If so, why?

some animals do need the protection like the eagle.

Many useful products (drugs, etc.) come from various species of plants and animals.  Killing off any species carries a risk of losing potential cancer cures or whatever.

Every species including our own is going to be "wiped" eventually regardless of what we do.  I'm opposed to making the extinctions happen sooner than they would otherwise, because we are too damn dumb to know which ones are truly useless.

If you've ever seen a bald eagle or a perigrine falcon you'd understand why they're protected.

I support reasonable laws to protect endangered species. No hunting of, no destruction of habitat, etc.

I do agree the laws sometimes go too far. I had a buddy who was fined $1,000 for (inadvertantly) killing an owl with his truck. Of course we all know the best way to hunt owls is to run them down with your friggin vehicle.

I have no problems with the protection of some animals or plants, but it had become way too politicized.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the Preble's meadow jumping mouse. [rolleyes]

[img]mountain-prairie.fws.gov/preble/mouse4c.gif[/img]

It's a fucking rodent!!!  Whooptee shit!!

Bullshit! We have scillions of 'em here in Oregon. If your State has a shortage, protect them there, not here!!

From needlessly hunting?  Maybe.  There is no point in causing eagles or something to go extinct because some joker wants another "trophy" on his wall.

Do I support the crazy stuff going on--keeping our troops from training in certain parts of their bases because of some weird animal, or forcing farmers out of business for the same reason, etc.--of course not.

Edit:  This must be related to that other thread about the guy who has been charged because he killed a snake.  Self-defense is, of course, much more important than the life of any animal.  This falls under the "crazy stuff" clause I included above.

I vote not just no, but heck no! Does anybody remember the elk hunting guide in Wyoming? I believe it was Wyoming anyway. He was an archery hunting guide. He was attacked by a grizzly Sow, & was lucky enough to get an arrow from his quiver, & stab the bear to death with it. He was nearly killed. As a result he was charged with killing an endangered animal. I believe they are supposed to be extinct in whatever state it happened in. It was on the cover of every hunting magazine when it happened. He was attacked for his action from those freaking tree hugging fish kissers.

I think animals are great, I eat them whenever I can.[:D], but they should not stop humans from using an area. As far as loosing a possible cure for some kind of cancer or what ever, I think you watched medicine Man one to many times. I've also flown over the "jungle" in Peru, & I would be willing to bet it would take a thousand years to log of just Peru. I won't cry if we loose a fricking snail darter.& gain electricity for a lot of humans in the process, or if all the spotted owls die, & people keep their jobs & feed their families. I've never seen one, don't care if I ever do. A lot of the animal rights activist will never see them either, or go near their range, but the darn sure want to tell people who live in those areas what they can & can't do. It's a big control issue the Democrats have with the rest of America. It's why we are so dependant on foreign oil.

I vote yes, however I will keep my answer brief....I support taking care of nature and not exterminating everything on the earth...BUT I can't fuckin stand the greenie weenies who don't even want people to look at nature. BTW I'm a hunter, I hate trash in the woods, and I hate slob hunters....I guess I'm in the middle really. Help the animals but don't f*** the people. Make any sense?

Without intervention common sources, such as certain animal species, will be depleted. The same goes for the effect of externalities like pollution. If not regulated by sanction, or permits, the effects will create significant damage to the environment.

Now you've done it.  Logic and reason have no place in this thread.

Everything is on a ecological system, the existence of different animals keeps a balance on the ecological system.
Why would you want animals extinct? Why would you not care if they were alive or not?
I know humans that are nothing but a waste of good air and I would be pleased to kill them off, but you can't due to the laws.
So why should killing of the animals be any different?
I would like to see the earth totally snake free, but that will never happen. If any animal deserves to die or be extinct it is snakes. If the poll was for death of snakes I would be a cheerleader for the thread.
Killing animals for shit and giggles is bullshit and shameful. I would never sink to that level unless they were causing damage or disease ridden.

yes, i support that. it's not their fault we allow dick wads from around the world to to come here & bread like rabits (including us) & over develop the shit out of everything.

15 years ago i didn't give a second glance at a large piece of land that didn't have a new sub built on it that had furry little vermin. nowadays, with the greater population being shoved down my throat, when i see that big piece of land intact- i relish it, and it's critters.

it's like our RTKBA. it's our history, we demand we keep it. i want,in 15 years, to still keep that history along with an ample supply of critter history too.  

...so i can shoot them of course. [:D]

raf?? That you??

Care to hear some Conspiracy Theories as to why that's true??  [:D]

agreed, I saw a bald eagle last week here in CT, never saw one before in the wild. other times they are out of control.

Exactly! That's why I voted no.

Unfortunately, these laws are not tempered with common sense.  While I support protecting endangered species of all types, I do not agree with putting those species above the human species.  It falls under survival of the fittest.

Also, for the hunters among us.  I too am a hunter and unfortunately see too many that care only about what they can hang on the wall.  I hunt for food.  Unless it poses a risk to me or is a nuisance (pests getting into the garden etc...)  Unless I will eat it, I won't kill it.  I do not hunt for the biggest rack and will shoot a doe as quick as a buck for meat.  I see some of these hunting shows where you hear joe pencil pusher out on a canned hunt passing on an excellent source of nutrition wanting one with a bigger rack on it.  This depletes the gene pool and weakens the species.  I was raised to believe in hunting to support and strengthen the species.

What's the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse's position in the food web? If it's removed how soon will the coyote find it's way into your back yard and eat your cat? You're in luck! You were home at the time and with your AR you expertly dispatch both of them. Unfortunately due to a slight drought season Beth & Wyle E Coyote were the only pair left and the 5 puppies they had starve to death quickly. Now the fleas on the coyotes are looking for a new food source.

Remember the mouse? It liked a certain seed, but the mice are gone so the plant flourishes. The rabbits love 'em and since there aren't any coyotes they multiply! Well, like rabbits! Have they found your vegetable garden yet? Oh, the fleas decide your cat and dog will do since there aren't any coyotes, and heck the neighbor's kids are kinda tasty too.

Screw that! Exclaim's Mr. Robinson, your neighbor, he sprays the fields to kill the fleas and gets rid of a few other pesky bugs too!

Then we get to the rats. Rats, WTF? Yea, those mice competed for food with the rats and helped to keep them in check but no mice? More rats! Don't worry the coyotes will.....er..uh.....no uh. So Mother Nature is all flustered and since childhood we all know it's not nice to fool (with) Mother Nature. She starts a small virus which is imbedded with the rats thank god! The thousands of rats in the field are an excellent breeding ground and begin to die rapidly but not rapid enough before it mutates a few times and spreads to the rabbits. But we don't have to worry about that.

Little Lucy strays out into the field and touches a dead rat. Oooh, it's squishy and icky! She heads home to a nicer life. On the way she has a lollipop to forget about the dead rat. Did she wash her hands?

Mr. Robinson is surprised at how quickly little Lucy Robinson comes down with a fever. Well if it doesn't break over the weekend he might have to take her in to see the Doctor.

Does she get over it? Does it spread and continue to mutate? Will it overtake SARS or just fade away?

The balance of nature is amazing and delicate. So leave the mouse alone.

dang hippies are winning

animals have been going extinct throught the history of the world, hasn't fucked things up yet

Exactly! So there is no more Dodo birds, & the passenger pigeons, are gone. The wolves , & plains grizzlies, buffaloes,etc., etc., etc.. Much bigger list exist than this. Has man been wiped out by disease carrying fleas from it? Wasn't it rats that were alive that carried the dreaded black plague?
I have been a hunter for 34 years. I love the outdoors, & the animals I hunt. I think trophy hunting is just as noble as food hunting. I've done both. Trophy hunters don't throw away the meat by the way! They don't deplete the good gene pool any more than meat hunters either.

I vote "yes", with the caveat that the laws that are currently on the books got [b]way[/b] too far.

This was basically my point. I hunt because I LOVE to. It's almost spiritual to me, but I don't kill indiscriminately except for vermin. I hunt for food...i.e. I shoot does if that's what I see first. I don't put ANY animals life above humans, but I believe in giving them a fair shot at living.

Yankee we need to tell the folks here the rest of this story. The I-25 corridor between Colorado Springs and Denver is a high volume interstate that was designed and built in the 60's for about 25% of the traffic that now uses I-25. It has been widened in most areas to a three and four lane super hi-way. But not between Denver and Colorado Springs. Why? Because they found this mouse living there so there will be no building a wider and safer hi-way to protect this mouse. Now most of this area is rural with thousands of acres of forest and prairie lands that the mouse could just run off into. But nope there will be no building any wider and safer hiways here. This is now a very dangerous section of I-25 and sometimes the traffic comes to a stand still on it because of the volume of traffic. Oh yea where did all this traffic come from? Most of the newbies to Colorado are from California and unfortunately there are allot of them [:(!]

And how fast were animals going extinct a couple of million years ago?

How fast a couple of thousand?

Now a thousand? Five hundred? Four? Three?

Why do you suppose they are going extinct at a much faster rate?

Gee, just because there were millions of buffalo wiped out in less than 200 years doesn't mean anything.

What's all that catch and release about? Let's get back to clear cutting, strip mining, dumping raw sewage into the waterways. Hell the dust bowl was just a phase, couldn't possibly mean real damage might happen. Better living through chemicals. Heck, we can make Soylent Green out of people! Who needs animals?

Farm land? Seems like a waste of space to me. Beautiful green pastures and just stupid cows to look at 'em, what a waste. Condos and developments everywhere.

How big were the trees taken 60 years ago? How about the Salmon, wild trout?

In the last 100 years we have fucked up the earth more than the previous 5000. But nothing's REALLY happened. I mean survival of the fittest right? We're still here. Sports records keep getting broken. Nevermind the general populace's health has dropped. We'll make more drugs!

"I support reasonable laws" Where have we heard that before?

That's a pretty fucking funny enviro-rant coming from somebody who chose a Hummer as his avatar pic.

While I do support Protecting Endangered Species...
I dont support the outragous regulations and/or Bullshit Science that often goes with them.

Ill only speak on the one that effects me.
The Spotted Owl.
When It came on the list in 90-91 it damn near shut down the friggin timber industry! Suddly It was decided there would be no more logging on state land . Well that shuts down a pritty large chunk of the state that happends to be forested. Also All this hype that The owl only lives in Old Growth Forests Ends up being total BS and its found that it also lives in 2nd growth forests... Think about it the thing eats mice and such Where do you find mice? In the grass... Which would come from a natural meadow or Clear cut. there are plenty of owls that live along the edges of clearcuts.
Also The patchwork way that timber is harvested Cutting tracts of clear cuts in irregualr patterns Actually benifits the vast majority of wildlife.

OregonShooter,

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop making sense.
Rational arguments only serve to make people understand the truth behind an issue.
Thank you. [;)]

Thank you for saving me a lot of typing.

And now I remind you of[url=http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0110/p2s2-uspo.html]this[/url]

 
 

Catfight ensues over case of lynx fur planted in forests
US biologists say they put fur of rare lynx in US forests to test laboratory analysis. Others see a hidden agenda.
By Todd Wilkinson | Special to The Christian Science Monitor

BOZEMAN, MONT. - A few strands of hair - lynx hair, to be precise - have touched off a political catfight that is being heard from the vast evergreen forests of the Pacific Northwest to the halls of Congress.

The spitting and hissing began last month, with the revelation that five federal wildlife biologists planted fur from a Canadian lynx - an officially "threatened" species - in the Wenatchee and Gifford Pinchott national forests in Washington. On the issue of placing lynx hair on rubbing posts, the researchers plead mea culpa.

What has everyone in an uproar is speculation about why they did it - and what their actions may imply about the reliability of scientific data used both to manage federal lands and to protect certain animals named under the Endangered Species Act.

"The discovery of this problem underscores a long-standing concern I've had over these Endangered Species Act studies," says James V. Hansen, chairman of the House Resources Committee and a vocal critic of the Endangered Species Act. "To me, this revelation calls into question all studies that have been done over the past eight years."

The US Inspector General's Office is now investigating whether the federal scientists should face criminal charges. The five, who so far have been subject to minor disciplinary action, are reported to have told investigators that they submitted fur samples to a laboratory not to deceive, but to test whether the DNA lab could identify real lynx fur if it weren't told beforehand what the sample was.

Others, though, see something more nefarious in the scientists' actions. Some claim that the scientists were trying to falsely establish the presence of lynx in the two national forests so as to restrict logging, mining, and recreation in them. Mr. Hansen, along with several Republican colleagues from the West, wants harsh punishment to be meted out because the suspect data, if used to impose restrictions on certain land uses, had the potential, he says, "to devastate the economies of entire towns and counties."

Defenders of the researchers say biologists simply made the mistake of not informing superiors of their covert actions.

"At no time was there any attempt made by the scientists to fabricate a lynx presence," says Andy Stahl, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. "This has turned into a witch hunt in search of a false conspiracy," Mr. Stahl contends. "It's really about well-intentioned scientists trying to make sure a process works properly but who got caught crosswise by political actors who took what happened and twisted it."

To some environmentalists, Hansen's verbal indictments are viewed as attempts to discredit legitimate wildlife research whose conclusions sometimes clash with the interests of mining and logging industries.

Much research remains to be done about the lynx. Cousins of the common bobcat, the tuft-eared felines are nocturnal, extremely difficult to track and, although the Fish and Wildlife Service two years ago classified lynx as a "threatened" species, the agency is still in the middle of conducting a four-year survey to find out how many of the cats still inhabit the lower 48 states.

Scientists do know that the combination of fur trapping and habitat fragmentation has caused lynx numbers to plummet. Among the options being considered are habitat improvement projects which include thinning of forest cover, possibly even light logging, to improve conditions for snowshoe hare that are the lynx's primary prey. Some restrictions on snowmobiling might be necessary.

"We're not looking, as some of our critics contend, to shut down activities in national forests," says Chris Tollefson, a spokesman for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Washington, D.C. says. "We have consistently tried to work with other agencies and the public to find solutions that preserve species and allow acceptable activities to continue."

the general populace's health has improved and keeps improving health has dropped.

You're staying in kalifornia, right?

[b]DO YOU SUPPORT LAWS THAT PROTECT "ENDANGERED SPECIES"? [/b]

Yeah, why not? I may be one some day!
[img]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung/tiere/animal-smiley-084.gif[/img][img]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung/tiere/animal-smiley-042.gif[/img][img]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung/tiere/animal-smiley-041.gif[/img][img]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung/tiere/animal-smiley-082.gif[/img]