Should wildlife be captured-hunted
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: All Empires Community
Forum Name: AE Tavern
Forum Discription: Come here to introduce yourself and discuss almost anything under the sun! Or just to let your hair down...
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35541
Printed Date: 29-Apr-2024 at 13:12
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Should wildlife be captured-hunted
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Subject: Should wildlife be captured-hunted
Date Posted: 15-Jun-2015 at 15:36
For the purposes of assisting species survival or injured wildlife...many times a created situation by man. I'm an endorser.
And the sooner their reintroduction into the wild the better. Consequently I remain a supporter of nature parks and reserves where governmental authorities maintain their watch in preservational efforts.
(a noted exception was and is the treatment of wild horses on BLM controlled acreage...a f**king total disgrace)
Otoh, I have never been a huge fan of zoos or private complexes.
(Even though I remain well aware of ancient and more modern practices, in varying facets, reference the interaction of wildlife and people. And their display or capture for amusement or trophy practices)
Dunno why really and yes I have been to several. No matter how well run and maintained I'm generally not pleased there but rather sad.
Bars, cages and even more modern designed restrictive measures, still smack of a sense of inappropriateness for me.
Given the modern age of film, video, and computers it's not a question of information on habitat and or their nature and interaction that's a practical concern for me. Nor, imo, should it be for others.
I grew up on the high and lonely lonesome. And never ever am I far from it, if at all possible. It's beauty both in flora and fauna remain a child like delight for an ole horse trooper.
And it's there that wildlife belongs, afaic, for it's there that they were intended.
Because I have no ancient need for meat, skins and or bones-horns to prove my virility or for survival; versus my more ancient fore bearers anymore.
(And full disclosure: was an occasional an avid hunter for many years)
That period in life has passed however. And short of an unprecedented disaster situation..
It shall remain so.
Amen.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
S. T. Friedman
Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'
|
Replies:
Posted By: Sidney
Date Posted: 15-Jun-2015 at 16:31
|
I wonder if such attitudes to animals will ever be extended to plants? The disgrace of seeing trees in a city when they should only be seen amidst green fields and open skies. The cruel restriction of patio planters, and keeping exotic plants trapped inside conservatories.
|
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 15-Jun-2015 at 18:16
Certainly u make a valid point for the protection and reverence of all life Sid....
but there's a galactic difference, imo, between arboretums and conservatories, or even groomed city parks. And animals in confinement simply because we can. For the former often provide sanctuaries for wild creatures as do their wild cousins-versions.
But a Lion or a Bull Elk or many other types of wild creatures deserve their freedom.... and sry.... but i'm not buying into the conscious desire of a plant to be thus.
-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
S. T. Friedman
Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'
|
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 15-Jun-2015 at 18:45
In war it as was define by many, as Horrofic.
See:
http://http://www.holocaustianity.com/zoo-bombing.html - http://www.holocaustianity.com/zoo-bombing.html
Many more examples abound.
-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
S. T. Friedman
Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'
|
|