Best essay on are we happier than our forefathers - correlation research definition pdf


 

Manage



 
 

Search

 
 
 

News

 

Comments

best essay on are we happier than our forefathers

best essay on are we happier than our forefathersBest essay on are we happier than our forefathers -Please don't send in your pictures, "cute" as they may be, as they will alert people that there are animals in your area to be killed. Bekoff implies, Time Magazine's reach is disproportionately large compared to the quality of its content.I also don’t believe that the sole solution to an overabundance of a species is simply to kill them off through hunting or more archaic measures.Some of the messages I received had quotes from this essay that at once shocked and saddened me.I look at Yellowstone National Park and the positive influence on the environment that the reintroduction of wolves caused as a model on how management of our ecosystems should take place.Although I try not to use words such as "cull" or "harvest" when discussing my hunting, at times I still do..because I'm ashamed of what I do but because the non-hunting population seems to prefer those terms.Sadly, we're really well on the way to ridding the world of numerous species without this misguided mandate.Instead, they are an important part of the ecosystem America has successfully nursed back from the brink.Someone asked me, and I also wonder, why in the world would anyone do this?They don't belong where we find them (and in many cases they wouldn't choose to be there), they make messes when we want to expand our own home ranges and territories, and they scare us when we encounter them.She concludes, "Hunting is a failed experiment, and it’s time to employ effective, nonlethal methods.Anytime you have so many deer in an area that all of the ground cover and trees are left barren from about six feet down, there is a major problem. Von Drehle makes a case for increased hunting; you make a plea for peaceful coexistence.We treat them as if they're the problem when, in fact, whatever "problems" they pose can most frequently, some might say invariably, be traced back to something we did to make them become 'problems'." Mr.I fear it'll then be readily accepted that killing does and will work, whatever "work" means, and that there truly will be a sustained and unrelenting war on wildlife that will even be more irreversible than it is now.I have read enough to believe that eliminating wolves threatens the caribou herds - predation serves a useful purpose.Now for where we differ…for one, humans are not an invasive species.When I see deer in these areas, it isn’t the magnificent animal that I encounter in rural Virginia; it is typically a malnourished shell of an animal that I could only take pity on. I don’t believe that either of you are completely correct, a middle ground needs to occur.Note: At the bottom of the summary of this essay there's an invitation to send photos of animals in your backyard.But, a subtitle like "It's Time to the Herd", would likely offend many people who find it difficult to grasp that that's what we do - we kill other animals with little hesitation absent any data that this really works. Von Drehle spoke his mind, and I hope people will read and respond both in print and in action to what he concludes, namely, "Now it is wise to correct the more recent mistake of killing too rarely." We are the pests who relentlessly redecorate nature and then kill the animals into whose homes we've trespassed According to a statement made by , "David Von Drehle makes the case that the only solution for this resurgent overpopulation is more hunting.We move into the homes of other animals and redecorate them because we like to see them or because it's "cool" to do so, or we alter their homes to the extent that they need to find new places in which to live and try to feel safe and at peace.It's really too easy to kill and then to justify it because animals have become "pests".best essay on are we happier than our forefathersBut power does not mean we have license to dominate and to kill.Be sure to include the title and date of the piece, and your name, address, and phone numbers for verification. As with the articles, they may be more inclined to publish letters because of the style than the substance.When she screamed, the bear reluctantly left the kitchen, ambling outside and flopping on the pool deck for a postprandial snooze.While we do indeed do many "good" things for other animals and Earth, we surely have done more than our share of "bad" and destructive things that likely will harm us in the future.We are the pests and there are far too many of us: We shouldn't move in, kill them, and think we're so special and we've solved the "problems" at hand Many people don't like to talk about the fact that there are far too many of us and that we are the most invasive species around and the one who has the power to do anything we want to other animals and to earth.magazine titled "America's Pest Problem: It's Time to Cull the Herd". And, that's why I want to respond briefly to some of what he writes.Like you, I hope many people will respond and let Mr.I will freely admit that we act like one at times but when using the scientific definition of the term, we do not qualify as such.The term "trash animal" should be viewed as an oxymoron, conveniently invented because it allows us to get rid of them however, wherever, and whenever we choose.Our species as a whole has traditionally revolved around a “take, take, take” mentality with regards to the Earth’s precious resources; eventually it will lead to the end of us too.Indifference is the same as allowing these individuals to be mercilessly killed because of invasive nature and arrogance. The perverse "kill when you don't like something" attitude is perverse and deeply troubling.'The same environmental sensitivity that brought Bambi back from the brink now makes it painfully controversial to do what experts say must be done: a bunch of critters need to be killed,' he writes." But, there are many experts who strongly disagree with this conclusion.They already do about as much as they can trying to sell as many hunting licenses as they can.Wolves, lions and bears are known to attack livestock and even pets. You also can see the video here and it is well worth your time to watch it and to read the summary of this film provided by Predator Defense. Von Drehle writes, "But whether we hoist the gun or draw the bowstring--or simply acknowledge the facts of nature that require these things to be done--it's time to shake off sentimentality and see responsible hunting through 21st century eyes.But not everyone wants a dedicated freezer to store their annual take of deer or elk meat, though plenty do.Yes, technically we cull them, but of course the word "culling" is a way to make the word "killing" more palatable.Surely, working for peaceful coexistence is a way to "rewild" ourselves.We are just another one of those organisms trying to survive and unfortunately we do it at the expense of other species at times.I can't speak to the larger issue, but at least locally that's the experiment which is being performed. People adapt by installing massive cattle-scraper type grills on their big pickups/SUVs, or by not driving at night/after dusk.There really are no "trash" animals except when we decide they are, and they pay the price by the billions for our uninformed and self-serving views. best essay on are we happier than our forefathers I disagree with anyone that portrays any species as “trash”.As I've previously noted in "Stray Animals and Trash Animals: Don't Kill the Messengers", "Our anthropocentric arrogance shines when we use such pejorative and derogatory terms and the words we use inform our actions.To many people this sanitizing mechanism -- using culling instead of killing -- is readily transparent.Their pain and suffering is incalculable and their deaths are a blight on our humanity.Other animals are just seen as collateral damage but we can be a better species and realize we are the problem and act with compassion and foresight.I also agree with you when it comes to the unnatural amount of humans on the planet and how we will be our own undoing.Indeed, the animals who are killed are sentient beings who care about what happens to them and to their family and friends and we know that a lack of regard for nonhumans is highly associated with a lack of regard for other humans. Von Drehle writes, "But suppose that all these [non-lethal] steps were taken tomorrow and the black bears of New Jersey and elsewhere were instantly restored to their paleo diet.Because like it or lump it, humans ARE natural predators. Bekoff, I appreciate your commentary on the Time article but in my opinion, your opinion is just the polar opposite of the authors. As you well know, there is no such thing as peaceful coexistence in nature at all; every species is in a battle to live every day...whether or not it comes at the expense of another species.By shouldering the role of careful, conservation-minded predators, hunters make the coexistence of humans and wildlife sustainable." I don't see that killing supposed pests is "required" nor do I agree that sentimentality should be shaken-off.It's just too easy to kill other animals and move on as if killing them is as acceptable as drinking a coke or a beer afterwards.As you well describe, it is our species that is out of control and until we can face and deal with that, our problems: climate change, resource scarcity, armed conflict, disease, human displacement, you name the human induced malady, our problems will continue to escalate.von Drehle and Time know this inaccurate portrayal of America's native wildlife will not be tolerated.Attempts to reintroduce predators -- cats, and the lynx specifically -- have been under way for ~25 yrs but have run into one difficulty after another. certainly -- but not indscriminate killingand NOT killing "the herd" but only somememebrs of the herd.Compassionate conservation to the rescue: Peaceful coexistence should be the only viable solution As I read through these two publications I realized that the growing field of compassionate conservation could surely come to the rescue of at least some of these unwanted animal beings because of its emphasis on the well-being of animals.Until we confront the indisputable fact that there are too many of us, we and other animals are doomed.I do find it quite bothersome that a man of your position would so blatantly disregard the accepted definition to make inflammatory statements to support your position.He also slides far too fast between the problems that deer and other animals pose with those that predators present. And, "well-planned hunting" is sort of an oxymoron especially with what we know about the heinous murderous ways of Wildlife Services.I look forward to those who work in the area of compassionate conservation to focus on "trash" animals.This article shows that they are not above publishing sensationalist rubbish or controversy dressed up as knowledge to do that, but a snappy rebuttal can undo at least some of the damage.I also agree that the goal of state or federal management agencies should not be to keep desirable prey species such as deer and elk abnormally high to facilitate better (read easier) hunting. best essay on are we happier than our forefathers The obvious place to start: stop increasing the population of deer for no reason other than to kill them." The last sentence of Mr.Accepting the "we've killed too rarely" argument as if it's fact, and as if there are no alternatives, is disheartening and simply too self-serving.Von Drehle's essay says it all: "Now it is wise to correct the more recent mistake of killing too rarely." As if we've really killed too rarely.If the natural predators of deers, etc, are removed then 'culling' by humans will benecessary to ensure the health of these herds.In my observation, humans tend to not to think about where their food comes from or the fact that we are all responsible for deaths of animals either directly or indirectly.What a terrible lesson it is for youngsters and others that it's just fine to kill other animals when we decide they're a problem.Or even closer to home, that no species were killed or displaced from whatever housing we choose.People who are "mad about wildlife" because they welcome their presence (not because they see them as supposed pests), need to do something now to stop the killing. If the message "we've killed too rarely" becomes the bumper sticker for future generations, it will be a sad time for all.Eventually, everyone hits one or has some story of a near miss. Hunting is already a very popular sport, but my guesstimate is that to make an appreciable dent the wildlife management folks would have to almost hire armies of hunters in a dedicated effort, and that's not going to happen, not that I'm suggesting it should.Slow starvation is no happier a way for a bear to die than by a hunter's bullet or arrow.Other nonlethal strategies tend to be either ineffective or expensive or both." Where's the data?Marc, thank you for highlighting this disturbing article.I don’t want to act like I don’t agree with what you have written, because there are portions of it that I do agree with.We need to be careful not to kill the messengers who constantly remind us just how lucky we are to live on our one and only magnificent planet and who also tell us about what we wantonly and unrelentingly do to them and to their homes.Indeed, we've freely and indiscriminately killed countless millions of other animals because we've created situations in which they become "pests" and we kill because we can.Kill, kill, and kill some more; that's the only solution for righting the wrongs for which we -- yes, we -- are responsible.These individuals are maimed and killed because they're of no use to us, so some argue.For those wishing to reach Time's audience with a rebuttal, please send letters to the editor at: letters@And then, when decide they've become "pests", we kill them.It won't be soon enough when this term is deleted from our vocabulary once and for all and these animals are respected for who they are and allowed to live in peace and safety. Cruelty can't stand the spotlight and if people who disagree with the tone of this piece don't do anything, millions upon millions of animals will be killed. Von Drehle's essay on cover of Time with a picture of a lone deer is, "American's Pest Problem: Why the rules of hunting are about to change". If they do, and killing animals we call "pests" is as easily accepted as swatting flies or mosquitos when they bother you, it's because those who oppose the kill, kill, kill mentality remain silent. best essay on are we happier than our forefathers Some of the messages I received had quotes from this essay that at once shocked and saddened me. best essay on are we happier than our forefathers




Status: FreeWare
OS: Windows|Mac OS
Autors 3427
Update: 26-Nov-2017 18:05
Cat: Home »