Coyote Attack in Laguna Woods: City Council Votes to Shoot Coyotes

[Math Is Hard]

I have mixed feeling about this. Little dogs and their owners have been attacked by coyotes while going out for walks, and that's sad. But if you own small pets, shouldn't you choose not to live in coyote territory? The coyotes are just trying to feed themselves and their pups.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...oks-shooting-of-coyotes-by-professionals.html

n the wake of a coyote attack that left a dog dead and its owner injured, the Laguna Woods City Council has voted to allow professionals to shoot the wild animals.

Before Thursday's vote, only a police officer could shoot a gun in the city, and then only in the line of duty.

Now the city manager and police chief have the authority to issue permits to licensed exterminators, veterinarians or other animal-control professionals, allowing them to shoot coyotes.

 

[mege]

Growing up, we had a few hundred acre property in the boonies which we used for deer hunting, snowmobiling and just generally getting away. We had 2 buildings in the middle of the property, and whenever I was at the property by myself (or with friends - being 16-17 at the time) we had blanket instructions to shoot Coyotes that approached the cabins (and this mentality was encouraged by the local conservation officers - one of which was a family friend whom hunted on our property). Now, we knew there was a few dens around - we could hear them often, but allowing them to interact with human influence regularly was a nono.

Bears, in the same situation, we were told explicitly not to shoot (we had bears at our house in a subdivision once in a while - they loved to tear apart grills it seemed). Just leave them be. Our family friend, the conservation officer, explained that Coyotes tend to be a little more resident when they find sustinance. Bears are transient (there were ~12 tracked bears in a 4 county area). So if a Coyote finds something of interest - likely it's going to come back to that same spot. Bears get bored quick and just keep going.

Point being - if coyotes find some place they like, and get rewarded for being in that area (with food being man-scraps or a poodle), then they're likely to stay/come back to the same spot. It's unfortunate for the coyotes if they come to like a populated area, but they're scavangers and are in no danger of becoming extinct (as far as I know). They're not going to move away on their own.

 

[DoggerDan]

Coyotes are plentiful. As do all animals who compete with one another for scarce resources, coyotes and man will adjust their territories in a natural fashion. I have no problem with shooting them if they're encroaching on human populations, but I'm would not support hunting parties to thin their numbers beyond human areas.

 

[Evo]

That's so sad. If there are coyotes in your area, keep your pets safe.

 

[ThomasT]

I have mixed feeling about this. Little dogs and their owners have been attacked by coyotes while going out for walks, and that's sad. But if you own small pets, shouldn't you choose not to live in coyote territory? The coyotes are just trying to feed themselves and their pups.

And Nazis were just trying to make the world a better place for Aryans.

I think that if a coyote attacks, or is visibly stalking, your little toy poodle, then you have the right to kill it.

But there's a less messy solution. Just get a big, and preferably ill-tempered, dog that you can walk with the little one. That, along with carrying a shotgun for insurance, should be an effective deterrent to coyote attacks.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

And Nazis were just trying to make the world a better place for Aryans.

I think that if a coyote attacks, or is visibly stalking, your little toy poodle, then you have the right to kill it.

But there's a less messy solution. Just get a big, and preferably ill-tempered, dog that you can walk with the little one. That, along with carrying a shotgun for insurance, should be an effective deterrent to coyote attacks.

That's nearly the fastest fulfilment of Godwin's law I've seen outside of youtube. Giving people the right to walk around with guns and shoot wildlife is not a good idea, if there is a big problem with wild animals in an area they should be professionally culled under an official order.

Here in England fox hunting got banned a few years ago. One of the worst parts about it in my opinion was how hunters would claim that they need to do it to protect farm animals before charging off with their dogs and wiping the foxes blood on each others cheeks. There are ways of doing things without enabling an avenue for animal cruelty.

 

[mege]

That's nearly the fastest fulfilment of Godwin's law I've seen outside of youtube. Giving people the right to walk around with guns and shoot wildlife is not a good idea, if there is a big problem with wild animals in an area they should be professionally culled under an official order.

Here in England fox hunting got banned a few years ago. One of the worst parts about it in my opinion was how hunters would claim that they need to do it to protect farm animals before charging off with their dogs and wiping the foxes blood on each others cheeks. There are ways of doing things without enabling an avenue for animal cruelty.

I think the setting is a big factor. It's much more appropriate to have a sidearm when in the middle of a forest or rural area than when walking downtown of a metro area. There are legitimate natural predators out there which warrant firearm use in the wild. I never go camping without a pistol (my wife thinks I'm paranoid), it's just not safe - in the plains states there are boars and in the great lakes areas there are wolves and bears. I've never had to use it, but I think it's good insurance in that setting. Not to mention the possible human predator.

In a city setting, however, I think it's far more appropriate to call the authorities. We've had coyote and rattlesnake run-ins at my dad's place in the mountains near Scottsdale, AZ - call the animal control and they come take care of them.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I think the setting is a big factor. It's much more appropriate to have a sidearm when in the middle of a forest or rural area than when walking downtown of a metro area. There are legitimate natural predators out there which warrant firearm use in the wild. I never go camping without a pistol (my wife thinks I'm paranoid), it's just not safe - in the plains states there are boars and in the great lakes areas there are wolves and bears. I've never had to use it, but I think it's good insurance in that setting. Not to mention the possible human predator.

In a city setting, however, I think it's far more appropriate to call the authorities. We've had coyote and rattlesnake run-ins at my dad's place in the mountains near Scottsdale, AZ - call the animal control and they come take care of them.

Yes obviously it depends, thanks to the Romans there haven't been any predators in England for thousands of years. But I still don't think animal control should be left in the hands of the public, not because I'm a statist or anything but because I think there should be proper regulation and accountability. I've met some pretty cruel people before who think that it should be their god given right to go around slaughtering wild life at will. I'd hate to think what would happen if those same people were legitimately allowed to walk around armed.

 

[dlgoff]

You might be interested in reading some Kansas History about this.

http://www.kshs.org/publicat/history/1997autumn_antle.pdf"

Here's a picture I snipped from the pdf.

 

[dlgoff]

If there are coyotes in your area, keep your pets safe.

Oh I've got them. So Roger, Henrietta, and Guinevere also.

 

[Evo]

Oh I've got them. So Roger, Henrietta, and Guinevere also.

How *are* my babies?

 

[ThomasT]

That's nearly the fastest fulfilment of Godwin's law I've seen outside of youtube.

It's one of my new hobbies. I'm retired.

Giving people the right to walk around with guns and shoot wildlife is not a good idea ...

Unless the wildlife happens to be injuring you and killing your pets?

... if there is a big problem with wild animals in an area they should be professionally culled under an official order.

Culling wouldn't necessarily solve the problem. Coyotes attack smaller animals (like tiny domesticated dogs) because they're easy targets. It seems quite reasonable to me that if a coyote is killing your little dog, then you have the right to kill the coyote.

Here in England fox hunting got banned a few years ago. One of the worst parts about it in my opinion was how hunters would claim that they need to do it to protect farm animals before charging off with their dogs and wiping the foxes blood on each others cheeks. There are ways of doing things without enabling an avenue for animal cruelty.

I agree. Hence my suggestion to owners of tiny dogs to also get at least one big, and preferably ill-tempered, dog to walk along with the little one. A deterrent. Problem solved. The shotgun would only be for insurance in case a coyote attacks anyway, or if somebody really pisses you off.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

It seems quite reasonable to me that if a coyote is killing your little dog, then you have the right to kill the coyote.

No doubt if my pet was being attacked and I had a gun I wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger. The problem is that people will pursue pre-emptive shootings.

 

[dlgoff]

How *are* my babies?

They are living a life of luxury. Cool shady home with large safe patio and a butler that hand selects fresh greens daily to go along with their Nutrena delicacies. Oh, and they love to be talked to; which I do also.

 

[ThomasT]

Another possibility, instead of or in addition to big dogs and shotguns, is to take some raw meat (assuming coyotes prefer raw to cooked) with you when walking the dog. Feed the coyote. Everybody's happy.

 

[ThomasT]

The problem is that people will pursue pre-emptive shootings.

Those sorts of people are going to do that sort of thing no matter what.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Those sorts of people are going to do that sort of thing no matter what.

Yes but if it's outlawed at least you can do something about it.

 

[ThomasT]

Yes but if it's outlawed at least you can do something about it.

Point taken.

 

[drankin]

Yes but if it's outlawed at least you can do something about it.

Killing coyotes is pretty much encouraged in much of the US. They will drag off a human child if they think they can get away with it. They will never be extinct anymore than cockroaches could be.

Never feed coyotes! LOL!

 

[turbo]

Killing coyotes is pretty much encouraged in much of the US. They will drag off a human child if they think they can get away with it. They will never be extinct anymore than cockroaches could be.

Never feed coyotes! LOL!

When I lived on wooded farm-land on a rural hill-top. I'd gut and skin steers for my (much) older neighbor, and we'd both gut and skin deer that we shot. We'd collect the guts, etc, and pile them up on the end of his lower field, to lure in coyotes, and he would watch the gut-piles with his Winchester .30-06 bolt-action in hand. He had lots of adult grand-children and his primary concern was the protection of fawns from predation, so the deer herd could grow and his extended family would have a fair chance of shooting some deer.

 

[zomgwtf]

When I lived on wooded farm-land on a rural hill-top. I'd gut and skin steers for my (much) older neighbor, and we'd both gut and skin deer that we shot. We'd collect the guts, etc, and pile them up on the end of his lower field, to lure in coyotes, and he would watch the gut-piles with his Winchester .30-06 bolt-action in hand. He had lots of adult grand-children and his primary concern was the protection of fawns from predation, so the deer herd could grow and his extended family would have a fair chance of shooting some deer.

That's just sickening.

I'm all for shooting any animal that is attacking you or any other human being but just luring them into just kill them? The **** is wrong with people. If there are any problems with animal populations in the future in your area it's definitely the work of humans, not coyotes.

 

[turbo]

The coyote population is out of control, thanks to the killing off of their competitors (wolves, mostly, that manage their populations much more tightly than coyotes). The state's department of inland fisheries and wildlife is poised to allow more night-hunting of coyotes in order to help the deer herd recover.

Coyotes target the low-hanging fruit, including nests of ground-nesting birds like partridge and the fawns of white-tail deer. Those are two favorite game-species, and they are being decimated by coyotes, which breed prolifically.

 

[zomgwtf]

The coyote population is out of control, thanks to the killing off of their competitors (wolves, mostly, that manage their populations much more tightly than coyotes). The state's department of inland fisheries and wildlife is poised to allow more night-hunting of coyotes in order to help the deer herd recover.

The wolves don't 'manage' their population better, lmfao! They just hardly breed in proximity to human population centres. Coyotes on the other hand are much 'braver' and have no problem being around humans. As well they mature quicker.
I'm not sure I buy their 'population is out of control'. Want to cite figures of pre-mass slaughter of wolf population of predators and post-population of predators? I'm willing to bet it's not significantly different. Maybe it is though... I think it's more of a humans want to kill every damn 'game' animal out there and if any other animal thinks it's going to kill it to, hey, actually eat it since that's what they've evolved to do, then they've got another thing comin to 'em!

Coyotes target the low-hanging fruit, including nests of ground-nesting birds like partridge and the fawns of white-tail deer. Those are two favorite game-species, and they are being decimated by coyotes, which breed prolifically.

"Decimated by coyotes"... proof? It may very well be the case but I want proof. Without human interference would the game-species population be being 'decimated'? I don't particularly care that it's a 'favorite game-species'.

 

[turbo]

People who live and hunt here (and have for decades) know that the availability of game species is not just tied to weather, but predation by fast-growing predators that adapt very quickly to changing conditions.

http://mainefishgame.blogspot.com/2010/12/coyotes-kill-fawns-and-pets.html

http://www.survivaltopics.com/survival-topics-blog/coyote-bags-a-partridge

http://www.uvsystems.com/articles/R_G_Article_5.pdf

http://mainesportsman.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=18&start=10

http://www.americanhunter.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2121&cid=47

 

[turbo]

The wolves don't 'manage' their population better, lmfao! They just hardly breed in proximity to human population centres. Coyotes on the other hand are much 'braver' and have no problem being around humans.

Wolves actually DO control their population growth. The alpha-male and alpha-female breed, and the rest of the pack cooperates to ensure that the "best of the best" kids grow up healthy and strong. Coyotes don't do that. They breed prolifically when they are at an advantage and they don't run in organized packs.

 

[Proton Soup]

"coyotes" killed a woman in Canada a couple of years ago. these may have been coyote/wolf hybrids, or "coywolves". these should be killed indiscriminately, IMO.

http://www.lymeneteurope.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3252

i've only once come upon a coyote in the woods. it was very skittish and ran away from me, showing no aggression at all.

 

[zomgwtf]

I too once came upon a coyote. It was a few weeks ago actually. We have two coyotes right now going around a wooded area right beside my complex. I had a bucket of KFC chicken walking home in the hydro field beside the woods. I walked right up to it, wasn't paying attention at first. It just stood there and stared at me and I stared back, was probably around 9 feet away from me. It didn't seem scared at all, more like 'aware' and 'ready', perhaps because of the chicken I was carrying.

Anyway I had no idea what to do. It was pretty scary... I just stared at it for 10 minutes trying to figure out what to do. Finally I just decided to try and back away from it slowly. It didn't move at all and once I was a distance I deemed safe (other side of hydro field... so like 30 ft) I just went on my way. I looked back to make sure it wasn't following me and it wasn't, after awhile of watching me walk off it just went the other way. Perhaps I got lucky who knows. In any case I don't want anyone to kill these coyotes, instead I would like the proper authorities to capture them and move them somewhere further from the populated areas of the city.

 

[zomgwtf]

@turbo, female wolves commit 'infanticide' that's a far cry from 'managing the population'. Coyotes also commit infanticide but it's more between packs than within the pack... but it's still has happened within the pack.

and trust me turbo. Without human intervention balance between predator and prey will be found. There are plenty of stable coyote populations all over. They aren't out of control at all... they loose numbers dramatically when wolves are introduced but that's hardly an issue since wolves will now just take up the niche. As well, coyotes mostly eat small animals. It's uncommon for them to just take on big-game animals.

 

[Evo]

I too once came upon a coyote. It was a few weeks ago actually. We have two coyotes right now going around a wooded area right beside my complex. I had a bucket of KFC chicken walking home in the hydro field beside the woods. I walked right up to it, wasn't paying attention at first. It just stood there and stared at me and I stared back, was probably around 9 feet away from me. It didn't seem scared at all, more like 'aware' and 'ready', perhaps because of the chicken I was carrying.

Anyway I had no idea what to do. It was pretty scary... I just stared at it for 10 minutes trying to figure out what to do. Finally I just decided to try and back away from it slowly. It didn't move at all and once I was a distance I deemed safe (other side of hydro field... so like 30 ft) I just went on my way. I looked back to make sure it wasn't following me and it wasn't, after awhile of watching me walk off it just went the other way. Perhaps I got lucky who knows. In any case I don't want anyone to kill these coyotes, instead I would like the proper authorities to capture them and move them somewhere further from the populated areas of the city.

Maybe it was a health nut?

Seriously, that's very scary. After being attacked by dogs when bicycle riding, I was saved thanks to a car driving by that stopped and got the dogs off of me, I only had my pants torn and a knee cap moved and lacerations, I hate to think of what would have happened if that guy was a few seconds later, I never rode there again. A few years later I started riding again around my house, different state, and carried a package of hot dogs to throw at the dogs that came at me.

And they were just dogs.

 

[dlgoff]

They're not little dogs.

We know what wolves and coyotes eat. The toolbox for delivering their self-serve meals is carried in their mouths. They don’t have a cat’s sharp, retractable claws and inward-turning wrists for grasping prey. Feet and legs get the wolf or coyote to the table, but they don’t serve the bacon. That must be done with the teeth and each type has a specific purpose.

http://www.ashgi.org/articles/teeth_bite_me.htm"

 

[Shukie]

The coyote population is out of control, thanks to the killing off of their competitors (wolves, mostly, that manage their populations much more tightly than coyotes). The state's department of inland fisheries and wildlife is poised to allow more night-hunting of coyotes in order to help the deer herd recover.

If the deer herd needs to recover, then how about, I don't know, stop shooting them? I've long ago stopped believing the lies of hunters as conservationists, when you see the stuff that goes on such as the above. Hunters are in the woods to kill, any other reason they come up with is merely an excuse.

 

[dlgoff]

Hunters are in the woods to kill, any other reason they come up with is merely an excuse.

Let me think of an excuse.... I know; Food.

Edit: oops. This is off topic. At least I don't eat coyotes.

 

[zomgwtf]

Let me think of an excuse.... I know; Food.

Edit: oops. This is off topic. At least I don't eat coyotes.

It's absolutely necessary for survival to go hunt specifically say deer for food? This seems far fetched, hunting is no longer a necessity for life but a hobby, something people do to get pleasure. Now I have nothing against hunting for those that actually use the animal. It is not only possible to get your food else where but it's also possible to hunt a different species. Coyotes pose more as a 'pest' because it will limit the ability of these hunters to have pleasure hunting what they want. They are not some invasive species our ecosystems have never dealt with before.

I find it absolutely hilarious that the one guy above talks about being ok with dangerous wild animals as long as they don't encroach on human territory... LOL. Does this just not scream of the ignorance that these people carry around with themselves?

 

[dydxforsn]

haha, I thought this thread was going to be about Texas governor Rick Perry who recently shot a coyote with a pistol after it attacked his dog while he was jogging.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/27/rick-perry-shoots-and-kil_n_554397.html

Yes, he jogs with a laser sighted pistol (I'm not judging though heh)..

 

[turbo]

There are many people who do not understand hunting. Often they describe it as people taking pleasure in killing. I have Native American blood on both sides of my extended family, and I grew up hunting deer. We did not kill deer indiscriminately - only for the venison, and my father and uncles trained me to only take a "kill" shot and respect the deer. I still hunt almost 50 years later, and I hunt with a single-shot rifle (.45-70 Ruger Model 1) and haven't needed a second shot for decades. There is nothing like venison steak, heart, liver, etc. It's what I grew up eating. And other meats, of course, because a couple of deer don't go far with a family of 6.

There are some out-of-state nuts that come to Maine loaded with semi-automatic rifles, wearing huge knives, etc, and they spend much of their time partying in the local bars. Anti-hunters might find some quarrel with such city-dwellers, but so do the natives in Maine that adhere to more traditional standards for hunting etiquette. That means concern and respect for the game and the other hunters in the woods.

There is no pleasure in killing an animal for meat. Slaughter-house-workers and butchers can tell you this. They are the "sin-eaters" for all the "innocents" that want to pick up packages of hamburg, steak, chicken, etc, neatly wrapped in plastic-covered foam trays and never take responsibility for the lives of the animals that they eat. At least a cleanly-killed deer has had the advantage of living all of its life in the wild, instead of in a feed-lot.

 

[zomgwtf]

There are many people who do not understand hunting. Often they describe it as people taking pleasure in killing. I have Native American blood on both sides of my extended family, and I grew up hunting deer. We did not kill deer indiscriminately - only for the venison, and my father and uncles trained me to only take a "kill" shot and respect the deer. I still hunt almost 50 years later, and I hunt with a single-shot rifle (.45-70 Ruger Model 1) and haven't needed a second shot for decades. There is nothing like venison steak, heart, liver, etc. It's what I grew up eating.

There are some out-of-state nuts that come to Maine loaded with semi-automatic rifles, wearing huge knives, etc, and they spend much of their time partying in the local bars. Anti-hunters might find some quarrel with such city-dwellers, but so do the natives in Maine that adhere to more traditional standards for hunting etiquette. That means concern and respect for the game and the other hunters in the woods.

There is no pleasure in killing an animal for meat. Slaughter-house-workers and butchers can tell you this. They are the "sin-eaters" for all the "innocents" that want to pick up packages of hamburg, steak, chicken, etc, neatly wrapped in plastic-covered foam trays and never take responsibility for the lives of the animals that they eat. At least a cleanly-killed deer has had the advantage of living all of its life in the wild, instead of in a feed-lot.

Turbo I think you know that I am Metis... fully. Non-status of course because due to a burnt down church and lost birth records but none the less many people in my family hunt for food as well. They come from New Brunswick (Grand Falls) which is really a light jog and a little jump away from Maine (where you are correct?) So the cultures aren't that different really. So I understand what you're saying... but...

Just because there's a greater purpose to the killed animal doesn't take away from the pleasure that's gained from hunting. That's why people do it. First you're alone in the woods (well sometimes alone sometimes not but it's quiet always so basically you're alone) which to most hunters is really pleasurable. Even if they don't get a kill it's a good day out. Second the anticipation of animal making sure you're doing everything properly, quite thrilling. Third, SEEING the animal and deciding it's good to shoot. Fourth, taking the shot... and this is probably the most pleasurable thing of all. It's not 'sadistic' it's just exhilarating, shooting a rifle within very small error margins to kill a sometimes HUGE animal. Fifth, some people actually like chopping up the animal it's not a weird sort of 'nasty' ew they like killing and dismembering bodies it's just interesting and some people enjoy it. Fifth EATING the meat. This is easily the most enjoyed by all parties, even those that don't hunt... Some people get pleasure just out of the gamey taste of meat, some people like non-gamey wild meat... makes no difference the pleasure factor is still there.

Now it used to be vital to do this to survive so while going on the hunt it would be counter balanced by the knowledge that if you screw up you're tribe/family won't eat. Now days though it's different, if you want any kind of meat you can go to the store and get already killed and butchered animals. Now why kill ANOTHER animal if you're so worried about them? The only reason is to get pleasure nothing else. It is not required to survive.

Also I do not know of these people personally that you speak of with automatic rifles etc. etc.. Our laws are different up here but I wouldn't consider those people hunters. Those type of hillbillies that just use dynamite to fish cause they think it's funny.

 

[turbo]

A semi-automatic rifle or pistol is not "automatic". It simply loads another round after each round is fired. That's all. There is no machine-gun rapid-fire going on, though anti-gun-nuts want to give the impression that that's that case, calling SKS rifles as AK-47s. and other crap. I have a couple of auto-loading pistols, though they are very antiquated. I have another that that is a bit more up-to-date, but still, it's not like the extreme fire-power that you see in movies and popular media is real. One trigger-pull is reguired for each shot.

 

[turbo]

Now it used to be vital to do this to survive so while going on the hunt it would be counter balanced by the knowledge that if you screw up you're tribe/family won't eat. Now days though it's different, if you want any kind of meat you can go to the store and get already killed and butchered animals. Now why kill ANOTHER animal if you're so worried about them? The only reason is to get pleasure nothing else. It is not required to survive.

When I was a kid, failure to get enough game was enough to guarantee that although your family wouldn't eat, it was enough to ensure that your family wouldn't eat well.

Would you want to feed your children meat from dead/dying dairy cows instead or healthy fresh-killed game? Nope. That's the way I was brought up.

 

[zomgwtf]

A semi-automatic rifle or pistol is not "automatic". It simply loads another round after each round is fired. That's all. There is no machine-gun rapid-fire going on, though anti-gun-nuts want to give the impression that that's that case, calling SKS rifles as AK-47s. and other crap. I have a couple of auto-loading pistols, though they are very antiquated. I have another that that is a bit more up-to-date, but still, it's not like the extreme fire-power that you see in movies and popular media is real. One trigger-pull is reguired for each shot.

Sorry, when I read semi-automatic I read automatic. Regardless the type of people you're explaining I think still fit the bill I said.

 

[dlgoff]

When I was a kid, failure to get enough game was enough to guarantee that although your family wouldn't eat, it was enough to ensure that your family wouldn't eat well.

Would you want to feed your children meat from dead/dying dairy cows instead or healthy fresh-killed game? Nope. That's the way I was brought up.

Right on turbo. My parents lived through the depression days in Arkansas and hunting was the only way to survive. And with the prices of food today, I'm seriously going to consider more hunting.

 

[Proton Soup]

Sorry, when I read semi-automatic I read automatic. Regardless the type of people you're explaining I think still fit the bill I said.

i think it's extremely bigoted and way off the mark. hunting out of state is expensive, for starters. a lot of the goons you are talking about are doctor and lawyer types, not hillbillies thank you very much. they pay stupid amounts of money for silly stuff like $300 hunting shirts, and then go to a deer ranch where they corral the animals up tight so you can bag your game.

 

[Evo]

i think it's extremely bigoted and way off the mark. hunting out of state is expensive, for starters. a lot of the goons you are talking about are doctor and lawyer types, not hillbillies thank you very much. they pay stupid amounts of money for silly stuff like $300 hunting shirts, and then go to a deer ranch where they corral the animals up tight so you can bag your game.

It was turbo that was speaking of out of state goon hunters, not zom.

 

[DaveC426913]

Those sorts of people are going to do that sort of thing no matter what.

It's not about "those sorts of people"; it's about humans have property rights and coyotes do not. Once humans claim the territory as their own (by deciding to live on it), they are within their rights to purge the area of any threat to them.

Now, that is not to say an area could not be set aside as a preserve, so that the coyotes are protected, but that is another kettle of fish.

 

[Evo]

It's not about "those sorts of people"; it's about humans have property rights and coyotes do not. Once humans claim the territory as their own (by deciding to live on it), they are within their rights to purge the area of any threat to them.

Now, that is not to say an area could not be set aside as a preserve, so that the coyotes are protected, but that is another kettle of fish.

I don't think humans have the right to claim any land they want and kill what ever lives on it. Just because it's done doesn't make it right.

 

[Proton Soup]

It was turbo that was speaking of out of state goon hunters, not zom.

i believe turbo mentioned city-dwellers and zomgwtf brought up hillbillies.

 

[zomgwtf]

i believe turbo mentioned city-dwellers and zomgwtf brought up hillbillies.

I can honestly say now that I have no idea of what turbo was talking about. The picture he painted in my head made me think of a "Larry the Cable Guy" type of person just coming from a city. If using the term hillybilly is offensive than sorry? I guess I should have said 'hick' or something along those lines. Those type of white people that go crazy for owning guns and pick up trucks and drinking heavy etc. etc.. That's what he got me thinking about anyways. Not that it's derogatory but for the most part I wouldn't consider them hunters. Just 'hick' is fine.

 

[turbo]

Zom, a lot of the out-of-state "hunters" that we get here are not "hunters" in any real sense. If you let them out in the woods without supervision (even with their expensive accouterments), you'd better hope that they don't stray too far from the road, because we'll have to pay wardens, etc, to find them and bring them back to safety. It's pretty sad.

Maine's terrain is not all that inhospitable, but when you have some clueless people let loose in many thousands of square miles of forest with no orientation skills, you've got to expect that we'll have to save quite a few of them from themselves every year.

 

[I_am_learning]

Should I kill this mosquito sitting on my cheek right now, Or should I phone the animal consevation bla bla officiers?
Why is our sentiment different for large and small animals?

If the beast gives you trouble, kill it.
If the beast don't have any love and moral sense, Is it the duty of humans alone to care for everybody?
Hello Every Species, just care for yourself. Thats what nature expects you to do.

 

[zomgwtf]

Should I kill this mosquito sitting on my cheek right now, Or should I phone the animal consevation bla bla officiers?
Why is our sentiment different for large and small animals?

If the beast gives you trouble, kill it.
If the beast don't have any love and moral sense, Is it the duty of humans alone to care for everybody?
Hello Every Species, just care for yourself. Thats what nature expects you to do.

I'm sure 'nature' in all parts of the world anticipated the human species. If this was about "naturally" defending yourself humans would be... ... ... well not so off let's just say that. Good luck fighting off two coyotes without a weapon, bud.

I assume you've never heard of the term noblesse oblige? Well, if humans want to be the rulers of the world and the dominant species then yes... we really do have a duty IMO.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Should I kill this mosquito sitting on my cheek right now, Or should I phone the animal consevation bla bla officiers?
Why is our sentiment different for large and small animals?

If the beast gives you trouble, kill it.
If the beast don't have any love and moral sense, Is it the duty of humans alone to care for everybody?
Hello Every Species, just care for yourself. Thats what nature expects you to do.

There's a big difference depending on the animal and what it's doing

Killing insects does not really open up an avenue to animal cruelty, hunting for hunting sake does.