Originally Posted by rollin904
Yea it's easy for me to preach about it when I don't know all the circumstances, but it seems such a waste to kill animals who are already dwindling in numbers. The real truth is that the animals never should have been allowed in the possession of the man who shot himself and released them. There's no valid reason for a person to house that many exotic animals...
He's lucky he offed himself...I'm sure there are quite a few who would have done a lot worse to him
A lot of exotic animal sanctuaries get their animals from owners who think a lion or tiger cub is cute, want it for a pet, then realize they fucked up when the animals never conform to domestic life. I know in Tulsa, OK there is a place that gets almost all their animals from idiots who didn't realize that housing a wild animal is stupid idea. (granted, that place stayed current with its permits and vets)
Originally Posted by kessler89
why dont you go catch them then, i'll watch
ETA i'm sure you guys would be fine with one of these animals killing one of your kids/niece/nephew's also, sometimes lethal force is necessary, this is one of those days
Well this is just ignorant. 1.) Keep your kids inside if there is a public hazard. 2.) Lethal force isn't necessary
, but it is logistically more efficient. 3.) There are plenty of people willing to help in their recapture. More than you think. Just because you are not doesn't mean that good people won't.
I had to think long about this, and while I don't like the idea or the methodology of the destruction of these animals, I do feel it's probably in the best interests of the community and possibly for the animals. These poor things probably never had a chance to grow in the wild, and most likely have lost any hunting/survival skills they may have picked up young. Unfortunately, bullets cost less than tranqs, and that has to be an issue. Not to mention, IF the animals were to be captured, where would they be housed? Who would treat them? Who would feed them? Transport them? Who would pay for it all? How could it be accomplished in a timely manner as to avoid malnutrition, prolonged inadequate captivity, human/animal altercations, etc.? I doubt many local zoos have the facilities to take on these beasts, and the manpower required to properly care for them far outweighs that needed to take them down. Would the citizens of Zanesville agree to a temporary tax hike to care for the animals? I doubt it.
While it's not the best thing to do, destroying them is probably the right thing and most certainly the most efficient thing. In the long run, it might be the most humane thing, too.