At the end of January a Sloth was born.
The Zoo also recieved 3 new animals, 3 males White-faced sakis.
The Zoo also recieved 3 new animals, 3 males White-faced sakis.
Odense Zoo Odense Zoo 2015
- Thread starter vogelcommando
- Start date
Lion dissection ........
Odense Zoo preparing for another lion dissection | The Post
Odense Zoo preparing for another lion dissection | The Post
WHY!?!?!!!!!!!???!??!??!
It's so stupid to kill animals because they are old or don't have genetic value. Only breed animals of genetic value. Only euthanise animals if they are suffering beyond return. In the U.S, zoos always care for animals until they die of a disease or die of old age or suffer from so many things that they would be happier dead than alive.
It's so stupid to kill animals because they are old or don't have genetic value. Only breed animals of genetic value. Only euthanise animals if they are suffering beyond return. In the U.S, zoos always care for animals until they die of a disease or die of old age or suffer from so many things that they would be happier dead than alive.
@ZEM, I can dig you do not approve or you follow a different line of thought, but to use the phrasing you do is a little too one-dimensional and - I dare say - in some respects a little arrogant ("We in the US …" as if everything is hunky dory on the other side of the Atlantic).
I would reserve the notion stupid for other phenomena or developments within society than where this pertains to practicing basic science. Dissection is an anatomical study for the purpose of better understanding of musculature and also for scientific research into improving captive environments for wildlife in our care (and not forgetting veterinary science has a lot to do with that too).
Beyond this the genetic value component of say retain up to 95% genetic diversity serves the purpose of retaining healthy and diverse captive populations. Population management in zoos is just a little more challenging than natural reserves or protected landscape in situ, although more often than not the same issues with genetics and viable populations apply in the wild and in situ (hence why so many species and subspecies of wild animals and plants including their habitats and even entire ecosystems are and remain at risk or are in danger of completely disappearing).
General zoo news:
13.4 3 Siberian tigers born
4.6 1.0 new male Western chimpanzee P. t. verus arrived from Vallee des Singes in France.
I would reserve the notion stupid for other phenomena or developments within society than where this pertains to practicing basic science. Dissection is an anatomical study for the purpose of better understanding of musculature and also for scientific research into improving captive environments for wildlife in our care (and not forgetting veterinary science has a lot to do with that too).
Beyond this the genetic value component of say retain up to 95% genetic diversity serves the purpose of retaining healthy and diverse captive populations. Population management in zoos is just a little more challenging than natural reserves or protected landscape in situ, although more often than not the same issues with genetics and viable populations apply in the wild and in situ (hence why so many species and subspecies of wild animals and plants including their habitats and even entire ecosystems are and remain at risk or are in danger of completely disappearing).
General zoo news:
13.4 3 Siberian tigers born
4.6 1.0 new male Western chimpanzee P. t. verus arrived from Vallee des Singes in France.
I don't want to sound like the U.S. is the best place ever. I just mention the U.S. since that is what I know.
I am not saying dissection is bad, I just don't think animals should be euthanized for the purpose of being dissected. I think most animals are dissected when they die to determine the cause of death, but they usually are euthanized when they are older. Like we let our big cats live into their 20s, even though they can't breed anymore. And if they get some terminal disease or their pain is insane and beyond no return, then we euthanize them.
I know that population managing is difficult, but it shouldn't be difficult to the point of needing to kill your animals. I might be wrong, but I think that zoos is most other European or North American countries don't euthanise animals just because they have low genetic diversity. And their populations still can thrive.
I am not saying dissection is bad, I just don't think animals should be euthanized for the purpose of being dissected. I think most animals are dissected when they die to determine the cause of death, but they usually are euthanized when they are older. Like we let our big cats live into their 20s, even though they can't breed anymore. And if they get some terminal disease or their pain is insane and beyond no return, then we euthanize them.
I know that population managing is difficult, but it shouldn't be difficult to the point of needing to kill your animals. I might be wrong, but I think that zoos is most other European or North American countries don't euthanise animals just because they have low genetic diversity. And their populations still can thrive.
I'm aware of no zoo in Europe or North America that euthanize for the purpose of dissection. This simply does not happen. What does happen is that animals are euthanized due to population management and then the animal is dissected (i.e. used for teaching) instead of being disposed as garbage. Whether such public dissection is good or bad is a separate discussion, but Scandinavians –Danes in particular– are well-known for being upfront about many things. Death is a part of life. Meat originates from animals that once were living. It isn't glorified, but it isn't hidden either. I suspect this is one of the things people from some other countries don't quite understand: Death (incl. internal parts of a body) can be presented as a normal part of life in a scientific way without being glorified or made into an amusement park show.
A lion has been euthanized because the genes of this particular lion already are well-represented in the captive population and no suitable institution wanted it. Simpy put it took up space that can be used for animals of higher genetic value. I realize the nuances can be a bit difficult to grap, but just to be sure there are no misunderstandings. Additionally, this isn't nearly as unique as you think. In North America+Europe I know only a single country where euthanization never is used for population management: Italy, where the zoos aren't allowed to because of the law. There are, however, differences between countries and in general it happens with lower frequency in North America than Europe, and with lower frequency in some European countries than others. If you go back to the whole Marius debacle you might remember that a major North American zoo organization made a general statement that "they had other methods" (saying everything and nothing at once; any media expert would've been proud), but at no point made the indisputable "we would never euthanizing surplus". Wonder why that was the case.
Whenever this is discussed there is one thing that stands out. Zoos in a tiny minority of countries are entirely upfront about it. Secrecy is the golden rule elsewhere and this has been even more strictly managed after the Marius case. The reasons for the differences are obvious.
Indirectly relevant: Lion contraception is good. Sometimes a bit too good
What happens when zoo contraceptives work too well? : News STLToday
I can guarantee that zoos in the USA also operate "Breed and cull" policies.
I can also guarantee that there will very, very few major collections in Europe and North America that do not operate such policies.