01-26-2007, 11:13 AM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
| | Re: Lion/Hiker near miss
cc wrote:
> MattB wrote:
>
>> cc wrote:
>>
>>> GeeDubb wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "MattB" <somedudeus@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:51umv5F1m7fmkU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>
>>>>> Wow. Scary!
>>>>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16817149/
>>>>>
>>>>> Glad he got away alive.
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "After the attack, game wardens closed the park about 320 miles
>>>> north of San Francisco and released hounds to track the lion. They
>>>> later shot and killed a pair of lions found near the trail where the
>>>> attack happened.
>>>>
>>>> The carcasses were flown to a state forensics lab to determine if
>>>> either animal mauled the man"
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is absolutely ridiculous. They should be prosecuted. It's
>>> obviously revenge, given the odds of actually finding the same lion.
>>> Last time I checked, mountain lions were predators in "nature". . .
>>> which a park should represent . . . sheesh.
>>
>>
>> Maybe. I'd think with dogs tracking them there is more likelihood of
>> getting the right one(s) would at least be better than just shooting
>> the first ones they could get.
>> I also see your point about nature, but like it or not humans have
>> pretty much removed themselves from the food chain. I see flaws with
>> doing this in terms of how things "should" play out, but if it was me,
>> my friends or my family involved, I'm less concerned with how the food
>> chain was designed to work.
>
>
> Even in the case where we are encroaching on their habitat with our
> residences, it is debatable whether we should engage in the "search and
> destroy" method of elimination of "rogue" wild animals. It is a much
> more compelling case, however, than doing the same thing to animals that
> behave as animals when we are supposedly visiting their habitat. The
> animal kingdom is dangerous. Kill or be killed. The only way to
> eliminate that danger is to eliminate the animals. Is that what we
> should do?
>
> cc
Definitely debatable, and I understand your logic. BUT, humans tend to
want to modify their environment to suit their needs or preferences.
It's just a fact whether you agree it's the right thing to do or not.
So what would be worse, these guys hunting down a couple of lions and
claiming to have eliminated the offending one, or the general public
deciding we don't want these dangerous creates to exist anymore and
killing them all? I'd go with the former.
We have a growing population of mountain lions around here. There have
been many sightings (I've only seen tracks so far) and no reported
conflicts yet. I'm hoping that the sheer volume of open space and prey
animals here will help keep them hunting their traditional prey. But as
a father, I'm genetically programmed to protect my offspring. If I ever
thought my son was potential prey I wouldn't hesitate to do whatever I
could to protect him. I'm not a hunter, but I would definitely kill a
lion I thought was an immediate threat, given the chance (although I may
need something better than my Leatherman).
Matt
|
|
|  |