Wolves as Endangered Species

How convenient that part of it happened to be left out lol.

Well if you insist on splitting hairs, MagiK, using the word slaughter would be as inappropriate since its definition is:

1) The killing of animals for food; to butcher animals for food

and

2)The killing of a large number of people; a massacre; killing in large numbers.



My point was that killing animals for sport alone is wrong and you can only argue that on a stance of morals vs no morals, an argument I won't take part in here.

Originally posted by Moni: My point was that killing animals for sport alone is wrong and you can only argue that on a stance of morals vs no morals, an argument I won't take part in here.

I would be tempted to agree with you...and I guess on a strictly precise definition of the issue I do agree with you. In Pennsylvania Hunting as a sport does happen though most hunters I know of do use what they kill as food...but the State uses hunting as a way of population control too, PA, MD and Va. all have problems with the Deer populations getting out of control because there are no natural predators left to control them. So strictly speaking no hunting in these three states is strictly for sport.

I used to hunt all sorts of game, but I gradually realized that I didn't like the taste of most small game and birds so quit hunting them and now only hunt Deer which I do eat, and pests/varmits like groundhogs and porcupines, which will damage property or endanger livestock like horses and cows.

The reason the text was invisible is because the Meriam webster page uses the > and < characters to bracket text which I didnt notice.

[ 10-19-2002, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Moni: My point was that killing animals for sport alone is wrong and you can only argue that on a stance of morals vs no morals, an argument I won't take part in here.

I would be tempted to agree with you...and I guess on a strictly precise definition of the issue I do agree with you. In Pennsylvania Hunting as a sport does happen though most hunters I know of do use what they kill as food...but the State uses hunting as a way of population control too, PA, MD and Va. all have problems with the Deer populations getting out of control because there are no natural predators left to control them. So strictly speaking no hunting in these three states is strictly for sport.

I used to hunt all sorts of game, but I gradually realized that I didn't like the taste of most small game and birds so quit hunting them and now only hunt Deer which I do eat, and pests/varmits like groundhogs and porcupines, which will damage property or endanger livestock like horses and cows.

The reason the text was invisible is because the Meriam webster page uses the > and < characters to bracket text which I didnt notice.[/QUOTE]Interesting because a deer's natural predator would be........a wolf.


To say that no hunting for sport is done in your state is only a generalization using people you know personally as an example. I've lived in the midwest (OH,and IN and have LOTS of family in PA) and there are plenty of people who pay for their hunting license to go out and kill for nothing more than sport. Strictly speaking, you cannot deny it does occur.

How do groundhogs and porcupines damage property (i.e. what property do they damage that warrants killing them) and how can they endanger livestock in a manner that would put that livestock's life at risk?

The brackets thing with the MW online dictionary is understandable. I have done something like that here myself at one point.
(You could still acknowledge that slaughter is an inappropriate term. [img]tongue.gif[/img] )

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Sir Krustin: Err, I'm from Ontario.

Sorry I saw the "On" in your "where are you from" and spaced it out

[The Hunter of Jahanna]

How do groundhogs and porcupines damage property (i.e. what property do they damage that warrants killing them) and how can they endanger livestock in a manner that would put that livestock's life at risk?

THats easy! Groundhogs dig holes in fields and backyards that both people and livestock can step into and break a leg.To my knowledge horses and cows with broken legs arent put into casts, they are put to sleep. WHile people are put in casts, I am willing to bet if you broke your leg in a chuck hole you would want the little rodent dead too. Porcupines can fill a critter up with barbed quills that can get infected and might cause it to die.

Originally posted by The Hunter of Jahanna: THats easy! Groundhogs dig holes in fields and backyards that both people and livestock can step into and break a leg.To my knowledge horses and cows with broken legs arent put into casts, they are put to sleep. WHile people are put in casts, I am willing to bet if you broke your leg in a chuck hole you would want the little rodent dead too. Porcupines can fill a critter up with barbed quills that can get infected and might cause it to die.

I've stepped in plenty of ground hog holes and gopher holes and dog holes and never once did I wish any of the animals dead for doing what is natural to them and never once were any of these mishaps serious enough to snap a bone.
I did get quite PO'd when a gopher ate through my young Magnolia's roots, killing it, but again I did not wish the animal dead.
As humans we are (usually) gifted with the ability to think and remember and look for holes in the ground that may exist and that we may step into.

I can understand why ranchers and farmers would want to keep their livestock from having a leg broken but there are humane ways to deter the animals from living on their land and there are ways to force them to move elsewhere, and there are ways to have them relocated; all without having to kill them.

Although a porcipine's quills can dislodge easily, the animals cannot "throw" their quills at will. They may display them as a defensive stance daring predators to bite because their quills will protect them and in some cases,they may lunge, but porcupines are not at all swift.
If a human or another animal gets too close, a porcupine may slap their tail, but in general will leave you or any other animal alone unless they are antagonized.
Their quills are only a problem for animals which are stuck and don't receive medical attention and I doubt that any rancher or farmer, even those who operate large ranches, are left unaware of the well-being of their animals long enough for infection to set in, esp long enough for it to get serious enough to warrant putting the livestock down but seriously, how many cows naturally go around antagonizing porcupines?
These creatures are even easier to repel or relocate than grounhogs and gophers.

EDIT: P.S. Guess what one of the groundhog's natural enemies are.

[ 10-20-2002, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: Moni ]

[Scholarcs]

Just expanding on the idea ofI honestly believe that we have to be more careful when killing animals and plants, even to save livestock. Plants and animals are becoming extinct at more than 1000 times the rate at which they did before humans began to have a serious effect on the environment. It is very scary to see how much of the world is being lost.

For that reason I believe that we should try and conserve wildlife wherever possible. There are millions, perhaps billions of livestock in the world, and in many species of wildlife only a few remain.

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by Moni: I can understand why ranchers and farmers would want to keep their livestock from having a leg broken but there are humane ways to deter the animals from living on their land and there are ways to force them to move elsewhere, and there are ways to have them relocated; all without having to kill them.

That is, at best, wishful thinking. You ever hear the expression nature abhors a vacuum? Ainimals such as groundhogs breed and expand as much as possible to fill gaps in the environment. If you force one group of groundhogs to move, then another group will breed up and move in just as fast. These things can fill a yard with holes in less than a year. One horse farmer hired me to remove NINETY SEVEN groundhogs that had appeared in his yard in the space of a year...you should have seen his front yard.

EDIT: P.S. Guess what one of the groundhog's natural enemies are.

Doesn't fly...everybody here says relocate not kill. Which is it? Leave the wolf where it can kill your livestock (which most people here acknowledge is not reasonable for the farmer to do) or relocate it? Natural remedies are all well and good, but you have to be reasonable.

This really underlines my belief that most people just don't understand what conservationism is all about.

[ 10-20-2002, 09:10 AM: Message edited by: Sir Krustin ]

[Sir Krustin]

Originally posted by Scholarcs: For that reason I believe that we should try and conserve wildlife wherever possible. There are millions, perhaps billions of livestock in the world, and in many species of wildlife only a few remain.

Note that it's illegal to hunt endangered species, and by definition species that are endangered aren't a threat to livestock.

You need a special permit to hunt predators like wolf up here, and there is no season per se. Also, many furbearing animals aren' to be shot - you need to trap them. (Live trapping is popular in many areas up here - for relocation and repopulation)

The basis of conservation is that since man has disturbed the balance by establishing cities and farms, that we must work to maintain the balance through our own efforts. Hunting whitetail and varmint is necessary to maintain the balance when predators have been displaced.

Originally posted by Sir Krustin: quote: Originally posted by Moni: I can understand why ranchers and farmers would want to keep their livestock from having a leg broken but there are humane ways to deter the animals from living on their land and there are ways to force them to move elsewhere, and there are ways to have them relocated; all without having to kill them.

That is, at best, wishful thinking. You ever hear the expression nature abhors a vacuum? Ainimals such as groundhogs breed and expand as much as possible to fill gaps in the environment. If you force one group of groundhogs to move, then another group will breed up and move in just as fast. These things can fill a yard with holes in less than a year. One horse farmer hired me to remove NINETY SEVEN groundhogs that had appeared in his yard in the space of a year...you should have seen his front yard.

EDIT: P.S. Guess what one of the groundhog's natural enemies are.

Doesn't fly...everybody here says relocate not kill. Which is it? Leave the wolf where it can kill your livestock (which most people here acknowledge is not reasonable for the farmer to do) or relocate it? Natural remedies are all well and good, but you have to be reasonable.

This really underlines my belief that most people just don't understand what conservationism is all about.[/QUOTE]"That is at best, wishful thinking" and "Doesn't fly" are statements of denial where real solutions exist...at least here in the U.S. anyway.
Our government has programs and services that do and will assist in relocating wild animals that become a nuisance to man's progress and this includes deer. wolves, porcupines, ground hogs and even gophers in extreme cases.
I've stated earlier that relocating a complete pack of wolves is detrimental to the pack's existance and that is no lie but I would rather see a part of a pack of wolves survive through relocation (because they can rebuild the pack) than to see the whole pack taken out by a bunch of human hunters who are only there for the thrill of the kill.

I'd rather see them left alone in some areas since there are ways to protect livestock from them and leave them alive at the same time, provided a rancher will be attentive enough and spend enough money to do it but I do understand how people aren't willing to invest money they would otherwise be spending on themselves to do so...guns and new trucks cost money (insert hurl here). Like I said before, it all boils down to man's greed and ignorance.
It will come back around, have no doubt about it.

One of the groundhog's natural enemies is the coyote. [img]smile.gif[/img] So you can remove your underline. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 10-20-2002, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: Moni ]