OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

topic posted Mon, May 21, 2007 - 11:12 PM by  Diego Rodriguez
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP
Big Wildlife Urges You to Take Action Now

Trophy hunters are pushing a bill, HB 2971, in the Oregon state legislature that would bring back the cruel practice of using a pack of radio-collared dogs to chase and corner cougars. Voters banned this extreme practice but allowed it for public protection. If HB 2971 becomes law, trophy hunters will once again be allowed to use hounds to run a cougar up a tree and shoot the animal at point blank range. Recently, the Oregon House already passed the bill. The Senate is expected to vote on the legislation this week.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

1.) Contact Governor Ted Kulongoski. Urge him to OPPOSE HB 2971 (See talking points below for more details about the bill)

Phone the Governor at: 503-986-6530

Or email his staff at:
Jo.L.Bell@state.or.us
And/or Ann.Butte@state.or.us

Or fax a letter to the Governor at: 503-378-3225

2.) Contact your State Senator. Urge your Senator to OPPOSE HB 2971

To identify your state senator, visit: www.leg.state.or.us/findlegsltr/

OR call 800-332-2313 and ask to be connected to their office

If you can spare a few more minutes:

3. Contact Senate Natural Resources Committee Chair, Senator Avakian. Urge the Senator to OPPOSE HB 2971

Phone: 503-986-1717
Email: sen.bradavakian@state.or.us

4. Contact Senator Alan Bates, a swing vote on the Committee. Urge the Senator to OPPOSE HB 2971

Phone: 503-986-1703
Email: sen.alanbates@state.or.us

TALKING POINTS (PLEASE USE YOUR OWN WORDS):

* HB 2971 overturns voters' will by allowing the unacceptable practices of baiting and hounding bears and cougars to be used at the discretion of ODFW. Current law allows hounding for damage-causing cougars and to protect public safety - this bill will allow indiscriminate killing of cougars that caused no harm or threat. More cougars were killed this year than in the history of the state without dogs; HB 2971 will increase that number and it is not needed and it's not the answer.

* Oregon's Cougar Management Plan is designed to allow the indiscriminate killing of all cougars found within certain target areas. HB 2971 provides a means to implement a bad plan by overturning the law.

* Nobody knows how many cats there are in the state, yet we're killing them at record rates and numbers. The ODFW population model has been severely criticized by expert biologists. Use the precautionary principle when in doubt.

* The Cougar Management Plan has a budget; and the ODFW has made millions of dollars on cougar tags, so they can well afford to pay for their Plan without violating current law established by the voters.

--
Big Wildlife

Providing a voice for top-carnivore wildlife throughout western North America.

POB 489 Williams OR 97544
voice 541-941-9242
fax 510-380-3600
posted by:
Diego Rodriguez
Oregon
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

    Sun, March 16, 2008 - 11:39 AM
    oregons cougar populations are estimated at over 5,000 and never in history before or after man settled in oregon has there been so many cougars . without wolves to compete for food their numbers have gone out of control much like the coyote . A controled hunt to manage populations is a fine idea. Most people don't want their hounds going after a cougar because a trained gundog costs many thousands of dollars and the cougar may attack it . The populations are monitored to guage if a hunt can be sustained on varmints and game. Fish and Game or similar agencies are not going to put the long term suvival of any species at risk . The decline in hunting has been devastating for animals of all kinds all over america . most of the money for buying reserves, parks , wildlife refuge etc comes from the sale of hunting and fishing liscense. also money to manage those areas . If hunting goes so will the department of fish and game which will mean devastation to many species and the paving of many wild and scenic places.
    • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

      Mon, March 17, 2008 - 12:20 PM
      varmints? You've got to be kidding.
      • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

        Mon, March 17, 2008 - 1:05 PM
        yeah varmints , they may want the populations controled for many varmint species , usualy ones that damage crops but they don't want them to go extinct. if the pupulation of say jackrabbits come to a criticaly low population they are going to further regulate the hunt or close it in that area .
        • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

          Mon, March 17, 2008 - 1:25 PM
          What part of your arguement is consistant with "animal rights"?
          • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

            Mon, March 17, 2008 - 2:46 PM
            the animals have a right to die quickly and we have a right as humans to hunt as long as the species population can sustain it. if the department of fish and game decides a hunt on cougars is sustainable whats the problem?....what you want to watch out for is poaching , not hunting........

            when i move up to oregon this summer i'll be hunting coyote with a wounded rabbit call. If I call in a cougar don't worry i'll respect his rights and harvest him with a large caliber in the vitals.



            • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

              Mon, March 17, 2008 - 4:07 PM
              plantshaman with all due respect...I think you are posting your opinions on the wrong tribe. Peeps in this tribe are very sensitive to any animal killing of any kind...especially hunting! Most of us do not even eat flesh so we don't understand the ways of those who do.
              I feel that humans should take care of their own population problems first before thinking they know how to control nature and her many complexities.
              • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                Mon, March 17, 2008 - 6:24 PM
                Hunters are instantly demonized and i think people should get the other side of the story. We get a bad name because a few idiots like to spotlight deer in their pickup truck and leave them to die or kill varmints by the hundreds and also leave them. The reality is most hunters love wildlife and make efforts to protect the animals and their habitat . Animals living in cages in meat factories with horrible conditions is a sick practice i'll agree . hunting however is an ancient tradition that should be passed on to the next generation and protected because it is our heritage, human right , and most of all it funds the conservation of our resources.
                • Unsu...
                   

                  Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                  Mon, March 17, 2008 - 10:10 PM
                  Let me be as clear as I can.
                  YOU are a hunter? on an animal rights tribe?

                  are you serious?

                  Animal RIGHTS . do you get it?

                  Stop killing. If you love wildlife so much try NOT killing wildlife. Please.

                  And you make a mistake, when you say that hunting is a human RIGHT. It can't be.

                  A person's right is only valid until it trumps another's rights.

                  For example a pedophile may claim to have the right to express his sexuality, but his method of sexual expression stiffles the rights of a child therefore his "right" is not valid.

                  A serial killer may exert his "right" to practice his "sport" of hunting single white females, but the single white females have a right to live, so again this trumps the serial killers rights.

                  Just like whites did not have the RIGHT to own blacks.
                  And men do not have the RIGHT to rape women.

                  You do not have the RIGHT to kill other species.
                  because their RIGHT to live trumps your right to kill.

                  All your welfare arguments are irrelevent. Killing someone goes against that person;s basic rights.
                  Love and killing does not go together.

                  You need to read a little bit about animal rights and educate yourself rather than coming on an animal rights tribe and asking us to stop "giving you a bad name"

                  hunters are sociopaths.
                  If it were up to me all hunters would be placed in institutes for the criminally insane.

                  oh and hunting would only be a sport if the deer had guns too! ;-)
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                    Tue, March 18, 2008 - 2:56 PM
                    Gotta say, as always, I love your analogies Antoine! It's pretty basic to me, killing an animal violates its right to live. It's right to feel the grass under its feet, to fell the wind on its face, to feel the freedom of the run, to lounge in a tree and survey its territory that it has a RIGHT to. Hunters (of all kinds, see Antoine's above analogies...) are the most disgusting branch of humanity who live, walk and revel in DEATH. You are deceiving yourself to think that you are helping ANYTHING. Get your head out of a hole in the ground, put your penile extension of a gun back in your pants, and walk (or run) away, because you are harming the earth, violating the rights of many species, and talking to the wrong people, bub.
                • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                  Wed, March 19, 2008 - 12:52 AM
                  Hey Dave. Your viewpoint would have more validity if you really refused to eat meat unless you hunted it yourself. Are you claiming you refuse to eat corporate meat? Also, calling animals "varmints" doesn't make you look more like Yosemite Sam than someone knowledgeable about wildlife. On the other hand, you make a good point about how Oregon needs the Wolf back. A lot of us would back you on that.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Unsu...
                     

                    Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                    Wed, March 19, 2008 - 2:25 PM
                    Yes and conveniently Dave fails to point out that the wolf was wiped out by people like him!
                    Imagine if we approached human overpopulation problems (which are much more problematic and dangerous for the environment) in the the same way that Dave and his psychopathic minions approached non-human overpopulation problems?
                    • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                      Wed, March 19, 2008 - 11:20 PM
                      the wolf being hunted to extinction was not from people like me .there is a difference between sustainable harvest and a managed hunt and the goverment paying people to shoot every single animal....

                      a varmint is a term used by fish and game bioligists its in every hunting regulations book . if you actualy read about both sides of the argument you would know what a varmint is. GAME has fur and is an animal that is hunted to eat like cotton tail rabbit , deer , or tree squirrel. VARMINT is an animal considered a pest and typicaly include coyote , prarie dogs , ground squirrel, skunk and jack rabbit .varmint is usualy not eaten and maybe the fur is used . its a shame that some varmint like the woodchuck is actualy very delicous and most are shot and not eaten.I personaly don't get off on killing a bunch of stuff i'm not going to eat or use the fur. however ,varmints damage crops and Damaged crops mean your going to pay alot more some food items and farmers will get more goverment money. there are also UPLAND BIRDS quail, chukar , dove , turkey , hungarian partridge etc. Last is WATERFOUL ducks , geese . maybe you should look into the proper terminology a little more before you go calling me yosemite sam
                      • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                        Thu, March 20, 2008 - 3:28 AM
                        Oh sweet Jesus...
                        • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                          Thu, March 20, 2008 - 2:49 PM
                          Does anybody else here, besides Dave obviously, consider any animal living in their natural habit attempting to survive through the changes that humanity has wrought upon their home and hunting grounds as pests? The "damage" these animals cause is a direct response to our incursion on THEIR world, it is THEIR RIGHT to exist in the world the best way they know how, and not the MURDERING HUNTER'S RIGHT to slaughter them.
                          • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                            Thu, March 20, 2008 - 4:00 PM
                            It's not just you. When I read his post I thought of the fact that humans keep moving into their homes, and then complain about them "invading" instead of just leaving them and their homes alone or at least trying to coexist. The arrogance is astounding.

                            Since this is the same pattern the Europeans followed with the native humans everywhere they went, I think it's not just hunters.

                            Do other non-European peoples do this?
                            • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                              Thu, March 20, 2008 - 7:47 PM
                              You should read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. It's very enlightening about the human patterns of invasion. Going back to the beginning of human civilization he discusses and gives theories about how location and living patterns, thus food harvested and animals domesticated, enabled the invaders to become the invaders. Really good book.
                              • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                                Fri, March 21, 2008 - 12:17 AM
                                do you know how many acres are developed to grow soy and other crops which i'm sure you all love ? I'm pretty sure all the land cleared and cultivated is killing far more then hunters . Sprawl, habitat destruction , pollution ,fences, roads and clearcuts are what you should be worried about . so what are you going to do ? stop eating cuz clearing those fields to grow vegetables killed countless numbers of animals , insects and other living things ? sure some may find a new area but some may not and they probably died a horrible death from starvation once their food source was plowed.they may also be forced in smaller and smaller area and start to compete for dwindling resources. how about all the erosion from those fields now pouring into rivers and smothering the eggs of the fish ? yeah vegetables are totaly a more ethical way to go just aslong as you don't personaly do any of those things to the land and the creatures on it . farming and ranching basicaly allowed all this stuff to happen . unless you can convince the entire planet to go back to hunter gatherer with a nomadic lifestyle that allows the land to regenerate then we are screwed . that life is basicaly only possible in the tropics and certainly if you think you could survive without hunting in that lifestyle the only place it would be possible is a lush tropical enviroment. have any of you thought beyond the point that animals are cute ?
                                • Re: OREGON COUGARS NEED YOUR HELP

                                  Fri, March 21, 2008 - 12:31 AM
                                  So, who wants to explain the differences in resource use resulting from eating plants vs. eating animals that eat plants? Oh, and whoever does it, don’t forget to factor in the average size of a vegetarian/vegan vs. the average size of a person who’s not, then health care, transportation costs of the extra weight (did you know that ambulances have recently found they have to increase the size of their gurneys because the Americans were getting too big to fit on the old ones?), etc. etc..
                                  • Unsu...
                                     

                                    Re: ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME???

                                    Fri, March 21, 2008 - 3:04 AM
                                    DAVE!!!!

                                    DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE POSTING ON AN ANIMAL RIGHTS TRIBE?

                                    what you are doing is like defending rape on a feminist tribe.
                                    or going on a anti-racism tribe and defending being part of the KKK.

                                    Please go away.

                                    your facile justifications and stupidities aside, it isn't about how an animal tastes and it isn't about how you psychopathically love to kill...(how long till you kill your wife or your child?)

                                    Animal RIGHTS!!! do you understand numb nuts? RIGHTS! that means that animals are not OUR PROPERTY. That they have the right to live...)and no simpleton, it does not mean that you have the right to kill them, moron!!!)

                                    it means that we in this tribe believe that animals are deserving of basic rights. And that psychopaths like you do not HAVE THE RIGHT to kill them. (Thou shall not kill, remmeber that one?)

                                    I know that your brain is small, so I will try to make it clear for you:

                                    It's like when africans were bought and sold as slaves... (okay? following me so far?)... Now imagine a group os abolitionists who get together to discuss about the equality of the races, and the abolition of slavery, ... (okay?) ...

                                    and now imagine some weak-brained, shit disturber (let's call him Dave) who walks in and starts giving genuine economic reasons and environmental reasons for slavery....(according to him) and starts to justify why he WANTS and SHOULD own slaves.

                                    now do you think he is in the right forum to have that discussion?

                                    and are you, Dave?

                                    Why are you a member of this tribe? is it just because our moderator is notoriously out to lunch and you know that you can get away with it?
                                    or do you GENUINELY think that we who believe in animal rights give two shits about what you believe.

                                    Tribe is about creating community, and joining tribes who'se topics you agree with or find interesting, NOT about joining tribes that you 100% oppose just to post your stupidity and get into fights.

                                    Dave, You KILL.
                                    You are a psychopath and you are going to hell.
                                    You are a monster.
                                    You disgust me.

                                    GO AWAY!

                                    (come one Have a nice day, are you kidding me with this? you delete my posts but you do NOTHING when a HUNTER repeatedly posts on your tribe????
                                    • Unsu...
                                       

                                      Re: ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME???

                                      Fri, March 21, 2008 - 3:14 AM
                                      Plus Dave your stupidity is astounding (although not suprising)
                                      the animals that you eat, what do they eat Dave?

                                      Do you get it yet or do I have to connect the dots?


                                      If grain farming is such an environmental concern for you, then perhaps you should stop eating meat. Because more than 60% of the crops grown in the world are grown for animals raised for food...

                                      not to mention that more than 30% of the fish caught in massive trawling operations is caught for animal feed as well.

                                      and that over 70% of the water used in agriculture is used for aniaml agriculture or crops used to feed animals raised for food.

                                      Plus while it would be possible to feed the entire planet on 100% organic (veganic) crops it is NOT possible to feed even 5 per cent of the planet on wild animal flesh and organically raised animal flesh.


                                      isn't it funny that meat-eaters who defend their environemntal right to hunt or eat meat, always try to prove that somehow a vegetarian diet is worse or just as bad as meat-eating? and then they satrt to weep about the bugs killed in harvesters, and the forests cut down for soybeans.

                                      but the forests cut down for soybeans are for soybeans fed to cattle and to make land for graising cattle. The meat and dairy industry uses more than 90 per cent of the soy that we grow....but YES of course! We vegans are the problem! yes. (idiot!)

                                      you can scream as loudly and as often as you want that 1 plus 4 equals 3, but it won't make it true.
                                      Likewise every intelligent person KNOWS that veganism is betetr for the environment than meat-eating (that's why it's called eating lower on the food chain)
                                      • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                        Fri, March 21, 2008 - 9:56 PM
                                        I like your logical arguments backed by data, but I don't think name-calling is effective. Some people who hunt believe animals have rights (the right to live free until killed). Obviously Dave doesn't understand all the environmental implications of raising animals for meat. But that's not surprising, since there is so much disinformation in the mainstream corporate media, along with their efforts to discredit and vilify environmentalists (the craziest one is calling a vandal an "eco-terrorist," like they're out randomly killing people). Remember, Rush Limbaugh and his ilk have been on a loud and repetitive twenty-year campaign against animal rights and environmentalism, and many people without logical abilities and scientific training have been fooled into repeating statements like those that Dave made. Hopefully Dave has learned something from you about the environmental damage of meat-eating compared to vegetarianism, unless your name-calling got his hackles up and he has become emotionally unable to face facts. I would recommend staying calm, avoiding insults and profanity, and sticking to facts and logic.

                                        I did notice that Dave dodged my question about whether he only ate meat that he killed himself (a la Ted Nugent), or if he usually just gorged himself on corporate meat. Now I am curious if he listens to rightwing talk radio and Fox News a lot, and if not, where does he get his "information" about diet, agriculture, and the environment?
                                        • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                          Fri, March 21, 2008 - 10:02 PM
                                          I just heard a stat on NPRs "Science Friday." They are doing a show on water, or growing lack thereof, and said it takes 10,000 gallons of water to produce one gallon of milk.
                                          • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                            Fri, March 21, 2008 - 10:16 PM
                                            It's crazy how in California they are trying to dredge up support to built a giant peripheral canal in order to send the Sacramento River's water straight down to L.A. when we waste so much water on the cattle industry (about half the total we use here). Meat eaters are strongly emotionally attached to their diet, and they get pretty worked up when you challenge the economic logic of the meat, dairy, and egg corporations.
                                            • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                              Sat, March 22, 2008 - 12:10 AM
                                              wait now no need to get so heated .l'm here to voice some other opinions i'm listening to your opinions and data . you guys migh tnot believe this but i'm Very left wing and i totaly support almost all enviromental movements . I HATE RUSH and his horrible right wing christian conservative crap and all those false numbers they give . I listen to NPR as my main source of news and sometimes BBC. I can't stand big suv's with one fat person on their cell phone driving it . if i could hunt any animal i'd probably hunt redneck republican pigs in suv's. I remember when I cried the first time i saw really massive clearcuts from horizon to horizon in humbolt county. Oh the silt in the eel river , horrible ! Then i started working in construction and now i realize I live in a wooden house and i'm not really going to live in a cave ! I've become alittle more centered on my enviromental stance . for example selective harvest of trees , and no harvest at all around creeks and rivers, no herbacides etc which in the klammath watershed are giving birds cancerous lesions on their beaks.

                                              I totaly agree farming meat is horrible for the enviroment , just the methane alone is a total disaster. I do however think meat is an important source of protein and men should consume 40 grams of protein worth of meat about 3 times a week , preferably no beef at all. I stopped eating beef for years but had a relapse as of late .its hard when i get lunch at work cuz i'm in construction and they all want beef. trying to get off the beef when i go to oregon and start my new life . I also LOVE lots of vegetarian stuff . tofu tacos , tofu mushroom melts ,potatos tacos and my favorite drink is yerba matte with soy milk and agave nectar MMMMMMMm ! try to eat organic when i can afford it but inflation has been making it harder.I think everyone could have some meat in their diet if they didn't eat it 3 times a day 7 days a week . free range meat is certainly better but it has bad impact on the enviroment , for example i hunt jackrabbit (yes i eat it ) where there free range cows . If there are alot of cow turds there are very few jackrabbit droppings cuz they compete for food . they cause erosion and destroy meadows which hurts the trout . labeling me as some radical meat eater is a little extreme although i will say beef eaters are obvious ! go in steak house and 99 percent of the people are really fat and gross! Basicaly i eat anything that is hot and infront of me . My wife is almost vegetarian she goes months at a time without meat so if she is cooking i'm eating it .

                                              i'm not avoiding questions . I do not hunt and kill all my own food . Not even close . Its sort of hard to do if i want to eat meat approximately 3 times a week and I live Los angeles . Its a long drive to go hunting . when i finaly live out in the wilderness i hope i can eat only what i hunt. I'm not really into big game hunting so its not like i can stockpile for the year with 1 elk . 1 rabbit is 1 meal for 1 person and lets see the last rabbit took 4 days sun up till sundown hiking about 10 miles a day , not to mention some frostbite on my hands. I probably expend alot more then the rabbit provides altough you can get more game at other times of the year . I would like to try hunting wildboar but i'm not sure about dear , i've never killed either . Deer eat out of my hands in the sierra , not sure if i can shoot one they are cute . If you don't feel remorse after killing any animal your a sick puppy . Its why tribal people usualy respect honor and warship the game they hunt . But its the natural cycle , living things eat other living things to sustain life . I guess the tribe always needs people to stay back at the village who aren't fit for hunting.

                                              like i said the only way for any of you to meet your ideals (from what i gather they are in regards to food) . You all have to live in lush rainforest and gather only . totaly possible . so book your flight then start practicing temporary shelter making and basket weaving . all the problems started when man left that life you can go back to it and save the world .

                                              or we could reduce the pupulation back down to a much lower number like 25 million or less and we can all have giant suv's and eat whatever we want without hurting anything . even if each couple only had 2 kids the pupulation would go down rapidly. its the main problem the catholics and christian fundamentalist don't want to talk about the real problems.why would they ? jesus will be here to get them soon.

                                              the reason I picked this particular post is because the bill mentioned is for hounds . I think that dogs love to hunt , and hunters love their dogs . Its a really beautiful relastionship and its an ancient tradition. Beagles for example often hunt rabbit on their own . I heard of a lady who got the dog a shock colar cuz it keeps chaseing and killing rabbits in her yard . thats just cruel ! the beagle is specificaly for rabbit hunting , its so small so it can chase into the brush . I am basicaly against any law thats going to harm the relationship of working dogs and their owner and for any laws that will help protect it . there is a law right now basicaly against breading muts which is bad for genetics and will mean many great hunting dogs won't be able to pass on their genes ....And dont' one of you guys go into some rave about puppy mills . Hunting dog kennels generaly treat their dogs really good and have them out in the field training etc . Its the ones that are going to pet shops that are the source of the puppy mills which are terrible.

                                              Not everyone who hunts is a right wing jerkoff . Did i mention the NRA is a bunch of whacko gun nuts ? I'm for MUCH harsher gun control maybe even the ban of handguns . eventualy i'd like to do all my hunting with a bow when i get more time and money. now then why is it vegetarians can't even entertain other ideas without going into some wild rage ? do you guys light laboratories on fire and burn down mcmasnions too ?
                                              • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                                Sat, March 22, 2008 - 12:53 PM
                                                So, Dave is in favor of killing cougars because it’s wrong to keep hounds from enjoying themselves?
                                                • Unsu...
                                                   

                                                  Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                                  Sun, March 23, 2008 - 9:24 PM
                                                  Matt.

                                                  I understand that we wish to be open minded and we wish to be respectful. But at one point do we fight back?

                                                  Also when I point out his stupidity, that is not an insult, because I then explain exactly WHY he is stupid, so it is a fact (or a point of view) but not an insult.

                                                  Also when I say that he is a sociopath that is not an insult either. It is a description of who he is.

                                                  Especially since this is an animal rights tribe, !!!RIGHTS!!! and Dave is trying to make arguments to justify the KILLING of animals, he is a sociopath, and everything that he says goes BY DEFINITION against animal rights.

                                                  And I think that as vegans and animal rights activists we need to be able to put our foot down somewhere. I doubt a KKK member would be well received in an anti-racism tribe, nor a convicted rapist in a feminist tribe, so why are we so concerned with how we treat Dave who is promoting the killing of animals? in an ANIMAL RIGHTS TRIBE!!

                                                  It is because of this push-over mentality that meat-eaters have little if any respect for animal rights activists. And in fact, also because of this attittude that they do not fully comprehend the scope and the severity of the situation and why animal rights are important.

                                                  In fact Dave doesn't even understand animal rights, and no one here is attempting to make him understand that

                                                  WHATEVER THE JUSTIFICATION, the killing of a right-bearer is a violation of that right-bearer's rights..And considering that we see animals as right-bearers (ie: they have the BASIC right to live) that to kill them WHATEVER THE REASON violates this right.

                                                  Of course Dave is entitled to disagree. but not here.

                                                  NOT HERE.

                                                  Actually do you know where else he can disagree? pretty much every fucking where else in the whole goddamn world...and so why is he here disagreeing with us, when the WHOLE WORLD apart from us already agrees with him? because he is a coward and a bully.

                                                  (as well as a sociopath)

                                                  And I ALWAYS stand up to bullies. In fact that is the whole point of animal rights, in a way.

                                                  And now because he is being nurtured in the belief that he is entitled to his opinion even here, he posts long bullcrap anti-animal rights messages on an animal rights tribe.

                                                  DEO YOU SEE MATT? Now instead of animal rigths messages on this animnal rights tribe, we have here: pro-hunting anti-vegetarian and anti-antimal rights messages.

                                                  And now this post which was initially about helping cougars (a genuine animal rights action) is now about giving Dave the forum to spread his crap about how veganism is more damaging to the environment than meat-eating and how hunters are good kind people.

                                                  How does that help the cougars??

                                                  And please don't give me the freedom of speech argument, his bullcrap opinion is EVERYONE ELSE'S opinion, and it is already everywhere, HERE on an animal rights tribe people come to read the animal rights position not Dave's ignorant sociopathic ramblings.

                                                  and I am the one who is seen asOVERREACTING!!! He is advocating killing and then tell me NOT to overeact!!!???

                                                  And in fact, the only reason why Dave's crap is even being tolerated is speciesist. If this where about human rights, children rights for example, and a pedophile which to post his "opinion" he would not be given any chance to voice this opinion.

                                                  This guy is advocating KILLING animals on an animal rights tribe, and we are allowing him to post his crap???

                                                  again, Have a nice day where the HELL are you???? WHERE IS OUR MODERATOR???

                                                  DELETE these posts (including mine) and let's make this tribe about promoting animal rights again, about saving Cougars and NOT about defending hunters.

                                                  How does humouring this moron in ANY WAY help animal rights?

                                                  (and for those whishing to respond, as a "turn your tongue in your mouth ten times before responding" exercise, I will offer this: While we animal rights activists argue within ourselves about the most polite way and most posotive ways to approach criminals against animal rights, and the most inclusive way to promote veganism and animal rights, our enemies are NOT considering our feelings or the feelings of the animals at all. ...and when we allow this shit to go on, we are NOT helping our movement.

                                                  the Rumsfelds, Bush and Monsanto, and Tyson Foods of this world are just forging ahead without any thoughts of what we feel, and when we spend too much time entertaining these idiots we play right into their hands, because they don't want us to forge ahead, they want us to sit around arguing amongst each other about how effective we are.)

                                                  We cannot compromise our morality or ethics just for the sake of being seen as "nicer".

                                                  *** and by the way, of course his arguments are stupid and not well-constructed, but it doesn't matter, even if they were brilliant arguments, Goebel's made brilliant arguments about racial cleansing, but it still would not be welcome on an anti-racism tribe...so the issue is not to mock Dave's arguments or even to discuss them, because to do so gives them validity...the issue is that to kill an animal goes against that animal's rihgts, so NO ARGUMENT justifying the killing of an animal is EVER right. ***
                                                  • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                                    Sun, March 23, 2008 - 9:54 PM
                                                    I have no problem with Antoine or any of his posts. He's being true to himself and his beliefs, very strong beliefs, and Goddamnit he isn't just talking the talk. He walks the walk.

                                                    People will change when something resonates with them. How can limiting the tenor and number of messages they get increase the chances them hearing the one that gets through to them?

                                                    It took the "Meat is Murder" guy down at the Venice Boardwalk, a grisly episode of "The Practice," and listening to PETA in quick succession to get through to me. However, once the connection was made, it was made. If I'd only heard from polite vegans, I'd still be eating meat. Same goes for the messages of animals rights.
                                              • Re: My response to Dave

                                                Sun, March 23, 2008 - 10:58 PM
                                                You say you are “very leftwing,” yet a couple posts ago you spouted some silly nonsense (I’m sorry, I meant scientifically inaccurate statements) about a vegetarian diet being bad for the environment. You didn’t get that from BBC or NPR. To your credit, you later admitted that, “farming meat is horrible for the environment.”

                                                Many of us live in wooden houses. Some of our houses are ten times as big as those of others. “Living in a cave” is not the only alternative. And some of our diets cause ten times the environmental damage as those of others. Changing lifestyles and consumption patterns could do a lot of good. The choice isn’t mass murder to reduce the human population or do nothing. That’s a false forced choice.

                                                You assert that “men should consume 40 grams of protein worth of meat about 3 times a week.” Why should they? Based on what?

                                                “I think everyone could have some meat in their diet if they didn't eat it 3 times a day 7 days a week.” Obviously decreasing the amount of meat eaten in the U.S. would benefit us all and strengthen our nation. If the rights of domesticated animals were respected during their lives, meat, eggs, and dairy would become more expensive and eaten only for special occasions or by the wealthy.

                                                Not everyone who believes in animal rights is trying to prevent any animal from being killed at any time. Most of us are trying to save as many species as possible, lessen abusive treatment of domestic animals, and reduce the number of animals killed, especially of the more intelligent species.

                                                Then you wrote “the only way for any of you to meet your ideals.. in regards to food... You all have to live in lush rainforest and gather only.” This is not accurate. Our ideals generally involve moving toward organic, sustainable agriculture, not tearing apart the rainforest. Anyways, the rainforest is a difficult place for humans to find food. Most of the production occurs a hundred feet above the floor.

                                                Then you advocate killing 99.6% of humanity so that the lucky survivors “can all have giant suv's and eat whatever we want.” If that happens, Dave, don’t get your hopes up. You won’t be the 1 out of 240 who makes the cut.
                                          • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                            Mon, March 24, 2008 - 11:50 AM
                                            I find this statistic a little hard to believe... I would buy 100, maybe even 1,000, but 10,000? That seems pretty insane... I can't find the statistic online anywhere, can you? I'd love for it to be true, because it would be a great one to toss out at dinner parties :P
                                            • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                              Mon, March 24, 2008 - 2:08 PM
                                              I never said we should kill people . we should have less children in the first place.
                                              • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                                Mon, March 24, 2008 - 2:18 PM
                                                in order to live in the rain forest and not destroy it you have to have a small population that is always moving which lets the land recover . A nomadic lifestyle. Permanant villages mean clearing land for huts and farming all of which is a total enviromental disaster .
                                                • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                                  Mon, March 24, 2008 - 2:28 PM
                                                  This isn't a right-wing-bush-and-jesus-freak-hating tribe, Dave. Stating your political views does not make your arguments any more valid or in line with an animal rights tribe. Right-wing poilitcal views and animal rights beliefs are not mutually exclusive. Oh, and HUNTERS SUCK POINTING YOUR FINGER AT US FOR FARMING AND EATING VEGETABLES DOES NOT ABSOLVE YOU OF YOUR GUILT IN THIS LIFE OR THE NEXT. Also, it takes 10000 pounds of grain to raise a 1000 pound cow. Doesn't take that much to raise a 120 pound vegan. Think about that when you're stuffing your face with flesh three times a week, you deluded death monger.
                                            • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                              Mon, March 24, 2008 - 10:42 PM
                                              "I find this statistic a little hard to believe... "

                                              I know what you mean, Matt, but if you take into account the water it takes to grow the grain, and for the cow to drink, the cow to be hosed down with, the truck to be washed with, the concrete floors of the milking stalls to be hosed down with,... you can see how it could add up fast.

                                              I'll look for the number though and let you know if I find it.
                                              • Re: Antoine's response to Dave

                                                Tue, March 25, 2008 - 4:17 PM
                                                Matt -www.sciencefriday.com/program...00803211
                                                The link to the Science Friday archives, 3/21/08 show on World Water Day.
                                                "

                                                From MooMilk.com FAQ:
                                                To make a gallon of milk, a cow needs to drink how much water?

                                                To make 9 gallons of milk a day, a cow must drink 18 gallons of fresh, clean water (2 gallons of water for every gallon of milk).
                                                www.moomilk.com/faq.htm#To%20make

                                                Also according to that site, "It takes 12 pounds of milk to make 1 gallon of ice cream. It takes 10 pounds of milk to make 1 pound of cheese. (1 quart of milk weighs 2.15 pounds)."

                                                So, 9 gallons a day. According to the site, cows from California produce more on average than any other cows in the nation, 8 gallons a day. How much water to grow the grain, or alfalfa? The cow is impregnated on the day after her first birthday, she is in gestation for nine months, the calf is taken from her the day it's born and at about 21 months, that's the beining of being taken for human consumption. The average dairy cow is tqken to slaughter at the age of four or five. So, the average cow would produce milk for three years or 3/4 of her life, then they start again with a new calf.

Recent topics in "Animal Rights"