btwIAMAzoophileDogs are cute. 2 points on 2016-09-12 16:03:41
Maybe it's just due to my lack of knowledge on the subject matter(probably not) but this sounds absolutely absurd and fucked up?
fuzzyfurry 3 points on 2016-09-12 17:17:15
First a controversial sterilization program, now this? I also don't feel there's much knowledge that would make me think society's attitude towards animals is not absurd and fucked up. I get it, they are considered an "invasive species" and some sort of population control may be needed, but how about researching something compassionate, instead of large scale killing?
[deleted] 2 points on 2016-09-14 12:41:57
This is the question of the 99 ninjas.
"I made an enemy among a clan of ninja masters. That clan has sent 99 ninjas to kill me! What am I supposed to do?"
"You die. What you were supposed to do is to not generate the problem in the first place. Now you have no good way out."
Charity animal welfare facilities that keep unwanted animals are a good thing but are not an effective solution. Adoption programs only get you so far. They are great - they make a BIG difference for the animals involved - but success is limited. They can take only so many animals until they become full. At that point you can barely keep the animals in good conditions and you start rejecting newcomers and you need a different plan. Since they failed to develop a plan before this happened, now there is no easy way out.
altoids1989zoo-exclusive 3 points on 2016-09-17 17:06:20
Apparently, it was more of a call for "help," AKA more funding, rather than them planning on killing them en masse. Here's something absurd though:
The BLM now houses about 45,000 in holding corrals and pastures — a practice that costs $50,000 per animal, $50 million a year and accounts for 65 percent of the bureau’s Wild Horse and Burro Program budget, according to agency figures.
Why is nobody questioning how absurd a figure 50k is for each horse? Also, a commenter on that site brought up a good point about the stupidity of the entire situation:
Wild horses are underpopulated: Per BLM's own geneticist, 83% of wild-horse herds suffer from arbitrary management levels (AMLs) set below minimum-viable population. For instance, the AML for Oregon's Beaty's Butte herd restricts the stocking-density to 1 wild horse per 7 square miles. If there are 2 wild horses per 7 square miles, BLM can technically declare an "overpopulation" because there is "double the number" that the preposterous AML allows. In contrast, BLM authorizes 119 cattle per 7 square miles. After eliminating 99% of the Beaty's Butte herd, BLM replaced the wild horses with cattle to accommodate a rancher, who had secured a contract to supply grass-fed beef to an upscale grocery chain.
So in other words, they're saying that they lack the land and money for keeping additional wild horses, yet they place over 100x as many cattle on the same amount of space they allocate per each horse. It's absurd.
peacheslala97 2 points on 2016-09-18 11:52:29
They just don't want to adopt out old horses or take care of them. It's cruel how they do this.
/r/zoophilia archive
More info: http://www.wildhorsepreservation.org/media/lawsuits-public-outrage-halt-dangerous-blm-wild-horse-sterilization-experiments
Maybe it's just due to my lack of knowledge on the subject matter(probably not) but this sounds absolutely absurd and fucked up?
First a controversial sterilization program, now this? I also don't feel there's much knowledge that would make me think society's attitude towards animals is not absurd and fucked up. I get it, they are considered an "invasive species" and some sort of population control may be needed, but how about researching something compassionate, instead of large scale killing?
This is the question of the 99 ninjas.
"I made an enemy among a clan of ninja masters. That clan has sent 99 ninjas to kill me! What am I supposed to do?" "You die. What you were supposed to do is to not generate the problem in the first place. Now you have no good way out."
Charity animal welfare facilities that keep unwanted animals are a good thing but are not an effective solution. Adoption programs only get you so far. They are great - they make a BIG difference for the animals involved - but success is limited. They can take only so many animals until they become full. At that point you can barely keep the animals in good conditions and you start rejecting newcomers and you need a different plan. Since they failed to develop a plan before this happened, now there is no easy way out.
Here's an interesting followup. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2016/09/16/the-government-is-not-going-to-kill-45000-wild-horses-not-yet-anyway/
Apparently, it was more of a call for "help," AKA more funding, rather than them planning on killing them en masse. Here's something absurd though:
Why is nobody questioning how absurd a figure 50k is for each horse? Also, a commenter on that site brought up a good point about the stupidity of the entire situation:
So in other words, they're saying that they lack the land and money for keeping additional wild horses, yet they place over 100x as many cattle on the same amount of space they allocate per each horse. It's absurd.
They just don't want to adopt out old horses or take care of them. It's cruel how they do this.