introducing a king snake population...

Dedicated exclusively to field herping.

Moderator: Scott Waters

SnakeDude
Posts: 417
Joined: July 14th, 2011, 8:18 am
Location: Denver, CO

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by SnakeDude » December 21st, 2011, 11:39 am

ditto
-Ian

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 21st, 2011, 3:29 pm

psyon wrote:Question of curiosity. For people that live in areas with large predators such as Bears, Mountain Lions, or Wolves. Is it considered ok to just shoot any of those animals that wonder onto your property because you fear they will eat your kids?
I think on some level you are attempting to compare apples to carbeurators here...i am doubtful the reptilian brain can quite register the dehabituation concept in the same manner a bear can, and I assure you the day a mountain lion wanders on my property it will be the last time it does so as i will be drinking my morning coffee from from a mug crafted from it's skull, I will not take a chance with that type of animal around my children, on the other hand if i found a rattler i likely would simply relocate it as i feel reasonable competent to do such a task, I will not involve F&W or animal control in such nonsense. I guess those that would be on the pro kill side of this arguement would consider it simply a pre-emptive strike and make the assumption they should have the right to manage their property and it's resources as they see fit, and i'm not sure i would necessarily disagree with that position, especially since in many locations there are no legal protection for nuicance snakes, or mammals for that instance. Personally i consider it my mission and I have good reason to terminate every single racoon that sets a paw on my property with extreme prejudice which i don't doubt there are some forum members as beast called them huggers that would take an issue with my idea of resource managment on my property for this. I am fortunate to live in a area where i don't have to face this dilemma concerning venomous snakes (at least that i've ever found on my property) as in all the years i've lived here i've turned up two snakes.....one of which was a black ratsnake in my quail pen with four lumps in it's belly and was too fat to escape the enclosure with it's prizes in it's belly. That snake got a free pass and a trip to a local park simply because i found the situation amusing but i assure you if this had become a common occurence (which for some people who keep fowl it is) i'd not have felt a bit of shame to start chopping heads off the local rat snake population to protect my personal interest, which in this case is domestic fowl. In other words i subscribe to the opinion human interest first.....local (especially non-endangered wildlife) second.

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 21st, 2011, 4:02 pm

squinn, but the attitude still appears to apply that "If I believe my loved ones are endanger, I can kill it". I hope people who believe that strongly support Castle Doctrine.

SnakeDude
Posts: 417
Joined: July 14th, 2011, 8:18 am
Location: Denver, CO

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by SnakeDude » December 21st, 2011, 4:10 pm

im not sure which side i really agree with here. i don't think it is appropriate under this circumstance to kill any of the animals involved, but then again there is a big difference in whether or not you are afraid the animal will endanger you, and whether or not it has...ITS SO CONFUSINGGGGGGGG :?: :?: :?:
Ian

User avatar
Mike VanValen
Posts: 2073
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:41 pm
Location: Connecticut
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Mike VanValen » December 21st, 2011, 4:37 pm

It's unreal how far some people will go to justify killing a snake. Ignorance at it's best.

Some of you are getting angry at the mere mention of another method that doesn't involve the death of a snake. Me brave. Kill snake!!!!!

:roll:

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 21st, 2011, 5:50 pm

psyon wrote:squinn, but the attitude still appears to apply that "If I believe my loved ones are endanger, I can kill it". I hope people who believe that strongly support Castle Doctrine.
Interesting parallel, i know i certainly support it, so i guess at least i'm consistent in your analogy especially it's recent incarnation in Indiana where it was significantly weakened in my opinion at least where LE is involved. Let me dissect your comment a little further I don't necessarily even think one needs to believe their loved ones are in danger to kill something I certainly don't feel my children are in danger from raccoons i just choose to manage my property in such a way to deter species populations from occurring that i consider detrimental to my plans for my property for instance......killing raccoons to protect birds, eliminating coyotes/woodchucks to protect hoofed livestock ect. I don't subscribe just because something is here i necessarily need to live and let live and deal with it, for instance if you like hatching a bunch of free range chickens/turkeys or watching squirrels play in your oak trees you may not want a healthy population of timber rattlers hanging about i think that decision needs to be left except in the most extreme critical examples to the property owners discretion.

I'd like to make another small point also, I think in order to fully understand all the dynamics at play we need to make an effort to not convey our comfort zone on the average person who has never deliberately stood within 10 foot of a snake and not expect them to have the same experience and positive reaction we have to snakes. Killing a snake is probably a more natural reaction for most people than us photographing it, and i'd strongly prefer someone with no experience not try to bag up/box up a snake and end up getting envenomated through ineptness.

User avatar
Bob
Posts: 127
Joined: November 1st, 2011, 12:35 pm
Location: livingston MT

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bob » December 21st, 2011, 5:53 pm

Wrong thread...edit & moved.

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 21st, 2011, 6:21 pm

about i think that decision needs to be left except in the most extreme critical examples to the property owners discretion.
The problem there is that how you manage your property affects your neighbors property as well (depending on how big your property is). It is one reason why, at least in my state, you can fish in your own lake without a license, but you can not hunt. The wildlife is not limited to only your property, and has a larger effect on the populations of animals around you.

User avatar
azatrox
Posts: 793
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 5:51 am
Location: Arizona

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by azatrox » December 21st, 2011, 6:46 pm

"I killed it to protect my family."

This argument is nothing more than a rationalization because:

a) Most of the people that say this have no idea whether the snake they just killed is venomous or not (and in most cases not).
b) The snake seen is not the dangerous snake, as any snake seen is actively avoided.
c) Actively attempting to kill the snake often means coming into close proximity to it, thus placing oneself (and by extension) one's family at greater risk than simply leaving it alone.
d) After "protecting one's family", said hero often herds his/her spouse and offspring into a vehicle weighing several thousand pounds and proceeds to travel at great speeds down roadways along with many other absent minded humans in vehicles weighing several thousand pounds each, thus negating any "protection from injury" the snake (supposedly) presented.
e) all of the above.

You may not need to have balls to answer this question, but it does require at least a modicum of gray matter.

-Kris

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 21st, 2011, 7:24 pm

psyon wrote:
about i think that decision needs to be left except in the most extreme critical examples to the property owners discretion.
The problem there is that how you manage your property affects your neighbors property as well (depending on how big your property is). It is one reason why, at least in my state, you can fish in your own lake without a license, but you can not hunt. The wildlife is not limited to only your property, and has a larger effect on the populations of animals around you.
I'm not sure i'm really following your point on the larger effect comment, sure my killing raccoons on my property effects other peoples property and the general ecosystem (I would argue in a positive way for both herps and humans since coons tend to predate various herp species) in the same way exterminating a rattlesnake population likely leads to an increase in the population of their target prey species, but well building a house 100 years ago in the first place did that....planting a garden did that, pulling up sumac trees and planting apple and persimmon trees sure as heck did that, every choice we make has a consequence, every time we choice one type of landscaping or build habitat to favor one type of animal another species likely will suffer, it is inevitable. Does that provision in your state about hunting extend to trapping and killing nuisance wildlife as well? In my state i do not need any permit to trap and kill common nuisance wildlife (including common mammalian species) but would need to buy a licence to harvest deer (unless i had F&W come out and agree they are doing significant property damage) In many places snakes fall under the legal definition of nuisance wildlife, for that matter in many states cruelty statues do not even cover cold blooded animals which is why Dbags can amuse us all by setting their houses on fire by trying to kill snakes with a lighter and flammable aerosol cans. In my humble opinion i disagree preventing landowners from hunting on their own property is due to the larger effect on the animal populations, mostly deer or as I like to call them antlered rodents around your property i would suggest it has more to do with raising revenue through selling deer tags ect. than true conservation. Based on the amount of people who actually bother to go into the woods and hunt now compared to when i was a kid I seriously doubt deer are in any danger of over harvesting in most areas of the country.

User avatar
Brian Hubbs
Posts: 4733
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:41 am
Location: "Buy My Books"-land

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Brian Hubbs » December 21st, 2011, 8:22 pm


User avatar
John Martin
Posts: 515
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 9:57 pm
Location: North end of Lake Okeechobee, Florida

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by John Martin » December 21st, 2011, 11:18 pm

squinn wrote: and I assure you the day a mountain lion wanders on my property it will be the last time it does so as i will be drinking my morning coffee from from a mug crafted from it's skull, I will not take a chance with that type of animal around my children

Personally i consider it my mission and I have good reason to terminate every single racoon that sets a paw on my property with extreme prejudice
Holy shite! These are some of the most ignorant statements I've ever heard. Dude (or dudette), have you ever considered co-existing with nature? I think you're living in the wrong environment, perhaps you should just move to the big city! :lol: I know mountain lion attacks HAVE occurred, but they are relatively rare, and certainly the exception to the rule. Just sounds to me like you're paranoid.

I never cease to be amazed at where some of these threads lead to. Please pass the popcorn! :crazyeyes:

edit: Hubbs, finally relented and had to play your Limbaugh video. You are one sick puppy... :D Even more so if you actually listen to that guy... :shock:

User avatar
Brian Hubbs
Posts: 4733
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:41 am
Location: "Buy My Books"-land

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Brian Hubbs » December 22nd, 2011, 12:43 am

:lol: :lol: :lol: I love it for the comedy...

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 3:34 am

John Martin wrote:
squinn wrote: and I assure you the day a mountain lion wanders on my property it will be the last time it does so as i will be drinking my morning coffee from from a mug crafted from it's skull, I will not take a chance with that type of animal around my children

Personally i consider it my mission and I have good reason to terminate every single racoon that sets a paw on my property with extreme prejudice
Holy shite! These are some of the most ignorant statements I've ever heard. Dude (or dudette), have you ever considered co-existing with nature? I think you're living in the wrong environment, perhaps you should just move to the big city! :lol: I know mountain lion attacks HAVE occurred, but they are relatively rare, and certainly the exception to the rule. Just sounds to me like you're paranoid.

I never cease to be amazed at where some of these threads lead to. Please pass the popcorn! :crazyeyes:

edit: Hubbs, finally relented and had to play your Limbaugh video. You are one sick puppy... :D Even more so if you actually listen to that guy... :shock:
I think you really need to take the birkenstocks off and take a reality check in answer to your question....No I have not considered even for a moment co-existing with the parts of nature on my property that i consider counterproductive to my land use goals of my property :evil: . Ignorant? I would consider your comment clearly ignorant from the perspective of the handful of people who have been killed/maimed by your little woodland friends, or by anyone who participates in keeping smaller farm stock. I personally consider it a wise choice that those who came before us eliminated a vast portion of the range of the apex predator (ML) in question in favor of human habititation and agriculture. I generally find those that rattle their sabers the loudest about reintroduction of apex predators especially those that potentially can kill humans rarely have any skin in the game themselves. Mostly the live in their little suburban homes and townhouses in the city. I assure you it is completely ignorant to believe you can keep livestock in an area with predators and not manage them somehow. For me my first line of defense is a large pyrenese that can mouth a basketball and has no love for any wild animal that threatens HER flock, and i assure you she believes those are her animals and deters a lot of predation, that being said even that step does not 100% eliminate, sooner or later a hungry predator is going to go for an easy meal and once it starts it will come back until it is killed or relocated. I did not move my family to an area zoned argricultural with the notion that i would not have to manage the local predator population if i wanted to protect my dinner on the hoof. By no means do i consider myself a rancher or a farmer but i certainly do have a vested interest in protecting my investment and I will protect my investment of both time and money.

This debate is only going to get more intense as it seems ML are starting to move back into historical ranges. There have been several reports in my general area of ML, although at this point i would be willing to be they are simply identification errors and are simply bobcats.

User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1217
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bryan Hamilton » December 22nd, 2011, 8:24 am

Come to Nevada squinn. We have plenty of lions and there are no bag limits on them. You'll learn quickly that having lions around is no big deal. And neither is killing them.

User avatar
Dell Despain
Posts: 542
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:08 pm
Location: Montana

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Dell Despain » December 22nd, 2011, 8:43 am

squinn wrote: I assure you the day a mountain lion wanders on my property it will be the last time it does so as i will be drinking my morning coffee from from a mug crafted from it's skull,
squinn wrote:No I have not considered even for a moment co-existing with the parts of nature on my property that i consider counterproductive to my land use goals of my property
There are so many paranoid wack-a-doodle statements coming from you I don't know where to start. These are two of my favorites. :thumb: Keep it up.

Mountain Lions are scary. Heres one I took a photo of trying to tap into our phone lines.
Image

And this Badger was trying to dig into our house from our cistern to eat my kids. Luckily I killed it w/ old bessy (my shot gun), and I'm drinking coffee from it's skull, as I write this, while wearing my Birkenstocks.
Image
-Dell

User avatar
Dell Despain
Posts: 542
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:08 pm
Location: Montana

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Dell Despain » December 22nd, 2011, 8:57 am

John Vanek wrote:For me, part of the benefit of living in rural areas is the presence of predators. My rational, logical brain knows the difference between perceived risk and actual risk,
John Martin wrote:I never cease to be amazed at where some of these threads lead to. Please pass the popcorn!
The Johns hit the nail on the head.

-Dell

User avatar
Joe Farah
Posts: 259
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 12:54 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Joe Farah » December 22nd, 2011, 9:07 am

Dell Despain wrote:[...

And this Badger was trying to dig into our house from our cistern to eat my kids. Luckily I killed it w/ old bessy (my shot gun), and I'm drinking coffee from it's skull, as I write this, while wearing my Birkenstocks.

-Dell

:lol:

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 22nd, 2011, 9:20 am

squinn wrote:I assure you it is completely ignorant to believe you can keep livestock in an area with predators and not manage them somehow.
If you know you have a predator taking your livestock, that is one thing, but when you shoot first and ask questions later, you are making large assumptions about the animal itself. We have mountain lions that cross through Iowa from time to time. They aren't sticking around to mess with your or your family.

User avatar
ThatFrogGuy
Posts: 743
Joined: April 15th, 2011, 12:29 pm
Location: Southern Indiana
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by ThatFrogGuy » December 22nd, 2011, 9:56 am

squinn, do you get any enjoyment from nature other than killing it to "protect your family?"

User avatar
Mike Pingleton
Posts: 1472
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:45 am
Location: One of the boys from Illinois
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Mike Pingleton » December 22nd, 2011, 10:16 am

Dang it Dell, I nearly peed myself. :shock: I'd hate to soak my socks and Birkies.
Dell Despain wrote: There are so many paranoid wack-a-doodle statements coming from you I don't know where to start. These are two of my favorites. :thumb: Keep it up.

Mountain Lions are scary. Heres one I took a photo of trying to tap into our phone lines.

And this Badger was trying to dig into our house from our cistern to eat my kids. Luckily I killed it w/ old bessy (my shot gun), and I'm drinking coffee from it's skull, as I write this, while wearing my Birkenstocks.
-Dell

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 11:12 am

ThatFrogGuy wrote:squinn, do you get any enjoyment from nature other than killing it to "protect your family?"
ummmmm sure when it's not edible and please do not misquote me i never once said i do it to protect my family, i do not live in an area that harbors apex predators raccoons are not an apex predator that would be rediculous, i do it to protect my livestock. who are you to tell me how i should manage MY LAND or anyone else's for that matter? I also like to harvest wild mushrooms god forbid i cut down a few trees and seed them with oyster mushroom spores (yes the non-hullucinagenic kind) and pick berries to make wine, both things i have deliberately introduced or increased the density on my land do you have a problem with that too?. My primary concern is protecting my land use interests and if a particular species are counter productive to furthering those land use goals they simply have to go, it has nothing to do with enjoyment although i suppose after the multitude of rabbits i've found dead in their pens from being chewed to death through 1/4" holes by racoons i do get a certain sense of vindication and sense of accomplishment when i eliminate one of the vermin from my property if it makes you feel better they rarely go to waste. If you can not the concept that livestock and predators do not mix i can't really elaborate much further on this, i don't particularly take kindly to finding animals i've raised chewed up and deceased but hey that's just me maybe i can get all the coons together hold hands and sing coombya with them and they will stop predating my rabbits and chickens.

User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1217
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bryan Hamilton » December 22nd, 2011, 11:25 am

I can just see sqinn out there chasing vermin. Reminds me of another dedicated pursuer of vermin:


squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 11:38 am

psyon wrote:
squinn wrote:I assure you it is completely ignorant to believe you can keep livestock in an area with predators and not manage them somehow.
If you know you have a predator taking your livestock, that is one thing, but when you shoot first and ask questions later, you are making large assumptions about the animal itself. We have mountain lions that cross through Iowa from time to time. They aren't sticking around to mess with your or your family.
I assure you psyon and I say this with respect and this is from decades of experience of keeping fowl and rabbits once I see signs of raccoons beginning to move through my yard it is a 100% certainty within two weeks they will begin predating on my chickens or rabbits, they simply cannot resist an easily contained meal of meat even if there is plenty of food available in the form of garbage cans, persimmon fruit or any of their "natural/unnatural" foods this is something i have found to be an absolute certainty and is enough reason for me pre-emptively strike to avoid what is a complete inevitability. On a plus note my land is quite rich in salamanders which i assume is helped by the lack of racoon and possums on my land (another example of choices that lead to my personal land use goals, i much prefer finding salamanders and newts to coons) In all my years of combating this the only thing i have found to be even a slight deterrant is the pyranese, the other non-lethal solutions like little red flickering lights they sell are completely useless, for that matter relocation is useless and i base this on what happened when my local coon club imported a bunch of tagged boars from several states away to increase the size and vitality of the local coon genetic pool, almost every one died crossing the road trying to make their way back to michigan. Land management isn't hygenic and pretty but choices often need to be made depending on what your goals are for a particular plot of land, whether it be monoculture agriculture, microfarming or a butterfly garden.

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 11:41 am

Bryan Hamilton wrote:I can just see sqinn out there chasing vermin. Reminds me of another dedicated pursuer of vermin:

funny.........
Is this what you do in nature Bryan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk2vR8w2sjc

User avatar
ThatFrogGuy
Posts: 743
Joined: April 15th, 2011, 12:29 pm
Location: Southern Indiana
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by ThatFrogGuy » December 22nd, 2011, 11:45 am

squinn wrote:
ThatFrogGuy wrote:squinn, do you get any enjoyment from nature other than killing it to "protect your family?"
ummmmm sure when it's not edible and please do not misquote me i never once said i do it to protect my family, i do not live in an area that harbors apex predators raccoons are not an apex predator that would be rediculous, i do it to protect my livestock. who are you to tell me how i should manage MY LAND or anyone else's for that matter? I also like to harvest wild mushrooms god forbid i cut down a few trees and seed them with oyster mushroom spores (yes the non-hullucinagenic kind) and pick berries to make wine, both things i have deliberately introduced or increased the density on my land do you have a problem with that too?. My primary concern is protecting my land use interests and if a particular species are counter productive to furthering those land use goals they simply have to go, it has nothing to do with enjoyment although i suppose after the multitude of rabbits i've found dead in their pens from being chewed to death through 1/4" holes by racoons i do get a certain sense of vindication and sense of accomplishment when i eliminate one of the vermin from my property if it makes you feel better they rarely go to waste. If you can not the concept that livestock and predators do not mix i can't really elaborate much further on this, i don't particularly take kindly to finding animals i've raised chewed up and deceased but hey that's just me maybe i can get all the coons together hold hands and sing coombya with them and they will stop predating my rabbits and chickens.
Field herping isn't in this list, why are you here, to protect your land? :lol:
Bryan Hamilton wrote:I can just see sqinn out there chasing vermin. Reminds me of another dedicated pursuer of vermin:
:thumb:

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 22nd, 2011, 11:55 am

squinn wrote:who are you to tell me how i should manage MY LAND or anyone else's for that matter?
Well, we are in no way in any position to FORCE our ways upon you on how to manage your land, but as conservation minded people, that puts us in a position where we desire to educate land owners on how to better manage their land for the purpose of resource conservation.

You may not think your actions affect things outside your own property, and they may not for all we know, but if people were left to do absolutely anything they want on their own land, it can cause issues for other people. Don't get me wrong, I would be labeled as a libertarian for my political views, and I believe people should be able to do what they want with themselves and their property, as long as they do not infringe on the rights and liberties of the people around them. With that said, there are things you can do on your own property, that can strongly interfere with the rights and liberties of other people. If you were dumping toxic chemicals onto your property, you would contaminate not only your soil, but the surrounding soil as well. The pollutants would probably seep into the water table, and enter into other peoples wells. If a person was allowed to dam up a creek or river on their property, it could interfere with people who own property up stream who enjoy fishing. If you shot every single deer that wandered onto your property, you would effect the numbers for people who only hunt on their property for food. There are plenty of other things that you can do with your property that has an impact on the people around you.

User avatar
Dell Despain
Posts: 542
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:08 pm
Location: Montana

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Dell Despain » December 22nd, 2011, 12:28 pm

squinn wrote: i can get all the coons together hold hands and sing coombya with them and they will stop predating my rabbits and chickens.
Predating? I didn't understand how big your problems are, sorry my bad. I don't know how you're going to stop those coons from predating your rabbits and chickens, but getting together to sing Kumbaya probably won't work.

I predated a girl in college once.

Seriously... Raccoons can be a real threat to penned birds, and mammals, and they do need to be dealt with, trapped or shot. But this thread is here because of a Rattlesnake on someones porch, and most members here feel the Rattlesnake can be moved away a safe distance, probably not to be seen again.
We have Rattlesnakes on the hunting and fishing lodge I work at, and before I worked there the mangers killed every one they saw, but the viridis kept showing up. Now they call me and I move them across river, and out of harms way. Seems to work better then killing them, keeps me happy too.

That whole line about Mountain Lions being a threat to livestock and family is way blown out of proportion too. Sure there are documented cases where Lions have preyed on livestock, but most don't from my experience. I have a couple of buddies that are cattle ranchers, and both of them have Lions on their property, and haven't had any loss of livestock from one. Coyotes are more of a problem for them then Mountain Lion. The Lions hunt the turkey, and deer on their property, and don't seem to much care for livestock.
Now if your little three year old daughter was hiking in her Birkenstocks by herself where Cougars have been seen, I'd worry for her. :P

-Dell

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 1:07 pm

psyon wrote:
squinn wrote:who are you to tell me how i should manage MY LAND or anyone else's for that matter?
Well, we are in no way in any position to FORCE our ways upon you on how to manage your land, but as conservation minded people, that puts us in a position where we desire to educate land owners on how to better manage their land for the purpose of resource conservation.

You may not think your actions affect things outside your own property, and they may not for all we know, but if people were left to do absolutely anything they want on their own land, it can cause issues for other people. Don't get me wrong, I would be labeled as a libertarian for my political views, and I believe people should be able to do what they want with themselves and their property, as long as they do not infringe on the rights and liberties of the people around them. With that said, there are things you can do on your own property, that can strongly interfere with the rights and liberties of other people. If you were dumping toxic chemicals onto your property, you would contaminate not only your soil, but the surrounding soil as well. The pollutants would probably seep into the water table, and enter into other peoples wells. If a person was allowed to dam up a creek or river on their property, it could interfere with people who own property up stream who enjoy fishing. If you shot every single deer that wandered onto your property, you would effect the numbers for people who only hunt on their property for food. There are plenty of other things that you can do with your property that has an impact on the people around you.
Ok psyon since you (and a few others) are apparantly willing to have a serious intellectual discussion about this and not post passive agressive caddyshack videos simply to be a baboon i'll bite you have my full attention i will gladly listen to what you have to say about this with an open mind. How on earth do you propose i protect my interests (livestock), which i think we both agree with that i have a right to engage in agricultural pursuits on my land as well as have the right to change the character of my land to suit my desires (example planting groves of fruit trees, placing logs for mushroom cultivation (side effect being salamander habitat), I do not see any way i can effectively meet my goals in a cost effective manner for my land without managing the predators that prey on them. Beyond that those animals that are harvested do not go to waste, and i certainly feel one should have every right to harvest common species of both plant and animal on their property. I most certainly am not willing to spend $1,000s of dollars in enclosure uprades that may or may not work, beyond that it is extremely important to me for various reasons (one of them being tick management since i live in a known lyme disease area) that a portion of my flock particularly the guineas be free range. Now i've been doing this a long time and when you keep a flock there is a certain percent that is an acceptable loss, I assure you my losses in the past are well beyond acceptable. I live in damn near perfect coon habitat and planting a bunch of pawpaw and persimmon trees certainly hasn't helped that. Beyond the killing of the livestock i intend to harvest my trees not the racoons. I agree with your take that you should not be allowed to make certain changes if they negatively affect adjoining property, but this must be an extremely specific litmus test IMO for instance killing endangered species for the sake of killing them or your example of a dam that prevents fishing downstream are reasonable times i could see having some restrictions, but i don't think you are seriously making the arguement that killing common pest species raccoons and opposums even come close to fitting this criterea (especially since most rationale human beings would make the arguement both those species populations are artificially inflated due to man's intervention, also deer can probably be added to that list). This is not my opinion that I am not harming the local ecosystem this is in fact the opinion of my states Department of Natural resources since the only regulation on my trapping these two species are they suggest they be humanely euthanized.

At the end of the day call it selfish if you like but my needs and desire will trump that of the local wildlife within reasonable paramaters. Fact of the matter is any time you help one species you are likely hurting another (again the salamander example) One of the problems with the econazi's is they can't seem to grasp the big picture, nature is not a hermitically sealed laboratory every choice has a consequence, my choices lead one direction perhaps a mile down the street there is an old lady that feeds the local coon population and exaggerates their population each to their own........

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 1:15 pm

John Vanek wrote:Squinn, no one is trying to tell you what to do, and despite some poster's rough style of speaking, we are really just hoping offer some alternative views on land management.

We also seem to be discussing different things: proactively trapping raccoons (which are subsidized and at artificially high levels) to protect chickens is much different than shooting a vagrant mountain lion. Also, if you see a rattlesnake on your property, I can almost guarantee there are many more in the general vicinity. So while I understand your want to protect your family, you would have to kill MANY rattlesnakes before ever eliminating that risk, time which might be better spent (from an efficiency standpoint) reducing rattlesnake habitat, such as via the aforementioned silt fences, lawn mowing, and removing debris piles.

Thanks John but what matters at the end of the day is please respect the fact that it is my land you are all welcome to your opinion but at the end of the day the only person's opinion who really matters for my land is mine and the law. Fortunately the mountain lion part of this conversation is sheerly theoretical for me, i was discussing this in a broader sense and please keep in mind i personally was not pro rattlesnake killing, i specifically stated i would relocate rattlesnakes but that is an easier thing for me to do than someone who has no experience with snakes, so please don't drop the rattlesnake killing tag on me (I do not have a known rattlesnake population anywhere near the part of the state i live in), i am someone that enjoys herps and has a comfort level with them, i choose to encourage herp friendly habitat on my land not kill them don't hang that comment on me that was the OP of the thread, but thank you for your civility and interesting opinion about my situation.

*EDIT* ok i lied and before i get called out on it let me own up to it i do on occassion kill herps i enjoy both frog legs/snapping turtle in accordance to my states fish and game laws and although i don't harvest them myself gator tail is rarely turned away.

User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1217
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bryan Hamilton » December 22nd, 2011, 1:22 pm

squinn wrote:funny.........
Is this what you do in nature Bryan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk2vR8w2sjc
No way. That IS actually me in the video... What a small world.

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 1:32 pm

Bryan Hamilton wrote:
squinn wrote:funny.........
Is this what you do in nature Bryan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk2vR8w2sjc
No way. That IS actually me in the video... What a small world.
wow that is a freaky coincidence which one are you lol?.......all right we've both had our fun now. I promise I will try to not show my baboon arse from here on out.

User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1217
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bryan Hamilton » December 22nd, 2011, 1:38 pm

squinn wrote:wow that is a freaky coincidence which one are you lol?.......all right we've both had our fun now. I promise I will try to not show my baboon arse from here on out.
Me too. Good luck with the coons. We don't have any out here yet. I do have to deal with skunks and mice.

And the mice have driven me "caddyshack crazy" at times trying to get rid of them.

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 22nd, 2011, 2:09 pm

squinn wrote:Thanks John but what matters at the end of the day is please respect the fact that it is my land you are all welcome to your opinion but at the end of the day the only person's opinion who really matters for my land is mine and the law.
Don't forget the opinion of people who make or influence the laws.
squinn wrote:How on earth do you propose i protect my interests (livestock), which i think we both agree with that i have a right to engage in agricultural pursuits on my land as well as have the right to change the character of my land to suit my desires (example planting groves of fruit trees, placing logs for mushroom cultivation (side effect being salamander habitat), I do not see any way i can effectively meet my goals in a cost effective manner for my land without managing the predators that prey on them.
The first step to stop any threat, is first to determine if a threat is present, and then to identify it. In the case of your livestock, you have already established that a threat is present, presumably by the loss of birds, and you have identified that the threat is from raccoons. The next step would be to analyze why the threat is there. Are they finding holes in your chicken houses, or simply taking advantage of the free range foul? Is there anything you can do within your means to deter or circumvent the threat? Can you patch holes, put up fencing, or anything else? In your case, you said you are not willing to spend $1000s on fencing, so you do not have a way to deter the threat, so you must move to the next step which is to eliminate it. In any case with livestock, I think killing a possible predator should only be an option AFTER it has been established that the predator is killing your animals. A random mountain lion walking through should not be shot on the hunch that it might take your chickens.

The original situation with the rattlesnake is different. First, lets determine if there is a threat. The rattlesnake was sitting in the open, not pursuing anyone. Is there a threat? No. If there is a rattlesnake on the deck, then most likely there are others hiding, so while the visible snake is not a threat, the hidden ones can be. What can we do to deter or circumvent the threat? Education. Learn to watch where you are stepping, teach your children how to be safe around the property. Train your pets to avoid the snakes as well. In this situation, there is no next step, because you can not eliminate the threat, because the threat is hidden, and is no longer a threat when revealed. Killing the visible snake is not going to eliminate the threat from others that are hiding.

User avatar
Bob
Posts: 127
Joined: November 1st, 2011, 12:35 pm
Location: livingston MT

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bob » December 22nd, 2011, 2:19 pm

Has anyone thought of introducing some king snakes?

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 22nd, 2011, 3:02 pm

psyon wrote:
squinn wrote:Thanks John but what matters at the end of the day is please respect the fact that it is my land you are all welcome to your opinion but at the end of the day the only person's opinion who really matters for my land is mine and the law.
Don't forget the opinion of people who make or influence the laws.
squinn wrote:How on earth do you propose i protect my interests (livestock), which i think we both agree with that i have a right to engage in agricultural pursuits on my land as well as have the right to change the character of my land to suit my desires (example planting groves of fruit trees, placing logs for mushroom cultivation (side effect being salamander habitat), I do not see any way i can effectively meet my goals in a cost effective manner for my land without managing the predators that prey on them.
The first step to stop any threat, is first to determine if a threat is present, and then to identify it. In the case of your livestock, you have already established that a threat is present, presumably by the loss of birds, and you have identified that the threat is from raccoons. The next step would be to analyze why the threat is there. Are they finding holes in your chicken houses, or simply taking advantage of the free range foul? Is there anything you can do within your means to deter or circumvent the threat? Can you patch holes, put up fencing, or anything else? In your case, you said you are not willing to spend $1000s on fencing, so you do not have a way to deter the threat, so you must move to the next step which is to eliminate it. In any case with livestock, I think killing a possible predator should only be an option AFTER it has been established that the predator is killing your animals. A random mountain lion walking through should not be shot on the hunch that it might take your chickens.

.
Oh man....yeah i'm 100% sure about the threat identification the methodology of the kill and typically catching the coon in a trap the next night is proof enough for me, coons have a very distinctive pattern of how they kill and eat a chicken, completely different from an owl, weasel or other predator (all my bird kills are nocturnal which is another piece of circumstantial evidence) i've lost more rabbits than i care to count who have been chewed to death through 1/4" hardware cloth, it is not a pretty sight. I tend to keep odd hours and am often up late a good flashlight can often reveal a pair or trio of coons in my backyard, very often it's seasonal as fall/winter is when this years young are kicked out of their nests and go on a search for territory normally they travel in threes, and i can almost guarantee over the course of three days i will catch three coons once the carnage starts more often than not they are not all that disturbed when they see me through the glass of my front door. Usually once i clean them out in spring i will not see them for the entire summer until the new ones move in search of territory I have found multiple chickens with their heads torn off through standard chicken wire the fencing is unbroken, smaller wire would not help as it would render the coop non-functional and causes feces to build up coons don't need much space to kill a bird, i wish it was a simple as running some more chicken wire and tidying up a few loose ends and the only time i felt the need to kill a coon is the once or twice a year i get a craving for seeing one in the crock pot with bbq sauce.

I understand your point about not killing a predator prior to it raiding your livestock and that philosophy would probably work well with coyotes, wolves and mountain lions, but i assure you any coon that takes up territory in my yard will become livestock killers, irregardless of alternate food options it is not a matter of if, it is when, there is no such thing as a coon that can co-exist with chickens in my experience, the same goes for foxes to my understanding but not my experience.

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 22nd, 2011, 3:37 pm

squinn wrote:I understand your point about not killing a predator prior to it raiding your livestock and that philosophy would probably work well with coyotes, wolves and mountain lions, but i assure you any coon that takes up territory in my yard will become livestock killers, irregardless of alternate food options it is not a matter of if, it is when, there is no such thing as a coon that can co-exist with chickens in my experience, the same goes for foxes to my understanding but not my experience.
You are still basing that on the fact that coons have already preyed on your animals. If you had never lost an animal to predation, I wouldn't see any reason to shoot every coon on site.

As someone else already mentioned, coons are a different situation than the rattlesnake, and are even different from other predators. Their numbers are inflated due to the lack of predators that eat them, and by the increased amount of food provided by people.

User avatar
Bob
Posts: 127
Joined: November 1st, 2011, 12:35 pm
Location: livingston MT

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bob » December 22nd, 2011, 3:49 pm

psyon wrote:
squinn wrote:I understand your point about not killing a predator prior to it raiding your livestock and that philosophy would probably work well with coyotes, wolves and mountain lions, but i assure you any coon that takes up territory in my yard will become livestock killers, irregardless of alternate food options it is not a matter of if, it is when, there is no such thing as a coon that can co-exist with chickens in my experience, the same goes for foxes to my understanding but not my experience.
You are still basing that on the fact that coons have already preyed on your animals. If you had never lost an animal to predation, I wouldn't see any reason to shoot every coon on site.

As someone else already mentioned, coons are a different situation than the rattlesnake, and are even different from other predators. Their numbers are inflated due to the lack of predators that eat them, and by the increased amount of food provided by people.
Mountain lions do eat raccoons. I'm sure they eat several hundred thousand chicken thieving coons for every family member taken. :thumb:

Actually around us, lions do attack or kill a few colts and foals each year (seem to like horse even more than Canadians :D ) House cats as well (I'll refrain from that one). We often have them sighted in back yards and one even walked past the high school stadium during a game a few years ago. The FW&Ps folks do a good job when concerns arise and you had best either have a licence, be in season or be able to show actual danger to life or property beyond having shit your pants when seeing it .

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 22nd, 2011, 5:44 pm

I'm sorry, just found this posted on another site, I could not resist posting it...

The coons are predating this woman!
Image

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by hellihooks » December 22nd, 2011, 6:08 pm

Squinn,
I find it pretty amusing that you actually think the land, and everything on it, 'Belongs' to you. And when you die... your kids will own it? And their kids after... never mind... by then ecological catastrophes will have most likely rid the world of all but a few scattered people, who will go back to being a part of nature, not it's ruler... :roll:

BTW... you keep mentioning 'rights'... other than the obvious and unsophisticated ' the Law says so', could you elaborate on what you think a 'right' actually is? jim

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by hellihooks » December 22nd, 2011, 6:19 pm

psyon wrote:I'm sorry, just found this posted on another site, I could not resist posting it...

The coons are predating this woman!
Image
Coons eat Beaver??? not what I heard :crazyeyes: (Sorry... also couldn't resist, but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna regret that one... :roll: )

RobK

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by RobK » December 22nd, 2011, 8:36 pm

beast wrote:Well if I kill it I will eat it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQKkuYEQhPo
I like how he tells people to "be mindful" and "keep his head pinned". This is a great instructional vid on how to get tagged.

EDIT: Not to mention his comments about baby cottonmouths being used for bait? Yeah, just grab one, no problem.

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 23rd, 2011, 3:31 am

hellihooks wrote:Squinn,
I find it pretty amusing that you actually think the land, and everything on it, 'Belongs' to you. And when you die... your kids will own it? And their kids after... never mind... by then ecological catastrophes will have most likely rid the world of all but a few scattered people, who will go back to being a part of nature, not it's ruler... :roll:

BTW... you keep mentioning 'rights'... other than the obvious and unsophisticated ' the Law says so', could you elaborate on what you think a 'right' actually is? jim
Now I'm no constitutional lawyer, just a country boy that likes to fish, hunt, farm and play with snakes but ok i'll do my best to defend the use of the word right..............seeing as several states have added agriculture and hunting as constitutional rights, (did i somehow misconstrue the definition of constitutional right?), so uh yeah i don't think referring to it (hunting and agriculture) as a right is exactly off base otherwise the words "constitutional right" would not be attached to it in a growing number of states.
Looks like Indiana is setting up to do this as well now, as well as a few other states, i believe this is the beginning eventually i expect many more states will adopt this position, personally i hope this gets adopted nationally as well i can't see any rationale human being finding a problem with this, I just find it sad we've come to a point in our society we actually have to defend growing a garden as a right, wow the concept of needing constitutional protection to grow a carrot would have blown my grandfather's mind. I'll let you google the states who have adopted this, or are considering it rather than me posting "biased" links, I assure you a few simple key word searches will provide you with more material than you will have time to read, try starting with michigan's constitutional law (there's that unpleasant, inconvenient word constitutional RIGHTagain), I believe it was the model for most of the others. Seems to be a counter reaction to oppose the USHS and peta moves and an all around good idea, with several more states in the process of adding similar propositions to voter referendum. For some reason are you opposed to people having the right to feed themselves rather than buy everything from Wal-Mart? I assume you consider yourself someone who is pro-nature, raising some of your own food/meat certainly has a smaller overall negative effect on the eco-system (maybe it will even postpone the inevitable human apocalypse you referenced :roll: ) and is a whole lot more "green" than big commercial farming, better for you and a great opportunity for teachable moments in a variety of subject with ones children.

So how did i do, was that the answer you were expecting? and did that satisfactorily elaborate on my definition of RIGHT or do i need to pursue it further?

By the way...i got curious myself the number of states that guarantee the constitutional Right to hunt and fish is 13 with several more in the process. I am unsure how many overlap with agriculture as well.

User avatar
Bob
Posts: 127
Joined: November 1st, 2011, 12:35 pm
Location: livingston MT

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bob » December 23rd, 2011, 5:57 am

hellihooks wrote:Squinn,
I find it pretty amusing that you actually think the land, and everything on it, 'Belongs' to you. And when you die... your kids will own it? And their kids after... never mind... by then ecological catastrophes will have most likely rid the world of all but a few scattered people, who will go back to being a part of nature, not it's ruler... :roll:

BTW... you keep mentioning 'rights'... other than the obvious and unsophisticated ' the Law says so', could you elaborate on what you think a 'right' actually is? jim
If you are referring to the rather anarchistic view of 'rights' that transcends our system that gets into La-La land pseudo religious thinking, that is far from sophisticated. Sort of like fixing the world's problems around a communal bong :D I actually find that thinking sort of pompous at best and an obfuscation of of one's responsibility to actually contribute at worst. It's so fringe, and requires engaging in sooooo much hypocrisy to enjoy the fruits the system while claiming it is 'morally' bankrupt. You may not have a pragmatic choice in the matter, but on the other hand you do...it would just suck living that way. :beer: Besides, owning land is akin to territory in nature, our system protects the weak and civilizes the process. Certainly our system is transient and evolving, order reverting to disorder and all that but so is everything over time. But nature also provides us with the will to persevere and improve our condition. Curling up in a nihilist ball and declaring nothing matters in the end runs counter to natures greatest gift, the will to survive. Devising political systems and rule of law IS being one with nature.

Back in the now world this is where he derives his rights. Land ownership is an established constitutional tenant that meshes with our unique system of checks and balances and limited power of government . You can rest assured without this enlightened thinking from the founders we would not have nearly the standard of living we enjoy now. In our system even the smallest owner enjoys the legal protections that land owners in other nations do not, protected from both the government and private taking under the Fifth Amendment "Nor shall [anyone] be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation." The Constitution, Bill of Rights and the founders writings explaining their thinking is brilliant stuff if you value individual freedom within a frame work that serves the common good... more people should take the time to read and understand them IMO . They work for everyone from the OWS minded to Tea Partiers and everyone inbetween.

In many other nations the government (crown in the British system, select individuals in oligarchs ) owns the land and everything on it and grants it's temporary use to private citizens. This a chaotic unjust system that introduces all sorts of dangers and uncertainty into the equation. Most such systems have been modified to emulate our system to accommodate deeded ownership...bestowing rights, associated responsibilities and thus opportunity in order to encourage certainty and economic stability.

Our wildlife on the other hand is collectively owned, as are public lands and institutions, as opposed to the crown or central government. We give the responsibility to the government to manage our shared resources. The only animals on his property he owns are domesticated thus killing or controlling 'our collective' wildlife can only be done within the scope of the law which we have put in place through the representative democratic process.


Your first bit is a bit cynical eh? :shock: For an ecological disaster on the scale you describe occurring within the next few generations, if so it will not be man made, it would have to be along the lines of several massive super volcano eruptions, jumbo meteorite or something that is in the purview of nature. Something so incredible that would have to completely destroy the will of the people to continue and surrender to anarchy. If we stick to our constitutional framework we ensure economic growth and the opportunity for well being no matter what.

The key to keeping the environment viable is for each nation to develop their political systems and thus economies (learning from others past mistakes such the UK's raw coal fired industrial revolution) because a well off human race has the time, resources and inclination to maintain and improve the environment. When people are simply struggling to survive things are prioritized, a tree's true value becomes realized as fuel or timber rather than as a tree.

Bottom line, if the guy acts within the law he does have the rights he claims. Not everyone needs or should be REQUIRED to think like the majority. Diversity is great, what a boring place if we all were the same. That said, it is everyone's right and even responsibility to express your views and try to change individual attitudes and mind or even prevailing cultural norms. Some ways work better than others, I find the fire and brimstone missionary zeal route counter productive. Rape by bigfoot as punishment for wrong-think might fall into that end of the spectrum. :thumb:

If you think about it, his point about making a (limited) self reliant living off the land is much closer to the anarchist model. Big circle of life and all that. :beer:

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 23rd, 2011, 6:03 am

Squinn, it seems you explained what you feel your rights are, but not what a right is.

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 23rd, 2011, 7:28 am

psyon wrote:Squinn, it seems you explained what you feel your rights are, but not what a right is.
you really want to argue semantics on this? i would think a constitutional right should be self explanatory, but if your asking what i think you are and want to take it further and get into what i consider birth right or as it is sometimes said inalienable rights i think i can define MY personal belief of what right SHOULD be but please do not twist this into something it is not or that this is what i was referring to as rights in my previous posts in a nutshell i feel.........

The rights of an individual should be supreme up onto the point they begin to significantly (very tight litmus test and the important word being significantly in this sentence) on the rights of another person


how's that work for you considering you seem to carry some strong libertarian views?

*sigh* i guess i better elaborate further before this gets completely twisted with an example I should be able to paint my house lime green and have pink flamingos in my yard, however i should not be able to go on my neighbors property and do the same just because i really like pink flamingos.

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 23rd, 2011, 7:40 am

Rights are a social construct, they are an agreement between people. Contrary to what is believed, there is no such thing as an inalienable right. We may believe that certain rights are inalienable, but they aren't. The right to live is often touted as an inalienable right, but society takes that right away from people by executing them. The people around you, the people who you think opinion's should not matter on how you manage your land, they are who grant you your rights. They are who agree to uphold your rights. If at any point in time, the overwhelming majority of people are fed up with your land management practices, they can take your right to be secure in your property away. They can do this by changing laws, or by forming a mob and running you out. Either way, your right is only as strong as the support it has from the people around you.

squinn
Posts: 128
Joined: October 21st, 2011, 2:30 am

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by squinn » December 23rd, 2011, 7:46 am

psyon wrote:Rights are a social construct, they are an agreement between people. Contrary to what is believed, there is no such thing as an inalienable right. We may believe that certain rights are inalienable, but they aren't. The right to live is often touted as an inalienable right, but society takes that right away from people by executing them. The people around you, the people who you think opinion's should not matter on how you manage your land, they are who grant you your rights. They are who agree to uphold your rights. If at any point in time, the overwhelming majority of people are fed up with your land management practices, they can take your right to be secure in your property away. They can do this by changing laws, or by forming a mob and running you out. Either way, your right is only as strong as the support it has from the people around you.
I think that is well said there are of course no guarantees in life but we have as a country chosen a basic framework of common values and agreed to live under a common constitution, choosing to disregard that is cultural suicide. As to the topic at hand 13 states, with more joining have seen fit add provisions to protect what i enjoy doing in the last couple decades to their constitutions and that gives me great hope my kids will have the option to choose to enjoy the same pursuits i do, my father and grandfather did.

User avatar
Bob
Posts: 127
Joined: November 1st, 2011, 12:35 pm
Location: livingston MT

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Bob » December 23rd, 2011, 8:00 am

psyon wrote:Rights are a social construct, they are an agreement between people. Contrary to what is believed, there is no such thing as an inalienable right. We may believe that certain rights are inalienable, but they aren't. The right to live is often touted as an inalienable right, but society takes that right away from people by executing them. The people around you, the people who you think opinion's should not matter on how you manage your land, they are who grant you your rights. They are who agree to uphold your rights. If at any point in time, the overwhelming majority of people are fed up with your land management practices, they can take your right to be secure in your property away. They can do this by changing laws, or by forming a mob and running you out. Either way, your right is only as strong as the support it has from the people around you.
Wow, that is simply anarchy and show a TOTAL lack of awareness of the constitution.

In our nation we do indeed have inalienable rights which are derived from the constitution and require no approval of those around you. The constitution can be amended to support previously unconstitutional law, but never revoked without dismantling the Union. NOBODY can just waive these principles on a whim.

This is a short sighted slippery slope line of thinking that you are taking here. Think about the possible consequences in your own life.

User avatar
Don Becker
Posts: 3355
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 3:21 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: introducing a king snake population...

Post by Don Becker » December 23rd, 2011, 8:07 am

The Constitution does not grant rights, people do. If people didn't support the Constitution, it wouldn't mean anything. Who enforces the rights granted by the constitution? People do. If the overwhelming majority of the population wants things to change, they can amend the constitution, or out right start to disregard it. . People do not always agree with it. The 18th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibited the consumption of alcohol. That certainly didn't stop people, and juries refused to convict people of violating the law. As a result, the Constitution was amended again, to repeal prohibition.

Post Reply