RACHEL JOHNSON
Perspectives Assistant
A female mountain lion was fatally mauled by her mate in a lengthy showdown near Malibu Creek State Park on Aug. 12, the Los Angeles Times reported. While this has been the first report of aggressive behavior within the past year, the incident has caused authorities and locals to question the safety of those who live near predator-infested areas.
As a result, many have begun to wonder whether aggressive animals, such as the mountain lion, should be permitted to peacefully coexist with humans any longer. A suggestion has been made to either relocate the mountain lions or institute laws that permit hunting them.
The idea, in my opinion, is outrageous. Not only were the mountain lions not threatening to human beings in the aforementioned confrontation, but they inhabited the area previous to the settlement of humans as well. Their habitat is a place that should be preserved and maintained, seeing as they serve to perpetuate the cycle of the ecosystem.
According to Backwoods Home Magazine, only 50 attacks have been recorded statewide in the past 100 years. This research concluded that “more people have died on the slopes of northern California’s (mountains) in hiking and other activities in the past two years than have been killed by cats throughout the entire state in its recorded history.”
These rare attacks are hardly sufficient to warrant any sort of public panic or fear.
Biologist Seth Riley told The Malibu Times that “mountain lions … are more dangerous to deer and other four-legged predators than they are to humans, because they see humans as competition.” He does not see any threat to humans in the area, attributing the actions of the mountain lion that killed its mate to jealousy or territorial issues.
Again, there is no reason for the community to be alarmed.
Mountain lions are an endangered species. Serious protection of lions began in 1971 with Gov. Ronald Reagan’s issuance of a temporary suspension on hunting mountain lions for gaming purposes. Proposition 117 was then passed in 1990 to permanently ban the sport of hunting mountain lions in California. The only way a mountain lion can be killed intentionally is if the animal threatens, attacks or kills a pet, livestock or a human.
These policies were put into place to protect the endangered mountain lions because it became obvious that their existence was threatened. Until attacks on humans become normal, the necessity to repeal previously enacted legislation does not exist.
Mountain lions roamed the area before humans settled on the land. Dana Murray, director of education for the California Wildlife Center, cautions people against making hasty decisions about hunting laws without learning about the animals first.
“Mountain lions were living in Southern California long before people resided here,” she told The Malibu Times. “It is our responsibility to co-exist and prevent problems.”
Perhaps the most important issue in the argument for preserving the mountain lions’ natural habitat is that their removal could devastate the ecosystem. Christa Mann, a Southern California representative from The Mountain Lion Foundation, spoke to the Rotary Club of Malibu in early August about the importance of coexisting with mountain lions.
She explained that mountain lions are the top predator in the wild and have an enormous sphere of influence not only over the other predators in the ecosystem but especially over the prey.
“If you remove a top predator from the ecosystem,” Mann said, “all the prey animals like deer will increase as a result of no predator control.”
Her statement implies that vegetation in the area could change, having damaging effects on roads and land.
Because no mountain lions to attacked humans in recent years, the public’s exaggerated reaction to the recent confrontation is not warranted. Mountain lions are an endangered species that deserve to be protected under the law. Coupled with evidence regarding potential damages to the ecosystem, it is obvious that hunting permits must continue to be withheld.
09-15-2005