Geoffrey Purcell wrote:
> Sorry, I should have made clear that I meant that reintroduction of species to an area where they were previously extinct was OK, but that introducing species such as rats etc. to areas they never were a natural part of the ecosystem thereof, was a bad idea. Of course, ideally, one should really just reduce human intervention in Nature  to near-zero levels as that would allow a balance to eventually appear on its own, but that would require much harsher laws to make slaughterers of wildlife suffer decades of imprisonment, a considerable expansion of the size of National Parks to allow animals to migrate to other wild areas  etc. 
>  
> Geoff 
>
>   

I cannot say that I'm a fan of tyranny in any form.  Man is a part of 
nature just as much as beavers dam up water sources, bees modify trees 
habitats, etc.  The idea that man is somehow out of place on earth or 
that he should not be allowed to modify his environment is ludicrous.  
As to national parks, there should be none.  Property should be owned by 
individuals who can choose to manage their resources to best advantage.  
Some will choose one way, some another, their choice.  If someone or 
some group doesn't like the way a piece of property is managed, they can 
buy it themselves and change it's management.  The idea of "Shoot a 
meal, go to jail" is a form of tyranny that I find unacceptable.

Steve