More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Glenn Hurowitz

GET UPDATES FROM Glenn Hurowitz

Jack Hanna Defends Wildlife Slaughter

Posted: 10/19/11 01:40 PM ET

Late last night, sheriffs' deputies in Muskingum County, Ohio responded to reported sightings of tigers, lions and bears by descending on the farm of Terry Thompson, who was known to keep exotic animals. Thompson apparently opened the cages for approximately 50 of his animals and then killed himself.

Under orders from Muskingum County sheriff Matt Lutz, the sheriff's deputies began systematically shooting the endangered animals "at close range," ultimately slaughtering about 44 tigers, lions, grizzly bears, wolves and other animals both on the farm and in the surrounding area. As of this writing, only three animals had yet to be tracked down and "dispatched" in Lutz's words.

"We cannot have animals running loose in this county," Lutz said.

I've got news for you, Sheriff Lutz: your county is full of wild animals, whether you know it or not. If you spent more time getting to know them, you'd know that the first response to a wild animal is not to shoot it. Lutz should face review of his actions, and should probably lose his job. Although he explained his actions by saying he wanted to protect public safety, the way to do that is not through wanton, unconsidered shootings.

But possibly worse that Lutz's ignorant savagery was the attitude of Columbus Zoo director emeritus and television animal entertainer Jack Hanna. He was in the area - and decided to take to television to lend his support to the idea of shooting the animals. Hanna is notorious for defending improper uses of captive animals - and was hired by Sea World to defend their confinement of orcas after a captive orca killed its trainer, despite mountains of evidence that marine mammals don't belong in a zoo. PETA has described Hanna as a "professional wildlife pimp," because zoos and aquariums frequently hire him to defend controversial projects.

Lutz's ignorant savagery and Hanna's defense of it is the reflexive attitude of too many police and public officials in this country, and not just when it comes to exotic animals. Police too often respond to one complaint with a hail of bullets - even when it's native wildlife like black bears, wolves or mountain lions. This is especially true in areas where predators were exterminated decades past, but are now migrating in from other areas. The reality is most citizens want police to protect wildlife - but police too often respond to one complaint - or one informational call - with a paranoid response. They forget that we live in a landscape of wild animals and the fact that we live in a country that still has wild animals is one of the things that makes our country great. Police west of the Mississippi know that it's cougar country, and it's not that big a deal if someone spots one (unfortunately, some states still exhibit anti-wolf hatred).

Even when it comes to exotics, the reality is that this kind of slaughter is unnecessary - a little patience and the occasional tranquilizer gun can usually get animals back together. Lethal measures should only be used as a last resort - and especially in cases like this, where police are dealing with highly endangered animals like tigers (3,000 left in the wild) and lions (just 23,000). We need to do everything we can to keep these animals alive and reintroduce them into the wild where possible to bolster wild populations.

Of course, the real problem here is unregulated and often cruel private menageries of the type involved here. To their credit, both Hanna and Sheriff Lutz have called for Ohio to re-regulate these kinds of operations (Republican governor John Kasich shares some blame for this debacle; upon entering office earlier this year, he refused to renew an executive order providing some restrictions on keeping wild animals).

Americans love wildlife of all kinds; they support wildlife laws; and they want their public servants to go out of their way to protect them.

 

Follow Glenn Hurowitz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/glennhurowitz

 
 
  • Comments
  • 145
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
02:32 AM on 10/24/2011
I live where there is a lot of wildlife. I say slaugher all of them! Before they slaughter us.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jesus Germanotta
Dissecting Pop Culture
12:35 PM on 10/23/2011
Why? In a state with THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS of unregulated exotic animals was no one trained to deal with this?
08:42 AM on 10/24/2011
They brought in a vet. with a dart gun and cornered a big cat but coudn't get it done, multiply that time 40 or 50 and you have mayhem.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:52 PM on 10/22/2011
Glenn Hurowitz!......You are my hero! As someone who is very concerned about the protection of wildlife species and the environment in general, you summed up exactly how I feel about this horrific slaughter of these wondrous animals. Please keep up your remarkable talent of informing the masses of the facts and I want you to know that it comforts me greatly knowing that a journalistic talent such as yourself is on the side of wildlife and common sense, and that you also want them protected before there is only the 2-legged human species left on a cold, dark, unappealing planet.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wynsar
Progressive Family for 4 generations
09:33 PM on 10/21/2011
Mr Hanna is obscuring the fact that CANNED HUNTING CLUBS buy exotic animals...the rarer the better.....a Bengal Tiger trophy in your man cave.....is coveted by friends of men like Dick Cheney et al.....
When a mentally ill human gets involved and releases the animals then these innocent creatures pay the price
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:47 PM on 10/21/2011
I was horrified at this story. Thank you for writing this. I completely thought the same thing- on the tigers, especially. These animals are so few on earth- why didn't they tranquilize them? I think Hanna is just being a stool pigeon, and I think sheriff put orders out for two reasons- one, that was the easiest route & two, it was a chance for the good old boys to go game hunting. Simply put. And it's sickening. I can't stop thinking about how many endangered tigers were killed instead of being tranquilized. I'm sure Tippi Hendren and many other facilities would've gladly obliged to take the animals after.
07:37 PM on 10/21/2011
I thought at the time I first read about this that it was such a waste. It didn't have to be done like this. I thought Jack Hanna cared about animals.
08:53 PM on 10/22/2011
Hanna does care about animals. But unlike the owner of these animals, Hanna saw the people in the surrounding area of more importance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jesus Germanotta
Dissecting Pop Culture
12:34 PM on 10/23/2011
I don't trust Hanna. His mission should not be hanging out on talk shows but shutting down private ownership of big cats.
05:32 PM on 10/21/2011
I love animals a lot and I was heartbroken that they all had to die BUT it needed to be done. There was way too many of them and they were probably scared and what happens when a deadly animal is scared? Nothing good. This article is way too biased and kudos to Hanna for having the common sense.
Its a shame, yes, but some innocent kids definitely shouldnt have been the victim.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:55 PM on 10/21/2011
What expertise does the author of this article have to make these statements? His "Opinion" means nothing to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
emerging pattern
06:05 PM on 10/21/2011
A link to his Bio is right at the top of this article. In case you can't find it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-hurowitz
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SusanElizabeth1949
My micro-bio may be empty but my head isn't.
07:21 AM on 10/24/2011
From what I read, his area of expertise is in politics and environmentalism, not the handling of wild animals let loose in a populated area.
04:46 PM on 10/21/2011
The longer this story stays in the news, the more questions go through my mind. How long was it from the time of the owner's death to the arrival of law enforcement? My hunch is that there must've been at least a couple of hours from death to discovery, giving the animals enough time to run away, if they were so inclined. If law enforcement was able to take out all of the big cats and bears while at the compound, doesn't that mean that they weren't roaming all over the countryside with the potential to wreak havoc. If, as reported, most of the big cats and bears were declawed and they were mostly accounted for at the compound itself, what imminent danger did they pose? Seeing the photos of the carcasses lined up leads me to conclude that these animals were summarily slaughtered, like in a firing squad, unable to offer any resistance. It's hard to imagine that many supposedly dangerous large animals being taken down by so few shooters without any reports of the shooters themselves suffering any injuries or deaths.
09:48 PM on 10/20/2011
Commenters are saying they are glad that "no one was hurt" and that "something tragic could have happened". But someone WAS hurt, and tragedy DID happen! These creatures were killed, and were most likey terrified beforehand by their circumstances. That matters, they matter, and its terribly tragic indeed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
emerging pattern
09:43 PM on 10/20/2011
Excellent article!! Well stated and truly insightful.
04:44 PM on 10/20/2011
Just a couple of final thoughts:
I can only hope that some good comes out of this tragedy: Ohio state legsilators need to get off their collective thumbs and make sure that this kind of situation is never again allowed to happen.
It is a miracle that no one was hurt during this fiasco; again, I say JOB WELL DONE!!
01:57 PM on 10/21/2011
none of these animals were trained to hunt and kill humans. They were looking for someone to fed them and take care of them. This made it easy for them to be shot. I dont see that as a miracle
05:34 PM on 10/21/2011
Serious? Lol
Animals arent trained to hunt and kill, that comes naturally to them. And when they dont have someone there to feed them AND theyre scared than they dont just sit on the floor with their fork and knife and wait patiently.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:48 PM on 10/21/2011
Exactly. Bottom line is they should have been tranquilized. They tranq'd the leopards, but not the tigers that you can count how many there are left with all the poaching? It's disgusting.
04:31 PM on 10/20/2011
Under these specific circumstances, my view is the right decision was made. But only under these circumstances. The tranquiliser arguments, however, are also valid. If it is the case that Ohio has high numbers of ''exotic'' animals, then Ohio should, reasonably, be expected to have plans in place for this kind of emergency. That they don't have them, or a police force appropriately trained in and with access to tranquilisers, or even laws to at least check the mental health of owners of these animals, then that does not reflect very well on the ethical reasoning as to why the general population should have such easy access to them in the first place.

If you allow dangerous animals to be owned, then you have to allow for the certainty that something could go wrong and prepare for it. How you prepare for it is a valid question here and one that should be reflected upon and addressed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:46 PM on 10/20/2011
I read the article twice and I still haven't found exactly what Jack Hanna said. Chances are those animals would have had to be put down anyway, if the guy who was keeping them released them like he did, they probably hadn't been properly taken care of.
12:19 PM on 10/20/2011
"Under orders from Muskingum County sheriff Matt Lutz, the sheriff's deputies began systematically shooting the endangered animals "at close range," "

This is a deliberate characterization, at best. Sheriff Lutz ordered his officers to shoot the animals, yes, but NOT at close range. What he did say was that after responding to the original dispatch regarding animals loose, his first responders were forced to fire on charging animals that had already approached so close, they were AT CLOSE RANGE.

You're suggesting here that the order was to not only kill the animal but to do so at close range, which is false. In fact, the way you word it, it's not suggesting, but more a flat out state of fact that is completely untrue. I understand your anger at the situation, but that doesn't justify what you've done here.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoeTheProgrammer
I love dogs.
05:01 PM on 10/21/2011
The article is purposely written to make villains out of the police. The writer wasn't there. Seems he thinks it's fine and dandy to let Tigers and Grizzly Bears roam through neighborhoods.

Fact is, the police were faced with a situation where they simply could not allow these animals to get away. If they had a shot, they had to take it.

This is the real world. Not some fairy tale.