Do you think the neighbors were justified when they shot the zebras that were bothering their livestock?
Should they be allowed to make the dead zebras into rugs? Aren’t the zebras still property of the Hearst family?
From the article.
What kind of moron doesn’t know what a zebra is or thinks it’s a predator?:mad:
I just saw one on Dec. 26, boxing day. And they belong to the Hearst Corp.
The zebras spooked his horses, so he short them. If I shot every creature that ever spooked any of my horses, there’d be a lot of dead bodies lying around the ranch.
I think the corpses of the dead zebras should not be given to the shooters, but that the shooters should be made to pay the fees to have them disposed of.
These links are date limited
An opinion is offered via this link
Bottom line: You can shoot the animals, but you can’t keep the skins. Sucks, but the Hearst Ranch isn’t exactly smelling roses, either.
Well, you see all those videos of zebras hunting lions…no, wait, you don’t. How the hell does someone decide a zebra is a predator? Even if you didn’t know what they were, you should notice they’re the same shape as your horses, which implies that they’re grazers, not predators.
They’re African. Of course they’re predators. :rolleyes:
bastards!
It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
I have a hard time believing it’s legal. Would it be legal to kill the rancher’s stock if it got through his fence? I’m guessing that the rancher’s horses would be considered valuable property and some kind of crime would be charged; certainly around here they’ve aggressively prosecuted people who’ve shot cattle or horses on someone’s farm (and said prosecution was not for trespassing or a firearms violation, so I assume it was germane to the killing of the animals.)
This seems like a simple black & white issue.
If the Hearst mansion (or whoever owns it) wants to keep zebras it’s their responsibility to keep the animals confined.
As to whether the ranchers were justified in killing the zebras… well, I have mixed feelings. Zebras aren’t predators but they ARE aggressive and wild animals. Approaching one could be hazardous, particularly one accustomed enough to humans to not fear them. The horses are highly unlikely to accept the zebra and vice versa (horses are typically suspicious of strange equines, even of their own species), so there’s a real possibility of fights breaking out between the animals and parties on either side getting seriously hurt.
Since a zebra is unlikely to be a free wild animal that just wandered into the neighborhood the best course probably would have been to notify the authorities that this animal obviously had escaped from somewhere, please send someone to get it.
On the other hand, rural people do tend to take care of things themselves, and if a rancher had concerns about his presumably valuable stock being injured I can see the logic in shooting the intruder. And then, if the rancher is frugal, the logic behind wanting to use the hide. I wonder if there are zebra steaks in the freezer?
But the same logic would apply to ranchers, and I don’t think it has been.
I love the anthropomorphizing in the article: “These zebras have no respect for fences.” Damned punks! Stop ‘em now before they rapin’ everybody out there.
Even if it hasn’t been applied I personally would argue it should - ranchers should be held responsible for their animals and keep them from wandering onto other peoples’ property.
Of course, I’m not a rancher, and not from California. They’d probably dismiss me as one of those damn Eastern city folk idiots.
Ranchers traditionally operated a lot like feudal lords; their interests, collectively if not individually, were a kind of common law.
I’m sure there’s a lot of holdover from this in the west - that there are ranchers and “others,” whose property (and livestock if any) don’t get equal treatment. At least not until big money lawyer-types step in.
I guarantee if ole W.R. were still in residence, nobody would shoot or even molest a zebra. He was bigger than any rancher.
Actually, I believe the same situation has happened to ranchers and the same rules apply. I seem to recall a story (a year or so ago) about buffalo wandering off one ranch (I think it was Ted Turner’s ranch in Montana) and into another and the rancher promptly shot them all. He said the other ranch had been negligent and allowed its buffalo to escape all the time and he got sick of it and shot them all. End of story.
I’m sure there’s a law regarding this, but I have no idea what it is.
I see what you did there.
Actually the horses know that ‘Once you go stripe, you don’t have a gripe.’
Well, in this case the law was applied in the way I am complaining about – a cow wandered onto someone’s property, he shot it, and was charged with a felony.
340 days from now, the rancher’s mares will be dropping these
