Why are Canadian Geese so Protected? - Page 6

AngusandBuddhasMom · ‎03-10-2010

@Marp wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
I disagree I am against hunting. I understand your point but we live in a culture that looks at any animal that is not "human" as food or sport. And so we don't draw the line. It would be understandable if it we did not live in a westernized world and that we had no knowledge of a plant based diet. But we do and science and science is proving everyday that we do not need to destroy animals to survive.
Your point about not needing to destroy animals to survive is well taken but it overlooks the fact that sometimes for the animals to survive some have to be sacrificed. It is also sometimes the humane thing to do for the survival of the species. Over population is a bigger threat than regulated culling.

I live in a zone that has been culled for years and now there are no deer and our bear population is zilch. So I know full well what culling does and its marketing to the masses who really could care less.

CrazyDaisy · ‎03-20-2010

@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Plaid Pants2 wrote:
@Venezia wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
Nothing in this world is more destructive then adult humans and we seem to over look that.
@AngusandBuddhasMom The discussion is about wildlife.
Oh thanks for clearing that up because I was not aware. Why you gotta be like that????
@AngusandBuddhasMom - Your comment about human destruction is just as valid as many of the other comments on this thread. It's about the interaction of humans and wildlife, IMO, and both play a part.

We have caused many of the problems that have forced wildlife out of its natural habitat.

@Venezia

I would agree.

At national parks where there are signs that specifically say, "DO NOT FEED THE WILDLIFE", and you see people feeding them from their vehicles.

That is doing the WILD animal no favors.

They don't learn to hunt on their own, and if a human gets hurt because of the HUMAN'S stupidity of blatently ignoring the signs, it is the ANIMAL that is destroyed.

I can understand thinning the deer population through hunting.

If there are too many deer, and not enough food for them, then they die a slow, painful death of starvation and disease.

How is that "kinder and gentler" than hunting?

Also, if the hunter uses the flesh, and not just kills just to hang a head on the wall, then I see no problem with hunting.
I disagree I am against hunting. I understand your point but we live in a culture that looks at any animal that is not "human" as food or sport. And so we don't draw the line. It would be understandable if it we did not live in a westernized world and that we had no knowledge of a plant based diet. But we do and science and science is proving everyday that we do not need to destroy animals to survive.

Then would we not be in competition with the animals for the land in order to grow for the "plant based diet". If i was growing something for my families survival not sure I would want to share with the forest creatures. I don't think this is an issue about meat eater vs plant eaters it is an issue of resources. As long as the human population is increasing, animals will continue to be displaced.
There will always be an argument for either side you agree on so I don't know what to tell you. But to see the terror in a cows eyes when its going to slaughter or to see the same in a deer I can't see the justification. jmo.

Commercial slaughter oprations are not the same as small operations and even hunting. Those who are skilled can do what needs to be done quickly and with little pain or stress on the animal. Commercial operations have lots of problems that are really not part of this discussion.

Someday, when scientists discover the center of the Universe....some people will be disappointed it is not them.

Greeneyedlady21 · ‎01-06-2015

I live near a park where the Canadian geese live and have babies every year. I love them, yes they poop everywhere but you become adept at dodging it when walking. Humans do far worse things to the environment, things that don't involve natural bodily functions.

Where I live I often see deer and I love them. To me they are magical creatures. When they look at you with their soulful eyes you can forget your troubles for a brief time. I believe nature belongs to the animals, we just borrow and rent it and we should respect it.

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Marp · ‎03-09-2010

@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Marp wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
I disagree I am against hunting. I understand your point but we live in a culture that looks at any animal that is not "human" as food or sport. And so we don't draw the line. It would be understandable if it we did not live in a westernized world and that we had no knowledge of a plant based diet. But we do and science and science is proving everyday that we do not need to destroy animals to survive.
Your point about not needing to destroy animals to survive is well taken but it overlooks the fact that sometimes for the animals to survive some have to be sacrificed. It is also sometimes the humane thing to do for the survival of the species. Over population is a bigger threat than regulated culling.
I live in a zone that has been culled for years and now there are no deer and our bear population is zilch. So I know full well what culling does and its marketing to the masses who really could care less.

If that is the result of "culling" allowing that to happen is NOT well regulated hunting or culling. More likely than not it is the result of human encroachment and/or distaste for wild animals being animals and infringing on what humans believe to be rightfully theirs.

What is good for the goose today will also be good for the gander tomorrow.

AngusandBuddhasMom · ‎03-10-2010

@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Plaid Pants2 wrote:
@Venezia wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
Nothing in this world is more destructive then adult humans and we seem to over look that.
@AngusandBuddhasMom The discussion is about wildlife.
Oh thanks for clearing that up because I was not aware. Why you gotta be like that????
@AngusandBuddhasMom - Your comment about human destruction is just as valid as many of the other comments on this thread. It's about the interaction of humans and wildlife, IMO, and both play a part.

We have caused many of the problems that have forced wildlife out of its natural habitat.

@Venezia

I would agree.

At national parks where there are signs that specifically say, "DO NOT FEED THE WILDLIFE", and you see people feeding them from their vehicles.

That is doing the WILD animal no favors.

They don't learn to hunt on their own, and if a human gets hurt because of the HUMAN'S stupidity of blatently ignoring the signs, it is the ANIMAL that is destroyed.

I can understand thinning the deer population through hunting.

If there are too many deer, and not enough food for them, then they die a slow, painful death of starvation and disease.

How is that "kinder and gentler" than hunting?

Also, if the hunter uses the flesh, and not just kills just to hang a head on the wall, then I see no problem with hunting.
I disagree I am against hunting. I understand your point but we live in a culture that looks at any animal that is not "human" as food or sport. And so we don't draw the line. It would be understandable if it we did not live in a westernized world and that we had no knowledge of a plant based diet. But we do and science and science is proving everyday that we do not need to destroy animals to survive.

Then would we not be in competition with the animals for the land in order to grow for the "plant based diet". If i was growing something for my families survival not sure I would want to share with the forest creatures. I don't think this is an issue about meat eater vs plant eaters it is an issue of resources. As long as the human population is increasing, animals will continue to be displaced.
There will always be an argument for either side you agree on so I don't know what to tell you. But to see the terror in a cows eyes when its going to slaughter or to see the same in a deer I can't see the justification. jmo.
Commercial slaughter oprations are not the same as small operations and even hunting. Those who are skilled can do what needs to be done quickly and with little pain or stress on the animal. Commercial operations have lots of problems that are really not part of this discussion.

I know I grew up in a family that had hunters and a cattle farm and I know the difference. Between a small slaughter house and a big operation. And to think that smaller slaughter operations are all humane is naive. Killing is killing and so I do not appreciate your dismissing my pov because its different then yours by saying its not a part of the discussion.

CrazyDaisy · ‎03-20-2010

@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Plaid Pants2 wrote:
@Venezia wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
Nothing in this world is more destructive then adult humans and we seem to over look that.
@AngusandBuddhasMom The discussion is about wildlife.
Oh thanks for clearing that up because I was not aware. Why you gotta be like that????
@AngusandBuddhasMom - Your comment about human destruction is just as valid as many of the other comments on this thread. It's about the interaction of humans and wildlife, IMO, and both play a part.

We have caused many of the problems that have forced wildlife out of its natural habitat.

@Venezia

I would agree.

At national parks where there are signs that specifically say, "DO NOT FEED THE WILDLIFE", and you see people feeding them from their vehicles.

That is doing the WILD animal no favors.

They don't learn to hunt on their own, and if a human gets hurt because of the HUMAN'S stupidity of blatently ignoring the signs, it is the ANIMAL that is destroyed.

I can understand thinning the deer population through hunting.

If there are too many deer, and not enough food for them, then they die a slow, painful death of starvation and disease.

How is that "kinder and gentler" than hunting?

Also, if the hunter uses the flesh, and not just kills just to hang a head on the wall, then I see no problem with hunting.
I disagree I am against hunting. I understand your point but we live in a culture that looks at any animal that is not "human" as food or sport. And so we don't draw the line. It would be understandable if it we did not live in a westernized world and that we had no knowledge of a plant based diet. But we do and science and science is proving everyday that we do not need to destroy animals to survive.

Then would we not be in competition with the animals for the land in order to grow for the "plant based diet". If i was growing something for my families survival not sure I would want to share with the forest creatures. I don't think this is an issue about meat eater vs plant eaters it is an issue of resources. As long as the human population is increasing, animals will continue to be displaced.
There will always be an argument for either side you agree on so I don't know what to tell you. But to see the terror in a cows eyes when its going to slaughter or to see the same in a deer I can't see the justification. jmo.
Commercial slaughter oprations are not the same as small operations and even hunting. Those who are skilled can do what needs to be done quickly and with little pain or stress on the animal. Commercial operations have lots of problems that are really not part of this discussion.
I know I grew up in a family that had hunters and a cattle farm and I know the difference. Between a small slaughter house and a big operation. And to think that smaller slaughter operations are all humane is naive. Killing is killing and so I do not appreciate your dismissing my pov because its different then yours by saying its not a part of the discussion.

Guess you just want to argue, I said the problems with commercial slaughter operations was not part of the discussion. I never dismissed your pov, but then you have mine. So I will move on.......

Someday, when scientists discover the center of the Universe....some people will be disappointed it is not them.

AngusandBuddhasMom · ‎03-10-2010

@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@CrazyDaisy wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Plaid Pants2 wrote:
@Venezia wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
@Kachina624 wrote:
@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:
Nothing in this world is more destructive then adult humans and we seem to over look that.
@AngusandBuddhasMom The discussion is about wildlife.
Oh thanks for clearing that up because I was not aware. Why you gotta be like that????
@AngusandBuddhasMom - Your comment about human destruction is just as valid as many of the other comments on this thread. It's about the interaction of humans and wildlife, IMO, and both play a part.

We have caused many of the problems that have forced wildlife out of its natural habitat.

@Venezia

I would agree.

At national parks where there are signs that specifically say, "DO NOT FEED THE WILDLIFE", and you see people feeding them from their vehicles.

That is doing the WILD animal no favors.

They don't learn to hunt on their own, and if a human gets hurt because of the HUMAN'S stupidity of blatently ignoring the signs, it is the ANIMAL that is destroyed.

I can understand thinning the deer population through hunting.

If there are too many deer, and not enough food for them, then they die a slow, painful death of starvation and disease.

How is that "kinder and gentler" than hunting?

Also, if the hunter uses the flesh, and not just kills just to hang a head on the wall, then I see no problem with hunting.
I disagree I am against hunting. I understand your point but we live in a culture that looks at any animal that is not "human" as food or sport. And so we don't draw the line. It would be understandable if it we did not live in a westernized world and that we had no knowledge of a plant based diet. But we do and science and science is proving everyday that we do not need to destroy animals to survive.

Then would we not be in competition with the animals for the land in order to grow for the "plant based diet". If i was growing something for my families survival not sure I would want to share with the forest creatures. I don't think this is an issue about meat eater vs plant eaters it is an issue of resources. As long as the human population is increasing, animals will continue to be displaced.
There will always be an argument for either side you agree on so I don't know what to tell you. But to see the terror in a cows eyes when its going to slaughter or to see the same in a deer I can't see the justification. jmo.
Commercial slaughter oprations are not the same as small operations and even hunting. Those who are skilled can do what needs to be done quickly and with little pain or stress on the animal. Commercial operations have lots of problems that are really not part of this discussion.
I know I grew up in a family that had hunters and a cattle farm and I know the difference. Between a small slaughter house and a big operation. And to think that smaller slaughter operations are all humane is naive. Killing is killing and so I do not appreciate your dismissing my pov because its different then yours by saying its not a part of the discussion.
Guess you just want to argue, I said the problems with commercial slaughter operations was not part of the discussion. I never dismissed your pov, but then you have mine. So I will move on.......

OK you replied to a post that I wrote that I was not arguing which I pointed out. So again I disagree with you and so you see that as an argument? I was pointing out my knowledge of the subject since you assumed I had known and attempted to give me a ridiculous Disney version of small slaughterhouses. Because the size of the place somehow deems it less violent to the animal? Again no argument just my pov from experience. A slaughterhouse is a slaughterhouse the animal still is killed. Sorry if that somehow seems argumentative to you.

dooBdoo · ‎06-27-2010

Venezia wrote:
caravaggio wrote:
Kachina624 wrote:
caravaggio wrote:
Nothing in this world is more destructive then adult humans and we seem to over look that.
@caravaggio The discussion is about wildlife.
Oh thanks for clearing that up because I was not aware. Why you gotta be like that????
@caravaggio - Your comment about human destruction is just as valid as many of the other comments on this thread. It's about the interaction of humans and wildlife, IMO, and both play a part.

We have caused many of the problems that have forced wildlife out of its natural habitat.

I agree, @Venezia. I think the entire thread has been an interesting discussion, no matter whether or not we all have the same perspectives.

Few things reveal your intellect and your generosity of spirit—the parallel powers of your heart and mind—better than how you give feedback.~Maria Popova

151949 · ‎03-09-2010

Oh please - there is no terror in a cows eyes as it goes to slaughter. They are not aware what is going on.Cows are not very intelligent animals.

151949 · ‎03-09-2010

The fact is that throughout the history of the earth species have come and gone for many reasons and sometimes the reason a species disappers is because it has no habitat. Some day humans will be gone too.