Coyote fears are valid, despite columnist’s disdain...

Coyote fears are valid, despite columnist’s disdain

I feel compelled to address both the inaccuracy and condescension

in Joseph Bell’s recent column “Catching up on the news.” This letter

concerns his sarcastic comments regarding community concern about

coyotes.

Perhaps rather than react with his typical disdain, he might want

to read a piece from a Carlsbad newspaper not long ago that described

an attack on a woman by a pack of coyotes, which would have been

deadly had it not been for her dog’s bravery.

Bell must not have pets or, if he does, neither appreciates their

devotion nor returns their affection. I’m reminded of his arrogance

about the lack of diversity in Newport Beach. He should simply pick

up and move to Gardena, Westminster or Inglewood rather than look

down his nose at our political incorrectness.

It seems to me that Bell is at the bottom of the bell curve and

needs to be put in his place.

R. CLAIRE FRIEND

Newport Beach

Fear cannot dictate attitudes toward wildlife

I sit holding my daughter, who just turned 45 hours old. As any

new parent, I have prepared for her arrival with a naive confidence

that was shaken, slightly, the first time I held her. I began

thinking about all of the hazards she will encounter -- for the rest

of her life. I began considering the consequences of a life spent

with fear as its focus; life marred and mired by worry.

I am not suggesting a carelessly cavalier approach to life, but I

am suggesting that we place our fears where they belong -- in proper

perspective. I don’t see people overly concerned about driving (or

riding in) cars on metropolitan streets and freeways. I do not see

people particularly concerned about working in factories in close

association with toxic materials. I don’t see concern for the levels

of air pollutants, water quality, and soil contaminants -- at least,

not an appropriate level of concern.

In spite of the fact that domestic canines kill approximately 200

people and inflict 200,000 wounds that require medical attention in

the U.S. per year, I do not see a mad rush to destroy our beloved

pets.

Why is it we don’t fear these hazards with any real conviction?

Maybe it is because we love our pets and our vehicles, and we require

air, water and land, in whatever condition they are offered. Maybe we

recognize that although the risks associated with these hazards are

real, they are also fairly low relative to each individual. You or I

may endure an entire lifetime without a single dog bite, motor

vehicle accident or an illness due to environmental pollution.

In the newspapers of late, there is no shortage of people

commenting on human and cougar encounters. Each person has their own

views and their own fears. I am concerned that so many people are so

afraid of these relatively elusive felines and that these

disproportionately fearful views will bring an inglorious end to

California’s largest wild cat.

And, for those of who have animals (i.e. livestock) in open pens

and do not expect losses: Get a clue. That is analogous to chumming

the water and then complaining that you attracted sharks; neither of

these examples exhibits anything resembling common sense.

Are cougars capable of injuring or killing a person? Absolutely.

Are you anywhere near as likely to be attacked by a cougar than to be

killed in an automobile accident, struck by lightning, afflicted by

cancer due to environmental contaminants, car-jacked, etc? Absolutely

not. In fact, not only are the odds of being attacked by a cougar in

California relatively negligible, but 80% of people attacked by

cougars survive.

Your chances of actually seeing a cougar are less than the chance

of occurrence of the previously mentioned hazards. That does not mean

that humans are not seen by cougars. We are under the watchful eyes

of a cougar more often than we can, or wish, to fathom. In spite of

this, attacks are rare.

Why don’t we accept the negligible risk of a cougar attack with

the same cavalier attitude that we accept these other infinitely

greater risks? There are many reasons. But I would like to suggest

that those who favor cougar eradication simply do not believe that

cougars favorably contribute to the ecosystem. They seem to believe

that if cougars were extirpated, there would be no adverse

consequences. And, apparently, they hold no reverence for this cat

that many people believe fills a spiritual niche in human life.

To be concerned about a cougar attack with concurrent antipathy

toward particulate-induced asthma in children or public parks being

built over toxic dumpsites, is absurdity beyond reason. But it is

understandable. It is apparently preferable to die over Memorial Day

weekend at the hands of a drunken driver than to be attacked by a

wild animal on a wilderness trail, where wild animals live,

incidentally. On New Year’s Eve, 14 people died in California due to

drunken driving related accidents. And 450,000 people die per year

from cigarette-related illnesses. Since 1890, eight people have been

killed by cougars in California and more than 60 attacked. That’s in

104 years, folks.

I believe humankind’s philosophy boils down to this: If it is

dangerous and has no apparent utility to humans, kill it. But, I know

in my heart and soul that this kind of thinking and acting is far

more harmful than what we are actually preventing. If, in this

current, unprecedented period of species extinctions, we exterminate

cougars from Southern California, a new hazard will replace the one

we destroyed. What is this hazard, you ask? It is difficult to

predict, specifically. But if one looks closely at similar

extinctions in the past (i.e. great whales, gray wolves, grizzly

bears), one will notice that nature enjoys surprises.

Look at the majesty of a cougar sometime -- if you can find one --

and try not to be impressed. Nature loves surprises. Let us not ruin

the surprise of nature that brought us this fabulous feline because

we are too afraid to appreciate the fact that with incredible beauty

often comes a little bit of danger.

When my daughter, who is now 46 1/2 hours old, is of sufficient

age, she and I will hike wilderness trails with a healthy respect for

these cats -- and other wildlife -- tempered with common sense and

irreplaceable awe. If, by that time, there are no more cougars in

Southern California, then we will just have to move to a place where

the people haven’t yet let fear rule their actions. If no such place

exists, then we are all in serious trouble.

JAY B. LITVAK

Costa Mesa