Ohio exotic animals...what constitutes justified shooting

[snevel]

The worst part of this whole situation as I see it is that these animals represented such a large portion of the genetic pool of many of these species; it would be like culling 5% of all humans on the planet.

I think you shifted a decimal point there...

18 bengals killed in ohio divided by approximately 1500 in the wild = 1.2%

Simeon

 

[brickeyee]

18 bengals killed in ohio divided by approximately 1500 in the wild = 1.2%

At this point it appears there are more in captivity than in the wild.

About 3,000 total, so 0.6%.

And these may have already been 'related' to the captured population so only a minor effect on the actual genetic pool.

 

[rori]

So lets see your very life is in danger and you have to decide whether to be tried by 12 or carried by 6. Your wasting everyones time including my own.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Incredible as it seems

So you are saying some suicidal individual was the keeper of 5% of some of the worlds endangered species????

That animal hoarder's 18 of the ~1400 of the world's Bengal tigers is about 1.3% of the known population (Jack Hanna quoted by AP "There are only about 1,400 of the endangered cats left in the world."). Sad to see them go, but it was necessary: imminent threat of death or greivous bodily harm to unarmed citizens or their pets.

 

[belercous]

Let's see. I'm a hunter. A safari just came to my neighborhood. Since the game is not native, they aren't under D.O.C. rules. How could I not take a few? God can't be this cruel to me.

The law surely must recognize this as an "attractive nuisance." Shooting justified.

 

[Art Eatman]

Lots of off-topic wandering, eh?

Feral dangerous animals. Bang.

 

[1911Tuner]

Okay! The dust is about to settle on the exotic animal killings in Ohio, and the enraged commentaries about the poor critters have begun.

I'm among those who feel that it's a genuine tragedy for the animals that had to die because some moron thought that keeping Apex predators in cages...within walking distance of neighbors...was somehow a good idea.
I'm morally at odds with the idea of keeping wild animals caged, period. Zoos are no exception. A 5 or 10 acre enclosure isn't freedom or "Natural Habitat." It's just a big cage.

But let's look at this problem on a more practical level and understand that unpleasant actions are sometimes the only real option available to us.

Hitting a Tiger with a trank gun requires getting close to the big cat. There's a vast difference in getting close enough to a caged Tiger and stalking a loose Tiger. For one thing, Tigers are ambush predators. That's what they do for a living. They know you're coming long before you get there.

If you're lucky enough to get close enough to hit him without being killed, the drugs can take anywhere from 2 to 10 minutes to knock him out. Meanwhile, you're tasked with staying out of his way until he falls. Dodging 500 pounds of thoroughly pissed off, high velocity cat ain't exactly my idea of an afternoon of fun and games.

Wolves are even more dangerous and terrifying. The wolf pack is nature's perfect killing machine. They surround, vector, triangulate, and attack en masse...and Wolves usually start to consume their prey before it's dead. They do that, not because they're "mean" or evil. It's instinctual, survival behavior. Numbers because there's less chance of any of the pack being injured, and they eat the prey as quickly as possible because a larger, stronger pack or predator may come and take it away from them. Not a pleasant thought, is it?