Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > Canada > The Maple Leaf
Reload this Page >

Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Wikiposts

Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Thread Tools
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 4:45 am
  #346  
Account Closed
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,319
DaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by LFC1977
Fail to see the point to be honest. If people want to shoot with guns at things, JOIN THE ARMED FORCES!
Gangs and guns on Liverpool's streets

"Disarm" campaign against Liverpool gun and gang culture

Former soldier set up secret gun factories to supply street gangs

Liverpool looks like a good recruiting area for the Army. The gang members will even be able to learn about weapons so they can sell them to gangs after they've left the military.


Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy
Quite, the point (that we both make) is which ever angle you 'attack' this from, there IS a counter argument that (most) reasonable people can at least consider even if they dont agree with it 100%.

I (currently) dont hunt, I do however ski. Many people would say that ski 'resorts' and the surrounding infrastructure are destroying the natural beauty and habitats of the mountains.

I drive (as you know) a Jeep Cheroke with a 3.0L Diesel engine. Do I need something that size? (within .5 km of me are two large grocery stores, christ knows how many coffee shops, numerous restaurants, London Drugs, Shoppers Drug Mart, Dominoes, at least three bars...... you get the idea). I could 'survive' without a vehicle at all.
Exactly. It's personal choice.

If the government doesn't want us to drive vehicles with large engines, they could force manufaturers to restrict the size of their engines, which would then restrict the size of the vehicle. If government seriously wanted to reduce speeding they could force manufacturers to install speed limiters on every new car.

If the Albertan government (or their agents) were to do the culling themselves, this could result in a ban on most hunting along with a possible reduction in stores which supply hunting equipment.

Last edited by DaveLovesDee; Sep 22nd 2009 at 4:53 am.
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 5:38 am
  #347  
Oakvillian's Avatar
Magnificently Withering
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,908
From: Oakville, ON
Oakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy
Consider this situation.

No hunters would require the 'authorities' to employ people to cull animals. The need to employ people would either result in lower unemployment OR greater demand within the current labour market. BOTH cases would result in higher overall spending power (due to increased incomes), the first case would result in lower EI payments allowing the govt to reduce a deficit budget OR increase a credit budget. Higher overall spending would result in increased demand for goods and services, resulting in EITHER further increases in employment (to meet increased demand) or increase in price (to reduce demand and therefore stop demand from outstripping supply).

Increased employment (and therefore wages\salaries) allows the govt to increase Income tax 'take'. Increased prices results in higher GST\PST\HST again going into the Govts coffers.

SO maybe we should stop hunting on purely economic grounds.
However, as these newly employed government cullers are on the public payroll, the government has to put up taxes to pay for them, having simultaneously lost the existing income stream from hunters paying for their tags. The increased tax burden drives businesses away from the jurisdiction and towards a lower-tax regime, resulting in significant job losses in the local economy, further reducing government income in the form of EI and income tax contributions, and further depleting government resources through increased EI payouts.

So maybe we should keep hunting on purely economic grounds

Oops - should have read to end of thread before commenting. MMC made just this point earlier.

Last edited by Oakvillian; Sep 22nd 2009 at 5:39 am. Reason: late to the party
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 5:51 am
  #348  
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 15,706
From: In Limbo
Butch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond reputeButch Cassidy has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by Oakvillian
However, as these newly employed government cullers are on the public payroll, the government has to put up taxes to pay for them, having simultaneously lost the existing income stream from hunters paying for their tags. The increased tax burden drives businesses away from the jurisdiction and towards a lower-tax regime, resulting in significant job losses in the local economy, further reducing government income in the form of EI and income tax contributions, and further depleting government resources through increased EI payouts.

So maybe we should keep hunting on purely economic grounds

Oops - should have read to end of thread before commenting. MMC made just this point earlier.
Realising that the newly formed Govt Culling Team is economically unviable, the federal govt puts the work out to tender. In order to keep costs down the winning bidder culls the animals, selling the meat to various restaurants and fast food outlets, the remaining carcasses are used for various animal by products, the skins are sold and the company makes massive profits and therefore pays ridiculous taxes back to the Govt offsetting any costs incured by the govt
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 6:14 am
  #349  
mandymoochops's Avatar
Thread Starter
Sawdust making harpy
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,291
From: Alberta
mandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by Oakvillian
However, as these newly employed government cullers are on the public payroll, the government has to put up taxes to pay for them, having simultaneously lost the existing income stream from hunters paying for their tags. The increased tax burden drives businesses away from the jurisdiction and towards a lower-tax regime, resulting in significant job losses in the local economy, further reducing government income in the form of EI and income tax contributions, and further depleting government resources through increased EI payouts.

So maybe we should keep hunting on purely economic grounds

Oops - should have read to end of thread before commenting. MMC made just this point earlier.
yeah thats exactly what I said
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 6:18 am
  #350  
mandymoochops's Avatar
Thread Starter
Sawdust making harpy
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,291
From: Alberta
mandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond reputemandymoochops has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy
Realising that the newly formed Govt Culling Team is economically unviable, the federal govt puts the work out to tender. In order to keep costs down the winning bidder culls the animals, selling the meat to various restaurants and fast food outlets, the remaining carcasses are used for various animal by products, the skins are sold and the company makes massive profits and therefore pays ridiculous taxes back to the Govt offsetting any costs incured by the govt
Then the meat that is sold cannot be deemed fit for human consumtion as no-one is sure what it ate when it was walking around in the wild, and therefore all the wild deer have to be kept in enclosures so that it can be monitored what they eat, then all the animal liberation jobbies will be up in arms because there are no wild deer anymore..............................
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 7:15 am
  #351  
Account Closed
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,319
DaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond reputeDaveLovesDee has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by mandymoochops
Then the meat that is sold cannot be deemed fit for human consumtion as no-one is sure what it ate when it was walking around in the wild, and therefore all the wild deer have to be kept in enclosures so that it can be monitored what they eat, then all the animal liberation jobbies will be up in arms because there are no wild deer anymore..............................
And because they're not wild, no-one will be allowed to cull the deer so the population will increase!
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 7:30 am
  #352  
Oakvillian's Avatar
Magnificently Withering
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,908
From: Oakville, ON
Oakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by CaptainHook
And because they're not wild, no-one will be allowed to cull the deer so the population will increase!
and those managed deer will become domesticated and eventually actively farmed, and they'll be stuffed full of growth hormones and kept in feedlots and made to eat corn and pumped with antibiotics and then there'll be a movement to return to "real" grass-fed organic venison as intensive deer farming is bad for the environment and the meat doesn't taste as good as it used to...
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 7:41 am
  #353  
Part Time Poster
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,219
From: Worcestershire
MikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by mandymoochops
Then the meat that is sold cannot be deemed fit for human consumtion as no-one is sure what it ate when it was walking around in the wild, and therefore all the wild deer have to be kept in enclosures so that it can be monitored what they eat, then all the animal liberation jobbies will be up in arms because there are no wild deer anymore..............................
As its government controlled culling, the meat source can controlled and the meat can be inspected, further increasing the jobs created by controlled culling

Healthy deer ; green tag and off to the food inspectors

Weak sick deer; red tag and to the dog food factory
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:17 am
  #354  
triumphguy's Avatar
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,092
From: Calgary
triumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Why is "government controlled" morally better than individually hunted?
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:22 am
  #355  
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 14,227
Alan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by triumphguy
Why is "government controlled" morally better than individually hunted?
It's not. The animal is just as dead. In fact it's worse as the practitioners are distancing themselves from the moral decision.
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:28 am
  #356  
Part Time Poster
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,219
From: Worcestershire
MikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond reputeMikeUK has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by triumphguy
Why is "government controlled" morally better than individually hunted?
Not morally better

You can train the government hunter to a high level in a multitude of areas and skill sets, higher than your average hunter will get to voluntarily , get clean kill rates above average hunters, ensure that the process is more controlled, it’s possible to get clean audit trail on the beast concerned to achieve a higher level of confidence in the consumeability of the meat
Investment in techniques and technology to maximize the return in investment can be achieved due to the higher purchasing power of regional government as opposed to the single hunter
This could lead to tagging of herds to ensure that the cull can be statistically analyzed and linked to meat data ensuring future improvements to the process
A controlled route to market can be made that would allow a greater distribution of the meat ensuring maximum price (ship to higher priced city markets, designer restaurants)

Stuff the morals, bring on the Dollar
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:32 am
  #357  
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 14,227
Alan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by MikeUK
Not morally better

You can train the government hunter to a high level in a multitude of areas and skill sets, higher than your average hunter will get to voluntarily , get clean kill rates above average hunters, ensure that the process is more controlled, it’s possible to get clean audit trail on the beast concerned to achieve a higher level of confidence in the consumeability of the meat
Investment in techniques and technology to maximize the return in investment can be achieved due to the higher purchasing power of regional government as opposed to the single hunter
This could lead to tagging of herds to ensure that the cull can be statistically analyzed and linked to meat data ensuring future improvements to the process
A controlled route to market can be made that would allow a greater distribution of the meat ensuring maximum price (ship to higher priced city markets, designer restaurants)

Stuff the morals, bring on the Dollar
If you want to the government to make money from hunting then it should just sell licences on a per animal basis. No need for the government to get any more involved than that.
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:33 am
  #358  
Oakvillian's Avatar
Magnificently Withering
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,908
From: Oakville, ON
Oakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond reputeOakvillian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by Alan2005
If you want to the government to make money from hunting then it should just sell licences on a per animal basis. No need for the government to get any more involved than that.
Quite. Isn't that fundamentally what happens today?
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:34 am
  #359  
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 14,227
Alan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond reputeAlan2005 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by Oakvillian
Quite. Isn't that fundamentally what happens today?
Dunno - not a hunter. Hope you're right though, it makes the most sense.

Edit to add: Am late into this debate. Have to confess to not having read it all...

Last edited by Alan2005; Sep 22nd 2009 at 8:38 am.
 
Old Sep 22nd 2009 | 8:35 am
  #360  
triumphguy's Avatar
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,092
From: Calgary
triumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond reputetriumphguy has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Something that will no doubt spark controversy....

Originally Posted by MikeUK
Not morally better

You can train the government hunter to a high level in a multitude of areas and skill sets, higher than your average hunter will get to voluntarily , get clean kill rates above average hunters, ensure that the process is more controlled, it’s possible to get clean audit trail on the beast concerned to achieve a higher level of confidence in the consumeability of the meat
Investment in techniques and technology to maximize the return in investment can be achieved due to the higher purchasing power of regional government as opposed to the single hunter
This could lead to tagging of herds to ensure that the cull can be statistically analyzed and linked to meat data ensuring future improvements to the process
A controlled route to market can be made that would allow a greater distribution of the meat ensuring maximum price (ship to higher priced city markets, designer restaurants)

Stuff the morals, bring on the Dollar
You're making all that up!

Let's see - how did the professional British army do against the "amateur" Boers, or the professional US army do against the "amateurs" in Vietnam?

Hunting is more akin to guerilla warfare than trench warfare. The amateurs do just fine! They are highly motivated to improve their skills!

Tag all the deer? Dear me! They need to be wild, not farmed!

Who is going to pay for all this? It works "as is" with the "amateurs" doing it for free, and not even for free - they pay!
 


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.