Try reading the thread - and the threads which preceded it - and you will see the matter is more complex than you realise. Insulting a significant proportion of the site is not the way to get your point across 
Euthanasia of healthy animals in zoos, and "Breed to Cull"
- Thread starter TeaLovingDave
- Start date
- Status
Malayan Tiger
Well-Known Member
It doesn't matter what humans think. You cannot get away from these facts:
1 Marius was a kid
2 Marius was healthy
3 It was not his fault the zoo did not want him
4 Other zoos offered to take him
5 If he were a human they wouldn't have done it
6 Nothing makes humans more valuable than him
7 Copenhagen Murdered him
If only Marius could read what have said about him.......
1 Marius was a kid
2 Marius was healthy
3 It was not his fault the zoo did not want him
4 Other zoos offered to take him
5 If he were a human they wouldn't have done it
6 Nothing makes humans more valuable than him
7 Copenhagen Murdered him
If only Marius could read what have said about him.......
Malayan Tiger
Well-Known Member
"Euthanasia" is just a fancy word for "Evil massacre being covered up by evil keepers"
If you had done as I suggested and read the discussion that has already taken place - rather than dismissing it as pointless - you would know that at least some of the zoos which offered to take him at the eleventh hour had previously refused to take him when Copenhagen asked approximately 6 months prior.
It is an emotive subject, but calling zookeepers evil and insulting anyone that disagrees with you is *not* the way to proceed in the discussion.
Malayan Tiger
Well-Known Member
Yes I did read it. They could have given the giraffe when the other zoos did finally offer, even if it was a "hassle". Living things are to important to toss away like an unwanted toy.
If you'd truly read it you'd also understand that these offers were publicity stunts and were made once it was already far too late and made with no intention of actually taking Marius.
~Thylo
Animal Friendly
Well-Known Member
I am not sure I like the suggestion that the offer of a good home to Marius the giraffe by the Yorkshire Wildlife Park was merely a publicity stunt, as has been suggested several times on here by a zoo chat moderator and his stooge, I would like it even less if I was indeed running this zoo in Doncaster and read what has been suggested on here, I suppose when this zoo took all the lions in a few years ago this was nothing but a publicity stunt also, I also do not like the idea of a zoo chat moderator with his stooge ganging up on a member just for expressing his opinion on this matter, this member is entitled to his opinion, even if it does not necessarily agree with a moderator and his stooge,
Your sixth reason warrants some concern about your priorities...
While I'm not the biggest fan of euthanasia and I would be happy to see Marius alive, I can understand the reasoning behind his death. I might not agree with it, but I understand it.
Studbook reccomendations prevented Marius from going to Yorkshire, and really, what is the point of a personal attack against two fellow zoochatters?
Animal Friendly
Well-Known Member
I am aware that it was suggested that sending Marius to Doncaster would be"a waste of space", as his genes were already represented in his brother that resides in the giraffe bachelor group at Doncaster,remember stud book recommendations, if indeed this was the case, are just recommendations, they do not have to be adhered to by the relevant zoo direction. Perhaps this is yet another case of jealousy rearing its ugly head on zoo chat, a zoo that opened with virtually nothing growing into the progressive place it is today with healthy visitor numbers and a very impressive, growing collection of animals. And as for personal attacks on zoo chat members, I think I am well qualified to comment on that subject considering what ridicule, bullying and insults myself and fellow member Jane Doe have been the victim of on here, it would appear that Malayan Tiger is now receiving similar treatment, perhaps the truth hurts
The thread which this current one stemmed from was locked in part due to it degenerating into insults.
Keep this thread civil and on-topic please.
Keep this thread civil and on-topic please.
wensleydale
Well-Known Member
I don't think that it is necessarily a good use of resources to keep every last animal. Yes, I am unhappy about what happened to Marius (although my art teacher grandmother probably would have taken me to the necropsy and made me sketch the whole thing to improve my drawing skills, serves me right for getting an art degree) but I can understand the reasoning and don't feel as if it's my place to really judge them. Maybe I am less sensitive when things like this because I grew up around farmers who did similar things (if eating most of the bull calves or gelding a colt counts). That said I would have tried to avoid the situation if I could have.
As much as I love animals and prefer their company to most people, the sad fact remains zoos are finite spaces on an over crowded world, if Marius had been Margaret she would still be alive. in animal husbandry and in a lot of wild situations males out number females and that is a fact. Sadly they can't keep every male animal that is born.
I have often wondered if humans can have terminations for the wrong sex of a baby may be zoo animals should have the same, breeding to order in it's most basic form.
And I still maintain giving animals human names in this situation is silly and creates a bond that can, as this case has proved, end up causing a lot of pain and bad publicity for the zoo involved.
I have often wondered if humans can have terminations for the wrong sex of a baby may be zoo animals should have the same, breeding to order in it's most basic form.
And I still maintain giving animals human names in this situation is silly and creates a bond that can, as this case has proved, end up causing a lot of pain and bad publicity for the zoo involved.
Animal Friendly
Well-Known Member
Perhaps termination because of the wrong sex could be a consideration, it would certainly prevent a problem that is going to get worse in the future with elephants and gorillas, would it be more humane to terminate the pregnancy rather than put the animal down later, a very valid point here. Of course if you terminate the pregnancy you are not going to have a popular box office draw of a cute baby giraffe, elephant or whatever and reap the financial rewards for this, until the baby grows up and it is time to discreetly dispose of it.
Malayan Tiger
Well-Known Member
Here's how its supposed to be:
Zoos= Conservation. Conservation= NOT KILLING HEALTHY ANIMALS.
Also, if you don't want a giraffe, DONT BREED A GIRRAFFE.
You don't see American doctors massacring every male baby because there are too many............
If someone put a human to death there would be a LOT more opposers than here....
How would you feel if someone came to your door, and ordered you to appear for your execution because there were too many of you gender?
Not very pleasant, I'm sure....
Also, you guys use the word "dispose" , but can you really be that heartless about a living ANIMAL? We are animals too......Oh, so long ago was the day the first living blob crawled out of the primordial ooze...Giving rise to us ALL. This is not conservation.....conservation is CONSERVING NATURE. In nature, Marius would have had a better chance at life than in a zoo......He would be just as likely to be die as any female giraffe.....
Zoos= Conservation. Conservation= NOT KILLING HEALTHY ANIMALS.
Also, if you don't want a giraffe, DONT BREED A GIRRAFFE.
You don't see American doctors massacring every male baby because there are too many............
If someone put a human to death there would be a LOT more opposers than here....
How would you feel if someone came to your door, and ordered you to appear for your execution because there were too many of you gender?
Not very pleasant, I'm sure....
Also, you guys use the word "dispose" , but can you really be that heartless about a living ANIMAL? We are animals too......Oh, so long ago was the day the first living blob crawled out of the primordial ooze...Giving rise to us ALL. This is not conservation.....conservation is CONSERVING NATURE. In nature, Marius would have had a better chance at life than in a zoo......He would be just as likely to be die as any female giraffe.....
sooty mangabey
Well-Known Member
Oh dear.
The childishness, immaturity and ignorance on display here are worrying.
When people start writing in capital letters, things are never good.
When they start off with the "how would you feel if you....?" questions, things are getting worse.
Giraffes are giraffes, people are people. There is no moral equivalence there. I wouldn't particularly want to live in the giraffe enclosure at Copenhagen Zoo, nor would I want to wander the Serengeti plains. This is because I am not a giraffe. If I were a giraffe, I would probably see the world differently.
You don't seem to be someone who likes to listen to reasonable arguments put out by those who know more than you do - the excellent line that Zoochat regular Hix has in his signature - Barrie's "I'm not young enough to know everything" - comes to mind - but to suggest that culling has no place in conservation is, sad though it may be, wholly wrong. Whether Marius should have been culled is, of course, debatable (I personally have no real issue with it; others do) but you do your argument little good by shrieking in this way, making nonsensical and impassioned claims.
Animal Friendly
Well-Known Member
All to do with our own personal opinion of coarse, I myself am very much against a breed to cull policy of any animal in captivity. It is also interesting that certain species capture the public's imagination in this matter, a giraffe in the case of Marius caused worldwide outrage, similar would happen if were an elephant or a great ape, how many would be bothered if it were an antelope, one that never had a name while living at the zoo, and thus would be anonymous as far as the public is concerned. It is very similar to people's attitude towards farm animals, how wonderful it is to see the baby lambs in the fields at Spring time, who is interested in them a few months later when they are rounded up and packed off to the slaughter house?, not many I would say.
jbnbsn99
Well-Known Member
Are you saying that you, a claimed thirteen-year old, knows more about what's going on then professionals who have worked in the industry for far longer than you've been alive?
Yes, it is perfectly alright to have your own opinion, but when someone expresses an opinion that is contrary to yours, you do not have the right to insult or demean them based on their opinion. The best way to back up your statements is with facts - hard, incontrovertible facts.
Zoos are not about keeping fluffy, cute animals for the benefit of you to see. They serve a real and meaningful purpose. Hard decisions must be made based on multiple factors that the general public cannot, and possible will never, understand.
Malayan Tiger
Well-Known Member
I never thought Id hear someone call a murderous supporter a reasonable argument....Then again, what should I expect when dealing with humans.......
Your right on one thing.......It was an insult to compare humans to a giraffe...and insult to GIRAFFES, that is.....
- Status