It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New law paves the way for the extinction of Hunting.

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   
www.cbsnews.com... 7368000/can-hunting-endangered-animals-save-the-species/?pageNum=4

In the coming weeks, a new rule issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will take effect, making it a crime to hunt the scimitar horned oryx - and two other endangered antelope - without a federal permit that will be difficult, if not impossible, to obtain.


Get ready hunters if this law goes into effect then the next step will be a federal hunting license for all game animals.
edit on 9-2-2012 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by deadeyedick
reply to post by kimish
 


I'm open to title suggestions.
I went with the cbs title.


I don't know, Maybe some other members can chime in
I would think that "Hunting preserves handle wildlife management better than the government" would be a good choice. But, that's just me .



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by deadeyedick
 


I don't think they killed off the Bison in spite of the Amerindians, maybe just a little. But, They liked to hunt for sport and had no concept on conservation, for the most part.

Regardless, these places do have a good grip on animal control, something the governments should take into consideration and learn from them. That's my penny's worth.



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by kimish
 


Here is some great info on the extinction of buffalo.
www1.american.edu...

Some scholars suggest that in order to make migration to the west easier, the US government, through the Army, adopted a policy to exterminate the buffalo. Extermination of the buffalo would inevitably mean the demise of the Indians who so relied on them for almost every aspect of their existence. "Although the army was plagued by strategic failures, the near extermination of the American bison during the 1870s helped to mask the military's poor performance. By stripping many Indians of their available resources, the slaughter of the buffalo severely reduced the Indians' capacity to continue an armed struggle against the United States. The military's role in this matter is difficult to asses. Sheridan and Sherman recognized that eliminating the buffalo severely reduced the Indians' capacity to continue an armed struggle against the United States. The editors of the Army and Navy Journal supported the proposition, comparing such an effort with Civil War campaigns against Confederate supplies and food sources. Forts provided de facto support for hunters, who used the civilian services often found near army bases. Officers and enlisted personnel also killed buffalo for food and sport, though the impact of their hunts was minute when compared to the organized efforts of the professionals." (The Military and United States Indian Policy, p. 171) "In 1874, Secretary of the Interior Delano testified before Congress, "The buffalo are disappearing rapidly, but not faster than I desire. I regard the destruction of such game as Indians subsist upon as facilitating the policy of the Government, of destroying their hunting habits, coercing them on reservations, and compelling them to begin to adopt the habits of civilization." (The Military and United States Indian Policy, p. 171) Two years later, reporter John F. Finerty wrote that the government's Indian allies "killed the animals in sheer wantonness, and when reproached by the officers said: ‘better kill buffalo than have him feed the Sioux.'" Although Sheridan added that "if I could learn that every buffalo in the the northern herd were killed I would be glad," some indications point to a groundswell of military opposition to the killing. (The Military and United States Indian Policy, p. 172) In 1873, the Secretary of War was forwarded a letter from Major R.J. Dodge, endorsed by [General] Pope and Sheridan, that addressed the problem. The Secretary of War also approved Sheridan's request which seemed to indicate the general's own ambivalence on the subject, to authorize Col. De L. Floyd Jones "to put a stop to their wholesale destruction." Several officers protested the wanton destruction to Henry Bergh, president of the America Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The army, while anxious to strike against the Indians' ability to continue their resistance, did not make the virtual extermination of the American bison part of its official policy; in some cases, individual officers took it upon themselves to try and end the slaughter. (The Military and United States Indian Policy, p. 171) While evidence seems to point to the existence of an official policy, the debate about whether one actually existed still continues (as noted in the above paragraph). Perhaps reading accounts by people who lived in those times will provide some interesting insight:

edit on 10-2-2012 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Au contraire, mon frère , how can one disagree with sound Game Management Practices Instituted by Theo. Roosevelt.

I am open to general extinction as a solution, are you open to Mankind not involving himself at all? Or is removing mankind the fix all to Climate, Eco System Management?
If so, will you be the first to carry out the eradication of human life

If you do disagree with said practices do you also disagree with Bill Gates funding Atmospheric Pollution to stop Polar Icecap degrade

To me, this subject brings up all kinds of questions, how about you



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


I agree it does bring up a lot of questions.
However that's the only part of your post i agree with.


IMO The best way to judge a man is by the fruits of his labors.
www.theodoreroosevelt.org...

One of President Theodore Roosevelt's most lasting and significant contributions to the world was the permanent preservation of the some of the most unique natural resources of the United States. According to the National Geographic, the area of the United States placed under public protection by Theodore Roosevelt, as National Parks, National Forests, game and bird preserves, and other federal reservations, comes to a total of approximately 230,000,000 acres or about 84,000 acres per day!


edit on 10-2-2012 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by deadeyedick
 


troublesome to venture other than my last statement, it kinda does pin one down to choosing a side.

One time in band camp, I was walking through the forest where some of it had been logged. At one point a course of conservation was to put poison pellets on feeder perches so the squirrel population would die out. True story. The thought was that no squirrels would mean tree self seeding would be a success. What really happened and will through the course of time be denied, all the habitat left said part of the forest. Predator and prey moved into rural areas and now there are problems associated with bears and cougars.

Balance is a big word
edit on 10-2-2012 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by rebellender
Balance is a big word


I totally agree. Mother Nature is the Master at balance. There's no way we can know all of the consequences of our actions on nature - thus the reason for the concept of unintentional consequence. However, that said... do you think that man's actions, whatever they may end up being or not being, cannot be further balanced by Mother Nature? When you assume it is better left to nature to balance things, isn't that also saying that our intrusion into nature limits nature's ability to balance?

It's a paradox...
edit on 10/2/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Gosh...I really, really do not know what to make of this...I think it is telling that the guy tried very hard not to use the word 'sport', because really that is what they are doing, having fun hunting something that they can't hunt in it's natural environment. I don't understand it to be honest...is it wrong? If it is, then I suppose it is wrong to raise any animal for slaughter...and since I am not a vegetarian, can I comment? And where does it end? Surely then we can breed tigers for their fur, or for their penises, or rhinos for their horns...

I don't know...I think that Mr Benn got it right.



I just feel very sad about this. Perhaps it is time I went back to vegetarianism and then maybe I wouldn't feel so torn. They may be able to rationalise that this is about conservation, but given the fact that they don't allow hunting or even culling due to overpopulation at the many animal conservation centres that exist around the world it is a wafer thin argument. Possibly, if they were providing them to their native countries, to be hunted by the indigenous people who once hunted those animals for food, it might wash, but for trophies? No, on so many levels, it is wrong. And just plain sad.



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
What is this sick obsession with humans that we must have what is in such little supply, when there is no "human survival or basic need" for it in the first place??? "Create hunting preserves" for nearly extinct animals"??? What a twisted irony we have created for ourselves. Why don't we create "hunting preserves" for those humans that would rather possess the last carcass of a species rather than leave it alone to survive and reproduce, and drive that gene out of our pool............



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by RoyalBlue
 


The conservation numbers tell a different story than the one you are trying to portray.
No amount of authority will every stop mankinds drive for tasty sustenance.
However with common sense conservation laws can maintain a healthy balance.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by deadeyedick
 


I don't think Royalblue watched the video or read the thread... just commented on the title.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join