Instapundit still confused over that whole "nature" thing

Perennial idiot Instapundit (aka "Glenn Reynolds", "Seasonal GOP Hack", "Insty") says (pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/022837.php):
DAVID BARON, CALL YOUR OFFICE (CONT'D): Black bear attacks boy in Smokies; father also hurt. "A black bear repeatedly mauled an 8-year-old boy Monday evening near a popular motor trail on the outskirts of Gatlinburg, and an animal matching its description was later killed by park rangers."

Plus, this commentary: "Parks were designed so people could experience nature in a positive way. Not be eaten by it."
1. The incident is certainly unfortunate and it's good that those involved made it out without serious injuries.

2. Just because Insty links to something doesn't mean he agrees with it, but I strongly suspect that Insty does in fact agree with that "commentary" (from lastcar.blogspot.com).

3. The incident occured in a National Park (specifically here: nps.gov/grsm/planyourvisit/roaringfork.htm), which is quite a bit different an environment from a "park" in the sense of a suburban park or similar. It's not like the victim was playing on a swing in Central Park. The victim was in the bear's habitat in a location that has a fair number of bears. If you go into such an environment, you have to be prepared for an encounter; there aren't packs of rangers whose job it is to clear them out of the way for your convenience.

4. The lesson to be learned here is that those who aren't prepared to enter bear country should be either kept out of bear country or should be made aware, not that people should just start blowing away bears.

5. There is no #5, because I think the foregoing is evident enough.

Comments

Yep, what you said. Number four... if only everyone thought that way. The blogger (of the comment) is talking about breaking nature for his own comfort, not truly experiencing it. From reading his older posts and the next one about bears, I don't think his mental capacity is sufficient for him to be in any public office.

I'll grant he is wrong in this case. However, this is a data point in a long (years long) point he has been making, which I agree with. His basic point has been that top predators were removed from areas of high population density for a reason, which is that they are dangerous. And secondarily, that conservationists who ignore that are not helping their cause, because the public WILL turn on them. I am a biologist who loves nature, and who personally would love to live in close proximity to (in, actually) robust environmental systems. That doesn't mean most people would. Again, however, this example, being essentially a nature preserve, is not a good example.

I do feel for the little guy and his really stupid father, but let us all hope we as a people will understand we must become the human bear country and eat our enemies, the other so called nation state understand what bear country means. read about one other balck bear that is eating you right now his name is Carlos Slim of mexico city he is now the third richest perosn in the world and he wants you under his mexican control he is now about to buy your country out and make it his own..think that is nut's do you? just wait and see his evil pig name start to show up all over the former USA.

Last night border patrol people happened to be attacked by about 100 young mexicans the good guys had to shot or be removed from this earth by our enemies, I can only hope the bush/mexico city boys don't have the good guys shot in a prison cell, and the families beaten to death by the enemies of freedom, but after-all you would never know if that happened. Mexico and south America is our enemies just like Bush and his best friends in the world Bin Laden and his families inside our government.

_...I don't think his mental capacity is sufficient for him to be in any public office._ Evidently not a significant barrier, the electorate being what it is.

Glenn is a good guy. He just doesn't want to rock the boat. He has an enormous readership and by coming out too strong on one side or another he may lose some advertising revenue. Right Helen?