Loxahatchee Tiger

Did anyone hear about Bobo the tiger, the tiger that got loose in south florida? This tiger got loose in a town called loxahatchee, it's in south florida. It's mostly forest and woods and stuff, most people don't even live in developments. Well, seeing as this would be the best place for a big cat trainer to live, so a man named Steve Sipek decided to move in with his five big cats. Well one named bobo got loose on (i think) sunday, climbed out a cage and two fences. They probably had an army of men with tranqulizer guns look for the cat out in the woods. Well, it turns out that when they finally find him, they shoot him in the head(amid a dozen men armed with tranqulizer guns). "I felt threatened" the police officer proclaimed. I had a feeling they were going to do it to. I knew. They showed Mr. Sipek sitting in his car crying after they told him, it was really hard to watch. It's bullshit, they expect us to belive this crap.

 

yeah, Im from south fla and I heard about that. Very sad. I saw the man upset on tv, and I feel terrible for him. I wonder if the tiger really ''lunged'' at the copper, like they said. Its a bit hard to believe that he had no other choice than to shoot it dead....but I dunno. I hope the truth will come out though. Poor tiger.

 

Not suprised the guy freaked out, but still poor tiger.

I had no idea about that till now, being in the UK.

TTFN
Sage

 

*sigh* I wish the tiger wasn't shot. Assuming the tiger really did jump the cop, the guy really didn't have another choice.


There really needs to be stricter regulations on having large cats as pets at all. If there were, the tiger wouldn't have had to be shot in the first place.

 

I don't think people should be allowed to keep big cats, or any animal, for that matter, as pets. at all. they should be free to do whatever they want whenever they want to, just like the rest of us.

 

Well, we have to take care of the one's we've domesticated, for a few reasons.


First of all, turning pets loose has bad effects on the environment. They make competition for survival tougher on the native species, causing said creatures' populations to suffer or to go completely extinct. I live in Florida where we have lots of problems with feral cats, pac man frogs, iguanas, and countless non-native plants causing native florida creatures to disappear.

Also, we've bred dogs to be with people. I did a reaserch paper on canine domestication before. Dogs have been bred to be juvinile wolves. Juvinile wolves bark and play like dogs too, and more importantly, juvinile wolves do best under the care of their elders. My dog, a two-year-old cavalier king charles spaniel, is snoring on my lap right now. She wouldn't last a week in the wild. Neither would many other American canines. I think it's best to not breed dogs just cause you think puppies are cool, FIX them as we already have a pet overpopulation problem as is, and take care of the ones in shelters that need a home. We, humans, created dogs. We, humans, are responsible to take care of them, not abandon them.

 

We tried that tamee and we killed everything. Of the eight species of tigers(not including white bengals), three are already extinct. Infant tiger survival rate is very low out in the wild, and is even lower in captivity. What's happening is that because they are going extinct out in the wild, they're being bred from orphaned cats. Well when the orphaned cats give birth they don't know how to care for their cubs, so they die. So now people have to take care of the cats to keep them alive, but because the new generation was never taken care of properly, they don't know how to take care of their kids. It just keeps going and going, generation after generation. You can't let them out in the wild because they don't know how to take care of their kids.

And about Sipek keeping his tiger, he was grandfathered in back in the eighties. It's just him and one other person who are alowed to keep tigers in florida. My neighbor fought for three years to get her tiger in, and she could'nt. She ended up moving. I do think there should be stricter regulations. Not a ban, but a respectable regulation.

 

How about neutering the offspring of the orphaned cats, so they can't breed and would quit perpetuating the problem? Tigers simply don't make good pets, and if death is the result of the tiger being too associated with people, then it's not good for the tiger either.

 

Well, yeah, everyone should take care of everyone else, but I think all creatures deserve the same kind of freedom that we all think humans should have. The choice to lead their own lives, instead of ones we set out for them. Letting them be on their own is not abandoning them. If they don't come back, it's their choice. I also am completely against "fixing" animals, just the same as anyone else would be if someone decided to "fix" their son or daughter. I view all creatures as complete equals to me and I would never do something to them I wouldn't want done to me.

 

Death is ok. It's just a part of life.

 

Well yes I suppose, but there's a diffrence between the whole circle of life thingy and animals dying because of human stupidity (neglect, being hit by a truck, or something)

Very noble sentiments, unfortunatly I'm not sure it works in real life.

For the record umans do not have total freedom, there are laws in place. Then there are social conditions to live within (not commiting adultrey, because it's wrong). These are put in place to ensure that the country stays ticking along nicely. Otherwise we'd have chaos (why bother with order, as there would be no consequences). What freedoms people have are granted based on their ability to understand and cope with the associated responsiblity.

I tend to think of companion animal like children. They are cared for but there are boundaries set out for their own welfare. They have limited freedoms due to a limited capacity to care for themselves.
There are so many dangers that companion animals have never faced and probably couldn't cope with. Of course might managed, but why run the risk. You wouldn't you let a one year old cross a busy road all alone, so why suggest putting a rabbit (of the same age) in that situation.
How could deliberatly leaving them to do their own thing not be abandoning. They seem to mean the same thing to me (albeit the former has a positive spin)


I care for/about Branwen they way I would care for/about a child. I respect and understand what she wants and needs and provide for her. Being the loving Mama * that I aspire to be I will occasionally limit her out of necessary to keep her safe. She has a run, it is perhaps cage like, but the alternative is her potentially escaping into next door's garden and being eaten by their rotweiler. A necessary evil of sorts.
She does by the way have free run of the house, but is supervised to ensure not harm occures. Just as my mother did when I was young.

The 'fixing' issue is diffrent for animals and people. Animals don't have the intelligence/ability to plan family sizes. They also produce considerable larger litters. With so many animals it would be impossible to provide the care and attention they would need. It seems iresponsible for me to let Branwen have an infinete number of babies that I could not provide for and would have to risk putting into situations where their needs might not be met (via letting other adopt them) spaying also reduces the risk of uterian cancer, and loving carers/parents will do almost anything to reduce the potential suffering that may befall their babies.

I also view creatures as my equals, and would never harm an animal (directly or otherwise, hence vegetarianism) however I appreciate that they have diffrent needs to people, and it is therefore necessary to treat them diffrently.

An essay of sorts I know.

* Note Mama, not owner. I balk at the term, feeling that one cannot own another spirit. Mama seems more appropriate, as there is a sense of mothering involved in caring for another creature.

 

there is no difference. it's all life. ALL OF IT.

You also don't know if it doesn't work...

not all humans are bound by laws.

Social conditions are only up to the individual to follow. I, for one, don't believe adultery is wrong.

you say that as if you live in a country that actually is "ticking along nicely". What country might that be?

So many people use that way of thinking and think that it actually makes sense. No one knows that we would have chaos because no one has ever seen it happen! No one has (at least in my country) experimented with getting rid of laws to see if their hypothesis is actually true, yet they still believe in it. And who's to say we are not in a state of chaos as it is! WITH LAWS! Everything is not well and there are tons of suffering life all around us. Life does not need to be controlled, otherwise, it would be inborn, like the need for water, food, sleep, happiness. It would just happen, and everyone would be fine with it. But we're not! And that says something about us.

what freedoms we have are granted based on other peoples' desire to be in control because of their insecurity.

No animal has a limited capacity to care for itself. The problem is that we lead them to believe they need us more than anything, so that we can say they couldn't live without us. But if you let a companion animal out to live on its own, it will learn how to live, at the risk of death. Just like you would.

probably is not actually

why not run the risk to give another being a happy life.

nothing in this world is abandoned. We are all here together.

you provide for her physical needs, but what about her mental/emotional needs?

the alternative is you giving up control of her life and her leaving you and never coming back, but what if after leaving you, she is the happiest she has ever been (even if only for 10 minutes before she gets eaten by the neighbors dog) Isn't her happiness more important than your insecurity?

the best times in my life happened when there was probable risks of harm occuring and no supervision.

I don't believe humans have the right to interfere with another being's life, which I think goes way past animals lack of intelligence/ability to plan family sizes.

None of this really matters more than living and letting others live.

I really don't believe you do view other creatures as your equal because you don't see the need to treat them just as you would one of your friends

 

I'm not going to bother arguing with you, we are never going to agree. So lets just drop it before we get too wound up.

As you asked I'm in the UK. It's not perfect, but fairly well run and organised, compared to say Iraq.
What I know about the break down of order is gleamed from news report of Iraq and learning about the Russian revolution.

 

I'm not arguing with you. I'm not even trying to tell you that you're wrong and I'm right, I'm just telling you how I feel. You feel that way for a reason, and I'm glad you do and I wouldn't have it any other way, because that's the way it needs to be. You are you and I am me. I cannot be you, and you cannot be me. No problem.

What I know about "order" comes from my life living in the US. Nothing can ever be completely controlled, so I say, what's the use at all. We're trying so hard for something that will never happen. CAN'T happen, even. I wouldn't even want it to happen. It's not natural.

 

...I suppose I don't quite see the issue in black-and-white. I don't believe we are any better than animals, as we are animals. If we were truely intellectually superior, we'd be able to live in a peaceful anarchy understanding that murder and mayham tend to cause communal strife. Failing that, saying we are superior to animals in that our lives mean more than theirs simply due to our "superior" intellgience I believe is hypocrytical and wrong.


I tend to view animals - like my dog Willow - as I would a human child. I don't find children to be below me, but I still look out for their safety and well-being. I would stop Willow from running into a buisy street for the same reason I would stop a human child from doing the same thing: I do not believe getting hit by an SUV is in either creature's best interest, even if they couldn't see it for themselves.

 

I still feel that treating another animal as most people would a human child is not giving it the kind of respect it deserves. But, for that matter, I don't believe most people give human children the kind of respect they deserve, either.

 

When i was moving with my family we had to leave our three cats in the kennel until we were at the new house. However they managed to escape through the window. the kennel was really close to our old house and 2 cats made it to the oldhome. the last one (who was always dreadfully afraid to go outside) we never saw again. i don't think she didn't want to come home, i think she couldn't make it.

 

Thats such a nice thought. Free..be Free !!
but hmm.. what if theres no where left to be free in? then what? Be Dead.. Be dead.. oh no.. we could never place you in bondage.. you must be free. there for .. Dead.

Free Willie.... btw.. willie is now dead cause they set him free.

I love animals as much as if not more then most. But im a realist..
Mankind is and will live everywhere on this planet in time. there will be NO PLACE left for any animal who can not live WITH man. If any animal can not live with us it will die. there is no other truth. ONLY by a effort that at present time is beyond us it seems that men can actualy hold off the advancement of men on some lands and save some habitat for creatures will any survive. but who is to deside what lands ( meaning what animals ) will be saved. All men do not think equaly , so just because we here in the US refuse to kill whales does not mean a nation like Japan is going to stop hunting them till their gone. same goes for every other creature of this planet.

So dont be so quick to condem a human who wishes to save any wild creature and put them in a man made habitat. Sure not everyone who trys will do it right but all who attempt it will learn and others can learn from their mistakes and advance the cause. Remember there is ONLY one end for large creatures of this planet. The longer we can delay that end the richer everyone will be.

 

btw. take a cow for example. What do you think would happen if the whole world desided that cows should be free and no one should eat meat.

Well for starters I would have to hazard a guess that 90% of the cattle population of planet earth would be dead.
while people will want them free thier not going to want them eating THEIR land. go eat someone elses land.
India would welcome some im sure..they worship them. but how many cattle can migrate there? and whos going to pay for that? LOL.
yep.. kiss cattle good bye.

ahh.. but thankfuly..thats not going to happen. we LOVE our cattle. nothing better then a tasty steak !

 

I agree with you Omniwulf.


I don't condone captivity completely. Take Sea World for example. Their Orca breeding program isn't to save the species, as Killer Whales aren't on the endangered species list, but for money. Obviously. While I believe that the vets and trainers really, really do care for these guys, I don't believe whales who travel hundreds of miles a day should be kept in a tank unless it is absoultly nessicary (say, if they rescued a beached whale or something). It would be great if they stopped breeding, but you can't just let these guys go. That would be the equivlent of being raised in a closet, then dropped in the middle of NYC to fend for yourself.

It would be cool if cows could reign free, but the only way that works in India is because they're worshiped. In the states, they'd be shot and run over by hummers.