Hunters Help Nature?
Print This Post
Gun lovers exists everywhere…sure, the worst case of gun addiction can be found in the United States, but the ‘Sarah Palin’ disease also exists in certain European countries (luckily it is somewhat less worse and less propagated).
But Swedish hunters recently got a chance to have some serious ‘fun’. They got a chance to go out and kill some wolves, with disastrous consequences.
It might be necessary for Sweden to import wolves soon. Yes, you read that right! As is again demonstrated: hunters are great “protectors” of nature! What would we do without Palin, Dick Cheney and their hordes and hordes of kindred souls everywhere across the globe? (something we can only dream of)
“Earlier this month, Sweden staged the country’s first licensed wolf hunt for over four decades, allowing a total quota of 27 wolves to be shot – a little more than 10 per cent of the total Scandinavian wolf population.”
For starters: the hunters were allowed to kill 27 wolves, but of course they managed to kill more. OK 1 more, but out of a population of only about 200 – 250 wolves in that entire country. When dealing with such small numbers, every wolf counts from a preservation perspective (and of course every wolf counts from an animal rights perspective!).
To me, it is a miracle that ‘only’ 28 wolves got killed. It could have been a lot more, as becomes clear when reading Swedish newspapers.
Wolves had 4500 hunters after them >>
“Licensjakten på varg lockade ut runt 4.500 jägare i skog och mark. Cirka 12.000 jägare hade registrerat sig hos Naturvårdsverket för vargjakt, men alla deltog inte i jakten.”
For those of you that don’t understand swedish: it says that 12000 hunters had themselves registered to participate in this hunt. In the end, 4500 got to join in to kill only a handful of wolves out of a very small population. And all of these animals were perfectly healthy (the hunt was meant to kill the ‘weaker’ animals).
“Sweden on Thursday announced plans to inject fresh blood into its wolf population that is threatened by inbreeding, including possible import of 20 wolves in coming years.”
First shoot them, and then when people had their fun: recognize that there suddenly is a problem and import some new! I find this mind blowing, but this was to be expected.
It was clear – to me – that nothing the hunters said to defend their hunt made any sense.
According to an article from DN.se hunters pay most of the scientific research out there on wildlife (like the US or Canada?):
“Politikers beslut om jaktfrågor grundar sig delvis på forskning om viltfrågor. Men alla känner inte till att jägarna själva finansierar merparten av all viltforskning i Sverige. Allmänna medel står för mindre än en fjärdedel.”
So, politicians take their decisions based ‘partly’ on scientific research. But the hunters themselves finance the majority of all research in this area. Funny that we are always ‘biased’ according to hunters, while they are exactly what they claim we are.
What depresses me, is that they always get away with it. They can do anything they want, and remain unscarred. At least here in europe there is somewhat of a backlash because of this, including scientists who openly distanced themselves from this hunt. This gives me some hope, especially when I read about similar cases in the US or Canada, where we are simply branded as extremists by default.
crosspost: empathy for animals blog
It’s so predictable… the more “rare” the species – the more “valuable” the “prize”. I detest the whole sick scenario…
What would happen to the “right to take” with only 2 white rhinos left? I shudder to think.
A few things that remind me of the similar idiocy in hunting here in the US.
On the money end: Deer and elk are supposed to be an “overpopulation” problem… Yet there are over 15,000 breeding facilities. They operate similar to factory farms and release bottle fed, nearly tame “game” into the woods. That’s disgusting enough…
But too, there are laws that forbid relocating them to a place where they might have a chance at survival. They say the deer are too difficult to transport (safely) — Yet they can to move them for purposes of further breeding, hunting, or slaughter? That’s twisted.
We can explore the heavens, listen to music on a device the size of a postage stamp, we can invent bombs that would destroy the earth several times over… BUT! We can’t figure ways to nonlethal control of (“pest”) animals? It enrages me!
And on the savagery: Somewhere in the midwest there was/is a coyote kill… There’s a contest which includes submitting an ear as a “chip”. Pretty brutal huh?
“Funny that we are always ‘biased’ according to hunters”… Sure, and even though most of the world makes similar decisions about killing or not, (3 times a day) — Vegans are considered “judgmental”. That’s a lot of cloudy thinking that needs to change…
.-= Bea Elliott´s last blog ..VEGAN MUST AIR DAIRY ‘S DIRTY LAUNDRY =-.
I am so sick of hunters! They are always coming up with excuses that they want to help the environment – why can’t they just admit that they like to kill?
In my local paper, here in Australia, there are regular adverts trying to get people to hunt for conservation – give me a break
As for this story on wolves it makes me feel nauseous. I hadn’t heard about it until now. I don’t understand their reasoning. What possible scientific evidence could they have for allowing people to kill 10% of a wolf population?
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. One more thing to take action against.
.-= Catherine´s last blog ..Another Link Between Animal Cruelty and Human Abuse =-.