What do animal rights activists/vegans think about culling destructive feral species? (ethical, legal)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What do animal rights activists/vegans think about culling destructive feral species? This is an issue that seems to split many animal rights activists/hardcore vegans and more practical minded conservationists. In Australia, where I live, introduced feral pests like cats, foxes, rabbits, cane roads have been responsible for the extinction or drastic reduction in population of countless native mammals, birds and reptiles. Baiting and other population control has helped many species bounce back from the brink. After these controls were implemented many species recovered. Yes, I know in a way it's not their fault and they're doing what is natural, but they don't belong in the eco-system and we have to clean up our mess. The end result is they'll just kill off all our native fauna and starve to death anyway. I have a friend who disagreed with me over having to remove cats, but I said while ugly, it's a necessary evil. The alternative is worse. I think some animal rights types care more about their fluffy pets than the environment. What do you think?
I like this topic but it doesn't seem to interest your target responders. Interesting, that. Feral and invasive species is are a big problem. Look at Pythons and Boas in FL. Uggg!. Here in NV, dogs and cats turned out by their former owners are an issue to. Cats especially. They breed so fast the only way to control them is to go to work with a 22. They flat destroy game birds like quail and chukar, tear up chicken pens and rabbit to, its a mess when you ha e feral cats.
Dogs , as well, are a problem. MOST dumps get picked up but the ones that go feral are dangerous. They thrill kill and have also bred enough with the yotes to make a brand new breed of predator. Coydogs. Bigger ztro her faster and with no fear of humans they are flat hard on livestock of all types.
Our only real invasive species issue here is with weeds, but CL has a bad one with snakes. I don't know why more folks there aren't trading in hides. They should be.
As long as the culling is done without needless suffering to the animal I can't say that I have a problem with it. Its just an unfortunate situation for all involved but when a population gets to the point where it could cause problems steps need to be taken to address that and I don't know of any other solution.
What do animal rights activists/vegans think about culling destructive feral species? This is an issue that seems to split many animal rights activists/hardcore vegans and more practical minded conservationists.
Firstly, I dont think you need to be an animal rights activist or a vegan () to have an opinion on this issue. And secondly, I reject your presumption that animal activists and conservationists are split on this issue.
Quote:
In Australia, where I live, introduced feral pests like cats, foxes, rabbits, cane roads have been responsible for the extinction or drastic reduction in population of countless native mammals, birds and reptiles. Baiting and other population control has helped many species bounce back from the brink. After these controls were implemented many species recovered.
Abandonment of the domestic cat is mainly a man-made problem. The use of the words destructive and pests, does not automatically shift the blame to the animal.
And, it is a nonsensical to suggest that the reduction in the number of native mammals and birds is mainly due to cats and rabbits (any sources?). In fact, the Australian Conservation Foundation (AFC) has routinely stated that the biggest problem in reduction of fauna is land clearing. Australia, has been the largest land clearing countries in the world.
From 2001: Facts & Figures, estimates that 564,800 hectares of bushland and native vegetation were cleared in Australia last year, a 7% rise on the 1999 estimate. The clearing to re-planting ratio is about 100:1.
Excessive land clearing is having numerous adverse impacts:
land clearing accounts for a substantial proportion (about 13%) of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions;
land clearing is exacerbating the loss of biodiversity and is placing Australia in breach of international treaty obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity;
more than 5 million birds are estimated to be killed each year by land clearing in Australia at the current rate, with numerous native animal and plant species at risk;
So, what do practical conservationists have to say about that?
It is important to underscore that the threat of extinction is truly a man made problem.
Also many seabirds that visit Australia are threatened by fishing practices, although there is some hope there through long term legal and educational campaigns and technological development.
Numbers of western ground parrot have plummeted over the last decade and the species could be lost; fox baiting has allowed feral cats to proliferate, which have then preyed on the parrots before being removed.
Yes, I know in a way it's not their fault and they're doing what is natural, but they don't belong in the eco-system and we have to clean up our mess. The end result is they'll just kill off all our native fauna and starve to death anyway. I have a friend who disagreed with me over having to remove cats, but I said while ugly, it's a necessary evil. The alternative is worse. I think some animal rights types care more about their fluffy pets than the environment. What do you think?
You are right. Cats dont belong in the Australian eco-system. Another man man problem. But to put the blame solely on cats and rabbits, while continuing to deforest land and kill animals is very misleading. Land clearing is also a major source of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions, leads to lesser rain and a dryer climate. Hunting foxes, that keep the feral cat population in check is also a problem. These and many other reasons are the main drivers behind reduction in number of birds and mammals. You are mistaken if you think that killing cats and rabbits will solve the problem.
What do animal rights activists/vegans think about culling destructive feral species? This is an issue that seems to split many animal rights activists/hardcore vegans and more practical minded conservationists. In Australia, where I live, introduced feral pests like cats, foxes, rabbits, cane roads have been responsible for the extinction or drastic reduction in population of countless native mammals, birds and reptiles. Baiting and other population control has helped many species bounce back from the brink. After these controls were implemented many species recovered. Yes, I know in a way it's not their fault and they're doing what is natural, but they don't belong in the eco-system and we have to clean up our mess. The end result is they'll just kill off all our native fauna and starve to death anyway. I have a friend who disagreed with me over having to remove cats, but I said while ugly, it's a necessary evil. The alternative is worse. I think some animal rights types care more about their fluffy pets than the environment. What do you think?
First, I'm not a vegan.
Second, I'm not an advocate of animal 'rights' in general, outside of the various species of great apes (I do, however, think non-human animals in general deserve more consideration, and legal protection, than they receive).
That said, I care about species. And invasive species tend to cause extinctions without benefiting the invading species (which typically has a habitat somewhere else where they are abundant, which is why there are so many of them that they can successfully 'invade' - with human assistance - another habitat). So, yes - I support the culling of invasive species in general to protect native species.
Of course, some species become naturalized and stable within their new environment - the pheasant (native to Asia) is but one example.
Suffering is more of a concern to me than life in an animal. If an animal is put down humanely, I have no issue with that if done for a good reason (member of an invasive species, and old and suffering pet, etc.).
I have no use for neither those who see animals naively on one hand, or those who see them as worthy of consideration only so far as they profit off of them on the other hand.
Firstly, I dont think you need to be an animal rights activist or a vegan () to have an opinion on this issue. And secondly, I reject your presumption that animal activists and conservationists are split on this issue.
Abandonment of the domestic cat is mainly a man-made problem. The use of the words destructive and pests, does not automatically shift the blame to the animal.
And, it is a nonsensical to suggest that the reduction in the number of native mammals and birds is mainly due to cats and rabbits (any sources?). In fact, the Australian Conservation Foundation (AFC) has routinely stated that the biggest problem in reduction of fauna is land clearing. Australia, has been the largest land clearing countries in the world.
From 2001: Facts & Figures, estimates that 564,800 hectares of bushland and native vegetation were cleared in Australia last year, a 7% rise on the 1999 estimate. The clearing to re-planting ratio is about 100:1.
Excessive land clearing is having numerous adverse impacts:
land clearing accounts for a substantial proportion (about 13%) of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions;
land clearing is exacerbating the loss of biodiversity and is placing Australia in breach of international treaty obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity;
more than 5 million birds are estimated to be killed each year by land clearing in Australia at the current rate, with numerous native animal and plant species at risk;
So, what do practical conservationists have to say about that?
It is important to underscore that the threat of extinction is truly a man made problem.
Also many seabirds that visit Australia are threatened by fishing practices, although there is some hope there through long term legal and educational campaigns and technological development.
Numbers of western ground parrot have plummeted over the last decade and the species could be lost; fox baiting has allowed feral cats to proliferate, which have then preyed on the parrots before being removed.
You are right. Cats dont belong in the Australian eco-system. Another man man problem. But to put the blame solely on cats and rabbits, while continuing to deforest land and kill animals is very misleading. Land clearing is also a major source of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions, leads to lesser rain and a dryer climate. Hunting foxes, that keep the feral cat population in check is also a problem. These and many other reasons are the main drivers behind reduction in number of birds and mammals. You are mistaken if you think that killing cats and rabbits will solve the problem.
Of course habitat destruction is a major cause, but that's not the issue here. It's been conclusively shown that feral animals DO have a huge impact on native species. So we still have to do something about them.
I would think the real argument here would be with your fellow countrymen who keep dumping the exotic, non-native animals into the environment...... probably most who are also meat eaters themselves. Are there that many animal rights activists and vegans in Australia?
What do animal rights activists/vegans think about culling destructive feral species? This is an issue that seems to split many animal rights activists/hardcore vegans and more practical minded conservationists. In Australia, where I live, introduced feral pests like cats, foxes, rabbits, cane roads have been responsible for the extinction or drastic reduction in population of countless native mammals, birds and reptiles. Baiting and other population control has helped many species bounce back from the brink. After these controls were implemented many species recovered. Yes, I know in a way it's not their fault and they're doing what is natural, but they don't belong in the eco-system and we have to clean up our mess. The end result is they'll just kill off all our native fauna and starve to death anyway. I have a friend who disagreed with me over having to remove cats, but I said while ugly, it's a necessary evil. The alternative is worse. I think some animal rights types care more about their fluffy pets than the environment. What do you think?
I don't have any problems with exterminating feral populations that are destroying native flora and fauna, especially if the natives have scientific, economic or even just esthetic importance. The foxes were introduced in Australia for hunting purposes, as I recall. Cats and rabbits were pets and/or food (the rabbits). The cane toads (?) I'm not sure about - are they edible?
If they're edible, along with the rabbits, then well and good, you have an incentive to hunt them down, and an economic basis to do so. Oz is a distinct case, since it's home to marsupials and many plants and animals that aren't found anyplace else. But note that exterminating a feral species is hard to do. Mammals tend to out reproduce marsupials, and even the cane toad numbers exploded there. It will be a long slog, and more likely will wind up as feral population control, rather than total extermination.
Compare the US Southwest problem with feral hogs, the coyote population across the US, zebra mussels in lakes, and so on. The feral hogs are a real problem - very destructive to crops, gardens, water supplies, fences - fast, smart, vicious, dangerous - and prodigious reproduction.
The feral hogs are a real problem - very destructive to crops, gardens, water supplies, fences - fast, smart, vicious, dangerous - and prodigious reproduction.
You forgot one -- they can be hard to kill. My friend was varmint-hunting with an inexperienced partner. Before my friend could stop him, the partner shot a feral hog four times with a .223. It just p*ssed him off. They spent several hours on top of a big rock...
I don't understand what "vegan" has to do with this.
Anyway, I do not condone the killing or suffering of any living creature without good reason. I eat meat, but eating is a good reason to me. I also hunt because I see no ethical difference between killing my own food and paying someone else to do it for me. About the only creatures I will kill outright without need or direct provocation are blood-sucking parasites (mosquitoes, ticks, fleas, etc.). Snakes, spiders, etc. are all safe from harm if I spot them.
That being said, if an invasive species or population of feral pet-species is threatening native plants and animals, then by all means they should be culled. Either by introducing a predator species or other means to naturally control their population or else by humane hunting.
One problem with the hunting, though, is if people enjoy hunting them it could actually spread the invasive species. In my current state of TN they had a problem with feral hogs in a few areas of the state so they opened a hunting season. People enjoyed hunting them but didn't like to drive to the infected areas, so some obliviots started capturing, breeding, and releasing the hogs into other parts of the state. Some hunting clubs intentionally released hogs on their own land so they could charge people for access. Thanks to them, the hog-hunting season was canceled and now only landowners and select others are allowed to hunt, but the state still has a huge problem with damage caused by feral hogs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) to have an opinion on this issue. And secondly, I reject your presumption that animal activists and conservationists are split on this issue. 
Something's gotta give
