Author Topic: Nature pics  (Read 82547 times)

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #60 on: May 15, 2009, 02:55:29 AM »
You need to book your spot at speakers corner next sunday morning Pat...
Don't forget your soapbox...

I'm sure you would gather a huge audience who would whole-heartedly agree with you...me for one, Linda for 2....

My brother gives a good arguement as to why it should not have been banned....but i don't give a monkey's...i think it's appalling...

smaug

  • Paronomaniac
  • ******
  • Posts: 444
  • Sydney, Australia
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #61 on: May 15, 2009, 07:47:30 AM »
 
Its not just the killing of the animals, but the whole idea that someone has enough time and money to waste on an activity which adds nothing to the good of the world, only takes away something. I bet if the people who pay a lot of money to kill a lion or to hunt fox were asked to help a needy human- or animal for that matter-with the money they would have spent, they would scoff at  the thought.

No doubt some of these hunters give in other ways- I dont believe people are completely evil.

birdy

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • Brooklyn, NY
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #62 on: May 15, 2009, 12:40:43 PM »
I'm never going to go out and shoot an animal myself - I'm much too soft for that - but I do realize that hunting is a necessity, since we don't have the predators (including Native Americans) to do the culling.  Our deer population has grown so much that it's much higher than when Europeans came to the New World.  We also provide optimum conditions - farms with field edges, not to mention suburbs with all those lovely bushes we plant to feed the deer.  So - increase and multiply!  The deer now have decimated the native plant life, and are so crowded that starvation and disease can be a real problem.

But I would much rather have professional hunters do the killing than the amateurs who don't know what they are doing - easier on the deer, as well as neighboring livestock.

Smaug, you're right about hunters giving in other ways.  Hunters provide a lot of the money for wildlife refuges, because they are more aware than most people of animal/gamebird need for habitat.  Too many people see that land and think of the money they can make from development.

As for fox hunting, "the unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible," as Oscar Wilde put it.

pat

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3376
  • Rugby, England.
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #63 on: May 15, 2009, 08:57:59 PM »
It's a topic that raises heated argument on both sides.
Hunters provide a lot of the money for wildlife refuges, because they are more aware than most people of animal/gamebird need for habitat.  Too many people see that land and think of the money they can make from development.


You're right about developers, birdy, but you seem to be implying that hunters aren't too bad a bunch since they cough up the money needed. They may well want to keep the developers off the land and give the wildlife a habitat to live in, but that's only so they can continue with their sick pursuits. If they really gave a toss about the animals they wouldn't gleefully slaughter them. Personally I'd rather see a species become extinct than live on just to provide target practice for the useless rich.

P.S. Gamebird??? >:( Surprised to hear you call them that, gamebirdy!


technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #64 on: May 15, 2009, 10:30:44 PM »
As much as i abhor fox etc...i still believe we are still a far more humane country than lots of others...you only have to watch the TV or read a newspaper to read the articles of bear-baiting, cock fights, the eating habits of some Asian countries, seal clubbing, whale hunting, the dolphin slaughters..etc..

Orangutan Diaries has been on here...the way they are treated is outrageous...

As a nation of animal lovers, i don't think we do too badly generally.

Our native red squirrel is dying out because of the imported grey version, which are cute, but vermin all the same...so what is the answer?

A contoversial subject that's for sure....

birdy

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • Brooklyn, NY
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #65 on: May 16, 2009, 01:16:20 PM »
It's a topic that raises heated argument on both sides.
Hunters provide a lot of the money for wildlife refuges, because they are more aware than most people of animal/gamebird need for habitat.  Too many people see that land and think of the money they can make from development.


You're right about developers, birdy, but you seem to be implying that hunters aren't too bad a bunch since they cough up the money needed. They may well want to keep the developers off the land and give the wildlife a habitat to live in, but that's only so they can continue with their sick pursuits. If they really gave a toss about the animals they wouldn't gleefully slaughter them. Personally I'd rather see a species become extinct than live on just to provide target practice for the useless rich.

P.S. Gamebird??? >:( Surprised to hear you call them that, gamebirdy!



Hi - I just used the term gamebirds to distinguish them from the passerines - I suppose I could have called them wild chickens and ducks.  My point was not that I like hunting, but that hunters often care more about the survival of wildlife than people who don't hunt.  And I'm not sure about where you are, Pat, but in this country, a lot of the hunters are far from rich - many people with a family tradition of hunting have been doing it as a way of obtaining food, and wouldn't think of hunting an inedible animal, let alone one who was driven to them by beaters.  But no one in my family was ever a hunter, so I can't speak from personal experience.

biggerbirdbrain

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8738
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #66 on: May 17, 2009, 03:01:20 AM »
Hey, birdy! I bet if you dig far back enough in your genealogy, SOMEBODY back there HAD to be a hunter of some sort, or you might have never arrived lo these many centuries later!  :angel:

pat

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3376
  • Rugby, England.
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #67 on: May 17, 2009, 04:38:39 AM »
Hey folks, Threeb's back!  ;D

biggerbirdbrain

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8738
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #68 on: May 18, 2009, 02:48:54 AM »
Only momentarily ...  :'(

birdy

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • Brooklyn, NY
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #69 on: May 18, 2009, 03:25:02 AM »
Hey, birdy! I bet if you dig far back enough in your genealogy, SOMEBODY back there HAD to be a hunter of some sort, or you might have never arrived lo these many centuries later!  :angel:

Probably must have been - though hunter-gathering probably means we were poking around looking for grubs.  As far back as we've traced, we were town and city folk.

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #70 on: May 18, 2009, 05:29:32 AM »
Birdy is a very game bird i have to say....

birdy

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • Brooklyn, NY
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #71 on: May 18, 2009, 09:04:57 AM »
Thanks, T - better than being a gamey bird!

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #72 on: May 19, 2009, 04:37:54 AM »
..or a bird on the game!!!!!  :-\

Toni

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 787
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #73 on: May 19, 2009, 04:33:47 PM »
Well, a bird on the game may have a lot more fun than a game bird?  ;D

birdy

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • Brooklyn, NY
    • View Profile
Re: Nature pics
« Reply #74 on: May 19, 2009, 10:30:30 PM »
And probably a great deal more fun than a gamey bird, though there's no accounting for tastes.