Woodland Management and culling practices (was [100% veg*n ] Digest Number 393)

[Guest guest]

Hi Dee (are you Ecocities Dee by the way?)

 

>According to Peta 'killing these pests' creates ideal conditions for

accelerated reproduction. The abrupt drop in poulation leads to less

competition among survivors, resulting in a higher birthrate.

 

The aim of responsible woodland management practices isn't to " kill all the

pests " .

The issue is summarised in 'A Guide To The Techniques Of Coppice Management' by

Mummery, Tabor & Homewood (pub Essex wildlife trust). In the section on 'Deer &

Coppice' the authors state " Culling by shooting, although emotive, is

increasingly

common. It is used, not to eliminate the deer, but to keep resident populations

at

a level the wood can tolerate. And this must be the woodsman's objective- to

find a

balance that reduces damage to an acceptable level.... "

 

>Even if an

unusual disaster caused an animal population to temporarily overpopulate,

the group would soon stabilize through natural processes.

 

I'm curious as to what these 'natural processes' that PETA mention actually are.

I

would have thought that with the predator niche no longer being filled within a

woodland ecosystem (because peoplekind have hunted them all to extinction)

herbivorous species will simply continue to multiply unchecked whilst they

continue

to have a food supply which they will consume at a faster rate than restock

could

occur. The situation is again further exacerbated due to past negative human

effects on the environment in that there is now so little woodland habitat left

that deer, squirrel, rabbit, etc populations tend to become highly concentrated

where they do occur, again leading to overgrazing at an unsustainable level.

 

What PETA are saying here seems to me to be more about propoganda (or at least a

selective culling of facts to support their particular agenda) that I not so

long

ago would have been happy to take at face value. It fits comfortably with my

pro-vegan worldview. However the more I read or speak to people who actually

know

about woodland and coppice management, the more i'm realising that if we are to

return to more sustainable and connected ways of life, we will need to accept

that

we ourselves are part of ecosystems rather than standing outside of them. We

interact. Sometimes this might mean taking steps to control the activities of

other

species that are damaging our means of sustainable survival. Fencing and brash

hedging will give some protection to regenerating coppice and young trees, but

if

populations are reaching unsustainable levels and constant damage is occuring

then

culling may unfortunately be necessary.

 

>They also say that

starvation and disease are unfortunate, but they are natures way of ensuring

the strong survive.

 

Predators are another efficient and humane (compared to dying of disease or

starvation- I know which I'd prefer!) way of ensuring that ecosytems remain in

check and that populations remain managable. Since 'we' have hunted all of our

indigenous large predators to extinction, perhaps it could be argued that this

niche is now being filled by those who wish to catch and eat wild game,

particularly if such activities were part of an integrated woodland management

design. I wouldn't want to do this myself, nor could I bring myself to carry out

such culling, but find it very difficult to critisise those who do lead such a

way

of life, and who are obviously taking responsibility for their actions and what

they eat, especially compared against the lifestyles of so many omnivores or

even

vegans who primarily obtain and consume their food 2nd hand from the supermarket

without much real idea of the processes or consequences that lie behind it's

production (how many Food Miles behind that soya burger we're so happy to munch

away at? What's the Ecological Footprint of those 'mock meats' that are being

chatted about on another thread?)

 

>Do you know if this 'vegetarian' just kills the sick and weakest animals

like the predators would in the wild. Or is he more partial to the strong

and healthy animals? Or maybe he eats just the females-then no more 'pests'

would be produced.

 

I know Ben fairly well and have visited Prickly Nut Wood, the woodland that he

Stewards and lives in. I know that his commitment to the woods and the wider

environment is profound and that he has nothing but the deepest respect for the

animal (and plant) life with which he shares the wood and interacts with every

day.

Ben does not describe himself as 'vegetarian' (that was my description of him),

what he actually said was " I seldom eat meat, but when I do, I like it to be

wild " .

What he does clearly state however is that the aim of culling is not to ensure

'no

more pests' but to ensure populations are kept at managable levels.

 

 

>Anyway-what gives us the right to say these animals are

ours, to eat, clothe ourselves or whatever? I don't think an animals life is

any less precious than a human one.

 

 

What if the interests of one species conflicts with the interests of another?

Would

you allow the 'rights' of that other species to take primacy over yours even

though

it's unchecked activities were eroding your ability to exist sustainably (as

well

as it's own long term viability)?

 

 

>Today I looked out of my window and saw 2 'healthy stags' hanging on hooks.

I later saw the hunters burying another cos they can't take it away with

them [they are from Denmark] and the butcher won't buy it if it's not a

'perfect shoot'. It died for nothing. They enjoy killing. I am scared to

venture out further than my house incase I get shot. These are the same

people who may agree some of the points you are making.

 

I don't think I'm talking about the same thing. I'm talking about sensitive

woodland management which (perhaps questionably)accepts a degree of culling as a

necessity in order tyo maintain balance. These people just sound like

insensitive

macho arseholes who are killing for killings sake.

 

>You

have a right to your opinions and I'm just letting you know another vegans

opinion for now.

 

That's cool! I find it a very difficult question myself, and i'm not entirely

comfortable with the conclusions I've been reaching. But if we don't explore our

own views and challenge ourselves sometimes how do we grow?

 

I would be very pleased if anybody could provide information about successful

sustainable woodland management that does not involve culling, BTW!

 

Cheers,

 

Graham

www.landandliberty.co.uk

[Guest guest]

silly question, but, how about we bring predators back and get a more " natural "

balance again

???????

here in the US, coyotes have spread to almost all 50 states, and have largerly

replaced wolves and other large predators..

there is still talk of returning wolves to idaho...

of course, if you have 3 acres, the point is moot...

don't know what sort of acreage you are talking about.....

and, i won't be able to see your reply, as i will be gone for aweek..

so with that

*poof*

*scampers away*

fraggle

 

 

 

>That's cool! I find it a very difficult question myself, and i'm not entirely

>comfortable with the conclusions I've been reaching. But if we don't explore

our

>own views and challenge ourselves sometimes how do we grow?

>

>I would be very pleased if anybody could provide information about successful

>sustainable woodland management that does not involve culling, BTW!

>

>Cheers,

>

>Graham

>www.landandliberty.co.uk

>

>

>

>

>To to the Digest Mode [ recommended ], send an email to:

vegan-network-digest

>

>