Why you shouldnt release your pets into the wild... - Page 2

Jeff_Favelle · 02-24-05, 07:14 PM

A LOT worse things happen to the animals that make the beef we eat or the McChickens we scarf down. AT least the Tiger wasn't hunted for sport, nor was it tortured in a circus-like atmosphere. Sucks that it died, but it'll have zero effect on the wild population and it likely didn't suffer.

peterm15 · 02-24-05, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Hunters, who finally caught up with the orange tiger Wednesday as it darted through green brush, fired several shots as the cat approached within several hundred yards from soccer and baseball fields at the edge of a housing development in Moorpark, northwest of Los Angeles.

thats my clincher.. it is to bad that they had to kill it but in this situation i think it was a good choice..

wetlander · 02-24-05, 09:27 PM

Unfortunately some idiot won't learn from this but instead will get idea that it would be cool to get one.....oh bother

concept3 · 02-24-05, 10:22 PM

I agree with marisa and anyone with like opinions. In that case the officers had to make a decision, #1 saftey of the public, #2 risk the saftey of the public to save the tiger. Any one who didnt pick option #1 needs to give their head a shake. They made the right call.

Ryan Pye · 02-24-05, 10:30 PM

ooooooowww what a threat (sarcastic) Dont they think that a tiger loose for at least ten days in a rural setting would have attacked someone by now if it was truely dangerous? I mean if it were aggressive or hungry, I think that it would have showed some sort of NATURAL preditory behaviour. I think that they should shoot the idiot (ir)responsible for the Tiger in the first place.

Ryan

Davey312 · 02-24-05, 11:00 PM

If the tiger was loose for that many days would the extra 5-10 minutes to tranquilise it really have caused any damage? but whats done is done.. sadly the tiger who was just acting out of instinct was the one who had to suffer because of someone's idiotic actions..

Davey

philli · 02-25-05, 01:00 AM

This is just another example of a person who got bored with thier exotic pet.They give no thought as to how big of a commitment an animal like that is.It was nice and cute as a baby but when they get bigger it's a different story.It's like people who get a large snake when it's a baby,it's nice when it's small but when it gets big and out of hand it's time to get rid of it.It's sad that they killed it but a dead tiger is not a dangerous tiger.

Jeff Hathaway · 02-25-05, 09:06 AM

Do you think that the tiger really went 10 days without eating? It very likely showed some predatory behaviour only no one was around to see it. On the outskirts of a city, it would likely find food in the form of stray dogs and cats, squirrels, raccoons, etc. Although a 5-10 minute delay might not be a big thing, it sounds like they had considerable difficulty actually finding it and getting close. Perhaps if they missed this opportunity, it would have been a few days before they got another chance. It's not like it would have sat out in the middle of the soccer field for 10 minutes waiting for them.

Let's say the tranquilize it. Then what? Zoos already have lots of tigers; I doubt you'd find one that would take it. There are lots of captive bred tigers in the US and they are reasonably available, so anyone with the resources and desire also probably has one already, even if the authorities were willing to turn it over to a private citizen which they probably wouldn't be. Can you blame them? Imagine the headline 'cops catch big cat again- new owner sorry for hole in fence'. How many 'tiger rescue' facilities are there? Admittedly, there are some. Any that aren't already strained by a lack of resources to care for their charges? I doubt it. And then think of the cost to cage and transport the tiger to such a facility. Who's paying that bill?

Perhaps Jeff Favelle said it best- sucks that it died...

Jeff Hathaway
Sciensational Sssnakes!!

BAZ · 02-25-05, 11:25 AM

There was a show on animal planet last night about the big cat problem in the states. It showed how many big cats are being kept by private owners in really crappy conditions. Also showed how many owners and their children have been killed by these cats.

Im not for outright bans to be quite honest. I think if you have a lot of money and can afford to keep one then you should be able to but the rules and regulations should be a hell of a lot mor strict for the animals safety and the publics safety. For someone to be able to keep a big cat they must meet certain enclosure requirements. Basically the owner must spend a lot of money on building an enclosure to the standard of a well respected zoo which is escape proof and go through some sort of training on how to deal with big cats. There should be licensing fees and yearly inspections of the animals and the enclosure... or a inspection with 48 hours notice.

Just these conditions will get rid of over 90% of people who can own big cats right now.

KrokadilyanGuy3 · 02-25-05, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Do you think that the tiger really went 10 days without eating?

Well considering no one knows when the last time the animal ate and with tigers not actually heavy duty eaters, it's quite possible the animal has not eaten within those 10 reported days.

I'm with Baz on this..

Zane

latazyo · 02-25-05, 01:11 PM

I can't believe that some people care more for the tiger than kids...

Jeff Hathaway · 02-25-05, 01:33 PM

Oh, I'm very much with BAZ as well, however, from Sea World's website (http://www.seaworld.org/infobooks/Tiger/diettiger.html):

"2. Because of their size and build, tigers can kill prey large enough to provide meals for several days.

a. Tigers can consume 20 to 35 kg (44-77 lb.) of food at one sitting; but they usually eat about 15 to 18 kg (33-40 lb.) of food a day, over several days. They don't seem to mind eating decaying flesh. (6)

b. After meals, tigers cover the remains of the kill with vegetation or debris. This conceals the carcass from scavengers such as vultures and jackals.

c. Tigers mainly rest and drink between meals, but may kill other prey if the opportunity arises.

d. Tigers usually gorge themselves at a kill, and they may not need to eat again for several days. If their food requirements are averaged per day over a year, female tigers need about 5 to 6 kg (11-13 lb.) of food per day and males need about 6 to 7 kg (13-15 lb.) of food per day. (6)

3. Kill frequency varies between tigers.

a. Researchers in Nepal found that female tigers without young killed every 8 to 8.5 days (42-45 kills per year). Researchers in India had similar findings. (6)

b. Female tigers with two cubs ages six to ten months old killed every five to six days (61-73 kills per year). (6)"

So, assuming this is correct, it would be pretty likely to have eaten something in 10 days...

Jeff Hathaway
Sciensational Sssnakes!!

loveispretend · 02-25-05, 01:51 PM

As a Californian, I saw tons and tons of coverage on this before the killing lead the story to really 'break' nationwide... even if it hadn't killed yet in the ten days, it was first spotted that day stalking children. When the father, luckily, noticed, he got his children inside, and the tiger moved on to crouching behind a fence and staring down two dogs behind a glass door... presumably, waiting for them to come out into the yard. It was clear that this animal was ready to hunt, and it was in a terrible spot to be allowed to esape... it was not only in residential, but also near a playground, a public park, the Reagan library, etc. Terrible as it is for the poor animal, there is only so much risk you can place on human lives before you are justified in killing it.
And exotic big cats are a HUGE problem in California. Only a day before this one was found, a man was sentenced for having been caught with 88 tigers (53 if them cubs) he had managed to get his hands on, but let die. And the story links to another 'bust' in that area. There seem to be new cases all the time. My hometown had two such escapes when I was a little kid... one was 'just' a canadian lynx, the other was an adult male african lion. Trust me, when you are in that position, where children and/or pets can't be allowed out for fear of becoming a meal, you tend to become a little more understanding about the measures law enforcement has to take.

loveispretend · 02-25-05, 01:57 PM

Another thing to keep in mind... at the time when animal control got the call about the tiger, and had not even assembled on the scene, they had about one hour until kids started showing up at the elementary school across the street fromt he park it was killed in. I think that would also put the presure on a little.

concept3 · 02-25-05, 03:53 PM

Baz I agree with you with the liscencing, but its impractical. Who is gonna pay to train the Inspectors? who is going to fund them? Tax payers? thats not fair, Their arent enough people that keep these animals ( that last part is an assumtion, but im sure its correct) to fund that kind of organization. I am not for bans either, but as far as im concerned a 500 pound predator should not be in or close to a city. Just too risky, for the people who own these animals oh well, buy a house cat like everyone else.
This is purely my opinion, taking into account the well-being of my family and community.