Cougar - "Sound Science"
This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91
THE CARTOON CALLED "SOUND SCIENCE"
There it is on page A8 of the Washington Times' 5
April edition, "Pumas
adapt to city life." The young man and young lady
from the University of
California are cradling a drugged mountain lion.
The caption reads that
they have used "Global Position System tracking" to
determine that mountain
lions are "more adapted to humans than previously
thought." The article
reports that the "continuing $200,000 a-year
study" is meant to determine
"mountain lion behavior changes as they get used
to people."
It is reasonable to investigate and publicize
scientific facts that
citizens and political leaders should know about.
Further reading reveals a
different agenda however. Scientists
morph into eco-cartoonists and their
studies into cartoons, as they almost
always seem to do of late.
We are told, "We are not on the menu" (sic, the
lions' menu.) This is
cutesy misinformation meant to pull the rug out
from concerned citizens and
to give the animal rights and environmental
radicals a sound bite for the
media and meetings. Mountain lions have
in the past and continue today to
kill humans and eat them. Whether
"we" are eaten as often as a deer or
golden retrievers is decidedly
irrelevant.
We are then told, "There might be ways with better
understanding to know
how to behave around lions to reduce the public safety
incidents or lion
attacks." This bit of eco-babble is meant to disarm
any concerned citizens
who might object to mountain lions wherever they (the
lions and their
supporters) exist. It is right up there with those
other award-winning
disinformation sound bites like "we are in their habitat"
and "they are a
vital part of the ecosystem" and "it was his (or her) fault
for being there
or for not 'behaving correctly.'" When government is
charged with insuring
"domestic Tranquility" it is beyond the pale for them
to encourage cougars
to live where we do and then to tell us how we are to
"behave" around
cougars.
They conclude by telling us how the mountain lions
eat, sleep, and wander
about densely populated California communities at
night. They also tell us
that "state game wardens" (who could believe
them, they don't have PhD after
their name) "assumptions" are "challenged"
regarding the need to "kill" a
cougar "once it eats domestic
livestock." They end with the admonition that
"Close to 50 % of the
lions killed could be avoided if people could be
RESPONSIBLE" (my
emphasis.)
Here is what is going on. The researchers
"love" lions, just like the
Indiana bat students and professors "love" bats
and the wolf researchers
"love" wolves. They will benefit financially
and regarding academic tenure
and status by keeping us all on the edge of our
seats about the plight and
"needs" of the object of their passion.
Urban folk (unaffected by cougars)
are particularly susceptible to and
supportive of such nonsense. Endangered
Species Listings, private land
use restrictions, non-management of animals
and public lands, impediments to
rural living and pet ownership, elimination
of active State management of
animals jurisdiction, equating the presence of
a deadly predator as somehow
justifying the deaths and maiming of humans
(children, bicyclists, joggers,
elderly, etc.), and the elevation of an
animal to equality with humans and
their society are all at work here. I
often marvel at how cougar
attacks and the death of innocent citizens never
generate an
appea!
l from the media for easier handgun availability for joggers,
bicyclists,
walkers, pet owners, et al who are being harmed and killed by
cougars in
their home environs. Wrong agenda, I guess.
Here is the kernel of "sound science" in this
propaganda piece that is
ignored because it does not advance a philosophical
bent. Cougar and bear
hunting have been under attack for 20
years. Restrictions on dogs, baiting,
and hunts are coupled with
demands for "more science", false claims of
cougar (like bear and wolf)
"benefits", and general anthropomorphizing of
predators that kill pets, game
animals, livestock, and people. California
is the poster child for this
movement because they outlawed all cougar
management (the article calls it
"trophy hunting') over two decades ago.
Since that time:
1.)The California bighorn sheep has become endangered
because of cougar
predation.
2.)The Federal government has been "controlling"
cougars in the Sierras
(guess who pays for that) to "save" California's
bighorns.
3.)Numerous (the media and State bureaucrats
obfuscate and avoid the
numbers) Californians have been killed and
maimed.
4.) Pets, probably numbering in the thousands have been killed.
5.) I would suggest (though no one will follow it up)
that some children
have been taken and consumed by cougars. They are probably
assumed to be
abducted or worse. One need only look at the little
Colorado boy on a
church hike that was very likely taken by a cougar and
disappeared as he ran
between two groups. Small children are a meal for
cougars. Cougars take
them to a quiet spot and the only trace is soon a
bit of clothing and a
stool far away that dries up and becomes
indiscernible.
Cougars, like wolves and bears, are stalking horses
for those who would
clear rural areas of American citizens to make wild
places untouched by man.
They are stalking horses for those who would
eliminate hunting and the
ownership of pets. They are stalking horses
for those who would eliminate
ranching, farming, and logging. They are
the stalking horse for those who
want us all living in cities using public
transportation and living lives
that they proscribe. Predators are important
weapons of choice for these and
other radical movements.
Cougars, like bears and wolves, are not "important"
or "integral" to "the
environment" or "native ecosystems." They are not
"necessary to control"
other animals although they can contribute to those
ends when properly
managed. Unmanaged, their numbers fluctuate with
their prey or they turn to
things not listed on the scientists' reported
"menu." "Sound science"
should be telling us how many pets they
kill. What they are eating in the
suburban environment? What
danger they pose to children, the elderly,
joggers, bicyclists, and
others? What their impact is or can be on
livestock owners? What
the total annual damage is in the state from their
activities? How much
it costs to monitor and control cougars in the
urban/suburban
environment? What is needed to make the urban/suburban
environment more
hostile to their presence? How to determine their numbers
and
distribution? How best to control their presence in areas where
they
are not to be tolerated? Studies that tell!
us to "puff
up" (grizzly-lovers lore) or not to "run" or "look them in
the eyes" or other
such deadly advice should be condemned outright.
Here is what one wildlife biologist (this one) thinks
should be done with
cougars. Urban/suburban counties should be kept
cougar-free. This can be
done with year-around open seasons and permits
to generate revenue for
management and to monitor distributions.
Government programs can supplement
these efforts. **We are not in
"their" habitat they are in "ours." The life
of one child is not worth
all the cougars in the world.**
Rural area cougar populations should be held to total
numbers and
distributions that are consistent with State goals for livestock
protection,
big game herd numbers and the protection of citizens and their
families and
pets. Protection of families or private property from
cougars should not be
an act for which an honest citizen should fear legal
retribution. Hunting
is the best tool long-term too for this because it
generates revenue,
provides scientific data and utilizes the animals
harvested while preserving
a traditional cultural heritage. Government
programs should be used only as
last resorts since they cost taxpayers lots
of dollars annually and do not
utilize the animals or preserve traditional
cultural heritages like training
dogs, knowledge of cougars, and hunting
methods.
Citizens and honest politicians can and should
determine when and where
cougars are to be tolerated. They are the
decision-makers here and they are
well able to do what is required of them in
a free society. Scientists and
State biologists who recognize elected
State officials as their bosses (as
opposed members of some eco-band of
brothers and sisters protecting the
environment from the rest of the world),
should contribute their knowledge
(i.e. "sound science") to the decisions we
make. When scientists slant
their work and their findings, all
scientific input becomes suspect. For 30
years we have allowed
scientists to define our final environmental decisions
based on specious
assertions and the results are magnifying the disasters.
The time to stop
accepting the disasters of "science" dictated by ideologues
and returning to
"science" that provides answers to be considered with the
needs and
priorities of our human society is now. Studying and posing
with
mountain lio!
ns that are living in the midst of dense human
settlements is the height
of absurdity and frankly profane.
Jim Beers
5 April 2004
Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact: