Coyote Trolling??
- Thread starter C01
- Start date
- Status
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I've had to deal with people who have opinions like leadcounsel's for several decades. Assuming from his "handle" that he's an attorney, I think the following applies:
He'd take pride in defending his clients' interests. Whether preparing a legal brief or a will, or representing his client in court, he'd work hard to do a good job. He'd take pride in work well done. He also knows that if he doesn't have clients he'd get kicked out of his office for not paying the rent, or lose his home for not making the payments.
A farmer or rancher is in the identical position: He, his family and his stock or crops are the clients. His efforts support them so he can meet his financial obligations. He deals with pests--be they locusts or coyotes or prairie dogs or rabbits--as part of protecting his clients' interests. To have a guest hunter deal with overabundance of certain species of pestiferous wildlife relieves the farmer/rancher of work which could well interfere with remunerative efforts. If said hunter will pay for the privilege of trespass, the farmer/rancher is ahead of the game of "Pay your bills".
I've never understood why city people find that so difficult to comprehend. "If you eat food, you're involved in agriculture."
Art
He'd take pride in defending his clients' interests. Whether preparing a legal brief or a will, or representing his client in court, he'd work hard to do a good job. He'd take pride in work well done. He also knows that if he doesn't have clients he'd get kicked out of his office for not paying the rent, or lose his home for not making the payments.
A farmer or rancher is in the identical position: He, his family and his stock or crops are the clients. His efforts support them so he can meet his financial obligations. He deals with pests--be they locusts or coyotes or prairie dogs or rabbits--as part of protecting his clients' interests. To have a guest hunter deal with overabundance of certain species of pestiferous wildlife relieves the farmer/rancher of work which could well interfere with remunerative efforts. If said hunter will pay for the privilege of trespass, the farmer/rancher is ahead of the game of "Pay your bills".
I've never understood why city people find that so difficult to comprehend. "If you eat food, you're involved in agriculture."
Art
leadcounsel
Moderator
MEDDAC19:
Someone with such all encompassing knowledge SHOULD know that indigenous people in N. America are technically called NATIVE AMERICANS and not INDIANS... and I suspect that they left slightly smaller of a permanent footprint than white man has with our thirst for destruction.
Someone with such all encompassing knowledge SHOULD know that indigenous people in N. America are technically called NATIVE AMERICANS and not INDIANS... and I suspect that they left slightly smaller of a permanent footprint than white man has with our thirst for destruction.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
From your keyboard to God's Ear. Someone should let the various Indian Nations know of this political faux pas, though. They portray themselves in such a degrading manner by using the word "Indian".
http://oneida-nation.net/
http://www.sni.org/
http://www.fsin.com/
http://www.nativeamericans.com/IndianNations.htm
http://indiannations.visitmt.com/
I take personal umbrage at this description. "White Man" is a derogatory term which directors forced Native Americans to utter in cowboy flicks. I am NOT a White Man....I am a Caucasion. [Double
]Rich
Superhornet
New member
LC-----In 1492 they were called Indians......when PC become vogue with the liberals, lawyers and ACLU they were called Native Americans.
You're absolutely out of hand, leadcounsel. You have such disdain towards your own species. Is there a psychological term for this? Anyone?
In the other threads with similar topic, your contempt for your own species jumps out like a neon sign. It's very noticeable even behind drivel such as "thirst for destruction" and other emotionally charged terms.
You've mentioned that varmint hunters consist of many who do it for sheer pleasure of the kill, or because they have low self-esteem... you gave a few other ridiculous reasons.
Same/similar arguments are made against gun owners.
Think about your arguments and broad generalizations of varmint hunters. Then think about how you disagree with people who make the same broad generalizations about gun owners. You disgree with broad generalizations about gun owners because you know they are false, based on emotion, and not applicable in reality.
Right now, you are talking to bunch of "gun nuts" as if you are "Sarah Brady". That's how you sound. Give it some thought.
I have enough all encompassing knowledge to know that PC speech is just silly, not technically correct. I guess if you want to be technically correct they would be Only Native Because They Got Here Before White Men but are Really Asian Expatriot Americans. There are still places that exhibit the affects the indians had on this land and they did it while still a primitive culture. Must have struck a nerve for the personal attack.
Note: The indians inhabited less than, what, maybe 5% of the North American continent. Kind of an apples to oranges arguement.
Note: The indians inhabited less than, what, maybe 5% of the North American continent. Kind of an apples to oranges arguement.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Folks-
This directed at a post I just deleted:
LeadCounsel's opinion may be of little value to some, but personal attacks are not tolerated at TFL. IOW, attack the argument if you wish. Attack the Man and the fight becomes mine....this goes for both sides.
Rich
This directed at a post I just deleted:
LeadCounsel's opinion may be of little value to some, but personal attacks are not tolerated at TFL. IOW, attack the argument if you wish. Attack the Man and the fight becomes mine....this goes for both sides.
Rich
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
"...and I suspect that they left slightly smaller of a permanent footprint than white man has with our thirst for destruction."
leadcounsel, will you be the one to select the 297 million or thereabouts whom you would kill in order to bring the US population back, roughly, to a circa-1500 AD level? Thus reducing that "footprint"?
Immigrants from every country in the world live here, making those footprints. AmerInds as well as Indians from India--or indigenous people from the Americas who are also referred to as Indians. (In Mexico, the Mexican appellation is "Indios".) They all live in houses, mobile homes and travel trailers. They all eat food. They all travel on paved highways as well as dirt roads. But you'll find the same style in every developed country, and it's on the rise in the developing countries.
Some activities are common throughout the history of Homo Sap. In what's now the U.S., there was inter-tribal warfare, thievery and slavery. The archaeologists claim that the extinction of certain species was due to the hunting processes of indigenous people.
That a limited number of primitive people made a smaller footprint upon the landscape than European settlers and their offspring is beyond question. However, that's absolutely irrelevant to the year 2006. You cannot dance back the buffalo.
leadcounsel, you have made numerous statements of opinion without any substantiation. You do not answer questions. Your responses are merely more of the same pattern of rhetoric. That fits in with the definition of trollish behavior, and is not polite Internet discourse. I strongly urge you to change your ways in this regard.
Art
leadcounsel, will you be the one to select the 297 million or thereabouts whom you would kill in order to bring the US population back, roughly, to a circa-1500 AD level? Thus reducing that "footprint"?
Immigrants from every country in the world live here, making those footprints. AmerInds as well as Indians from India--or indigenous people from the Americas who are also referred to as Indians. (In Mexico, the Mexican appellation is "Indios".) They all live in houses, mobile homes and travel trailers. They all eat food. They all travel on paved highways as well as dirt roads. But you'll find the same style in every developed country, and it's on the rise in the developing countries.
Some activities are common throughout the history of Homo Sap. In what's now the U.S., there was inter-tribal warfare, thievery and slavery. The archaeologists claim that the extinction of certain species was due to the hunting processes of indigenous people.
That a limited number of primitive people made a smaller footprint upon the landscape than European settlers and their offspring is beyond question. However, that's absolutely irrelevant to the year 2006. You cannot dance back the buffalo.
leadcounsel, you have made numerous statements of opinion without any substantiation. You do not answer questions. Your responses are merely more of the same pattern of rhetoric. That fits in with the definition of trollish behavior, and is not polite Internet discourse. I strongly urge you to change your ways in this regard.
Art
jhgreasemonkey
New member
I believe the phycological term would be "self hater" for someone who does this. I dont think its cool to degrade race. Men of all races have been responsible for destruction and sensless killing in america. Man. Not just the white man. A person would be labeled a racist if he were to make that statement about any other race so why not the white race as well? And on the topic of sensless killing and destruction if you have ever lived on a farm you can understand the need to eliminate coyotees, etc. It is not sensless. It is necesity.
ON topic if you will --- coyote attacks are fairly common here in AZ --- I treat maybe 1 every 6 weeks or so as an emergency vet and see maybe 1 a month or more come through the clinic --- offten are smaller dogs that are less capible of self defense, often being walked on those 30 foot retratable lead things through the washes or more wild parts of town or simply left unattended outside, have seen cattle dog sized dog attacked as well, never anything lab / German Shep sized or larger though I will not say it can't happen, form working with yotes I suspect they have the sense to only pick fights they think they can win, the coyote attack wounds are usually extensive and severe these guys are hunting for food and or defending their turf / home / family, few dog on dog attacks are quite so severe in their wound patterns.
I'm not gona touch the rest of this thread,
I'm not gona touch the rest of this thread,
For a "bunch of ignorant rednecks" and "ruthless killers", I think the folks on this forum have shown remarkable restraint. I have been very active on linux forums for many years. I can guarantee you that the dreaded "T" word would have been mentioned much earlier and in a much more hostile manner than has been the case here. It must be true, an armed society is a REALLY polite society.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Amen to that, and thanks to most for that restraint.
Rich
Superhornet
New member
I would suspect there are many "Rednecks" on this forum. If the term Redneck means from a specific geographical location then I am guilty. I am a southerner, harvest only what I am going to eat, and do not shoot anything that I can't consume..............or...........that mother nature needs a little help with in "Balancing Nature". Once in a while she does call on me to help keep a few coyotes and plains pups in check. Since she has always provided for me I always help her out. That great movie produced many years ago, "Bambi", started an anthropomorphic movement which continues today and is a cause for much misunderstanding on how the real world operates.. There are only two elements in this world, and it applies to humans as well as animals........there is prey and there are those who prey on prey. I choose not to be prey...
Unless you hang with the militant AIM crowd, none of the indians I know refer to themselves as Native Americans.
I've lived in bush Alaska for 13 years. My gf is a Koyukon Athabascan Indian and refers to herself as such.
Ocassionally she'll use the term "Alaska Native" when speaking of indigenous Alaskans in general.
But be rest assured, when outsiders start lumping indians and eskimos and Aleuts in the same bunch they'll be quickly corrected and she'll distance herself by asserting her indian heritage....not native.
leadcounsel
Moderator
For the record, I never called anyone an "ignorant redneck." That's your own inference.
As far as putting me in the same camp as Sarah Brady, little could offend ME more. I fully believe in our inalienable right to keep and bear arms of military grade, without restriction. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You and I are allied in this cause, let's not forget that important fact. However, can someone point to the phrase that discusses the wholesale slaugter of "varmints"? Or is that the "security of a free state?" Maybe it's "national security" as everything else seems to be these days...
Further, when you look at a coyote, fish, shark, wolf, prarie dog, apes, chimps, or rabbits what you see as an annoyance or varmint I see as a wonder of nature; a beautiful creature that has a complex neuroligical and respiratory system that is a being capable of living, breathing, eating, digesting, simple thought, instinct, complex muscle and motor movements, and feeling (particularly pain). The fact that you are capable of higher thought doesn't give you the ethical or moral right to terminate that life because it annoys you; instead it gives you the ethical and moral duty to figure out how to coexist with that creature as best you can. It cannot think coherently or change its instinct to NOT kill your sheep or eat your plants. Therefore, it is OUR duty to figure out how to shift its behavior without resorting to slaughtering it.
Point taken that "white man" is not soley responsible for the destruction that Man in general is responsible for. It's simply that as Man develops more, he doesn't seem to know when to call it quits and stop developing. When is too much nuclear waste, mercury, cianide, styrofoam, plastic and other permanent garbage enough?
As far as "hating" Man, that can't be farther from the truth. I think "Man" is an amazing species and one I am frequently proud to be a part of. I am proud of our collective and individual accomplishments, capacity for intelligent and logical though, capacity for compassion (which no other creature possesses), generosity, and a host of other good qualities. I don't see the incompassionate destruction of nature, which MAN has done since the dawn of time (not just in the current times) as a positive quality.
The qualities I'm NOT proud of include lack of compassion for the survivial of individual or collective species of living, breathing, feeling animals which have their own survival instincts, particulary when the life of an animal could be saved but for the greed, profit, etc that could be curbed if MAN wasn't so wasteful with "our" -- which is debatable -- resources.
Here's a for instance as to how our waste leads to unnecessary environmental destruction as a small daily reminder of our waste. Every day I take handfuls of paper garbage from my mailbox, which I've requested to have deliver stopped. That garbage was created by cutting down fantastic trees in the Pacific Northwest (yes, I know there are new trees planted, but that landscape where they have cut the trees down is an eyesore). For that daily handful of garbage, countless animals which made their habitat in htat forest were needlessly killed. The chemicals we pour into the wood pulp to make bleached paper ultimately end up in the lakes, rivers, and oceans suffocating and poisoning our sealife. And guess what, most of that garbage is not recycleable so ends up in a landfill, wasting land (which forces us to push more animals from their habitat.
Another example of Mans wasteful attitude. Here in Denver and surrounding cities Man has recently passed "anti-pitbull" legislation. Our leaders have determined, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary (indicating that nationwide attacks by this breed are nor statistically significant nor larger than many other breeds, and that any dog can be trained to fight and be vicious, and that it's the owners' fault and not the dogs' fault -- sound familiar to the gun control debate?), that any dog that looks like a pit bull (there are several "pit bull" breeds) is effectively given a death sentence with few pracital options. Doesn't matter the dogs age (pups and 15 year old dogs included), its individual assessment for behavior, etc. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dogs were euthanized.... Why? Thank the media for making a few pit bull attacks headline news and thank the legislature for being ignorant, wasteful, and short sighted.
As a thinking, emoting, rational being, I cannot help feeling the individual PAIN that animals must endure for our collective and independent short sighted, ignorant, foolish decisions which have driven animals such as great white sharks, whales, wolves, polar bears, apes, chimps, and hundreds of species into extinction or near extinction.
As far as putting me in the same camp as Sarah Brady, little could offend ME more. I fully believe in our inalienable right to keep and bear arms of military grade, without restriction. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You and I are allied in this cause, let's not forget that important fact. However, can someone point to the phrase that discusses the wholesale slaugter of "varmints"? Or is that the "security of a free state?" Maybe it's "national security" as everything else seems to be these days...
Further, when you look at a coyote, fish, shark, wolf, prarie dog, apes, chimps, or rabbits what you see as an annoyance or varmint I see as a wonder of nature; a beautiful creature that has a complex neuroligical and respiratory system that is a being capable of living, breathing, eating, digesting, simple thought, instinct, complex muscle and motor movements, and feeling (particularly pain). The fact that you are capable of higher thought doesn't give you the ethical or moral right to terminate that life because it annoys you; instead it gives you the ethical and moral duty to figure out how to coexist with that creature as best you can. It cannot think coherently or change its instinct to NOT kill your sheep or eat your plants. Therefore, it is OUR duty to figure out how to shift its behavior without resorting to slaughtering it.
Point taken that "white man" is not soley responsible for the destruction that Man in general is responsible for. It's simply that as Man develops more, he doesn't seem to know when to call it quits and stop developing. When is too much nuclear waste, mercury, cianide, styrofoam, plastic and other permanent garbage enough?
As far as "hating" Man, that can't be farther from the truth. I think "Man" is an amazing species and one I am frequently proud to be a part of. I am proud of our collective and individual accomplishments, capacity for intelligent and logical though, capacity for compassion (which no other creature possesses), generosity, and a host of other good qualities. I don't see the incompassionate destruction of nature, which MAN has done since the dawn of time (not just in the current times) as a positive quality.
The qualities I'm NOT proud of include lack of compassion for the survivial of individual or collective species of living, breathing, feeling animals which have their own survival instincts, particulary when the life of an animal could be saved but for the greed, profit, etc that could be curbed if MAN wasn't so wasteful with "our" -- which is debatable -- resources.
Here's a for instance as to how our waste leads to unnecessary environmental destruction as a small daily reminder of our waste. Every day I take handfuls of paper garbage from my mailbox, which I've requested to have deliver stopped. That garbage was created by cutting down fantastic trees in the Pacific Northwest (yes, I know there are new trees planted, but that landscape where they have cut the trees down is an eyesore). For that daily handful of garbage, countless animals which made their habitat in htat forest were needlessly killed. The chemicals we pour into the wood pulp to make bleached paper ultimately end up in the lakes, rivers, and oceans suffocating and poisoning our sealife. And guess what, most of that garbage is not recycleable so ends up in a landfill, wasting land (which forces us to push more animals from their habitat.
Another example of Mans wasteful attitude. Here in Denver and surrounding cities Man has recently passed "anti-pitbull" legislation. Our leaders have determined, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary (indicating that nationwide attacks by this breed are nor statistically significant nor larger than many other breeds, and that any dog can be trained to fight and be vicious, and that it's the owners' fault and not the dogs' fault -- sound familiar to the gun control debate?), that any dog that looks like a pit bull (there are several "pit bull" breeds) is effectively given a death sentence with few pracital options. Doesn't matter the dogs age (pups and 15 year old dogs included), its individual assessment for behavior, etc. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dogs were euthanized.... Why? Thank the media for making a few pit bull attacks headline news and thank the legislature for being ignorant, wasteful, and short sighted.
As a thinking, emoting, rational being, I cannot help feeling the individual PAIN that animals must endure for our collective and independent short sighted, ignorant, foolish decisions which have driven animals such as great white sharks, whales, wolves, polar bears, apes, chimps, and hundreds of species into extinction or near extinction.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
"As a thinking, emoting, rational being, I cannot help feeling the individual PAIN that animals must endure for our collective and independent short sighted, ignorant, foolish decisions which have driven animals such as great white sharks, whales, wolves, polar bears, apes, chimps, and hundreds of species into extinction or near extinction."
That's a blast a homo sap in general. It does not apply to all people. It danged sure doesn't apply to those of us who frequent this website. Or over at THR, for that matter. IOW, you've been generalizing against events of which none of us are--or was--a part.
FWIW, I was an original proponent of the Endangered Species Act. leadcounsel, where were you in the 1960s?
Coyotes are a known pest. They attack small children on infrequent occasions. They attack domestic pets. They attack domestic livestock. They don't restrict themselves to rabbits, mice and birds, even though those are the most common elements in their diet.
The issue is not the elimination of coyotes as a species. It is control of the numbers in particular locations in order to reduce depredations upon people's interests.
I note that the coyote has expanded his territory into all the lower 48 states, which is more than double his known habitat area of the 1700s/1800s when he was first called the "prairie wolf" and first seen in the western edges of the then-U.S. Essentially, west of the Mississippi River.
Art
That's a blast a homo sap in general. It does not apply to all people. It danged sure doesn't apply to those of us who frequent this website. Or over at THR, for that matter. IOW, you've been generalizing against events of which none of us are--or was--a part.
FWIW, I was an original proponent of the Endangered Species Act. leadcounsel, where were you in the 1960s?
Coyotes are a known pest. They attack small children on infrequent occasions. They attack domestic pets. They attack domestic livestock. They don't restrict themselves to rabbits, mice and birds, even though those are the most common elements in their diet.
The issue is not the elimination of coyotes as a species. It is control of the numbers in particular locations in order to reduce depredations upon people's interests.
I note that the coyote has expanded his territory into all the lower 48 states, which is more than double his known habitat area of the 1700s/1800s when he was first called the "prairie wolf" and first seen in the western edges of the then-U.S. Essentially, west of the Mississippi River.
Art
Superhornet
New member
LC---begging to differ with you but, on the Varmit hunting or the Easter Bunny thread you did infer, REDNECKS. A good lawyer should always know what he has written or said.....IMHO
leadcounsel
Moderator
Art -- the coyote has spread because we've pushed it to migrate or introduced it into other areas. Hardly the fault of the coyote, or the one that's born in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sure, the "varmint" hunters here may have never directly killed a chimp or a shark, but it's the wasteful attitude that I'm against...
And in the 60's I wasn't even an itch in my daddy's pants yet
And in the 60's I wasn't even an itch in my daddy's pants yet
You know something leadcounsel, Some of us get really tired of your repetitive rhetoric. If you don't like hunting then stay the hell out of the hunting area. Many of us find you to be a royal pain in the A## when you come marching into a discussion and muck it up with your disruption. I don't like it, most of them don't like it, SO FREAKING STOP IT!!
What if that was your dog about to be attacked, would you shoot the coyote. If you would then you would be a Hypocrite because by the very logic you apply here the coyote is just acting within its own nature and you dog is in his environment and therefore PREY!!. Likewise with some child or hiker who, including YOUR buddies and YOUR children, who could not defend themselves. Can't hunt down the offending animal for acting within its nature, now can you?
What if that was your dog about to be attacked, would you shoot the coyote. If you would then you would be a Hypocrite because by the very logic you apply here the coyote is just acting within its own nature and you dog is in his environment and therefore PREY!!. Likewise with some child or hiker who, including YOUR buddies and YOUR children, who could not defend themselves. Can't hunt down the offending animal for acting within its nature, now can you?
- Status