Should we KILL predators that prey on HUMANS?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo

Should animals that attack/kill humans be put down?

  • Yes?

    Votes: 11 16.9%
  • No!

    Votes: 54 83.1%

  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
The majority of animal attacks on humans were 100% provoked by the Humans.

There are > 7 billion humans totally unsustainable with the resources of our planet. We are not close enough to terraforming planets in our solar system, nor are we near enough to intragalactic space travel to inhabit planets outside of our solar system.

We need to figure out how to control human population, not predator population.

This. I say more large predators!

Interesting that they bring up Gustave. He's not exactly something that can be stopped easily. He disappears for weeks, even months at a time before being spotted again. It's easier said than done to even find him, let alone kill him.

People just need to think before doing stuff like this. When I was 5 I knew not to go near the water in Florida. Most people seem to lack the common sense these days, or fail to do research in the Internet Age..... That's a painful amount of irony.
 
We should be intelligent enough to take note that whenever were in places where large predators are known to exist, we are fair game for these animals. Its sad to see humans being attacked, but I think its hard to blame those animals for killing or attacking humans, yes some of them may even have acquired some taste for human flesh but still, going there and then when the animal attacked you I think it should not be put down.and there are a lot more people killing us around these days
 
I think it depends on the animal itself. Take a gator for instance, they strike out of pure natural reaction. Something like a grizzly however can learn to seek and hunt humans exclusively from habit. Some animals need to be prevented from acquiring a "taste" for humans.

I came to say this

Depends on the animal for me. If a cougar (not Erica, a real cougar) came to town looking to hunt and eat a human, it's gotta go

So it's yes and no for me depending. So I didn't vote
 
But killing wild animals—even endangered ones—that attack humans is arguably necessary for the continued protection of the species.

as a SPECIES, we only need protection from ourselves at this point.
I'm more in favor of killing the people that prey on people than killing an animal looking for a meal.
 
^^^ I think he was referring to the species of the animal that attacked us. We're not in any danger of going anywhere, everyone knows that. But The author's got a good point about the revenge killings...
 
Jim Corbett had it right. Tigers and leopards in some areas eat humans regularly. The 35-40 or so he killed were estimated to have consumed about 1200 people. The people loved him so much he got a national park named after him.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
I'm going to say in most situations, no. the article made some valid, if not overly optimistic, points. most of the members make points that make more sense to me. As humans, treading out of our own territory (towns and cities) we're just dumb if we don't know the dangers before hand.

for example, I grew up camping on about 100 acres of land in east texas, most of that rarely sees human activity. Did/do I stay on familiar paths? yes. Do I watch for signs of wild boars and cats that could kill me? yes. Do I keep going if I see those signs? HECK NO. I turn my happy butt around and go tell my dad to keep an eye out. (of course in this example I'm telling him about boars so he can kill one. not for sport as much as for food and the fact that that area is dealing with MAJOR overpopulation issues.)

I'm not saying the kid deserved to have half of his arm ripped off, but maybe the adult that was supposed to teach him to be aware of his surroundings should have done a better job.

And the whole vigilante justice thing? illogical people will act illogically no matter what you tell them. Despite the fact that the gator was killed, I'm sure there's going to be at the very least a brief "scare period" in which people may not seek out vengeance, but they won't have to look hard for a reason to "defend" themselves.

One thing related, that I haven't seen any comments on are captive animals that are killed for acting on instinct when I guess their trainers thought that they no longer had instincts? I don't know. here's an example the tiger that attacked sigfreid or roy on stage during their magic act. (I don't remember which guy it was, but even HE didn't think the tiger deserved to be killed) That animal certainly didn't deserve to die. She was doing what tigers do. So there were horrified witnesses who definitely got more than they bargained for. Was the tiger killed to give the paying customers piece of mind? If anything, I think she and any stage animal that becomes aggressive, should be retired to a sanctuary specifically for animals that don't necessarily know how to be the animals they are.
 
Jim Corbett had it right. Tigers and leopards in some areas eat humans regularly. The 35-40 or so he killed were estimated to have consumed about 1200 people. The people loved him so much he got a national park named after him.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app

That's a very good point.
I will say "problem animals" that seek out and specifically hunt humans should probably be stopped.
 
There is a big difference between animals that hunt people and animals that are dangerous that kill people. In the USA we only have about 3 animals that would even possibly see humans as food, wolves, grizzlies, cougars. 99.99% of ppl that are outdoorsmen wont ever even encounter a wolf or cougar because they are so rare.


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com