Tiger in MoorPark

[imapodaddy]

Got this article from MSN.com

Trackers kill roaming tiger in California
Wildlife officials shoot adult cat near housing developmentThe Associated Press
Updated: 4:44 p.m. ET Feb. 23, 2005MOORPARK, Calif. - Authorities shot and killed a tiger Wednesday that had been roaming the hills near the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.


The cat was shot several hundred yards from soccer and baseball fields at the edge of a housing development, said Lorna Bernard, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Fish and Game.

“It’s unfortunate that we had to kill it,” Bernard said. “It’s even more unfortunate that the person who owned it didn’t come forward and alert us immediately. We might have been able to capture it.”

Trackers had to shoot to kill because a tranquilizer would have taken five to 10 minutes to bring down the animal, Bernard said. They were concerned the animal might attack them or bolt onto a nearby highway. The animal was killed near Simi Valley, about 40 miles northwest of Los Angeles.


Authorities received a call just after 6 a.m. from a resident who reported the tiger strolling past his back fence. He said his children took pictures from inside their home.

Ken Tucker told KCBS-TV the tiger walked to a nearby house and “was just staring down” the neighbor’s dogs.

The trackers had been looking for the animal for eight days, using infrared equipment at night. They had set traps with goat meat and chicken.

The hunt began after the discovery of paw prints on a ranch near the library that were far too large for native bobcats or mountain lions. The size of the tracks indicated the animal weighed as much as 600 pounds.

Hungry and disoriented
Bernard said the owner could have told authorities about the tiger’s temperament and eating habits, which might have helped them catch the animal sooner.

As the cat roamed the hills, it became hungrier and disoriented, making it more dangerous to the nearby community of horse ranches and sprawling homes.

Authorities said they were investigating how the cat got loose in the hills.

“Obviously we’ll be looking at all the facilities in the area that housed big cats,” Bernard said.

Two weeks ago, authorities removed nearly two dozen large cats, including lions and tigers, from property rented by Abby and Emma Hedengran not far from the library, Bernard said. All the animals that inspectors found on the property were accounted for, she said.

A telephone message left Wednesday for the Hedengrans by The Associated Press was not immediately returned.

Tests will be performed on the tiger that may provide clues about its history.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

[arturo]

Too bad they had to shoot it. I'm not at all a fan of the small ones but the big ones are incredible beasts.

[moochy]

I heard about this "big cat" being lose about a week ago...i still dont understand why they had to shoot it...couldn't they tranq' it and then if it does something wild or dangerous shoot it....I hate when people are so afraid/paranoid about something that they do something drastic

[EBasil]

I dunno...I remember the fear in the neighborhoods when we had a big, black panther in the Chatsworth resevoir and adjacent hills in the 80's...people have kids that are prime targets for hungry cats. Like now, the cat was a "release" or "escaped" inmate from a private zoo...so they are more likely to be comfortable around humans, maybe hunting them, than they are skilled at finding deer.

Too bad they couldn't tranq the cat, but so be it.

[Tina]

I hate people who shoot animals for no reason. They swear like just 'cause he was roaming around after being dropped there by some idiot that he's this killer tiger.

People can just be so judgemental its terrible.

They said on the news that the tiger was one of 6 tigers reportedly transported illegally without notice to that site, and the man that transported them told officials it "wasnt his cat"....so he has 6 permits but only 5 tigers?. what a jerk...

And i like how the article puts that the tiger was "just staring down" the dogs... if we went around and shot everyone who was "just staring down" anyone or anything else, it'd be a massacre.


I think the cats name was "tippy" if i remember correctly.

Anyways, RIP to a most likely innocent cat.

[badfishgood]

The authorities claimed it posed a danger to the surrounding community and that tranquilizers don't work instantly...

Full of schit I say... from the pictures I saw on tv it looked like that cat was in the middle of nowhere...

Bastards.

[ECOdork]

I'm a grad student at Texas A&M Univeristy in the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences. I'm more of a fish guy (and less of a wildlife guy) but in my experience--and from the brief article--I'd have to say that it sounds like Cali Fish and Game didn't just go out and kill the tiger for the sake of killing it. Don't let the media fool you. They are after the "big story" and tend to neglect the important details. This is one of those cases where the details are truly significant. Obviously none of us knows exactly how it went down, but to me, it sounds as though they tried non-drastic measures first, such as extensive tracking (8 days is a long time to track a single animal) and multiple attempts to capture it. I would bet that the LAST thing the biologists wanted to do was kill the innocent tiger. I would imagine that they waited until they had no other options to take that drastic step.

Think about the range of a 100 pound mountain lion. I admit that I don't know what it is exactly (I know fish better than felines), but remember the 2 lions in Whiting that apparently didn't have enough space to roam. Now imagine that a 600 pound tiger will need that much more area to explore in order to satisfy its feed requirement. And it will satisfy it, as that is what predators are good at. The reality is that it was just a matter of time before the tiger got so hungry that it took some easy, unsuspecting prey like a outdoor dog, a horse in a enclosed area, or worse, a human out on a hike/bike. Then everyone would be condeming the Fish and Game for NOT doing anything.

Don't get me wrong, I too am frustrated by the useless death of the animal. But direct your anger to the jackazzes that think nothing of keeping 600 pound predators in major urban areas. They are the real jerks, not the biologists who are looking out for the welfare of both the animal and us; that is a difficult situation to be in. Further, these owners apparently had more than enough opportunity to let the biologists know about it before it got to this point. But they kept their mouths shut. It may not have made a difference, but it certainly could have. If they knew what it was used to eating and its general habits, the outcome may have been different.

As it is, we have enough problems with humans encroaching on the habitat of wildlife; the last thing we need to do is exacerbate the situation by keeping these things as pets. It is sort of like poking at a hornet's nest with a short stick then wondering why you got the ever living sh*t stung out of yourself....

[moochy]

I know that the media leaves out a lot of things but it still sounds a little drastic...According to the paper they didn't even try using tranquilizers because it would've taken 10 minutes to bring him down (10 MINUTES, are you kidding me? I take dumps longer than 10 minutes!)...There is no reason to kill the thing unless it attacks something...They found it and that seemed like that was the hardest part so I believe they could have used more effort to bring it down safely...I've seen them get bears from neighborhoods in new hampshire when i used to go up there and those things seem a lot scarier. We have a lot of resources at our dispossal out here and I don't think they used them wisely.

If they were worried about it eating something (dogs, horses, whatever), then throw a bunch of steaks to it...make it all satiated and sleepy. Tell the people (and pets) in the area to stay in their houses or on the pavement. Call Sigfried&Roy if you have to. It sounds like they don't want to pay for the capture and maintenence of the cat. I could go on but its just making me mad and the things dead already so whatever

[arturo]

My guess is that the wildlife officials on the scene didn't see much of an alternative. Sure, 10 minutes doesn't seem too long but that tiger is going to be seriously pi55ed once it gets shot. It's one thing to shoot dart from a distance on the Discovery Channel where the thing has room to run. It's quite another to have a raging 400-600 lb beast within a couple hundred yards of houses, sports fields, and a road. Once hit, the tiger is going to take off running and could easily cover a couple hundred yards is a matter of seconds. I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the professionals on the scene. 10 minutes is long time to have an irate tiger running loose in a populated area.

[Jawbreaker]

well said texlepomis

[ocrider]

I think they should have tranqued it even if it does take 10 minutes

[moochy]

Ok...not trying to beat a dead horse, or dead tiger i guess (god, thats a horrible tasteless joke), but apparently the tiger was declawed also. And also its been reported that they shot him twice and it didn't die so they shot it again 7 minutes later while it was lying on the ground...Damn, so sad.