3 ms·

I'm very far from the sterotypical "tree hugging hippie eco-terrorist" type, but even I read this, and can't help but feel a certain bit of misanthropy. I mean.

I'm very far from the sterotypical "tree hugging hippie eco-terrorist" type, but even I read this, and can't help but feel a certain bit of misanthropy. I mean.. we do kinda suck. That's not to say that I'm advocating for anarcho-primitivism or "returning the planet to the animals" or anything. But it sure seems like we should be able to do better. Ya know? Local prey - coyotes, raccoons, and other small animals - are laced with the rat poison that has become ubiquitous around Los Angeles. In 2014, camera traps spotted P-22 looking ill and officials hauled him in for treatment. A mugshot of P-22 looking grizzled and bemused quickly went viral, but the cause was no joke. He was found to be full of rat poison and consumed by mange - conditions that kill most mountain lions. The great slashes of asphalt also make journeys to new homes potentially deadly. In September, a pregnant mountain lion was struck and killed when she tried to cross a Malibu highway, which bisects a key swathe of habitat. She and her four unborn cubs all had traces of rat poison in their systems. Once, Mr Ordeñana captured a video of P-22 making plaintive mating calls. They would never be answered; the freeways and development surrounding Griffith Park guaranteed he was walled off from any potential females and would never reproduce.

kodah 4y ago
My takeaway is that: - Some places don't need buildings or roads. The intersection of rich people and wildlife habitats is interesting. - If there must be roads, like highways, we should study ways to get wildlife under or over them. I'm curious what could be done, but just slap this on an ever-growing list in my head of "things that should change in California".
- themaninthedark 4y ago
  There is a solution that both I and a sister comment have touched on: Green bridges, otherwise known as wildlife crossings.
  - bioemerl 4y ago
    I agree with the concept of these if nothing else but for the reason that it would reduce deaths due to deer impacts
kelnos 4y ago
> Once, Mr Ordeñana captured a video of P-22 making plaintive mating calls. They would never be answered; the freeways and development surrounding Griffith Park guaranteed he was walled off from any potential females and would never reproduce. As much as P-22 ended up being a sort of local celebrity, I wonder if it would have been more humane to relocate him to somewhere he could interact with other mountain lions, not to mention that it may have been safer for him, too. Sure, ideally we build spaces that are safer for wildlife in the first place, but that ship had already sailed in this particular area, and any positive changes would have come far too late for P-22. He might be still alive (and happier) in a different place, even if it might have been an adjustment for him.
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  Relocation isn't a great solution unfortunately. Doubly so for an older sick animal like him. The most common outcomes are that the lion gets in a fight to the death with the younger males he's competing with, he starves, or he makes the trek back to his home territory.
  - Mistletoe 4y ago
    I think I'd rather take that chance than live full of rat poison and mange and alone. It seems like he was left here to make humans happy, which is messed up.
- shagie 4y ago
  > As much as P-22 ended up being a sort of local celebrity, I wonder if it would have been more humane to relocate him to somewhere he could interact with other mountain lions, not to mention that it may have been safer for him, too. The "relocate large predator that often maintains a territory of 100 square miles" would likely be a net loss for both the relocated and whatever mountain lions are in that area.
ornornor 4y ago
> I'm very far from the sterotypical "tree hugging hippie eco-terrorist" type, but even I read this, and can't help but feel a certain bit of misanthropy. It’s not either or. You can be a normal person and still wish human societies didn’t pour so much time, effort, and money into destroying the planet for greed and convenience. You are allowed to have a negative view of cars without being a zealot. If anything, this actually makes you a well adjusted human being. Who in their right mind would wish for more pollution, more highways, more destruction, and less wildlife? But this is still portrayed as an extremist, irrational point of view because it makes it easier to dismiss. It’s big oil’s playbook for global warming. Although it’s becoming a more accepted point of view, we’re still ways off. What if it’s already too late?
- mindcrime 4y ago
  Well said!

kodah 4y ago

My takeaway is that: - Some places don't need buildings or roads. The intersection of rich people and wildlife habitats is interesting. - If there must be roads, like highways, we should study ways to get wildlife under or over them. I'm curious what could be done, but just slap this on an ever-growing list in my head of "things that should change in California".

themaninthedark 4y ago
There is a solution that both I and a sister comment have touched on: Green bridges, otherwise known as wildlife crossings.
- bioemerl 4y ago
  I agree with the concept of these if nothing else but for the reason that it would reduce deaths due to deer impacts

kelnos 4y ago

> Once, Mr Ordeñana captured a video of P-22 making plaintive mating calls. They would never be answered; the freeways and development surrounding Griffith Park guaranteed he was walled off from any potential females and would never reproduce. As much as P-22 ended up being a sort of local celebrity, I wonder if it would have been more humane to relocate him to somewhere he could interact with other mountain lions, not to mention that it may have been safer for him, too. Sure, ideally we build spaces that are safer for wildlife in the first place, but that ship had already sailed in this particular area, and any positive changes would have come far too late for P-22. He might be still alive (and happier) in a different place, even if it might have been an adjustment for him.

Rebelgecko 4y ago
Relocation isn't a great solution unfortunately. Doubly so for an older sick animal like him. The most common outcomes are that the lion gets in a fight to the death with the younger males he's competing with, he starves, or he makes the trek back to his home territory.
- Mistletoe 4y ago
  I think I'd rather take that chance than live full of rat poison and mange and alone. It seems like he was left here to make humans happy, which is messed up.
shagie 4y ago
> As much as P-22 ended up being a sort of local celebrity, I wonder if it would have been more humane to relocate him to somewhere he could interact with other mountain lions, not to mention that it may have been safer for him, too. The "relocate large predator that often maintains a territory of 100 square miles" would likely be a net loss for both the relocated and whatever mountain lions are in that area.

ornornor 4y ago

> I'm very far from the sterotypical "tree hugging hippie eco-terrorist" type, but even I read this, and can't help but feel a certain bit of misanthropy. It’s not either or. You can be a normal person and still wish human societies didn’t pour so much time, effort, and money into destroying the planet for greed and convenience. You are allowed to have a negative view of cars without being a zealot. If anything, this actually makes you a well adjusted human being. Who in their right mind would wish for more pollution, more highways, more destruction, and less wildlife? But this is still portrayed as an extremist, irrational point of view because it makes it easier to dismiss. It’s big oil’s playbook for global warming. Although it’s becoming a more accepted point of view, we’re still ways off. What if it’s already too late?

mindcrime 4y ago
Well said!