|
Post by Metella on Jan 12, 2007 12:41:16 GMT -5
Here is the article: news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070112/ap_on_re_us/wolf_huntingBelow is an email I sent in response and a link if you want to use the "contact us" section and send a similar response. gov.idaho.gov/Greetings from a tourist! While I understand the quick emotions of your call to hunt wolves; were you aware that more $$ is spent on eco-tourism & especially around the yellowstone area to just see wolves in the distance? You would actually make more $$ for your state to cultivate this activity than sporatic hunting permits. In addition; the food source for Elk has been shown to be the main source of their decline - so that habitat health would be the most important aspect in growing your state's herd of Elk - as well as dispersment - the wasting disease (prion disease) threatens to wipe out about 80% of all Elk if they continue to huddle in dense feeding grounds over winter. There is NO cure for this disease, so once infected - the elk will die. I would like to vist and see Elk as well as wolves. I don't drive an RV - so I would spend my money on nice hotels, restarants, trinkets: Then multiply me times the many others out there like me & one small ad campain can bring in tens of thousands in one quick swoop. Just hoping you hear my voice which is not anti-hunting at ALL! I have hunted white-tail in PA; as well as other small game. Just my opinion that in the long run - more Elk and more wolves seems to be the way to go. Thank you for your time.
|
|
|
Post by Metella on Jan 12, 2007 12:44:29 GMT -5
Actually I am VERY Anti-hunting just to kill something or mount something or to kill because you are misinformed about the animal!
However, I am not against people hunting an animal that has grown in population to a very large amount IF IF IF they are going to use the animal for meat, fur, etc ...... such as the whitetail deer who in many states are so populous that many starve to death each winter.
Just to kill wolves because you heard too many big bad wolf stories is horrid. Just horrid.
|
|
rangerhm
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 59
|
Post by rangerhm on Jan 12, 2007 14:06:37 GMT -5
I hope the Governor of Idaho never gets his way, what an idiot. At least the wolves will always be protected within the boundaries of Yellowstone National Park and other National Parks as hunting is prohibited there.
I agree with you Metella about hunting, I too am VERY anti hunting if it is just for hunting sake. I don't even like fishing. I think subsistance hunting is OK if you need to do it or it is a part of your family traditions and the animal in question is not endangered in any way.
As for the whitetaled deer who are so populous that many do starve to death each winter, although not this winter in the northeast, I am looking at 5 of them in my backyard right now. Unless people get doe permits and kill does, killing bucks really doesn't help reduce the population all that much. The bucks impregnate the doe's before hunting season begins. I know it is controversial but unless some doe's are killed, hunting alone will not reduce the deer population.
|
|
|
Post by madger on Jan 12, 2007 14:51:57 GMT -5
I love hunters, most of them claim to be nature lovers, they say "Look at that beautiful, I must obliterate it from existence".
Wolves are at the top of the food-chain, if you kill them it trickles down the food chain affecting everything else, down to the algae.
My idea for ecological balance is to get rid of the assholes of the World, of course they would have to be the assholes by my standards. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Jan 12, 2007 16:14:14 GMT -5
I'm afraid my answer to deer overpopulation is to reintroduce the cougars and bring on more wolves (g).
Patcat (who realizes that to a cougar she looks like the main course)
|
|
|
Post by Techguy on Jan 12, 2007 16:29:39 GMT -5
Whenever possible, the ecological balance of nature should be maintained so that the food chain remains relatively intact and undisturbed. Problems arise when humans encroach on the habitats of wildlife, and then expect the wildlife to move or be dealt with so that housing developments and malls can take over the countryside. That's BS, and short-range thinking.
Disrupting nature leads to all sorts of dire consequences which I won't elaborate on here. Suffice it to say, I strongly oppose any ecological "policy" based on misinformation and scare tactics. It's unfortunate that government officials make environmental decisions based on hearsay and a whole lot of errors, and then make more ill-advised decisions on top of that to "correct" their mistakes. This sort of @$$-backwards thinking is what got the US involved in the Iraq quagmire, and will continue with a "surge" of additional forces if Dubya is not stopped. But that's a topic for another thread so I won't go there--for now.
|
|
rangerhm
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 59
|
Post by rangerhm on Jan 13, 2007 17:49:43 GMT -5
Patcat, I agree with you but it is not that simple. In the 80's a college professor of mine did a research study to test the feasability of reintroducing the Mountain Lion back into the high peaks area of the Adirondack Mountains of New York State. He and his research team found that there was not enough contiguous land for them. Too many roads, towns, malls, etc. That was in the 80's in the Adirondack's, can't imagine what a study like that would find now.
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Jan 13, 2007 19:11:12 GMT -5
Oh, I realize it's not that simple...if it only were (sigh.)
Patcat
|
|
|
Post by Metella on Jan 15, 2007 8:12:36 GMT -5
Well - for me - it is that we have seen now (perhaps not in the past - so I can let that go) the care that wolves give their young, they way the play, they way they SCIENTIFICALLY bring down the old and infirm (saving feeding for those who can make it), how they have NOT attacked humans in all our long history .... and finally that there is an organization that Reimburses farmers if there is a proven wolf kill on their livestock.
So how can a human slaughter something when you have seen joy and love in its eyes?
|
|
rue721
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 101
|
Post by rue721 on Jan 16, 2007 15:43:14 GMT -5
People just need to realize that animals aren't here for the personal enjoyment of human beings.
I actually understand hunting better than the way some people mistreat their pets. Some hunters view hunting as a fair physical test of themselves against the wilderness. While I think killing is wrong, and I won't do it, I can understand SOME types of naturalistic hunting, i.e. with bows (as opposed to high powered, super-lethal guns).
At least you can ARGUE that the interaction is a fair contest, and therefore respectful to the animal.
But what about those people who fight their dogs or cocks to the death? Or breed them for agression, so that the animls can never live comfortably within society? Or lock, cage, or tie their animals up, so that the animals must live for long periods with no intellectual stimulation? Or abandon them? Or beat them? Or just show them no love?
That disgusts me more than anything, because a lot of the time, the owners deny that they are doing anything wrong. Animals are beings deserving of respect, and they need social interaction, stimulation, and a medicum of physical comfort, just like people do. How can someone look at an animal and then treat it so casually or cruelly out of completely selfish reasons: persuit of a certain image, or even just plain laziness?
Disgusting.
|
|
noc
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 127
|
Post by noc on Jan 16, 2007 21:42:14 GMT -5
Ok, rue721, after reading your post, I'm afraid that I will be reincarnated as a dog left at home all day alone. I don't think I'll get another dog since I'm not home enough, but I do agree that it is just as bad to mistreat a beloved pet as a wild animal. I had a rescue dog that was bred for aggession and it was heartbreaking. He was so frightened most of the time until he got adjusted to my "pack". My vet teases me that I was a "dog whisperer" before people knew what it was, but my dogs actually take the training credit. He died last December and I miss him horribly (he was a one person dog), but as happy as he was for the last 6 years of his life, he was still nervous outside the home.
I agree with the issues of hunting wolves. I come from an area with coyotes and people, unfortunately, lose their pet cats or small dogs to the coyotes. That said, it's the people who live on the edge of town or a reserve. The poor farmers deal with much paperwork and all sort of hassles, so they can probably deal with it when a wolve kills part of their livestock. I've seen how angry some farmers are on tv, but, frankly, wild dogs have been known to do even more distruction. Three pitbulls killed an 11 year old boy at a bus stop in a town I lived in years ago.
I have few issues with hunting deer for their meat. It's healthier than cows. I try not to eat much meat (I do eat fish) after reading a book called "Living more with less" (may have that backwards). I do think it would be more sporting if the deer had rifles or bows, too (sorry, loved Crocodile Dundee).
Thanks for the information. I really also enjoy wolves, and think they are a tourist attraction.
|
|
rue721
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 101
|
Post by rue721 on Jan 17, 2007 1:06:59 GMT -5
I've seen how angry some farmers are on tv, but, frankly, wild dogs have been known to do even more distruction. Three pitbulls killed an 11 year old boy at a bus stop in a town I lived in years ago. Pittbulls are bred to be extremely aggressive dogs, and they are often trained to fight. I used to live in a neighborhood where that was popular, and it was horrifying what people did to those animals. One man started breeding the dogs, and then he left them in the yards of the local crackhouses to keep them seperated. I lived next door to one of those crackhouses, and saw a dog go from being a sweet puppy to a being a bloodthirsty monster. The dog was left outside- alone- at all times. She was left without food or water for long periods, or given inappropriate food like chicken bones. Other neighborhood fighting dogs were walked with weights, and beaten. And the situation wasn't just bad for the dogs themselves. They were used for intimidation- and they WERE intimidating. Those dogs are so big and powerful, and what with their mistreatment and naturally aggressive dispositions, they become perpetually on edge, and even crazed. To start a dog fight, a cat or other small animal is thrown into the dog fighting ring. The dogs tear the animal apart, and then start in on eachother. These fights can go to the death. My family personally was terrorized by one of these pittbull owners/breeders. He even used our pet cat to start one of his dog fights. Because it was an animal cruelty issue, we couldn't press serious charges. As long as he threatened or destroyed our pets, or used his own dogs as tools of intimidation, nothing could be done. All of this was pretty frightening, not to mention the fact that there are deaths fairly often, of local people who've gotten in the way of some of these viscious dogs. That's why I am strongly against the breeding of these super-aggressive dogs- it's hard enough for the dogs to naturally fit into society, because they are being bred specifically to be as aggressive and strong as possible. They often involved in situations that lead to extreme animal abuse, such as dog fighting. And these abused, aggressive, strong dogs are a threat to people. Sorry to go on such a tirade. I don't understand why ALL issues of animal cruelty aren't taken more seriously- God knows, a lot of people are directly effected. And not just by having the occasional cow taken. We might just need to change our approach to our problems with animals- shooting a few wolves, or putting a few dogs to sleep- isn't going to solve anything as long as we perpetuate the culture or system that brought about the problems in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by member727 on Jan 17, 2007 7:56:58 GMT -5
Sorry to go on such a tirade... Not at all. Kind of makes you sad for the state of humanity though...
|
|
|
Post by maherjunkie on Jan 17, 2007 20:18:32 GMT -5
Rue are you serious? The police could do nothing about the crackhouse, and this creep could take your cat and you had no recourse? No ASPCA in your area?
|
|
rue721
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 101
|
Post by rue721 on Jan 18, 2007 2:51:30 GMT -5
Yes I'm serious. There are scary people, but as long as they don't hurt or explicitly threaten a human being, the cops can't really do anything. What could the ASPCA do? Take the dogs? Someone on the street DID call animal control- it turned out that as long as a dog is fed/watered once a week, and doesn't show real signs of needing a vet, nothing can be done. As long as there is some semblance of normality, law enforcement just sort of has to wait- for any long-term solution at least. And people (except my mother, God bless her) were too intimidated (or they were too uncaring, whatever) to complain too openly about these assholes.
ANYWAY I'm just saying that people can be bullies, and we as a society should be more concerned about it.
|
|