Putting don't feed the animals in perspective - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

link · #1 08-27-2013, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pj67coll

Given that the park service has such signs in it's parks, it might be interesting to ask what their "stated" reason for them is. I think it's along the lines of trying to keep animals wild and away from people. For both animals and human safety. But part of that is the implicit realization that when animals become used to humans for food they become dependent on them.

- Peter.

WRT the bolded portion above, this is not true. The no-feeding policy is done so that animals don’t approach people. That’s where the problem begins.

A lot of .gov organizations and Native American tribes feed wildlife regularly, especially in the winter months. That is one way to maintain herd size and health, But this maintenance is not done by offering pop corn to a black bear or other wild animals who are near the parking lot. The result of that is that the animals will begin to approach people and then the arm chewing starts….

Once park officials learn that, for example, a bear approaches visitors, the bear is usually killed, else, it will harm visitors. IIRC some who were injured brought suit to the NPS and some have won.... That is why there is sinage.

BobK · #2 08-27-2013, 11:02 AM

Wind Cave National Park - Your Safety (U.S. National Park Service)

Honus · #3 08-27-2013, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by link

WRT the bolded portion above, this is not true. The no-feeding policy is done so that animals don’t approach people. That’s where the problem begins.

A lot of .gov organizations and Native American tribes feed wildlife regularly, especially in the winter months. That is one way to maintain herd size and health, But this maintenance is not done by offering pop corn to a black bear or other wild animals who are near the parking lot. The result of that is that the animals will begin to approach people and then the arm chewing starts….

Once park officials learn that, for example, a bear approaches visitors, the bear is usually killed, else, it will harm visitors. IIRC some who were injured brought suit to the NPS and some have won.... That is why there is sinage.

Don't both reasons apply, though in different degrees? I once was looking to get a bird feeder. The guy at the store said I shouldn't get it unless I intended to keep up with it. He said birds will become to prefer it as a source of food, which only works if I keep it full. I'm sure that the primary reason for rules against feeding animals is to keep them wild, for the reasons you state, but I suspect that another reason might be to avoid dependency. To apply that concept to humans is a bit obscene.

link · #4 08-27-2013, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honus

Don't both reasons apply, though in different degrees? I once was looking to get a bird feeder. The guy at the store said I shouldn't get it unless I intended to keep up with it. He said birds will become to prefer it as a source of food, which only works if I keep it full. I'm sure that the primary reason for rules against feeding animals is to keep them wild, for the reasons you state, but I suspect that another reason might be to avoid dependency.

Having lived in a wilderness area for well over 10 years I only know from my own experiences where I have not seen any sense of dependency upon wildlife that is fed occasionally or regularly.

I agree that most creatures will opt for the easy meal but that doesn’t imply or suggest they don’t know how to feed themselves otherwise. A real dependence requires that the animals know of no other way of feeding themselves and they depend on the hand out.

As an example, some near me feed a deer population regularly, but not only does this not stop the deer from feeding on their traditional sources of food, but during late spring through autumn, they usually won’t touch the offered food (alfalfa or hay) that is placed in a location known to the deer, as deer prefer fresh grasses and related food instead.

I know of several who use bird feeders seasonally, because most birds here go to different locations when the conditions change. We have pretty severe winters with lots of snow. Anywho, the birds aren’t dependent but do go for the easy meal.

In contrast, an animal that is raised in a home or lab, who knows of no other source for food is dependent, and represents a different set of circumstances than described here.

Due to this, I think the alleged NPS statement is BS intended for little but to protect the NPS from litigation, and people from being chewed.

Quote:

To apply that concept to humans is a bit obscene.

I agree that applying the comment made by the OP to humans is a stretch designed to offend.

elchivito · #5 08-27-2013, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by link

Having lived in a wilderness area for well over 10 years I only know from my own experiences where I have not seen any sense of dependency upon wildlife that is fed occasionally or regularly.

I agree that most creatures will opt for the easy meal but that doesn’t imply or suggest they don’t know how to feed themselves otherwise. A real dependence requires that the animals know of no other way of feeding themselves and they depend on the hand out.

As an example, some near me feed a deer population regularly, but not only does this not stop the deer from feeding on their traditional sources of food, but during late spring through autumn, they usually won’t touch the offered food (alfalfa or hay) that is placed in a location known to the deer, as deer prefer fresh grasses and related food instead.

I know of several who use bird feeders seasonally, because most birds here go to different locations when the conditions change. We have pretty severe winters with lots of snow. Anywho, the birds aren’t dependent but do go for the easy meal.

In contrast, an animal that is raised in a home or lab, who knows of no other source for food is dependent, and represents a different set of circumstances than described here.

Due to this, I think the alleged NPS statement is BS intended for little but to protect the NPS from litigation, and people from being chewed.

I agree that applying the comment made by the OP to humans is a stretch designed to offend.

Such a statement has not been proven to have been issued by the Park Service.
On the other hand, my experience with wildlife, which is lifelong, is different from yours. Feeding wildlife interferes with natural population fluctuations as it allows for a higher survival rate among newborns. Mother raccoons that are being fed by "helpful" humans on a regular basis will bring their newly weaned young and to the food and teach them that that is where the food is. While survival rates increase, foraging skills decrease. This is only one example. All one has to do is look at the difference between feral barn cats and domestic house cats. Domestic house cats may hunt for sport, but put one into the situation of having to hunt to feed itself and it won't survive. It's country cousins on the other hand do quite well without human intervention.

I have neighbors who have a place here and a place on the edge of the Phoenix Mountain Preserve down in the valley. She feeds Javelina. Buys flour tortillas at Costco by the gross. The mother pigs bring their babies as soon as they stop nursing to her porch for their food. Over the years "her" herd grew to scary numbers. The state Game and Fish dept. was called by a neighbor who'd had enough and they showed up in force and in no uncertain terms told her she was interfering with the natural course of the Javelinas' life cycle and population. They trapped and moved the herd and issued her a written warning, threatening that if the activity continued she would be fined and forced to pay for the relocation costs.
Feeding birds can be done in such a way that it doesn't interfere with seasonal migratory patterns. Our area is full of hummingbirds in summer. They naturally migrate south in winter as it can get quite cold here and nothing grows in winter that they can eat. This is how it is supposed to be. It's possible to get them to stay around all winter by keeping feeders out. I take mine down after the first hard freeze. Leaving them up is selfish and harmful to the natural pattern of existence for these birds. Does the person who feeds birds all winter that should have flown south congratulate himself on "saving them a trip"?
Feeding wildlife is stupid.