• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

just for awareness

JayNiDogg

Member
It's so sad to realize that for someone this is entertainment. I can understand controlling the population (so that a huge number of wolves do not damage the entire biosystem), but to kill for their own pleasure...
 

AniwayasSong

Active Member
people like this exist;
I find it more than irritating that so many of these 'Outraged People' live nowhere near the areas where wolves (and bears/mountain lions/coyotes) live and are a real threat not only to people, pets, but especially the livestock they depend on (and every meat product these 'Outraged People' enjoy w/o contributing to any of its creation).
Deal with and face the fact that as people move into once-wild areas and develop those areas for the creation of all our food products (minus fish, of course), the predators that once lived there are removed and not tolerated.
Here in N/E Oregon (Washington, Idaho, Montana) the reintroduction of wolves is causing one hell of an uproar amongst the ranchers.
Killing animals for 'Sport', and or 'Trophies', solely for the purpose of malignant fun/wall adornments is reprehensible to me, and I don't support it.
I've personally seen bears, mountain lions (one bobcat/lynx? couldn't get close enough a peek with my binoculars to confirm), and I/everyone I know who hikes/works in our region always carry firearms with us, 'Just in case.' The Law prevents ranchers/anyone from just shooting anything w/o justification, but I'm certain it's happened by ranchers too disgusted at finding the remains of their valuable stock.
As the human population continues to grow, wild places are going to be supplanted.
That is the simple fact of our reality.
 

JayNiDogg

Member
I find it more than irritating that so many of these 'Outraged People' live nowhere near the areas where wolves (and bears/mountain lions/coyotes) live and are a real threat not only to people, pets, but especially the livestock they depend on (and every meat product these 'Outraged People' enjoy w/o contributing to any of its creation).
Deal with and face the fact that as people move into once-wild areas and develop those areas for the creation of all our food products (minus fish, of course), the predators that once lived there are removed and not tolerated.
Here in N/E Oregon (Washington, Idaho, Montana) the reintroduction of wolves is causing one hell of an uproar amongst the ranchers.
Killing animals for 'Sport', and or 'Trophies', solely for the purpose of malignant fun/wall adornments is reprehensible to me, and I don't support it.
I've personally seen bears, mountain lions (one bobcat/lynx? couldn't get close enough a peek with my binoculars to confirm), and I/everyone I know who hikes/works in our region always carry firearms with us, 'Just in case.' The Law prevents ranchers/anyone from just shooting anything w/o justification, but I'm certain it's happened by ranchers too disgusted at finding the remains of their valuable stock.
As the human population continues to grow, wild places are going to be supplanted.
That is the simple fact of our reality.
Yes. For population regulation and safety, this is normal. Because we are primarily human beings.
Although it is sad that we are displacing such beautiful animals.
 

AniwayasSong

Active Member
Yes. For population regulation and safety, this is normal. Because we are primarily human beings.
Although it is sad that we are displacing such beautiful animals.
I would love to see genuine population areas developed and maintained, where so many billions of people already exist and work. Compress and restore all the ruined cities and derelict towns, establish gigantic 'Wildland/life Refuges' so there is an actual balance and harmony with people, nature, and the guardianship of our planet.
We only have one, after all. At the rate we're poisoning/destroying it, I doubt it'll be anything worth existing in, soon.
 

Jackpot Raccuki

Although half canine, is not a wolf.
It’s understandable to be mad because someone hunts animals for fun and sport. And I mean just because they can.

But if said person is doing it to say defend their life stock or said animal is actively threatening them then they can do it as it’s more justified.
 

JayNiDogg

Member
I would love to see genuine population areas developed and maintained, where so many billions of people already exist and work. Compress and restore all the ruined cities and derelict towns, establish gigantic 'Wildland/life Refuges' so there is an actual balance and harmony with people, nature, and the guardianship of our planet.
We only have one, after all. At the rate we're poisoning/destroying it, I doubt it'll be anything worth existing in, soon.
As rude as it sounds. It seems to me that the population of people should be regulated. Almost eight billion people. What for?
Why do alcoholics, drug addicts, crazy people or people with severe congenital diseases give birth (knowing that a person will be born with the same disease and will suffer all his life).
As long as we give birth randomly (as if people do not understand what genetics is), there will be a degeneration of humanity. There will be hunger, lack of clothing, things, high mortality in children/young people.
Too many stupid and uneducated people, unfortunately.
 

JayNiDogg

Member
It’s understandable to be mad because someone hunts animals for fun and sport. And I mean just because they can.

But if said person is doing it to say defend their life stock or said animal is actively threatening them then they can do it as it’s more justified.
There is another aspect to this situation.
As we said above, we have a lot of territories that we don't use.
We cut down forests, build towns or villages, and then abandon them. And they remain still in the possession of mankind. But we don't use these ghost towns, we go and cut down new forests.

We multiply and multiply, we don't know why. If it is impossible to feed even the existing population of people. Almost eight billion. Many are starving, many are dying because there is no medical care. Many people suffer from congenital diseases that could have been avoided. And many have nowhere to live.
And these people, who are not completely provided for, also want to reproduce. Although they know that their children will starve and suffer just as much.

The more people there are, the fewer territories there are for animals. The smaller the territories , the more often animals and people intersect. The more often they intersect , the more often the animals die. The more often they die , the more endangered species there are. The more dying species , the worse the ecology. And then we'll die too
 

TheCynicalViet

Well-Known Member
Here's the problem: wild animals pose a problem to people who have to live near wild life or live in areas that has expanded into previously "wild" land. It's just how it is. Life is not kumbayah and animals like bears, wolves, cougers, etc do not give up their predatory instincts for people. But at the same time, wolves do play a role in the ecosystem and we have seen what happens when the wolf population becomes so low that the herbivore population booms which leads to overgrazing which leads to more problems. And vice versa. If you let the wolf population get too big then you also get some pretty rough problems.

As long as they don't go overboard with culling the wolf population then things will be fine.
 

rekcerW

Well-Known Member
Here's the problem: wild animals pose a problem to people who have to live near wild life or live in areas that has expanded into previously "wild" land. It's just how it is. Life is not kumbayah and animals like bears, wolves, cougers, etc do not give up their predatory instincts for people. But at the same time, wolves do play a role in the ecosystem and we have seen what happens when the wolf population becomes so low that the herbivore population booms which leads to overgrazing which leads to more problems. And vice versa. If yofou let the wolf population get too big then you also get some pretty rough problems.

As long as they don't go overboard with culling the wolf population then things will be fine.
then move







that's the fucking sentiment all the time, 'they're near me and i dun wanna lose shit all the time.' there's always payments for lost livestock and these fucking clownshoes can't build a fence to save their lives. 'i'm goona tell you something, you gotta know, these animals are going to be their natural selves in their natural environment.'

wtf kinda argument is that gigantic pile of shit?
 

puffypawbs

Member
There is another aspect to this situation.
As we said above, we have a lot of territories that we don't use.
We cut down forests, build towns or villages, and then abandon them. And they remain still in the possession of mankind. But we don't use these ghost towns, we go and cut down new forests.

We multiply and multiply, we don't know why. If it is impossible to feed even the existing population of people. Almost eight billion. Many are starving, many are dying because there is no medical care. Many people suffer from congenital diseases that could have been avoided. And many have nowhere to live.
And these people, who are not completely provided for, also want to reproduce. Although they know that their children will starve and suffer just as much.

The more people there are, the fewer territories there are for animals. The smaller the territories , the more often animals and people intersect. The more often they intersect , the more often the animals die. The more often they die , the more endangered species there are. The more dying species , the worse the ecology. And then we'll die too

i don't have the emotional willpower to argue this, but i do have a video to link that i hope you may watch and consider. it's about seven minutes long.

 
Top