Wildlife/FreeLiving Animals
-
Highway Construction That Considers Animals
-
Obama Admin Still Neglecting Endangered Species
-
Ethical Hunting Awards That Ignore the Actual Victims
Why Is the Nature Conservancy Killing Animals?
Published November 18, 2009 @ 07:51PM PT
The nonprofit Friends of Animals has just started a petition here at Change.org that I recommend interested animal advocates customize (i.e., personalize with their own language, perspectives, and concerns) and sign their names to. "Once again," the group explains, "the Nature Conservancy is using lethal wildlife management in one of its 'sanctuaries.' This time it's in the Devil's Den Preserve in Weston, CT."
And you know how I feel about the preposterous nature of encouraging killing in what is supposed to be a "refuge" or "sanctuary."
Is Golf More Important to San Francisco Than Endangered Animals?
Published November 16, 2009 @ 01:57PM PT
Um, no. I'm guessing most residents of the San Francisco area would say no.
But the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department apparently didn't get the memo. According to the Center for Biological Diversity, the department is supposed to be figuring out how to restore habitat for the San Francisco garter snake and red-legged frog in Pacifica's Sharp Park, but instead, the department is pushing for the option that least considers the animals: an 18-hole golf course, which will push habitat restoration to "the margins of existing wetlands."
Are Vegans Responsible for More Deaths in the Fields? No Way
Published October 31, 2009 @ 09:08AM PT
The comment threads around here have been home to a lot of arguments over the last year, and a few discussions have a habit of resurfacing from time to time. One of these typically starts with a defender of animal-eating accusing vegans of being responsible for more animals' deaths than animal-eaters because of the animals who die as a result of raising and harvesting crops. The person making the argument assumes that people who eat plant-based diets must be responsible for more deaths in the fields than those who eat animal-based diets full of flesh, dairy, and eggs, failing to acknowledge, of course, the enormous amounts of plant foods that must be raised and fed to the animals people kill to eat -- more than must be raised for direct consumption by vegans. As has been discussed in those comment threads each time, the logic fails. And recently, Animal Visuals gave animal advocates a great new tool to answer this weak but common argument. Continue after the jump to view the powerful graph settling the debate.
The Tiniest Rescues and the Building of Compassion
Published October 30, 2009 @ 06:15AM PT
I have a habit of not only rescuing the insects and arachnids I encounter but also, if there's a camera handy, photographing them obsessively (one of many reasons that getting a good camera and learning how to use it is high on my to-do-when-I-have-money list), and this post and the images in it stem from that.
I've been fascinated by these tiniest of animals for years, and transporting them outside or out of harm's way brings me a form of peace, albeit passing, that I don't quite know how to explain. There's something about those quiet moments of gently gathering the little one up, of peering at him and the wondrous details of his delicate body, of carefully moving him to safety, and of watching him go on his way that oh-so-briefly stops the world around me.
"Shooting a Moose Is an Accomplishment Whether You're 12 or 38"
Published October 22, 2009 @ 04:03AM PT
The latest in the ongoing series of "Yay! We taught kids to kill!" stories: "12-Year-Old Bags a Moose in Hunt of a Lifetime."
"I feel really happy and proud,’’ Kelly said Wednesday. "Shooting a moose is an accomplishment whether you’re 12 or 38 – you’re going to put the same amount of effort into it. It’s a big sense of accomplishment because I am 12. The moose is as wide as I am tall. I can sit inside his antlers.’’
Elk "Calf Production" Down? Kill More Elk!
Published September 29, 2009 @ 07:17AM PT
Welcome to the latest episode of Hunting and Wildlife "Management" Logic! (See WTF? 101 here, and try using a browser other than IE if the long comment thread is making it difficult to open the page.) Today we head to South Dakota's Custer State Park, where elk numbers are dropping rapidly; the elk are giving birth to only half as many calves as usual.
The "management goal" is 750 elk, yet there are only around 450 of the animals left. But don't worry, hunters: the state of South Dakota still absolutely encourages you to go out there and get yourself a permit and a "trophy" kill; there are still bulls out there just waiting to be killed, and all the state asks is that you quickly stick a needle in the dying animal and get a blood sample after you shoot him.
Wolves Are Not the Dangerous Predators; Humans Are
Published September 22, 2009 @ 06:39AM PT
If you want an example of essentially all that's wrong with the way humans think of, talk about, and interact with their fellow animals, do I ever have an editorial for you. The publisher, editorial board, or some unnamed journalist from an Oregon newspaper (the byline is vague) yesterday published this doozy: "Give Ranchers Right to Kill Problem Wolves."
Early on in the editorial, the authors set up wolves as the indisputable bad guys. First we learn that wolves in one general area killed twenty-something sheep total in April and August incidents, and thus those wolves were deemed "rogue" and were tracked and killed by the trusty U.S. Wildlife Services. This, it is argued, was justifiable because the wolves clearly intended to cause the ranchers trouble: "Since the wolves were bent on mayhem, and since efforts to relocate them did not work, it’s right that they were killed."
Bent on mayhem? Seriously? I mean, seriously? It gets better:
