Saturday, May 7, 2011

Protecting ravenous wolves: Has the world gone completely bonkers?

Aww, how precious.
Okay, before I get flamed for being cold and heartless, let me just say that I think protecting endangered species is generally a good thing.  Although it might be going against the natural order of things, I think it’s good to protect the beauty of creation.

Be that as it may, as the dominant species on the planet I think we’re allowed to determine which species stay and which have to go.  Why?  Natural selection baby.

Idaho has a wolf problem right now.  The wolves are overpopulated and they are slaughtering livestock.  The solution?  Kill the damn wolves.  While it might seem like a simple solution to me, and probably anyone who is rational, some people are crying foul over this.

There’s been a big legal battle about removing the wolves from the endangered species list in order to allow hunters to cull the wolves.  The state got stalled in removing the protection because the environmentalists got the state supreme court to prevent the protection from being lifted.  The state government then petitioned the federal government to allow them to remove the protection so they could take care of the problem.

You can't see it, but there's probably a pack of nasty wolves
waiting to slaughter the photographer of this picture.  O_o
Some are crying foul because the federal government removed the protection via legislation rather than with “scientific review.”  Now conservationists are afraid that there will be a mass culling.

Well why the fuck not?  As long as they don’t completely eradicate the species from existence, why should we give a damn?  Look, the wolves are killing shit.  That’s what they do.  When there’s a fuck ton of wolves, that means they’re killing a fuck ton of shit.  Why should the livelihood of farmers and livestock owners suffer because some fool conservationist has a problem with it?

I get that life is sacred, but Idaho has a serious problem.  They need to cull some of the wolves for a good reason.  Why should human interests take a back seat to animal interests?  Are we not a part of nature, entitled to our own growth and wellness whether or not some animals are hurt by it?

Dan Rather is not pleased.  I don't know
if he is or not, I just ran out of relevant
pictures for thir article.

I’m sorry, but that’s the way of nature.  If a wild animal starts killing our shit, we have the natural right to defend our shit.  Lets stop this bullshit about being “better than that.”  We are better than nature, we can reason beyond our own biological imperatives, and that means we have the power to responsibly protect what is ours.

I don’t think they’re advocating the slaughter of the entire species, but just enough to stop the problem.  Tell me, how safe you would feel if you knew that wolves were coming close to your property?  Then tell me how pissed you’d be if you knew that the government which is supposed to protect you from shit like this is busy arguing about whether or not to protect human interests (or potentially lives).


KP said...

You gotta protect your stuff. I don't like the Wolverines much. I am more of a Trojan and Bruin fan. Does your opinion have anything to do with your possible ties to the Buckeyes?

Jack Camwell said...

Woah now. Because I am a free human being, I choose not to worship the Buckeyes.

I'm actually a Michigan fan. Because I can be.


KP said...

Glad I said "possible ties". Michigan took our coach (Brady Hoke) from here on Montezuma Mesa, home of the Aztecs and San Diego State. I really think you are going to like him. Our loss, your program's gain. He is a winner. I like him enough to become a Michigan supporter in hopes of his good fortune. Mark Sept 24th, 2011 on your calendar: SDSU vs Michigan.

KP said...

As youn know, it is a wild rivalry betweem Michigan and Ohio dating way back to the Toledo war over the Toledo strip. The Michigan territory and the US state of Ohio going kookoo in 1835. Crazy how it lasts until this day. Water and commerce are a common thread between state rivalries. Out in the west we still battle NoCal vs SoCal; SoCal vs Colorado, Arizona and Nevada.

KP said...

Borders matter.

Jack Camwell said...

Ugh, yeah. And everyone takes it SO damn seriously here.

Buckeye fans are rabid, and I hate this town during football season.

Robert Felton said...

What a crock of extreme right Christian fundamentalist horse shit. No, humans don't have the right to decide which species should stay and which should go...natural selection (baby)?!
Are you, perchance, on medication?

Jack Camwell said...

Thanks for visiting Christian Fearing God-Man. I always welcome new perspectives and readers.

First of all, I think it's clear that you haven't read much of my work here, or else you never would accuse me of being a "extreme right Christian fundamentalist." I don't even have the slightest of inclination towards that persuasion. Maybe you ignored the title of my blog?

Secondly, what is fundamentalist about the notion that if a population of ravenous beasts is starting to kill off your livestock that you have no right to defend it?

Your statement "humans don't have the right to decide which species should stay and which should go" is a logical fallacy. If we don't get to decide which should die, why do we get to decide which should stay?

Answer me this. If you're a livestock owner, lets say cows, and those cows are your livelihood, would you simply stand by and let the wolves tear your cows apart, essentially destroying the things that make you money and put dinner on your table?

Let me guess, you're John Rambo, right? You'll go out and hunt the specific pack of wolves tearing your shit apart.

Oh, you're not Rambo? You're not a hunter? Well then how will you deal? Just get a "real" job right? No, you'd probably ask the government to help you out, just like these livestock owners have done. Pretend you're in charge, and a bunch of the citizens of your town are coming to you asking you to help control the wolf population ravaging their livestock and making it unsafe to go out at night. What do you do? Do you ignore them and tell them that their livestock must die to serve some sort of higher moral principle?

Here's a question. Are you pro-choice? I bet you are. If so, then how can you tell me a human has the right to decide whether or not another human is allowed to be born, but a human is somehow not allowed to (A) decide whether a vicious animal lives or dies and (B) is not allowed to protect his the lives of his livestock?

(Disclaimer: I'm pro-choice, before you go lumping me into the "extreme right" category).

Anonymous said...

Oh, hey, by the way, wolves don't kill people. You know how many myths are going around about these kind and shy creatures? Millions.

Go ahead and kill the wolf if it's eating your livestock. Completely fine! But just remember - the only wolves that will attack people are rabid ones - and werewolves of course.