[18] Finally, trapping has been the subject of political activism [19]
by animal protectionist groups seeking to restrict and / or ban trapping altogether.
However, the legal actions taken
by animal protectionist groups suggest the trappers» concerns are not without warrant.
The author suspects that most Christians, while not explicitly adopting animal protectionist ideology, have failed to properly consider the implications of adopting the hands - off view of creation espoused
by animal protectionists.
Trapping's alleged deleterious effect on the environment constitutes the second line of argument employed
by animal protectionists.
Not exact matches
Animal protectionists cast a great deal of ire on the wildlife damage control programs, especially the work performed
by USDA - APHIS - Wildlife Services (hereafter WS) which has historically administered predator control programs in the U.S.. For example, activists reject the idea that coyote control programs are needed to protect flocks from costly predation.
Recall that
animal protectionists by - in - large adopt a minimalist view of human intervention into the affairs of wildlife.
[24]
By such a limitation, the author engages
animal protectionist arguments at their strongest point as land trapping results in greater injury potential than water trapping where drowning sets can be employed.
[109] If
by rabies control,
animal protectionists mean eliminate or drastically reduce the incidence of rabies in wildlife populations, then they are correct.
For example, most
animal protectionists will argue that the mere death of the
animal (unless to end suffering not induced
by humans) is
by definition cruel, as the
animal will have lost its expectation of life.