Pointing Fingers in Tiger’s Death

Re “Trackers Kill Tiger in Ventura County,” Feb. 24: We were extremely disappointed to read that the Department of Fish and Game shot dead the great cat in Ventura County instead of using a tranquilizer. It was loose since [at least] Feb. 8 and had hurt no one. The cat was obviously domesticated. And that is the issue: Domesticating big wild animals like that is not a good idea. You have to be committed to its care for 20 years or more. And the cost to feed and supply medical care to such an animal is astronomical. People are so irresponsible. And their animals and children suffer for it.

Nancy Shinn

Bonanza, Ore.

*

The people who would keep a wild animal as a house pet deserve a heaping share of the blame for this senseless killing, but there’s more to go around.

Department of Fish and Game officials said repeatedly that their main concern was for the safety of citizens -- which is very reasonable. But their job was also to protect this very rare animal. And with well over a week to pull together the resources to secure this tiger safely, they still failed to do it.

It doesn’t sound to me like the situation ever got to the point where a choice had to be made between a person and the tiger. Was it absolutely necessary that it be killed?

This is California, not some Third World village, and this tired old cat was not mauling kids down at the river. Please don’t tell me in this state of all places that it wasn’t possible to have this end with the tiger tranquilized and on its way to a preserve or zoo.

Chris McCaleb

Los Angeles

*

I live approximately two miles from where the tiger was shot and killed. Helicopters have been circling our neighborhood for days searching for it. Other than keeping my dog inside, my family never felt in any danger from this poor animal. California Department of Fish and Game officials made no attempt to tranquilize the tiger even though they led the public to believe that they would consider sedating it to relocate it to a sanctuary. As it appears, they never had any plans to tranquilize.

Large exotic animals are sedated and relocated on a regular basis, an example being black bears in Yosemite and Sequoia national parks. This may not be the easiest solution, but it would have saved the life of this frightened and hungry animal. I am concerned about the mind-set behind this decision. Local officials would rather risk some bad PR than take the extra effort to save this animal.

I am sorry that our local Fish and Game officers were unable to control their trigger-happy instincts.

Ann Hart

Thousand Oaks

*

For two weeks, while these so-called trackers couldn’t find it, the tiger didn’t attack anything or “bolt onto the highway,” so why the rush to kill it? If it were so dangerous, why wasn’t there an all-out effort to find it sooner? The safety of residents and motorists must not have been of too great a concern during that time.

That this beautiful animal was destroyed without any effort to tranquilize and relocate it is deplorable. As is the insult to those of us who respect other forms of life, when the officials hid the carcass because they were afraid that activists might “endanger state workers.”

If these government officials really cared about public safety, they would stop giving permits to private individuals who, for whatever misguided reasons, want to keep big cats in their backyards. They put more people at risk than this unfortunate animal ever did.

Sallie C. Russell

Costa Mesa

*

The unnecessary shooting of the big tiger makes me sick, angry and sad, knowing that officials could have used tranquilizer darts and saved the cat. It didn’t harm anybody. The Department of Fish and Game must revise its policies to prevent this from ever happening again. It makes no sense at all, and leaves us all feeling disheartened.

Tom Schnabel

Venice