Our U.S. government has a real problem with life and a respect for life. Not only does it support abortion on demand and the killing of unborn children, but when an animal, say a bear, attacks a woman in Florida who went to go throw out some trash (dog waste, anyway), that same government says trap and kill the bear. Why is the answer always to kill the unwanted party?
The bear in question, according to the report, was protecting its cub. So there is another issue government has a real problem with. Our government has no respect for parental rights any longer, and that extends to animals as well. On the human side government attacks human parents for how we raise our children, including how and what we feed them and how we school them, and in particularly if we want to home school instead of placing them in public school.
On the animal side, our government attacks the parental rights of a bear and her prerogative to protect her own cub. As if a mother bear is any less sympathetic to her children than human parents would be if they thought their own children were in danger. Does anyone doubt that if government could get away with it legally, they’d kill us, humans, for protecting our children as this bear did with her cub? Obamacare may take care of that.
Now, it is impossible for humans and bears to co-exist with one another. However, what can we expect to happen, and what can we expect the reaction is going to be from wildlife, so long as we, humans, continue to encroach upon their habitat? There needs to be some balance between human habitat and wildlife habitat so that everyone can live comfortably and safely. So long as humans slash and burn deeper into the untamed forests left remaining in America where wildlife (bears and such) live, naturally wildlife, the kind really dangerous to humans, are going to become as unwanted, uninvited pests into areas they once roamed but which now have been replaced with streets and roadways, and have had homes, schools, shops, etc. built where there once were acres and acres of trees.
Obviously humans and animals are not equal, nor are there any Constitutional rights set aside for animals. (And no one is suggesting that happen) However, that doesn’t mean we can’t have or show more respect and understanding for wildlife, even wild bears, wolves, foxes, and animals of that nature which often encroach upon human civilization. If a wild animal is threatening us, our family, friends, neighbors, etc., of course we ought to step in, and all the better if we are armed, to protect, to defend one another, against the wild animal.
The Fish and Wildlife Department wants to trap and kill the bear as it is probably a real threat to humans and probably will attack again if it is not caught. It begs the question – how much is it costing taxpayers to have The Fish and Wildlife Department conduct this stake-out? And why, if the bear can be trapped, cannot it, and her cub, be relocated to another part of Florida, or somewhere it can live without being a nuisance to humans? Even the woman who was attacked does not want the bear killed.
Is it a cost factor? Is it just so damn easier to kill life than try to save it, to preserve it, to respect it? Trillion dollar federal budgets every year of Obama’s Presidency and we can’t come up with a little extra cash to save life. That is money well spent.
Whatever government policy is mandating the Fish and Wildlife Department kill this bear ought to be abolished and replaced with a more humane and animal friendly version that traps the animals, but relocates them to “greener pastures”. Enough of the killing already.
- A New View on Wildlife Conservation – Maine Black Bear Cams (withywindlenature.com)
- Orphan Bear Cubs Released into the Wild (myfoxphoenix.com)