View Single Post
Old 12-15-2011, 06:04 PM   #39
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
redhawk's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,931
Originally Posted by Pumpkin QAAD View Post
That's an interesting way to keep things in perspective. There are 700,000 hunters in New York State alone, how many fatalities? Of those fatalities how many were people not participating in the act of hunting such as mountain biking or hiking? People practicing unsafe hunting practices and causing accidents are generally viewed differently in the public than someone getting killed by a wild animal. At least I do.

Using your twisted way of keeping things in perspective, if cougar populations mimic'd hunter populations there would be close to 1,000 human fatalities in New York State alone every year. Do you see how doing that in reverse doesn't make sense? Of course things that are more common lead to more instances of occurence, that's not keeping things in perspective that's called manipulation.

Here are the Adirondack facts, I'm sure things have changed since you were a boy but I would love to see your "facts" about the high density human population of southern South Dakota and surrounding area.

7-10 Million people visit the Adirondacks every year
130,000 year round residents and 200,000 seasonal.
60 Million people live within a days drive of the Adirondacks.
Actually your thinking is a little skewed. the cougar kills for food, not for sport. So to assume that if there were the same numbers of Cougars as hunters (which of course, nature would prevent) that there would be as many fatalities is baseless. Not indicting hunters here, just pointing out the differences.

On the flip side, just for arguments sake, since the solution to the predators when they seem to be getting too large in numbers (or prey for that matter) is to "cull" the population, then if other species, humans for instance are engaged in activities in such numbers that a lot of fatalities occur, then should the hunting be curtailed in some way?

You see where I am going with this? "Logic" gets implied in one case to justify human behavior, but on the other hand the logic doesn't apply when it is the humans who are he cause.

So, we should not have apex predators because they might cause a human fatality. BUT nothing needs to be done when humans are causing a lot of fatalities.

"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote