Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Should the use of 1080 poison be encouraged?
The use of aerial-dropped 1080 poison should be encouraged.
Without a viable alternative target species would cause much more harm to the environment than the poison does.
It is currently the most effective method to control pests in areas that cannot be reached by foot.
The number of predators who threaten the native bird population is reduced.
There is an economic benefit to the sellers and distributors of the poison.
Other animals are killed by the poison.
More effort should be put in to finding an effective alternative means of eradicating pests.
It's hypocritical to go to such lengths to eradicate pest species while we continue to nurture and spread cats and dogs, two of the most damaging species to the environment
Waterways carry the poison away from the target area endangering other non-target areas.
It is ethically questionable to drop large amounts of deadly toxins into a natural wilderness.
Should the use of 'chosen' or gender-neutral pronouns be mandatory?
Is the use of force, under the principle of Responsibility to Protect, necessary and appropriate now in Venezuela?
If the use of animal labor is ethically fine, is sex with animals ethical, too?