Dangerous wild animals & protecting the public - Moose in the Glen - BBC

[jonathan55751]

we can have wolves back in Britain, but not Bears.

[1234LMAO12345]

BRING BACK THE LYNX!!!

[bigbillbob88]

Do we realy want wolfs and bore back into scotland? Foxes which are tiny compared to wolfs are already enought imagin wild foxes racking through your bin lol

[thatsMrSmileytoyou]

(This is my opinion)People have different objectives, where were these guys when they were DISCUSSING the fence, I'm sure it was no freaking secret. They're gunna say they somehow missed part of their land(23000 acres) being fenced in?? Scew that they can cry all they want. "we need couple hundred more miles of land to roam, waaah". What selfish pricks, I sweat my nuts off during the week shaping hot glass to live in a 2 bedroom condo with a balcony. They want 23000 acres more? Go to hell

[FreethinkingJim]

@thatsMrSmileytoyou They need that land for wild reserves so species can evolve.

[thatsMrSmileytoyou]

Uh dude I think you need to read my comment again, I wasn't opposing their fence..

[RoyalBlueMersey]

I can't stand ramblers, they cause so many problems when they aren't needed.

[thatsMrSmileytoyou]

Ramblers? You mean like me?

[RoyalBlueMersey]

Well if you walk through people's land and go on about your right to walk through it yes.

[cw7385a]

Cameron McNeish - die. you have never experienced the magic of alladale, its truly amazing, and those animals would have a life ten thousand times better than they would in a cage in a zoo, or on a plate...

[BachgenCwm]

This area is supposedly huge (23,000 acres) and they want to extend that to around 50,000 acres or more. Having a fence around that is just like having all the animals on an island. Complaining about a fence is extremely selfish in my opinion. Just as someone said, "i dont see why people should have to go everywhere, there should be some places for nature"

[lgr1991]

your right, there being extremely selfish, the highland are over 11500 square miles, if the reserve was to be extended to 50000 acres, thats just under 80 square miles, theyve still got 11420 square miles of highlands to use there "right to roam".

[jonathanburr89]

Totally aggree, the thing that ammuses me they go on about this fence and them not been free but if they was no fence and they was let to roam around and they attacked a person they would all be up in arms about it! Also i wonder how many wont end up hunting them too!

[lgr1991]

excellent point, there selfishness could be stopping something great happening, those animals deserve to be there, they were there before we came along, we forced them out, we should put them back in, and because these ppl want the whole highlands to themselves, it jeopordises the whole project. and its not like the plan is to cut of the public alltogether, the fence is to protect them, which goes back to what you just said,there damned if they do,damned if they dont

[madilov11]

cant believe people care more about their livestock than the future of the earth.

[fistofpeanuts]

stupid ...

[sanguiness2]

Are national parks zoos? Just because they try to keep animals in, doesn't mean that it's a zoo.. that's a total strawman, and using a weasel word (of sorts). It's a wildlife preserve.

Yes, there's no comparison of unfenced nature - to fenced. But in the context of farmers not wanting their animals to get eaten, how is it fair to not allow the fence? Either let the animals eat other animals, as in nature.. or make a fence.. as in the unnatural harnessing of nature -- as farmers do.

[sanguiness2]

I wish they would go on in more length about the argument of the people against the fence.

His statement about this being "morally repugnant" wasn't even substantiated with anything he said. He said they fought for a long time for the law, and that they want to "roam" ? What does that even mean?

Is the idea of private property not a concept they accept? How does he own it in the first place then? In America it's called trespassing when you violate someones private property.

[FreethinkingJim]

@sanguiness2 No matter if its someones property, if the president wanted to subside it as a national reserve or park for wildlife, they can do it, even if its yours, nature is more important than your interests. If you're against improving nature in any way then you don't deserve to live.

[mystykit]

Who's paying the millions for this and whose agenda is at work? Interersting post, beautiful scenery.

[talkto20john]

can there be entrances with 'wild animals enter at your own risk' signs?

[anglaismoyen]

why would an animal enter at my own risk? in case it eats, shoots and leaves? :) sorry, i couldn't resist.

[talkto20john]

fnar fnar :)

[anglaismoyen]

i don't get it. :\