Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by Chatha, Nov 17, 2006.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Holy crap. I see that kind of thing at night...ITS GO TIME
Latest Tiger mauling, San Francisco
So it means Tigers are dangerous beings that cannot be predictable, so it means they ought to be handled by the experts and with care. And it also means we are not domesticating them..coughs..not without shrinking the bastards. Keeping a Tiger is a very good way to set yourself up for serious bodily harm and screams, a time when your adrenalin will raise to your head amidst the ferocious struggle between you and the animal. Maybe the Tiger was probably frustrated by being caged for too long, and the energy build up to a dengerous point, a point of no return. The moral is that an attack can happen anytime, and caging them is almost surely a way to get bit.
Typical animal rights propaganda.
LOL why don't you stay in your room for 4 weeks and see how fun it is. While you are there, remind me to bring you some food and drinks, let me know when the experiment is over.
Anything we say, you redundantly say the same thing: "propaganda."
Chatha's says it very accurately: "Tigers are dangerous beings that cannot be predictable, so it means they ought to be handled by the experts and with care." Not "ought to": "Need to."
But I go beyond this in saying that we need to protect and further establish more wildlife preserves where they can live free without human intervention, to protect their rights and behavior without human interference, and to live free and wild as they were born and meant to be. I believe in freedom and animal rights for people and all of nature.
As said, go have your pet cougar. I honestly don't care. But please care about their reputation and don't make it worse! Are you experienced to do that? Get yourself prepared - as an expert who knows how to handle them - and prepared to deal with all the problems that you are certain to face for the next 25 years, without further damaging their reputation so that others might come despise and fear them even more, and then want them all to be extirpated. That is what I am against. You are hiding behind an artificial mask that you label as "propaganda" in defiance of anything that anyone else has to say.
What experience do you have with mountain lions, cougars and pumas? Do you or do you not have any? If not, then this needs to be your first step.
Show me one other place in this thread where I have used the word.
After deforestation, 99.999999999999999% of the problems encountering the tiger is private ownership. If I were a smuggler I'd rather steal or get my tiger from private owners, besides you'd be hard pressed to find a buyer for stolen governement goods, and thats if the government doesn't trace it back to you in time. More Tigers have disappeared in private captivity than all the wild combined. The problem with private captivity is that you never know where they are going to end up, especially when the private party is not affiliated with a well known organization. There used to be black panthers in America but private ownership and encroachment fucked it all up. To be totally honest with you Tigers are not going to make it past another 300 years time, there will be no more Tigers, both in the wild and in captivity, not if you decide to ease regulation on Tigers. If it weren't for CITES efforts they would have been long gone...fuck captive breeding
I think that is total nonsense. Tigers are very easy to breed to large numbers in captivity. In the article that started this thread the Chinese bred eight tigers up to three hundred tigers. The AR people are fond of saying that there are 20,000 tigers in the U.S. The estimates that say that a high percentage of exotics die inside of two years include feeder animals and animals that have a short lifespan to begin with.
All you did in that last message was repeat false doctrine and embellish it.
I'm not against captive breeding, i'm only against private captivity, they are the reason for all the regressions. If Tigers are so easy to breed in captivity they should have been sufficient enough to cater to all the medicinal, exhibitional, and fur material needs of the market. It will take 10 years to breed 8 Tigers to 300 Tigers, and in one year alone 100 Tigers can end up as one man's dinner or a lady's hair extension(don't ask). The problem with animal trafficking is demand, once the demand exceeds the supply there is nothing you can do to curb the situation. A very good example are illegal drugs and conflict diamonds. Diamonds are responsible for all the civil wars in Africa and some south American countries, the demand is there so it keeps many people in business, highly organized and efficient people around the world. We can make diamonds, fake diamonds that look very much like diamonds, but for some reason its not enough to curb the diamond trade and arnachy in these countries; I think the demand is too high. People will do anything to get themselves out of an unfavorable situation, and Tiger trafficking was no different from any other contraban goods. I don't know if there are 20,000 Tigers in America, and I really don't think so, thats probably more than all the Lions and Tigers combined left the world.
Part of the reason that there are so few in captivity now is because conservationists and animal rights people have been total fuckwads about it.
These are wild mammals that need lots of land to roam free. We're not talking about purrrrr house kittens here. They need miles and miles of land. The average territory of a mountain lion is 100 square miles, though this does decrease as the food source becomes more plentiful. Still, they are not domesticated house pets that you can keep tied up or confined to the inside of your house, if that's what you intend? The captive breeding programs that do have expert handlers know this.
This is what I keep saying. the same thing as you originally said on page 3.
Are you talking about here in the U.S.? We are trying to preserve and protect the land against encroachment and poachers for free-roaming mountain lion habitat. We are trying our best to keep people away so that they can live and breed free in their natural habitat.
How does this differ from what you are planning to do?
Equivalent to saying it's all propaganda. The people that I know here and myself fight for effect methods of preservation.
I know for a fact that they don't. This is cruel and inhumane treatment. Even my Norwegian Elkhound needs acres to run and this is the main reason why I moved from Phoenix to the Coconino Nat'l Forest up here in Flagstaff - colder climate and entire forest that she can run in. These animals need to run for
proper physiological exercise to ssay the least. No breeding program can be started in someone's basement. Clearly, you are off the wall in this post. What you state here is akin to saying you're going to keep a cougar in a fish bowl.
Good God, you actually went to that much effort.
You will never convince me that the population of tigers will increase faster if we just magic up a few million square miles of land and leave them alone on it.
No effort spent. Just use the search key: 1,2,3
I'm not trying to convince you that mountain lion populations will increase in the wild: only saying that we need to do our best to preserve their habitat. And you also do state this. I'm just saying that if you intend to raise a cougar in captivity that you need to be educated around them first. It's a 25 year commitment. It is those that who are inexperienced in this endeavor that end up abandoning them and thus giving them all a bad rap to be extirpated. Get a job at a preserve with a captive breeding program first. Hell, I've got mountain lions that are said to occasionally roam through my backyard, but I'd never think of having one as a pet. And why should I? They are not an endangered species and we have plenty of them right here. Why would I want one in my house? To eat my dog? I go up to Alaska and take photos of Grizzlies in the wild. Some say I get too close. Maybe so. But I'm not going to be like Timothy Treadwell.
I would just as soon we had it both ways. It is an outright lie as far as I am concerned that captive breeding hurts wild populations. Without captive breeding we would not have the thriving herds of wild buffalo that we do have now.
If I had the income, and if people leave me alone about it, 25 years hardly seems like long enough to be committed to keeping some big cats. Nine wonderful years with the dog I had weren't long enough, for sure. And it's not "inexperience" because a lot of long-term owners had no experience when they started. It's money and politics. There are those who use the presumption that someone can't take care of them to get people to force others to get rid of their animals.
Something I have to say is this: If I get some tigers and breed them for ten to twenty years and sell or give them away, I have helped the species. I don't believe the lies about it being such a bad thing to breed them. The lies are revealed when they claim that there are so many thousands of tigers in the U.S.
i think you are delusional
Separate names with a comma.