Letter to the Editor
Wild nonsense
Published Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!March 17, 2008
To the editor:
Who needs wolves? Who needs polar bears? Who needs dinosaurs? I’d much rather have the moose and caribou meat on our tables than let the wolves eat it or have them eat our pets and other small animals.
With the price of meat, milk and eggs going through the ceiling because of corn being used for ethanol with its subsequent price increase, many people, especially in the villages, will be unable to afford these items. If Sweden has no predators and has moose meat to sell, why can’t we? Is not people having enough to eat more important than saving the wolves?
The wacko animal rights activists have gone too far, and their priorities are screwy. Or is that many of them are exploiting the situation for money? I understand that Priscilla Feral lives in a very upscale neighborhood and Armand Hammer was a very rich man. What’s wrong with many of their followers I can’t explain.
Don’t give me that crap about wolves being noble animals, either. Many Natives and hunters have observed wolves killing just for the fun of it. What’s noble about that? Sure many hunters enjoy hunting, but most of them utilize the meat, and that’s important for subsidizing food costs. Also moose and caribou are healthier than beef or pork.
So I don’t care if wolves, and maybe polar bears, go the way of the dinosaurs. The human race has survived very well without many extinct animals. We will continue to survive if we have enough to eat. Certainly animals should be treated humanely. Native people have a way of showing their respect for animals and don’t kill unless it is necessary, as do many hunters. So let’s stop the nonsense and manage wild meat populations to feed the human population.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
thank you , i couldent have sayed it better, im a trapper from the yukon area, your right about it , priscilla feral is of them , that live only to fraud others to sue others, they lie to make others think they love wildlife, but the facts show them for what they are. we can manage ower own wildlife just fine, and are doing so,and we dont need outside the state trash sueing the state all the time . ban them from the right of haveing rights in this state, thank you,,,,
I support the notion that wildlife conservation is ultimately about serving the desires of humans rather than to "protect Earth from evil humans." The smallpox virus was part of nature and humanity rightly made it extinct. However some species, especially "cool" ones like polar bears and wolves, have what I call totem value. Unfortunately it is hard to determine what the sum of this value would be and the costs of supporting it. There is currently no market for predators and the closest thing to it is the political and legal systems. Perhaps a cap-and-trade system could be used where a certain number of hunting permits would be sold and anyone can buy them (either hunter or totemic).
As for the whole global warming and polar bear issue, the idea that we should shut down the economy to preserve a few non-essential species is moronic. Nature will evolve and adapt, just as it always has. The costs and benefits of preserving a species should be taken into account instead of having a simple-minded, preserve-at-all-costs mentality.
yeah, wolves aren't evil, they aren't saints, they are just wolves. same with polar bears. and sometimes species are just destined to go extinct. it has happened before man came along, it will happen after we are gone. a long concerted effort by hollywood and the mass media has changed the view of animals by city dwellers that will never come in contact with a wild animal outside of an occassional trip to a zoo. now wolves are noble but persecuted animals. when in reality they are just another successful predator species on the planet like humans. (but not as successful) wolves in the past have been demonized plain and simply because we compete for the same resources the wolves do. that is unfair too. but hey, if it comes down to it, i get to choose, the wolf pack eats or my family eats, guess which one i pick? polar bears are all cute and cuddly and drink coca cola from a bottle.
it is my opinion that a member of a species main loyalty should be with members of it's own species. otherwise humans could be on track to go extinct. not being loyal first to your own species is a form of being a traitor. like being a traitor to your country. maybe even worse. traitors that do harm to their country are punished quite harshly. why shouldn't doing things that are harmful to your own species not be the same. valuing members of a species more than your own, like wolves or polar bears, is not good. it is not a good species survival trait.
turning corn into automobile fuel.... now, i know that corn mainly goes to animal feed for farm animals and the like, but some where down the line you are taking food out that would have been for human consumption. does it mean we now donate less food hungry people in africa? we could make up that difference by drilling anwr. what's more important? a postage stamp on an elephant worth of development in a pristine wilderness area or hungry people who depend on north america's agricultural capabilities? the other option of course is to stop driving cars and heating homes in the winter. but that too would doom millions to starvation. where is this new green super technology? we need it! bring it on. let's see some blueprints.
A synopsis, for those of you that didn't read the entire letter:
"Me, me, me, me. Me me me poor. Me me me me me me me me me egocentric me me me. Me shortsighted, me me me. Me me me, I uneducated. Me me me."
Humans also kill just for the fun of it, sometimes leaving the dead in piles to rot. The Outdoor Council wants to kill bears without even saving the meat. Two hundred and fifty years ago the US was a wilderness with abundant game. Now it contains millions of hunters, more every year. Of course there is less game. Don't blame it all on the wild predators when there are plenty of the human kind.
Ellen you could look at the states were peta or others have stopped wildlife management , im not for killing off wildlife,im for haveing ower kids kids kids have of all we have now in wildlife, with that sayed , we are not in the 1800s no more, you have to manage to keep things at a point were not one criter is more better off then the rest, or we all lose out, yep your right in one thing ,there are that do not care , and they kill for the fun of it, im not one of them for your info, never will be, but im for wildlife management, the dep,s fish & game, and the us fish&wildlife have done a good job in manageing ower wildlife, thank you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ellen, the number of hunters has been going down in the U.S. for some time now (a few decades).
Thanks, sdoownek. Made my morning.
paradox44, let me get this straight - you want "ower" kids to have all of the wildlife we have now. Yet, you agree with the author who states, "I don’t care if wolves, and maybe polar bears, go the way of the dinosaurs." Don't you find that a little hypocritical? Personally, I find it to be rather humorously ironic.
I couldnt have said it better, sdoownek.
the letter didnt say me me me me? I re-read it and I honestly dont see anything selfish in it.
I assume that the "me me me" reference is because the writer wanted game meat and didn't care about conserving predators for current and future human generations. This reference seems to be based on the idea that future generations will value a pristine environment more than the benefits economic growth. As past and the current generations do not have this value standard I see no reason why future generations would. It is really a "humans are evil, nature is good" mentality.
I feel like comparing polar bears and wolves to dinosaurs is rediculous. If polar bears and wolves go extinct, it will be because of global warming, over hunting, but most likely both. Dinosaurs went extinct due to a giant asteroid collision with earth not because we traveled back in time and shot them all.
Wolves have just recently come off the endangered species list in several states. Why should we be so hasty to put them back on it? Alaska is known across the world for being full of game and wildlife. Let's not destroy such a positive reputation by killing off an entire species (or two) just because a few people think it won't hurt anything.
I don't like playing "wait and see" with nature, humans always seem to lose at that game.
If Ms. Harris likes Sweden so much, maybe she should move there. America! Love it or leave it!
For one. I don't agree with this letter. You can lower the population of wolves, you don't need to make them extinct. And two, what do polar bears have to do with caribou? They live off of seals and marine aminals. If you are going to write a letter to the editor. Try to do a little research.
I'm an Alaskan Native that is faced with the horrible idea of not having our native foods. Such as Moose, Geese, and Caribou. Our village has an incentative program for trappers and hunters to LOWER the wolve population, not to make them extinct.
Yes, we as natives do depend on the land, but we would never want one of our sacred animals to go extinct.
i noticed sdoonek called him uneducated. but the letter was well written. it had good grammer, paragraphs and spelling. i would say the uneducated tag is probably unwarranted. i have definately noticed that animal rights activists (including vegans and anti-fur people), ecofriendly and left leaning folks tend to have this annoying habit of assuming they are morally superior to all others.
I have a much better idea! Let's unleash a global nuclear holocaust! This will eliminate all human misery, as well as all those pesky endangered species. Two birds with one stone (or perhaps I should say, lots of critters with lots of bombs).
The only thing that will survive will be cockroaches, because they can adapt to anything. This proves that they sit atop the evolutionary tree, and should therefore be given dominion over the Earth, as opposed to we humans who have to fight our environment just to survive.
As long as the cockroaches don't repeat our mistakes and invent religion and economics, they'll be far better planetary stewards than we've ever been.
Curmudgeon ~ Have you heard of E.R.I.F. (Equal Rights for Insect Friends)? Their view is that as insects evolved before mammals and that they will be here after the inevitable nuclear war, that Earth is really theirs and we are just uninvited guests. They decry the use of WMDs (insecticides) and the stealing of honey from baby bees. The founder wants one federal vote for each 150 pounds of insect biomass in the U.S. as the representative of insect interests.
Seriously? Do you know anything about ecology? The world we live in is a delicate balance of so many factors you blithely choose to ignore. Wolves and caribou are part of a system of checks and balances that hinges on population density and distribution. Without the proper number of predators prey animals become over abundant and quickly eat their way through what little resources are available to them, leaving many young animals to starve, therefore affecting subsequent generations of animals. Before you condemn wolves, think about what you'll really be losing.
"As long as the cockroaches don't repeat our mistakes and invent religion and economics, they'll be far better planetary stewards than we've ever been."
Nicely said!!! I LOVE IT!!!
@polarmark: Your assumption that using proper "grammer"(sic) equates to being being educated (about an issue) is inherently incorrect.
Just because I'm able to discuss quantum field theory and curved spacetime doesn't mean I'm qualified to replace the water pump in my truck. A "well written" letter doesn't mean that one is qualified to dictate wildlife management.
As long as you brought it up, it wasn't a well written letter. Sure, it was "more gooder then" some of the letters that make it into print. There weren't any double negatives and there were paragraph breaks and punctuation. That doesn't mean the intent was conveyed accurately and distinctly.
MEL1776,
"Equal Rights for Insect Friends." "Insect Friends?" Does that mean that cockroaches and dung beetles are Quakers?
I think ERIF would argue that those insects are too enlightened by communal spirit to believe in theology.
I'm trying to find a fluoride angle in all of this. Can anyone help me?
lol funny curmedgeon!
We could add fluoride to all natural fresh water and see the results on polar bears and wolves, which are poor and thus are more likely to benefit from such an additive.
Or, we could add large quantities of fluoride to all of our drinking water - then the poor polar bears and wolves would no longer have to worry about us pesky humans taking up their turf and endangering their habitats.
Maybe we cold just feed people like news reader to the wolves and polar bears.
Maybe we could just feed people like news reader to the wolves and polar bears.
I think the me me me comment was just a lame attempt at making a point without actually having anything good to say.
sdoownek:
You wrote “@polarmark: Your assumption that using proper "grammer"(sic) equates to being being educated (about an issue) is inherently incorrect.”
My favorite part was the “being being.” I’m going to have to say that his letter was “more gooder than” your post.