I'll never understand...

wrote:
Shiral wrote:

Add to the already stated reasons why this is a bad idea is that the
big wild cats cannot be tamed with any reliability. It's no kindness
to keep them as pets, either to the lion or to the person. I wouldn't
even want to be this person's neighbor. Some people are just not all
there!

I totally would not want to be that person's neighbor. Talk about lack
of consent!

There was a segment about that on Animal Planet (which is probably
what started this thread), some guy had a whole backyard full of big
cats, plus a few bears. Neighbors were complaining about it, and that
was just about the noise! The guy had a legal permit to keep them,
which doesn't say much for the state he lived in.

Which came first, the "wild" animals or the neighbors? When I first
lived in California, a great deal of the San Fernando Valley still had
"rural" zoning, even though the developers were fast encroaching with
tract homes and condominiums. Consequently you had the original
residents who kept chickens and horses and an occasional cow on their
property, plus newcomers who objected to anything more "agricultural"
than dogs and cats.

Yowie wrote:
Catnipped, you know that even if we passionately disagree, the 'worst'
you'll get from me as a lively discussion, not an argument :-)

I think of owning big cats like skydiving. With proper training, experience
and safety precautions, you can significantly reduce the 'raw' risk. It is
then up to the individual to make an informed decision to carry on, knowing
the residual degree of risk involved.

You'll note that I have never gone sky diving, bungee jumping or even rock
climbing because I find the concept far too risky, but don't begrudge those
that enjoy such activities and won't argue for the banning of said
activities because there's a risk involved.[1]

The most dangerous thing we do every day, by far, is to get into our cars
and drive. And yet we do, because the benefits far outweigh the risk. I'd
say that goes with lion keeping as well. Roy continues owning and
interacting with big cats, despite knowing from first hand personal
experience what can happen, and I can only assume that for him, the benefits
still outweigh the risks.

I agree, Yowie! (Actually, I think he maintained all along that the
tiger was only trying to protect him - that the true culprits were fans
who were in the backstage area where they had no business being.)

I think most of us here get the same "AWWWW!" reaction from pictures and
videos of lion and tiger cubs as we do from a litter of kittens. That
doesn't mean we want to take them into our homes (and like me, many of
us lack the courage to even get close enough to pet them). But for most
of us the fascination with big cats remains - there's a lot of truth in
the (Chinese?) proverb: "God made Cat so Man could pat a Tiger".

"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote:

wrote:

There was a segment about that on Animal Planet (which is probably
what started this thread), some guy had a whole backyard full of big
cats, plus a few bears. Neighbors were complaining about it, and that
was just about the noise! The guy had a legal permit to keep them,
which doesn't say much for the state he lived in.

Which came first, the "wild" animals or the neighbors? When I first
lived in California, a great deal of the San Fernando Valley still had
"rural" zoning, even though the developers were fast encroaching with
tract homes and condominiums. Consequently you had the original
residents who kept chickens and horses and an occasional cow on their
property, plus newcomers who objected to anything more "agricultural"
than dogs and cats.

This was nothing like that. I think it was in a midwest state, maybe
Ohio? None of the animals he was keeping were natives of the area - most
weren't even native to North America. And he had them in cages in the
back yard. Neighbors would complain about lions roaring in the middle
of the night. Creepy!

Joyce

--
Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me,
for I may not follow. Do not walk beside me, either. Just leave me
the hell alone. -- Unknown

"CatNipped" wrote in message
...
I don't understand, and maybe it's a visceral reaction, but it's hard to
imagine not feeling an instinct to flee when faced with a predator 10
times bigger and a thousand times stronger - something I know *I* couldn't
control and I think even well "tamed" cats would pick up on that scent of
fear and react to it instinctually.

S'OK, I have no idea why anyone woudl want to fling themselves off a bridge
with just a big elastic band attached to their ankles, or hurtle down a
snowy mountain on two small wooden sticks without any form crash
protectionand little inthe way of being able to stop quickly in case a tree
suddenly gets in the way. But people do.

I'm in your camp, I am not a 'risk taker' either. (which also explains why I
am still doing essentially the same job I had when I was 21, I find the
thought of throwing it in and moving to another job too risky, although I
know that others move jobs every few years and tend to get far further in
their careers than I do. But unlike them, I refuse to uproot my family and
move to far flung places where we know no-one every few years simply for the
sake of my career)

Yowie

"Yowie" wrote in message
...

"CatNipped" wrote in message
...
I don't understand, and maybe it's a visceral reaction, but it's hard to
imagine not feeling an instinct to flee when faced with a predator 10
times bigger and a thousand times stronger - something I know *I*
couldn't control and I think even well "tamed" cats would pick up on that
scent of fear and react to it instinctually.

S'OK, I have no idea why anyone woudl want to fling themselves off a
bridge with just a big elastic band attached to their ankles, or hurtle
down a snowy mountain on two small wooden sticks without any form crash
protectionand little inthe way of being able to stop quickly in case a
tree suddenly gets in the way. But people do.

I'm in your camp, I am not a 'risk taker' either. (which also explains why
I am still doing essentially the same job I had when I was 21, I find the
thought of throwing it in and moving to another job too risky, although I
know that others move jobs every few years and tend to get far further in
their careers than I do. But unlike them, I refuse to uproot my family and
move to far flung places where we know no-one every few years simply for
the sake of my career)

Yowie

Oh that I can agree with totally. Working the "Oil Patch", you could never
expect to have a job for more than 5 or 6 years (the industry itself is
cyclical - running on upturns and downturns usually decided by OPEC rather
than what anyone in the States wanted. So at Shell and had a good run for
five years until they were bought out by The Dutch and moved overseas. Then
it was Amoco Oil - that one I thought I might have secured myself a
permanent spot by being the person who, all on my own, promoted, initiated
and installed (or at least supervising others to do the manual part),
networked personal computers when we got too big and spread apart too much
for our mainframes (one for each of *thousands* of offices around the globe.
But then Amoco was the "victim" of a "hostile takeover". They outsourced
the entire IT department and, after 10 years of my working hard for them, I
was again unemployed, but this time I had "tenure" and qualify for
retirement payments (a whole $325.00 a month)). After that I had to go from
a 6 figure salary to *half* of that (ouch, since I was the sole breadwinner
in our family.

There were a few odd jobs after then, but web architecture is one of the
main things they've "off-shored" - computer programmers are no longer
required to be even on the same continent (they can pay people $.00 an hour
to do what US persons charged)... now it's like a "something nice to have"
(like speaking a second language - if I could, I'd learn Spanish for the
Houston) But, crazy as it was to try again, I got hired at Amerada Hess Oil
Company for three years laid off when my manager quit to work part-time
after she had her twins right in the middle of a "downsizing".

Then I started working for an IT firm who took care of the IT needs for all
those companies I used to work for. Then, against all the bad vibes, I took
another Oil Patch job at Sovereign Oil & Gas (that lasted for a whole more
months until they closed the doors.

So I can't say it's an "irrational" fear - especially now that the doctors
say I can't go back to work, ever (I just need to get Ben off is backside
and help me finish up the Binder & Binder forms so they can submit my
request).

But, even if all that were resolved, with no illness thrown into the mix,
I'd probably still be a chronic worrier, but just not the ones I have now.
I'm an expert on worrying over nothing - I learned it at the knee of my mom
who beats even me at worrying. I make light of it, but it really is
troubling - I *HATE* it when Ben says, "Just quit worrying, it won't do any
good). Well, **DUH** why didn't *I* think about that solution??!!!

Now I just need to learn about a solution that doesn't promise you'll get
well if you just stop thinking about it. ;

On Nov 24, 11:42*am, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:
Shiral wrote:

Add to the already stated reasons why this is a bad idea * is that the
big wild cats cannot be tamed with any reliability. *It's no kindness
to keep them as pets, either to the lion or to the person. I wouldn't
even want to be this person's neighbor. Some people are just not all
there!

Melissa

I agree, they are definitely wild animals and should never be considered
"house pets", but for people who work with them regularly and know how
to behave around them, the dangers are minimal. *Horses can inflict some
pretty severe damage on people, too - and from what I've heard about
horses, they are among the least intelligent of domesticated animals.
(Your average barn cat is probably brighter, its larger cousins even
more so.)

I agree that some people have more knowledge about how to behave
around wild cats in safety than the average person.....but even they
cannot relax their guard around them.

Horses for their size, are not smart, and I've fallen off or had my
foot stepped on by a horse more than once--it hurts! BUT.... horses
can be reliably tamed and domesticated, and they are not predators by
nature. It makes a significant difference. I'd let a child patand
ride a horse and teach them how to take care of them and how to behave
around them. I sure wouldn't want a child anywhere near a lion.

Melissa

Shiral wrote:

Horses for their size, are not smart, and I've fallen off or had my
foot stepped on by a horse more than once--it hurts! BUT.... horses
can be reliably tamed and domesticated, and they are not predators by
nature. It makes a significant difference. I'd let a child patand
ride a horse and teach them how to take care of them and how to behave
around them. I sure wouldn't want a child anywhere near a lion.

Aren't there species of horses that have been domesticated (ie, bred to
be domestic, and therefore separate from wild horses)? I know, for example,
that there are wild sheep and domestic sheep. Domestic sheep aren't
simply wild sheep that someone took and tamed. They've been bred for
millenia to be.. well, stupid. Wild sheep are much smarter. Ditto
wild and domesticated goats. So can't the same be true for horses?

Nonetheless, horses are large and strong, and they have a hell of a
back kick. So a person dealing with a horse should know what they're
doing. I like them, and I've ridden horses (not recently, but when
I was younger), but I never fully got over my fear of them. If I had
been trained in how to handle them properly, maybe I would have
stopped being afraid.

Joyce

--
There is no alternative to being yourself.

On Nov 24, 9:43*pm, Shiral wrote:
On Nov 24, 11:42*am, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"





wrote:
Shiral wrote:

Add to the already stated reasons why this is a bad idea * is that the
big wild cats cannot be tamed with any reliability. *It's no kindness
to keep them as pets, either to the lion or to the person. I wouldn't
even want to be this person's neighbor. Some people are just not all
there!

Melissa

I agree, they are definitely wild animals and should never be considered
"house pets", but for people who work with them regularly and know how
to behave around them, the dangers are minimal. *Horses can inflict some
pretty severe damage on people, too - and from what I've heard about
horses, they are among the least intelligent of domesticated animals.
(Your average barn cat is probably brighter, its larger cousins even
more so.)

I agree that some people have more knowledge about how to behave
around wild cats in safety than the average person.....but even they
cannot relax their guard around them.

Horses for their size, are not smart, and I've fallen off or *had *my
foot stepped on by a horse more than once--it hurts! *BUT.... horses
can be reliably tamed and domesticated, and they are not predators by
nature. It makes a significant difference. *I'd let a child patand
ride a horse and teach them how to take care of them and how to behave
around them. *I sure wouldn't want a child anywhere near a lion.

Melissa- Hide quoted text -

IME, horses are pretty smart. Not just trainable, but savvy enough to
know
what they can get away with. We had one once with an amazing ability
to open any gate unless it was locked. You make a good point about the
comparison though. Horses are very
trainable, big cats not so easy. And any animal is unpredictable, when
it
comes right down to it. I've been around horses and livestock all my
life,
and I am *still* a little bit afraid of them. Anything that large does
deserve
some reciprocal respect!
What I hate most about wild-cat owners are the ones who are just
looking
for a status symbol.
Sherry

On Nov 24, 10:27*pm, wrote:
Shiral wrote:

* Horses for their size, are not smart, and I've fallen off or *had *my
* foot stepped on by a horse more than once--it hurts! *BUT.... horses
* can be reliably tamed and domesticated, and they are not predators by
* nature. It makes a significant difference. *I'd let a child patand
* ride a horse and teach them how to take care of them and how to behave
* around them. *I sure wouldn't want a child anywhere near a lion.

Aren't there species of horses that have been domesticated (ie, bred to
be domestic, and therefore separate from wild horses)? I know, for example,
that there are wild sheep and domestic sheep. Domestic sheep aren't
simply wild sheep that someone took and tamed. They've been bred for
millenia to be.. well, stupid. *Wild sheep are much smarter. Ditto
wild and domesticated goats. So can't the same be true for horses?

Nonetheless, horses are large and strong, and they have a hell of a
back kick. So a person dealing with a horse should know what they're
doing. I like them, and I've ridden horses (not recently, but when
I was younger), but I never fully got over my fear of them. If I had
been trained in how to handle them properly, maybe I would have
stopped being afraid.

Joyce

--
There is no alternative to being yourself.

Not an expert here, but I would think pretty much all horses bred now
are domesticated animals. There are still wild mustangs out there (and
they're growing in number, I understand; there was an adopt-a-thon
recently where a group was trying to save a herd).
But that's different from regular owned horses who were just never
trained
for riding and gentled down. Any horse (like cats I suppose!) aren't
going
to trust humans if they've never been worked with.
Even further OT: If you want to see a truly beautiful thing, try to
catch
a dressage competition on TV sometime.

Sherry

25.11.2010 7:55, hopitus kirjoitti:
On Nov 24, 10:06 pm, wrote:
On Nov 24, 10:27 pm, wrote:



Shiral wrote:

Horses for their size, are not smart, and I've fallen off or had my
foot stepped on by a horse more than once--it hurts! BUT.... horses
can be reliably tamed and domesticated, and they are not predators by
nature. It makes a significant difference. I'd let a child patand
ride a horse and teach them how to take care of them and how to behave
around them. I sure wouldn't want a child anywhere near a lion.

Aren't there species of horses that have been domesticated (ie, bred to
be domestic, and therefore separate from wild horses)? I know, for example,
that there are wild sheep and domestic sheep. Domestic sheep aren't
simply wild sheep that someone took and tamed. They've been bred for
millenia to be.. well, stupid. Wild sheep are much smarter. Ditto
wild and domesticated goats. So can't the same be true for horses?

Nonetheless, horses are large and strong, and they have a hell of a
back kick. So a person dealing with a horse should know what they're
doing. I like them, and I've ridden horses (not recently, but when
I was younger), but I never fully got over my fear of them. If I had
been trained in how to handle them properly, maybe I would have
stopped being afraid.

Joyce

--
There is no alternative to being yourself.

Not an expert here, but I would think pretty much all horses bred now
are domesticated animals. There are still wild mustangs out there (and
they're growing in number, I understand; there was an adopt-a-thon
recently where a group was trying to save a herd).
But that's different from regular owned horses who were just never
trained
for riding and gentled down. Any horse (like cats I suppose!) aren't
going
to trust humans if they've never been worked with.
Even further OT: If you want to see a truly beautiful thing, try to
catch
a dressage competition on TV sometime.

Sherry

If a "dressage" is the exhibition where horses and their owners wear
clothes of matching colors, big trophies and prizes are awarded for
high-stepping (the horses), jumping hurdles, and much "parading"
and obedience testing goes on accompanied by stirring military
tunes.. BTDT.

No. Dressage has nothing to do with clothes, especially on the horse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dressage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKQgTiqhPbw

--
Christine in Finland
christal63 (at) gmail (dot) com