Thank you anti-fur people!

[dahermit]

Ah, Spring. My geese have begun to nest and lay eggs. I have started my annual Spring activity of trapping raccoons that will destroy the goose eggs. The count is three so far. Last year's total count was fifteen raccoons, three opossums. When I trap them I throw them into the adjacent field where they become fertilizer. The raccoon fur, which would have been a resource in the fall to trappers pre-anti-fur, is totally wasted.
Before the anti-fur people intervened, trappers kept the numbers much lower than they are now. They would even stop and pickup road killed raccoons in the fall.
With the high number of raccoons it has become all but impossible to raise chickens. My entire flock was wiped out save one. My Amish neighbors have stated that due to the large number or raccoons, raising sweet corn is an exercise in frustration, with at least one year's production being completely destroyed.
So, as I see it, your anti-fur people own me for the flock of chickens that raccoons killed, and for my time and energy in the yearly trapping and poisoning of predators, also, the damage to my fruit trees from raccoons breaking the branches attempting to get to the fruit. Again, will that be cash or check. Pay Up!

 

[dogtowner]

why are you exploiting these birds for your selfish gain ?



/joke



what eats raccoons and not birds ?

 

[dahermit]

what eats raccoons and not birds ?

Raccoons in the lower peninsula of Michigan have no natural (other than man) predators that I know of. If there are any predators of raccoons, they do not kill a significant amount of them to make an impact upon their population. That is why, without the predication by trappers, their numbers have exploded, negatively impacting all ground nesting birds (pheasants, quail, grouse, ducks, and wild geese), as well as domestic chickens, goose eggs, and crops.

Also note: My geese are not exploited, as were not my chickens, although providing eggs, they were pets that would have lived out their lives without being utilized for meat.

Anti-fur people: A pox on you! And, may a Mountain Lion eat your children!

 

[samsara15]

Raccoons are no longer a problem here

Raccoons in the lower peninsula of Michigan have no natural (other than man) predators that I know of. If there are any predators of raccoons, they do not kill a significant amount of them to make an impact upon their population. That is why, without the predication by trappers, their numbers have exploded, negatively impacting all ground nesting birds (pheasants, quail, grouse, ducks, and wild geese), as well as domestic chickens, goose eggs, and crops.

Also note: My geese are not exploited, as were not my chickens, although providing eggs, they were pets that would have lived out their lives without being utilized for meat.

Anti-fur people: A pox on you! And, may a Mountain Lion eat your children!

sine we had an epidemic of rabies among the roccoon population several years ago.

Our problem is deer. Deer eat everything, and their only natural predator is the automobile. I killed one with my car March 3. They eat all of our flowers, and even the bushes. I've sen places where they even eat the lower leaves off maple trees.

 

[Bunz]

I am a fan of fur, mankind has yet to improve on fur when it comes to warmth, potential beauty, and durability of garments. I know that when it dips to real cold (below -20) I go to fur.

That being said, of course in AK we have plenty of controversy when it comes to predator control issues such as aerial methods on wolves.

Just a few weeks ago in a village not to far from where I live partime, a teacher was killed and partially predated by non rabid wolves.

http://www.adn.com/2010/03/18/1189267/wolves-believed-to-have-killed.html

 

[dogtowner]

Raccoons in the lower peninsula of Michigan have no natural (other than man) predators that I know of. If there are any predators of raccoons, they do not kill a significant amount of them to make an impact upon their population. That is why, without the predication by trappers, their numbers have exploded, negatively impacting all ground nesting birds (pheasants, quail, grouse, ducks, and wild geese), as well as domestic chickens, goose eggs, and crops.

the point was to introduce some predators yourself to protect the birds. some dogs if nothing better.

Also note: My geese are not exploited, as were not my chickens, although providing eggs, they were pets that would have lived out their lives without being utilized for meat.

obviously the /joke was lost on you

Anti-fur people: A pox on you! And, may a Mountain Lion eat your children!

I am contnually amazed at the disregard y'all libs have for human life.

 

[dahermit]

the point was to introduce some predators yourself to protect the birds. some dogs if nothing better. .

Dogs are a problem in themselves. The only predator that I have lost adult geese to are domestic dogs. Fox will watch the geese (I have observed them doing that, but it became apparent that they were looking for goslings...),the fox actually lay down to watch, but inasmuch as there were no goslings, did not attack. I got a shot but missed that one.

obviously the /joke was lost on you
.

No, I knew you were joking.

I am contnually amazed at the disregard y'all libs have for human life.

I am somewhat of a lib, but am not an idologe...there are issues on which I am on the other side.

But to counter; I am amazed that cons believe in the sanctity of human life only from conception to birth.

 

[dahermit]

I am a fan of fur, mankind has yet to improve on fur when it comes to warmth, potential beauty, and durability of garments. I know that when it dips to real cold (below -20) I go to fur.

I agree. I have observed that all natural fibers cannot be replaced with a man-made alternative. Fur for warm clothing in sub-zero conditions, cotton for underwear, wool for warmth in cold but not sub-zero weather, down for cold weather sleeping bags, leather for shoes and saddles, etc.

Just a few weeks ago in a village not to far from where I live partime, a teacher was killed and partially predated by non rabid wolves.

Say the artical...it was very well done. They talked about reading the signs in the snow and how the man's and the wolves tracks indicated what had happened. Usually such articles are so poorly done, they raise more questions than they answer. Whoops! were likely talking about the woman teacher, not the grad student in the additional link.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

You're welcome, Dahermit, since I'm one of those anti-fur people. People in the North who use fur get no grief from me, but people who wear it for the satisfaction of their egos are disgusting. If you have to kill animals, then do so and stop trying to make a buck on the process.

As for you, dogtwn, I fail to see the connection to your remark about libs lack of value for human life. Conservatives seem to vote for war since there is money to be made, they seem to vote against the environment if there is money to be made, they seem to vote against human rights if there is money involved--do we see a pattern here?

I think people are more important than money, more important than huge profits, and I vote that way. I support human rights, environmental rights, animals' rights, and in general the right of life over profit. Weird how Jesus felt the same way.

 

[top gun]

I am a fan of fur, mankind has yet to improve on fur when it comes to warmth, potential beauty, and durability of garments.

I know that when it dips to real cold (below -20) I go to fur.

That being said, of course in AK we have plenty of controversy when it comes to predator control issues such as aerial methods on wolves.

Just a few weeks ago in a village not to far from where I live partime, a teacher was killed and partially predated by non rabid wolves.

http://www.adn.com/2010/03/18/1189267/wolves-believed-to-have-killed.html

Yep and even if it weren't I'd still see no problem with it.

Look I know some of my brethren on the very far Left don't see this my way... and that's fine, big tent thing you know.

But here's the way I do the math. To not be a complete hypocrite on this "fur issue" one who have to be a devout vegetarian or vegan or something.

To that I'd say... oooooooooooooooow!

So if you ever eat a Big Mac or a nice rack of ribs or have a nice leather belt or pair of shoes? Then get off the anti-fur kick. Because you're even messing with stuff further inside than the fur!

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I've been a vegan for more than half my life (30+ years), I don't use animal products of any kind if I can help it. I don't use leather, but I still use cement. I don't use sugar because they filter it through a medium of burned beef bones.

There are genuine people on this side of the discussion--not everyone with ethical standards is a hypocrite.

 

[Gipper]

I've been a vegan for more than half my life (30+ years), I don't use animal products of any kind if I can help it. I don't use leather, but I still use cement. I don't use sugar because they filter it through a medium of burned beef bones.

There are genuine people on this side of the discussion--not everyone with ethical standards is a hypocrite.

Mare is back!!! How wonderful. Oh how I have missed you. And you are vegan...not surprised, but how do manage to get enough protein?

Now if only Shaman and Dorothy would return, all would be right in the world.

 

[dahermit]

You're welcome, Dahermit, since I'm one of those anti-fur people. People in the North who use fur get no grief from me, but people who wear it for the satisfaction of their egos are disgusting. If you have to kill animals, then do so and stop trying to make a buck on the process.

As for you, dogtwn, I fail to see the connection to your remark about libs lack of value for human life. Conservatives seem to vote for war since there is money to be made, they seem to vote against the environment if there is money to be made, they seem to vote against human rights if there is money involved--do we see a pattern here?

I think people are more important than money, more important than huge profits, and I vote that way. I support human rights, environmental rights, animals' rights, and in general the right of life over profit. Weird how Jesus felt the same way.

The people who wear fur because "...for the satisfaction of their egos...", are the ones who create the market that results in the price of raw fur being worth the effort to trap it (and result in a lower population density of raccoons which results in less damage to crops and domestic animals.).
People who trap fur are at the low end of the economic scale. There are no doctors, lawyers, wall street stock brokers, bankers who trap fur. The people who trap fur, are school kids, poor rural people who are willing to get up at 4:00 A.M. and check their traps in the rain. They work hard for that money. However, when "Little sobbing Mary" gets involved and the price of fur falls to the point where it is a waste of time to trap, this extra income is no longer available to them. These people never get wealthy from harvesting fur; it just adds to their meager income.
Now, as an admitted anti-fur person, you own me about 30 dollars for each goose that has been killed and I am sure you want to pay my Amish neighbors for all the sweet corn they have lost to raccoons. Will that be cash or check?
And, by the way, "F" Jesus.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Mare is back!!! How wonderful. Oh how I have missed you. And you are vegan...not surprised, but how do manage to get enough protein?

Now if only Shaman and Dorothy would return, all would be right in the world.

]

Protein is not an issue, if you didn't eat anything but broccoli you'd get adequate protein.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

The people who wear fur because "...for the satisfaction of their egos...", are the ones who create the market that results in the price of raw fur being worth the effort to trap it..."

Precisely, and that's why it's so important to make fur socially unacceptable.

(and result in a lower population density of raccoons which results in less damage to crops and domestic animals.).
People who trap fur are at the low end of the economic scale. There are no doctors, lawyers, wall street stock brokers, bankers who trap fur. The people who trap fur, are school kids, poor rural people who are willing to get up at 4:00 A.M. and check their traps in the rain. They work hard for that money. However, when "Little sobbing Mary" gets involved and the price of fur falls to the point where it is a waste of time to trap, this extra income is no longer available to them. These people never get wealthy from harvesting fur; it just adds to their meager income.
Now, as an admitted anti-fur person, you own me about 30 dollars for each goose that has been killed and I am sure you want to pay my Amish neighbors for all the sweet corn they have lost to raccoons. Will that be cash or check?
And, by the way, "F" Jesus.

Nice ending to your post. Trapping is incredibly cruel to the trapped animal, if you have to kill a creature (human or animal) it should be done with the least amount of suffering possible.