Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 255 posts

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#91

Post by rtkwe »

shadowgovt wrote: post #4
Ericson2314 wrote: post #2

Yeah this is a bit premature. I dunno why we don't just pay the ranchers for livestock killed (it's pretty rare) and everyone goes home happy? Apex predator reintroduction is a good litmus test for how much conservation we can stomach, so I think it's important that we get this right.

That would be wealth redistribution, which a critical mass of Americans are pathologically opposed to.

Except they're not really there's all sorts of subsidies in the US economy propping up various industries; oil, farms, manufacturing, etc.

It's the specific phrase and label of wealth redistribution/socialism that the US is allergic to the policies are generally individually pretty popular if they're broad based.

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#92

Post by [deleted] »

wbl wrote: post #72
jacurtis wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is that farmers (or anyone else) actually do have a right to protect/defend their property (livestock are property). So when the government says that you can't protect your property if the thing killing it is a wolf, then farmers get very frustrated because they feel like their freedom/rights have been controlled or taken away from the government. To put the farmer's perspective another way: Everyone has…

That's what fences are for

[deleted]

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#93

Post by aww_dang »

yupyup54133 wrote: post #55
gbrown wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should we even pay? There's no constitutional right to be able to leave your livestock basically unprotected on vast tracts of land where they're vulnerable to predators. I mean, if it makes it more palatable it's probably worth it to pay farmers... but I viscerally dislike the idea that any industry has the right to: 1. Destroy the environment for their convenience 2. Be indemnified by the government for their i…

Unless you are for the reintroduction of wolves where you live your opinion on this is selfish. Too many wealthy urbanites and subutbanites have a not-in-my-backyard mentality about wolves.

When I spent time in DC, I never noticed any predators on K street or any of the locations further afield in the NW quadrant where wildlife lobbyists operated. However, wouldn't doubt that they would be the first people to dial if there were a threatening animal anywhere near them.

"Leopard suspected of eating 15 people in Nepal" https://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/03/world/asia/nepal-leopard-...

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#94

Post by NewOrderNow »

pcmaffey wrote: post #69
NewOrderNow wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A human can eat any animal. A human can't eat any vegetation. What point are you trying to make exactly?

That people don't kill wolves to eat them. So it makes no sense to compare killing wolves for sport to killing livestock.

The semantics is strong with this one. Livestock is a word, it doesn't change what it is. Killing for sport, population control, or any other reason is hunting.

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#95

Post by bcrosby95 »

yupyup54133 wrote: post #60
snowwrestler wrote: post #56

It's arguable that, based on continuously declining trends in wild species, wild areas, and biodiversity, we should reverse our 19th-century policy default and apply blanket protection to all wild species. If we find compelling reasons they should be culled or impacted, then that can be done with specific regulation or legislation. We've gone so far down in wild species and areas, and these are things that we absolut…

Unless you are for the reintroduction of wolves where you live your opinion on this is selfish. Too many wealthy urbanites and subutbanites have a not-in-my-backyard mentality about wolves.

I live in a suburb in southern California and we don't have wolves, but there are mountain lions around here. They're planning on building a wildlife crossing near us so they can get across the 101 freeway to have a larger range. Which I think they should do.

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#96

Post by Grakel »

NewOrderNow wrote: post #47
floren wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were not erased by the modern hunter, but by farmers who didn't want them eating their sheep and, in many cases, by professional wolf-killers hired by states . The renowned conservation writer Aldo Leopold's earliest work was killing bears, wolves, and mountain lions for the forest service. Unfortunately it wasn't until we'd nearly erased wolves and grizzlies (cougars have always been too wily to be wiped out) t…

A farmer that protest his livestock is, guess what, a hunter. What is up with the semantics on murdering livestock?

Wolves are not livestock, which is a term for animals useful to humans.

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#97

Post by dboreham »

shadowgovt wrote: post #32
dboreham wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which a critical mass of Americans are pathologically opposed to Presumably this is a joke?

it is not. https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/job...

Obviously nuts. Almost all Americans are beneficiaries of some sort of wealth distribution. Heck wealth distribution is at the core of western civilization. Pretending that a majority is against it is surely delusional.

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#99

Post by aww_dang »

Fezzik wrote: post #37
gbrown wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should we even pay? There's no constitutional right to be able to leave your livestock basically unprotected on vast tracts of land where they're vulnerable to predators. I mean, if it makes it more palatable it's probably worth it to pay farmers... but I viscerally dislike the idea that any industry has the right to: 1. Destroy the environment for their convenience 2. Be indemnified by the government for their i…

We should pay... the price of cows killed by wolves should be priced in to the sales price of beef, which is way too cheap right now as it is. This is a super simple calculation.

Not if the wolves are reintroduced and protected by the government.

Re: Gray Wolves to Be Removed from Endangered Species List

#100

Post by jakear »

kbutler wrote: post #54
vanattab wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience the killing part is not what hunters enjoy. There is a lot more to hunting then pulling the trigger...

I could enjoy the research, stalking, and viewing parts of the experience, but I'd personally rather do it with a camera than a rifle.

Do it! Though it ends up being far easier with a camera as you aren't restricted by seasons and locations. I think part of the fun in hunting is that most of the time you turn up empty handed, so the one time you get it is special. Certain tags can take decades to acquire, then you have to actually kill the animal in the right (potentially quite small) location, in the right (potentially quite narrow) time frame, using a single shot from potentially hundreds of meters out. Compared to with a camera you can walk onto a wildlife preserve, find a watering hole, and shoot away all year round.
Post reply on HN