A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Rather than large scale culls, why not just decriminalize shooting one close to your property, but prohibit any sort of organized action against them? So if a farmer went out and shot one he would be fine, but if a few farmers got together to hunt, they'd become guilty of something like conspiracy to cull.
Should give the farmers what they want while also keeping the species protected in more distant areas, which seems like it'd be a reasonable compromise.
Because in Europe you are pretty much always on or near somebodies property.
Some people just have a hard on for hunting them. They would set up some kind of bait to get them close enough and bam - hunting trophy is theirs.
Or they just keep quiet and lie and do whatever they want. Hard to prove guilt in the sticks if there isn't a game warden nearby.
Here's an anecdote from an American outdoors industry leader where he admits he doesn't give a shit about conservation laws and admits to seeking out and killing at least one bear, against the advice of fish and wildlife, because he deemed it to be dangerous. https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=108
Over here we have people akin to that in the ministry of environment and theu get to chanhe laws and stuff to suit them.
No care for preventing the encounters, they like it as it gives them reason to kill them. Couple of months back there was a male bear who got into town, so they went to hunt it down and in the end they said the bear was shot down but it was a female... as long as there is a dead bear, they don't care
Likely because it wouldn't be reported to the government as thoroughly as hunting tags are. Politicians tend to be against policies that don't directly give them clout when policies exist that could.
Why can't the EU simply stop sweden from murdering wolves & bears? Every year local rednecks murder these animals and no one cares.
They don't murder them, they cull them.
If you'd like to wander out into the forest and ask them nicely not to breed so much that they're a danger to humans, by all means do.
Why can't I ask humans not to breed so much that they're hurting the wolves? There's far more humans than wolves. Who is really at risk here?
The wolves. We're both at the top of our food chains, so losing either humans or wolves isn't a problem for the planet
I'm sure the wolves will appreciate your tasty offering if you'd prefer
Guess you never heard of how the Yellowstone wolves dramatically changed the ecosystem after being reintroduced. Source
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/sep/12/europe-saved-its-predators-from-brink-of-extinction-so-why-killing-thousands-bears-wolves-lynx-aoe