If I was forced to choose between a bullet or starvation, I believe I would opt for the quick death.Because you (and I) think on abstract levels. I'm not sure if I would or not. As long as there is life there is hope. The universe doesn't give a crap about me, but "random" (not really random, but you get my meaning) things can happen that might save me.I wouldn't say so much that I'm not "concerned" with wolves (or other animals) starving. But I accept that it's nature's way. If there aren't enough wolves, then the grazers eat too much vegetation, and ultimately they begin to starve. Too many wolves, and the prey is reduced until the wolf population declines due to lack of prey. It all balances. It may not be "pretty", but it works. And it fuels the evolution of all species involved. Which allows the whole thing to remain in elegant (if "brutal" and "unforgiving") balance. Unless we humans decide we know better and muck it all up.That is going to require human intervention at some point.Sure. Us protecting our offspring on school playgrounds from a wolf pack is perfectly appropriate. Seeking them out, trapping them, slaughtering them because they might, or just because we can, or because we think we can balance their numbers better than natural forces, is (IMO) not appropriate.1poorguy
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra