|
Animal Legends and Lore
|
The Beast that Walks Like Man by Harold McCracken.
The Pawnees, who called themselves the Chahiksichshiks or "men of men" and who lived in the great valley of the Platte River, had a legend very similar but much more elaborate than the one previously cited. It was "The Story of Ku ruks la war' uks ti" ( "Medicine Bear" ). The hero of this interesting saga of Indian Americana was a certain poor boy of the Pawnee tribe. He was so poor that he is not even given a name at the beginning of the long story, and it is related that his whole family was so destitute that everyone looked down upon them. However, the lad decided to find honor or death; and he went to a fabled place among the hills, where there were many cedar trees and there were many skeletons of his people who had been killed in a mysterious manner. In the center of this strange graveyard he found the cave of a family of grizzlies. The father was not at home, but the friendly old she-bear said: "I am sorry that you have come here. My husband is the one who kills persons and brings them here for the children and me to eat. You had better go back to your people quickly, or he will eat you up ... He is one of those bad bears - a grizzly - medicine!" The poor boy, however, insisted on waiting to face this terrible man-eating bear. When the monster returned and saw the bold young intruder, he pounded the earth with his great paws, snorted like thunder, and blew red dust from his nostrils. He shouted that he was chief of all the grizzlies and head of all the animal lodges, and there was no living creature on earth as strong or who had as much supernatural power. The poor boy was very frightened, but he bravely faced the demon, defying all his wrath and power. Greatly admiring this unusual courage, the grizzly finally promised to adopt the boy as his own and bestow all his powers upon him. In this imaginative story there is a mingling of primitive drama, poetic justice, and mystic animal worship. To tell it briefly is only to spoil it; and even in all its translated detail it unquestionably loses a vast amount of its original conception, as it once was related in all its orthodox sincerity of complete belief by the tribal patriarchs of the proud Pawnees. The grizzly invested the poor boy with invulnerability to being injured in any way by the weapons of his enemies, and he taught him the magic of literally wiping away the wounds inflicted upon others and of restoring life to those who had been killed. When the lad finally returned to the lodge of his own father, the people quickly learned about what had happened. He had such great supernatural powers that he was able to go right into the midst of enemy warriors, without any fear of personal injury, and slay the tribal enemies with reckless abandon. And so it came to pass that "old men were calling his name, young women were singing his praise, and old women came to dance before him. People no longer made fun of his father or mother. Now they looked upon him as a great and powerful person." He was given the distinguished name of Ku ruks la war' uks ti or Medicine Bear, and sometimes they called him Ku ruks ti carish, which means Angry Bear. He brought great honor to his tribe, finally married the chief's beautiful daughter, and became a great chief in his own right - all because of the grizzly bear. These are but a few of the Indian's legends in which the grizzly was accorded a worshipful distinction and homage and which show the influence of these animals upon the red man's culture.
The Grizzly Bear by William H. Wright ( 1909 )... He then proceeds to call attention, in regard to the Great Naked Bear, which they believe to have once inhabited the territories of New York State, and to suggest that the bear of this Indian legend was identical with the grizzly... The report runs: "that among all animals that had been formerly in this country this was the most ferocious; that it was the largest of the common bears and remarkably long bodied. All over ( except a spot of hair on its back of a white color ) naked. That it attacked and devoured man and beast, and that a man or a common bear only served for one meal for one of these animals; that with its teeth it could crack the strongest bones; that it could not see very well, but in discovering its prey by scent it exceeded all other animals; that it purpued its prey unremitting ravenousness, and that there was no other way of escape but by taking to a river, and either swimming down the same or saving one's self by means of a canoe; that its heart being remarkably small, it could seldom be killed with an arrow; that the surest wayof destroying him was to break its backbone; that when a party went out to destroy this animal they first took leave of their friends and relations at home, considering themselves as going on an expedition, perhaps never to return again; that when out they sought for his track, carefully attending to the course the wind blew and endeavoring to keep as near as possible to a river; that every man of the party knew at what part of the body he was to take his aim; that some were to strike at the backbone, some at the head, and others at the heart; that the last of these animals known of was on the east side of the Mohicanni Sipu ( Hudson River ) where, after devouring several Indians that were tilling their ground, a resolute party, well provided with bows,. arrows, etc., fell upon the following plan...
Straight from the master story teller, Aesop http://www.aesop-fable.com/people/the-be...-travelers
The Bear and the Two Travelers Two men were traveling together, when a Bear suddenly met them on their path. One of them climbed up quickly into a tree and concealed himself in the branches. The other, seeing that he would be attacked, fell flat on the ground. When the Bear came up and felt him with his snout, and smelt him all over, the Traveler held his breath, and pretended to be dead. The Bear soon left the “dead” Traveler, for it is said a bear will not touch a dead body. When the Bear was gone, the other Traveler descended from the tree, and asked his friend what it was the Bear had whispered in his ear. “He gave me this advice,” his companion replied. “Never travel with a friend who deserts you at the approach of danger.” Moral: Misfortune tests the sincerity of friends.
http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/nat...er-speaks/
Published April 27, 2016 YELLOWSTONE PARK – Yellowstone National Park’s most famous grizzly bear is dead. Five months after being illegally shot by a hunter, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) released the information as FWS’s public comment period on its proposed rule to delist the Yellowstone grizzly bear from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is coming to a close. Known to bear biologists as Bear 211, and to millions of tourists as “Scarface,” the 25-year-old grizzly was killed last November in the Little Trail Creek drainage just north of the Park on the Gallatin National Forest. “I don’t know if it was self-defense or mistaken identity,” says Ron Aasheim, a spokesman for MFWP. “The USFWS is leading the investigation and until that is done they are not releasing the name of the hunter,” he affirms. In the wake of the belated announcement, an outpouring of anti-Native sentiment has been posited on local media sites and blogs, with posters suggesting that a Native hunter shot the patriarch grizzly, amidst accusations that Natives wantonly kill “bison, elk, bighorn and bald eagles” north of Yellowstone during the buffalo and elk seasons. Tribal members from the Nez Perce, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation participate in those hunts through existent treaty rights. “I think it’s safe to say that’s inaccurate information that it was a tribal hunter,” was Aasheim’s response to the allegations about Scarface’s killer, and adds that he does not know “of any instances where elk or bison were just shot and left by tribal members,” contrary to assertions made on the Internet and in the local community of Gardiner, Montana. Tensions arising from the tribal buffalo and elk subsistence hunts, in combination with massed tribal opposition to the federal delisting and subsequent state operated trophy hunts of the grizzly, is thought to be behind the attempt to smear Native people in the killing of the iconic grizzly. “The grizzly bear is very sacred to us,” says Johnny Arlee, a nationally respected elder and traditional leader of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) of the Flathead Indian Reservation in Montana. “It’s a good thing that the CSKT council is backing other tribes in protecting the grizzly bear. They know that our animals are precious. As Native people we have faith in the animal world. Grizzlies are very powerful.” The CSKT is a member of the Rocky Mountain Tribal Leaders Council (RMTLC), one of the first tribal bodies to pass a resolution opposing the delisting and trophy hunting of the grizzly bear. Among the core objections cited by the RMTLC is the “threat to the sovereignty and spiritual rights of Tribal Nations” posed by delisting, and FWS’s failure to meet the standard of “meaningful consultation” required by Executive Order 13175 on the fate of the bear considered sacred by tribes from Canada to the Rio Grande. “Our ceremonies have always been important. Only a medicine man has the right to keep sacred things associated with the grizzly. The grizzly’s spirit has its own way of healing; the spirits of other animals have different ways. A spiritual gift from a grizzly can be used in a good or bad way. You can use that gift to help people, or to be greedy, and hurt others with that power. The more you help, the more knowledge you gain from doctoring people,” explains Johnny Arlee. Internationally, the Salish elder’s reputation grew from his role in Robert Redford’s 1972 western Jeremiah Johnson, and in the proceeding years he has been featured in documentaries, authored books on Salish culture, and recorded multiple CDs. Throughout, he has been a fulcrum of traditional life on the Flathead Reservation, and continues to have a central role in the annual Arlee powwow, and shares his knowledge with students at Salish Kootenai College. “Grizzly bears were here before the human beings and we respect them that way. We don’t play with them. It is an honor to have a grizzly bear name. It is powerful, and you have to earn that name,” he says. “This idea of trophy hunting grizzly bears is really dumb. It’s the complete opposite of our culture. If it was turned around the other way and the trophy hunters were hunted, there would be a different thought.” The killing of Scarface just over the boundary of Yellowstone National Park provides a glimpse into what awaits the grizzly bear if it loses ESA protections and the states of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho initiate their long-planned trophy hunts. “Scarface and the other 61 grizzlies in 2015 were killed while supposedly protected under the ESA. Couple that with the states’ plans post-delisting and the bloodbath we’ve predicted all along will ensue beyond the boundaries of the Parks and what the Feds have identified as the Demographic Monitoring Area (DMA),” warns GOAL Tribal Coalition Co-founder, R. Bear Stands Last. FWS’s Chris Servheen recently admitted that grizzlies “outside the DMA” have “a limited future.” Yellowstone National Park Superintendent, Dan Wenk, has expressed concerns about trophy hunts in proximity to the Parks, but denied that he has advocated for a buffer zone. “If grizzly bears are delisted, and if there is hunting in the surrounding states, we do care,” clarifies Wenk. “We want to be involved in where the hunts will take place, when they’ll take place, and we would like to see them concentrate the hunts away from the Park boundary. But I have never used the term ‘buffer zone.” Wenk relayed that it was, “three to four weeks ago that we got some information that Scarface had been killed.” The Yellowstone Superintendent didn’t know why it took so long for the Park to be notified of the identity of the bear, given that Scarface was collared. “I don’t believe that’s true,” Wenk counters. “There was a tag on the bear. I don’t know that there was a collar. When we first knew about it, I think they called to ask if the number on the tag was a bear that we were familiar with,” he says. “He was wearing a collar,” confirms Sam Sheppard, MFWP Supervisor for Region 3 where Scarface was killed. “But he was identified as Bear 211 by his tag. I can’t give the exact date because of the USFWS investigation, but it was November,” Sheppard asserts. Captured 17 times by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) since 1993, Scarface was one of FWS’s best-known and most studied grizzly bears, which has left many questioning why it took five months for the Service to approve the release of the bear’s identity. “Informing the public that 211, Scarface, had been shot in the direct aftermath would not have hindered FWS’s investigation at all. What it would have hindered is the Feds’ and states’ delisting and trophy hunting narrative. Telling millions of people who have seen Yellowstone’s most famous grizzly that the bear had been killed by a hunter would have changed the dynamic and inspired more opposition and negative public comment. It would have contributed to derailing Servheen’s and Director Ashe’s agenda,” suggests Bear Stands Last. Servheen, FWS’s retiring “Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator,” was, according to Bear Trust International, “instrumental” in its creation. Bear Trust International’s founder and chairman, AC Smid, is a prominent trophy hunter, and the group actively promotes the delisting and trophy hunting of the Yellowstone grizzly bear. Among the organization’s partners is Safari Club International, and its corporate sponsors include ExxonMobil and BP. “My message to trophy hunters who want to kill this sacred being on our sacred lands is this: go home,” says Johnny Arlee. “It’s crazy to have these rich white people coming here to kill, kill, kill and to brag about killing a grizzly bear. Human beings are crazy. There has got to be a change in our hearts,” concludes the Salish elder.  *This image is copyright of its original author
http://www.whitewolfpack.com/2011/09/bea...ch-us.html
Bear Medicine: What Bear Can Teach Us - Elders Speaks The Great Bear is found on every continent and comes in many sizes and colors. The bear is revered on every continent, especially North America where the indigenous people who believe it was once human and Great Mystery lives in the spirit of bear. Many American Indian tribes have bear clans and bear ceremonies. Bear people use herbs and other plants in healing. Bear medicine is powerful and without peer among the animal people. The bear is a guide to the river of meaning. Bear is spirit keeper of the West, the place of darkness, maturity and good harvest. From this place, Grandfather Bear gives strength, introspection and knowledge. Bears are active during the night and day. This symbolizes its connection with solar energy, that of strength and power, and lunar energy, that of intuition. It enhances and teaches those with this totem how to develop both within themselves. Grandfather Bear is a solitary dweller and master of his domain. This teaches us the importance of independent thinking and to seek peace in quite meditation to Bears are sensitive to Mother Nature's cycles. They sleep long hours in the winter living on fat stored in their bodies. It teaches us how to go within and find the resources for survival and how to remain balanced amid change. This medicine is a reminder of the great circle of life and rebirth, renewal and fresh beginnings. The stars above in infinite meadows of heaven show us the Great Bear in the Sky, Ursa Major, as a sign of the greatness and infinity of bear wisdom. Bear is the embodiment of strength and is fierce to a threat on its lair. It is not wise to come between the mother bear and her cubs, teaching us ways to always protect those we love. The bear holds the teachings of introspection. When it shows up in your life pay attention to how you think, act and interact.
Cowboys, Mountain Men & Grizzly Bears by Matthew P. Mayo.
I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the rich history of the American West. Among the many stories are those of Hugh Glass ( Unstoppable Man ) and Jedediah Smith ( The Toughest of Men ). In April of 1823, having been left for dead by his party after a sow grizzly severely mauled him, mountain man Hugh Glass dragged his savaged body 350 miles to Fort Brazeau. Barely recovered, he set out for revenge, not on the bear but on the men who had abandoned him in the wild. Revenge, he felt, was a dish worth serving. The saga of Hugh Glass has been recorded in many forms including films, books, songs, stories, and poems. And it endures because his unbelievable trek is a prime example of the power of human endurance and blind will to live. That Glass's motivation was revenge speaks highly of the man, for he went on to forgive those who wronged him - though it's doubtful he ever forgot. Young Jim Bridger, one of the forgiven, went on to establish his own great fame as a legendary mountain man, guide, explorer, hunter, and businessman. It's probable that his early dose of humility and forgiveness at the hands of the mighty Hugh Glass helped shape the respected man he became. In 1824, on Captain Jedediah Smith's second westward expedition, a massive, bawling grizzly bear emerged from a thicket, bypassed the entire line of men and horses, and made straight for the young leader. "Old Jed" Smith took to wearing his hair long in an attempt to conceal the welted braids of scarring that encircled his head, dipped above his left eye, and ringed his drooping and misshapen ear. Despite a string of such close calls in his eight years of roaming the West, Captain Jedediah Smith was not the average hard-living, devil-may-care man of the mountains. He was quiet, not boastful, and preferred his Bible to liquor, tobacco, and swearing. His thirst for exploration was unquenchable and unmatched. Among many notable experiences in his short life - he died alone, overwhelmed by Comanches in 1831 at age thirty-two - he was the first white man to blaze a land route to California.
http://russiapedia.rt.com/of-russian-origin/medved/
A translation of part of the closing song from the 1980 Moscow Olympics, Misha the bear, the symbol of the Olympics, was tearful to say goodbye. But it’s interesting that Misha was chosen as the mascot by a public poll. When Russians thought of a mascot for their country, even after decades in the USSR with no official symbol animal, they thought of a bear. The outside world has long associated Russia with bears. Its connotations are usually negative, with many viewing ‘The Russian Bear’, especially from the 19th century, as big, brutal and clumsy. It can be seen in political cartoons of the time. And even in 2009 when Obama visited Moscow, the stereotype stuck on some front pages.  *This image is copyright of its original author The Economist cover page. But Russians’ association with the bear as a symbol and animal is far more complex. It is a national symbol, a marketing tool, a wonder of nature, an unspoken fear and a prize for hunters to name but a few. To start with, Russia is thought to have the worlds largest bear population, at around 120,000. They are brown bears, cousins of the grizzlies in North America. They eat salmon in the rivers of the Far East and hunt anything they can in the rest of Russia. A fearsome and intelligent predator, bears have long been revered by the locals who live in the forests with them and they have a place among the mythical animals of Russia’s songs and stories. In the story of Morozko, the hero, trying brashly to impress the girl he wants to marry, tries to kill a mother bear and her cubs. A forest spirit, Father Mushroom, is so incensed by this brazen attack he turns the hero’s head into a bear head, which makes him terrifying to everyone, and so he is ostracized. Sadly, in real life many hunters want to shoot Russia’s bears. A few are legally hunted each year and a tourist can pay $10,000 for a bear. Poachers though claim hundreds more for skins or for things like the huge demand for animal parts for Chinese medicine. As a marketing symbol though, the bear remains as powerful as ever. There is at least one beer brand featuring a polar bear, and the country’s ruling political party, United Russia also features a white bear. Its connotations of strength and power are something companies as well as the national spirit would like to bask in. However, the bear also engenders fear, and it’s a fear deep in the Russian soul. The name says it all. All Russians call the bear “Medved”, meaning something akin to “the one who likes honey”, from the Russian for honey, “Med”. However, an interesting test you can do, ask a Russian where a bear lives, what’s the Russian for a bear’s house. They will tell you correctly it’s called a ‘Bearlogga’. In this name we find, hidden away in the language the true name of the Bear in Russian. It’s…..Bear! But a long time ago the superstitious Russians decided that saying the name of something terrible would make it appear. Clearly it wasn’t very convenient to have a huge bear pop up in your kitchen just because your kid said its name, so they changed it, to protect them. Actually similar things have been done to scary animals or phenomena the world over. Russians will forever be linked with the bear as an animal and a symbol. As foreigners learn more about Russia perhaps the image solely of the big, nasty Russian bear will be replaced by a more complex one, clever, wild, majestic and ferocious. Because underneath Russians do identify with the bear. They fear it, they respect it, but they also want to emulate it. Written by Tom Barton , RT correspondent
http://www.monarchbear.org/monarch/
The Monarch Bear Quote:"Monarch lived for 22 years in captivity during this transition from flesh and fur commercial coup to mythical beast - embodying the heart and soul of Californians."The famous Monarch Bear was captured at Samhain (end of October) by newspaper reporter Allen Kelley. Allen Kelley was given the task of capturing the last wild gizzly bear of California by his famous boss, William Randolph Hearst. He was given a blank check and a large staff to accomplish this task. After six months of searching, Allen Kelley and his crew found the Monarch Bear in the Ojia Valley, Ventura County, near Los Angeles. He was brought to San Francisco on November 3rd, 1889 and was offered to the Menagerie (zoo) at Golden Gate Park. The gift was refused by the park and Hearst placed the Monarch Bear on exhibit at Woodwards Gardens in San Francisco. Opening day, November 10th, 1889, saw over 20,000 people visiting the Monarch Bear at Woodwards Gardens. This opened the Monarch Bear as a star bear which lasted for over 22 years. His stardom included becoming the model for the bear on the state flag of the state of California, his becoming the poster bear for the rejuvenation of San Francisco following the 1906 earthquake, and the totem animal of the state of California. He was the last wild grizzly bear of California. The grizzly bear is the official animal of the state of California. The Monarch Bear's pelt was stuffed soon after his death, in 1911, and he was placed on exhibit in the Academy of Sciences at Golden Gate Park, at that time through December, 2003, when the Academy closed to be torn-down and re-built. He has been visited by millions during this extensive stay, and is well known and beloved of many San Francisco school chrildren. His skeleton was donated to UC Berkeley's museum of Vertebrate zooology at the time of his death, where they remain to this day. The Monarch Bear was euthanized in 1911. He was likely very old at that time. He had been in captivity for over 22 years, and was a fully mature grizzly at the time of his capture. Therefore, he appears as an ancient elder bear. The stuffed pelt of the Monarch Bear which was on display at the Academy of Sciences does not express his magnificence. The Monarch was very unusual as a grizzly bear in that he was black instead of gray. His pelt after almost 100 years of exposure to strong artificial light has faded to a reddish brown from its original black. Better examples of the Monarch Bear's power and magnificence may be obtained from drawings, photographs and paintings that were done during his lifetime. A number of beautiful pictures and drawings, paintings and stories concerning the Monarch Bear can be seen in the new book "Bear in Mind" - The California Grizzly, edited by Susan Snyder, the Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 2003. We are just begining the research regarding the Monarch Bear's cubs and his mate. Anyone who is viewing this site and has more information regarding the Monarch Bear, his mate, and the cubs, please contact us! ( [email protected], [email protected]). The bear was Monarch, a California grizzly who became the first animal in the Zoo’s collection and a lasting symbol of the city’s evolving relationship to vanishing wildlife. Monarch’s affiliation with the City began in 1889, when William Randolph Hearst, founder and publisher of the San Francisco Examiner, engaged one of his reporters, Allen Kelly, in a heated debate over whether grizzlies continued to exist in California. Hearst ended the argument with a challenge for Kelly to go out and find one. Photographic proof would not suffice; Kelly would have to bring the animal back alive. After five months in the mountains of Ventura County, Kelly and the Examiner party succeeded in luring an enormous grizzly into a catch pen baited with honey and mutton. A crowd of 20,000 was waiting at the Townsend Street train station to greet the triumphant Kelly and his California grizzly. Monarch lived for 16 years, first in Woodward’s Garden in the Mission District, then in Golden Gate Park. He sired two cubs, and although he never set a paw in the Zoo’s current location, he provided the impetus for Fleishhacker to pursue his dream of a bona fide city zoo.
Post #9 tells the story of the Ungava bear of Labrador. Here it is: http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic29-4-194.pdf
In recent times, i am interested in studying snakes. They have evolved over millions of years ago probably present since the times of dinosaurs. Sources suggest that they must have evolved from their ancestors losing limbs. As they lost limbs, they must have found a new way of attacking prey, coiling around it and suffocating it. As animals during those period were cruel, snakes being hungry must have jumped randomly onto an animal biting it. It must have coiled around it and must have learned to harm it in some way by pressing it in coils and must have easily recognized the weak point in the body of the prey through physical touch or atleast must have learned to detect the weak point through several trial and error methods. The prey must have retaliated and tried to attack the handicapped (as it lost limbs) snakes. But they must have viciously and cruelly faced and escaped from the prey. That may be the reason they have evolved to be the most cruel, vicious and evil creatures. They must have faced many hard lessons and must have learned to survive hard conditions. They must have learned skilfully the art of constricting prey. But of course, present day pythons and anacondas are much sluggish as they are the ancient animals that have not changed forms or reduced their sizes to fit for the present conditions.
Now, coming to the present situation, snakes seem to have IR vision. That vision must have been a result of weakened vision evolved from much better vision over the course of generations. Due to the conditions or situations or circumstances demanding better vision, they must have had their perfect vision once deteriorated but retained their ability to detect heat in the animal and they must have sharpened or developed this skill of detecting heat in the animals desperate and unable to retain other abilities. Those abilities must have gradually deteriorated. They must have retained this one ability of detecting heat in animals. During their prime periods during ancient times, they must have been alert, keen and beautiful eyed creatures who had perfect vision and alert enough to sense any movement in their surroundings. They must have thrived during those times killing prey regularly, moving quickly, alertful etc. They must have fully utilized this ability(just strong and perfect vision for that time) but not fit and good enough to pass this onto coming generations. That must have made their eyes perfect looking but left with poor vision but IR one. That may be the reason why the python in jungle book is seen to have perfect eyes that hypnotize mowgli.
( in my own words )... During my childhood, I well remember how the gorilla was thought of and portrayed in books and movies. He was a favorite monster from the late 19th century until the mid-20th century. He was pictured as a savage brutal killer of man and beasts; and all other animals feared him. I remember a book in my 5th grade classroom ( 1958 ) about African animals. This particular book had one single centerfold that spread out to depict a wild animal stampede. Within this stampede were an elephant, a rhinoceros, a buffalo, and a lion ( to name a few ). They were all running in terror from a savage gorilla shown beating his chest.
Many of our early pioneers into the American west and northwest returned will tales of the savage killer grizzly. He was ( like the gorilla ) viewed as a brutal killer of both man and beast; a monster. The Grizzly, Our Greatest Wild Animal by Enos Mills. In summing up the animals of the North and West in 1790, Edward Umfreville wrote of the "red and the grizzle bear" that "their nature is savage and ferocious, their power dangerous, and their haunts to be guarded against." In 1795 Sir Alexander MacKenzie recorded the following:- "The Indians entertain great apprehension of this kind of a bear, which is called the grisly bear, and they never venture to attack it except in a party of least three or four." Henry M. Brackenridge, author of "Views of Louisiana," wrote the following from hearsay:- "This animal is the monarch of the country which he inhabitates. The African lion or the Bengal tiger are not more terrible than he. He is the enemy of man and literally thirsts for human blood. So far from shunning, he seldom fails to attack and even to hunt him. The Indians make war upon these ferocious monsters with ceremonies as they do upon a tribe of their own species, and, in the recital of their victories, the death of one of them gives the warrior greater renown than the scalp of an enemy. He possesses an amazing strength, and attacks without hesitation and tears to pieces the largest buffalo."
If you ask me, snakes are the real kings. In contrast to their cousins dinosaurs, they have faced tough times without legs, survived from the attacks from prey while they miss the target and probably from predators too (who knows there must have been some predators who must have tried to feed on them even during those times). In this way they must have evolved to be the most cruel i suppose. They learned hard lessons while they survived or else the unfortunate ones must have died while the rest survived with some really tough lessons. Mongooses must be the mofos who must have targeted them exclusively, evolved targeting them(by developing resistance against venom). They are such badasses capitalizing on such great creatures.
I was under wrong notion that snakes are gullible. But after watching this video, I must agree snakes outstandingly outsmart their prey. Look at the way the snake pretends as if it does not want to attack the chameleon. But once the chameleon's sight is out of snake or as soon as it feels it is out of danger, then it immediately runs towards it to attack and succeeds. Though they have poor vision (IR), they seem to sense their prey's intentions through some means. Amazing truly amazing.
I think bears have relatively weaker hearts than the rest of the body. It is just my personal opinion. No personal hurtings to anyone. But can anyone please clarify. I feel the amount of thickness or density of muscles in all other parts of body is higher than the muscles contained in the heart. The heart muscles seem to be slightly weaker, not much. Or atleast the heart is comparitively weakly muscled than other parts of the body. I think this is the reason why our subconscious mind that does not accept them to be called "King of beasts." That may be the reason why bears have evolved to use their muscles brutally against prey and with an intention to kill them quickly as they have relatively weak heart that cannot constantly supply blood to muscles effectively for long time as per demand. That must be the reason for their brutality.
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |