wolves, we have enough.....

EdP

WKR
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,407
Location
Southwest Va
Once again, the typical RS bull excrement comes out. Attack anyone that disagrees with your royal highness.

You complain about mob rule yet you want to enforce your personal will and beliefs on the very masses that you so openly loathe. It is not surprising to see yet another forum member who is a despot at heart.

And here we have more of the same drivel from the same source. I would like to hear the source's examples of instances when rural folk have imposed something that negatively affected city dwellers quality of life but had no impact on the rural folk.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
2,956
And here we have more of the same drivel from the same source. I would like to hear the source's examples of instances when rural folk have imposed something that negatively affected city dwellers quality of life but had no impact on the rural folk.

Folks tend to not like to have others' beliefs rammed down their throats yet far too often are guilty of doing the very thing that they are bitching about. QuackAttack didn't like that the city dwellers "forced" their belief down his throat yet he personally wants to force his belief down their throats.

In one simple statement QuackAttack went nuclear on "city dwellers"and claimed they have committed an immoral act and should be treated with disdain. It is a faulty premise on his part to assume that just because someone is a city dweller that they automatically support the re-introduction of predators; 80% of the US population is technically a "city dweller" and will encompass the bulk of hunters and RS forum members.

The numbers, at least in CO, do not support his call to treat city dwellers with disdain. CO Prop 114 passed by a measly 56,986 votes. If QuackAttack and the others were to work the system, rather than sitting on their butts or attacking others, then this and other outcomes likely would be more palatable to them.
 

z987k

WKR
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
1,850
Location
AK
Someone just needs to do something similar as to what the German and Dutch farmers are doing.

Bring what people are voting for to their actual doorstep. Someone should start live trapping some wolves and griz and releasing them in the neighborhoods of the capitols of where they're voting for this. Let them have what they want. Wolves generally can urbanize.
See how fast they want to keep the wolves around when half the dogs and cats are dead in a year and eventually they start going after kids at school bus stops and the elderly out for walks.
 

EdP

WKR
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,407
Location
Southwest Va
QuackAttack didn't like that the city dwellers "forced" their belief down his throat yet he personally wants to force his belief down their throats.
QA made no mention of forcing anything on city dwellers.

It is a faulty premise on his part to assume that just because someone is a city dweller that they automatically support the re-introduction of predators; 80% of the US population is technically a "city dweller" and will encompass the bulk of hunters and RS forum members.

There is no faulty premise. It was city dwellers that supported the reintroduction of predators, not rural folks. Not every single city dweller supported reintroduction and I don't interpret his words to say that, but rather that it WAS city dwellers imposing on rural folks something rural folks don't want. More to the point, what was imposed by city dwellers is a challenge for rural folks that city dwellers don't have to endure and they did it without consideration of the impact on the lives of others.

If QuackAttack and the others were to work the system, rather than sitting on their butts or attacking others, ...
I don't believe you have any personal knowledge of QA's actions on which to base such a statement. As you pointed out, the population of cities is overwhelmingly greater than that of rural areas, so it is the actions of those in the cities that resulted in reintroduction of predators and not inaction by those who opposed it.
 

KHNC

WKR
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,631
Location
NC
Those same ancestors eradicated bison. Not rooting for wolves but I don’t see that as a legitimate argument.
I think they eradicated bison so the indians would have to move out or die. Wolves were just a virus to cattle that needed to be cleaned up.
 

EdP

WKR
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,407
Location
Southwest Va
I think they eradicated bison so the indians would have to move out or die.
It is absolutely true that the US government actively encouraged the indiscriminate killing of the buffalo with the intent of starving the native tribes into submission. However, there were too many buffalo for it to be successful, and the actual near extinction occurred in too short a time frame for killing by humans to have caused it. Here is an article on the subject, one not particularly popular with the anti-hunting crowd.

 

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,903
Folks tend to not like to have others' beliefs rammed down their throats yet far too often are guilty of doing the very thing that they are bitching about. QuackAttack didn't like that the city dwellers "forced" their belief down his throat yet he personally wants to force his belief down their throats.

In one simple statement QuackAttack went nuclear on "city dwellers"and claimed they have committed an immoral act and should be treated with disdain. It is a faulty premise on his part to assume that just because someone is a city dweller that they automatically support the re-introduction of predators; 80% of the US population is technically a "city dweller" and will encompass the bulk of hunters and RS forum members.

The numbers, at least in CO, do not support his call to treat city dwellers with disdain. CO Prop 114 passed by a measly 56,986 votes. If QuackAttack and the others were to work the system, rather than sitting on their butts or attacking others, then this and other outcomes likely would be more palatable to them.
Quick question, how do those that live in rural areas have the power to dictate what happens in cities? From my understanding most of what happens within cities comes purely from how those that live in cities voted in local elections. Are you saying rural areas are the majority rule in the country and making people that live in cities do what rural people want?
 
  • Like
Reactions: EdP

Rthur

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
239
It is absolutely true that the US government actively encouraged the indiscriminate killing of the buffalo with the intent of starving the native tribes into submission. However, there were too many buffalo for it to be successful, and the actual near extinction occurred in too short a time frame for killing by humans to have caused it. Here is an article on the subject, one not particularly popular with the anti-hunting crowd.

Another interesting part:


R
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2019
Messages
1,071
Those same ancestors eradicated bison. Not rooting for wolves but I don’t see that as a legitimate argument.
The eradication of bison was for a completely different reason. I feel that the bison argument is not applicable here. Had you said grizzlies, I’d agree.
 

QuackAttack

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jan 3, 2022
Messages
226
Once again, the typical RS bull excrement comes out. Attack anyone that disagrees with your royal highness.

You complain about mob rule yet you want to enforce your personal will and beliefs on the very masses that you so openly loathe. It is not surprising to see yet another forum member who is a despot at heart.

We can put a grizzly or few wolves in your living room and you can tell they you come in peace so they will just cuddle up and be friendly. Just say it in Arapaho…not evil white man language.

That’s about how stupid your ideas are. A Denver resident would probably believe it. They believed wolves were a good idea…
 

JjamesIII

WKR
Joined
Jan 3, 2022
Messages
401
Location
Ohio
Here in Mn. canoe country they continue to be loosing their fear of man, no surprise as we've got no season on them.
This year during deer hunting season I saw more wolves then deer and news like this just keeps getting more common.

Thank a dem from the city
 

Walmart Greeter

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Apr 24, 2023
Messages
111
The eradication of bison was for a completely different reason. I feel that the bison argument is not applicable here. Had you said grizzlies, I’d agree.
It absolutely applies. The eradication of bison destroys any credibility of our ancestors as conservationists so deferring to their “expertise” in any matters regarding wildlife management is foolish
 

Squincher

WKR
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
634
Location
Midwest
It absolutely applies. The eradication of bison destroys any credibility of our ancestors as conservationists so deferring to their “expertise” in any matters regarding wildlife management is foolish

What is foolish is looking at history through a woke lens so it can be disregarded out of hand. You should consider the possibility you aren't smarter than those who came before.
 

Walmart Greeter

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Apr 24, 2023
Messages
111
What is foolish is looking at history through a woke lens so it can be disregarded out of hand. You should consider the possibility you aren't smarter than those who came before.
It’s called being objective. You blindly spit rhetoric like “woke” and assume that anyone who has an opinion that doesn’t align with yours must be some liberal snowflake obama lover. Whether it was over hunting, a virus introduced by cattle, or a combination of those and other factors, it is clear that white settlers destroyed a thriving environment. The bison did fine with the wolves so why don’t the elk? Oh yeah it’s because they were driven from their native range in the lower plains up into the mountains where wolves have the strategic advantage. Going back to my main point, using the argument that our ancestors killed off wolves for a reason will get destroyed in any discussion that involves people outside of this group. If you want to convince non hunters that wolves are bad and you use that argument you will not get good results.
 

Squincher

WKR
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
634
Location
Midwest
It’s called being objective. You blindly spit rhetoric like “woke” and assume that anyone who has an opinion that doesn’t align with yours must be some liberal snowflake obama lover. Whether it was over hunting, a virus introduced by cattle, or a combination of those and other factors, it is clear that white settlers destroyed a thriving environment. The bison did fine with the wolves so why don’t the elk? Oh yeah it’s because they were driven from their native range in the lower plains up into the mountains where wolves have the strategic advantage. Going back to my main point, using the argument that our ancestors killed off wolves for a reason will get destroyed in any discussion that involves people outside of this group. If you want to convince non hunters that wolves are bad and you use that argument you will not get good results.

Don't blame me if your attitudes align with the woke; they also think they are objective when cancelling history. We will eventually have to extirpate wolves again, and for the same reasons our forebearers did. I'm not going to sugarcoat any argument for the lowest common denominator. Lying to the ignorant, or the just plain stupid, to get your way doesn't do them a service.
 

EdP

WKR
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,407
Location
Southwest Va
It absolutely applies. The eradication of bison destroys any credibility of our ancestors as conservationists so deferring to their “expertise” in any matters regarding wildlife management is foolish
To be accurate, the bison were NOT eradicated, they were saved from eradication by conservationists. Then there is the recovery of the whitetail, the beaver,and the wild turkey, all due to the efforts of conservationists.
 
Top