Excellent point Terry. I guess my only rebutal is that I did not go out looking to kill the rat ... and I guess we could argue that the bear hunter did not actually go out looking for that bear (but we do know he got a permit ). I am very much against people going and looking for trouble, for example: Surfers that complain about sharks, etc. ... well the shark DID not swim into their habitat (house), the surfer choose to go swimming in the SHARK's habitat. So who is the idiot then? ... to me the surfer and they are playing natural section with a superior preditor. Another good point ... but as we know some people enjoy being cruel and thus we (as we are able to create laws to control the idiots) IMO should not allow that ... but ofcourse that opens up an enormous debate about where the line is drawn. Another valid point, but you see in 99% of cases an animal (non-human one) kills for a real need of survival, not to prove something. We need to ensure we do not return or allow the BS behaviour of the big white hunter (primarily English @rseholes of the past) ... who desimated the animal population JUST for sport. Hmmm ... I don't actually, but as long as they do not come on to me or shove it in my face (ie. Sydney Gay Mardi Gra cr@p ... which really gets up my goat. Try and have a hetrosexual parade like that and we would all get locked up ... totally one sided, and they do not realise that the only reason it is allowed is because the NSW government is making some bucks out of exploiting them. Why not just have a sex parade like Southern American countries ... ). Good point, but there are many things I would like outlawed, like pediophilia, should I shut up on that because I am not being tolerant of others ... fnck no!. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe is right ... and that is where great countries like yours and mine come to the fore, because we discuss thanks to democracy. Thus if I really wanted to do something about it I could stand up and give myself a voice ... will I?. Probably not, 'cause like most of the world I do not like it, but not enough to turn that into action. I guess that is a personal black mark against myself. No worries ... I've got wide shoulders and there are many good points in your post. Now I'd like to discuss why I do not believe in culling. Environmentalists favour culling because it maintains the current state of the world (plant life, animal life, etc.) within the boundaries that our ever explanding human population allow. Now that sounds good at first look but I believe it is wrong. Most environmentalists probably believe in natural selection (?), and thus they understand the laws of the wild. I would imagine that most environmentalists believe in evolution ... but I do wonder if this culling comes from those that don't (ie. they believe the world has always been like it is and they are doing God's work trying to keep it the same). Well that is plain wrong IMO. What I believe environmentalists SHOULD be doing is simply: Removing/reducing the impact of the human race on the world. NOT fncking with the evolutionary (or if you do not believe that), the natural selection process. Lets think about what I just said. If the human race did not exist at all (and thus culling would not exist) how could this not be right, ie. everything that happens to any plant, animal, etc. is either Gods work or natural selection playing out. Thus you can definitely infer that by culling WE the human controllers of the world are interferring with either Gods work or natural selection. Thus say the bear and deer population should grow until there population reaches the natural limit, this is when they need to adapt and evolve (possibly) into better adapted animals to make the most out of their surroundings. Instead we cull them and thus they are stuck, unable to evolve and improve their species as much as natural processes would have demanded, ie. adapt or become extinct. I believe your (America's) Yellow Stone park has a no human intervention concept ... that is 100% right and perfect case of correctly removing the negative impact of the human race. Pete BTW: I do believe in evolution ... but I also go to church most Sundays with my kids. I would not consider myself as religious as many, but I believe in the values of the church. Many will say how can you believe in evolution and be religious at all. Well quite simply (to me) ... religion is based on a book and is a way of life and also teaches tolerance ... thus we can all take what we need from the good book and go from there. I do not believe it should be read and preached rigidly and with intolerance ... that goes against the values of tolerance, etc. Thus I guess I believe that Adam and Eve were cells ... and then evolution kicked it
Without throwing any more opinions into the discussions (which are good reading for me, since I have no bias either way), a polar bear WILL say, "Yup, let's take it out" about a human, but for food. It is believed that they are the only animal to proactivily track, pursue and attack a human (or anything else, like trucks, submarines, etc.) for food. I saw one (in person) gnawing on an 18-wheeler on the Dalton highway. I guess it is a good thing they are in very lightly human populated areas. Self defense would be much more prevelent in that environment. And about being big, a polar bear will approach 12 feet standing up on his hind legs. Hunting or not, I would have a hard time keeping a gun steady on something twice my height. But if this is activley tracking me, I feel safe... Image Unavailable, Please Login
For those that don't care for the hunters, you know nothing of nature and man. Man has evolved and so his weapons. Hunters provide more meat to the deprived than any other organized group. Their knowledge of nature and it's beauty is second to none. And their respect for wildlife is what brought them to the woods that day. When was the last time you spent a day in the woods? There are rules for hunters and seasons to hunt for "cause and sport." Enought already!
Hate to break it to you. But the longest Retic was 36 ft. officially. I was a manager/ part owner of a reptile shop. The Fact was that they have never measured a retic over 36' officially. I had a pet Reticulated python that measured 24' and about 200lbs. and a Burmese python that measured 20ft which weighed roughly 230lbs. I have been around reptiles since I was 3. And have bred them since I was 10. Over 100 types of reptiles at last count as this was my source of income for over 4 years.
