I oppose the reintroduction of any large predator. The ecosystem benefits can be met by human hunters instead, and if they are skilled they can kill more humanely than wild predators. That said, wolves are much less dangerous than tigers, so I'm not too concerned by that specific case.
To all the downvoters, what is the maximum number of humans eaten by tigers per year you'd be willing to accept in exchange for allowing them to roam free?
Tigers don't eat humans because tigers roam free, they eat humans because humans roam free. Build a fence around your town and tigers won't eat you.
Don't try to build such a general argument on such marginal premises. Humans kill far more humans that Tigers ever have. Tigers are simply not a serious threat to us.
>To all the downvoters, what is the maximum number of humans eaten by tigers per year you'd be willing to accept in exchange for allowing them to roam free?
Really you’d wipe out the entire human race to see tigers remain in the wild? That’s an odd hypothetical but do you really stand by it or am I missing something.
