Dog mauled while defending owners against mountain lion

shadowofnight

Airplay355 wrote: »

If they haven't found the lion, how do they know it weighs 120lbs? How does that guy know the lion wanted to kill them? It went after the dog. A dog is certainly snack sized food. Why are we going to kill a lion for trying to eat a dog. It's not some vicious killer, it couldn't even finish the dog off. It never even touched the people, hurt the people and certainly didn't kill anyone.

Exactly...as I mentioned before, the cat saw the dog...something he viewed as an easy way to a full stomach.

Say Joe human hadnt eaten for 5 days and he ran across a juicy 1/2 pound hamburger in his kitchen ( His natural food in its natural surrounding ) but there happened to be green alien standing in the corner of the kitchen....would Joe human be more concerned with if the green alien could possibly hurt him...or B lining to that hamburger so he doesnt starve to death ?

That hiker was lucky it ran across a normal mountain lion and not a mankiller.

snow

shadowofnight wrote: »

Exactly...as I mentioned before, the cat saw the dog...something he viewed as an easy way to a full stomach.

Say Joe human hadnt eaten for 5 days and he ran across a juicy 1/2 pound hamburger in his kitchen ( His natural food in its natural surrounding ) but there happened to be green alien standing in the corner of the kitchen....would Joe human be more concerned with if the green alien could possibly hurt him...or B lining to that hamburger so he doesnt starve to death ?

That hiker was lucky it ran across a normal mountain lion and not a mankiller.

Great analogy but totally wrong. First off dogs arent hamburgers and are not there natural food in there natural enviroment. Secondly the Mountain lion attacked the people and then the dog protected them it didnt attack the dog by itself. And even if that was the case and the dog was the intended target but still attacked with people present but wasnt concerned about the people it has shown it has no fear of people and would attack them without a second thought. The mountain lion was not a "NORMAL" mountain lion behaving normally if it had of been it would have never attacked with people present.



REGARDS SNOW

cfrizz

+10 Air, Mark, Steve, Shack etc.

You are in their territory that is the risk you run. It is the arrogance & bloodthirsty mentality of man who has put a good many animals on the endangered speicies lists.

Nature originally had most things in balance, we have upset that balance so much that it isn't funny. We systematically eliminate most natural predators of other animals and as a result have an overabundance of those animals that can now breed & live & breed at will. Sometimes resulting in deaths of us because we run into them on the road.

God bless that dog for saving its owners, but leave the lion alone.

Airplay355 wrote: »

If they haven't found the lion, how do they know it weighs 120lbs? How does that guy know the lion wanted to kill them? It went after the dog. A dog is certainly snack sized food. Why are we going to kill a lion for trying to eat a dog. It's not some vicious killer, it couldn't even finish the dog off. It never even touched the people, hurt the people and certainly didn't kill anyone.

I found a shark tooth on the beach the other day, so clearly there are hungry sharks in the area. I'd like to go into the ocean so I think we should rid the ocean of sharks so I can protect myself. :rolleyes:

Human life is not sacred, get over yourself. You're just tiger/lion/shark food that has been lucky enough to not get eaten yet.

+1 Shack. The smartest animal on the planet manages to protect it's species from natural selection with it's technology and make the species worse off as a whole....ironic isn't it.

Lord Vader

cfrizz wrote: »

+10 Air, Mark, Steve, Shack etc.

You are in their territory that is the risk you run. It is the arrogance & bloodthirsty mentality of man who has put a good many animals on the endangered speicies lists.

Nature originally had most things in balance, we have upset that balance so much that it isn't funny. We systematically eliminate most natural predators of other animals and as a result have an overabundance of those animals that can now breed & live & breed at will. Sometimes resulting in deaths of us because we run into them on the road.

God bless that dog for saving its owners, but leave the lion alone.

correction. They are in our territory and attacking us... The "bloodthirsty" mentality of man??? I counter that it is the ability of man to protect themselves from threats that has protected you and your right to find man to be at fault here. Perhaps we should instead say "here kitty-kitty" and scratch them behind the ear with one hand while the lion knaws away on the other...

Kex

There are mountain lions in our area. The Angeles National Forest is right up the hill from our street and there are plenty of trails to hike. Here is what the Rangers had to say about the topic recently:

If you hike these trails NEVER bring your dog: it is like a beacon to any mountain lion for miles around, and if it shows up, the dog will always loose.

Take it FWIW.

hearingimpared

Airplay355 wrote: »

Human life is not sacred, get over yourself. You're just tiger/lion/shark food that has been lucky enough to not get eaten yet.

That is absurd. Human life is sacred! How can you compare humans to be just food that is lucky not to be "tiger/lion/shark" food? Perhaps we should take convicts and feed them to animals in the zoo instead of the meat from steers and such.

ryanjoachim

Kudos to the dog for defending itself and it's person. -1 billion to the idiots who want to kill the cat.

Is the cat dangerous? Yes. Will the cat attack someone again? Maybe. Do we know what set off the cat in the first place? No.

Needless to say, the cat could have been startled by something when the man and dog came around. The dog could have chased or antagonized the cat (barking). The cat could have just been having a **** day.

All in all, just because it's a "campground" doesn't give us the right to kill anything that happens to take offense at us destroying it's home. If the cat attacks again and is caught then, go ahead and relocate it. If it seems rabid or diseased, then go ahead and kill it.

Killing it just for being WHAT IT IS...idiotic.

Kex

anonymouse wrote: »

Scott's Crabgrass Preventer followed in 8 weeks by Weed n Feed. A good mowing in order as well

Give the poor guy a break! He was living in an appartment a short time ago. He probably doesn't even own a lawnmower yet!

Hey Sal, since it's been mentioned: pushing that lawnmower might help with that training program you were talking about!

ryanjoachim

hearingimpared wrote: »

That is absurd. Human life is sacred! How can you compare humans to be just food that is lucky not to be "tiger/lion/shark" food? Perhaps we should take convicts and feed them to animals in the zoo instead of the meat from steers and such.

And thanks for bringing this up.

Humans kill with a conscious action. They choose who and what to kill. Animals kill because they need to, either for food or to protect something.

If we kill animals just because they attack us, why don't we kill humans when they outright kill each other?

"Humans aren't animals!"
Wrong. We are worse than the real animals.

Dogs used to be animals. They used to kill other animals (still do on occasion). What makes them so different now? Domestication. Now anything the dog does wrong is usually blamed on the human. And then the dog dies.

I don't see how it's fair.

dorokusai

snow wrote: »

Great analogy but totally wrong. First off dogs arent hamburgers and are not there natural food in there natural enviroment. Secondly the Mountain lion attacked the people and then the dog protected them it didnt attack the dog by itself. And even if that was the case and the dog was the intended target but still attacked with people present but wasnt concerned about the people it has shown it has no fear of people and would attack them without a second thought. The mountain lion was not a "NORMAL" mountain lion behaving normally if it had of been it would have never attacked with people present.



REGARDS SNOW

If the mountain lion had extra moderators or even super moderators to oversee the moderators it would have come down to a 30 sided die roll at best. Unfortunately the dog didn't have a coat of invisibility and the lion had vorpal fangs +5. Everyone loses and another parrot has been strangled by a drunk Jimmy Buffet fan.

ryanjoachim

dorokusai wrote: »

If the mountain lion had extra moderators or even super moderators to oversee the moderators it would have come down to a 30 sided die roll at best. Unfortunately the dog didn't have a coat of invisibility and the lion had vorpal fangs +5. Everyone loses and another parrot has been strangled by a drunk Jimmy Buffet fan.

hahaha...I giggled IRL. Thanks!

skipf

I'll bet a lot of Cali folks are regretting banning hunting for mountain lions about ten years ago. There are more incidents like this happening every year that goes by. As the population of lions increases, they are bound to come in more contact with humans as they won't share a territory with another lion. When hunted, the lions stayed away from humans as a conditioned response. Now they are discovering we are the softest, tastiest, easiest to catch and subdue large prey animal out there in the woods.

jflail2

And this is why I will conceal carry on all future hikes, regardless if it's a national park or not. I want the warm, fuzzy safe feeling of a .45 under my arm in case something like this were to ever happen...

bruss

Didnt Lassie take out a Mountain Lion..

shack

jflail2 wrote:

And this is why I will conceal carry on all future hikes, regardless if it's a national park or not. I want the warm, fuzzy safe feeling of a .45 under my arm in case something like this were to ever happen...

I guess you are special and don't have to obey the laws like the rest of us. If you don't like the laws regarding carrying a firearm in a National Park....DON'T GO!

shadowofnight

snow wrote: »

Great analogy but totally wrong. First off dogs arent hamburgers and are not there natural food in there natural enviroment. Secondly the Mountain lion attacked the people and then the dog protected them it didnt attack the dog by itself. And even if that was the case and the dog was the intended target but still attacked with people present but wasnt concerned about the people it has shown it has no fear of people and would attack them without a second thought. The mountain lion was not a "NORMAL" mountain lion behaving normally if it had of been it would have never attacked with people present.



REGARDS SNOW

I just figured people would know a dog was pretty close to a coyote...which is natural prey is all...it would look the same to a hungry cat. I also agree that unless starving or injured, most cats wouldnt have done that...but even a considered normal cat might have thought the dog ( Coyote ) was just too easy of pickings to pass on.

I also thought the people were not attacked ...did they receive injuries ?

ben62670

It is not normal for a Mountain Lion to attack people. Live stock sometimes, but people? They usually go the other way. If you value a predators life more than a humans please slap and sterilize yourself. The weak argument that you shouldn't be outdoors is real nice for the apartment/city dwellers.
Thanks
Ben

steveinaz

Lord Vader wrote: »

correction. They are in our territory and attacking us...

Apparently, the lion felt it was his territory--

I'm not getting your point. So wild animals should "know" when they have just entered a camp ground or other geneva convention human protected area?

You must live in the city huh?

ryanjoachim

ben62670 wrote: »

It is not normal for a Mountain Lion to attack people. Live stock sometimes, but people? They usually go the other way. If you value a predators life more than a humans please slap and sterilize yourself. The weak argument that you shouldn't be outdoors is real nice for the apartment/city dwellers.
Thanks
Ben

Again, nothing in the news article said anything about the cat attacking the humans. The dog was the only victim. I seriously doubt any dog smaller than a lab could do any sort of "serious" damage to a mountain lion, which leads me to believe that the cat was after the dog solely and not the humans.

shadowofnight

Kex wrote: »

There are mountain lions in our area. The Angeles National Forest is right up the hill from our street and there are plenty of trails to hike. Here is what the Rangers had to say about the topic recently:
Take it FWIW.

" If you hike these trails NEVER bring your dog: it is like a beacon to any mountain lion for miles around, and if it shows up, the dog will always loose.
"

Exactly...it looks like natural prey to the cat...like the wording beacon

steveinaz

bruss wrote: »

Didnt Lassie take out a Mountain Lion..

I think Lassie even kicked a whales **** in one episode....:D

ben62670

Did you read the article, and watch the video. I guess not.
I guess they would have been much better off without the dog:rolleyes:
You guys have fun.

steveinaz

shack wrote: »

I guess you are special and don't have to obey the laws like the rest of us. If you don't like the laws regarding carrying a firearm in a National Park....DON'T GO!

Sorry Shack-master, I disagree. While it is illegal, better to be judged by 12 then eaten by 1. I don't see a problem with people carrying a firearm for the sole purpose of animal protection--just in case. Silly laws won't keep me out of my tax funded National Park either. having said all that, I would not shoot an animal unless it was obvoius that it was about to attack.

An example, last year Bev & I were camping (not a national park) and there was a lion in the area (we saw it). He even sliced the edges of the campground a few times, and though I had my 12 gauge--I left him alone. While it did make sleeping at night a little stressful, it all worked out fine.

shawn474

So should we kill all dogs who go after cats, all cats who go after mice, etc? It's ludicrous. A natural instinct - how do you know the mountain lion was hungry? He may have attacked because he saw another ANIMAL threatening to move into his territory.........a natural reaction for animals is to attack or ward off others trying to invade their territory.

ben62670

steveinaz wrote: »

Sorry Shack-master, I disagree. While it is illegal, better to be judged by 12 then eaten by 1. I don't see a problem with people carrying a firearm for the sole purpose of animal protection--just in case. Silly laws won't keep me out of my tax funded National Park either. having said all that, I would not shoot an animal unless it was obvoius that it was about to attack.

An example, last year Bev & I were camping and there was a lion in the area (we saw it). He even sliced the edges of the campground a few times, and though I had my 12 gauge--I left him alone. While it did make sleeping at night a little stressful, it all worked out fine.

Link for Steve

jflail2

steveinaz wrote: »

Sorry Shack-master, I disagree. While it is illegal, better to be judged by 12 then eaten by 1. I don't see a problem with people carrying a firearm for the sole purpose of animal protection--just in case. Silly laws won't keep me out of my tax funded National Park either.

Agreed Steve.

I guess you are special and don't have to obey the laws like the rest of us.

So you don't speed, run red lights, nothing at all eh? If you do, do the rest of us a favor and stay off the roads please. Your speeding would be more apt to kill someone than my carrying a pistol in a national park for personal protection only. Well I'm definitely not a perfect citizen (unlike yourself) but I do no harm to my fellow man. If I decide to risk being caught with a concealed pistol that is being carried for protection ONLY, I don't see how that's a huge deal.

edit: And I COMPLETELY agree Steve. I'd never shoot an animal just to shoot one; that's what clays and paper targets are for. Only for safety purposes...

POIDOG

It's interesting to note all the opinions of people not aware of the area we are discussing.
While the loin has a right to exist, the Cleveland National Forest is huge. That campground is on the fringes of this area. One of the problems in this area is a severe drought that has impacted some animal behavior (including humans). The point here is simple, there are hundreds of documented lions in the area, which are not attacking humans. In fact, many are co-existing with humans, which is one of the tributes to the Cleveland National Forest. This is an example of a lion going astray. It happens alot here and is well documented, maulings of dogs and yes, small children. The good people of this area do not go on wild parties of killing lions at whim. A govermental policy is in place to protect man and animals. So please, spare us your dribble about animal rights, while you verbally trample on human safety. If it was your life or safety, what would you do?

ben62670

shawn474 wrote: »

So should we kill all dogs who go after cats, all cats who go after mice, etc? It's ludicrous. A natural instinct - how do you know the mountain lion was hungry? He may have attacked because he saw another ANIMAL threatening to move into his territory.........a natural reaction for animals is to attack or ward off others trying to invade their territory.

Please say something moderately intelligent. The poor kitty(Mountain Lion) had no place to run. It felt threatened:rolleyes: Some of you people are so silly.

Lord Vader

steveinaz wrote: »

Apparently, the lion felt it was his territory--

I'm not getting your point. So wild animals should "know" when they have just entered a camp ground or other geneva convention human protected area?

You must live in the city huh?

Actually no, I live near a river and have plenty of wildlife all around me. I have even lost a litter of kittens to the Eagles that soar over my home all the time. My dog was targeted by coyote and thankfully she was able to defend herself. It has ALWAYS been the case that man and nature don't always get along and always will be that way. I do NOT subscribe to the environmental whacko point of view that every time we encounter a billygoat in its's natural habitat that it is I that need to leave. There is something called environmental stewardship which comes into play here. There are plenty of wild mountain lions out there. Leave them alone and in peace, but this ONE is dangerous to HUMANS, and in my book people come first.

ben62670

POIDOG wrote: »

It's interesting to note all the opinions of people not aware of the area we are discussing.
While the loin has a right to exist, the Cleveland National Forest is huge. That campground is on the fringes of this area. One of the problems in this area is a severe drought that has impacted some animal behavior (including humans). The point here is simple, there are hundreds of documented lions in the area, which are not attacking humans. In fact, many are co-existing with humans, which is one of the tributes to the Cleveland National Forest. This is an example of a lion going astray. It happens alot here and is well documented, maulings of dogs and yes, small children. The good people of this area do not go on wild parties of killing lions at whim. A govermental policy is in place to protect man and animals. So please, spare us your dribble about animal rights, while you verbally trample on human safety. If it was your life or safety, what would you do?

Thank you very much.