Why do they kill animals after they've eaten a human?

[Jamoross]

*Originally posted by Cisco ***
Of course…you have a cite for this. Right? **

Had you continued reading for another dozen words,
you would have tripped over the citation:

Trochilidae circumbendibus**
Jack Corbett’s Maneaters of Kumaon**

If it were a snake you’d have been bitten.

Sorry for the venomous tone, but… sheesh!

• jam

[Cisco]

*Originally posted by ssskuggiii *
**Actually, sharks don’t like the taste of humans, but they don’t realize you’re a human until they’ve taken a big bite out of ya, and then they proceed to rid themselves of that “icky taste” in their mouth. **

Actually i think what you meant to say is Great Whites don’t like the taste of humans. A tiger shark, for example, will eat you whole just as fast as he would anything else. Another interesting point that i shouldn’t even be getting into this late is…ahhh fuck it, I’ll post it tomorrow if no one else has by then, it’s past my bedtime.

[justwannano]

Wow Jacknife
You sure wouldn’t want it for a house pet.

Here kitty kitty
Now where did I leave that shotgun

[Speaker_for_the_Dead]

they do kill alligators suspected of eating humans, as well as those that people have admitted to feeding

They kill the people who admitted to feeding?!? That’s cruel!

Actually, I think it’s a big revenge thing. You killed them, you’re lower than us, you die.

[Lawmill]

Cisco said:

Actually i think what you meant to say is Great Whites don’t like the taste of humans. A tiger shark, for example, will eat you whole just as fast as he would anything else. Another interesting point that i shouldn’t even be getting into this late is…ahhh fuck it, I’ll post it tomorrow if no one else has by then, it’s past my bedtime.

Don’t Great Whites usually eat fatty sea mammals? Seeing as we don’t have nearly the same level of body fat, it’s understandable that we wouldn’t taste good. Crocs and Tiger sharks probably eat a wide variety of things, many of which have much more human percentages of fat, muscle and bone.

[Jamoross]

*Originally posted by Cisco ***
Another interesting point that i shouldn’t even be getting into this late is…ahhh fuck it, I’ll post it tomorrow if no one else has by then, it’s past my bedtime. **

I’m on it like spots on a panther! (Hey, bedtime on your
side of the globe is lunchtime on mine.)

I think sethdallob nibbled at the idea. We humans,
being fairly competent predators ourselves, have a
longstanding policy of intolerance for competitors.
(Another thing Bill Gates didn’t invent.) Through countless
generations of hunting down man-eaters, we have exerted
enough genetic pressure to induce a change in behavior;
selecting for human-avoidance.

The work of geneticist Dmitry K. Belyaev is instructive in
this regard even though it was in the opposite direction.
(His experiments selected for human-affinity in wild canids.)

I think this view is supported by the observation that most
man-eating species today are found only in areas where
contact with humans is mostly precluded by some
feature of geography. Tigers tend to live in places that
are difficult for humans to navigate. Likewise sharks.
Encounters happen at the margins of these habitats.
Lions on the other hand live where we can easily track
them down and enforce our informal armistice. Therefore,
the lion gene-pool is more thoroughly trimmed and
“deviant” individuals are rare.

Now, anyone care to speculate on the apparent Code of
Honor among predators? When humans kill predators for
whatever reason --revenge, anti-competition, sport,
safety, self-defense, whatever-- the kill is almost never
eaten. This seems to hold among non-humans too. You don’t
hear about cougars hunting wolves or coyotes. Do they?

• jam

[screech-owl]

*Originally posted by Speaker for the Dead *
**

they do kill alligators suspected of eating humans, as well as those that people have admitted to feeding

They kill the people who admitted to feeding?!? That’s cruel!

**

No no no, they kill the gator that people have fed! …those that people have admitted to feeding. Didn’t I write that clearly???

Then again, the people who feed the wild gators (“well, 'cause they’re hungry!”), well, let’s say, someone probably peed in their gene pool somewhere along the line. These are the people who are surprised when their or a neighbor’s precious little puppy or tyke is no longer among the breeding, and get mad at the authorities when the gator is killed when, in 9 times out of 10, they were the dumb@$$es who fed the gator in the first place, conditioning it to human presence and food.

[cleansing breath]

**Actually, I think it’s a big revenge thing. You killed them, you’re lower than us, you die. **

By George, he’s got it.
Back to sharks.

An excellent source on shark attack on humans (the hardcover is out of print, but the paperback is being published in June 2001). - WARNING!!! - The photographs in the book are NOT for the squeamish - in fact, they are in a separately sealed section that can be opened as an option.

The Jaws of Death: Sharks As Predator, Man As Prey by Xavier Maniguet

Paperback (June 2001)
The Lyons Press; ISBN: 1585743194

[Phobos]

fear. revenge. etc.
nothing logical. (although there may be isolated cases where something gained a taste for humans…but my SWAG is that I doubt is a common thing)

[Sleepy_Weasel]

*Originally posted by Guinastasia *
**I heard that if you see a shark, you should punch it in the nose, and it will leave you alone.

Yeah right.
**

Actually it’s more effective to hold out your hand and say “Pick two fingers.” When he does, take those two fingers and poke 'im in the eyes… Nyuk nyuk nyuk!

[Sleepy_Weasel]

*Originally posted by Lawmill *
**Cisco said:

Actually i think what you meant to say is Great Whites don’t like the taste of humans. A tiger shark, for example, will eat you whole just as fast as he would anything else. Another interesting point that i shouldn’t even be getting into this late is…ahhh fuck it, I’ll post it tomorrow if no one else has by then, it’s past my bedtime.

Don’t Great Whites usually eat fatty sea mammals? Seeing as we don’t have nearly the same level of body fat, it’s understandable that we wouldn’t taste good. Crocs and Tiger sharks probably eat a wide variety of things, many of which have much more human percentages of fat, muscle and bone. **

Great Whites don’t like the taste of humans? Says who?

4 out of 5 Great Whites surveyed said they preferred the taste of omnivorous humans to carnivorous seals.

9 out of 10 shark dentists recommend humans for their patients who chew mammals…

[Sleepy_Weasel]

While I agree that for the family and friends of humans consumed by animals, there may be a certain emotional urge to kill the animal out of revenge, I think there is a much more reasonable motivation for “the authorities” to dispatch the animal.

While the “death penalty” may not provide a deterrent to prevent others from committing the same act, it does at least provide an effective and permanent deterrent to the guilty party. A killer, be they human or animal, left unstopped, is likely to kill again. Since we know that most people haven’t enough common sense to avoid becoming a target, the only way to protect them is to remove the known threats. If you can’t remove the people from the danger, you will eventually remove the danger from the people.

[evilhanz]

In the case of shark attacks, often, an all-out effort is made to kill the offending shark. Recent studies of shark ranges and movement have shown that the attacking shark is usually well on it’s way to deep ocean by the time this effort is underway. The sharks killed are recent arrivals to the shore, and “innocent” of snacking on humans. But it sure does make everyone feel better. And in the end, isn’t that all that matters?

I tried to find a cite for the research I mentioned, and I know it was mentioned on a Discovery Channel program about a week ago, but there are just too many shark programs and studies to filter through.

[Sleepy_Weasel]

I don’t doubt it… How many of us go to a restaurant, load up, then stay there until the next time we’re hungry? Of course, when we find someplace we like, we’d be stupid not to go back.

[MEBuckner]

Originally posted by Jamoross
Now, anyone care to speculate on the apparent Code of
Honor among predators? When humans kill predators for
whatever reason --revenge, anti-competition, sport,
safety, self-defense, whatever-- the kill is almost never
eaten. This seems to hold among non-humans too. You don’t
hear about cougars hunting wolves or coyotes. Do they?

From the U.S. Forest Service:

Mountain lions (Felis concolor) sometimes kill and eat coyotes [4]. Other predators of coyotes include humans, gray wolves, black bears (Ursus americanus), and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos). Golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) attack young coyotes.

Also, from the Singapore Zoo:

Lions will kill competing predators like leopards, cheetahs and hyenas, sometimes just out of spite.

and:

Tigers sometimes kill and eat leopards, other tigers and other carnivores like bears.

From the Discovery Channel:

Hyenas, leopards, and even other lions may kill cubs while the mother is away hunting.

It’s a cold, cruel world out there.

Originally posted by Sleepy Weasel
Great Whites don’t like the taste of humans? Says who?

Man-Eaters Aren’t Man-Eaters After All (ABC News):

The great white shark, immortalized in the 1975 movie as one of the natural world’s most ruthlessly efficient predators, actually appears to be a finicky eater with little taste for humans, new research indicates.
“They clearly make a decision on what they are going to swallow,” said Peter Klimley, a marine animal behaviorist with the University of California, Davis. “Most surfers they just spit out.”

[Colibri]

*Originally posted by Cisco *
**

*Originally posted by Colibri *
**Some individual maneaters in India have killed more than 500 people
**

Of course…you have a cite for this. Right? **

I checked over Man-eaters of Kumaon (Jim Corbett, 1947, Oxford Press) last night. I misremembered the figures a little high, but not by much. Corbett says the Champawat tiger killed 200 people in Nepal before being driven into Kumaon in India by an armed band of men. The tiger then proceeded to kill 234 more over the next four years - or more than one a week - before Corbett nailed it in 1907, for a total of well over 400. In More Man-eaters of Kumaon, Corbett describes killing the Panar leopard, which was credited with at least 400 victims. I have seen estimates that before WWII sometimes more than 1000 people a year fell victim to maneaters in India.

I was also a bit high on the Tsavo man-eating lions, although their actual full toll is not known. In The Man-eaters of Tsavo, (first published 1907), Col. J.H. Patterson, who killed the beasts, said they had killed 28 Indian coolies on the railroad, plus “scores” of Africans who were never fully accounted for. This happened in 1898.

[Cervaise]

Guinastasia: I heard that if you see a shark, you should punch it in the nose, and it will leave you alone.

Necros: Guin, AFAIK, the nose of a shark contains a large concentration of nerves, and so it might leave you alone. Of course, we have large concentrations of nerves in our noses, too, and it might be enough to get anyone bothering you to leave you alone by punching them in the nose. But, it might not. I don’t want to take the chance with a shark.

Guinastasia: I know that, Necros. I just heard it somewhere. I don’t plan on going anywhere near shark infested waters in the future, however.

The “punch the shark in the nose” defense is a myth. I read this recently, in the last few months. I can’t look up the cite right now, but it was certainly in one of two places. It was either in The Worst-Case Scenario Survival Handbook, or it was in National Geographic’s issue with the shark on the cover. I’m fairly certain it was the latter.

At any rate, the article specifically debunked this survival method. Punching it in the nose, the expert said, would have almost zero effect. Instead, he suggested, if you can reach it, poke it in the eye. 'Course, problem is, if you can reach the eye, it probably means you’re already in the shark’s mouth, and might have other things on your mind…

[broccoli]

nononononono… they do it as a warning to other animals that might want to eat human flesh… if you were a tiger, and saw a tiger skull hanging from the gates of the city you’d back off too…

Wait, i’m thinking about Rebel Leaders. Shit!

[Max_Torque]

Sleepy Weasel might be close; this article tells about a long tradition (in the West, at least) of blaming the object of death:

Indeed, the scapegoat object has long tradition in Anglo-American law. For many centuries, if a criminal killed someone with a sword, the sword would be forfeited. Earlier in Britain, objects that “caused” a death were punished. If man fell from a tree, the tree was cut down. If he drowned in a well, the well was filled up. If a criminal killed a victim with a third party’s sword, “the sword shall be forfeit as deodand, and yet no default is in the owner.” A steam-engine was even forfeited under this doctrine (Holmes, 1881). The “deodand” was a gift to God of the object causing death. In early American law, a tree that fell on someone might be destroyed as deodand. One court ordered destruction of a canoe that had failed “to make way in a storm,” causing its owner’s death. A Virginia court ordered the chain by which a boy had hanged himself in suicide to be forfeit as deodand (Chapin, 1983).

Similarly, in ancient Greece, a sword used by a murderer would be banished beyond the city limits, as would a statue that fell on someone (Hyde, 1916). This punishment of physical objects was paralleled in medieval and early modern European law by the legal punishment of animals. If a pig killed a baby, or if a swarm of locusts ate a crop, the animals would be charged with legal offenses, defended by a court-appointed lawyer, and usually convicted. Animal defendants whom the court could apprehend, like domestic pigs, would be tortured to death, just as were human criminals (Evans, 1906).

Some scholars suggest that the people who punished swords and executed pigs were not so stupid as to believe that swords or pigs could form criminal intent, or could be deterred by the punishment of their fellows. Rather, argues one scholar of the phenomena, people were terrified by the seemingly random nature of bad events, which implied that perhaps there was no order to the universe. Thus, the purpose of punishing objects and animals “was to establish cognitive control … the job of the courts was to domesticate chaos, and to impose order on a world of accidents–and specifically to make sense of certain seemingly inexplicable events by redefining them as crimes … the child’s death became explicable. The child had died as an act of calculated wickedness, and however awful that still was, at least it made some kind of sense” (Humphrey, 1906: xxvi). Albert Cohen described the same phenomena as the “evil causes evil fallacy”: the belief that bad consequences must had bad causes.

[Sleepy_Weasel]

*Originally posted by MEBuckner *
**

Originally posted by Sleepy Weasel
Great Whites don’t like the taste of humans? Says who?

The great white shark, immortalized in the 1975 movie as one of the natural world’s most ruthlessly efficient predators, actually appears to be a finicky eater with little taste for humans, new research indicates.
“They clearly make a decision on what they are going to swallow,” said Peter Klimley, a marine animal behaviorist with the University of California, Davis. “Most surfers they just spit out.”

**
[/QUOTE]

Surfers are a bad example… They spend so much time in the ocean, they’re too salty… Besides, neoprene makes a funny noise when you bite it. Sharks hate that…

Mostly they bite surfers to get them to stop saying, “Dude!”

[Colibri]

*Originally posted by Jamoross *
**

Trochilidae circumbendibus**
Jack Corbett’s Maneaters of Kumaon**

• jam **

Hey, jam, I wasn’t reading carefully and I just noticed this. Was this intended to mean I am “around the twist,” as it were? (And the genus should be *Trochilus * anyway; Trochilidae is the family.)

If you wish to know my species, it is Huitzlipochtli grandiloquens.