Those that have been following my work know that I have been a long-standing opponent of the animal rights movement. I have published an article at http://www.cornwallalliance.org/2015/09/28/seal-hunting-and-definitions-of-cruelty/ It may be of interest to you.
Stephen M. Vantassel
Stephen on the BBC
Stephen M. Vantassel was invited to participate on the BBC show, “All Things Considered.” Stephen had to compete with 3 animal protectionists in the United Kingdom. We discussed the theology of human-animal relations. Although Stephen has been a critic of Dr. Andrew Linzey for years (who has yet to respond), he was pleased to have the opportunity to debate his daughter.
You can listen to the show by clicking the bar below.
The arrival of cougars (AKA mountain lions; scientific name Puma concolor) in Nebraska is one of the latest achievements of scientific wildlife management here in the U.S. While South Dakota has had a successful mountain lion hunt for several years now, cougar numbers have increased in Nebraska. With careful scientific research, the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC) determined that mountain lions could sustain some very limited hunting.
Hunting of mountain lions would offer several benefits to Nebraska. First, it would reduce the concerns of cattle ranchers about the likelihood of mountain lions predating on their livestock. Fewer mountain lions means less risk for predation (yes it is that simple). Second, offering a hunt brings in valuable dollars, through hunting license fees, to the (NGPC) to continue its important role in managing Nebraska’s natural resources, without raising taxes or harming the NGPC’s independence.
Regrettably, as of February 23, 2014, the Nebraska legislature has voted to eliminate this hunt in the first of three rounds of voting. The legislation is proffered by people who think they support the environment. But if they cared to study a little more they would know that anti-hunting is anti-environmentalist. Hunting elevates an animal from a pest to a resource. People don’t hunt rats because rats don’t have value in our society. Presently, Nebraskan have been quite successful at killing cougars deemed dangerous to people, which is as it should be. But as the population of cougars increases, continuing to rely on killing of cougars for nuisance reasons continues negative stereotypes about cougars. Conversely, when people hunt them, cougars have value because landowners know the cougar may be able to be left alone until hunting season.
Hopefully Nebraskans will ask their state Senators to vote down the ban on regulated mountain hunting.
Stephen M. Vantassel is a Certified Wildlife Control Professional (CWCP) who helps individuals, businesses, and agencies resolve wildlife damage issues through training, writing, expert witness, and research. His latest books are the Wildlife Damage Inspection Handbook, 3rd edition and The Practical Guide to the Control of Feral Cats. He can be contacted at wildlifecontrolconsultant at gmail dot com.
If you would like your publication, video, or product reviewed, please contact the author at the e-mail above.
All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) on its web site http://www.humanesociety.org/animals/resources/facts/avitrol.html (viewed Nov 10, 2013) condemns the frightening device as cruel to birds. In fact, the precise words used by author, Maggie Brasted, Wildlife Policy Associate for the HSUS, “..the cruel death it inflicts on target birds and other animals.”
To accuse Avitrol® of causing a cruel death to birds is a pretty harsh criticism. So what evidence does the HSUS provide to support its accusation? Well, actually, Ms. Brasted provides none. So what could Ms. Brasted mean by “cruel death”. In my opinion, she probably means that the mere fact that the birds die is cruel. So contrary to the normal way people understand cruel as needless and gratuitous suffering, Ms. Brasted, if my assessment is correct, thinks that the death of a pest bird is by definition cruel.
My point ultimately is, “Force animal protectionists and animal rights protest industry activists to define their terms.” Don’t let them simply spout off their accusations without critical attention to the terms they use. I would suggest that forcing them to define terms will reveal the level of their extremism as well as contradictions within their views. Reporters should also compel the HSUS to answer the research report by H.C. Rowsell, J. Ritcey, and F. Cox. 1979. Assessment of Humaneness of Vertebrate Pesticides. University of Ottawa, Presented at the 1979 CALAS Convention, University of Guelph, June 25-28 that stated that birds treated with Avitrol® do not feel pain and is humane.
I find it ironic that an activist organization with the word humane in its name wouldn’t provide a detailed response to the claims of Rowsell et al. regarding the humanness of Avitrol®. I would welcome the HSUS’s response but given their history of ignoring my publications, I won’t hold my breath.
Stephen M. Vantassel is a certified wildlife control operator who helps individuals, businesses, and agencies resolve wildlife damage issues through training, writing, expert witness, and research. His latest books are the Wildlife Damage Inspection Handbook, 3rd edition and The Practical Guide to the Control of Feral Cats. He can be contacted at wildlifecontrolconsultant at gmail dot com.
If you would like your publication, video, or product reviewed, please contact the author at the e-mail above.
All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.
As someone who believes in the consumptive use of wildlife, I am subject to some rather critical (to put it mildly) e-mails from those who disagree. You know, members of the animal rights protest industry activist movement. Part of the reason why I enjoy getting these letters is that it gives me some insight into how other people think. Unlike animal rights protest industry activists, I actually read material that I disagree with because I was taught that before I criticize I must understand. Regrettably, many of my critics don’t follow the same advice which makes reading their letters somewhat entertaining because they frequently accuse me of things I haven’t said nor believe.
A friend of mine recently sent me this link http://catdefender.blogspot.com/2011/07/evil-professors-have-transformed.html, where I along with a host of other people were vilified by someone with the moniker “Moonraker”. I admit I didn’t read it that closely. It is a rather long post. Nevertheless, I was amazed at the number of factual errors the document contained. I shouldn’t be surprised. Animal rights protest industry activists frequently get the facts wrong either by distorting the context containing the fact or by ignoring it all together.
What was amazing about this “Moonraker” was that it (I don’t know the individual’s gender so Moonraker will be called “It”) appeared to argue in an intellectual manner. It quoted all kinds of documents and listed names and used graphic language. The brunt of Its tirade focused on academics who oppose the presence of free-range cats on our landscapes. Free-range cats are effectively a protected predator but beyond that they are invasive in that they were introduced to the North American environment. So their predatory habits are devastating to our wildlife.
On its face, it sounds like a thoughtful (but angry) and researched person. But upon closer inspection, you find out this individual held several seriously mistaken ideas.
Permit me to list a few of the errors.
I’m sure I could go on. But these are enough and I have already given Moonraker way too much airtime.
Stephen M. Vantassel is a certified wildlife control operator who helps individuals, businesses, and agencies resolve wildlife damage issues through training, writing, expert witness, and research. His latest books are the Wildlife Damage Inspection Handbook, 3rd edition and The Practical Guide to the Control of Feral Cats. He can be contacted at wildlifecontrolconsultant at gmail dot com.
If you would like your publication, video, or product reviewed, please contact the author at the e-mail above.
All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.