Forums.NitroExpress.com

The ass-wipe politicians surely have their share of the blame. But their are preservationist special interests also have their share.

That's what I was driving at with my sarcastic earlier post. I finally canceled my cable subscription because of the blatant bald-faced lies I was being told by, among others, Animal Planet. I can't keep track of how many shows about the Sundarbans I've seen. All have told the same lie. The villagers who are being preyed upon, we are told, have the same unnatural reaction.

The tiger is the protector of the forest, so they protect the tiger.

Which is insane. If the tiger COULD protect the forest, they wouldn't need to protect the tiger. But more fundamentally, that has never been the reaction of people anywhere when confronted with dangerous, life threatening wildlife. Corbett, who was no fan of indiscriminate slaughter, frankly discussed how Indian villagers considered man-killing cats to be demons.

It's the same attitude Africans have toward elephants that you can read in Gryphon's post on the African hunting forum. It's the same attitude any one of us would have if we were impoverished and living in a country who's government valued the lives of the animals killing us more than it valued ours. Or, as the man's widow put it, it would be better if there were no tigers.

Preservationist special interests were and are simply lying when they claim that the villagers have a different attitude toward tigers. That the occasional man-killing is an acceptable compromise. And the politicians are inhuman enough to believe them.

The fact is that people are people. Here in North America the prevailing attitude is that the occasional animal that kills people needs to be eliminated. Canada didn't take the attitude that the 2 coyotes in Nova Scotia that killed the up-and-coming 19 year old singer were magnificent spirit creatures. They shot them.

Despite what Animal Planet tries to tell me, I have no doubt that the people of the Sundarbans value their lives just as much as I value mine. Fortunately, I don't live in a country where the laws conspire against me, to the point where I have to violate them to scratch out a living.

Iqbal is exactly right, as far as he goes. What the hell is a poor Bangledeshi supposed to do? Just die as cat chow? So a bunch of rich first-worlders can feel good about themselves and their environmental sensitivities?

If I had the misfortune to be born poor near the Sundarbans, whether in India or Bangladesh, you can be damned sure I'd be poaching tigers like their were no tomorrow. Why would I share the first world's concern over the future of the tiger? Especially when it's showing so much contempt for my own.

These governments need to be on the side of their people. And that means hunting. Revenue, and hopefully security.