Ok. I'm not anti-hunting! I totally understand how nature needs balances with
predators and prey. But when it comes to species that have been endangered
before, well that's why I signed this. Yes, they probably aren't endangered
anymore. I didn't mean to get anybody's undies in a bunch. I wasn't trying to
persuade anyone to change their minds about hunting. Like I said, I'm not
anti-hunting. I didn't think this would cause debate. I just thought some of
us might want to sign it, that's all. No big deal if you don't want to.
-Angie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angie writes:
I don't know. I just was e-mailed that, and agreed. Are you trying to slam
me?
-Angie
Well, first off...forgive me to have pointed you out. I truly thought that
your posting was from an ANTI.
The reason behind these shootings are to keep these wolves population in
check. And at best they are only done in certain areas of Alaska to help keep
the caribou's population up. As crazy as this sounds, if this didn't happen the
wolves would overload the caribou herds.
They have been doing this since the mid 70's on and off.
Be truthful the last I heard they were spading the wolves and relocating them.
Again...sorry for pointing your post out. I do live in New Jersey and the
Anti's here, about the bears, are out of hand. Although, I don't hunt bear...I
sure don't want my hunting privileged to be stopped either.
Keith/C4-5/NJ
PS. I wouldn't hunt anything I wouldn't eat. For me that's deer and turkey.
Wait, I never hunted turkey, but would love to.
---------------------------------
Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel
and lay it on us.
