Environmentalists feed people to dragons

Komodo dragons have been eating a lot of people in Indonesia lately and the locals blame environmentalists, as reported by Yaroslav Trofimov at the Wall Street Journal (a subscription is required; or borrow or buy today’s paper).

Apparently, in Indonesia, people used to hunt deer and leave portions of successful hunts to the komodo dragons. They also used to tie up goats as sacrifices. All of this pleased the dragons, which left the humans alone.

Then entered the Environmentalists from the Nature Conservancy, who sought and were awarded a ban on deer hunting. They also had dogs declared an “alien species”, thus outlawing them. Naturally, being sympathetic souls, they also got a ban on goat offerings. The reason they did all this, according to Widodo Ramono, the policy director of the environmentalist organization, was because he feared the komodo was becoming “domesticated.”

But, even though all the people in this group were no doubt armed with many letters after their names, each with multiple “studies” in hand, they forgot that the dragons had to eat.

So the dragons started wandering down to the villages and learned how tasty villagers and the villagers’ livestock were. “[T]oday the dragons are angry with us,” says villager Hajji Faisal, “and see us an enemies.” A man named Jamain, whose son was eaten, said “I don’t blame the dragons for my boy’s death. I blame those who forbade us from following custom and feeding them. If it weren’t for them, my boy would still be alive.”

Nature Conservancy officials think Jamain’s and other villagers’ arguments that the environmentalist policies are to blame are based on “superstition.” They instead accuse Jamain’s son for looking too delicious (no, my dear readers, I am not kidding). In words I believe he has never himself heeded, environmentalist Putri Naga Komodo said of the connection, “You’ve got to be very careful about extrapolating and drawing any conclusions.”

In banning age old practices, I can only ask, wither multiculturalism?

Be sure and read Trofimov’s full story, from which all the quotes were taken.


  1. Bernie

    This hits on a bigger issue in terms of “who decides.” My skepticism around these types of environmental and, more significantly, climate issues is based on who is laying claim to decision-making power. Many environmental groups have a weak record around such policy making decisions with little consideration to their implications and the costs imposed on others.

  2. Swade016

    Environments or Environmentalists?

  3. Briggs

    Ah! What a rotten error. Thanks Swade016!

  4. Thomas A Means

    I tend to think environmentalists are keen to impose as much cost as possible on others, and it’s not an accident. It leaves less discretionary income to do unapproved things. I just wonder why Indonesia let these fascists influence policy in the first place. They must have done an excellent job of salesmanship, convincing them that A) there was some threat and B) the fascists had the solution. I don’t know about the deer in Indonesia, but around here the white tailed deer have become a nuisance, along with those flying rats, err, geese. Thankfully we don’t have Komodo dragons to contend with, but I’m going to be having some roast goose one of these days, poaching notwithstanding.

  5. I find it hard to believe these laws are enforced all that vigorously. If they are, it’s only because the environmentalists continue to pay attention. Once they lose interest, no doubt the local officials will look the other way.

  6. I, actually, am more inclined to agree with Mr. Herring’s take. That given, I was reminded of a review I’m currently undergoing of Mr. Burke’s Thoughts on the Present Discontents and Speeches(Cassell & Company, Limited: London, Paris, New York & Melbourne, 1886.)

    “Nations are not primarily ruled by laws; less by violence. Whatever original energy may be supposed either in force or regulation, the operation of both is, in truth, merely instrumental. Nations are governed by the same methods, and on the same principles, by which an individual without authority is often able to govern those who are his equals or his superiors, by a knowledge of their temper, and by a judicious management of it; I mean, when public affairs are steadily and quietly conducted: not when Government is nothing but a continued scuffle between the magistrate and the multitude, in which sometimes the one and sometimes the other is uppermost–in which they alternately yield and prevail, in a series of contemptible victories and scandalous submissions. The temper of the people amongst whom he presides ought therefore to be the first study of a statesman. And the knowledge of this temper it is by no means impossible for him to attain, if he has not an interest in being ignorant of what it is his duty to learn.”

    But, I’m a conservative. You may disregard my notions.

  7. Alan Bates

    Law of unintended consequences strikes again?

    Or was it intended? Surely, the experts cannot have forgotten that the dragons still have to eat something?

    We have 2 particular nuisances in the UK:

    Geese which muscle in anywhere they can (i.e. everywhere there is water). They are not protected by law but the law is complicated as usual in the UK. Geese are a problem because you cannot just break the eggs – they lay another batch. The preferred solution is to let your grandmother suck eggs (unlike the proverb forbidding her) and replace the blown eggs in the nest.

    Grey squirrels. “Aren’t they cute?” No. Just rats with fluffy tails and good P.R. (or spin doctors now). They carry a virus to which they are imune but it kills the red squirrel which really is cute.

  8. JH

    This post really stirs up my childhood fascination about dragons. I am and will be spending some of my spare time researching dragons again!

    Evidently the incident happened more than a year ago; and a previous fatal incident happened 34 years ago. I can only speculate about the reason why the reporter from the WSJ wrote with such a clear bias toward environmentalists a year later.

  9. Paul Spite

    Dear Mr. Briggs

    Carbon emissions have no discernable effect on climate, but our gullibility nets promoters of this “crisis” billions per year. Meanwhile they change nothing of their own lifestyles, though they also live on the planet they claim we are destroying. Claiming to want to save us from our folly, they seek to strip away our freedoms while destroying our economy. While the climate itself mocks their so-called linkages, and our economy is already on the edge of collapse, a Democratic Congress is still pushing for carbon cap legislation. What will it take to bring this farce to an end?

    Your website leads me to believe we share the concerns about this attempt to sell out our country for profit and power. Would you help me promote a book I have written examining this hoax? It is intended to make readers angry over being played for patsies. If enough people read it, it would create a public backlash against that legislation, but through my own efforts, I have been unable to sufficiently publicize this work. Would you also pass this e-mail on to all your peers you think might agree and help?

    The book is entitled “A Climate Crisis a la Gore” and is organized as follows:

    • Introduction – the motivation behind the assembly of this information for public use.
    • Part 1 – Excerpted ideas from Mr. Gore’s book, The Assault on Reason. I use Mr. Gore’s own claims regarding the proper and reasonable way to enter an argument or evidence into the marketplace of ideas, the forum of reason, the real power behind democracy.
    • Part 2 – A claim by claim analysis of Mr. Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. These are evaluated with simple logic, claims elsewhere in the documentary, Mr. Gore’s excerpted written principles of reasoning, and scientific research and findings regarding the subjects of his claims.
    • Part 3 – Discussion and disclosure of players and special interest groups creating the perception of a global climate crisis. The history of the movement is examined, motives behind involvement, dollar amounts of profit already being reaped by promoters, and what they stand to gain if America enacts carbon legislation.
    • Conclusion – The coming economic storm resulting from enacting this legislation and a plea to readers to contact legislators demanding such laws be reconsidered.

    Excerpts can be reviewed and the book ordered at Amazon.com by entering the title, ISBN# (978-1-4196-8684-9) or by following the link http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Crisis-Gore-perception-warming/dp/1419686844/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202424474&sr=8-1 If you are willing to inform your readers of its contents and availability, an informed (and angry) population of voters might be a real, and maybe the only, check and balance system capable of stopping Congress.


    Paul Spite

  10. Flu-Bird

    Look at just how evil these greens are they would rather see someone lose their child to a komodo dragon then see any real protecting for the people take place FRANKLY THE GREENS SHOULD BE FED TO THE DRAGONS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *