| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Shall we preserve wolves and other big predators?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Shall we preserve wolves and other big predators?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 11:16
By the way, our governments actions against the wolves has been reported to the European Union where Sweden is a member. According to the Swedish Association for Protection of Nature the license hunt is illegal and violates conventions for the protection of threatened species that Sweden actually has signed:
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 11:43
hunting is a part of living style in country side and a resource of exploiting forest and farmlands which are home to deers and other fauna and it is not only reserved to farmers and rurale.
even  both a great part of forest and farmlands are owned by rural  population .
and  deers are sustained by crop and plants planted by rural population and mooses are eating each years hundreds of hectars of new planted wood which costs millions of krowns!!, despite that everybody is welcome  too hunt  if they pay the hunting licens and rent a land .
it is the part of truth that many green partist  can 't or don't want to know or understand or talk about it.
 listning to swedish green party's talk about nature and biodiversity  in one hand and nepotism and breaking law in other hand  like what was done in Gothland  and lack of respect for rural populations right of ownership of their farms do not give a lot of credibilility to this party .
 please tel me if i am wrong about  the GOTLAND and green party scandal?having such a double standard is an abomination for the people pretending defending nature and biodiversity!!
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 12:55
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

  hunting is a part of living style in country side and a resource of exploiting forest and farmlands which are home to deers and other fauna and it is not only reserved to farmers and rurale.
even  both a great part of forest and farmlands are owned by rural  population .
and  deers are sustained by crop and plants planted by rural population and mooses are eating each years hundreds of hectars of new planted wood which costs millions of krowns!!, despite that everybody is welcome  too hunt  if they pay the hunting licens and rent a land .
it is the part of truth that many green partist  can 't or don't want to know or understand or talk about it.
 
Well, all people that live on the countryside do not hunt, and all people on the countryside do not oppose of some more wolves or other predadors. There are many naturelovers that love to see the wildlife in all its diversity, to take photos and to participate in different kinds of activities. And sometimes their activities are actually disturbed by hunters (as on the time of the moose hunt where hardly no other people can walk around in the forests) and by all these dogs running round. About these dogs, they actually does a lot of harm both in nature and also on peoples livestock. More livestock are actually killed by dogs than by all wild predators.
 
And many people who are not hunters do help animals to survive the winters by feeding them and helping them in other ways. I can actually recall a woman I met who used to feed a couple of hares that often came to her house and garden. I still remember how upset she was when a hunter shot these hares as soon as they ventured over to his land.
  
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

 listning to swedish green party's talk about nature and biodiversity  in one hand and nepotism and breaking law in other hand  like what was done in Gothland  and lack of respect for rural populations right of ownership of their farms do not give a lot of credibilility to this party .
 please tel me if i am wrong about  the GOTLAND and green party scandal?having such a double standard is an abomination for the people pretending defending nature and biodiversity!!
 
I do not think the woman in Gotland where representative for the Green party. Unfortunately all parties have some black sheep.
 


Edited by Carcharodon - 01 Feb 2010 at 12:56
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 13:37
sure there are many peoples that do not hunt  and live in country side and sure there are many hunter and no hunting people who loves to have biodiversity and predators on country side, but one thing for the sure not  many people likes that the question of biodiversity become  exploited and  become  a way to fish political votes by political parties known  for extremism and nepotism. 
yes there are many rutten eggs in  every political parties , but seldom they are so hypocites like green party is. the other parties do not pretend to be  the only party defending wildlife and accusing the others to be against biodiversity.
why not swedish green party  do not try to dart those wolves and release them inside national parks(there are many of them in sweden and actually hunting is forbiden there and deers need predators to  regulate the population well 200 wolves are according you a very little  number and they will not exterminare deers only help them by taking sicks and weaks!!)  and see how long and how nice  they can  ballance the wild life inside national parks??


Edited by kalhor - 01 Feb 2010 at 14:05
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 14:04
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

sure there are many peoples that do not hunt  and live in country side and sure there are many hunter and no hunting people who loves to have biodiversity and predators on country side, but one thing for the sure not  many people likes that the question of biodiversity become  exploited and  become  a way to fish political votes by political parties known  for extremism and nepotism. 
yes there are many rutten eggs in  every political parties , but seldom they are so hypocites like green party is. the other parties do not pretend to be  the only party defending wildlife and accusing the others to be against biodiversity.
 
Well, the Center party also has talked much about biodiversity, green future and similar things. Not to forget their resistance against nuclear power that one do not hear so much about anymore now when they sit in the lap of the conservatives (moderaterna).
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 14:16
 what is wrong with nuclear power so far it is  much less poluoting alternative compared to charcol or oil  plants? and the cheapest too. our country is rich because we have a heavy industry and our industry needs cheap and clean energy. anyway we have windgenerated electricityat homeApprove and it helps a lot . but it is not enough and  dependant of wind and sun power is not possible due to lack of sunlight many month per year. well center party have their own agenda and being in the same governement dosen't mean that they are sitting on the lapp of someone else. well green party needs the lapp of social demokrates (which they haven't share the power with them du to their extrem political agenda) and a lot of help from communists venster party)Dead
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 15:39
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

 what is wrong with nuclear power so far it is  much less poluoting alternative compared to charcol or oil  plants? and the cheapest too. our country is rich because we have a heavy industry and our industry needs cheap and clean energy. anyway we have windgenerated electricityat homeApprove and it helps a lot .
 
In itself nuclear power can be okey. The issue is that the centerparty once went out so hard and promised that they could never think themselves to agree to more power plants. But now one do not here anything about those promises anymore.
 
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

  but it is not enough and  dependant of wind and sun power is not possible due to lack of sunlight many month per year. well center party have their own agenda and being in the same governement dosen't mean that they are sitting on the lapp of someone else. well green party needs the lapp of social demokrates (which they haven't share the power with them du to their extrem political agenda) and a lot of help from communists venster party)Dead
 
The green partys agenda is hardly extreme, they are just concerned about the ongoing destruction of the climate and natural resources that is going on in todays world. They just want increased research and effort to find viable alternatives.
 
The left wing party of today has not much in common with yesterdays hard core communists. Today Vansterpartiet is more like the Social Democrats were a long time ago.
 
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 15:41

About predators again: When it concerns wolves Sweden seems a bit paranoid in its relationship to these animals. One can compare some other countries that have much higher population densities but still can accept wolves, as Spain that have more than 2000 of these animals, Poland that has nearly 1000 and Greece that has around 500. If you count the wolf density in Sweden, it become around 0,5 wolf per thousand square kilometers, which is place 21 among countries with wolf populations. Spain has 5 wolves per thousand square kilometers and Greece 15.
So for many people in other countries Swedens neurotic relationship to the wolves must seem rather ridiculous.



Edited by Carcharodon - 01 Feb 2010 at 15:46
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 16:03
in sweden there are 26 national parks and 642 000 hektar land which all hunting is forbiden only abisko and padjelanata is 200 000 hektars. there surely predators are needed most because nobody is hunting there they can regulate the deer population!! and nobody or very few are living there
 my question is why these wolves are not moved to  the national parks to regulate  the  roe deer and moose population in national parks?why they should be concentrated in area where people have settlements and sheep cattle  like vermland? maybe wolves are  prefering LAMB MEATWink
in spain  one kind of rare ibex was exterminated  despite hunting forbid of more that 30 years !! no wonder !! blame hunters for that!!. i would love to see wolves but they are not in national parks  
!!
 642 000  hektar  national park  is nearly as large as a little european country. why the national parks can not sustain  those 200 swedish wolf population` and they need to kill cattle and domestical dogs?? 
i believe the truth is obscured by anti hunter lobby or they can maybe answere to this question .




Edited by kalhor - 01 Feb 2010 at 17:15
son of Bavand
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 18:08
Obviously, the Swedes talk a mean rhetoric when it comes to matters beyond their borders but do not grasp a twaddle of the true meaning behind conservation.  I am surprised the Swedes are not blaming the Finns over their canid migrants...
 
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 18:34
Quote
About predators again: When it concerns wolves Sweden seems a bit paranoid in its relationship to these animals. One can compare some other countries that have much higher population densities but still can accept wolves, as Spain that have more than 2000 of these animals, Poland that has nearly 1000 and Greece that has around 500. If you count the wolf density in Sweden, it become around 0,5 wolf per thousand square kilometers, which is place 21 among countries with wolf populations. Spain has 5 wolves per thousand square kilometers and Greece 15.
So for many people in other countries Swedens neurotic relationship to the wolves must seem rather ridiculous.

What is ridiculous is your density calculation. Wolf/per square meter is an utterly pointless value. 

Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

in sweden there are 26 national parks and 642 000 hektar land which all hunting is forbiden only abisko and padjelanata is 200 000 hektars. there surely predators are needed most because nobody is hunting there they can regulate the deer population!! and nobody or very few are living there
 my question is why these wolves are not moved to  the national parks to regulate  the  roe deer and moose population in national parks?why they should be concentrated in area where people have settlements and sheep cattle  like vermland? maybe wolves are  prefering LAMB MEATWink
in spain  one kind of rare ibex was exterminated  despite hunting forbid of more that 30 years !! no wonder !! blame hunters for that!!. i would love to see wolves but they are not in national parks  
!!
 642 000  hektar  national park  is nearly as large as a little european country. why the national parks can not sustain  those 200 swedish wolf population` and they need to kill cattle and domestical dogs?? 
i believe the truth is obscured by anti hunter lobby or they can maybe answere to this question .



The national parks are colder and offer less prey than the forests which are full of deer, rabbits, farmers' lambs and hunters' dogs. Besides, in the south there are no Sami shooting every wolf in sight to prevent them from hunting reindeer.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 01 Feb 2010 at 18:36
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2010 at 21:33
 wolf are well prepared for cold climate they thrive well in russia and alaska,but for the sure the sami defend their reindeer well and naturally lamb and roe deer kids are much easier to catch and they taste much  betterWink than an old and sick moose, may be we can call it  NATURAL SELECTIONLOL anyway i understand wolves an old bul moose tastes crapThumbs Down
only abisko and padjelanta are att extrem north .  there are many other national parks in the southern part of sweden like fulufjallet  in dalarna(38500 hectar) and the TIVEDEN national park (1300 hectar) is in southern sweden  and i have been there many times in tiveden and  no sign of wolvesShocked but only few miles from tivedn in vermland you can see every where track of wolves and people are loosing lambs and dogs in great number!!!. that is what called regulating the deer population by predators!!


Edited by kalhor - 01 Feb 2010 at 22:18
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Scourge View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Scourge Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 00:36
Of course we should preserve wolves who the hell would wanna massacre wolves? Their wolves their bad ass.

/thread.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7830
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 06:06
The problem is humans and wolves compete for food, so we naturally attack the wolves. In recent years there's been an overpopulation of humans, and thus the wolves have been threatened. If an alien species were to come to earth and make the same decisions about managing earths animals as we do with our countries (non-human) animals. They'd cull the humans.
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 08:17
Hi Omar
now i understandLampwhy GREEN PARTY is in favour of  closing down power plants and  factories and finally they will apply  the final soloution (let the aliens cull humans) which are trouble makers on the earthWink it would be a ballance between prey and predators without human intervention!!
they collaborate with aliensLOL
scourge
 no one wants to masacre wolves . they have been around here for more than 30 years and thrived very well and  from a few couples grown into a large  population too  and no hunters killed them otherwise they coulden't grow in population like they have done!!
it is only THE GREEN'S anti -hunter propaganda. 
all we ask is a regullated number of wolves nothing more and keeping them inside the national parks. there are 26 national parks in sweden in areas as large as  a little country  642 000 hectar + and recently a  few new national parks added in jamtland  making the total area  of more than 1,000,000 hectars!!!! in NP there hunting is forbiden and wolves can regulate the deer population as they are suposed to do!!!, but the wolves don't like this idea they prefer tender lamb meat and dear and  loved domestical dogsWink and green party as usual  they want every thing against human population in favour of animals!!!


Edited by kalhor - 02 Feb 2010 at 09:39
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Reginmund View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2005
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 2659
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Reginmund Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 08:40
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

The problem is humans and wolves compete for food, so we naturally attack the wolves. In recent years there's been an overpopulation of humans, and thus the wolves have been threatened. If an alien species were to come to earth and make the same decisions about managing earths animals as we do with our countries (non-human) animals. They'd cull the humans.
 
We compete with wolves for food? I can't recall the last time I raced a wolf to the groceries.
Sing, goddess, of Achilles' ruinous anger
Which brought ten thousand pains to the Achaeans,
And cast the souls of many stalwart heroes
To Hades, and their bodies to the dogs
And birds of prey
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 10:53

Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

in sweden there are 26 national parks and 642 000 hektar land which all hunting is forbiden only abisko and padjelanata is 200 000 hektars. there surely predators are needed most because nobody is hunting there they can regulate the deer population!! and nobody or very few are living there

 my question is why these wolves are not moved to  the national parks to regulate  the  roe deer and moose population in national parks?why they should be concentrated in area where people have settlements and sheep cattle  like vermland? maybe wolves are  prefering LAMB MEATWink


Wolves are needed to regulate their prey als outside national parks. They are actually doing a better job in holding the populations at good health than humans. Just look at the moose disease in Southwestern Sweden.

Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

 in spain  one kind of rare ibex was exterminated  despite hunting forbid of more that 30 years !! no wonder !! blame hunters for that!!. i would love to see wolves but they are not in national parks  

!!

 642 000  hektar  national park  is nearly as large as a little european country. why the national parks can not sustain  those 200 swedish wolf population` and they need to kill cattle and domestical dogs?? 


It would be better to kill off some of the infinite numbers of dogs in this country who costs a lot cleaning up after them, who kills more livestock than the wild predators, who also kill many wild animals and who every year injure a lot of people.

But that is seldom one hear the hunters and dog owners talk about.

Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

  only abisko and padjelanta are att extrem north .  there are many other national parks in the southern part of sweden like fulufjallet  in dalarna(38500 hectar) and the TIVEDEN national park (1300 hectar) is in southern sweden  and i have been there many times in tiveden and  no sign of wolvesShocked but only few miles from tivedn in vermland you can see every where track of wolves and people are loosing lambs and dogs in great number!!!. that is what called regulating the deer population by predators!!


Well, Tiveden and a lot of other places in Sweden of course once had a thriving population of wolves, but these animals were killed by hunters already long time ago. But if the wolves are allowed to increase and spread there is nothing that hinders them to recolonize also places like Tiveden.

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

 What is ridiculous is your density calculation. Wolf/per square meter is an utterly pointless value. 

Well, I did not do that calclation, the numbers are from Svenska Naturskyddsforeningen. They do not say so much in itself but together with numbers of population density they can indicate that the density of wolves can be much higher also in countries with higher population densities without it is leading to a catastrophe, which many hunters and some other people here in Sweden seem to believe. But of course one must also take into consideration the numbers and densities of prey, where in a country the wolves are concentrated and similar. But still it seems that Swedes may have a more neurotic relation (sometimes bordering to sheer superstition) to wolves and other big predators (even concerning smaller predators, like birds of prey some people have this attitude) than people in many other countries.

And that makes Sweden look somewhat ridicolous, especially when Swedish authorities, media and organisations talk about environmental issues in other countries.



Edited by Carcharodon - 02 Feb 2010 at 10:56
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 10:59
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:


 no one wants to masacre wolves . they have been around here for more than 30 years and thrived very well and  from a few couples grown into a large  population too  and no hunters killed them otherwise they coulden't grow in population like they have done!!


The wolves do not thrive, and even when it was illegal to hunt them poachers have culled their numbers so they really have difficulties to regain a truly viable poulation.





Edited by Carcharodon - 02 Feb 2010 at 11:01
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:12
you diden't answer me why wolves  will or can  not stay inside huge areas of national parks in sweden?!!! there hunting is forbiden and there  are  plenty of wild animals both moose and other kinds of deers!! and need for predators to regulate the deer population is much more !!there they don't risk to get killed by local population and hunting is forbiden and they do not compete with human population.by adding a 300 000 hectar new national park in jamtland now nearly 1000,000 hectar of national park isn't that enough to sustain a little wolf population ??? why the animal loving GREENs which do so much for wild lifeBig smile according you don't try to dart the wolves and bring them back inside national parks? in many other countries they do so and it would be no need to kill predators attacking domestical animals and indangering rural population!!.
why it is not possible??
maybe it will not give the GREENS  a reason and possibility to attack hunters  or farmers and blame them  and fish votes among young ignorant population living in citiesWink??
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:19
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

And that makes Sweden look somewhat ridicolous, especially when Swedish authorities, media and organisations talk about environmental issues in other countries.



Sweden has no business in other peoples lands anyway, so that would be simply solved by social democrats minding their own business instead of telling other people how to run their countries.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:22
Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

you diden't answer me why wolves  will or can  not stay inside huge areas of national parks in sweden?!!! there hunting is forbiden and there  are  plenty of wild animals both moose and other kinds of deers!!


Well, one can ofcourse have wolfs in national parks, but they will not remain there forever. Some wolves will always wander away to find partners of their own and form new territories, so confining them to parks will of course be difficult. And also outside the national parks there need to be some balance in the ecosystems and as much biodiveristy as possible.

Originally posted by kalhor kalhor wrote:

  why the animal loving GREENs which do so much for wild lifeBig smile according you don't try to dart the wolves and bring them back inside national parks? in many other countries they do so and it would be no need to kill predators attacking domestical animals and indangering rural population!!.
why it is not possible??


Well, maybe one shall dart all dogs running around everywhere and put them in an enclosure? That would save both a lot of wild animals and a a lot of livestock from death and injure. Also it would save many peoples lives and health and save a lot of costs for the society.



Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:26
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

And that makes Sweden look somewhat ridicolous, especially when Swedish authorities, media and organisations talk about environmental issues in other countries.



Sweden has no business in other peoples lands anyway, so that would be simply solved by social democrats minding their own business instead of telling other people how to run their countries.


Well, in todays interconnected world everyone interferes in each others business, so if one shall do it it would be better to do it with so much credibility as possible. And also Sweden is a member of EU and ought to follow conventions and agreements about environment, endangerd species and biodiversity. Now Sweden has even been reported to the EU regarding the wolf hunt.
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:30
Quote Well, in todays interconnected world everyone interferes in each others business, so if one shall do it it would be better to do it with so much credibility as possible. A

We shouldn't do it at all. Nothing is more annoying than a tiny besserwisser without muscle.
The days of Hammarsköld are gone and what did we gain on that? 

Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

  Now Sweden has even been reported to the EU regarding the wolf hunt.


I can report Sweden for anything I like to, and so could the green nutters who reported this. Doesn't mean a thing.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 02 Feb 2010 at 12:30
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:41
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Quote Well, in todays interconnected world everyone interferes in each others business, so if one shall do it it would be better to do it with so much credibility as possible. A

We shouldn't do it at all. Nothing is more annoying than a tiny besserwisser without muscle.
The days of Hammarsköld are gone and what did we gain on that? 


Many environmental problems (and other problems too) are not restricted by borders written on a map. Issues like climate, pollution, management of wildlife and other natural resources are issues that often concerns many countries. So because of this countries just have to interfere and have opinions about each other.

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

I can report Sweden for anything I like to, and so could the green nutters who reported this. Doesn't mean a thing.


Just mean that Sweden will be seen as a country of superstitous hillbillies that are afraid of some wolves.
And next time Sweden are trying to instigate some necessary actions regarding environmental issues maybe other countries will not listen.

Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:54
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:


Just mean that Sweden will be seen as a country of superstitous hillbillies that are afraid of some wolves.
And next time Sweden are trying to instigate some necessary actions regarding environmental issues maybe other countries will not listen.



And you honestly think they would have cared if we did not shoot 27+1 wolves?  The Russians, who are  the only major environmental polluters that affect Sweden through the Baltic sea, kill between 10,000 and 20,000 yearly, with a population of 45,000. Would they listen more I we spared 28 wolves out of 220?

Enough with the "hillbilly" nonsense! No one believes wolves dress up in grandma's clothes and eat babies. This is about economics and animal control.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 02 Feb 2010 at 12:55
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 12:55

carchardon
you mean all those dogs killed and eaten by wolves are dogs killed and eaten by other dogsTongue it is a new fenomena occuring only in swedenShocked and all those lambs kiled  and eaten by feral dogs?? why the wildlife experts visiting the place don't say that ???
you are not serious !! are you? and those horrible  blood thirsty hunters Big smile only shoot wolves and not feral dogs!! let them ruin their cattle!!!Wacko how many feral dogs have you seen in the forest???Shocked
come on for NATUR'S sake stop kiddingBig smile
son of Bavand
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 13:25
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:


And you honestly think they would have cared if we did not shoot 27+1 wolves?  The Russians, who are  the only major environmental polluters that affect Sweden through the Baltic sea, kill between 10,000 and 20,000 yearly, with a population of 45,000. Would they listen more I we spared 28 wolves out of 220?


Well, the shooting of the 27 wolves has already got attention in foreign media. Even Chinese and Arab media are mentioning it. If Sweden have problems with a so minuscule wolf population as 200 animals, how could anyone take Sweden seriously when its  representatives ask other countries to refrain from measures that are considered much more economically significant?

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

  Enough with the "hillbilly" nonsense! No one believes wolves dress up in grandma's clothes and eat babies. This is about economics and animal control.


This is about a minority of greedy people who think they have the right to control the whole nature and also lifestyle in rural areas.
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 13:27
Quote
Well, the shooting of the 27 wolves has already got attention in foreign media. Even Chinese and Arab media are mentioning it.

They are amazed of the discussion surrounding it, not the hunt itself. And you didn't answer my question.

Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:



This is about a minority of greedy people who think they have the right to control the whole nature and also lifestyle in rural areas.

This is the decision of the NRV and supported by the people who live in the area. Exactly what right do you think YOU have to determine their lifestyle?


Edited by Styrbiorn - 02 Feb 2010 at 13:29
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 13:43
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:


This is the decision of the NRV and supported by the people who live in the area. Exactly what right do you think YOU have to determine their lifestyle?


Well, it seems that hunters want to determine the lifestyle of most other peoples who live in rural areas, hindering them from enjoying the full diversity of Nature and making the forests unsafe with shooting and a lot of dogs running around everywhere. A few hunters destroy for many nature and wildlife lovers.
Back to Top
kalhor View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Location: sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kalhor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2010 at 13:49
it is not about greed it is about feeling unsecure when your children are playing in the garden and a kilometer away your dog  is killed and eaten by wolves. don't tel me wolves have never eaten humans, because it is agreat rubbish .
 only few weeks ago a woman(she was a known singer) was killed by a pack of coyotes somewhere in america and news were on the international media and coyotes are much lesser than average wolves. if wolves can eat a moose  then they can kill humans too
 i would love to have wolves ,but i don't understand why can't we keep them inside national parks like the majority of civilised country in the world? may be it will not give an excuse to greens pretending defending wildlife to accuse the locals and hunters!!!
you said it costs to dart and bring back a wolf to a national park. well the governemnt pays a lot of damage  monety to the farmers loosing thier cattle . it isen't cheap either!!to pay hundreds of cases yearly !! and wildlife organisation beg a lot of money from people to save wild life. what happens to all the money collected from people for saving wild life???
son of Bavand
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.