Post
by timmy » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:22 am
I believe that saving animals and species is the highest priority, over any other ideological line of thought.
Maintaining the biodiversity of the planet is nothing less than proper stewardship of our own living space, along with everyone else's. Problems can arise from over hunting, as we see with the whaling practices of some nations and over fishing of fishing grounds. There is an environmental limit to how many animals can be harvested from an area.
What I have a problem with is how gun owners and hunters are made the "whipping boys" for our vanishing wildlife. This sort of ban on hunting is nothing more than an ideological "back door" to taking away gun ownership rights.
The fact is, that if gun owners and hunters are going to have to "give" on this issue to meet a crisis, it must be recognized that NO simple minded approach like this will be successful. Other factors that must be taken into account are deforestation (which means that the land developer is going to have to sacrifice) and pollution of the environment (which means that Mr Industrialist and Mr Filthy Liver will have to change their modes of operation).
The point I'm making here is that simply restricting or outright banning of hunting is not going to be a workable solution in the end. Many people who are ideologically opposed to gun ownership like to sell hunting bans and hitch their wagon to the environmental movement -- and make gun owners the bogeyman. However, the effective approach from an environmental perspective is to address the entire range of issues related to a bio zone: range, soil, water, flora, air quality, etc. All of these issues and more must be considered along with how much game is harvested -- if it is not, you can be sure that people posing as environmentalists while advocating only a hunting ban are insincere demagogues, whipping up emotion with shallow appeals. The crime here is that the animals who are supposedly being protected are the real victims.
Here in the USA, sportsmen hunters often have an excellent record on this matter. For instance, the great bulk of conservation and environmental costs related to waterfowl populations is borne by hunters. Great tracts of wetlands in the USA and Canada have been purchased by groups like Ducks Unlimited --- it seems a shame to me that these hunters, who contribute more than their fair share toward environmental health that all enjoy, are not recognized for their contributions because short-sighted ideologues are constantly beating the dead horse of gun control from every possible angle.
“Fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim.”
saying in the British Royal Navy
Hunting is banned already, except for occassional grants for shooting vermin like neel gai.
)
CC, You have a nice point there, might have read a few days ago, that Central Govt. has decided to ban Pre-paid cellphones in J&K with effect from Nov 01, 2009, the reason- Security 
if US can teach Dolphins remember then why not those 'Madari' guys with bear and monkey maybe they should apply 
