Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

brogrammer9k t1_j4uq2t2 wrote

Reply to comment by Elipticalwheel1 in Polar Bear Enters Remote Alaska Village, Fatally Mauls Woman, Boy by MinimumMonitor7

This is in a very rural part of alaska, chances are these two were alaska native and their people have been here just as long as polar bears.

The nihilistic take when humans die to animals is really fucking dumb. A mother and child were eaten alive, that is fucking horrifying.

Hopefully they blasted it straight to hell.

6

GWS2004 t1_j4v4t22 wrote

You think they're response is dumb? Yet you want the polar bear to go to hell?? 🤨

7

brogrammer9k t1_j4vlfk4 wrote

their* and its an expression.

Carnivores that kill humans for prey should be put down. Not out of revenge but to prevent them from associating humans as a food source.

−5

fusrohdave t1_j4vpuze wrote

Humans aren’t more important than animals. In fact, we are just other animals that are aware of the concept of self. It’s the food chain. Is it sad? Yes. But it’s nature. Maybe if we didn’t encroach on their territory at the same time as destroying their natural habitat this wouldn’t happen. Bears just being a bear.

I’ll go on record and say If a bear kills and eats me, let him live and chill. His life is just as important.

6

brogrammer9k t1_j4xlr37 wrote

Its pretty much standard wildlife conservation 101 with predators that any predator that kills humans and eats them is likely to do it again. Your feelings about leaving the bear be would not matter because not doing anything would put other people, vulnerable people in danger. The people who go to school and spend their careers studying and protecting these animals are the same ones who make the calls to euthanize them when this happens. Just because you empathize with the bear doesnt change how the Biologists with Fish and Game operate.

2

fusrohdave t1_j4yh4u8 wrote

Hate to break it to you but I know first hand that that is not “wildlife conservation 101”. First thing they do is relocate, far away from any civilization. They want the bear to live, especially when the animal is endangered. At the same time factors that led to the incident are addressed as best as they can be. In this case that would be difficult. Only as a last resort are they euthanized. If you’d actually like to learn anything, there’s actually a lot of good resources available with the WCS.

We also aren’t talking about some downtown suburbs. It’s a remote Alaskan village. There’s an entirely different set of circumstances.

2

brogrammer9k t1_j52ady3 wrote

carnivores that have killed humans are certainly not relocated.

The WCS has no actual jurisdiction on what happens to animals that have killed people, especially not in the state of alaska. Every single instance of an identified wild predator killing someone (especially in Alaska) has ended with the dept of fish and game or state troopers eliminating the animal.

The WCS has about as much a say in what happens with dangerous animals as MAAD has about legislation that DOT is responsible for.

2