Hosta garden each year my feelings are a little less charitable.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 10:40PM #7
solfeggio
Posts: 9,191

I always wonder why people use terminology like 'harvesting' or 'thinning out' to describe what is, in fact, plain old-fashioned killing.  Why not just say that you're killing deer? 


At any rate, people complain about there being too many deer in the suburbs and other places, which I'm sure is true.  What is also true is that all that killing over the years has not done anything to reduce those herds, has it?


So, it's not working, then, is it?


The only answer to keeping down a deer population is some sort of sterilisation for either the males of females.  If scientists can come up with a birth control pill for humans, surely they could invent a pill or powder or liquid that could be left about in the forest for deer to eat and thus not have babies.


It's certainly better than killing.


But, of course, if you couldn't kill them legally, then the hunters wouldn't like that.  And I'm sure that's why nobody has ever seriously tried to find some sort of birth control.


 


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 10:45PM #8
jane2
Posts: 14,295

Mar 5, 2012 -- 10:40PM, solfeggio wrote:


I always wonder why people use terminology like 'harvesting' or 'thinning out' to describe what is, in fact, plain old-fashioned killing.  Why not just say that you're killing deer? 


At any rate, people complain about there being too many deer in the suburbs and other places, which I'm sure is true.  What is also true is that all that killing over the years has not done anything to reduce those herds, has it?


So, it's not working, then, is it?


The only answer to keeping down a deer population is some sort of sterilisation for either the males of females.  If scientists can come up with a birth control pill for humans, surely they could invent a pill or powder or liquid that could be left about in the forest for deer to eat and thus not have babies.


It's certainly better than killing.


But, of course, if you couldn't kill them legally, then the hunters wouldn't like that.  And I'm sure that's why nobody has ever seriously tried to find some sort of birth control.


 


 




Take care of your animals in NZ and we'll take care of ours according to our wisdom.




 

discuss catholicism
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 11:20PM #9
solfeggio
Posts: 9,191

Jane -


I'm curious.  Is it your intention to drive me off the Hot Topics Zone?  Do you really feel that only Americans should be allowed to voice opinions here? 


Do you want me to just go away?  Are you so insecure that you cannot bear to have input from anybody who is not an American citizen?


But, other non-Americans post here, but you don't criticise them.  I don't understand.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 10:11AM #10
arielg
Posts: 9,116

At any rate, people complain about there being too many deer in the suburbs and other places, which I'm sure is true.  What is also true is that all that killing over the years has not done anything to reduce those herds, has it?


So, it's not working, then, is it?



It is not working for the simple reason that humans got rid of the natural predators. Every time man gets his hand in the natural order of things, he creates another imbalance  to be solved by further manipulations and attempts to control.


We will have this problem as long as the mindset of "controlling or subduing nature" keeps driving    people's actions.


We have to learn from the ideals of the zen people :  to "walk without leaving any trace", rather than trying  to change  the world to fit our desires.  But unfortunately  hunmanity is too far away from that kind of understanding.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook