From: jsemrad@ems.cdc.com (Joe Semrad)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Trapping
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:30:59 GMT
Reply-To: jsemrad@ems.cdc.com
Organization: Empros Systems International, a division of CDC

In article <1992Dec11.172214.2797@informix.com>, proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) writes:
|> In article <30967@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com> jsemrad@ems.cdc.com writes:
|> 
|> >governing unit to get trapping made illegal in the park?  If the traps bother
|> >you that much why don't you take constructive action instead of just being
|> >a weenie about it?
|> >
|> 
|> But springing the traps *is* constructive action. The most "weenie" thing
|> I have yet seen on this newsgroup is Karl saying "I am forwarding your
|> posts to the authorities".
|> 
|> Sure, campaigning to have trapping made illegal is a better long-term
|> solution. In them meantime, springing the traps is the right thing to
|> do, even if it is against the law.

First off, Rob has finally answered the question about the traps being
illegal in the park in the affirmative, and notified the authorities.
Assuming there are no MORE facts that are being withheld that would
change the picture, I fully support Rob in getting the authorites to
remove the traps and perhaps cite the owner if warranted.  This is the
way these situations should be handled.

Since Rob has done this, I suppose he is less of a weenie that I originally
supposed, but remember he withheld the complete story in the original posting,
and by mentioning that he repeatedly sprung the traps, implied that no
further action had been taken.

However his reaction to possibly breaking the law (was I springing traps or
just dropping a stick on the ground...) was pretty lame.  He also wanted
to send the trapper a message, which just springing the traps doesn't
do.  In other words, from the tone of many of Rob's posts on this subject,
I get the idea that playing with the trapper's mind is giving Rob as much
or more of a charge than is getting the traps removed.

I still don't like his repeated springing of the traps, for a couple of 
reasons.  One, there is a possibility that the traps are legal, being set
by the park management for pest eradication or some other reason unknown
to Rob, or perhaps this park does issue trapping permits under certain
circumstances even though trapping is generally prohibited.  Secondly,
if the above is not true and the traps are illegal, then Rob may be 
tampering with evidence, making it more difficult to provide legal
penalties for their owner.

If Rob is certain that the traps are illegal, perhaps he should monitor the
area, without touching anything.  If the park authorites do not respond
then he should continue to nag them until he gets a response.  Depending
on the park management, I could see this being fairly low on some underpaid
overworked park ranger's priority list.  However if Rob makes enough noise,
I'm sure something will be done, or at least he will be told why nothing
is going to be done.

If the traps had been legal, and laws against tampering with them were
in effect, then springing them is NOT the "right" thing to do.  Since
when does an AR person have the right to decide that the law is wrong
and that they are justified in breaking it?  This is just a more minor
form of the idea that firebombing is ok if done in the name of animal
rights.  The only person who could justify it would be the AR person who
feels that their cause is so noble that they are above the law, which
is a scary thought indeed.

As for Karl, all I can say is that Russell constantly threatens to send
stuff off to PETA for possible legal action.  I don't really see how Karl's
statement is any different.

Joe
(All opinions mine.)
-- 
================================================================
= C. Joseph Semrad                  =   Phone: 612-553-4758    =
= EMPOWER Development               =   FAX:   612-553-4018    =
= Empros Systems International      =   jsemrad@ems.cdc.com    =
================================================================
=    "My basic view on tackle and equipment costs is that      =
=     fly fishers as a group spend too much and spin           =
=     fishers spend too little" - Stream Smallmouth Fishing    =
================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals