Why do people get so pissed off at animal abuse when its a dog or a cat? But when something like rattlesnake roundups have been going on for years nobody says shit. I mean really the fucking DNR does not even regulate this shit.
dumping more pics of this shit.
Round-ups are a sport. Sports are entertainment. Entertainment makes money.
Banning rattlesnake round-ups is like banning the hunting of deer or similar animals. Such a right is protected under national law.
Hunting is regulated if people want to go out and kill a rattlesnake they should be free to do it but rounding up thousands of them makes no fucking sense. plus we have little data on there numbers and the gasoline they poor on the rattlesnake dens is toxic and may persist for a while.
good, fuck these nasty little fucks, they'er deadly and give me the weebie geebies. also i fucking hate retards that own snakes and shit and act as if they'er as smart and as capable of the same love and affection for it's owner as a dog or a cat.
Hunting a single rattlesnake, unlike larger animals, is illogical due to what the snakes are actually used for. For example, you can't really make any clothes from only one, and it doesn't provide much food.
It makes sense because it serves several industries. And the quotas were only introduced somewhat recently. The only remaining issue, I think, is the ethics of the whole thing. But ethics = loss of profit, and no-one cares enough for a potentially deadly animal to kill it humanely.
There are alot more humane ways to get rid of a pest like traps and repellents. You don't see people going rounding up thousands of raccoons.
I really dont have a problem with people hunting them for food or anything I fucking deer hunt when I its just there is no restrictions on it thats what really gets me. If they would meet a quota or some sort of limit that would sufficient for a lot of people who share my opinion its just the unregulated hunting of these animal will most certainly lead to their endangerment.
I kill rattlesnakes on a weekly basis on my family's property.
1) Rattlesnakes are pests
2) Rattlesnakes are venomous pests
3) Rattlesnakes are venomous pests that kill/eat chickens, cats, dogs, and can bite your kids
With the drought, rattlesnake are getting more invasive and desperate, and are coming into homes and on busy property. Kill as many as you can find, prevent an accident in the future.
I'm a Park ranger its my job to know this shit.
you don't know shit, dipshit. learn english.
(of a substance or plant) causing or capable of causing death or illness if taken into the body.
synonyms: toxic, noxious, deadly, fatal, lethal, mortal, death-dealing
"a poisonous chemical"
antonyms: harmless, nontoxic
(of an animal) producing poison as a means of attacking enemies or prey; venomous.
"a poisonous snake"
synonyms: venomous, deadly
"a poisonous snake"
extremely unpleasant or malicious.
"there was a poisonous atmosphere at the office"
synonyms: malicious, malevolent, hostile, vicious, spiteful, bitter, venomous, vindictive, vitriolic, rancorous, malign, pernicious, mean, nasty; More
It's really not that complicated retard.
People are more willing to empathize with animals that show loyalty or personality traits.
Especially when they've actually owned them.
I don't agree with any animal abuse, but people don't see rattle snakes as pets, they seem them as vermin that will kill a human, which we obviously value the life of more than a snake.
It's not hard, please think before you ask such obvious questions.
This shouldn't be something up for debate. Cats and dogs show affection to their human owners. Just 30 minutes ago my cat creeked into my room and jumped on my bed and onto my chest. Well, he lays half on me and half on the bed, he's a giant friend. but he does this often and he purrs as loud as my playstation 3. snakes are cold blooded animals incapable of affection:(
If I thought my dog was a threat to my family I'd kill it just as quick.
It keeps the population down, and in California rattlesnakes have been acting up these past few years. I with the agree opinion that it's a blood sport that could be more humane, but I can't disagree with controlling the pest population.
ah okay thx confirmed for absolute retard.
you should realize that not everyone on the fucking planet speaks english for 1. language so instead of going full autist and commenting on peoples choice of words, how about you answer the fucking question you little nigger?
your bait was effective. 5/10
educate thyselves, afterbirths.
You need to understand the difference between domesticated pets and pests, then you will understand why killing snakes is fine
Obviously there is, there's more snakes than him
>didn't read the analysis
FROM YOUR SOURCE:
"Experts disagree as to whether this claim is true or false. Steve Reaves, owner of Tucson Rattlesnake Removal in Arizona, says it's true. Some rattlesnakes have stopped rattling for one simple reason, he told Associated Press in July 2010: to avoid being killed by humans. Those born with a genetic predisposition to stay quiet have a better survival rate wherever they come into contact with people, Reaves explained. Jerry Feldner of the Arizona Herpetological Association agrees, as does herpetologist Daryl Sprout of Dallas, who told KLTV 7 News in Tyler, Texas that "natural selection is already beginning to prefer snakes that do not bring attention to themselves and therefore draw incoming fire from humans." Also in agreement with the general proposition is Gene Hall of the Texas Farm Bureau, though he, like the author of the message above, attributes the behavioral change to the threat posed by snake-eating feral hogs, not people."
i didn't cite either of those, and /b/ isn't a scientific paper, faggot.
that doesn't include snakes. just people.
you have a massive problem with words.
the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.
synonyms: mass murder, mass homicide, massacre; More
Who said I was completely refuting that they do not rattle?
If you read a little lower on that page, you'll see that rattlesnakes have always been on-and-off about rattling before an attack. it's nothing new.
Because a dog or a cat can be tought as they have a brain while snakes can't be tought they act by their insticts. You can only remove it's glands so that its not venomous anymore or injrct some drug or something
>damage control engaged
read stuff before you post it, tard.
>it's nothing new
your own source disagrees.
why don't you
1) learn your motherfucking language?
2) flip through a national geographic before pretending to be a park ranger?
Well now that THAT'S all settled with, we should move on to the bigger discussion... DOLPHINS. Not only are those fuckers much more clever than dogs or cats, they've already worked their way into the heart of our country (both literally and figuratively). It's only a matter of time until they take over. I say we kill them all now, before it starts.
>Stephane Poulin, Curator of Herpetology at the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum in Tucson, says he he's noticed no major changes in rattlesnake behavior over the past quarter-century. "Overall, rattlesnakes just don't rattle very often,"
>According to Keith Boesen of Arizona's Poison and Drug Information Center, there's no evidence that rattlesnakes striking without warning constitutes a "recent phenomenon."
>rattlesnakes don't always sound a warning before striking.
Get fukt. :^)
Those born with a genetic predisposition to stay quiet have a better survival rate wherever they come into contact with people, Reaves explained. Jerry Feldner of the Arizona Herpetological Association agrees, as does herpetologist Daryl Sprout of Dallas, who told KLTV 7 News in Tyler, Texas that "natural selection is already beginning to prefer snakes that do not bring attention to themselves and therefore draw incoming fire from humans." Also in agreement with the general proposition is Gene Hall of the Texas Farm Bureau, though he, like the author of the message above, attributes the behavioral change to the threat posed by snake-eating feral hogs, not people."
that's 3 to your 2, faggot.
>he's noticed no major changes in rattlesnake behavior over the past quarter-century
>there's no evidence that rattlesnakes striking without warning constitutes a "recent phenomenon."
Behaviour doesn't just change over one generation of animals. Do you even evolution?
Mostly because rattlesnakes are considered pests, same as rats, mice, etc. Dogs specifically are seen as pets and so there's a stigma about injuring them, abusing any animal unduly is shitty.
Nigger, I don't think even you know what you're saying anymore. Your brain frying from being so utterly wrong?
It's okay. Maybe someday you'll read up on behaviour, and realise how silly you look right now.
Mostly because snakes kill more people than a well-trained dog. The badly trained dogs are rounded up, and people get upset because dogs normally do nothing but love you. If you have a snake for 10 years f your life and feed it and love it, it will never love you back. It will just tolerate your existence.
i do know more than you. that's precisely the implication. this MF forestry will be my third professional graduate degree.
and no, forestry is perfectly relevant to animal behavior. more so than a BA in psychology.
The third being preceded by what, exactly? Unless they're irrelevant to this discussion, then don't bother.
Also, what part of forestry is relevant to animal behaviour? The end product is the ability to observe and conserve forest ecosystems. What part of that requires a detailed understanding of animal, never mind reptilian behaviour?
>that's 3 to your 2
Since when was /b/ about quantity over quality oh wait
Ausfag here. Snakes are pretty okay. My sources are a long history of being close to snakes of the wild, poisonous kind. No weapons, no backup, just 12yr old me and a red-bellied blacksnake. We were less than a meter apart, looking into the other's eyes. After a few minutes I just walked away.
>inb4 underage b&
That example was from long ago, but it's probably the most illustrative.
>unless they're irrelevant
linguistics and speech pathology were the other masters.
environmental biology is a large part of the forestry program here.
better than a BA in psychology.
the fact is that we aren't talking about a single generation, and not all behaviors are learned.
snakes have been dealing with increasing encroachment for hundreds of years.
this includes natives. they weren't always around the southwest, you know.
and this also includes other animals encroachment on the rattler's habitats as well.
So, they were irrelevant. 10/10.
>implying biology has anything to do with behaviour
>not all behaviours are learned
Never said they were. Just that the majority are learned.
Also, if snakes have been encroached upon for hundreds of years, why is it only now that they've started to stop rattling?
If it was so detrimental, why gain that evolution in the first place?
OP, are you retarded? Seriously.
Cats and dogs are sweet and adorable companions who give as much love as they get.
Rattlesnakes don't give a fuck except to inject you with poison to put you in the ground and swallow your dog or cat. The world does not need rattlesnakes. We could kill every last one of them and improve the world for every living creature, especially the humans. However, most humans cannot live without the companionship that a dog or cat provides. And if you've never had your own dog or cat, you do not understand. They become a part of your family because their very nature earns their way into your heart. Rattlesnakes want you to become part of their list of victims, perhaps their next meal. Fuck snakes.
snakes are essential to the world, obviously more than you think. they help keep mice and other pests down while if they werent there we would be over run with them. i do agree with op here but i alwso agree with you in part. we tend to care more about animals we can pet anc cuddle with. not so much the ones that can kill us.
are you a chick?
which by your statement means they should be considered, remember?
and no, hardly irrelevant. behavioral and developmental and abnormal psychologies were all large parts of the speech pathology degree.
>Just that the majority are learned.
and that's a useless statement, anon. since we aren't talking about the majority of anything.
who says they are only now reducing their rattle rates? we don't have a litmus.
>evolution is static.
because environments change, anon. this is how i know you are still an undergrad student.
Doog & cats have good qualitys, rattle snakes are pissy cunts that will fuck you up for very little reason. Breed gopher snakes and garden snakes to curb rodents but kill all rattle snakes
because fuck snakes, they're fucking disgusting,
>they help keep mice and other pests down
Cats are natural mouse predators. Several dog breeds were created to hunt down and kill mice and other pests. Yorkies were literally made to kill mice and rats on farms and in barns. The world does not need snakes. The world is worse because of snakes.
you aren't a park ranger. park rangers don't "host" shitty events. you are just a part time/ volunteer who has dreams of going to school one day.
shut the fuck up already you hack.
I've had dogs. Several of them. I have two dogs now. There was several years in between owning dogs where I had no dogs but only had two cats. I also owned two snakes. I had a ball python, the fucker was a nasty fuck. I gave it away to a friend. I got a sand boa. Fucker never moved. Laziest fucking thing wouldn't even kill its own prey. I had to kill the mice and leave the dead ones in the cage. Sometimes the snake ate it, sometimes it couldn't be bothered. It just wanted to sleep cured up in a corner. Dogs are awesome. Dogs are always up for whatever you want to do. Dogs bring the energy. Cats are cool too. Cats want maximum attention when they want it and then they just want to be alone. Cats love play time until they don't. Cats are like us. Sometimes we are ready to go, sometimes we just don't give a fuck.
we don't like to hurt animals that can show emotion apparently. A dog or cat can physically show that they're sad, while a snake can not.
>It keeps the population down, and in California rattlesnakes have been acting up these past few years. I with the agree opinion that it's a blood sport that could be more humane, but I can't disagree with controlling the pest population.
Which part of california? I live in the bay area; should I be on the lookout?
Because snakes havnt been domesticated and evolved alongside humans in the sense of companionship. This is coming from someone who has owned everything from tarantulas to scorpions. Cats and dogs just share a bond with us that isnt the same as other species. Theres also plenty of fucking rattlesnakes, and theyre more then a threat to humans.
Because theres horses roaming around fucking up peoples days right? This is more of a conversation about humans developing out into the dessert and coming into contact with the indigenous species. Also what is anti venom retard