U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-30-2017, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Canada
5,119 posts, read 3,633,578 times
Reputation: 13519

Advertisements

What kind of sports is this? Shooting bear cubs in their sleep and shooting bears from airplanes? Accepting the cruelty of leg hold traps?

How can this have anything to do with "making America great again"? There is nothing great about it other than hunters having more rights IMO.

It's Done: Trump Signs HJR 69 into Law Allowing Slaughter of Alaskan Bear Cubs, Wolf Pups - EnviroNews | The Environmental News Specialists

Quote:
Editorial: Trump says, ‘I have won awards on environmental protection’ — EnviroNews says, ‘Bull****!’
Quote:
Frankly, for Trump to call himself an “environmentalist” could be considered blasphemy — at least if you’re from the school that considers Great Nature a sacred sanctuary. It is the hope of the EnviroNews USA Editorial Board that the President will stop with the ridiculous “environmental protection” claims and just give everybody a break already.
Signable Petition Demands Zinke to Reject HJR 69, Trump's Bear Cub/Wolf Pup Killing Bill - EnviroNews | The Environmental News Specialists

Quote:
President Donald Trump recently signed a cruel bill into law repealing protections for wolves, bears and other wildlife on Alaska’s national wildlife refuges. The law – rushed through Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) — repealed an Obama Administration rule that prohibited killing wolves and their pups in their dens, gunning down bears at bait stations and shooting them from airplanes. And it’s all in an attempt to artificially boost caribou numbers to placate sport hunters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-30-2017, 12:45 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,341 posts, read 10,898,841 times
Reputation: 12285
Providing the article is accurate and not simply filed with emotional commentary there are things that that I, as an avid outdoorsman (not an animal rights advocate) strongly disagree with allowing. Leg hold traps have always bothered me but their use has always been a fact of life in my world. Air hunting as well I don't cotton to. Denning? Please. That's NOT hunting. Nor is taking animals with young. Bears are not a threat to herd animal populations though Grizzlies do prey on them. Wolves, in profusion are. As are coyotes. However these canines are more of an issue for us in the lower 48. Those who run stock.


I'll have to research this some more before I buy off on the animal rights groups and enviro wackos opinion. There is no doubt some ...poetic license...in their released position here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2017, 12:48 PM
 
5,470 posts, read 8,160,530 times
Reputation: 7284
What do you have against Caribou?


The creatures you listed are predators.
They have nothing that preys upon them except man.
By and large hunters are FAR MORE conservationists than some urban wackos that have never seen a predator take down prey.

It's our job to maintain the balance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2017, 02:18 PM
 
Location: on the wind
4,121 posts, read 1,535,580 times
Reputation: 14706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Themanwithnoname View Post
What do you have against Caribou?


The creatures you listed are predators.
They have nothing that preys upon them except man.
By and large hunters are FAR MORE conservationists than some urban wackos that have never seen a predator take down prey.

It's our job to maintain the balance.
No, its not "our" job. We've decided it is our job despite what ecology might say. We tend to want the simplest solutions for a problem WE perceive. Predator and prey do tend to balance each other without man's interference, but that balance isn't necessarily what humans want. Natural systems are not steady-state affairs. Things tend to fluctuate, expand and crash....corrections. Take moose for example (caribou are very different!). If left to itself, habitats tend to favor moose at specific times unless predators keep them in check. Given enough time and a low population of predators, moose can damage their range, the population crashes, predators and hunters lose out, the range recovers, herbivores recover, predators recover, over and over. But, humans don't want to wait the cycles out....they want what they want all the time.

So, here is the problem....that word "balance". It means one thing to someone who hunts caribou or moose for subsistence, another thing to the sport hunter, and yet another to a tourist on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to AK. Didn't even include the state game and fish commission that depends on revenue from hunting licenses and permits.

The subsistence hunter wants more moose/caribou to fill the freezer, and feels that wolves and bears eat too much of HIS meat. The sport trophy hunter probably wants more of those moose and caribou around to chase and shoot, to live longer and develop the trophy-sized racks and poundage that gives them their thrill.

The tourist wants a chance to see the bears and wolves as well as the moose and caribou. Fewer of the predators there are and the shyer, the less likely they'll get that chance.

This idea of balance is subjective. Now if someone primarily uses ecological monitoring to make these "balance" determinations, maybe hunting more predators at specific times makes biological sense. If the range is overbrowsed and damaged, increasing the moose or caribou take limit could correct that. But, all this study is expensive, takes time. and the study program has to be fine tuned to a wide variety of habitats in order to be meaningful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2017, 02:31 PM
 
Location: on the wind
4,121 posts, read 1,535,580 times
Reputation: 14706
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
Providing the article is accurate and not simply filed with emotional commentary there are things that that I, as an avid outdoorsman (not an animal rights advocate) strongly disagree with allowing. Leg hold traps have always bothered me but their use has always been a fact of life in my world. Air hunting as well I don't cotton to. Denning? Please. That's NOT hunting. Nor is taking animals with young. Bears are not a threat to herd animal populations though Grizzlies do prey on them. Wolves, in profusion are. As are coyotes. However these canines are more of an issue for us in the lower 48. Those who run stock.


I'll have to research this some more before I buy off on the animal rights groups and enviro wackos opinion. There is no doubt some ...poetic license...in their released position here.
Yes, I feel there are two issues here....the basic wish to increase the moose and caribou population by removing predators, and the METHOD by which "we" do so. Hunting adult predators by so-called fair chase versus cornering and killing them while they are unable to defend themselves. I have no problem with responsible hunting. Conscientious hunters need to understand what they are doing, and they appreciate and respect the game. I have a major problem with baiting or cornering defenseless babies and slaughtering them.

There is some evidence that caribou populations are declining more than expected, but is this only due to predation? Probably not, but I am not an expert. I would suspect there are other processes affecting their habitat as well. We know tundra systems are showing a lot of stress from climate change (changes in vegetation, soils, permafrost, ice and snow cover) which affect key caribou lichen food, changes which affect their winter survival and overall health too. If they are less fit, disease spreads and predators can take advantage of it.

All this is pretty basic biology, but politicians are not basing their decisions on biology. They are trying to please a group of people who feel underprivileged. There are more people who desire to live a subsistence life, but there is less and less land on which their food animals can exist. So, people feel they want to create and maintain a sort of free range livestock farm without doing anything to protect the habitat it depends on. Polar regions are delicately balanced, not very forgiving or resilient....the reactions will probably not be what people want, and it will take generations for the effects of bad decisions to resolve.

Another very real concern about a new "opportunity" like this is repealing it once conditions change. Its harder to shut something off (even if the reasons to get rid of it are great) once it becomes status quo. People start to think if it as a right, not as the short term solution to a perceived problem.

Last edited by Parnassia; 08-30-2017 at 03:01 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2017, 04:49 PM
 
10,339 posts, read 7,594,643 times
Reputation: 4513
Quote:
Originally Posted by gouligann View Post
What kind of sports is this? Shooting bear cubs in their sleep and shooting bears from airplanes? Accepting the cruelty of leg hold traps?

How can this have anything to do with "making America great again"? There is nothing great about it other than hunters having more rights IMO.

It's Done: Trump Signs HJR 69 into Law Allowing Slaughter of Alaskan Bear Cubs, Wolf Pups - EnviroNews | The Environmental News Specialists





Signable Petition Demands Zinke to Reject HJR 69, Trump's Bear Cub/Wolf Pup Killing Bill - EnviroNews | The Environmental News Specialists
This is so sickening. The Trump Administration is sickening.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2017, 06:21 AM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
1,650 posts, read 628,150 times
Reputation: 3303
The federal court in CT recently put the wolf in MI WI & MN back on the endangered list despite several govt and independent studies suggesting their populations needed to be controlled to match the available habitat & prey situation.

Why should ivory tower, eastern, urban liberals imperiously determine what rural westerners are allowed to do with their own environmental situation? Those who pontificate against hunting of the predators have obviously never considered the losses suffered by those living among them when the population exceeds its natural food source.

Hunting is well controlled with limits set based on scientific population studies-- except when political concerns interfere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2017, 03:31 AM
 
5,470 posts, read 8,160,530 times
Reputation: 7284
Fine. If you don't like job how about:

"Our place in 'the circle of life"

"Out place in the food chain"

"What its like at the top of the chain"

"What its like at the top"

Etc
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
5,602 posts, read 3,464,733 times
Reputation: 7803
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
This is so sickening. The Trump Administration is sickening.
Yeah, its almost as bad as Obama releasing ISIS terrorists back into circulation. You know, those friendly people who like to kill and maim and murder as many people as they can on a daily basis.


Pick your battles, lady.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2017, 06:33 AM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
1,650 posts, read 628,150 times
Reputation: 3303
Romania, il governo ordina una strage programmata di orsi e lupi - La Stampa

It seems Romania has just changed it's protective policy also.

"Bears and wolves are too many and too dangerous."

They have set the kill at 140 bears and 97 wolves. The journalist calls it a "programmed slaughter," but I think ecologists would call it a "managed harvest." Because humans have generally upset the natural order of ecosystems, good stewardship involves proper attention to population control, and hunters perform a necessary service to that end.

If you don't like hunting, don't go hunting. Leave it to others. I'm not personally a hunter, but I know their value.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top