board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Use of deadly force to protect property

Post Reply   Page 11 of 11  [ 218 posts ]
Jump to page « 17 8 9 10 11
Author Message
Feredir
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 08 Sep , 2008 6:06 pm
 
 
Ara-anna,

First, why did you say "yikes?"

I will admit that I am not that familiar with it. I will say that I prefer hunting as the ultimate means of animal population control. There are plenty of hunters who would pay money to hunt (special costs, licenses, etc) that would put money into the conservation funds.

With that being said, I trust the Department of Natural Resources and their wildlife managers to make the decisions that will be best for the animals. They get paid to figure these things out and if they fail they will lose their jobs. It's can be a very delicate balance.

Since I joined Ducks Unlimited I have gained a new appreciation for these biologists. Ducks are some of the most finicky animals as far as reproducing. There are several species that continue to struggle and I have seen the bag limits go from 1 to 2 and back to none in the matter a three years simply because of water in nesting grounds. They know what they are doing and I trust them.

freddy


Top
Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 08 Sep , 2008 7:16 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
I say yikes because I think you are probably going to vote Palin/McCain.

;)

I will have to find the stories on the wolf and bear killing.

I'll be back.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
Feredir
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 08 Sep , 2008 7:45 pm
 
 
Ara-anna wrote:
I say yikes because I think you are probably going to vote Palin/McCain.

;)

I will have to find the stories on the wolf and bear killing.

I'll be back.
Come on now, was there ever any doubt that I would vote McCain/Palin? Not my favorite ticket but sure beats the alternative. Actually, I could write in the person I would most like to see but Reagan can't do much from where he is now.

freddy :D


Top
Quote
MariaHobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 1:40 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu 03 Feb , 2005 2:39 pm
Location: MO
 
My puppy heard dogs barking on TV the other day and started barking in return and had to run all through the house looking for the *other* dog. So, my husband thought it would be fun to put in a CD we have of wolves howling.

The pup did NOT bark. She got very scared and started whining and trying to hide behind our legs.

Wolves are not our friends, and even a young puppy knows it.

_________________


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 3:10 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Funny, I had a slighly less intense experience once. My cat look extremely startled one time that the National Geographic channel had a jungle cat meowing on TV.

Yes, wolves are not our friends. In some communities where wolves are being reintroduced the people there are very against it because the wolves are attacking children.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 3:28 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
How many people have been attacked by wolves in the last 10 years?
How many people have been attacked by pitbulls in the last 10 years?

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
Feredir
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 3:38 pm
 
 
Wolves-v-pit bulls is an unfair comparison. Rural with little human contact-v- suburban/city with lots of human contact.

Wolves are no longer endangered and some packs need culling. Where you do not have regulated hunting of species then the population will explode. Take California for example. They outlawed cougar hunting and cougar attacks on people have through the roof. When officials go out and kills the suspect cat it is almost always a young tom that was likely displaced by an older tom or female. There is no place for these cats to go so they move closer to humans and we are prey for them.

The same holds true for coyotes. There have been several documented coyote attacks on children this year alone. That bothers me more than cougar attacks because coyotes are extremely weary animals.

freddy


Top
Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 3:44 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
I have no problem culling the packs. What I have a problem with is running the wolves/bears down to exhaustion and then shooting them out of helicopters, especially when regular traps work just as well.

And why can't pitbulls and wolves be compared? Research shows that pitbulls attack humans a great deal more than wolves, but I dare say that if I were to say cull out pitbulls because they are our enemy people would be so receptive to it all.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
sauronsfinger
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 4:14 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4336
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Location: The real world
 
Where does the "sport" part of "sportsman" come into this equation?

_________________

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 4:23 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Pitbulls encounter people much more often than wolves do. I don't have the statistics on hand, but if they attacked at the same rate the greater number of encounters would result in more pitbull attacks on people.

That is exacerbated by those who raise the poor dogs specifically to be fierce. They are raised for the purpose of being agressive, unlike wolves who are agressive for the purpose of hunting or defense. It is known that if they are raised right pitbulls are loving and loyal dogs.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 4:54 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
Yes, but looking at what I can find about wolves on the net, the number of people actually attacked by wolves in Alaska is really really small. I understand culling because of Moose and other eating animals. I understand down sizing coyotes, even though I think here in New Mexico it contributes to the huge increase in Hantra Virus, simply because the main source of food for coyotes is deer mice. But what I have a huge problem with is the shooting out of helicopters and offering rewards for paws. I have no problem with farmers or others making sure people and property are safe from wolves. What I have a problem with is the un-sportsman inhumane way these wolf and bear hunts are carried out.

but then again I also know if a someone was entering my house to due harm (human and or wolf) I'd might shoot them. And honestly I don't know if I would be able to live with myself if it was a human. Vets have a reason they have PSTD and the few I know that have actually killed a human all do not talk about it and have a very hard time wrapping their minds around it all. And all of them have at one time or another a real big battle with alcohol. So I don't think killing should be thought of as just something that can be done, even in self defense or to guard property, without there being any serious reprocussions to the person.

I wonder what the stats are on people who have killed in self defense, what happens after to them.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
Feredir
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 09 Sep , 2008 6:02 pm
 
 
The most likely place to find info on killing a person in self-defense is through the police publications. However, you will likely not find the truth because cops are supposed to be big tough people who can handle anything and won't talk about their issues.

As far as shooting the wolves/bears out of helicopters, that is not hunting, it's culling. There is nothing intended to be "sporting" (I hate that word when it involves hunting) about it.

feddy


Top
Quote
The OG Borry
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 10 Sep , 2008 1:17 pm
The best things in life are not things
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2136
Joined: Tue 26 Jul , 2005 10:44 pm
Location: here....<_< yeah here thats Ceres, CA for you stalkers
 
Feredir wrote:
Take California for example. They outlawed cougar hunting and cougar attacks on people have through the roof.
freddy
Really? Living in CA and hearing nothing about this makes me kinda speculative. Then again so does this. Four attacks in the past 10 years really doesn't seem to be an explosion of attacks. I understand the point you're trying to make but in this case you have it wrong unless you know something I don't.
Borry

_________________

Borry: equality works both ways cheater!
Don: so does not

So I take pictures now, check em out if you'd like. Here you go.


Top
Profile Quote
Feredir
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 10 Sep , 2008 3:04 pm
 
 
Here's the CA code from their website: (It's not all of the code but portions that I felt applicable)

CALIFORNIA CODES
FISH AND GAME CODE
SECTION 4800-4809

4800. (a) The mountain lion (genus Felis) is a specially protected
mammal under the laws of this state.
(b) It is unlawful to take, injure, possess, transport, import, or
sell any mountain lion or any part or product thereof, except as
specifically provided in this chapter or in Chapter 2 (commencing
with Section 2116) of Division 3. This chapter does not prohibit the
sale or possession of any mountain lion or any part or product
thereof, when the owner can demonstrate that the mountain lion, or
part or product thereof, was in the person's possession on June 6,
1990.

4804. In order to ensure that only the depredating mountain lion
will be taken, the department shall issue the permit pursuant to
Section 4803 with the following conditions attached:
(a) The permit shall expire 10 days after issuance.
(b) The permit shall authorize the holder to begin pursuit not
more than one mile from the depredation site.
(c) The permit shall limit the pursuit of the depredating mountain
lion to within a 10-mile radius from the location of the reported
damage or destruction.


Here's an article:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_16218229

I should have qualified that as cougar encounters have gone through the roof, not attacks. Not meant to inflame or exaggerate, sorry. My point is that hunting is a valid conservation tool. It's not for everyone but when it is regulated then good things happen.

freddy


Top
Quote
MariaHobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 10 Sep , 2008 3:29 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu 03 Feb , 2005 2:39 pm
Location: MO
 
Ara wrote:
Vets have a reason they have PSTD
:LMAO: I read that first as short for veterinarians. Poor vets. It's so traumatic docking tails and declawing cats! :bawl: I could never stand doing such a horrible thing to poor kitties and puppies.



I disapprove of pitbulls, too. I see no reason for an animal bred to chomp on the nose of a bull and not let go to exist in this day and age. There are plenty of other breeds of dog available, without encouraging that tendancy.

_________________


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
PrinceAlarming
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 10 Sep , 2008 5:05 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun 07 Sep , 2008 5:50 pm
Location: The Colonies
Contact: Website
 
Feredir wrote:
My point is that hunting is a valid conservation tool.
At one time in our past we were hunters; the progression and survival of our species depended on it. By hunting, we also played a part in animal population control. We were a link in the food chain, and helped a balance.

We are actually the fiercest predators on the face of the planet, not because we are strong or fast or have amazing senses, but because of our ingenuity and fine motor skills. Unfortunately our ingenuity allowed us to increase or hunting prowess at a ridiculous pace.

Our techniques and apparatuses progressed quicker than our foresight. No more passenger pigeons, very few bison, very few fish. On the other end, our successful idea to raise and domesticate animals for mass consumption also means an increase in wild animals we might have considered prey in the past. This may be throwing the balance off, or maybe it is just redistributing the weight.

We are in this ecosystem, and, try as we might to live without impacting our fragile biosphere, nature will adapt to the way we live. Fish are actually getting smaller, because we can only keep the large ones. Bears are becoming acclimated to our cities; trash cans make for easy eats. It's all to easy to forget that sooner or later cougars and the like will start to find themselves good reason to be in our backyards and unafraid of their bipedal neighbors.

I'm guessing that pit bull looks mighty tasty to a mountain lion.

On the subject of pit bulls; considering they were bred to fight, I think it is insane that they are considered for family pets. You have decades of genetics in them; the right demeanor, the right body, the right amount of hatred for other canines and anything else perceived as a threat.

I also have a problem with dobermans, rottweilers, and other dogs bred for a purpose and end up, now, being confined in a house or backyard with some gnawing need to do something they are not being utilized for. A guard dog with nothing to guard. An attack dog with nothing to attack. Even a spaniel, bred for hunting, with nothing to hunt. Some sheep dogs go nuts and try to herd anything that moves, even their owners.

Dog breeding in general is kind of sick. It is the longest running human guided genetics experiment in history. Most breeds have only come about within the last 50 years or so. Look at the poor, little pug; bred for looks, we have allowed this creature to exist and they all have horrible upper respiratory problems because of the anatomy some breeder wanted it to have. This new "pocket dog" trend is also alarming. Maybe there will be a pocket pit bull soon.

Great, bloody violent Paris Hilton can fit in her Gucci bag!

Regardless of how violent a dog is, most breeds listen to their master. With proper training and behavior modifications, even the meanest pit bull won't do anything to anyone. Just like children, their parents are to blame.

I once got told not to pet a pit bull puppy outside of a store because the owner "didn't want him to like or trust people." That disgusted me. Way to raise a maiming killer...


Top
Profile Quote
Feredir
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 10 Sep , 2008 5:56 pm
 
 
PrinceAlarming wrote:
Feredir wrote:
My point is that hunting is a valid conservation tool.
At one time in our past we were hunters; the progression and survival of our species depended on it. By hunting, we also played a part in animal population control. We were a link in the food chain, and helped a balance.

We are actually the fiercest predators on the face of the planet, not because we are strong or fast or have amazing senses, but because of our ingenuity and fine motor skills. Unfortunately our ingenuity allowed us to increase or hunting prowess at a ridiculous pace.

Our techniques and apparatuses progressed quicker than our foresight. No more passenger pigeons, very few bison, very few fish. On the other end, our successful idea to raise and domesticate animals for mass consumption also means an increase in wild animals we might have considered prey in the past. This may be throwing the balance off, or maybe it is just redistributing the weight.

We are in this ecosystem, and, try as we might to live without impacting our fragile biosphere, nature will adapt to the way we live. Fish are actually getting smaller, because we can only keep the large ones. Bears are becoming acclimated to our cities; trash cans make for easy eats. It's all to easy to forget that sooner or later cougars and the like will start to find themselves good reason to be in our backyards and unafraid of their bipedal neighbors.

I'm not sure that I'm getting everything that you are trying to point point out but I have a few counter points.

1) You say fish (animals) are getting smaller because we can only keep larger ones. Each year my state sets new records for the largest fish caught of that species. I have not seen a decline in the size of animals. Whitetail deer populations have never been higher and the herds in most states are very healthy with large animals killed each year.




Even a spaniel, bred for hunting, with nothing to hunt. Some sheep dogs go nuts and try to herd anything that moves, even their owners.

2) My spinger is very content to hunt mice and moles in the yard. She's actually quite afraid of the weeds (sissy no good hunting dog, but a great pet!)


If I've missed your point I apologize.

freddy





..


Top
Quote
PrinceAlarming
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 11 Sep , 2008 5:16 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun 07 Sep , 2008 5:50 pm
Location: The Colonies
Contact: Website
 
Feredir, B77 won't let my insert a URL...:rage:

I also agree that hunting is a valid conservation tool.

I think we should have a cane toad hunting Olympics in Australia every year.

;)

Fish are getting smaller, even the whale shark...

Google "Fish Getting Smaller"...

Here is an excerpt from a story written August 27, of this year...

Fish stocks in many parts of the ocean have hit historic lows. And a new study finds over-fishing actually changes a fish's biology. And not in a good way -- turns out they're getting smaller. And that makes fisheries even more vulnerable. From the Innovations Desk at North Carolina Pubic Radio, Janet Babin reports.

This particular story can be found through (marketplace. publicradio. org).

Whitetail deer population only serves to prove my point... 150 years ago, we would all be hunting deer if we could, now I buy meat from some refrigerator in a market. I did say our domestication of meat bearing animals increases the population of things in the wild that we may have used for food in the past...

I was displaying the dual effects of our food-getting ingenuity as human beings. We get better at killing, we kill more and wipe out. We get better at not relying on wild animals, those wild beasts can reproduce unchecked and overrun...

Sorry if it was a bit incoherent. I would be more than happy to explain any other foggy details.

As far as your dog, I think it is awesome that you are a good dog owner and that you can provide an outlet for your pet's behavior...

There are a lot of horrible dog owners out there, and I must live in a city that is particularly bad. Or I watch too much Animal Cops on the Animal Planet...

Either way, I still have a problem with a living creature being created for one purpose, and then found "cute" and wanted by the masses for some cosmetic reason... "I want a rottweiler because they look cool and mean..."

...I would love to have a springer spaniel and go duck hunting with it...

...And then let it chase the moles in my yard...

...And rub its belly by the fire...

...I miss my basset hounds...

:(


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 11 of 11  [ 218 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page « 17 8 9 10 11
Jump to: