Do we need wildlife?

[peterk1234]

The mule deer mismanagement discussion got me thinking. Well that, and I just finished watching Life on our Planet on Netflix. Does it really matter if we wipe out all the deer, elk, wolves and anything else that lives where people do?

Think about it for a minute. I will pick on massachusetts, only because it is the only other state I really know well. Much of it is sterile. Heck, hardly even have insects. I remember driving to the reservoir to fish with my dad as a kid. In ten minutes the windshield was full of dead bugs. Not anymore. Lucky if one bug gets sacrificed. Bats are gone. I notice that there are a fraction of the birds. Nobody really cares. And it has no impact on anyone's life. No bugs is a good thing right? All we need really are a bunch of breweries, bars and restaurants. It is the modern day jungle.

We don't need wildlife. We don't use them for food anymore. If anything, they're pests. Deer eat our gardens. Coyotes eat our pets.

During the last 4 billion years we have had plenty of mass extinctions. Maybe we are part of the process of the next one.

I love the outdoors. I love animals. But much of that is due to the fact that I love to hunt. I certainly don't need to hunt. I can get what I need from the grocery store. Maybe these pesky animals everywhere and open lands need to make way for the next stage of the planet's life where there is nothing left but humans.

Maybe I'm actually the problem. I'm holding onto this nostalgic idea that for some reason is still lingering in my dna. The modern man doesn't hunt. He doesn't live in nature. He does not cherish his tools to harvest animals.

Deer have no place in Worcester or Boston. Why should we have them anywhere in between?

 

[Pewpew82]

The mule deer mismanagement discussion got me thinking. Well that, and I just finished watching Life on our Planet on Netflix. Does it really matter if we wipe out all the deer, elk, wolves and anything else that lives where people do?

Think about it for a minute. I will pick on massachusetts, only because it is the only other state I really know well. Much of it is sterile. Heck, hardly even have insects. I remember driving to the reservoir to fish with my dad as a kid. In ten minutes the windshield was full of dead bugs. Not anymore. Lucky if one bug gets sacrificed. Bats are gone. I notice that there are a fraction of the birds. Nobody really cares. And it has no impact on anyone's life. No bugs is a good thing right? All we need really are a bunch of breweries, bars and restaurants. It is the modern day jungle.

We don't need wildlife. We don't use them for food anymore. If anything, they're pests. Deer eat our gardens. Coyotes eat our pets.

During the last 4 billion years we have had plenty of mass extinctions. Maybe we are part of the process of the next one.

I love the outdoors. I love animals. But much of that is due to the fact that I love to hunt. I certainly don't need to hunt. I can get what I need from the grocery store. Maybe these pesky animals everywhere and open lands need to make way for the next stage of the planet's life where there is nothing left but humans.

Maybe I'm actually the problem. I'm holding onto this nostalgic idea that for some reason is still lingering in my dna. The modern man doesn't hunt. He doesn't live in nature. He does not cherish his tools to harvest animals.

Deer have no place in Worcester or Boston. Why should we have them anywhere in between?

I really hope there is no seriousness in this.

The "circle of life" includes everything living. Bugs, coyotes, deer, trees. Trees clean the air we breathe. The wildlife that transfer seeds and fertilizer for new plant life are fully necessary.

Without wildlife, we have no trees and no oxygen to breathe.

 

[ccc23454]

 

[YukonGold]

We are, in fact, in another extinction event and it is human-caused. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

The question of whether or not we "need" wildlife is an androcentric worldview, a dominating worldview which is why we're in this mess. Some people are perfectly okay with the idea that the world revolves around us humans, and it's our right to subdue everything to our power and leave a mess in our wake. Personally, I am not okay with that, and think we have a responsibility to do everything we can to find a way to live in balance with our planet. I also think we're failing spectacularly at it. Makes me extremely glad I don't have kids. With extinction, pollution...we're leaving a pretty shitty world for them.

 

[SaskHunter]

Yes.

 

[TOGIE]

didn't wllm smoke a few deer within spitting distance of boston?

to the seriousness of your question our country greatly values its wildlife. even if it largely has a very ignorant and detached understanding of its wildlife. but it greatly values it and will work to preserve it. even if that value and work is filled with perverse irony.

society at large's value of wildlife is indeed detached in such a way that it will remain willfully ignorant to its immediate effects on wildlife by killing them off with their roads and homes, but will remain intensely worried about the wildlife somewhere else that they don't live near nor understand.

overall though, yes, the US greatly values its wildlife and i think the majority of citizens will demand to keep wildlife populations intact. but wildlife will, in many places, continue to lose.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The mule deer mismanagement discussion got me thinking. Well that, and I just finished watching Life on our Planet on Netflix. Does it really matter if we wipe out all the deer, elk, wolves and anything else that lives where people do?

Think about it for a minute. I will pick on massachusetts, only because it is the only other state I really know well. Much of it is sterile. Heck, hardly even have insects. I remember driving to the reservoir to fish with my dad as a kid. In ten minutes the windshield was full of dead bugs. Not anymore. Lucky if one bug gets sacrificed. Bats are gone. I notice that there are a fraction of the birds. Nobody really cares. And it has no impact on anyone's life. No bugs is a good thing right? All we need really are a bunch of breweries, bars and restaurants. It is the modern day jungle.

We don't need wildlife. We don't use them for food anymore. If anything, they're pests. Deer eat our gardens. Coyotes eat our pets.

During the last 4 billion years we have had plenty of mass extinctions. Maybe we are part of the process of the next one.

I love the outdoors. I love animals. But much of that is due to the fact that I love to hunt. I certainly don't need to hunt. I can get what I need from the grocery store. Maybe these pesky animals everywhere and open lands need to make way for the next stage of the planet's life where there is nothing left but humans.

Maybe I'm actually the problem. I'm holding onto this nostalgic idea that for some reason is still lingering in my dna. The modern man doesn't hunt. He doesn't live in nature. He does not cherish his tools to harvest animals.

Deer have no place in Worcester or Boston. Why should we have them anywhere in between?

What are you talking about guy? Massachusetts makes Montana look sterile. I'm still getting emails from Mass wildlife to use my tag inside the 495 because there are sooo many deer in Boston lol.











All these are inside the 495

 

[Deleted member 28227]

didn't wllm smoke a few deer within spitting distance of boston?

It's a great thread topic but man do people over look the urban areas/urban interface for wildlife. I don't have pics but I watched bald eagles fishing in the seaport and saw a peregrine outside MGH.

and yeah all of these were taken in here over the course of 2 years.

I think there aren't many western cities you could get ducks, turkey, deer, and pheasant on public land within 45 min of downtown.

 

[SAJ-99]

The question is pretty broad. Done, as a society value wildlife? A little. Do individuals value wildlife over their ability to make an extra buck? No. Mostly our view of wildlife is whitewashed to make us feel better. You will notice that we don’t have any pictures of passenger pigeons flying around Massachusetts or anywhere else.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Heck, hardly even have insects. I remember driving to the reservoir to fish with my dad as a kid. In ten minutes the windshield was full of dead bugs. Not anymore. Lucky if one bug gets sacrificed. Bats are gone. I notice that there are a fraction of the birds. Nobody really cares. And it has no impact on anyone's life. No bugs is a good thing right? All we need really are a bunch of breweries

Now this I couldn't agree with more and have noticed as well. It is pretty wild the lack of bugs. Seemed like only a few years ago I was scraping bugs of my windshield every time I got out of my car and I can't remember the last time I had to...

 

[TOGIE]

I think there aren't many western cities you could get ducks, turkey, deer, and pheasant on public land within 45 min of downtown.

exactly.

western towns, for sure. western cities? not a chance. exhibit A as to why living in colorado with a sustainable job isn't at all what it's cracked up to be for the "want to live out west" crowd - for the skiers and hunters alike.

but even if you live in a cute little western town with mule deer on public land 8 minutes away, you might not even be able to get the tag except once every 2-3 years.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

exactly.

western towns, for sure. western cities? not a chance. exhibit A as to why living in colorado with a sustainable job isn't at all what it's cracked up to be for the "want to live out west" crowd - for the skiers and hunters alike.

but even if you live in a cute little western town with mule deer on public land 8 minutes away, you might not even be able to get the tag except once every 2-3 years.

Meanwhile in MA

 

[Gellar]

and saw a peregrine outside MGH.

Peregrine falcons very well may be extirpated from the U.S. if it wasn't for reintroduction efforts that started in cities. Nesting boxes were placed on the outside of tall buildings in downtowns and a breeding pair of falcons would be placed in the box. In the midwest, it is believed that Peregrine Falcons are above their historic numbers because of the success of the urban nesting programs in cities. The falcons are used to control other birds like pigeons and swallows.

 

[YukonGold]

You will notice that we don’t have any pictures of passenger pigeons flying around Massachusetts or anywhere else.

I think there will always be some species around, the ones that are able to adapt to human development. White-tailed deer, raccoons, peregrine falcons, the host of nonnative species that have been introduced, etc. The ones people don't have to think much about (except when they're causing problems). Sure. But it remains extremely easy to forget about the ones that don't do so well. We allow them to quietly disappear off the landscape, while pointing at the white-tails and saying, "But look, deer, we're doing great!"

 

[TOGIE]

Meanwhile in MA

View attachment 306106

the only thing that beats basically every state east of the mississippi at this point is wyoming IMO.

i'm trying to work that angle with my wife - only options from here on out are wyoming and wisconsin, hun.

 

[peterk1234]

I really hope there is no seriousness in this.

The "circle of life" includes everything living. Bugs, coyotes, deer, trees. Trees clean the air we breathe. The wildlife that transfer seeds and fertilizer for new plant life are fully necessary.

Without wildlife, we have no trees and no oxygen to breathe.

Of course I'm not serious. I was just thinking about how quickly we are destroying habitat. Some of it is subtle, like bugs. What happens when there are no more mosquitos, for example? Some animal populations are considered successful because there exists a couple thousand in a state. Don't get me wrong. The US is the gold standard for wildlife management. But what will it all look like a few generations from now? Balancing it will become very challenging as the pressure to relieve other countries of over crowding is forced upon our landscape and of course, population just continues to increase as intended.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I think there will always be some species around, the ones that are able to adapt to human development. White-tailed deer, raccoons, peregrine falcons, the host of nonnative species that have been introduced, etc. The ones people don't have to think much about (except when they're causing problems). Sure. But it remains extremely easy to forget about the ones that don't do so well. We allow them to quietly disappear off the landscape, while pointing at the white-tails and saying, "But look, deer, we're doing great!"

Definitely true, though I find it interesting that maybe counterintuitively it's sometimes near population centers where threatened species are actually making it and mean while struggling in rural areas.

I was pretty shocked to learn there one of few populations of Eastern Timber rattlers in MA is about 8 miles from downtown in the Blue Hills Reservation.

 

[YukonGold]

Definitely true, though I find it interesting that maybe counterintuitively it's sometimes near population centers where threatened species are actually making it and mean while struggling in rural areas.

I was pretty shocked to learn there one of few populations of Eastern Timber rattlers in MA is about 8 miles from downtown in the Blue Hills Reservation.

Yeah. Makes me curious what exactly is going on in those situations. In the case of the rattlers, maybe because the population of feral, human-loving animals (rats, mice, birds) supplies a food source that is severely depleted in the wild?

 

[Treeshark]

only options from here on out are wyoming and wisconsin, hun.

Reading this makes my day in a very Wisconsin way.

I know you have a little one at home now- it’s hard for me to imagine a better place to raise a family than here.

 

[TOGIE]

Reading this makes my day in a very Wisconsin way.

I know you have a little one at home now- it’s hard for me to imagine a better place to raise a family than here.

and i even with my very limited experience being further east than kansas it's not hard for me to agree.

colorado, besides objectively having some of the most beautiful and dramatic mountain scenery in the west and a lifetime of adventure that awaits amongst it, has long been turning into a real crock of shit. it's a stressful place to live, on every front. i'm pretty over it.

but as usual, all the immediate family is here - pretty well bolted down now starting to sprout little ones, whether i like it or not.

all that said, if i had to be bolted down somewhere, colorado is still very far from the worst place to be stuck.