Some BIG Animals.....

Poaching is whole different ball game. The Poacher is the anti-hunter. They care nothing about the animals or nature or preserving our wildlife. They are criminals of the worst sort because they steal from ALL of us.

Poaching here in N. GA for black bear is a real problem. They kill them for the gall bladders as asians believe that eating the black bear gall bladder cures everything. The game officials have been going after poachers aggressively to halt this. All the hunters I know HATE poachers. In fact, poachers really better hope they never run into some of the hunters I know when out in the woods...


Terry

 

Terry,

LAW ... what is this law thing you keep talking about?

Seriously think about the stupidity of your statement that only humans have legal rights under the law. Really think about it.

Now answer this: Who made that law?

Human beings made that law is the obvious answer, thus we are giving OURSELVES all the rights we please.

That is my point (and the "anti-hunters for sport").

Again (you do not seem to understand this so I will try again) I have absolutely nothing against hunting or killing an animal for food, clothing or anything to sustain a REAL need. I am not being hypocritical, killing for a real need to sustain human life is part of the law of nature ... but culling is not a real need (see below).

Hunting an animal (as your country, and probably mine allow) to keep the animal population down is not a REAL need. It is simply a case of US people wanting to take over the whole world.

Now Why do we need to cull animals?

The answer is because we HUMANS have removed or atleast drastically shrunk the animals habitat. Thus the whole reason for culling animals is to allow us HUMAN animals to continue to expand, breed and grow as we please.

Now lets discuss again what makes us different from animals (which yes a human being is but).

Some very random process decided that you and I, Terry would be born as a human animal, nothing more nothing less. We had absolutely no say in what we would be on this world. Thus there was even more chance that you and I could have been born as say an ant, or shudder that bear.

To say that we are not animals is to be completely blind.

We are just different animals that have more successfully adapted to this planet. Now survival of the fittest tells us that we have every right to take over the whole planet (and we are) ... but we also have a thing called a conscience (well I do anyway) and one of the things that really does differentiate us from most animals is this concept of caring.

We do not need to continue our growth and coverage of this world. We could say heck, our population is large enough ... we are all happy and through birth control (not culling humans ) say enough is enough.

The end result of this is that we could simply let the animal population grow to their natural sustainable population and then guess what? ... natural will do the culling for us.

In the end culling is simply a way for men and women to justify their conscience that they are doing good for the animals ... and on the other hand clear fell a forest and turn it into farm land, with out giving a single thought to the fact that WE humans have just reduced the animals habitat. That is not living with animals ... that is simply taking.

Saying an animal is not our equal and has no rights is just the same as saying that a person with different skin colour is not the same as you or I, saying that a person with a disability should not have the same chances as you and I. A humanbeing is an animal ... have a look at an encyclopedia, a bear has a heart, lungs, muscles, brain, reproductive system, hands (paws) and feet, etc. it just looks different and thinks different ... just like your neighbour and mine.

When we were born on this planet, 100% naked, well like all creatures we were just born. Thankfully you were born a human animal and thus a caring mother picked you up ... if you had been a deer or antler in the plans of Africa, well you would have started walking and running a heck of a lot quicker than the dumb human animal child.

Pete
ps: BTW before we learnt how to write and read and make superior weapons there was a REAL law. It was the law of nature and the humanbeing (minus his self made laws and guns, etc.) pretty much sucked at it ... thus who is superior then?. I don't need to tell tell you that a bear would not even have to stress itself to kill a human animal. Thus we sat down and created our LAWS to control animals ... and animals have no right of reproach ... thus we treat all animals like they belong to us, which is wrong.

I just hope for your sake that reincarnation is not true, or atleast we cannot remember our previous life, 'cause when you are the one chosen to be culled in your next life ... heck your views might be a little different.

All life is sacred IMO.

 

Without a presence of human influence, natural selection dictates that animals will obviously die off to a level at which they can sustain themselves. I don't disagree that levels of some animals need to be controlled, but it's for the convenience of humans to do so, not a preservation of natural balance. Any balance that needs maintaining does so because WE fncked it up to begin with.[/QUOTE]

Yes, nature would find its own balance in managing populations if humans did not exist. Not only would populations grow sick and die off when their numbers exceeded what the ecosystem could support, but natural predators would arise as well.

I am not sure of your whole point though.

It seems that you are saying that hunting is bad and killing animals is bad and we should not do it, yet you understand that if we do not more animals will die far worse deaths. So you support nature arriving at a balance through animal populations growing abnormally large and then dying off from malnutrition and resulting disease and the process repeating all because you dont like hunting?

I find that highly ironic.



Terry[/QUOTE]

Actually, we're talking about 10-12,000 years ago, when mankind first migrated through North America.

My point wasn't to slam hunting, my point was that it's an error to say we're performing nature's job. What we're doing by culling animals is making a correction for our negative influences on their natural habitat and lifestyle.

 

Terry, we agree on this point.

Yes the man that shot this bear made a rug ... but he did not really need to kill the bear did he. He was not hungry, he was not cold and thus needed the bears skin for clothing ... and he was not in danger. That was 100% hunting for the fun of it ... and that is just plain wrong IMO.

Pete

 

Perfectly articulated.

Pete

 

When you kill a rat that is in your home.... you are not hungry, you do not need the skin for clothing and you are not in danger. You could just let the furry little thing go about its business and share the habitat. But you would not. You would kill it.

Whatever.... if you want hunting outlawed and all Wildlife Management programs halted join PETA and write your congressman, but I would not hold my breath.


Terry

 

Close to a good point ... the rat may infect my family with a disease, thus I kill it for my families safety.

Note I did not tramp for miles into the bush and seek out this rat. Now ofcouse if I was stupid enough to build my house in the middle of the bush ... well that is another story.

Pete

 

Nature has a way of balancing out..........they were doing fine millions of years ago before we came along and started killing everything.........

be a hunter gatherer.that's fine.....bears don't need to be culled.......if the population is exploding....nature will have a way of handeling it and they don't need human intervention.............called evolution they will eventually stop breeding survival of the fittest

if one brings up the point well they are coming into my backyard, I need to kill the animal.......well maybe you are invading it's backyard.........

We have caused more willful distruction in the last 100 years than the last million.........

plus with the traffic in Atlanta.........maybe humans need to be culled

 

Ahhhhh but if you get the disease, that was natures natural course. You are now interfering with natures natural course by killing the rat just because you MIGHT get a disease from it. What right do you have to kill the rat anyhow? According to your own arguement you have no such right since you and the rate have the same rights.

The hunter is evil if he kills the bear for sport and a rug.... you are mr. good guy since you kill the rat because you think it may carry disease. Your both killing for reasons you each find acceptable, but the bottom line is your are both KILLING. The "why" is just semantics.

Terry

 

I have a large animal in my PANTS that is hunted by women!!!!!!!!





zing........

 

Good post ... but my WHY is why I sleep with a good conscience. I would be completely ashamed of myself to kill an animal just for sport! Remember I have nothing against killing for the necessary survival of an individual, thus my why was the disease risk ... not because I enjoyed it, or it made me think my penis was bigger

And thus I do not support culling. It is not natural selection and is simply implemented to allow us humans to maintain our irresponsible ways.

Pete
ps: It does disturb me that we continue with our lovely lives while we do nothing about the situation in Congo. Why the UN exists anymore is beyond me ... it does nothing, but turn a blind eye.

But that is another discussion and belongs in the Political section

 

The WHY is everything.

Pete

 

Whatever you do, don't go fishing.

 

If you replying to me Wax, you have missed my point ...

My brother-inlaw fishes just for the fun of it (errr), but luckily (for the killing for a right reason point) my sister loves fish and she, and their kids eat a lot of fish. He most definitely does not kill them and disgard them ... pumping his chest at the magnificent kill. Infact I believe (as is common nowadays) he catches some and removes the hook and returns the fish to the water ... alive.

EDIT: Oops I forgot, thus in my brother-inlaws case the WHY is to feed his family. I don't fish BTW ... boring and do not really like fish.

Pete

 

To save you a reply, I'll explain my WHY a bit more:

1. Many Hunters eat the animals they kill - I respect them ... no different to my brother-inlaw fishing.
2. Hunters that kill for sport and justify their killing on culling - I have no respect for them. Culling is BS and just a way of justifying their killing to their guilty consciences.

This bear killer ... WHY did he kill that bear?. I believe it was simply so he could say he killed the biggest bear he has ever seen and apparently ever recorded. I have absolutely no respect for that senseless murder.

Pete

 

For sake of clarity, I wasn't replying directly. In fact, your post came up between me opening reply box, prepping some chili and posting fishy comment.

Overpopulation in a microsystem need not be in the millions - it can be in the hundreds.

There are limits. Zero tolerance for hunting is not a limit. There is a difference between endangered species and endangering species. Not culling herds endangers species. If a population explodes, it wipes out it's very means of sustenance, then can no longer sustain itself.

This link should explain things in a nutshell
http://www.town.sudbury.ma.us/news.asp?id=345

As those who read it can see - "conservation" is firmly imprinted on both sides of the same coin carried by hunters.

With hunting, everybody is fat and happy.

 

Wax,

I can only agree with this direction (ie. culling) because I know that we humans will not change our ways and control our OWN population ... thus as we reduce others habitats we do endanger other species.

But it is still wrong ... and as I said earlier, if say the Bear was the law maker of the world and they decided that culling humans was the right way to sustain the human species, health, etc. ... er, I don't think we as individuals would be very happy. We enjoy the fact that we have control over our own species ... shame we cannot share that theory.

Agree.

Pete

 

The guy used the bear fur for a RUG. Such rugs are highly prized by many people.

YOU say that getting a very nice and unique rug to decorate your home is not a good enough reason to allow hunting/killing the bear. But you also say killing a rat in your home simply because you MIGHT get a disease from it is just fine. You also have no problem with a cow being slaughtered so you can have leather seats in your Ferrari. Hmmmmmmmmm HYPOCRITE anyone???!!!???

Any disease you were likely to catch could EASILY be treated by medications. The plague is not a threat these days. You are ok with killing rats because you say that slight chance of disease is ample justification. I say baloney. That is hypocrisy pure and simple.

The "why" is indeed the crux of the debate. To the hunter, he gets great pleasure from the hunt. He also uses the animal in almost all cases, but still the "pleasure" is the primary factor.

When you eat an animal or use its hide for clothing why are you doing so? PLEASURE. Its is entirely possible for you to live as a vegan. You could live just fine a lifestyle that does not require the killing of any animals. So why do you choose a lifestyle that DOES require killing animals?

For your own pleasure and convenience. PERIOD. Just like the hunter who killed the bear.

You say your ok with hunting if the "WHY" is a valid reason. Well answer me this: Who gets to decide what is and what is not a good enough reason for hunting? You? The liberal intelligencia elite who know what is best for the rest of us and should be allowed to make all the rules?

How about this: We EACH get to decide for HIMSELF what is and what is not a valid reason for killing an animal.

Is that not natures way? IF one Lion decides to kill another, a third lion has no say in it.

You have said that people who enjoy hunting and killing animals for sport and pleasure are messed up and "like Hitler". Yet I bet you think that men who enjoy having sex with other men are perfectly normal and simply enjoying an alternative lifestyle.

I think homosexuality is perversion. But I also think its none of my business. Just because someone is gay does not mean they are hurting me in any way nor does it mean they are not nice people and productive members of society and its no reason we cannot be friends so I really do not care.

That is because I am tolerant of others. Even though they do things I do not believe are "right" I do not pass judgement on them.

You seem to want Hunting outlawed or condemned. Because you do not believe it is "right" you want others to not be able to do it. I call that intolerant.



Terry



PS: Pete: I am of course just trying to get your goat a bit on this. I know your not an intolerant SOB and I am not seriously attacking you.... just spirited debate my friend.

 

FWIW - that bear was gay.

 

lets post more pictures of big animals eh?.......

 

More "bravery" from "skilled hunters" doing their bit for the ecosystem.

Read the background and then click on the link...warning, it might make you sick.

 

i just read the description of that and didnt even bother to open it, thats just sick, i mean a dog? seriously, a defensless dog that did nothing at all and this guy says...

"after we thought it was dead we dug a hole and when I picked it up with the shovel it came back to life, so we shot it a couple more times....its pretty funny."


I may be young, but im old enough to realize what a sick world we live in. that kind of s**t disgusts me, i cant imagine how i would feel if i actually WATCHED the video. Anyone else here who owns and loves their dog probably feels pretty sick right now ( i called my dog up just to pet it after reading that)

 

thats terrible, I honestly hope one of those Iraqi bullets mentioned in his description gets him between the eyes, and I say that with all sincerity, there is absolutely no need for somebody like that on this planet.