Re: Shooting Ourselves in the Foot

"Dutch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Andrew Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Dutch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "Andrew Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > >
> > > > As I said at the very start of this thread, "I am not arguing either
> > way"
> > > > because my primary reasons for not using animals are environmental.
> > >
> > > Then you should be hunting and fishing, it is more environmentally
> > friendly
> >
> > How can you say that about fishing. Do you have any idea what happens to
> > the underwater environment when fish stocks get depleted?
>
> Do you have any idea what happens to land when it's overused?

Sure do, I see it all the time, everywhere I turn my head in this country I
see cattle and sheep farms.
Anyway you obviously don't understand what happens when fish stocks are
depleted, so I'll give you an example. Here in New Zealand Snapper
populations
have declined from overfishing, snapper are a natural predator of an
animal called kina which eats kelp. Now if you went and took a dive in our
waters you would notice that the sea beds are completely covered by kina all
munching on kelp because there are not enought snapper to keep their
population down, or should I say what's left of it, because in places most
of the kelp has disappeared. Next everything that depends on kelp will die
and a cascade effect will take place. Leaving no seafood for your dinner
table.

>It turns to a
> barren dust bowl.  You could conceivably catch enough fish for your own
use
> if you live near the ocean,

Or I could just buy it from the supermarket, makes no difference whether
I caught it or whether a trawler caught it.

>and you would very likely be having no greater
> impact on the environment than with your purchases of shrink wrapped
veggie
> burgers.

I would be supporting a practise that cannot be sustained. There is a good
chance that technology improvements will lessen the impact of vege
production
on the environment, however the exact opposite will happen with fishing.
Technology improvements will just make catching fish more effective and
hasten
the demise of the oceans.

>
> Anyway, the topic here still is about this bullshit story about an
imaginary
> hunter who saw the light and wanted to stop harming animals.
>

Yeh sorry, it got off topic because rick was prompting me about why I did
not
respond to his comments, so I had to explain myself.

>
> > > than the large-scale monoculture farming that at least partially
> supports
> > > most vegan diets.
> > >
> > > [..]
> > >
> > > > My point is that I don't think humans have a clue about how
ecosystems
> > > > really work and it seems to me that the more we can leave them be
then
> > > > the better. The problem is that people do not notice gradual
changes,
> > > > if someone moved into my street these days they would probably think
> > > > that the bay had always been like it is, lifeless and dirty.
> > >
> > > This is about a hunter who supposedly realized one day that his quarry
> > were
> > > living, breathing creatures, "saw the light", found compassion, quit
> > > hunting, and went vegetarian. It was never about environmentalism.
> > >
> > > I'm more convinced than ever that the story is a fake. Making demons
out
> > of
> > > all hunters is all too typical a routine for vegans and ARAs, anything
> to
> > > reinforce this us/them notion that supports their raging sanctimony.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>