The Copenhagen Giraffe

Who are you to dictate how anyone feels Bags get off your high horse.

I agree with you, nightowl that there is nothing wrong with emotion, and without genuine affection from its owner/keeper/carer no animal is going to get the care it deserves. However the emotion must not cloud recognition of what is best for the animal, or for the whole species that animal belongs to

It can be better for the animal to be humanely killed than to be allowed inhumanely to live and suffer because no-one will take an unpopular decision.

At times it can even be better for the species that an individual animal does not breed or sometimes does not continue to live. That is an even more unpopular and difficult decision, but those responsible for animal welfare have to be prepared to face the possibility.

Cute babies and attractive furry things evoke oohs and aahs, naturally. But reptiles and creepy crawlies do not. Would there have been such an outcry if there had been a population explosion of naked mole rats who could not be found suitable homes and had to be euthanased? Are we more concerned about the dwindling numbers of giant pandas than we are about the similar danger to poison frogs (who are actually very pretty things) ? Are there hundreds of comments on Facebook about the male day-old chicks who can find no home and are used as animal food (they are cute, too, and appear on all the Easter cards)? Do we stop drinking milk because of the calves who must be born to keep the cows lactating?

Concern for animal welfare is very patchy, and not at all logical.

Elegran - thanks for your contributions to this thread.

Too successful?

Or, in a Catch 22 sort of situation, the animals at the zoo are breeding more than expected because they are so well looked after and are happy, [given that unhappy animals won't breed].

Perhaps the giraffe was born as a result of visitors wanting to see cute baby animals? Or because of the wish to have the adult animals living a "normal" life?

I don't think lions and giraffes can be "easily sterilised" so wanted some proof.

Absolutely, nightowl. It was the emotion without the back up that was problematic.

There's nothing wrong with emotion bags, alongside information and reasoned argument. Life and death are subjects that generally raise emotions of one kind or another.

Hear hear or here here?

We still haven't espablished why the poor giraffe was allowed to be born in the first place. Which, to me is the main cause for concern.

Information and well-reasoned arguments rather than unsupported emotional statements.

What for, bags?

Thank you, elegran.

Thatbags You said above that keeping animals "not in animal sanctuaries" often involves unpleasant decisions. In reality, animal sanctuaries are not always havens of delight for the rescued animals. Some of them are run by and for people who cannot bear to have even a sick old pet humanely put down when it is the best thing that could happen to it. Difficult decisions are needed there too, at times. Also their funding can be irregular and dependent on fluctuating donations, and their helpers willing but not knowledgable.

There are many excellent ones, of course, but there are those that fall short.

Galen and it does not seem than Noah's Ark even look at the science of their breeding policies. Perhaps they don't believe in DNA and heredity.

Well said Tegan

Noah's ark is round the corner from me. It seems to be very popular. I would never visit it or take DGC s there. They preach creationism.

Although I still don't condone what happened at Copenhagen Zoo, I wish the amount of anger aimed at the Danes could be harnessed and aimed, instead at the Chinese for allowing tigers to be killed for 'medicinal' purposes or those countries where they keep bears in crates for their bile.

I'd say that in this case the step that should have been taken years ago would have been to euthanase Louisa and not let her go on to breed. No doubt some would say she should have been sterilised and allowed to live out her days. Unfortunately, I don't think that prides of lionesses would have toerated her, and her neurological problems would have caused trouble sooner or later. If she had become violent, she would have faced euthanasia at that point - and a safari park like Longleat wouold have had to contain a possible risk to their human visitors.

Louisa came from Noah's Ark Zoo. "an animal collection with very poor standing within the animal management industry."

"Noah’s Ark zoo was kicked out of BIAZA (British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums) in 2009 after an undercover investigation by CAPS (The Captive Animals Protection Society) found that the zoo were secretly working with the last circus in the UK to use big cats, which is against BIAZA rules. It was discovered that a tiger on loan to Noah’s Ark from the Circus had died at the zoo and the owners had skinned the six year old female named Tira, removed her head and paws and then dumped the body in a nearby field."

from howtoskinatiger.tumblr.com/

The data will be available to check, aka so if it is not true, that will be revealed.

Yes, indiscriminate breeding is bad. It does NOT take place in reputable zoos, certainly not in good British ones. I don't know where Louisa and her ancestors were bred.

I think I shall see whether I can find that out.

Actually my response was in response to Bags query, but thank you for your reply. I've seen the excuses flung together statement issued after all the furore.

It all comes back to the same thing, indiscriminate breeding. If there was the slightest indication that the lioness was in any way unsuitable for breeding then steps ought to have been taken. Simple implants.

The fact is that the lion population has been allowed to escalate beyond a point where there can be harmony within and between the various families. Henry was a victim of this overpopulation and his increasing age made him a target for younger fitter lions.

Sounds like very good reasons for destroying them