California sides with the animal rights nuts

Come on East, how many cases of one species hunting another into extinction are you aware of? I looked and could not find a single instance. Humans hunt more than we can consume and more than nature can replenish. That is not “natural”, it is the exception to the rule.

I think we are using different definitions. I am referring to stewardship as a care taker. I am suggesting that we alter our consumer, wasteful self centered behavior and consider our actions in relation to the world we live in. I am suggesting that we try and limit our foot print where ever possible. I am not suggesting that we can extend our planets future. What I am suggesting is that our actions can and do affect our future. Instead of hunting a species to extinction or to the point it is endangered we should take no more than what nature can replenish and certainly no more than we need. Instead of blaming a wool for killing a few head of cattle perhaps we should create reserves for the animals or just accept the fact that a ranch is in the range of a wolf and that there will be some loss.

Yes we will be long gone in a blink of an eye. We have only been here for a second or two in relation to the earth's existence. I do not think that is an excuse for treating the planet like a waste bucket. My game plane is to treat the earth with respect. I try my best to minimize my foot print.

The wolves have been reintroduced into Yellowstone. The reintroduction of wolves into the eco system created a cascading affect and help bring back a little balance to the region.

Wolves in Yellowstone

Yes I know some people do not like lions. They probably do not like sharks, bears and a host of other predators. Shall we just kill them all off save for a few in zoos and animal parks? I am not of the mind set that we should just do as we please on this planet and dam the consequences. We are humans, we can take precautions. I do not understand why our answer to things must be to eradicate a problem by extermination. Well, I think I do understand it but I just don't get it. I think our arrogance and short sightedness is the height of arrogance/ignorance/astounding....etc.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #62
EastUS1 said:
I'm properly envious EC. Sigh!....never had the pleasure of seeing the man's show in person. Typical sad story = missed a couple chances to do so...thinking "later"....

Hope the Fourth was fun for you and yours. I liked the video link you posted. Far too few see themselves nowadays as properly being Americans.
Click to expand...

My wife and I were two rows back at when he performed at the Aladdin in Vegas. One of the best show's I saw in two decades of visits.

I'm glad you enjoyed the video. It's a reminder of who the real enemy is and does not involve our dispute. It's the low lifes who sucker-punched us on 9-11.

I hope you had a good 4th as well. This was the first time I remember watching fireworks in Phoenix when the temp was in the 70's. We usually head for the hills (Payson) to find cool weather this time of year.
 
Ms Tree said:
I am suggesting that we try and limit our foot print where ever possible.

I try my best to minimize my foot print.

The wolves have been reintroduced into Yellowstone. The reintroduction of wolves into the eco system created a cascading affect and help bring back a little balance to the region.

Yes I know some people do not like lions.
Click to expand...

1) Why? Is that some strange sort of self-loathing nonsense?
2) Sounds like a personal problem to me.
3) What fantasized "balance" are we talking about here? See below:

;)
After the Wolves Were Gone, Elk Increased in Population

Safe from the wolves, elk became more numerous in the park as the years passed. When winters were mild, many elk survived, and without wolves to keep the population down, elk numbers swelled. Park rangers stepped in to control elk numbers. They trapped the elk and sent them to other parks and preserves, but sometimes they had to shoot hundreds of them to keep the population down......

".... sometimes they had to shoot hundreds of them to keep the population down." Ummm...and humans hunting the elk, instead of wolves..is "bad"....umm...WHY? Some elk meat's pretty dang tasty!

Too Many Coyotes
"Without wolves, their smaller cousins, the coyotes, became more numerous...."

Umm...I don't know of any shortage of hunters who'd be happy to take down excessive coyotes either....just a thought here...or; does it have to be other species doing the "controlling?" How is it any grand, "natural" and truly wonderful thing to have wolves killing animals over people doing the same instead? You're not a fan of animals being tortured as I recall...? Well...Would YOU rather be stalked and set upon by a pack of ravenous wolves, and literally chewed to pieces?..or just shot, presumably with little or no warning, or time for severe fear?...Perhaps the "joys" of being torn to shreds and eaten alive are somehow more "compassionate" and "caring" and, of course, blissfully "natural" to inflict on animals in this case? ;)

Do I have this at ALL right here? = You're enthusiastic about laws that prevent unfortunate ducks from being force fed...and believe both lions and wolves should be free to savagely tear up whatever meaty treats come their way, be they human or not?...And these cuddly critters shoiuld be reintroduced into areas previously cleared of them, in order to achieve some "natural balance"...? Is this accurate so far? OK then...you're perfectly fine with accepting savage and extremely violent/brutal/etc attacks on relatively helpless animals (and sometimes human beings) by lions and presumably wolves/et al....just to keep things "natural"...and supposedly in "balance", and that is somehow "Good" and should be supported by laws and taxpayers' money? (Insert the sound of a wolf or lion's teeth crunching into bone here, after ripping away the surface flesh..nevermind the terrified shreiks of fear and the agony of the prey)...BUT.....even such atrocities as force feeding ducks for pate/etc...is "bad"? Sigh!.....I think we're pretty close to being done here on this, as at least one us is obviously "unclear on the concept" here. ;) Might be me, since I can make NO sense whatsoever of what your actual position on cruelty to animals is....or if it even exists as other than some VERY vague concept. I'm unsure as to whether you actually know yourself, or can at least define it in any reasonable and consistent terms.....?

Wolves/Lions/Sharks et al, sometimes slowly and savagely tearing other animals to bits = Perfectly OK? People shooting their "natural" prey instead = "Bad"? Let's all hear a rousing show of applause for the true Glory of going for "natural balance"! ;)

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Other bits:[/background]​


http://www.jhnewsand...php?art_id=4596

http://www.powayusd....owstonewolf.htm
 
Never mind. We are completely different plains of thought and this discussion is going no where.
 
Ms Tree said:
Never mind. We are completely different plains of thought and this discussion is going no where.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I've NEVER met any who offer up such as you do that could, with ANY actual reason and logic, support ANY of it with even the slightest consistency.

Oh well: "Might be me, since I can make NO sense whatsoever of what your actual position on cruelty to animals is....or if it even exists as other than some VERY vague concept. I'm unsure as to whether you actually know yourself, or can at least define it in any reasonable and consistent terms.....?"

Translation = I'm not up for even attempting full time living in any cross-threaded Fantasyland, as would seemingly be required to enter into your "plain" by which I believe you meant "plane" of thought.
 
Since your all about Big Brother running your life, why not write a letter to the "Annointed One" , asking him to pass another bill, in the middle of the night, behind closed doors, stating "One child per household, then it's spay and neuter time!" At least that would cut down on some of the "FREE" handouts to all the single parents with 8 kids , and 4 different fathers !
 
EastCheats said:
My wife and I were two rows back at when he performed at the Aladdin in Vegas. One of the best show's I saw in two decades of visits.

I'm glad you enjoyed the video. It's a reminder of who the real enemy is and does not involve our dispute. It's the low lifes who sucker-punched us on 9-11.
Click to expand...

1) That would have been great...Sigh!...more envy ;)
2) Amen to that Brother!
 
southwind said:
Since your all about Big Brother running your life, why not write a letter to the "Annointed One" , asking him to pass another bill, in the middle of the night, behind closed doors, stating "One child per household, then it's spay and neuter time!" At least that would cut down on some of the "FREE" handouts to all the single parents with 8 kids , and 4 different fathers !
Click to expand...

Well....that might be considered "cruel". Perhaps they should be allowed to be born..then thrown to wolves/sharks/lions or whatever's available to keep things in some "natural balance" instead? Plus...just consider how much money could be raised to feed starving people by making such ceremonies available on Pay Per View? Ok...just kidding there folks...It was only my "natural" animal coming out..seeking "balance" for the environment ;)
 
Ms Tree said:
10 recently extinct animals
Click to expand...

Yes and we were responsible for the dinosaurs, the sabre tooth tiger, the wholly mammoth, and so many other species on this earth. Now we are getting blamed for the polar bear and we're doing it by causing globull warming. Man may contribute but is no way the sole factor.

Also, I'll look it up for you, but there are animals that are being discovered that we never even knew existed. Man is not nature-since you probably don't want to hear the God factor-nor can he manipulate it. Those raging fires are sending masses of carbon into the air. A moose's fart gives off more greenhouse gas than a 747 circumventing the globe twice. These are real global warming factors.

Evolution doesn't really involve one animal leading to another, but rather the survival instinct in a changing world of the species. Like I said, sometimes you have to go beyond the books, and look closely at the real world around you and deviate from the norm and not follow others.
 
So since we are not responsible for some/most extinctions we are not responsible for any? Is that your argument? Science is not claiming man is the sole factor but a contributing factor.


I'll save you the trouble, according to National Geogrphic about 86% of the Zo pecies on the planet are unknown. This has nothing to do with anything being discussed.

Assuming that we may contribute to the changing climate on the planet does it not follow that we can
limit our contribution? What would be the harm in that?

Evolution involves genetics, not instinct or any other magic qualities you would like to attribute to it. I suggest that before you look beyond books, you actually look at them first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SegmentKing
INFLIGHT SERVICE UPGRADES COMING! :-)
2
Replies
19
Views
4K
singh4us
singh4us
Y
Airline Showdown at the CA Corral
3 4 5
Replies
62
Views
12K
Steiner
S
I
Rjdc 4/22/04 Update
Replies
2
Views
2K
BoeingBoy
BoeingBoy

Latest posts

Back
Top