Vegetarian Discussion: Fw: Support The Right To Arm Bears

Fw: Support The Right To Arm Bears
Posts: 38

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4   Next  (First | Last)

Pearl
2005-11-02 12:01:34 EST
Ain't This America. . .
Support the Right to Arm Bears
By BONNIE ERBE
Nov 1, 2005, 00:30

Last week's local section of The Washington Post
celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
us mourned not just the cruel and completely
unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
instilled in this child by her family.

That certain Americans sadly find valor in killing is
beyond doubt. But in many ways, it's also beyond
belief. That they would take pleasure in a wantonly
destructive act and train this into an 8-year-old
female heart is beyond forgiveness.

We've heard it all before. Hunters love nature.
Hunters work to preserve wildlife. Hunters are great
stewards of the environment. Hunters eat what they
kill. What was the justification here? That enough
bears exist in Maryland to kill them off without
destroying the species, as mankind once almost did.
Only cowards could find solace, justification and
pride in that.

There's no sport in taking down a large, lumbering
animal with a .243 calibre rifle, the kind used by the
young girl portrayed in worshipful prose by the Post.
That's the same caliber weapon NATO uses in its
assault weapons. There's more technology than
sport in today's high-powered, scoped weapons.
(The Post did not report whether the rifle she used
was scoped or not.)

I've sat in the Maryland woods and watched deer
saunter by, totally unaffected by my presence. I've
watched grizzlies, mothers and cubs, in Alaska's
Denali National Park. If destruction of their lives
had been my goal, the task would have been simple.
Nothing to laud, any more than the lauding of
fecklessness itself.

A week or so ago, I drove down a dirt road through
a 200-acre farm along the Chesapeake Bay. I passed
two hunters, all dressed up in fatigues, rifles in hand,
apparently waiting for some prey to pass close by.
They looked more like overgrown school boys in
arrested development than men.

Despite all this, the Post described the state's first
bear kill of the season in glorified terms: "There's a
new hunting legend in the mountains of Western
Maryland. Born to the woods, she's 4 1/2 feet tall
and 8 years old, with a shock of light brown hair
and a steady trigger finger that put two bullets into
a black bear's chest cavity Monday, according to
her and her father and granduncle, who were hunting
with her."

That her family's prideful recitation of the facts included
the nugget she "skipped school" to take part in the hunt
clues us into their hierarchy of values: fake machismo
over education. Sad, sad, sad.

Perhaps because there are few satisfying wars to fight
anymore (what true war hero would stack, for example,
Iraq up against World War II?), the testosterone-
challenged among us now need to vent their need to
destroy one of nature's most stunning creations. It's
sad enough when that false sense of power is visited on
boys. It's sadder still when it's foisted on young girls.

It's almost as horrific as the latest blend of technology
and feckless machismo: Internet hunting. Some skewed
mind devised a system that mounts a rifle and a camera
onto a platform pointed at caged creatures. With a click
of a computer mouse, "bang, bang" and the creature is
destroyed. Congress is considering a bill (and so are
several states, including Texas, Michigan and Minnesota)
that would ban the interstate practice of same, which
proponents defend as a way of allowing the disabled to hunt.
Methinks the disabled have more important things to do.

There's a special place in the afterlife for worshipers of
the cruel, for those who feign strength by destroying life.

(Bonnie Erbe is a TV host and writes this column for
Scripps Howard News Service. E-mail bonnieerbe(at)
CompuServe.com.)

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7600.shtml



Usual Suspect
2005-11-02 12:34:29 EST
pearl wrote:
> Ain't This America. . .
> Support the Right to Arm Bears
> By BONNIE ERBE
> Nov 1, 2005, 00:30
>
> Last week's local section of The Washington Post
> celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
> bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
> us

Typical of Erbe to presume she's among the "compassionate," just as
other leftists are wont to do.

> mourned not just the cruel and completely
> unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
> creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
> instilled in this child by her family.

Hunting isn't "violence and destruction." But as a limousine liberal,
how would Ms Erbe know the difference?

<snip rest of brainless diatribe from that leftist ditz>

Ray Johnson
2005-11-02 12:35:23 EST
pearl wrote:

> Ain't This America. . .
> Support the Right to Arm Bears
> By BONNIE ERBE
> Nov 1, 2005, 00:30
>
> Last week's local section of The Washington Post
> celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
> bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
> us mourned not just the cruel and completely
> unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
> creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
> instilled in this child by her family.
>
> That certain Americans sadly find valor in killing is
> beyond doubt. But in many ways, it's also beyond
> belief. That they would take pleasure in a wantonly
> destructive act and train this into an 8-year-old
> female heart is beyond forgiveness.
>



Every time I think there's hope for the extreme left - I read some trash
like this. I wonder if this joker realizes just who is paying for most of
wildlife conservation efforts? Hunters are footing a large part of the
bill.

These hysterical leftists have managed to whine, snivel and brainwash the
public against hunting which is a prime reason why Bambi and friends are
now destroying their habitate. Without normal culling their numbers are
exploding which is also a serious threat for people and domestic animals.
Bears are the same way.

As far as wolves - don't get me started. People were better off when wolves
were extinct. Ever wonder *why* they were hunted to extinction? Leftist
idiots don't have a clue.










Pearl
2005-11-02 18:00:59 EST
"Ray Johnson" <RayJohnson@speedstreet.net> wrote in message news:11mhtu2q95ebm74@news.supernews.com...
> pearl wrote:
>
> > Ain't This America. . .
> > Support the Right to Arm Bears
> > By BONNIE ERBE
> > Nov 1, 2005, 00:30
> >
> > Last week's local section of The Washington Post
> > celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
> > bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
> > us mourned not just the cruel and completely
> > unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
> > creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
> > instilled in this child by her family.
> >
> > That certain Americans sadly find valor in killing is
> > beyond doubt. But in many ways, it's also beyond
> > belief. That they would take pleasure in a wantonly
> > destructive act and train this into an 8-year-old
> > female heart is beyond forgiveness.
>
>
> Every time I think there's hope for the extreme left - I read some trash
> like this. I wonder if this joker realizes just who is paying for most of
> wildlife conservation efforts? Hunters are footing a large part of the
> bill.

Gee, how on earth did wildlife manage all by itself for millions of years.

> These hysterical leftists have managed to whine, snivel and brainwash the
> public against hunting which is a prime reason why Bambi and friends are
> now destroying their habitate. Without normal culling their numbers are
> exploding which is also a serious threat for people and domestic animals.
> Bears are the same way.

'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
landscapes filled with wildlife; great diversities of lush vegetation; highly
productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs; abundant, dark,
fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural processes. Of
the Montana plains, one excerpt from Clark reads, "we observe in
every direction Buffalow, Elk Antelopes & Mule Deer inumerable and
so jintle that we could approach them near with great ease." Another
states, We saw a great number of buffaloe, Elk, common and Black
tailed deer, goats [pronghorn] beaver and wolves. ..

In the West today only ungrazed Yellowstone National Park supports
nearly this variety and density of large wild animals. ..

Lewis and Clark's and other historic journals attest that buffalo, elk,
deer, bighorns, pronghorn, mountain goats, moose, horses, grizzly
and black bears, wolves, foxes, cougars, bobcats, beaver, muskrats,
river otters, fish, porcupines, wild turkeys and other "game" birds,
waterfowl, snakes, prairie dogs and other rodents, most insects, and
the vast majority of wild animals were all many times more abundant
then than now. So too were native plants; the journals describe a
great abundance and diversity of grasses and herbaceous vegetation,
willows and deciduous trees, cattails, rushes, sedges, wild grapes,
chokecherries, currants, wild cherries and plums, gooseberries,
"red" and "yellow" berries, service berries, flax, dock, wild garlic and
onions, sunflowers, wild roses, tansy, honeysuckle, mints, and more,
a large number being edible. Most of these plants have been depleted
through the many effects of livestock grazing for 100 years and are
today comparatively scarce.
.......'
Livestock Grazing: Enviro. Effects
http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter3.html

Global Perspective
http://www.wasteofthewest.com/Chapter6.html

> As far as wolves - don't get me started. People were better off when wolves
> were extinct. Ever wonder *why* they were hunted to extinction? Leftist
> idiots don't have a clue.

'Animal Enemies

[I]n the eyes of graziers, basically there are 3 requirements for
an acceptable environment -- grass, water, and livestock to
eat and drink them. All else is questionable, if not expendable,
a possible hindrance to profit and power.

The ranching establishment's assault on the environment,
therefore, includes campaigns against a huge number and
wide variety of animals. Most of the score or so native large
mammal species in the West have been decimated by ranching,
both intentionally through slaughtering efforts and indirectly
through the harmful effects of livestock grazing and ranching
developments. Indeed, most larger and a great many smaller
animal species are in some way assailed as enemies. The
mass carnage carried out for the sake of privately owned
livestock continues today throughout the grazed 70% of the
West, including public lands, and even in adjacent ungrazed
areas.

Though definitions given by ranching advocates vary, most
animal enemies fall into 4 main subdivisions: Carnivores and
omnivores are (1) predators if able to kill a sheep, calf, or
goat. Herbivores are (2) competitors if they eat enough forage
or browse to decrease the amount available to livestock.
Many smaller animal species are (3) pests if they occur in
large enough numbers to affect production in some manner.
And a huge number of animals are considered (4) no- goods,
inherently "no good" because they are perceived as possessing
some offensive characteristic.'

http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page7.html
Next page-
http://www.wasteofthewest/chapter4/page8.html



Ray Johnson
2005-11-03 07:30:46 EST
pearl wrote:

>
> 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
> One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
> was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
> expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
> Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
> the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
> landscapes filled with wildlife; great diversities of lush vegetation;
> highly productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs; abundant,
> dark, fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural processes.



Ugh. Nice cut-n-paste. Taken in context, it provides a limited view into
what was happening on the North American continent *at that time*. I get
the impression that somehow you've equated an unspoiled landscape and
primitive indigenous peoples to some form of utopia. The simple fact is,
in a world of perfect balance, nature would recycle you and me out the
south end of a north facing scavenger or predator.

You also forgot to mention that human existence during this period was
essentially one prolonged camping trip for most people. You forgot to
mention what was *not* around 200 years ago. Little things like no roads,
no cars, no aircraft, no dams, no electricity, no plumbing, no
manufacturing to speak of, no subdivisions, no metropolitan sprawl -- in
short -- most of America at that time was free from European or Colonial
American culture. Most of America was free from European and Colonial
American *people*.

The large number of inhabitants are shrinking natural habitats. A good
example is L.A. county in California. It used to be mostly a rural area
with wildly separated towns. Now, urban sprawl is almost completely
continuous across that county. For all practicable purposes, there is no
natural habitat of any appreciable size left in that county.

I've gotta go for now - I'll be back later to continue the slash and burn.







Ray Johnson
2005-11-03 07:30:46 EST
pearl wrote:

>
> 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
> One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
> was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
> expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
> Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
> the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
> landscapes filled with wildlife; great diversities of lush vegetation;
> highly productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs; abundant,
> dark, fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural processes.



Ugh. Nice cut-n-paste. Taken in context, it provides a limited view into
what was happening on the North American continent *at that time*. I get
the impression that somehow you've equated an unspoiled landscape and
primitive indigenous peoples to some form of utopia. The simple fact is,
in a world of perfect balance, nature would recycle you and me out the
south end of a north facing scavenger or predator.

You also forgot to mention that human existence during this period was
essentially one prolonged camping trip for most people. You forgot to
mention what was *not* around 200 years ago. Little things like no roads,
no cars, no aircraft, no dams, no electricity, no plumbing, no
manufacturing to speak of, no subdivisions, no metropolitan sprawl -- in
short -- most of America at that time was free from European or Colonial
American culture. Most of America was free from European and Colonial
American *people*.

The large number of inhabitants are shrinking natural habitats. A good
example is L.A. county in California. It used to be mostly a rural area
with wildly separated towns. Now, urban sprawl is almost completely
continuous across that county. For all practicable purposes, there is no
natural habitat of any appreciable size left in that county.

I've gotta go for now - I'll be back later to continue the slash and burn.







U*@montana.edu
2005-11-04 13:08:53 EST

pearl wrote:
> "Ray Johnson" <RayJohnson@speedstreet.net> wrote in message news:11mhtu2q95ebm74@news.supernews.com...
> > pearl wrote:
> >
> > > Ain't This America. . .
> > > Support the Right to Arm Bears
> > > By BONNIE ERBE
> > > Nov 1, 2005, 00:30
> > >
> > > Last week's local section of The Washington Post
> > > celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
> > > bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
> > > us mourned not just the cruel and completely
> > > unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
> > > creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
> > > instilled in this child by her family.
> > >
> > > That certain Americans sadly find valor in killing is
> > > beyond doubt. But in many ways, it's also beyond
> > > belief. That they would take pleasure in a wantonly
> > > destructive act and train this into an 8-year-old
> > > female heart is beyond forgiveness.
> >
> >
> > Every time I think there's hope for the extreme left - I read some trash
> > like this. I wonder if this joker realizes just who is paying for most of
> > wildlife conservation efforts? Hunters are footing a large part of the
> > bill.
>
> Gee, how on earth did wildlife manage all by itself for millions of years.
>
> > These hysterical leftists have managed to whine, snivel and brainwash the
> > public against hunting which is a prime reason why Bambi and friends are
> > now destroying their habitate. Without normal culling their numbers are
> > exploding which is also a serious threat for people and domestic animals.
> > Bears are the same way.
>
> 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.

The bear in your opening post was hunted in Maryland. That's in the
east, not the west.

> One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
> was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
> expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
> Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
> the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
> landscapes filled with wildlife;

Yes, including grazing bison.

> great diversities of lush vegetation;

Not on the prairie.

> highly
> productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs;

These are still found on ranches. Irrigation for grain farming
(particularly barley has ruined many streams with silt. This is easily
visible in satellite photos.

> abundant, dark,
> fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural processes. Of
> the Montana plains, one excerpt from Clark reads, "we observe in
> every direction Buffalow, Elk Antelopes & Mule Deer inumerable and
> so jintle that we could approach them near with great ease."

All of them grazing. Elk, antelope, and mule deer populations are still
very healthy here in the middle of the Montana plains.

> Another
> states, We saw a great number of buffaloe, Elk, common and Black
> tailed deer, goats [pronghorn] beaver and wolves. ..
>
> In the West today only ungrazed Yellowstone National Park supports
> nearly this variety and density of large wild animals. ..

The term "ungrazed" is a lie for two reasons. First, because bison,
deer, and elk live there via grazing, and second, because YNP has a
huge problem with OVERgrazing by those species:

http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/aga/lspa/LXEHTML/tech/ch2e.htm


Pearl
2005-11-04 19:48:56 EST
<*m@montana.edu> wrote in message news:1131127733.241739.117430@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> pearl wrote:
> > "Ray Johnson" <RayJohnson@speedstreet.net> wrote in message news:11mhtu2q95ebm74@news.supernews.com...
> > > pearl wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ain't This America. . .
> > > > Support the Right to Arm Bears
> > > > By BONNIE ERBE
> > > > Nov 1, 2005, 00:30
> > > >
> > > > Last week's local section of The Washington Post
> > > > celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
> > > > bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
> > > > us mourned not just the cruel and completely
> > > > unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
> > > > creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
> > > > instilled in this child by her family.
> > > >
> > > > That certain Americans sadly find valor in killing is
> > > > beyond doubt. But in many ways, it's also beyond
> > > > belief. That they would take pleasure in a wantonly
> > > > destructive act and train this into an 8-year-old
> > > > female heart is beyond forgiveness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Every time I think there's hope for the extreme left - I read some trash
> > > like this. I wonder if this joker realizes just who is paying for most of
> > > wildlife conservation efforts? Hunters are footing a large part of the
> > > bill.
> >
> > Gee, how on earth did wildlife manage all by itself for millions of years.
> >
> > > These hysterical leftists have managed to whine, snivel and brainwash the
> > > public against hunting which is a prime reason why Bambi and friends are
> > > now destroying their habitate. Without normal culling their numbers are
> > > exploding which is also a serious threat for people and domestic animals.
> > > Bears are the same way.
> >
> > 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> > in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> > of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> > the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> > that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
>
> The bear in your opening post was hunted in Maryland. That's in the
> east, not the west.

And no natural habitat in the east hasn't been converted to
pastureland, and cropland for production of livestock feed?

> > One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
> > was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
> > expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
> > Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
> > the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
> > landscapes filled with wildlife;
>
> Yes, including grazing bison.

'The common argument that cattle are the ecological equivalents
of bison is erroneous. Bison, being wanderers, are less likely to
regraze a given site in a single season than are cattle. Bison can
use drier, rougher forage than cattle and can forage more
effectively in deep snow. And whereas cattle are well known for
their ability to lay waste to riparian areas, bison typically go to
water only once a day. 7

Some of the comparisons of bison with cattle are done from a
strictly managerial perspective- that is, how specific traits can
"be more effectively exploited in land management." 8 But Glenn
Plumb and Jerrold Dodd, who studied bison and cattle in a fenced
"natural area," did admit that "bison reflect a greater degree of
evolutionary context to a grassland natural area [and that] differences
between the influence of free-roaming bison on pristine grasslands
and semi-free-roaming bison on a fenced natural area must be much
greater than those of the latter and domestic cattle." This admission
is not only a concession to the importance of scale but also an
invitation to question the use of "natural" in their fenced "natural areas."
Others also have alluded to issues of scale and freedom of movement
when they acknowledged that the change from "nomadic bison to
resident cattle herds" coincided with subdivision of the land into
fenced areas with managed watering and feeding situations, thus
altering the spatial and temporal patterns of grazing and its impacts
on vegetation. 9 ..
...'
The Impacts of Cattle and Sheep on Native Herbivores
http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/wr_bison_roamed.htm

> > great diversities of lush vegetation;
>
> Not on the prairie.

Not anymore..

> > highly
> > productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs;
>
> These are still found on ranches.

'Livestock grazing has damaged approximately 80% of
stream and riparian ecosystems in the western United States.
Although these areas compose only 0.5-1.0% of the overall
landscape, a disproportionately large percentage (70-80%)
of all desert, shrub, and grassland plants and animals depend
on them. The introduction of livestock into these areas
100-200 years ago caused a disturbance with many ripple
effects. Livestock seek out water, succulent forage, and
shade in riparian areas, leading to trampling and overgrazing
of streambanks, soil erosion, loss of streambank stability,
declining water quality, and drier, hotter conditions. These
changes have reduced habitat for riparian plant species,
cold-water fish, and wildlife, thereby causing many native
species to decline in number or go locally extinct. Such
modifications can lead to large-scale changes in adjacent
and downstream ecosystems.

.. recent studies clearly document that livestock continue
to degrade western streams and rivers, and that riparian
recovery is contingent upon total rest from grazing.
..'
http://www.onda.org/library/papers/BelskyGrazing.pdf

> Irrigation for grain farming
> (particularly barley has ruined many streams with silt. This is easily
> visible in satellite photos.

'The 7 billion livestock animals in the United States consume
five times as much grain as is consumed directly by the entire
American population.
..
About 26 million tons of the livestock feed comes from
grains and 15 million tons from forage crops.
..
More than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to
producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about
272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million hectares
for cultivated feed grains.
..
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Aug97/livestock.hrs.html

> > abundant, dark,
> > fertile soil; unaltered, unimpeded fire and other natural processes. Of
> > the Montana plains, one excerpt from Clark reads, "we observe in
> > every direction Buffalow, Elk Antelopes & Mule Deer inumerable and
> > so jintle that we could approach them near with great ease."
>
> All of them grazing. Elk, antelope, and mule deer populations are still
> very healthy here in the middle of the Montana plains.

Search for 'montana elk antelope ranching'- http://tinyurl.com/86lqc.
The population is tolerated because hunting them is big business.

> > Another
> > states, We saw a great number of buffaloe, Elk, common and Black
> > tailed deer, goats [pronghorn] beaver and wolves. ..
> >
> > In the West today only ungrazed Yellowstone National Park supports
> > nearly this variety and density of large wild animals. ..
>
> The term "ungrazed" is a lie for two reasons. First, because bison,
> deer, and elk live there via grazing,

Of course those species graze. The meaning was 'grazed by livestock'.

> and second, because YNP has a
> huge problem with OVERgrazing by those species:
>
> http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/aga/lspa/LXEHTML/tech/ch2e.htm

It is a limited area. These animals can't disperse as they
otherwise would, as they're hemmed-in by cattle ranches.



Leif Erikson
2005-11-04 20:08:32 EST
the lying foot-rubber and WHORE Lesley lied:
> <umbjm@montana.edu> wrote in message news:1131127733.241739.117430@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > pearl wrote:
> > > "Ray Johnson" <RayJohnson@speedstreet.net> wrote in message news:11mhtu2q95ebm74@news.supernews.com...
> > > > pearl wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Ain't This America. . .
> > > > > Support the Right to Arm Bears
> > > > > By BONNIE ERBE
> > > > > Nov 1, 2005, 00:30
> > > > >
> > > > > Last week's local section of The Washington Post
> > > > > celebrated -- yes, celebrated -- the killing of a black
> > > > > bear by an 8-year-old girl. The compassionate among
> > > > > us mourned not just the cruel and completely
> > > > > unnecessary killing of one of nature's most fabulous
> > > > > creatures, but the love of violence and destruction
> > > > > instilled in this child by her family.
> > > > >
> > > > > That certain Americans sadly find valor in killing is
> > > > > beyond doubt. But in many ways, it's also beyond
> > > > > belief. That they would take pleasure in a wantonly
> > > > > destructive act and train this into an 8-year-old
> > > > > female heart is beyond forgiveness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Every time I think there's hope for the extreme left - I read some trash
> > > > like this. I wonder if this joker realizes just who is paying for most of
> > > > wildlife conservation efforts? Hunters are footing a large part of the
> > > > bill.
> > >
> > > Gee, how on earth did wildlife manage all by itself for millions of years.
> > >
> > > > These hysterical leftists have managed to whine, snivel and brainwash the
> > > > public against hunting which is a prime reason why Bambi and friends are
> > > > now destroying their habitate. Without normal culling their numbers are
> > > > exploding which is also a serious threat for people and domestic animals.
> > > > Bears are the same way.
> > >
> > > 'Numerous historical accounts do confirm drastic, detrimental changes
> > > in plant and animal life, soil, water, and fire conditions throughout most
> > > of the West. These reports progressively establish livestock grazing as
> > > the biggest single perpetrator of these changes, particularly considering
> > > that it was the only significant land use over most of the West.
> >
> > The bear in your opening post was hunted in Maryland. That's in the
> > east, not the west.
>
> And no natural habitat in the east hasn't been converted to
> pastureland, and cropland for production of livestock feed?
>
> > > One of the most useful and informative descriptions of the early West
> > > was that of Meriweather Lewis and William Clark on their famous
> > > expedition across the northern Midwest, Rockies, and Pacific
> > > Northwest from 1804 to 1806 (Thwaites 1959). Their descriptions of
> > > the unconquered West are of a world we can scarcely imagine:
> > > landscapes filled with wildlife;
> >
> > Yes, including grazing bison.
>
> 'The common argument that cattle are the ecological equivalents
> of bison is erroneous.

False.

>
> > > great diversities of lush vegetation;
> >
> > Not on the prairie.
>
> Not anymore..

There NEVER was "lush vegetation" on the prairies. There wasn't the
water for it. You don't know what "prairie" is, you moron.


>
> > > highly
> > > productive, free-flowing rivers, creeks, and springs;
> >
> > These are still found on ranches.


Pearl
2005-11-06 06:47:02 EST
"Leif Erikson" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1131152912.623511.14650@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> the lying foot-rubber and WHORE Lesley lied:

Faking quotes, forged posts, lies, filth, harassment.
http://www.iol.ie/~creature/boiled%20ball.html




Page: 1 2 3 4   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron