Brown signs landmark mountain lion protection law. Cougar, puma

snoopdogg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
2,614
Reaction score
19
Heaven help us who live in this goofy ass state. "Mind boggling" indeed.
 

Orygun

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Messages
7,276
Reaction score
71
I'm glad Brown and the legislature has solved all your pressing needs like the budget, infrastructure, crime, gangs, medical care, unemployment, etc. that they could spend time on this nonsense. I'm also glad they have money saved up to stave off lawsuits when more people get mauled as a result of this.
 

mtnsammy

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
873
Reaction score
2
Never had the problem but if I was to face a perched lion I would not hesitate to take it quickly and with great compassion to ensure it did not suffer. One snarl, grimmace, crouched position or even thought I might be in trouble, DONE. Now if I were inside and waiting for FNG to arrive and no one was a threat, who cares it can run off again. Some people rely on the government to care for their problems too much. I do not call for stray dogs, bears in the trash or snakes in my yard. I am a grown up and can take care of it alone. Adding to the code, other than the presence of humans, is irresponsible. The cats are threatened by our presence just as we are by theirs. That is why they and us are called predators.
 

bobcatdan

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
309
Reaction score
0
its becuase of the half moon bay incident people seen them kill one. but they broke the law by shotting so close to the building .my point is there is laws over laws and they make more justto make people feel better if they dont follow the old they wont folow the new laws
 

Amari

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Well, I didn't come across this type of thing anytime. And laws for it should be passed so that these one's could be protected from some greedy mankind..
 

spectr17

Administrator
Admin
Joined
Mar 11, 2001
Messages
69,434
Reaction score
354
its becuase of the half moon bay incident people seen them kill one. but they broke the law by shotting so close to the building .my point is there is laws over laws and they make more justto make people feel better if they dont follow the old they wont folow the new laws
What law did they break? As far as I've been told, if they deem the animal to be a threat they can take it out just about anywhere. There is no 150 yd deal for wardens or cops on this. THey try and get a perimeter around the animal and then work on tranquilizing or non lethal means. It is a wild, cornered and scared animal after all. Who knows how they are going to react with all the sudden attention.

THe big blow up over Half moon was the residents and antis claimed the warden shot 2 harmless bear cubs.
 

RTG

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
What law did they break? As far as I've been told, if they deem the animal to be a threat they can take it out just about anywhere. There is no 150 yd deal for wardens or cops on this. THey try and get a perimeter around the animal and then work on tranquilizing or non lethal means. It is a wild, cornered and scared animal after all. Who knows how they are going to react with all the sudden attention.

THe big blow up over Half moon was the residents and antis claimed the warden shot 2 harmless bear cubs.
No, they shot two harmless mountain lion cubs, not bear cubs. The new law says that the lion in question must be ready to make an unprovoked attack. So when the responding agency is on scene, they have to make the effort to tranq and move the lion, unless it is a clear cut public safety offender.
So if you have... say, 2 wardens and 2 city cops, as well as 10 looky-loos, in the back yard of a residence regarding a treed lion you can't kill the lion if; it just shows aggression towards the people on scene. The thinking is that of course it might show aggression. It is a scared wild animal. It is a "no harm, no foul animal". It's a little confusing, but if you think about it, not so much. Different story if that lion just stalked some kids in their backyard.
This law just protects the lion from someone just "blasting" it for no good reason-like in Half Moon Bay. Now I'll wait for all the lion haters to rip me a new one..................
 

spectr17

Administrator
Admin
Joined
Mar 11, 2001
Messages
69,434
Reaction score
354
So wardens are now mind readers LOL. What training do they get on reading a cornered animals mind and how do they know when the animals is about to make an unprovoked attack? Snarling and ears back?. WHat if the animal is sick? Good luck with that.
 

BFR

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
344
Reaction score
10
This stupidity was started by Lowell Dunn. Dunn had only seen 1 wild lion in his life while hunting and wanted to see more. He contacted a non (anti) hunter, Sen. John Dunlap who was eager to start a bill to protect lions, he did so in 1970. The bill was finally passed and signed into law in 1971 by Gov. R. Reagan, actor turned politician. The law went into effect Feb. 1972, after the last lion hunting season Cali. had.

Inho the blame starts with Lowell who didn't know crap about cats and stops with Reagan who sould NOT have signed the bill. I don't discount Dunlaps part, but attribute his to being an idiot liberal anti hunter and therefore lacking common sense.
 

RTG

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
So wardens are now mind readers LOL. What training do they get on reading a cornered animals mind and how do they know when the animals is about to make an unprovoked attack? Snarling and ears back?. WHat if the animal is sick? Good luck with that.
Since you're having a little trouble understanding this, I'll help ya, big fella. Scenario 1; Mountain lion wanders into a neighborhood at the edge of the foothills. You know, where urban sprawl and coastal city-dwellers like to move to. The lion wanders into the neighborhood during the night, and gets caught in a backyard near dawn, by a barking dog. The homeowner sees the lion, now in their tree and calls authorities. The cat is darted and moved back to the hills. Easy stuff. No mindreading.
Scenario 2; Another lion wanders down near the same ugly, urban-sprawl tract, but this time it sets up near a school. As children walk home a parent sees it in a crouched position, slowly creeping towards two little girls that are lagging behind and by themselves. The lions is low to the ground with it's ears back-obviously getting ready to attack. The parent sees it and yells at the lion, and runs towards the children. The lion runs away.
The parent describes this action to the DFW and they deem it as public safety. That lion will be removed (lethally). Comprende amigo? See the difference.
In years past many lions were killed unnecessarily. This will prevent that from happening. Would you like me to explain anything else to you ;)
 

Live2hunt

Forever Hunting
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Messages
2,289
Reaction score
17
Haha.......scenario 1) Lions goes back to hills. A month later it return and is now the lion in scenario 2. The parent sees it and yells at the lion, and runs towards the children. The lion sees the parent as a double whopper vs the children as two piece chicken nuggets. The lion ordered a double whopper for lunch. DFW show up and remove(lethally) lion. Coroner show up and remove double whopper. Or double whopper end up in disable and we taxpayers are supplying its disability income until it croak. Now why did lion go back to hills in scenario 1? Scenario 2 wouldn't exist if THE END was done in scenario 1. Comprende amigo? see the difference?
 

BFR

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
344
Reaction score
10
Scenario 2....why is it a threat, it ran away ergo not threatening anyone or anything now...............just waiting for a better chance
 

spectr17

Administrator
Admin
Joined
Mar 11, 2001
Messages
69,434
Reaction score
354
Since you're having a little trouble understanding this, I'll help ya, big fella. Scenario 1; Mountain lion wanders into a neighborhood at the edge of the foothills. You know, where urban sprawl and coastal city-dwellers like to move to. The lion wanders into the neighborhood during the night, and gets caught in a backyard near dawn, by a barking dog. The homeowner sees the lion, now in their tree and calls authorities. The cat is darted and moved back to the hills. Easy stuff. No mindreading.
Scenario 2; Another lion wanders down near the same ugly, urban-sprawl tract, but this time it sets up near a school. As children walk home a parent sees it in a crouched position, slowly creeping towards two little girls that are lagging behind and by themselves. The lions is low to the ground with it's ears back-obviously getting ready to attack. The parent sees it and yells at the lion, and runs towards the children. The lion runs away.
The parent describes this action to the DFW and they deem it as public safety. That lion will be removed (lethally). Comprende amigo? See the difference.
In years past many lions were killed unnecessarily. This will prevent that from happening. Would you like me to explain anything else to you ;)
You don't believe in killing anything you don't eat so you can't give an objective opinion on predators and killing them. It's simple really, an apex predator in close proximity to people needs to be taken out. You can't have both. Sucks for the cat but last time I checked there is no shortage of big cats in CA. When you move these cats are you marking them somehow so if they do attack someone they can sue the DFW for just moving the problem cat somewhere else? When you do dart them how far do you move them and how far from homes are they set free? Are they like bears and just come right back to where they were darted? I know one depredation guy who said he wasn't paid by the hour for moving a problem bear and he just dumped them out a couple miles down the road and they were back the next day some times.
 

Stonepointer

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
863
Reaction score
21
If I am hungry and coming out from the edge of the forest and see a whopper and chicken nuggets, I will be eating both.

Many of these places that cats are showing up in now have been settled human areas for some time, and in many cases have been settled for hundreds of years.

These cats have lost their fear of humankind and are getting less nocturnal.

It would not be long before some parent loses their toddler in a fenced back yard to a big cat looking for an easy meal to nab away with.
 

Sodhunter

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
76
Since you're having a little trouble understanding this, I'll help ya, big fella. Scenario 1; Mountain lion wanders into a neighborhood at the edge of the foothills. You know, where urban sprawl and coastal city-dwellers like to move to. The lion wanders into the neighborhood during the night, and gets caught in a backyard near dawn, by a barking dog. The homeowner sees the lion, now in their tree and calls authorities. The cat is darted and moved back to the hills. Easy stuff. No mindreading.
Scenario 2; Another lion wanders down near the same ugly, urban-sprawl tract, but this time it sets up near a school. As children walk home a parent sees it in a crouched position, slowly creeping towards two little girls that are lagging behind and by themselves. The lions is low to the ground with it's ears back-obviously getting ready to attack. The parent sees it and yells at the lion, and runs towards the children. The lion runs away.
The parent describes this action to the DFW and they deem it as public safety. That lion will be removed (lethally). Comprende amigo? See the difference.
In years past many lions were killed unnecessarily. This will prevent that from happening. Would you like me to explain anything else to you ;)
In years past many lions were killed unnecessarily. This will prevent that from happening. Would you like me to explain anything else to you ;)

Yes please. We have twice as many lions as we should have. Please explain which lions were killed unnecessarily. Sounds like you think the lion stalking the children that was scared off would have been "an unnecessary kill". Explain to me how you would feel if those were your kids and that lion came back next week and ate one of them out of your back yard while they were playing kick the can in the dark. Explain to me why I never used to even see a lion track unless I was miles from town or roads 20 years ago and now I see actual lions leaving neighborhoods with cats in their mouth. Explain to me why you want to chance letting a dangerous urban dwelling lion get away to kill a deer a week from our dwindling deer herd when there are way too damn many lions in the forest? Explain to me why I should not build a house next to a forest instead of in the middle of the city and how that is good for my family. I want lions in my forest. Because I am the top of the food chain greatest smartest predator, I do not want to eliminate all other species. I want to use my God given abilities to do as He commanded us and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. I am sick of liberal tree huggers telling us we net to let "nature" be "natural" and be hands off. WE are part of this nature. WE rule. Hopefully in a way that is best first of all for all mankind and secondly for all natures living things. As ruler over all things wild I say kill any lion that sets foot in city limits. They will still proliferate and infest our forests with too many lions because of our stupid no hunting law. Explain where I am wrong please.
 

Sodhunter

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
76
Ooops. I see you think the stalking lion should be killed. Good! I think the one in a tree caught by a dog in a backyard should be too so it does not come back. I do not think any lions have been killed unnecessarily.
 

RVRKNG

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
1,117
Reaction score
1
They kill it, their bad. They don't & let it go, it kills a kid, their bad!
Years ago a little girl was mauled by lion in the O.C. Got millions from county.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't !
"We moved into their wilderness!" Fine, when do we start thinning the human herd?
Oh, no I forgot, no death penalty!........sorry just venting.
 

RTG

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
Haha.......scenario 1) Lions goes back to hills. A month later it return and is now the lion in scenario 2. The parent sees it and yells at the lion, and runs towards the children. The lion sees the parent as a double whopper vs the children as two piece chicken nuggets. The lion ordered a double whopper for lunch. DFW show up and remove(lethally) lion. Coroner show up and remove double whopper. Or double whopper end up in disable and we taxpayers are supplying its disability income until it croak. Now why did lion go back to hills in scenario 1? Scenario 2 wouldn't exist if THE END was done in scenario 1. Comprende amigo? see the difference?
Cute. However I fully understand how it works, unlike some of you. I realize some people get their kicks killing stuff just for fun. And I'm pretty sure I was hunting while you were still in diapers, so save the anti-hunter BS. All this law does is tries to prevent the unnecessary killing of the animal. There is a difference between a public safety animal and a depredation/ nuisance animal. Do YOU see the difference, genius?
 

RTG

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
You don't believe in killing anything you don't eat so you can't give an objective opinion on predators and killing them. It's simple really, an apex predator in close proximity to people needs to be taken out. You can't have both. Sucks for the cat but last time I checked there is no shortage of big cats in CA. When you move these cats are you marking them somehow so if they do attack someone they can sue the DFW for just moving the problem cat somewhere else? When you do dart them how far do you move them and how far from homes are they set free? Are they like bears and just come right back to where they were darted? I know one depredation guy who said he wasn't paid by the hour for moving a problem bear and he just dumped them out a couple miles down the road and they were back the next day some times.
I never said that I don't kill anything that I don't eat. You need to listen more carefully. And you, like many of these posters, does not understand the difference between a public safety animal, and a nuisance/ depredation animal. And your unnamed "depredation guy" is FOS. The only people darting and moving wildlife is the DFW. The animal is ear-tagged and if it returns it is euthanized, or rarely, taken to a facility for the rest of it's life (i.e. "Meatball" the bear).
I realize it's macho, big man talk to hate mountain lions and want to kill 'em all. If the cat is deemed public safety, or has caused damage to property (livestock, etc), then by all means-whack it. But if a lion wanders into a residential area near the foothills, and gets caught by daybreak and is treed, why kill it it if has done nothing to threaten anyone or anything. I'm a lifelong hunter, and Jesse you know that. However, I have a respect for wildlife, whether it is a species I'm hunting, or a non-game animal.
I understand the "game". Obviously many of you don't. Oh well.
 
Last edited:


Top Bottom