So tigers aren’t endangered then?

An oft-quoted statistic is that there are more tigers in American back yards than there are left in the wild. According to the US Fish & Wildlife Service, there are between 3,200 and 3,500 tigers remaining in the wild globally. By some estimates there are 5,000 in captivity in the US, though there might be more. The truth is we have little idea how many there are in American ranches, unlicensed zoos, apartments, truck stops and private breeding facilities, due to a mishmash of state, federal and county laws governing their ownership.

Thank God for private property, eh? Or thank Gaia, eh?

10 thoughts on “So tigers aren’t endangered then?”

  1. Is there a better paragraph that sums up the ‘Guardian’ than this?

    ’… Rathburn’s sense of entitlement – this rugged individualism that says the government shouldn’t interfere with an individual’s right to own pretty much whatever they want – runs deep in America.’

    How very dare anyone think that the government shouldn’t be nose-deep in their personal business 24/7/365!

  2. Can’t help noticing that the people most keen on saving the likes of the tiger are those least likely to have their throat torn out by one.
    I suspect that a collection for saving the tiger in a remote Indian village would be lucky to raise a tin rupee.

  3. ‘The animal was given a name, Loki, and sent to an animal sanctuary in the country, run by the Humane Society of the United States.’

    HSUS is loathed throughout the states. Trying to out creep PETA. ‘Animal sanctuary’ is suspicious.

    ‘According to the World Wildlife Fund’

    Another fine Leftard organization.

    The article can be dismissed as junk science.

    ‘In Texas . . . a state that prides itself on promoting individual freedoms, like openly carrying AR-15 semi-automatic rifles or bringing concealed handguns on to university campuses, it’s perhaps not surprising that owning a tiger is considered (by some) to be a God-given right.’

    So all privately held tigers should be euthanized, and when they go extinct in the wild, that’s it. Better to be extinct than privately held.

  4. I suspect that a collection for saving the tiger in a remote Indian village would be lucky to raise a tin rupee.

    I went to a tiger sanctuary whilst in India. Poaching still goes on but they hire ex-poachers as guards. Raises some interesting economic questions:
    1. Tiger poachers must do it because it earns them more money than their alternatives (which don’t involve being killed by a tiger).
    2. Ex-poachers now working as poaching preventers must have some incentive to switch. Seems to me that might make it the most desirable job in the area given that it has to be preferable to poaching which is already preferable to other jobs.
    3. They only hire ex-poachers as poaching preventers. So the only career route to the most desirable job in the area is to become a poacher.

    Wish I could have stayed there longer to test this line of thinking.

  5. Mal, you think the article is about Tigers. It’s actually about getting rid of Texans.

    ‘like openly carrying AR-15 semi-automatic rifles’

    45 states allow open carry.

    Leftards are ignorant of the law. They frequently demand laws which already exist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *