Exotic Ethics?

[TexasJack]

My wife and I saw some movie awhile back featuring a giant snake. (Anaconda?) Of course, when it first appears there is lots of screaming and panic. She turned to me and said, "You can tell none of them are from Texas. Someone from here would be saying, 'Dang, wonder how many pairs of boots we could get from THAT sucker!!'"

Of course there is always an issue over potentially killing off a species for it's hide or feathers. It has happened in the past. But what we're really talking about is the difference between conservationists and ecofanatics. Theodore Roosevelt saw the deforestation and destruction of the Adirondacks and the over-hunting of the west. As president, he secured the immense national parks to help preserve nature. But he also was an avid hunter. He believed - and rightfully so - that we could manage the great resources of the planet, both utilizing and preserving them. What is to be gained by throwing away an elephant hide?

In fact, the most successful elephant preservation areas in Africa are allowing controlled hunting. The money - and meat - allows the local people to prosper and pays for the land for the elephant herds to survive.

Meanwhile, I see where PETA wants Ben and Jerry's to start making their ice cream with human milk. (Presumably they don't want cows to suffer the humiliation of living on a dairy farm.) These are people with too much time on their hands, too much money, and absolutely no idea about how nature actually functions.

Suggestion: When you get some fanatic that starts riding you about animal hides, tell them that you only use the hides of dead animals. (Which, of course, is true.) Then tell them that it's part of recycling nature and that you make things to honor and preserve what they were in life. Now, pick up an item with fine leather and say, "See this? I'd like you to meet my first wife....."

That should send them packing!!!

[Andy]

Badlove,

I run into this "problem" with some of the Greenies from time to time.

Explain it like this, sometimes it helps add logic to an emotional issue. "leather is the ultimate recycling, we use the hide from an animal that was dispatched for for food, without using the hide, it would go to waste" or some variant thereof. Without the meat industry, we would have VERY VERY VERY little to work with.

A majority of my customer base use my slings in Africa for hunting (and culling). Meat is used but the locals and the hunters.

Again this an emotional topic, it is difficult to change peoples minds, so just give them the data to learn what you do and why.

Andy

[Bree]

I have met some deranged ignorant people in my leatherworking years, and you can imagine the hate mail admin gets now and then when some PETA member gets all riled up. I have had fake blood smeared on my shop windows- Jim- it wasn't the real thing, they just do it for attention. There is a section here called "leather is a byproduct of the meat industry" and that is true for 95% of the leathers we use or more. Anything else is covered by what UK Ray had to say. I lived in PA where they refused to let hunters take more deer, and they trampled the suburbs, starved and were hit by cars. It was pretty stupid, considering there were food banks lined up for the meat. PETA people are not reasonable. If you can be polite, just say, "That's an interesting assumption." and walk away. if you can't be polite, call 911 because they will get violent to "prove a point". A fur dealer had his store burned down. PETA people think they mean well, but they are often badly misinformed, and it's like they have been brainwashed. Most of them can't tell leather from plastic or vinyl or pleather either, and most of them are not vegans. So they have sweaty feet so no cows are killed for their skins while they eat a hamburger. Makes sense, huh?

Johanna

You are exactly right. Most of these people are hypocrites of the first order. They consume animal flesh. They use animal parts in their attire. They use animal parts in their vehicles.

And then we get to the living plants that are killed to provide even the vegans with their daily bread. If life is so sacred to them, they shouldn't even be eating bread or vegetables. The whole thing gets to be ridiculous.

I am not in favor of abusing animals and do not support abuse. But let's face facts... nature is a cruel place. We do what we must to live and survive. That means that other living things must die that we can live. There is no other way. At least we make certain that nothing is wasted and return wonderful joyous things in our craft.

[rdb]

For me, I wouldn't use anything I wouldn't eat. I wouldn't eat dog, cat, or monkey, but that's just me. All over the planet people eat those very same things, and more. Now this either proves that the world is filled with unethical people, or ethics is very subjective. And in extreme cases, Survival will always outweigh ethics.

No matter our choices, there is always something wrong with that choice. Choosing hemp farming to replace oil products, like polyester, or nylon rope would probably do more good than harm. Among other things, it would mean more acreage would need to cultivated, thereby destroying more natural landscape. There is no free ride...

I'm pretty tired of people telling other people what's right or wrong. There isn't a one of us who knows better than the next person. The only thing we should be doing is discussing a problem, and trying to solve it together.

[Washroad]

I'm a very active member of 2 organizations; the American Sand Association (ASA) and California Off-Road Vehicles Association (CORVA).

We are very involved in trying to do something about the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It was signed into law by Richard Nixon and it's intent at the time was to help species of "importance" that were on the brink of extinction. Species at the time were the bald eagle, the California Condor, etc. Those 2 have been brought back and trust me, it was because people got involved and actually did something to help.

Since the '70's, the ESA has been broadly interpetted (I know I spelled that wrong, dammit!) to include not only the specie, but it's habitat as well.

And the way they protect them? Do nothing. Keep away. Don't go near them or their habitat.

Well, that's just plain ol' stupid and wrong.

Right now, there are about 1800 species listed as "endangered" (which is more "critical" than just "threatened"). Of all the species listed, only (this is true) .01% have been considered recovered.

The ESA doesn't work.

Groups like the Sierra Club (SC), the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), and many others, don't want the species to recover. If a specie recovers, they lose money.

The way the ESA is written, all the SC has to do is say a specie is "threatened" or "endangered" and use the latest "science" available. Often times, there is no science or study available and they whip one out. They file suit against the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the FWS goes to court, loses the case, the SC gets reimbursed for all their expenses. That means that you and me, the taxpayers of the USA, pay for these scumsuckingcamellickers to close off land and access to everyone. Then, we, the taxpayers, still have to pay for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or other agencey to "manage" the area.

The SC and CBD are not above lies. A particular area I'm fighting for has a plant called the Pierson's Milkvetch (PMV). The SC said there were only 1,200 of the plants left, and they only grow in one place. We, the ASA, hired a well respected botanist (that incidentally used to work for the SC) to check it out. Over the course of 5 years, he determined that the plant wasn't endangered, that it was actually thriving, and that there were over 1,800,000 of them (BLM confirmed this count).

Guess what? Because the SC "judge shopped" and found a San Francisco judge named Illston, the plant is still considered "threatened" and over 49,000 acres are closed to anyone that can't hike in on foot (you can't even ride a horse in there or take your dog for a walk in there). How stupid is that?

As a final bit on my rant, the SC did get a land development stopped in Colton, California because there was an endangered "fly" on the land. No shit. A fly.

Yeah, I'm not gonna swat one of them, ya know?

While I'm not for just going out and destroying things, animals, plant, etc., we are getting screwed.

Back to the issue of exotics......

Legally obtained, use them by all means.

Just because some group says an animal is "endangered" doesn't mean it is so.

PETA is a bunch of fanatics. They should be "culled" and their hides tanned. We could use the leather.

[JRedding]

Washroad, not that you need to hear one more endangered species story, it sounds like you already know plenty but heres the one they do in our area. I live about ten minutes from the Colorado river in Utah and there are some trashfish in the river the humpback chub, the squawfish, and one other I can't remember, they got them declared endangered so now we grow them in cement ponds just outside of town. It's a big spawning type facility, with several biologists employed there full time, we're not doing anything with the fish, just growing them in cement ponds so we know there's still one left. This has went on for a decade or more. The real kicker we're told is in Washington the state fish and game pays the kids a bounty to jerk them out of the river and dispose of them because they're a trash fish that's destroying their fisherie up there. But just in case they ever dispose of the last one we have some in Utah in the cement pond.

[TwinOaks]

hmmm..

It's ethically responsible to use ALL parts of an animal taken for human use...

We wear leather and furs, eat the meat, and make tools or musical instruments out of the bones....

If we don't use it immediately, it rots and or has to be buried, wait..the dinosaurs were buried...

There doesn't seem to be a time limit imposed by anyone for this....

Driving my 10 MPG pickup truck is recycling!!!!!

[MADMAX22]

HMMMM well I may as well throw my two pennies in here while Im looking around.

My parents raised horses and many other animals when I was a kid. Infact we raised all our own poultry including chickens/geese/pheasent/duck/turkeys (up to 60lbs lol), we also raised a few pigs, a cow a year roughly, and all this was a food source for some time for our family.

We also had a pet shop for 15 years, not a meth head drug haven petshop but a respectable one that didnt mill out puppies/cats and the such and we carried alot of exotic animals.

I worked at a pet breeder/wholesaler for 3 years as well.

Anyways what Im getting at here is that with all my past experiences Ive raised and butchered just about all the normal domestic animals there is to eat and I dont see a problem with it. Seeing things like fish, snakes, other small animals that granted have some intelligence but nothing to even border a dog or cat. I wouldnt mind using any of these animals hides as long as the whole animal went to use and we just didnt throw the rest of it away. THis goes for any type of snake, reptile, croc, and the such.

NOW when it comes to elephants I have a little but of a moral dilema. I have scene these animals, I have not worked with them but done some research a long time ago and I have scene alot of different sides of them. They are in my mind too intelligent of an animal to treat like we do like locking them up in zoo's which I really hate for the larger animals. Every elephant I have scene locked up like that has shown signs of seriouse stress that you would see in a person if locked up like that. You wonder why the guys go crazy and burst out of carnivals and start tramping people, heck I would too if you beat me down and made me do stupid tricks all day. All this after being seperated from your family which elephants actually have a significant awareness of.

Anyways if however the animal dies I dont see any reason for it to be wasted. So if I could get a source that provided elephant from a animal that died naturally or as stated was from a culling to maintain the area to support the animals that are left then that would be ok IMHO.

Now this has nothing to do with the dumbo thing or anything else. Heck I use to have pet spiders and scorpions and Ill still squich the little bastards every chance I get lol.

[cybertracy]

I believe one of the problems with using 'exotic' furs, even if gained legally and humanely, is that it creates an easier market for poachers to sneak in their illegally obtained goods. If a certain skin/hide is completely banned for sale/use then it is easier for customs & officials to spot the sale of poached goods. My grandfather worked in several countries trying to find a solution to both problems (protection of endangered animals and the legal market for culled/farmed exotic goods) and happened upon a park where 2 game wardens (one a single father of 6 children) were murdered in Africa for a single pair of juvenile elephant tusks. Heartbreak about the elephant, but the tragedy of the warden's deaths still ripples in the region. This happened about 1 year after a lift on a ban of ivory (I forget what country) was passed and they tracked the tusks gotten from this incident to that country.

[Hammerhead]

yaknow the gators under my house kill each other and i'm not allowed to scoop them out and use them

here's a video i made filmed from my front porch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpcXtrNXXx4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpcXtrNXXx4' rel="external nofollow">