I had to read "Three mountain lions killed at Glacier" twice to believe it. "The risks to the residents were extraordinary," a ranger is quoted as saying.
Residents? Which residents? It sure did turn out to be risky for the lions. Since when are our national parks supposed to be safe suburbs for human beings, their dogs and children?
This incident points up the need for a re-evaluation of the presence of resident staff in the parks. Human beings have a choice as to where they live; wildlife - by definition - does not. If the rangers were worried about lion-people encounters, why didn't they move the people? There is plenty Homo sapiens habitat outside the park for them. Lion habitat, on the other hand, is steadily diminishing.
Oh, I know the objections. It would have been troublesome, expensive and time-consuming. But the decision to move resident staff out of the parks will have to be made eventually. They don't belong there.
- vince bandola on The Forest Service battles placer mining with an obscure law
- Deb Dedon on Deaths renew calls for national parks to rescind BASE jumping bans
- Edward Williams on When poisoning is the solution
- Deb Dedon on In the middle of nowhere, a Promised Land
- John Finch on Illegal bike trails and a Forest Service crackdown divide a town