V. Paul Reynolds is certainly a man out of time and place. Judging from a recent column, he’d be very comfortable in the 18th or 19th century when slavery was legal, children worked long hours in factories, women couldn’t vote, and cockfighting and public executions were common.

His views on snaring, for example, overlook two very important considerations. First, a snare is indiscriminate. It will choke to death any creature, intended or not, protected or not, that is caught by it. Second, it is not snaring, it is strangling, which becomes more intense as the trapped animal struggles desperately to escape. That is a vital difference, and not just the choice of one word over another. If you describe something accurately, you confront its reality, and you deal with it for what it is.

It is also interesting to note that Reynolds admits that the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife has “no compelling scientific data supporting the value of snaring.” This is the same state agency that recently brought us the slogan “Science and Safety,” yet Reynolds argues that we should proceed to “snare” anyway on the basis of “common sense,” which in his mind is opposed to science.

As I say, Reynolds would feel more at home in another age, a time where the cruelty and indifference to life that he’s so comfortable with was widely accepted. But it’s not the 21st century, nor should it be.

Don Loprieno, Bristol

Copy the Story Link