OT: Lion/Hiker near miss - Page 2

01-26-2007, 04:13 PM

Scott Gordo wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 11:15 am, "GeeDubb" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in messagenews:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...> Wow. Scary!
>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>> 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"
>>
>> How sad that they blatantly killed two lions neither of which may have
>> attacked the man. Too bad they don't treat murderers that way....might be
>> less murders.
>>
>> Gary (population control)
>
> Just out of curiosity, anybody know what happens to the carcasses?
> Buried next to the parking lot? Eaten? Thrown in a dumpster? Entrails
> sent to the four corners?
>
> /s
>

probably donated to science.

01-26-2007, 04:27 PM

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 08:31:53 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>GeeDubb wrote:
>>
>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>>> Wow. Scary!
>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>
>>> 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.

I agree. They should be presumed innocent till proven guilty. The park
should be closed permanently.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

01-26-2007, 04:29 PM

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 11:49:55 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>MattB wrote:
>> cc wrote:
>>> GeeDubb wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>>>>
>>>>> Wow. Scary!
>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>
>>>>> 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

No. Close the park permanently to humans.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

01-26-2007, 04:59 PM

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:54:58 -0800, Scott Gordo <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Jan 26, 11:15 am, "GeeDubb" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
>> messagenews:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...> Wow. Scary!
>> >[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>
>> > 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"
>>
>> How sad that they blatantly killed two lions neither of which may have
>> attacked the man. Too bad they don't treat murderers that way....might
>> be
>> less murders.
>>
>> Gary (population control)
>
> Just out of curiosity, anybody know what happens to the carcasses?
> Buried next to the parking lot? Eaten? Thrown in a dumpster? Entrails
> sent to the four corners?
>
> /s
>

Not sure about the rest of the kitty, but the penis and testicles go to
small Asian people as a tasty [couple hundred $] treat.
--
Slack

01-26-2007, 08:00 PM

Slack wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:54:58 -0800, Scott Gordo <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 26, 11:15 am, "GeeDubb" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
>>> messagenews:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...> Wow. Scary!
>>> >[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>
>>> > 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"
>>>
>>> How sad that they blatantly killed two lions neither of which may have
>>> attacked the man. Too bad they don't treat murderers that
>>> way....might be
>>> less murders.
>>>
>>> Gary (population control)
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, anybody know what happens to the carcasses?
>> Buried next to the parking lot? Eaten? Thrown in a dumpster? Entrails
>> sent to the four corners?
>>
>> /s
>>
>
> Not sure about the rest of the kitty, but the penis and testicles go to
> small Asian people as a tasty [couple hundred $] treat.
> --Slack

Don't forget the gall bladder.
All the money's in the gall
bladder . . .

01-26-2007, 08:22 PM

cc wrote:
>
> Don't forget the gall bladder. All the money's in the gall bladder . . .

I could use one of those.

Lost mine a few years back and I miss it.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot (12 minutes to disaster) o-o-o-o
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

01-28-2007, 05:18 AM

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 11:49:55 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>>MattB wrote:
>>> cc wrote:
>>>> GeeDubb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wow. Scary!
>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>
> No. Close the park permanently to humans.
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
> fond of!
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

01-28-2007, 10:18 AM

On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 14:18:43 GMT, "JP" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 11:49:55 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>>MattB wrote:
>>>> cc wrote:
>>>>> GeeDubb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "MattB" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wow. Scary!
>>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>
>> No. Close the park permanently to humans.
>> ===
>> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
>> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
>> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>>
>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>> fond of!
>>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>

Of course. Just A LOT LESS than any mountain biker. A hiker can and
will step over an animal on the trail. A mountain biker most likely
will never even know it was there, and will certainly crush it. There
are examples in zoological museums.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

01-28-2007, 10:34 AM

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 14:18:43 GMT, "JP" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
e
>
> Of course. Just A LOT LESS than any mountain biker. A hiker can and
> will step over an animal on the trail. A mountain biker most likely
> will never even know it was there, and will certainly crush it. There
> are examples in zoological museums.
> ===
I suspect any animal which sets there permitting itself to be run over
is dead already. Or perhaps it lost in love and chooses death before
dishonor.

Gimme your take on snowmobiles.

-paul

01-28-2007, 01:07 PM

On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 11:34:46 -0800, Paul Cassel
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 14:18:43 GMT, "JP" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> e
>> Of course. Just A LOT LESS than any mountain biker. A hiker can and
>> will step over an animal on the trail. A mountain biker most likely
>> will never even know it was there, and will certainly crush it. There
>> are examples in zoological museums.
>> ===
> I suspect any animal which sets there permitting itself to be run over
> is dead already. Or perhaps it lost in love and chooses death before
> dishonor.
>
> Gimme your take on snowmobiles.
>
> -paul

They are instruments of the devil!
--
Mikey Vandersplam