Hunting Wife
Well-known member
Are you Russian? Surprised you guys still have internet.
You Can't Fix Stupid - $87,000,000 California Lion "Crossing"
- Thread starter Desk Pop
- Start date
And this overpass is going to be the world's largest at 200 feet long & 165 feet wide. https://www.latimes.com/california/...-bridge-101-freeway-agoura-hills-january-2022
The language around cat conservation in Southern Cal is geared towards people who have a Disney view of wildlife. Not the rugged individualists here who get freaked out over grislty bears & woofs. Having the kind of overpass on a road like the 101 is good for reducing costs for motorists too.
Wyoming just passed $10 million for wildlife overpasses (Thanks to the ARPA funds) and added another $75 million to their wildlife trust. Colorado is going to be making some big investments this year as well.
Last edited:
QuazyQuinton
Well-known member
2rocky
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2010
- Messages
- 4,982
I think because this project is in California it has a big ol' Target on it...
But if it happens in the Wasatch ...That's cool...
ksltv.com
But if it happens in the Wasatch ...That's cool...
Parley's Canyon wildlife bridge had 706 animal crossings in 2021
UDOT cameras show over 706 wildlife crossings using the bridge over I-80 in 2021.
ksltv.com
Sasquatchewan
Well-known member
Please, PLEASE, don't get him to start posting pictures...
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,641
Cat crossing in California..
jryoung
Well-known member
@IdahoNick how far over carrying capacity are mountain lions right now? What are the population densities regionally in California?
Desk Pop
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,497
Overpopulation and carrying capacity are two different things. You can have too many lions and be under carrying capacity depending on how you define it. True carrying capacity ends when the lions run out of food to eat... deer, elk and moose to kill, rabbits to kill, dogs and cats, etc and then die off as those populations rebound....or some would say it ends when the overpopulation of a species causes the habitat to degrade.
Would long-time California hunters who have been hunting ungulates since the lion hunting ban say that the environment has degraded...or are they pleased with the number of deer and elk?
If you think the bridge will prevent extinction of the species that is totally your business and perhaps it is a worthy cause for you to donate to.
I shared my opinion. It is a lot of money in the name of conservation with very little upside, and I love lions. I don't want them overshot. I don't "sit on the sidelines" as some suggest either.
You can think whatever you please. Maybe you can fight alongside those funding the bridge-builders as they try to outlaw lion hunting in every other western state. I mean, they are almost extinct, haven't you heard?
jryoung
Well-known member
I'm not asking your opinion, nor did I offer any indication of how I feel about this overpass. Let's try again with just the second question, what are the population densities by region or how are you quantifying population by stating "overrun" "insanely overpopulated" and "massive overpopulation".
Desk Pop
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,497
Take your red herring elsewhere.
I am not your secretary. You are welcome to look up any information and make your own determination or opinion.
Keep looking for a mic drop moment, "oh look, you don't know each lion by name in California so you aren't qualified to have an opinion."
If you don't think lions need to be managed by hunting in California then I am sorry you are so uninformed.
It is sad that common sense is so uncommon. I am very sorry, but I have run out of crayons on this one so just donate to the bridge.
All you need to know is that the entire species in imperiled and this bridge will save them from extinction.
Last edited:
jryoung
Well-known member
So much irony with the red herring comment when both replies are filled with tangents and conjecture.
I'm not even trying to argue or discredit your opinion. I'm literally asking if you have data but clearly you seem a little defensive about it.
I'm not even trying to argue or discredit your opinion. I'm literally asking if you have data but clearly you seem a little defensive about it.
Last edited:
The lion population has grown ten fold since 1920 in California. The deer population has declined from over 2 million to 400-500,000. Is this the right species to spend 87 million on in that state? Why do they favor one species the lion over the other species-deer? Kind of like wildlife racism
Is Griffith park or LA prime habitat for mountain lions? Is this really a subspecies of cougar that only lives in the city? I’m all for wildlife habitat and spending money on overpasses and protecting migration corridors. Why spend money on a predator that’s population is rapidly expanding and regularly kills one that is in decline? I don’t care what California does and I don’t want to bash the state. I think some posters on here are in idealogical straight jackets and just will not look at the facts. This makes no sense but I have never and won’t ever live there so I guess I shouldn’t care.Attachments
appaloosa
Well-known member
I don't care if they call it a lion overpass or a unicorn overpass. It is a way to safely get wildlife across an interstate highway. Attaching a megafauna nexus to it to pull at the heartstrings of the ultra wealthy is just savvy marketing in my opinion.
D_Walt
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2020
- Messages
- 666
Seems like a great idea, boggles my mind why someone would be so up in arms about an 80% privately funded wildlife crossing? People in a state making decisions based on scientific research and taking action about their state’s wildlife? The nerve of those commie bastards!
HONEYBADGER
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 707
Peer reviewed studies mean nothing in the post COVID era.....the medical community lit them all on fire.Woah woah woah there! Your peer reviewed studies are not allowed on this thread. Either say something mean about California or move on.
I don’t think anyone is up in arms. They are spending 87 million on the only species of wildlife that they have in over abundance. They are protecting lions which are overpopulated and ignoring deer herds that have been in a steady decline for decades. Lions eat deer right? Ya but it’s a win for conservation right? Wrong, this is backwards wildlife management. The op I think started this thread in a joking fashion because to anyone with common sense it’s absurd. Wildlife crossings are great, I am all for them and have donated my own funds towards protecting migration corridors. This is an absurd abuse of funds which could and should be put good use for wildlife that’s actually struggling. You’re saying If they says it’s for conservation we all need to support it I guess? Not me its ridiculous but has no impact on me either
Peer reviewed studies and “ science “ are two words I have grown to hate. Most misused and abused words in the English language last few years. When all your peers share your agenda is it really valuable that they “reviewed” your work?
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
Most ignorant statement on this thread. You obviously know zero about what goes into a peer review. It is literally about people who are experts on the subject tearing apart your work to find flaws.
Honestly, a peer review is kind of similar to this thread. Some of us are asking pointed questions of the folks passionately against the crossing asking them for some simple citations supporting their claims that it is not necessary. So far, this opinion isn’t really standing up to this “peer review” since not one citation refuting the science behind the proposed structure has been produced.
This is peer review, in a nutshell. Fun, huh?
Similar threads
