because people care more about animals then they do other people. It's a fact. I think half the human race has given up on itself, and no longer cares about who dies, unless its a lot of people, or really gruesome. Then it's interesting. Not heartbreaking, just interesting. Then it actually makes the national news, unlike the majority of deaths.
<!--QuoteBegin-coil+Mar 15 2004, 08:23 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (coil @ Mar 15 2004, 08:23 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> EEK, you're working your way towards a suspension. Learn to play nice with the other forumers or you're going to be taking time off. It's fine to have a different opinion, but at least respect the opinions of others. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What did I say? He said it wasn't nice we were encroaching on other critter's territory. I pointed out how rediculous that is.
<!--QuoteBegin-Shockwave+Mar 15 2004, 09:04 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Shockwave @ Mar 15 2004, 09:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Mar 15 2004, 02:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Mar 15 2004, 02:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <ul> </li><li>I agree its sad to see animals become extinct, but it comes down to survival of the fittest. </li></ul> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not when we do it against all others so effectively we damage our own foodchain. We as a species are currently way above our population level as it should be. This is having huge effects on other life. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> We are above the foodchain. If we need food we can create it at our will.
<!--QuoteBegin-Epidemic+Mar 14 2004, 08:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Epidemic @ Mar 14 2004, 08:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Adapt or die wulfies - This is the law of nature.. Survival of the fittest <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> my thoughts exactly lol!1
As someone who has lived on a farm his entire life, I will say that the most cost effective solution is to shoot any animal that threatens the business. It seems like non-violent deterents are usually too expensive for the full time family farmer (big corporate farms have no excuse though). Its sad to see your money go down the drain because some animal has ate the crops or the livestock.
Bah, discussions like this make me angry, you people think "aww the poor animals get shot because they were hungry" but what about the people who's entire lives depend on what those damn animals are eating. I have had the personal experience of seeing what a herd of deer can do to a cornfield, and I have helped rectify that problem too. I have shot deer, coyotes, raccoons, groundhogs (woodchucks if you call them that) and other forms of animals that have destroyed our farm. Hell, the deer are such a large problem that we get special permits to shoot deer with high powered rifles at night with spotlights (and what fun it is I might add). We kill the animals not because of sport, but because they are a threat to our survival.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We are above the foodchain. If we need food we can create it at our will. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, we are not above the foodchain. Food is still grown, not created, people seem to lose this notion when they go to the local gorcery store and find all the food there packed up nice and neat, not realizing how much hard work and dedication went into growing that food so you can keep on living.
LikuI, am the Somberlain.Join Date: 2003-01-10Member: 12128Members
edited March 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Beast+Mar 15 2004, 02:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beast @ Mar 15 2004, 02:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> but going on a killing spree on the wolves afterwards..killing an entire pack because of the doings of one or two wolves...it's outrageous.. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Cattle don't do anything, they're killed by the thousands. <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Some of them are completely innocent of the "crimes" charged.. They were killed just because they happened to be in the same pack as the "offenders"...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If you're caught with someone that has drugs, but you're not using, you're getting arrested. <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If someone is sent to deathrow (human), do we send their family as well? Why is it different for wolves?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, because we can reason with their families. We can teach them not to do what their family member did. Can't do that with Wolves, they'll just keep coming back. <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->How would <u>you</u> like it if someone killed everyone in your family but you and your brother/sister, then captured and used you to lure your brother/sister back, so he could kill you both?
Why not think about that for a while, then make an opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Tough Luck. <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Because a handful of kooks think they're wolves inside a human being? Please...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ouch.
<!--QuoteBegin-Burr+Mar 16 2004, 03:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burr @ Mar 16 2004, 03:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As someone who has lived on a farm his entire life, I will say that the most cost effective solution is to shoot any animal that threatens the business. It seems like non-violent deterents are usually too expensive for the full time family farmer (big corporate farms have no excuse though). Its sad to see your money go down the drain because some animal has ate the crops or the livestock.
Bah, discussions like this make me angry, you people think "aww the poor animals get shot because they were hungry" but what about the people who's entire lives depend on what those damn animals are eating. I have had the personal experience of seeing what a herd of deer can do to a cornfield, and I have helped rectify that problem too. I have shot deer, coyotes, raccoons, groundhogs (woodchucks if you call them that) and other forms of animals that have destroyed our farm. Hell, the deer are such a large problem that we get special permits to shoot deer with high powered rifles at night with spotlights (and what fun it is I might add). We kill the animals not because of sport, but because they are a threat to our survival.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We are above the foodchain. If we need food we can create it at our will. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, we are not above the foodchain. Food is still grown, not created, people seem to lose this notion when they go to the local gorcery store and find all the food there packed up nice and neat, not realizing how much hard work and dedication went into growing that food so you can keep on living.
/rant <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> If it came to it, we could have synthetic foods, so nya
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If it came to it, we could have synthetic foods, so nya <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, we could, since we can make synthetic materials such as nylon, we could also just take vitamins that have all the nutrients we need, but would you really want to do that? I mean, taking the joy out of eating a nice big steak or a fresh crisp salad just dones't seem too appealing to me. Plus, everything still comes from the earth, its still a transfer of energy, you can't just make food appear out of nothing.
ShockehIf a packet drops on the web and nobody's near to see it...Join Date: 2002-11-19Member: 9336NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-Mullet+Mar 16 2004, 03:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mullet @ Mar 16 2004, 03:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Personally I think it's pretty sad that this topic is more active than the topic about the Spain terrorist attacks. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't. It pretty much summarises how stupid humans are in general.
You cant remove an animal like the wolf without it having dire consequences. Kill all the wolves? Guess what? too much deer! Then they come in hordes and eat your corn, and the remaining predators increase because there's so much deer. Then you kill those off. Deer come back. They eat all the plants in the forest, then come in hordes to eat your corn. You slaughter them. No more fertilization in the forest, because you've killed everything. Plants die. Soil eventually turns to ****. You gradually lose farmland because it's not being fertilized by wild animals, only your cattle, which dont walk everywhere on a daily basis, so they cant poo on every bit of land you have. They returned the wolves to Yellowstone for ecological reasons, not because they look cool.
<!--QuoteBegin-BloodySloth+Mar 16 2004, 08:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BloodySloth @ Mar 16 2004, 08:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You cant remove an animal like the wolf without it having dire consequences. Kill all the wolves? Guess what? too much deer! Then they come in hordes and eat your corn, and the remaining predators increase because there's so much deer. Then you kill those off. Deer come back. They eat all the plants in the forest, then come in hordes to eat your corn. You slaughter them. No more fertilization in the forest, because you've killed everything. Plants die. Soil eventually turns to ****. You gradually lose farmland because it's not being fertilized by wild animals, only your cattle, which dont walk everywhere on a daily basis, so they cant poo on every bit of land you have. They returned the wolves to Yellowstone for ecological reasons, not because they look cool. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually most deer are too fast for wolves. They rarely will ever kill one, instead opting to kill the weaker, slower ones when they need food (thus strengthening the herd), but hunting deer, those weaker deer get killed, thus depriving wolves of their food source (smaller species are known to eat mice when this happens) leaving them to look for food elsewhere. The "wolf problem", isn't a wolf problem at all, its a deer problem.
I'll say it again, and again until people get this basic bit of biology through their heads.
Predator populations follow a typical 'boom and bust' cycle. Where one year they will peak at a very high number proportional to the amount of food available (prey), who funnily enough, are ALSO following the same cycle. Following years the prey gets wiped out (IE a bust) and then the predators follow. So both species fluctuate in numbers very widely from season to season.
Wiping out a pack of wolves will have no significant effect on the population other than wiping out potential alleles. In a very short time, maybe a year or so, they will probably have to do it again because of the wolf population getting back up to high levels. Really, the wolf population is under no threat of becoming extinct any time soon. It would take a truely catastrophic slaughter to actually cause the population to go extinct.
There are far more important things to be worried about in the animal kingdom. Frogs have been disappearing at an amazing rate, we're losing species of birds left right and centre and more than 800+ species of insect go extinct/become endangered every day as we encroach on the rain forest. Endangered whales are being massacred for 'scientific research' when in reality this is simply full of rubbish. Extremely endangered tigers are being killed for no real apparent reason (fur I believe, sometimes claws too) and more reasons. There are infinitely better things for people to be focusing effort on.
Really, I'm hardly going to worry when a few non endangered wolves that have a more than self-sustaining number are culled.
The final aspect really is how effective other means than shooting an animal there are. Well first of all, deterrants only work when there isn't a large pressure to simply ignore them. What doesn't kill something, only makes it stronger. If they know there is food there, and selective pressures (usually competition, a lack of other food sources) are inevitably going to lead to a conflict. Unfortunately for wolves, where we've forgone teeth and claws, we've developed extremely cunning projectile weapons. This inevitably leads to the wolves losing, and pretty badly. Unfortunately, that is the only suitably control method, that will cease the attacks and reduce the competition (and hence desire to ignore deterrants etc).
Incidently, on shark repellant, one of the other little factors involved here is that sharks normally don't attack people. They only really do in certain circumstances, such as surfers being the classic example, because the human in question resembles its natural prey or food. Wolves on the other hand DID formerly attack humans and history has recorded this many times. Unfortunately for wolves, we were infinitely better at wiping them out, and is probably why we have few wolf attacks today, because wolves that were aggressive enough to attack humans were pretty much were exterminated. Nothing like a selective pressure not to bother a particular creature or die.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Actually most deer are too fast for wolves. They rarely will ever kill one,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but this is true of nearly any predator/prey interaction.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> (smaller species are known to eat mice when this happens) leaving them to look for food elsewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wolves (and many other species) are adapted for eating small prey actually, not large animals at all. The only reason they can eat large animals is because they evolved pack hunting instincts. Otherwise they are in fact marvellously adapted to eating small animals or whatever else they find.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
<!--QuoteBegin-Shockwave+Mar 16 2004, 10:16 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Shockwave @ Mar 16 2004, 10:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Mullet+Mar 16 2004, 03:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mullet @ Mar 16 2004, 03:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Personally I think it's pretty sad that this topic is more active than the topic about the Spain terrorist attacks. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't. It pretty much summarises how stupid humans are in general. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Jebus, that's along the same line of generalisation as nazi-german. Yeah, "der ewige mench"
ShockehIf a packet drops on the web and nobody's near to see it...Join Date: 2002-11-19Member: 9336NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-Epidemic+Mar 16 2004, 02:33 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Epidemic @ Mar 16 2004, 02:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Shockwave+Mar 16 2004, 10:16 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Shockwave @ Mar 16 2004, 10:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Mullet+Mar 16 2004, 03:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mullet @ Mar 16 2004, 03:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Personally I think it's pretty sad that this topic is more active than the topic about the Spain terrorist attacks. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't. It pretty much summarises how stupid humans are in general. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Jebus, that's along the same line of generalisation as nazi-german. Yeah, "der ewige mench" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not. I have an amazing low opinion on the ability of the human race to make intelligent decisions. We're far more animal than we think we are.
<!--QuoteBegin-BloodySloth+Mar 16 2004, 08:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BloodySloth @ Mar 16 2004, 08:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You gradually lose farmland because it's not being fertilized by wild animals, only your cattle, which dont walk everywhere on a daily basis, so they cant poo on every bit of land you have.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> YEah, that would almost be right, except for a few things:
A: Cattle only walk on pasture and grazing fields, which in turn get chewed down to make a more suitable environment to plant on next season
B: Since our main animal is pigs, they excrete ALOT of manure, and since they do not reside outside, then all the manure gets collected in large tanks/pits, and that in turn can BE APPLIED to the fields to increase the fertility of the soil during the off season.
C: Even if they didn't have large amounts of manure, farmers still applied synthetic fertilizer (Urea, or something with a high nitrogen content) before, during, and after planting.
D: Its called Crop Rotation, Basically one year you plant corn in a field, then the next year you plant some crop with high nitrogen content (some kind of legume) and let it die on the field, thereby adding the nitrogen to the soil and refertilzing the feild so it can be planted on again next season.
Yes, there is a WHOLE lot more to farming than just planting stuff into the ground and hoping it will grow. Alot of math and science goes into farming to make sure you have something to eat.
*edit* Forgive me for the thread hijack, but its not very often I can use this kind of information that is stored in my head to educate the masses
ShockehIf a packet drops on the web and nobody's near to see it...Join Date: 2002-11-19Member: 9336NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-Epidemic+Mar 16 2004, 03:19 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Epidemic @ Mar 16 2004, 03:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Would that include yourself? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Absolutely. I'm under no illusions as to how many times I've looked back & in hindsight, realised what I did was more instinctive & reactionary than conscious thought.
Glad I'm not the only forumite to not jump on the wolf band wagon, and a healthy debate taking place in Off Topic - hurrah for the forums.
Back on topic, I feel this is only getting people interested becasue wolves are more palatable to humans then the plight of modern farmers (down the Common Agricultural Policy!) and personally I'd know I'd rather save farmer's welfare than one pack of wolves.
As for the reply to my post earlier, humans have different rights to animals, and are vastly more important to the State which is why the wolves were culled.
Zig...I am Captain Planet!Join Date: 2002-10-23Member: 1576Members
<!--QuoteBegin-Josiah Bartlet+Mar 16 2004, 09:47 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Mar 16 2004, 09:47 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> and personally I'd know I'd rather save farmer's welfare than one pack of wolves. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> but they could have saved both.
<!--QuoteBegin-Josiah Bartlet+Mar 16 2004, 12:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Mar 16 2004, 12:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> and personally I'd know I'd rather save farmer's welfare than one pack of wolves.
As for the reply to my post earlier, humans have different rights to animals, and are vastly more important to the State which is why the wolves were culled. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes because we all know money is more important than attempting NOT to destroy our ecosystem. Really this is a bigger issue than 'just wolves'. Its people thinking that this is THEIR planet, that THEY are the only ones on it, and that everything should bow down to them. Example: Africanized honey bees, AKA killer bees. A business endeavor to make bees produce more honey, ends with them having a horrid temperment, attacking in huge swarms, and the breed is slowly moving north. The point is when you screw with this stuff theres reprecussions. You might not see it visibly, but when you kill 3/4th of that pack, from a friggin helicopter, theres going to be reprecussions. This isn't about 'save the wolves' its about 'stop freaking up the planet, were already screwing it up enough as is with global warming'
<!--QuoteBegin-dr.d+Mar 15 2004, 07:14 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Mar 15 2004, 07:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The reason so much livestock is being killed by predators is because more and more farms are moving into areas which were previously uninhabited.
Food has become an enormous business in the US, and the key to the current fast food phenomenon is low prices for beef, dairy, etc. The only way to do this is to have a huge surplus of food to sell the companies so they can constantly flood the market and keep prices at bottom levels.
Sure we don't want to pay more for food, we have a right to be fed etc., etc. But have you ever stopped to think about why obesity is such a huge problem in the US, do you notice that there are at least 2 commercials for some sort of food products in every commercial break on any channel you turn to. The food industries are making quick bucks at the expense of our health and the stability of ecosystems, scaling down will not bring about the apocalypse and cause soaring prices it will simply reduce the amount of product flooding the market, and in turn lead to people actually eating within normal human limits. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> That's why so many farmers are "in plight" the US is producing way more food than it needs. Food has become big business, and when a lot of money is involved you can be sure the only interests that are being looked after are the people who are making the profits.
The U.S. farmers plight is the fact that the government tries to keep food prices as low as they can. This means (Im giving hogs again as an example) that pigs are imported in from canada, driving down the market price. Do you really think that we get all that money you paid for the bacon? Hell no, we barely get a fraction. For us, an acceptable price per pound for a market hog would be around 40 cents per pound. Right now I beleive it is around 20 cents per pound. Now, do you think that this affects all the large coroporate farms? No, this affects all the small farmers. You talk about wolves going extinct, well the Full Time Family Farmer is going extinct too, the one who gets up at the crack of dawn and only quits for lunch, dinner, and then is finally done about 3 hours after the sun goes down. My family is one of the few remaining in the county that makes all its money from the farm, no outside income whatsoever, my mom even works full time on the farm. It is a business, an investment, our lives, and I am not going to let some animal ruin that because people feel bad about them. Yes, you could take measures to peacefully deter the animals, but as I stated before those are expensive, and farmers just don't have that kind of money to throw around, they have to pay for things like seed, electriciy, maitenece, chemicals, medicine, among various other expensive things. So unless the government decides to help us and pay for these deterents, I'm going to keep on shooting pests that threaten my families way of life, because it is the most cost effective solution to our problem.
<!--QuoteBegin-OttoDestruct+Mar 16 2004, 06:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (OttoDestruct @ Mar 16 2004, 06:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Josiah Bartlet+Mar 16 2004, 12:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Mar 16 2004, 12:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> and personally I'd know I'd rather save farmer's welfare than one pack of wolves.
As for the reply to my post earlier, humans have different rights to animals, and are vastly more important to the State which is why the wolves were culled. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes because we all know money is more important than attempting NOT to destroy our ecosystem. Really this is a bigger issue than 'just wolves'. Its people thinking that this is THEIR planet, that THEY are the only ones on it, and that everything should bow down to them. Example: Africanized honey bees, AKA killer bees. A business endeavor to make bees produce more honey, ends with them having a horrid temperment, attacking in huge swarms, and the breed is slowly moving north. The point is when you screw with this stuff theres reprecussions. You might not see it visibly, but when you kill 3/4th of that pack, from a friggin helicopter, theres going to be reprecussions. This isn't about 'save the wolves' its about 'stop freaking up the planet, were already screwing it up enough as is with global warming' <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Someone else already explained in this thread as to why one pack of wolves will not destroy the entire wolf population. And I didn't say that money was more important than our own ecosystem - I said one pack of wolves is less important than the farmer's welfare.
<!--QuoteBegin-Josiah Bartlet+Mar 16 2004, 02:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Mar 16 2004, 02:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Someone else already explained in this thread as to why one pack of wolves will not destroy the entire wolf population. And I didn't say that money was more important than our own ecosystem - I said one pack of wolves is less important than the farmer's welfare. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> A pack of wolves here, a pack of wolves there, until it becomes to the point where theres only a few packs left right?
<!--QuoteBegin-OttoDestruct+Mar 16 2004, 07:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (OttoDestruct @ Mar 16 2004, 07:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Josiah Bartlet+Mar 16 2004, 02:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Mar 16 2004, 02:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Someone else already explained in this thread as to why one pack of wolves will not destroy the entire wolf population. And I didn't say that money was more important than our own ecosystem - I said one pack of wolves is less important than the farmer's welfare. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> A pack of wolves here, a pack of wolves there, until it becomes to the point where theres only a few packs left right? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No I was refering to the ones in the article at the start and there of course must be limits to however many wolves are killed. Just because I say that these wolves should be killed doesn't mean I say that all wolves should be killed. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
<!--QuoteBegin-OttoDestruct+Mar 16 2004, 07:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (OttoDestruct @ Mar 16 2004, 07:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Josiah Bartlet+Mar 16 2004, 02:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Mar 16 2004, 02:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Someone else already explained in this thread as to why one pack of wolves will not destroy the entire wolf population. And I didn't say that money was more important than our own ecosystem - I said one pack of wolves is less important than the farmer's welfare. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> A pack of wolves here, a pack of wolves there, until it becomes to the point where theres only a few packs left right? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> As far as I know, this happened with the Mexican wolf (lobo)... THere are only about 4 dozen Mexican wolves left in the wild now AFAIK.....
So, what exactly are we doing to save wolves besides complaining here?
Honestly, online petitions don't do any good whatsoever. Don't forget to save all the other endangered species that people kill every day for useless purposes. I know they're not cuddly wolves who beast apparently evolved from, but they still deserve a chance.
Comments
Personally I think it's pretty sad that this topic is more active than the topic about the Spain terrorist attacks.
What did I say? He said it wasn't nice we were encroaching on other critter's territory. I pointed out how rediculous that is.
</li><li>I agree its sad to see animals become extinct, but it comes down to survival of the fittest.
</li></ul> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not when we do it against all others so effectively we damage our own foodchain. We as a species are currently way above our population level as it should be. This is having huge effects on other life. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
We are above the foodchain. If we need food we can create it at our will.
my thoughts exactly lol!1
Bah, discussions like this make me angry, you people think "aww the poor animals get shot because they were hungry" but what about the people who's entire lives depend on what those damn animals are eating. I have had the personal experience of seeing what a herd of deer can do to a cornfield, and I have helped rectify that problem too. I have shot deer, coyotes, raccoons, groundhogs (woodchucks if you call them that) and other forms of animals that have destroyed our farm. Hell, the deer are such a large problem that we get special permits to shoot deer with high powered rifles at night with spotlights (and what fun it is I might add). We kill the animals not because of sport, but because they are a threat to our survival.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We are above the foodchain. If we need food we can create it at our will. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, we are not above the foodchain. Food is still grown, not created, people seem to lose this notion when they go to the local gorcery store and find all the food there packed up nice and neat, not realizing how much hard work and dedication went into growing that food so you can keep on living.
/rant
Cattle don't do anything, they're killed by the thousands.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Some of them are completely innocent of the "crimes" charged.. They were killed just because they happened to be in the same pack as the "offenders"...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you're caught with someone that has drugs, but you're not using, you're getting arrested.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If someone is sent to deathrow (human), do we send their family as well? Why is it different for wolves?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, because we can reason with their families. We can teach them not to do what their family member did. Can't do that with Wolves, they'll just keep coming back.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->How would <u>you</u> like it if someone killed everyone in your family but you and your brother/sister, then captured and used you to lure your brother/sister back, so he could kill you both?
Why not think about that for a while, then make an opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Tough Luck.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Because a handful of kooks think they're wolves inside a human being? Please...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ouch.
Bah, discussions like this make me angry, you people think "aww the poor animals get shot because they were hungry" but what about the people who's entire lives depend on what those damn animals are eating. I have had the personal experience of seeing what a herd of deer can do to a cornfield, and I have helped rectify that problem too. I have shot deer, coyotes, raccoons, groundhogs (woodchucks if you call them that) and other forms of animals that have destroyed our farm. Hell, the deer are such a large problem that we get special permits to shoot deer with high powered rifles at night with spotlights (and what fun it is I might add). We kill the animals not because of sport, but because they are a threat to our survival.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We are above the foodchain. If we need food we can create it at our will. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, we are not above the foodchain. Food is still grown, not created, people seem to lose this notion when they go to the local gorcery store and find all the food there packed up nice and neat, not realizing how much hard work and dedication went into growing that food so you can keep on living.
/rant <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
If it came to it, we could have synthetic foods, so nya
Yes, we could, since we can make synthetic materials such as nylon, we could also just take vitamins that have all the nutrients we need, but would you really want to do that? I mean, taking the joy out of eating a nice big steak or a fresh crisp salad just dones't seem too appealing to me. Plus, everything still comes from the earth, its still a transfer of energy, you can't just make food appear out of nothing.
I don't. It pretty much summarises how stupid humans are in general.
Actually most deer are too fast for wolves. They rarely will ever kill one, instead opting to kill the weaker, slower ones when they need food (thus strengthening the herd), but hunting deer, those weaker deer get killed, thus depriving wolves of their food source (smaller species are known to eat mice when this happens) leaving them to look for food elsewhere. The "wolf problem", isn't a wolf problem at all, its a deer problem.
Predator populations follow a typical 'boom and bust' cycle. Where one year they will peak at a very high number proportional to the amount of food available (prey), who funnily enough, are ALSO following the same cycle. Following years the prey gets wiped out (IE a bust) and then the predators follow. So both species fluctuate in numbers very widely from season to season.
Wiping out a pack of wolves will have no significant effect on the population other than wiping out potential alleles. In a very short time, maybe a year or so, they will probably have to do it again because of the wolf population getting back up to high levels. Really, the wolf population is under no threat of becoming extinct any time soon. It would take a truely catastrophic slaughter to actually cause the population to go extinct.
There are far more important things to be worried about in the animal kingdom. Frogs have been disappearing at an amazing rate, we're losing species of birds left right and centre and more than 800+ species of insect go extinct/become endangered every day as we encroach on the rain forest. Endangered whales are being massacred for 'scientific research' when in reality this is simply full of rubbish. Extremely endangered tigers are being killed for no real apparent reason (fur I believe, sometimes claws too) and more reasons. There are infinitely better things for people to be focusing effort on.
Really, I'm hardly going to worry when a few non endangered wolves that have a more than self-sustaining number are culled.
The final aspect really is how effective other means than shooting an animal there are. Well first of all, deterrants only work when there isn't a large pressure to simply ignore them. What doesn't kill something, only makes it stronger. If they know there is food there, and selective pressures (usually competition, a lack of other food sources) are inevitably going to lead to a conflict. Unfortunately for wolves, where we've forgone teeth and claws, we've developed extremely cunning projectile weapons. This inevitably leads to the wolves losing, and pretty badly. Unfortunately, that is the only suitably control method, that will cease the attacks and reduce the competition (and hence desire to ignore deterrants etc).
Incidently, on shark repellant, one of the other little factors involved here is that sharks normally don't attack people. They only really do in certain circumstances, such as surfers being the classic example, because the human in question resembles its natural prey or food. Wolves on the other hand DID formerly attack humans and history has recorded this many times. Unfortunately for wolves, we were infinitely better at wiping them out, and is probably why we have few wolf attacks today, because wolves that were aggressive enough to attack humans were pretty much were exterminated. Nothing like a selective pressure not to bother a particular creature or die.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Actually most deer are too fast for wolves. They rarely will ever kill one,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but this is true of nearly any predator/prey interaction.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> (smaller species are known to eat mice when this happens) leaving them to look for food elsewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wolves (and many other species) are adapted for eating small prey actually, not large animals at all. The only reason they can eat large animals is because they evolved pack hunting instincts. Otherwise they are in fact marvellously adapted to eating small animals or whatever else they find.
I don't. It pretty much summarises how stupid humans are in general. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Jebus, that's along the same line of generalisation as nazi-german. Yeah, "der ewige mench"
I don't. It pretty much summarises how stupid humans are in general. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Jebus, that's along the same line of generalisation as nazi-german. Yeah, "der ewige mench" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not. I have an amazing low opinion on the ability of the human race to make intelligent decisions. We're far more animal than we think we are.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
YEah, that would almost be right, except for a few things:
A: Cattle only walk on pasture and grazing fields, which in turn get chewed down to make a more suitable environment to plant on next season
B: Since our main animal is pigs, they excrete ALOT of manure, and since they do not reside outside, then all the manure gets collected in large tanks/pits, and that in turn can BE APPLIED to the fields to increase the fertility of the soil during the off season.
C: Even if they didn't have large amounts of manure, farmers still applied synthetic fertilizer (Urea, or something with a high nitrogen content) before, during, and after planting.
D: Its called Crop Rotation, Basically one year you plant corn in a field, then the next year you plant some crop with high nitrogen content (some kind of legume) and let it die on the field, thereby adding the nitrogen to the soil and refertilzing the feild so it can be planted on again next season.
Yes, there is a WHOLE lot more to farming than just planting stuff into the ground and hoping it will grow. Alot of math and science goes into farming to make sure you have something to eat.
*edit* Forgive me for the thread hijack, but its not very often I can use this kind of information that is stored in my head to educate the masses
Absolutely. I'm under no illusions as to how many times I've looked back & in hindsight, realised what I did was more instinctive & reactionary than conscious thought.
Back on topic, I feel this is only getting people interested becasue wolves are more palatable to humans then the plight of modern farmers (down the Common Agricultural Policy!) and personally I'd know I'd rather save farmer's welfare than one pack of wolves.
As for the reply to my post earlier, humans have different rights to animals, and are vastly more important to the State which is why the wolves were culled.
but they could have saved both.
=\
As for the reply to my post earlier, humans have different rights to animals, and are vastly more important to the State which is why the wolves were culled. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes because we all know money is more important than attempting NOT to destroy our ecosystem. Really this is a bigger issue than 'just wolves'. Its people thinking that this is THEIR planet, that THEY are the only ones on it, and that everything should bow down to them. Example: Africanized honey bees, AKA killer bees. A business endeavor to make bees produce more honey, ends with them having a horrid temperment, attacking in huge swarms, and the breed is slowly moving north. The point is when you screw with this stuff theres reprecussions. You might not see it visibly, but when you kill 3/4th of that pack, from a friggin helicopter, theres going to be reprecussions. This isn't about 'save the wolves' its about 'stop freaking up the planet, were already screwing it up enough as is with global warming'
Food has become an enormous business in the US, and the key to the current fast food phenomenon is low prices for beef, dairy, etc. The only way to do this is to have a huge surplus of food to sell the companies so they can constantly flood the market and keep prices at bottom levels.
Sure we don't want to pay more for food, we have a right to be fed etc., etc. But have you ever stopped to think about why obesity is such a huge problem in the US, do you notice that there are at least 2 commercials for some sort of food products in every commercial break on any channel you turn to. The food industries are making quick bucks at the expense of our health and the stability of ecosystems, scaling down will not bring about the apocalypse and cause soaring prices it will simply reduce the amount of product flooding the market, and in turn lead to people actually eating within normal human limits. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's why so many farmers are "in plight" the US is producing way more food than it needs. Food has become big business, and when a lot of money is involved you can be sure the only interests that are being looked after are the people who are making the profits.
Its evolution, get used to it.
As for the reply to my post earlier, humans have different rights to animals, and are vastly more important to the State which is why the wolves were culled. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes because we all know money is more important than attempting NOT to destroy our ecosystem. Really this is a bigger issue than 'just wolves'. Its people thinking that this is THEIR planet, that THEY are the only ones on it, and that everything should bow down to them. Example: Africanized honey bees, AKA killer bees. A business endeavor to make bees produce more honey, ends with them having a horrid temperment, attacking in huge swarms, and the breed is slowly moving north. The point is when you screw with this stuff theres reprecussions. You might not see it visibly, but when you kill 3/4th of that pack, from a friggin helicopter, theres going to be reprecussions. This isn't about 'save the wolves' its about 'stop freaking up the planet, were already screwing it up enough as is with global warming' <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Someone else already explained in this thread as to why one pack of wolves will not destroy the entire wolf population. And I didn't say that money was more important than our own ecosystem - I said one pack of wolves is less important than the farmer's welfare.
A pack of wolves here, a pack of wolves there, until it becomes to the point where theres only a few packs left right?
A pack of wolves here, a pack of wolves there, until it becomes to the point where theres only a few packs left right? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No I was refering to the ones in the article at the start and there of course must be limits to however many wolves are killed. Just because I say that these wolves should be killed doesn't mean I say that all wolves should be killed. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
A pack of wolves here, a pack of wolves there, until it becomes to the point where theres only a few packs left right? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
As far as I know, this happened with the Mexican wolf (lobo)... THere are only about 4 dozen Mexican wolves left in the wild now AFAIK.....
Honestly, online petitions don't do any good whatsoever. Don't forget to save all the other endangered species that people kill every day for useless purposes. I know they're not cuddly wolves who beast apparently evolved from, but they still deserve a chance.