These people are blinded by 20:20 (Whitehorse Star Jan 30/09)

Re: Yukon Fish and Wildlife: A 20:20 Vision ---Comments

"Wildlife Management" for human "use" has been and will continue to be a failure for wildlife (history has proven this time and time again). So when the public is asked with respect to wildlife: "What is your vision for the year 2020?", I would say that wildlife need and deserve their basic rights. That means that they are not the property of humans to fulfill are wants and desires; they would be allowed to live in accordance to their nature. This is the only sure way to protect wildlife and "their" habitat.

Wildlife are not "resources" nor "inventory" to be exploited and killed for human interest. They are sentient beings (they feel pleasure, fear, hunger, pain etc.) and must be respected as such if we truly want to protect them far beyond the year 2020.

The interest of the wildlife will never come first, as long as hunters are put in charge of "wildlife management".

So lets not be blinded by the status quo that wildlife are "ours" to manage for our own interest and fool ourselves that, in 2020, wildlife populations will be healthier than they once were.

Want to truly protect wildlife? Protect "their" habitat and let them be!

Mike Grieco ,,Whitehorse Yukon

-----------------------------------------------------

Letter was much on words, little on fact
By Whitehorse Star on February 2, 2009
Mike Grieco's condemnation of Yukon Fish and Wildlife: A 20:20 Vision (Star
letters, Jan. 30) is much on words but little, if any, on facts.

First, Mike and I have talked on the phone a number of times and we do have
a few things in common. We both are from Ontario but never met until here in
the Yukon.

Both our fathers hunted as well as trapped, but neither met. Back in the
1930s, my father trapped as a necessity, raising a family of seven boys and
eight girls.

Both Mike and I have hunted in Ontario but never together. That is where all
other similarities end.

Mike's condemnation of Yukon Fish and Wildlife: A 20:20 Vision on wildlife
management produced no scientific documentation whatsoever. That proves
letter-writing is easy, but backing one's words with evidence is totally
absent.

Mike's statement to condemn "wildlife management" for human "use has been
and will continue to be a failure (history has proven this time again),"
unquote.

His statements, as with a number of other letters of Mike's, are void on
proven incidence, scientific facts, dates and places, names and studies and
what documented history (as he used to prove a point) that back up his
letter of condemnation.

I attended Yukon Fish and Wildlife: A 20:20 Vision board meetings and did
not see Mike Grieco. Nor did I hear him stand up and participate in any way
whatsoever.

It's like not voting at elections - "If you don't vote, don't complain."

Mike's letter to the editor may be used to attempt to make the gullible
think wildlife management is not a positive and crucial part of the future
of all wildlife in the Yukon, Canada, North America and, in fact, the world.

If so, then I challenge Mike to not just use word but provide the readers
with real facts, researched and proven, dates, times and names based on
facts.

If not, the letters of words are meaningless, and possibly one of the
greatest threats to all wildlife's future, be it a songbird or a caribou.

Murray J. Martin
Whitehorse
_____________________________________________________________

Response to Mr. Martin --This is a crime against biodiversity! (Whitehorse Star, Feb 6/09)

Re: Letter was much on words, little on fact (Star, Feb 2/09).

Wildlife, in the true sense of the word, are dead to us for now, no thanks
to "wildlife management". Murray J Martin's letter clearly supports the need for
sentient non-human beings to have basic rights. This includes the right not to
be the property/ resource/ inventory etc. of humans. Wildlife management
entails the regulation and use of animals as we see fit-for pleasure, entertainment,
etc. It puts our needs first.

One only has to look at the list of questions on the Yukon Fish and Wildlife: A 20:20 Vision
website to see that wildlife management is all about what we want from animals, and
stripping them of their freedom (i.e. killing them before the end of their
natural lifespan). This is a failure to wildlife. This was the way of
things in the past, it is in the present, and it will be the way of the
future so long as we keep up our self-centred attitude towards these
animals. From an animal rights perspective, they deserve to have their own
lives to themselves, and live according to their nature (not our wants).
This is a rational argument, not something that requires documentation from
scientific studies, as Murray suggested.

Why do otherwise rational people become irrational when they are attached
to a certain belief system? For example, in one of Murray's recent columns,
he pointed out that under the guise of wildlife management, trophy hunting
is legal and well-supported by government, but "scientific studies" have
shown it is detrimental to the health of the population (this is a failure
for wildlife and a crime against biodiversity!). Also, Murray has pointed
out that under wildlife management, introduced big game species have caused
problems, while native species are in decline. Murray also wrote about how
wolves kill the sick and weak, keeping the populations healthy, while
hunting by humans has been detrimental to wildlife populations because
humans target healthy animals. I want to thank him for pointing these
things out, as Murray does make good points when he's not contradicting
himself. Irrationally, he loudly defends wildlife management, even after
pointing out some of its many failures himself. Irrationally, he says he
supports predator control, when he knows the problem of dwindling wildlife
populations was created by humans (hunting "managed" populations), not by
non-human predators. Please think about this for a moment: How could humans,
who can't peacefully, successfully manage themselves, manage anyone else (wildlife)?
There is a serious need for human management, not wildlife management. Otherwise,
these failures will continue.

As for the 20:20 meeting, Murray might want to revisit the 20:20 website to
see that they welcomed feedback in any form, including phone, email, in
person etc. There was no mandatory requirement for anyone to be at the
meeting, which was conveniently timed for retired conservation officers,
since it took place durin several working days. Just like voting, Murray; I
don't have to be in Ottawa to vote.

I wonder why Murray ( and others) seem to feel so threatened by an animal rights
perspective? Maybe he will explain this in his next column, right before
the recipes.

Time will tell whether or not we can continue to abuse our obligation to
these creatures we should be sharing this planet with. Thank you!

Mike Grieco