From: shawn@ut-emx.uucp (Shawn Boyd)
Newsgroups: alt.wolves
Subject: Re: Working with Wolves
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:25:33 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas

>>>>>Why do you advocate killing of humans?  Why do you advocate sabotage?
>>>>>Don't humans have a right to live that is equal to the wolves?  Aren't
>>>>>humans part of the animal kingdom?
>>>>>Mary Otto

 Point well made, Mary -- and from my point of view, well taken as well.

>>>>saying that hunting is legal is saying that we are a superior species.

 Not.  The act of hunting is simply claiming a long heritage passed down 
 to me by generations of forbearers.

 Saying that hunting is legal merely means that no legislation has been enacted
 which precludes the activity.  A generic statement which blankets the 
 topic by proclaiming "hunting is legal" does not deal appropriately with 
 the issue.  Certain kinds of hunting are legal, certain kinds are not.

 I think I understand something of what you mean when you make the above 
 statement, but cannot be sure, simply because it does not deal in any 
 detailed way with the full issue.

>>>>we have alot to learn from wolves(and other species). 

 This is absolutely true.  I do not advocate hunting wolves (at this point)
 due to the fact that they are nearly extinct.  This does not mean that I 
 will not hunt other species.  As a hunter, a member of the Sierra Club, as
 well as being a member of several Bowhunting and Archery associations, I 
 can say that environmentalists do not preclude hunters from their ranks, and
 in fact often welcome hunters as being major contributors to environmental 
 efforts.

>>>>hunting and killing of sane murderers who kill for the fun of it. if you
>>>>dont like it... go to hell!

 No, I don't think so.  Why don't we just discuss the matter in a sane and 
 responsible way.

>>>Wolves hunt.  Wolverines also hunt--for the fun of it.  
 
 So do common house cats.  It is certainly true that human beings are not 
 the only species to hunt.  The hunters I hunt with, eat what they kill.  The
 same cannot be said for other hunters (of any species) some of which will 
 kill simply for the sake of killing.  This kind of behaviour is observed 
 across most species that hunt.

>>if i had a hen house, i would shoot that weasle. 

 I might too, if the weasel were legal game.  I might also consider other sol-
 utions.  Live traps, can work if set properly.

>> BUT, if humans went hunting with no weapons (well, i'll
>>let them bring a knife) i would not say a word. they would then be
>>catching the diseased and lame, and helping that species.

 I assume you are vegetarian.  The kill is only a very small part of the 
 hunt.  If the kill is what you object to, then at the very least you should
 probably object to killing any animal for food, regardless of the weapon 
 employed.  This should include domestic animals as well as wild animals if 
 indeed the killing portion of the hunting process is all you really object to.

 I hunt strictly with a bow, although I am lining up a wild boar hunt for this 
 Spring, and am strongly reconsidering my previous wariness of knife hunting.  
 I may end up on a knife hunt next year.  I have several hunting acquaintances 
 who are urging me to do so.  Whether I kill with a bow or knife, I must say, 
 has nothing to do with whether I consider myself superior to the animal I am
 hunting.

>>>It's not very constructive to insult and condemn out of hand.  Humans are
>>>part of the animal kingdom, and the biggest fault I see is not recognizing
>>>that we are PART of nature and must regain that sense of living with and 
>>>not against the rest of nature.

 Agreed, and I don't see hunting as being "against the rest of nature."  In 
 fact, it is practiced by all predatory species.  I happen to be a member of 
 such a species, and I will hunt as long as it remains legal.

>>>Incidentally, saying things like "do nature a favor, stay the hell away
>>>from it" fails to recognize that we are a part of it.  We don't have to
>>>destroy when we appreciate.

 Absolutely.

>>>Fanaticism on either side of environmental issues will never solve the
>>>problems that we've created.  It only creates more problems and fuels
>>>the fires that destroy.

 Calm, responsible and forthright discussion is usually much more productive
 than shouting matches or cursing one another.  I agree with this point as 
 well.

>>sorry again. but the point of view you ask me to understand is that its
>>ok to kill wildlfe because they are inferior to us (basically they could
>>not produce firearms). i will never agree with this.

 Again, the point you're trying to make does not necessary follow from your
 premise.  Just because human beings hunt with weapons forged by hand, does
 not mean that humans claim superiority over the creatures they hunt any 
 more than a Kodiak Bear or Tiger shark claims superiority using weapons that
 grow naturally from them.  They are simply hunting for food.  As a hunter, so 
 am I.

>>>	Joy Metcalf
>>
>>-brent
>
>It seems to me that you're presenting a very simplistic and romanticized 
>version of wolves and hunting.  First of all, wolves do NOT only kill the
>lame, diseased, old, etc.  They are opportunists by nature and will kill
>what they can catch -- if that happens to be a young, healthy animal, so
>be it.

 The same is true of human hunters, but with some notable differences.  I'll
 await the inevitable comment before discussing the matter further.

>
>I don't think anyone on this network believes that wolves (or other wildlife
>for that matter) are (is?) inferior to humans, especially because they 
>cannot produce firearms -- Come on... let's not be antagonistic, shall we?

 Sounds good to me.  Thanks for making the point.

>The problem of wolf ecology is a global problem.  Terrorist activities, such
>as shooting down aircraft, is bound to give environmental activists a bad
>name and thereby thwart our efforts to improve the ecology of the planet.  I
>already know what kind of response I'm going to get to that, but ...

 This is certainly true.  As both a hunter and an active environmentalist, I 
 must be doubly careful in the way in which I express myself and by my 
 behaviour when I'm advocating or participating in any of these activities.
 Regardless of whether I'm on a beach with a group picking up litter and trash,
 or improving a wildlife refuge, or hunting a Javelina, I must always be sure 
 that my behaviour while participating in such activities will demonstrate that
 I am a responsible and reasonable individual.

>And, by the way, can we please watch the language a bit, here?  It could
>cause problems to the network, the sender, etc.  Besides, there are other
>ways to express strong emotions.

 Probably a good idea, but the internet readers I've had the opportunity to 
 converse with are generally pretty flexible about this.  Still, it doesn't
 hurt to choose your words carefully when expressing an opinion in this kind 
 of forum.  Generally, that will serve to help make your point, and will 
 avoid clouding the pertinent issues with appeals to emotion and the other 
 side effects which can accrue to angering people as opposed to discussing 
 the issues in an objective fashion.

 Shawn Boyd
 Austin, Texas
Newsgroups: alt.wolves