NONSENSICAL

            A New Yorker article illustrates nonsensical thinking:  "Ranchers are appalled by the prospect of their cattle and sheep being killed by wolves, even though they plan to send those animals to slaughter anyway."

             This statement, offered as axiomatic, nonchalantly, has enough logic flaws in it to fill a ship, but let's try to look at the most obvious.  By this logic, the final destiny of everything determines its stewardship value during its existence.  In other words, if the end of my car is a crusher and recycling machine, then there is no value in driving it or using it.

             If the end of a person is death, then why even try to have a life?  It's worthless.

             Beyond that, it assumes no value accrues between life and death.  This demeans the benefits or values of life.  Does an animal not accomplish value by its existence?  Of course:  it's the ultimate upgrade of plant to human-edible protein.  The human gut is not designed to handle grass, but ruminants can turn grass and other perennial forages that build soil into nutrient-dense, perfectly balanced food sources for humans.  I'd call that pretty valuable. 

             While doing that, they prune the grass to stimulate more biomass accumulation and therefore more carbon sequestration.  They digest and decompose plant material, converting it into highly available fertility.  They aerate the soil to facilitate air and water intake for better functioning microbial life.  Yes, indeed, those animals are doing a lot while they're alive.  Keeping them alive to do this important work is a noble goal.

             Finally, this asinine statement assumes nobody benefits from a non-wolf kill.  In other words, the wolf kill does not differ in value from a managed abattoir kill.  A wolf eating a cow is no different ethically or economically than a hungry child eating it.  That such thinking now permeates the elite cubicles of our nation's media is both appalling and shocking.  Of course, it also assumes that a human cannot or should not exercise management of an animal.  This is the ultimate Disneyfication of our culture and why you'll never see me set foot in a Disney park.

             This also shows the larger divide between urban and rural.  The condescending view from a person sitting in a Manhattan editor's cubicle to chide my emotional trauma over seeing 50 chickens with their intestines strewn out in the field after a possum attack is the height of disrespect.  In a time when inclusiveness is the middle word of the urbanite, how about including some farmers trying to protect their livestock in that big political tent?  Show me some love, will you?

             The whole notion that my coming upon a predator-killed animal on my farm should evoke no more emotion than eating that animal in a communal and convivial dinner with a friend is beyond belief and beyond reason.  What kind of people think like this?  What kind of disregard for everything that's reasonable and beautiful breeds this kind of thinking?  And these people vote!

             Do you think I'm ridiculous for shooting a possum who's yanking intestines out of my chickens?