So we should shoot bad drivers your saying? Every little bit helps if we kill 50 wolves that is saving human lives, the wolves here have lost all there fear on humans and if you see one in the wild and dont have a gun, you better have been #1 on your track team otherwise your his lunch. And i cannot show you these articles because they were printed in the newspaper not online I looked it up on google but i guess these hicks down here dont even know what the internet is heh.
| |
*walking through the forest*
"Huh what's that noise?" Suddenly 50 wolves (and a kangaroo) burst from the shrubbery and maul poor Kujila to death! ~Kujila | |
I am indeed from Australia, and believe me, we have PLENTY of dangerous animals. Dingos, sharks, spiders, snakes, even kangaroos. (No, I'm not joking about the kangaroos.)
None of these dangerous animals will attack humans unless provoked. Dingo attacks are nearly unheard of; shark attacks are only slightly more common. Spider and snake bites are usually due to people being careless or unlucky (for example, accidentally treading on an unseen snake). Kangaroos have powerful kicks, but if you don't do anything stupid like charge at them yelling loudly then they won't harm you.
Then show me those reports. The site you linked to lists a handful of deaths per century. Certainly that's a bad thing, but let's put this in perspective for a moment.
Here's a site showing the number of deaths on US highways in 2002: http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/statistics/ stats-usa_indiv-states_per-capita_2002.htm
Note in particular:
USA Overall: [...] 42815 [deaths in 2002]
[...]
America has made the least progress of 23 countries over the ten-year period from 1992 through 2001, with a reduction of just 4% in the per-capita death rate.
Over FORTY THOUSAND DEATHS PER YEAR. How many people are actually killed by wolves each year? (And I'm not talking about attacks, either; these road statistics don't include injuries, so to be fair neither should yours.)
And how much is this wolf-killing operation costing, exactly? I'm willing to bet it's a lot. Large-scale culls of dangerous animals are usually conducted from the air, which is expensive.
Hmm, let's see. What's worse - a handful of deaths (i.e. your alleged wolf killings), or many deaths (i.e. the well-documented road toll)? Which problem is more deserving of having this money spent on it?
Seems to me that this culling operation is a purely political exercise designed to gain support from hunters and farmers. The money could be spent saving more lives elsewhere. Reducing Idaho wolf population by fifty percent would save maybe a couple of human lives; reducing the number of road deaths by a mere ten percent across all of Idaho would save dozens.