I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/02/09/marius_danish_zoo_kils_young_giraffe_feeds_it_to_lions.html
QuoteDanish Zoo Kills Young Giraffe, Invites Children to Watch It Be Chopped Up, Fed to Lions
By Daniel Politi
A zoo in Copenhagen has sparked outrage after it ignored an intense online campaign and went ahead with its plan to kill Marius, a healthy 18-month-old giraffe. He was put down with a bolt gun Sunday as a crowd that included many small children looked on. Marius was then chopped up and fed to lions and other carnivores at the zoo. Officials at the zoo said that while they understood the protests, they had no choice because the giraffe was part of an international breeding program that prohibits inbreeding. Although he was healthy, his genes were already over-represented at the zoo, notes the AFP.
Although other zoos offered to take in Marius, and one person even offered to buy him, the zoo would only be able to transfer him to an institution that was part of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. Other alternatives, like contraceptives and neutering are considered cruel because they can have undesirable side effects, the zoo's scientific director, Bengt Holst, tells Time.
Advertisement
After Marius was killed, technicians invited parents and their children to watch an autopsy that was performed for research purposes. Many watched the three-hour-long procedure from beginning to end, which to the zoo spokesman demonstrates that the institution fulfilled its goal of being a place of scientific knowledge, reports the Associated Press.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fcontent%2Fdam%2Fslate%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2014%2F02%2F09%2Fmarius_danish_zoo_kils_young_giraffe_feeds_it_to_lions%2F468072951-the-lions-in-copenhagen-zoo-eat-the-remains-of-a.jpg.CROP.promo-mediumlarge.jpg&hash=2bbdb4ee3c13e2e512b4061db24811078e403273)
Would it have been less outrageous if they fed some anonymous cow from a giant farm to the lion?
Slate <_<
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/10/world/europe/anger-erupts-over-danish-zoos-decision-to-put-down-a-giraffe.html
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic01.nyt.com%2Fimages%2F2014%2F02%2F10%2Fworld%2Feurope%2F10giraffe_1%2F10giraffe_1-superJumbo.jpg&hash=c8266981c0963ca14d7f07a34e0fae4230e0b1c7)
Did they play "The circle of life" from the lion king sound track as they did it?
Completely unnecessary, on a number of levels.
I didn't know "Marius" was a Jewish name.
They watched Madagascar and realized how fucking annoying the giraffe character was.
I think I'll trust the scientists over a bunch of animal rights freaks.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 09, 2014, 11:20:50 PM
They watched Madagascar and realized how fucking annoying the giraffe character was.
Anti Semite!
I don't see how this became a story, it's not like giraffes are endangered or that this one was special in any way other that it was an inbreeding hazard.
It did make me wonder how giraffe meat taste though.
Quote from: Liep on February 10, 2014, 04:33:25 AM
It did make me wonder how giraffe meat taste though.
Quote from: KatmaiAnti Semite!
Quote from: Liep on February 10, 2014, 04:33:25 AM
I don't see how this became a story, it's not like giraffes are endangered or that this one was special in any way other that it was an inbreeding hazard.
It did make me wonder how giraffe meat taste though.
The weirdest thing that wasn't really explained in either piece was the presence of those little kids. What kind of parent would bring their small child to the zoo so as to watch a giraffe get butchered?
I approve. I watched a few reindeer get gutted and hung up when I was 6 with grandfather. Circle of life.
I'm a bit torn on this (just like the giraffe, badum tsssh!). On the one hand, the guys running the breeding program have to take care of potential hazards down the line like inbreeding, and this particular individual seemed to be a risk for the program, so in a way they surely know better. On the other hand, I don't think that it would have been that difficult to find another zoo willing to take the animal, and their "nah, it was not worth it" answer seems insensitive on the zoo management's part and makes me guess that they didn't really make an effort on that front.
Regarding the decission to sacrifice the giraffe and disecting it in front of schoolchildren, it seems overkill IMO. If they really wanted to use it as an educational tool, an older audience would have been more appropriate, like high school kids, or veterinary school students. If you want to slaughter an animal for educational purposes to kids that young a normal cow or pig would be just as enlightening in a "this is where your food comes from" and far less an spectacle.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
It's a freakin' zoo. Not much chance that "nature" can "take its course" in a zoo. If, by "let nature take its course," you mean that you would have been more comfortable if the giraffe suffered more before it died, I disagree.
Quote from: Camerus on February 10, 2014, 05:06:33 AM
The weirdest thing that wasn't really explained in either piece was the presence of those little kids. What kind of parent would bring their small child to the zoo so as to watch a giraffe get butchered?
The articles did explain it; the children were invited to attend the autopsy to learn more about giraffe physiology. Contrary to the hysterical reporting, the final butchering and feedings apparently didn't happen right away, and there was no special invite to watch that.
Quote from: grumbler on February 10, 2014, 07:43:00 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
It's a freakin' zoo. Not much chance that "nature" can "take its course" in a zoo. If, by "let nature take its course," you mean that you would have been more comfortable if the giraffe suffered more before it died, I disagree.
No kidding. The poor giraffe being torn to shreds by a lion that is inexperienced in hunting is not really cool Tim. Curb the bloodlust.
Also, you don't want to put ideas in the lion's head.
You have to be a seriously disturbed individual to be disturbed by this.
I thought letting kids watch was the best part.
After all some of these kids are going to be running gigantic pig factory farms some day.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
Timmay, I don't know how old and strong the giraffe was, but a healthy adult giraffe can hold its own against a lion. Putting a giraffe in a cage with a lion may get the lion hurt or killed.
Quote from: alfred russel on February 10, 2014, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
Timmay, I don't know how old and strong the giraffe was, but a healthy adult giraffe can hold its own against a lion. Putting a giraffe in a cage with a lion may get the lion hurt or killed.
:hmm:
If only the first sentence of the article said how old the giraffe was.
This is just a storm because Giraffes are cute. No one would have raised an eyebrow at a crocodile getting the same treatment.
Animals rights, #firstworldproblems
Quote from: Grey Fox on February 10, 2014, 02:54:27 PM
No one would have raised an eyebrow at a crocodile getting the same treatment.
I bet the lion would have, Captain Safari. :P
Dead meat is dead meat. Now if the crocodile was still alive, that'd get interesting...
Quote from: alfred russel on February 10, 2014, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
Timmay, I don't know how old and strong the giraffe was, but a healthy adult giraffe can hold its own against a lion. Putting a giraffe in a cage with a lion may get the lion hurt or killed.
Then it's genetically fit and should be allowed to live.
Giraffes don't always win.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phRwK0521y4
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 10, 2014, 02:59:24 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on February 10, 2014, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
Timmay, I don't know how old and strong the giraffe was, but a healthy adult giraffe can hold its own against a lion. Putting a giraffe in a cage with a lion may get the lion hurt or killed.
Then it's genetically fit and should be allowed to live.
Giraffes don't always win.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phRwK0521y4
It wasn't about whether it was "genetically fit" or not. It was a genetic dead end in a breeding program.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 10, 2014, 02:59:24 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on February 10, 2014, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 09, 2014, 08:05:13 PM
I'd be more comfortable with this if they just put the Giraffe in the Lion's den and let nature take its course.
Timmay, I don't know how old and strong the giraffe was, but a healthy adult giraffe can hold its own against a lion. Putting a giraffe in a cage with a lion may get the lion hurt or killed.
Then it's genetically fit and should be allowed to live.
Giraffes don't always win.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phRwK0521y4
I don't think you understand what they're trying to accomplish with these breeding programs.
I'm not really sure a giraffe vs. lion thunderdome is what a zoo should be....doing....
Quote from: Camerus on February 10, 2014, 05:06:33 AM
Quote from: Liep on February 10, 2014, 04:33:25 AM
I don't see how this became a story, it's not like giraffes are endangered or that this one was special in any way other that it was an inbreeding hazard.
It did make me wonder how giraffe meat taste though.
The weirdest thing that wasn't really explained in either piece was the presence of those little kids. What kind of parent would bring their small child to the zoo so as to watch a giraffe get butchered?
It was mainly students from Lars von Trier's School For Gifted Youngsters.
Garbon is unfortunately correct about the cow thing. It's an obligate carnivore. The only alternative is to slaughter the lion.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 03:53:43 PM
Garbon is unfortunately correct about the cow thing. It's an obligate carnivore. The only alternative is to slaughter the lion.
But I never mentioned a cow. :hmm:
Quote from: Grey Fox on February 10, 2014, 02:54:27 PM
This is just a storm because Giraffes are cute. No one would have raised an eyebrow at a crocodile getting the same treatment.
Animals rights, #firstworldproblems
Wrong. When I'm in charge, they're damn well going to be the Third World's problem. Especially if you consider B-52s a problem.
Quote from: garbon on February 10, 2014, 03:54:53 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 03:53:43 PM
Garbon is unfortunately correct about the cow thing. It's an obligate carnivore. The only alternative is to slaughter the lion.
But I never mentioned a cow. :hmm:
Wagnaard. My mistake.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 03:57:08 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on February 10, 2014, 02:54:27 PM
This is just a storm because Giraffes are cute. No one would have raised an eyebrow at a crocodile getting the same treatment.
Animals rights, #firstworldproblems
Wrong. When I'm in charge, they're damn well going to be the Third World's problem. Especially if you consider B-52s a problem.
By the time you're old enough to be in charge, the B-52 airframe will be long retired.
Besides, wouldn't carpet bombing the Third World pretty much destroy their wildlife? Not directly from the bombs themselves, but when the people flooded into the countryside to avoid the bombs?
We don't negotiate with hostage-takers.
And for better or worse they're going to stretch the B-52 fleet out till they fall apart.
Actually, on reflection, it would probably be cheaper to just buy the bonobos and chimpanzees and relocate them in one of the cleared districts of Florida.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 03:53:43 PM
It was mainly students from Lars von Trier's School For Gifted Youngsters.
I LOL'd. Right before I ejaculated blood.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 04:06:22 PM
And for better or worse they're going to stretch the B-52 fleet out till they fall apart.
Our grandchildren's grandchildren will be bombing foreigners with B-52's.
Quote from: MadBurgerMaker on February 10, 2014, 03:46:36 PM
I'm not really sure a giraffe vs. lion thunderdome is what a zoo should be....doing....
No, but I hear the Post Office is looking for new revenue streams.
Quote from: The Larch on February 10, 2014, 05:53:47 AMOn the other hand, I don't think that it would have been that difficult to find another zoo willing to take the animal, and their "nah, it was not worth it" answer seems insensitive on the zoo management's part and makes me guess that they didn't really make an effort on that front.
The Guardian said other zoos offered to take the giraffe. This caused a lot of outrage on the British part of the internet. A lot.
Quote from: The Larch on February 10, 2014, 05:53:47 AMOn the other hand, I don't think that it would have been that difficult to find another zoo willing to take the animal, and their "nah, it was not worth it" answer seems insensitive on the zoo management's part and makes me guess that they didn't really make an effort on that front.
I don't know what their funding is like, but if it's anything like zoos in the United States, they'll get an earful from the donors that keep it running.
Of course, it's a European zoo, so it's probably funded 100% by the state, the royal family and the blood of Jews.
My only experience with Euro zoos was this place:
http://www.apenheul.com/
Golden lion tamarins running around your shoulders was pretty cool. :cool:
QuoteMarius the giraffe: Copenhagen Zoo staff get death threats
(CNN) -- Staff at a Danish zoo where a healthy giraffe was put down have received death threats as debate rages online over the killing, which took place despite a petition signed by thousands of animal lovers.
Several staff members were targeted after the animal, named Marius, was shot Sunday, Copenhagen Zoo spokesman Tobias Stenbæk Bro told CNN on Monday. He added that Bengt Holst, director of research and conservation at Copenhagen Zoo "received threats via telephone and e-mails."
While some American zoo officials have said this is not standard practice for their facilities, the executive director of a European body governing 345 institutions has said that this can be chalked up to a misunderstanding about what is "normal in Danish culture" and that zoological experts could do a better job of communicating.
"People have perhaps lost sight of the bigger picture and perhaps we as zoos have not been good at explaining why on very few occasions we need to make decisions like this," said Lesley Dickie, executive director of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria.
The Copenhagen Zoo said it "euthanized" Marius to avoid inbreeding. A veterinarian shot Marius with a rifle as he leaned down to munch on rye bread, a favorite snack. After an autopsy the giraffe was dismembered in front of an audience that included children and fed to the zoo's lions, tigers and leopards.
"Our giraffes are part of an international breeding program, which has a purpose of ensuring a sound and healthy population of giraffes," Holst told CNN. "It can only be done by matching the genetic composition of the various animals with the available space. ... When giraffes breed as well as they do now, then you will inevitably run into so-called surplus problems now and then."
As for the public autopsy, Holst said Monday that the zoo staff saw it as a learning opportunity because zoos have an obligation "not to make nature into a Disney World," but rather show those interested in "the real thing."
He further pointed out that most of the children in attendance brought their parents to the autopsy, not vice versa.
"It's not by accident that people came by here," he said.
This may speak to the cultural gap Dickie referenced. At the Copenhagen Zoo, she said, all euthanized animals are autopsied, with some parts used for research and the rest of the animal fed to the zoo's carnivores.
"They strongly believe that the public should know how autopsies are done, what is the work of a vet in the zoo," she said.
Shame on whom?
That didn't dull the outrage sparked by the killing, as many people expressed their revulsion on the zoo's Facebook page.
"I find the killing of innocent baby giraffe Absolutely Barbaric. And to do it in front of children just desensitizes them to brutal killing of animals. SHAME ON YOU!" Hope Welch posted Monday.
However some users pointed out the hypocrisy of those who criticized the zoo without any understanding of the reasons behind the decision, or who ate meat without knowing its true origin. "The level of crass hypocrisy demonstrated by the vast majority of comments on this thread is absolutely repugnant. Shame on you, armchair warrior, shame on you," wrote Matthew Ogden.
More than 27,000 people had signed a "Save Marius" petition, appealing for a last-minute change of heart. "The zoo has raised him so it is their responsibility to find him a home," author Maria Evans wrote on the petition site.
When that petition failed, another petition popped up Monday, titled, "Fire Bengt Holst From the Copenhagen Zoo For Having Marius the Giraffe Killed." It had more than 16,000 signatures as of 3:30 p.m. ET.
Zookeeper and TV personality Jack Hanna, who is also director emeritus of the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium in Ohio, joined the chorus of outrage Monday, calling the Copenhagen Zoo's decision "the most abominable, insensitive, ridiculous thing I've ever heard of."
He also questioned why the Copenhagen Zoo would keep breeding animals for which they didn't have room. The Columbus Zoo would never put down an animal in this manner, Hanna said, and he wouldn't condone showing an animal consume another animal to children.
"I know it's natural in nature. I'm not an idiot," he said, "but I don't need to have some 2- and 3- and 6-year-olds -- they cannot understand at that age. You understand they don't understand nature. They haven't been to Africa, so that's what we do at the zoos. We try to educate people at zoos on what happens in the wild."
Which is exactly what Holst argues the Copenhagen Zoo was doing. As for exploring other purportedly more humane options, such as lethal injection or sterilization, Holst said that an injection would have contaminated about 200 kilograms of perfectly good meat, which was out of the question. He added, "if we just sterilize him, he will take up space for more genetically valuable giraffes."
Options deemed not viable
Several zoos volunteered to take Marius. The UK's Yorkshire Wildlife Park, which said it has the capacity for an extra male, was among several places that offered to take him.
Copenhagen Zoo said in a Q&A about the decision on its website, "it is not possible to transfer the giraffe to another zoo as it will cause inbreeding."
The EAZA's Dickie said some institutions were ruled out because they did not meet her organization's strict protocols, and the Copenhagen Zoo wouldn't send Marius to an institution with "lesser standards of welfare."
She further said that while EAZA members are "saddened by the death of any animal in our care," the EAZA supports the Copenhagen Zoo's decision and reiterated the zoo's claim that "transfer within our network does not represent a solution to the unsuitability of the individual animal for breeding."
In the EAZA's history, which dates to the early 1800s, its member zoos have put down only five giraffes, Dickie said.
Numerous American zoos did not immediately respond to requests for interviews. The Association of Zoos and Aquariums declined a request, issuing a short statement from executive director Kris Vehrs stating that EAZA's "programs and procedures vary from those of the AZA."
"Through the AZA Species Survival Plan program, these methods include science-based breeding recommendations and cooperating to plan for adequate space," Vehrs said in the statement.
The Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle, Washington, also declined an interview but said its birth plans were managed by the AZA Species Survival Plan.
"With each new animal birth, Woodland Park Zoo establishes a breeding and relocation plan that ensures a healthy and genetically sound future for the individual and species," the statement said.
To claims that the Copenhagen Zoo acted irresponsibly by allowing Marius to be born if it had no room to house him, Dickie said the giraffe was born more than two years ago, and it's difficult to predict "genetic kinship" and a zoo's available space that far out.
As for preventing the giraffes from breeding, that would violate the EAZA's standard of "providing a behavioral repertoire as natural as possible" for animals in captivity, she said.
"Conservation is not always simple. It's not always clean," she said. "I'm afraid that when we have limited space in zoos -- and it's limited because of problems in the wild, of course, and more and more animals need our help -- then we sometimes have to make these really tough decisions."
People have too much time on their hands. Also, it is reprehensible to let children see animals eat another animal? :huh:
QuoteThe Copenhagen Zoo said it "euthanized" Marius to avoid inbreeding.
Here's a novel idea: don't let him fuck. What, giraffes can't be neutered or something? Goddamn.
QuoteA veterinarian shot Marius with a rifle as he leaned down to munch on rye bread, a favorite snack.
That's some punk ass gangsta shit right there.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:53:01 PM
QuoteThe Copenhagen Zoo said it "euthanized" Marius to avoid inbreeding.
Here's a novel idea: don't let him fuck. What, giraffes can't be neutered or something? Goddamn.
Novel idea, Tim's blurb of an article had the zoo speaking about that.
Quote from: garbon on February 10, 2014, 08:55:47 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:53:01 PM
QuoteThe Copenhagen Zoo said it "euthanized" Marius to avoid inbreeding.
Here's a novel idea: don't let him fuck. What, giraffes can't be neutered or something? Goddamn.
Novel idea, Tim's blurb of an article had the zoo speaking about that.
That could impact my righteous indignation. Not having it. Not in this thread, Florence.
People read Tim's threads? Shocking.
Write me a story about it.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 10, 2014, 08:59:57 PM
People read Tim's threads? Shocking.
There were like 10 sentences in the article. Not hard, mate.
I refuse to read his shit on humanitarian grounds.
:secret:
Tim doesn't write any articles.
That said, as I said from the start, it was Slate. -_-
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:51:15 PM
Zookeeper and TV personality Jack Hanna, who is also director emeritus of the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium in Ohio, joined the chorus of outrage Monday, calling the Copenhagen Zoo's decision "the most abominable, insensitive, ridiculous thing I've ever heard of."
I had to google this guy, and he looks exactly like I imagined. :lol:
Quote from: garbon on February 10, 2014, 09:05:23 PM
:secret:
Tim doesn't write any articles.
That said, as I said from the start, it was Slate. -_-
You know what I mean. :shakes fist:
Quote from: Liep on February 10, 2014, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:51:15 PM
Zookeeper and TV personality Jack Hanna, who is also director emeritus of the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium in Ohio, joined the chorus of outrage Monday, calling the Copenhagen Zoo's decision "the most abominable, insensitive, ridiculous thing I've ever heard of."
I had to google this guy, and he looks exactly like I imagined. :lol:
And he's looked like that since at least the mid-90s. :(
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 10, 2014, 09:08:47 PM
Quote from: garbon on February 10, 2014, 09:05:23 PM
:secret:
Tim doesn't write any articles.
That said, as I said from the start, it was Slate. -_-
You know what I mean. :shakes fist:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3-ec.buzzfed.com%2Fstatic%2Fenhanced%2Fwebdr02%2F2013%2F9%2F17%2F16%2Fanigif_enhanced-buzz-14637-1379451547-13.gif&hash=d6e22ad3422a1040856ee3fdb73ff19cc8431618)
Quote from: Liep on February 10, 2014, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:51:15 PM
Zookeeper and TV personality Jack Hanna, who is also director emeritus of the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium in Ohio, joined the chorus of outrage Monday, calling the Copenhagen Zoo's decision "the most abominable, insensitive, ridiculous thing I've ever heard of."
I had to google this guy, and he looks exactly like I imagined. :lol:
Yeah, he's been a regular on David Letterman for Christ knows how long.
Plus he brought animals to the graduation ceremony at Ohio State. Totally awesome.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 10, 2014, 08:34:46 PM
Quote from: The Larch on February 10, 2014, 05:53:47 AMOn the other hand, I don't think that it would have been that difficult to find another zoo willing to take the animal, and their "nah, it was not worth it" answer seems insensitive on the zoo management's part and makes me guess that they didn't really make an effort on that front.
The Guardian said other zoos offered to take the giraffe. This caused a lot of outrage on the British part of the internet. A lot.
Britons have a well-earned reputation about being stupi when it comes to animals.
iirc, this is where american zoos differ from european. american zoos neuter the animals they don't want to breed, while euro zoos allow the animals to raise offspring to prevent behavioral issues.. then destroy the offspring
that's what this refers to
QuoteNumerous American zoos did not immediately respond to requests for interviews. The Association of Zoos and Aquariums declined a request, issuing a short statement from executive director Kris Vehrs stating that EAZA's "programs and procedures vary from those of the AZA."
if one is able to stomach the destruction of animals, the euro way better, imo
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 04:07:23 PM
Actually, on reflection, it would probably be cheaper to just buy the bonobos and chimpanzees and relocate them in one of the cleared districts of Florida.
Without regard for the local ecosystem?
Typical. I knew your love for animals was weak and without deep thought.
Quote from: Neil on February 10, 2014, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 04:07:23 PM
Actually, on reflection, it would probably be cheaper to just buy the bonobos and chimpanzees and relocate them in one of the cleared districts of Florida.
Without regard for the local ecosystem?
Typical. I knew your love for animals was weak and without deep thought.
He's a capitalist at heart; it's all about the Bottom Line.
I was chopped up and fed to a lion once. Twice actually. I found the experience entirely disagreeable, but in hindsight it was probably for the best.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 10, 2014, 11:49:50 PM
I was chopped up and fed to a lion once.
You're awfully prolific for such a victim.
Quote from: fhdz on February 10, 2014, 11:50:59 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 10, 2014, 11:49:50 PM
I was chopped up and fed to a lion once.
You're awfully prolific for such a victim.
I have degrees in victimology and victimonomy with minors in gender studies and applied string theory respectively.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 10, 2014, 11:54:34 PM
Quote from: fhdz on February 10, 2014, 11:50:59 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 10, 2014, 11:49:50 PM
I was chopped up and fed to a lion once.
You're awfully prolific for such a victim.
I have degrees in victimology and victimonomy with minors in gender studies and applied string theory respectively.
Given your typical posting history, I believe you.
I can also make a hat out of a newspaper.
Quote from: dps on February 10, 2014, 05:04:15 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 04:06:22 PM
And for better or worse they're going to stretch the B-52 fleet out till they fall apart.
Our grandchildren's grandchildren will be bombing foreigners with B-52's.
I suddenly feel a great continuity between past and the future, and with the Earth itself. :weep:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:53:01 PM
QuoteThe Copenhagen Zoo said it "euthanized" Marius to avoid inbreeding.
Here's a novel idea: don't let him fuck. What, giraffes can't be neutered or something? Goddamn.
Quoteif we just sterilize him, he will take up space for more genetically valuable giraffes
A noble sentiment, no?
Quote from: Neil on February 10, 2014, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 04:07:23 PM
Actually, on reflection, it would probably be cheaper to just buy the bonobos and chimpanzees and relocate them in one of the cleared districts of Florida.
Without regard for the local ecosystem?
Typical. I knew your love for animals was weak and without deep thought.
1)The impact would be almost invisible. Pan occupies no special place in the ecological framework; for one thing, there are only about 250,000 of them. It's like arguing the city of Dresden had an important role to play in the ecology of Germany.
2)The members of Pan, as basically sapient animals, are more valuable than any animals or plants who depend upon their existence for sustenance (of which I believe there are none).
Oh and Ide, victimology is a humanity but victimonomy is a STEM. I do remember fondly days of rigorously victimizing people in the lab.
Quote from: Tonitrus on February 10, 2014, 08:47:27 PM
My only experience with Euro zoos was this place:
http://www.apenheul.com/
Golden lion tamarins running around your shoulders was pretty cool. :cool:
Yes, that's a fun place. The monkeys aren't allowed to interact with visitors anymore though.
Too bad, it was hilarious to see them steal anything they could get their hands on: phones, glasses, wigs... :lol:
Somehow I still managed to get bitten by one of them last time I was there.
I've been to Hagenbeck in Hamburg, which pioneered cageless enclosures and Schönbrunn which has turned from one of the worst zoos to one of the best in Europe.
And I've been to an Aquarium in Wilmington, NC.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 10, 2014, 08:34:46 PM
The Guardian said other zoos offered to take the giraffe. This caused a lot of outrage on the British part of the internet. A lot.
First of all, it's the Guardian.
Second, the Danish zoo didn't own the animal, and so couldn't send it to any zoo that wanted it. The only zoos that were also part of the group that owned the animals already had giraffes that were from this bloodline.
Third, the Brits are always willing to get more wound up by the death of an animal even more than they do over the death of a person. That's just the way the Brits are about animals.
These sacrifices are actually far more common than people might think. This one only had the added publicity of the children witnessing it and the resulting outrage. DNA diversity is a big deal in modern zoos - they see themselves more as a repository of animal DNA than a weekend entertainment for families.
It may look cold from the outside, but we're talking a scenario with limited space and resources for a lot of animals, so an animal with over-represented DNA is taking the place of another one that might be more useful for the long-term survival of the entire species. And it's not like that lion wouldn't have been fed some cow otherwise.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 11, 2014, 01:20:48 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 10, 2014, 08:53:01 PM
QuoteThe Copenhagen Zoo said it "euthanized" Marius to avoid inbreeding.
Here's a novel idea: don't let him fuck. What, giraffes can't be neutered or something? Goddamn.
Quoteif we just sterilize him, he will take up space for more genetically valuable giraffes
A noble sentiment, no?
Apparently they don't sterilize animals there because of the behavioural issues.
And yes, these are animals. Their worth is determined by their value to people.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 11, 2014, 01:26:04 AM
Quote from: Neil on February 10, 2014, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 10, 2014, 04:07:23 PM
Actually, on reflection, it would probably be cheaper to just buy the bonobos and chimpanzees and relocate them in one of the cleared districts of Florida.
Without regard for the local ecosystem?
Typical. I knew your love for animals was weak and without deep thought.
1)The impact would be almost invisible. Pan occupies no special place in the ecological framework; for one thing, there are only about 250,000 of them. It's like arguing the city of Dresden had an important role to play in the ecology of Germany.
2)The members of Pan, as basically sapient animals, are more valuable than any animals or plants who depend upon their existence for sustenance (of which I believe there are none).
I'm talking about the ecology of Florida.
Besides, they're not sapient enough.
The alligators will enjoy their company, I'm sure.
Quote from: Neil on February 11, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Apparently they don't sterilize animals there because of the behavioural issues.
And yes, these are animals. Their worth is determined by their value to people.
:yes:
Surplus males are expendable, if he had been a she, the giraffe would still be a valuable addition to the population. As it is, his genes are well represented in that regard.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2014, 12:01:17 AM
I can also make a hat out of a newspaper.
Can you make a broach? Can you make a pterodactyl?
http://www.der-postillon.com/2014/02/herzlos-bauer-will-muhende-kurzhals.html
"Heartless - German farmer wants to kill mooing, short-necked giraffe and feed it to humans!"
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-A1t7h7E2Q_I%2FUvo9CcXMfSI%2FAAAAAAAAYWc%2FTtVaQqVzp6o%2Fs600%2FGiraffe.jpg&hash=09ba09c3b8e489f31e05b919fa2c6279a2fe8dee)
:lol:
As a hunter I'm not prone to really accept the concept of "rights" for animals in the first place and am as anti-PETA as it gets, I just assumed this was a common/accepted practice and the reality of managing a herd (or whatever you call it) of giraffes. I will admit to being wholly unwilling to explore the issue independently, but my stance changed a bit as I read a few articles here where American zookeepers said that not only is the practice not practiced by any American zoo, that to their knowledge it's never been practiced by European zoos they have associations with, and went on to say they believe this is the first instance they've heard of where a healthy male giraffe was euthanized for a reason like this in any Western zoo. That makes it sound more likely that the Copenhagen Zoo is not in fact acting in accordance with norms of modern zoos. Which doesn't affect or concern me, but if I was say, Danish or something I might wonder why our zoo isn't operating like a normal zoo which (again, just based on my morning reading) typically has an obligation to rehome unwanted animals unless there is a compelling reason not to do so.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on February 11, 2014, 09:49:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 11, 2014, 12:01:17 AM
I can also make a hat out of a newspaper.
Can you make a broach? Can you make a pterodactyl?
To be honest, the I'm using a fairly loose definition of "hat" as it is.
The Copenhagen Zoo has done this before (they cull 25 animals a year, according to a non-scholarly About.com article http://endangeredspecies.about.com/od/endangeredspeciesconflicts/a/Euthanasia-In-Zoos.htm (http://endangeredspecies.about.com/od/endangeredspeciesconflicts/a/Euthanasia-In-Zoos.htm)
Veteran zookeeper Peter Dickenson wrote an article about this four years ago: http://zoonewsdigest.blogspot.com/2010/11/good-zoo-and-euthanasia.html (http://zoonewsdigest.blogspot.com/2010/11/good-zoo-and-euthanasia.html)
Time magazine talks about how common this is, as well: http://world.time.com/2014/02/10/marius-the-giraffe-not-the-only-animal-zoos-have-culled/ (http://world.time.com/2014/02/10/marius-the-giraffe-not-the-only-animal-zoos-have-culled/). the article refers to several examples of zoos all over Europe culling healthy animals.
I suppose that it is possible that Otto's un-named "experts" simply are unaware of what is actually happening in zoos, but I suspect that he is either not looking at real experts, or not understanding what he is reading. the Copenhagen Zoo's ethics board looked at this decision and approved it; they would seem to be far more expert than some random internet dudes.
Now, one can argue the ethics of allowing this giraffe to even be born, knowing that it would be surplus and have to be euthanized. There are arguments for and against. But there isn't any evidence that the Copenhagen Zoo did anything that was contrary to normal zoo practices, other than, perhaps, act in a more open manner than zoos usually do in cases like this.
The hook is baited.
Quote from: celedhring on February 11, 2014, 07:59:41 AM
they see themselves more as a repository of animal DNA than a weekend entertainment for families.
Me too!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENnNNVOEDZ4
Zoo director of science being interviewed by Channel 4
Quote from: The Brain on February 11, 2014, 04:47:27 PM
Quote from: celedhring on February 11, 2014, 07:59:41 AM
they see themselves more as a repository of animal DNA than a weekend entertainment for families.
Me too!
:lol:
Quote from: grumbler on February 11, 2014, 04:43:24 PM
The Copenhagen Zoo has done this before (they cull 25 animals a year, according to a non-scholarly About.com article http://endangeredspecies.about.com/od/endangeredspeciesconflicts/a/Euthanasia-In-Zoos.htm (http://endangeredspecies.about.com/od/endangeredspeciesconflicts/a/Euthanasia-In-Zoos.htm)
Veteran zookeeper Peter Dickenson wrote an article about this four years ago: http://zoonewsdigest.blogspot.com/2010/11/good-zoo-and-euthanasia.html (http://zoonewsdigest.blogspot.com/2010/11/good-zoo-and-euthanasia.html)
Time magazine talks about how common this is, as well: http://world.time.com/2014/02/10/marius-the-giraffe-not-the-only-animal-zoos-have-culled/ (http://world.time.com/2014/02/10/marius-the-giraffe-not-the-only-animal-zoos-have-culled/). the article refers to several examples of zoos all over Europe culling healthy animals.
I suppose that it is possible that Otto's un-named "experts" simply are unaware of what is actually happening in zoos, but I suspect that he is either not looking at real experts, or not understanding what he is reading. the Copenhagen Zoo's ethics board looked at this decision and approved it; they would seem to be far more expert than some random internet dudes.
Now, one can argue the ethics of allowing this giraffe to even be born, knowing that it would be surplus and have to be euthanized. There are arguments for and against. But there isn't any evidence that the Copenhagen Zoo did anything that was contrary to normal zoo practices, other than, perhaps, act in a more open manner than zoos usually do in cases like this.
Loser, I hope you had fun looking up that garbage you just cited. At your age I'd think you'd want to be making productive use of your time being quite the limited commodity and all, I won't click on any links posted by a troll who has to change his depends every morning but I can be 100% sure none of them refute what I said.
The appears to be a statement the zoo released before the killing, explaining their decision to euthanize the giraffe.
http://zoo.dk/BesogZoo/Nyhedsarkiv/2014/Februar/Why%20Copenhagen%20Zoo%20euthanized%20a%20giraffe.aspx
The fish see the hook and leaves in disgust. The Grumbler will now declare victory over the fish reasoning he has defended the bait on his hook with naught but his fearsome presence.
So, did grumbler run over otto's cat or something?
Quote from: HVC on February 11, 2014, 09:04:40 PM
So, did grumbler run over otto's cat or something?
Drivers of grumbler's age are a menace. Well, grumbler is, not sure if there are any others still around. :hmm:
Quote from: HVC on February 11, 2014, 09:04:40 PM
So, did grumbler run over otto's cat or something?
Not yet, but give him time.
Quote from: Jacob on February 12, 2014, 12:19:08 AM
Quote from: HVC on February 11, 2014, 09:04:40 PM
So, did grumbler run over otto's cat or something?
Not yet, but give him time.
There's nothing that grumbler wouldn't do to try and win one of his arguments but I think that might be going too far, even for him.
Quote from: sbr on February 11, 2014, 07:52:48 PM
The appears to be a statement the zoo released before the killing, explaining their decision to euthanize the giraffe.
http://zoo.dk/BesogZoo/Nyhedsarkiv/2014/Februar/Why%20Copenhagen%20Zoo%20euthanized%20a%20giraffe.aspx
As a point of reference, I don't believe anyone has said zoos never cull animals. (A crazed, very stupid person posted some articles earlier showing that zoos cull animals, I'm assuming that individual thought he was refuting something that had been stated here when of course, that's not the case.) What the head of the American Zookeepers Association has said, and Jack Hannah has said, is they've never heard of a giraffe being euthanized that was a healthy specimen, solely for genetic reasons. Especially because the entirety of the American zoo keeping association and apparently most of the international organization believe you first have a responsibility to try and re-home animals in that scenario. If you can't re-home, but you have the resources to care for the animal, some form of neutering would be preferred over euthanasia. Culling is only really acceptable when you don't have the resources to handle the animal
and after doing some due diligence you can find no other place to home the animal. That's a realistic enough scenario and happens all the time, but the reason zoological professionals in the United States appear up in arms is because accredited zoos had offered to home the animal and the Copenhagen Zoo declined to let it go there. Even the Copenhagen Zoo's statement offers no reason as to why they would turn that down, but only explains why they wouldn't sell the zoo to a private buyer or give the animal to some random organization. There's nothing in the breeding program that would have precluded giving the giraffe to another accredited zoo willing to keep the animal.
The larger the animal the less likely it would be to just randomly get culled FWIW, a healthy male giraffe actually has a good bit of value to many accredited zoos which leads me to think the guy running the Copenhagen Zoo had some sort of weird agenda in place here. Normal zookeepers cull animals when necessary as that's reality, when there is no need to do so and they do it anyway is probably why it's gotten attention. If it was a requirement of the breeding program that the giraffes be euthanized and never given to any other group, then you'd have seen lots of culled giraffes--but giraffe culling isn't common to the point some professionals in the industry have said this is the first time they've really heard of a healthy young male being euthanized in a scenario such as this.
Quote from: Neil on February 12, 2014, 12:34:57 AMThere's nothing that grumbler wouldn't do to try and win one of his arguments but I think that might be going too far, even for him.
Grumbler doesn't have arguments, as a senile pedophile he just has sexually frustrated temper tantrums.
So, the Americans feel one way. Has the European equivalent to the AZA commented?
Quote from: Neil on February 12, 2014, 12:48:42 AM
So, the Americans feel one way. Has the European equivalent to the AZA commented?
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/10/opinion/giraffe-cull-argument-for/
QuoteEditor's note: Lesley Dickie is Executive Director of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely his.
(CNN)
The European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA) takes very seriously its duty of protecting endangered and vulnerable species from extinction.
Our European Endangered Species Programmes (EEP) have been established to ensure a viable future for endangered animals -- including giraffes -- despite the destruction of their habitats and rampant poaching of wild animals.
More than 700 giraffes are kept within our institutions to the highest possible standards of welfare and care by zoos such as Copenhagen, and EAZA monitors breeding closely to ensure that the species has the genetic diversity it needs to have the best possible chance of survival in the long term.
While we understand that some members of the public are upset by the euthanization of the giraffe at Copenhagen zoo, the protection of the species as a whole must be our priority.
Our resources are regrettably finite, and as a result, the EEP must prioritize animals which can contribute to the overall genetic health of the captive population.
This means that in rare cases (five in the case of giraffes in EAZA zoos since records began in 1828), animals must be removed from the population by management euthanasia.
Compare this to the 60 billion+ healthy, young animals killed each year worldwide for human consumption. In-breeding is a serious problem that can lead to genes being passed on that increase the population's susceptibility to disease and other chronic conditions which threaten the future of the species in our care.
As for alternative solutions, we cannot in good conscience recommend the transfer of animals under our protection to zoos which are not our members and therefore not subject to our strict standards of animal husbandry and welfare; transfer within our network does not represent a solution to the unsuitability of the individual animal for breeding. Contraception is difficult and in its infancy for female giraffes, and can be irreversible.
Castration of a male animal can have also undesirable side-effects, and a place that could otherwise be reserved for an animal that can contribute to its species' future is lost.
Release into the wild of this single individual would almost certainly result in early death for the animal, after a long and stressful journey of thousands of kilometers -- reintroduction is an intensive and complicated matter and we would not countenance this unless recommended to by the IUCN, the paramount global body for nature conservation.
All of these alternatives were explored, and none were found to be viable; in addition, EAZA's position is supported by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
EAZA members do not euthanize animals lightly, and we are saddened by the death of any animal in our care.
Nonetheless, we strongly support Copenhagen Zoo, which has an exemplary record of animal welfare, education, research and conservation, and which took great pains to be transparent about the situation -- 7,000 visitors came to Copenhagen Zoo on Sunday, while 15 protesters stood outside.
The Copenhagen public spoke with their tickets to the zoo and left knowing far more about the real threats to conservation of giraffes in the wild.
Quote from: Octavian on February 12, 2014, 02:30:54 AM
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/10/opinion/giraffe-cull-argument-for/
QuoteEditor's note: Lesley Dickie is Executive Director of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely his.
(snip)
Who to believe: Otto or a zoo expert? :hmm:
I think it is clear why Otto never proves links to what he claims are the opinions of experts, and instead just gives us his own interpretations of what they are saying; the experts are against him.
And, Otto, if you are reading this, please include another lame ad hom in your response. Those add so much to your credibility!
If I was interested in having a debate about this issue I might care that I've not posted links. But since I made it clear I wasn't from the very beginning I don't see why you think you can goad me into citing stuff. I've mentioned who I was repeating, I just haven't bothered to provide links. What exactly is the downside for me here? You think less of me, Languish thinks less of me? Please. This isn't a forum for serious discussions and you're the last person I'd engage in serious discourse with based on years of you basically being the biggest troll here in how you conduct yourself.
Note Octavian that the EAZA article hasn't explicitly said that what Copenhagen did was good or bad, just that they support the zoo. They're being diplomatic, especially since we know the zoo in London which is a member of the same organization offered to house the giraffe and pay for its transport which removes basically 100% of any problems there might have been with a transfer. The issue of castration is also pretty clear cut, mammals have been castrated for pretty much as long as humans have kept them in various states of captivity or domestication, while it has some negative side effects the idea that it's some risky thing that is worse than euthanasia is pretty unsupported.
I've never said culling isn't appropriate, just that typically in America it's only done when there aren't other options (which does happen frequently), what has many professionals apparently in both the U.S. and U.K. at least confused is why the Copenhagen Zoo chose to euthanize when it did actually have genuine other options. Which leads me to believe the guy running the giraffe operation in Copenhagen has some strange agenda he wanted to push.
Reading a multiple paragraph post by Otto? :hmm:
Nah.
At least one of the parks in England that offered to take the giraffe already houses his older brother. The genetic line was already too represented in all parks that are part of the breeding program.
Quote from: sbr on February 12, 2014, 12:07:38 PM
At least one of the parks in England that offered to take the giraffe already houses his older brother. The genetic line was already too represented in all parks that are part of the breeding program.
That doesn't fit Otto's bizarre "strange agenda" narrative, so stand by for the ad homs. :P
Quote from: garbon on February 12, 2014, 09:56:56 AM
Reading a multiple paragraph post by Otto? :hmm:
Nah.
What's a paragraph?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 11, 2014, 09:07:22 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 11, 2014, 09:04:40 PM
So, did grumbler run over otto's cat or something?
Drivers of grumbler's age are a menace. Well, grumbler is, not sure if there are any others still around. :hmm:
I bet grumbler can drive an automobile better than you can drive a chariot.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on February 12, 2014, 02:33:42 PM
Quote from: garbon on February 12, 2014, 09:56:56 AM
Reading a multiple paragraph post by Otto? :hmm:
Nah.
What's a paragraph?
It's what happens you throw a statistician out of an airplane.
I laughed.
Quote
Second giraffe named Marius at risk of being put down in Denmark
Jyllands Park zoo says it may kill male giraffe to make way for female, days after death at Copenhagen zoo sparked outcry
Lars Eriksen in Copenhagen
theguardian.com, Wednesday 12 February 2014 12.30 EST
If you are a giraffe and your name is Marius, now might be a good time to leave Denmark.
Days after the euthanasia of a healthy young giraffe at Copenhagen zoo sparked controversy around the world, a second Danish zoo has announced that it is considering a similar fate for another giraffe – also named Marius.
Jyllands Park zoo, in western Denmark, currently has two male giraffes, but has been approved to participate in the European breeding programme. If zookeepers manage to acquire a female giraffe, seven-year-old Marius will have to make way.
Like his namesake in Copenhagen, the giraffe is considered unsuitable for breeding, and the zoo said there was a high risk that Marius would have to be put down as it would be difficult to find him a new home.
Janni Løjtved Poulsen, zookeeper at Jyllands Park, said it was not clear when the park would acquire a female giraffe and that the decision on Marius's future would be taken by the breeding programme co-ordinator.
"If we are told we have to euthanise [Marius] we would of course do that," said Poulsen.
She said the park managers would not to be influenced by the wave of protests that followed the killing of 18-month-old Marius at Copenhagen zoo.
More than 27,000 people around the world signed a petition to save the Copenhagen giraffe, and zoo officials said they had received death threats after the animal was put down, dissected in front of a large crowd and fed to lions.
"It doesn't affect us in any way. We are completely behind Copenhagen and would have done the same," said Poulsen.
Jyllands Park zoo has not decided whether they would also carry out a public dissection.
Poulsen said she had been surprised to discover there was a second giraffe named Marius in Denmark. The Jyllands Park giraffe had been named after a former vet at the zoo, she said. "We thought it was amusing that there was another Marius among the giraffes when there aren't that many giraffes in Denmark overall."
Copenhagen zoo's scientific director, Bengt Holst, said their animals were not given names in order to avoid any personification.
"The zoo keepers sometimes call the animals names, and then our guests have heard the name Marius, and that has then become the individual Marius," Holst told Denmark's Radio. "But in no way is it an official name it has been given."
Does Sulla run Denmark's zoos? :mellow:
Sulla is rampaging through Denmark. Death to the Marians.
DAMMIT TOO SLOW
I feel bad for taking a legitimate Sulla joke from you :(
It's alright. :)
p.s. Marius and Cinna stink.
I'm surprised it took so long for a Sulla reference.
I've not been firing on all cylinders lately.
Politicians here are fearing a "second Muhammad-crisis" referring to the cartoon predicament we found ourselves in years ago. :lol:
The Chechen president wants to adopt the 2nd Marius. It's been officially named "Giraf-gate". :bleeding:
Quote from: Liep on February 13, 2014, 04:54:28 PM
The Chechen president wants to adopt the 2nd Marius. It's been officially named "Giraf-gate". :bleeding:
Did someone tell him that it's not a miniature giraffe?
Quote from: Tonitrus on February 13, 2014, 04:58:43 PM
Quote from: Liep on February 13, 2014, 04:54:28 PM
The Chechen president wants to adopt the 2nd Marius. It's been officially named "Giraf-gate". :bleeding:
Did someone tell him that it's not a miniature giraffe?
From his Instagram profile.
QuoteДорогие друзья! Я с тревогой воспринял информацию о том, что в Дании намерены лишить жизни еще одного жирафа. Несколько дней назад в датском зоопарке Юлландс по надуманным мотивам пристрелили молодого жирафа Мариуса. Это произошло на глазах у детей. Затем устроили кровавое шоу, расчленив и скормив жирафа хищным зверям. Теперь это может повториться и с другим молодым жирафом также по имени Мариус. Исходя из соображений гуманности я готов принять Мариуса. Мы можем гарантировать ему хорошие условия содержания и заботу о его здоровье. Надеемся, что это предложение найдет положительный отклик у руководства зоопарка Юлландс! #Кадыров #Россия #Чечня #Дания #Жираф #Мариус
Because he's known for his humanitarianism.
QuoteDenmark: Second zoo may euthanize a giraffe named Marius
By Laura Smith-Spark and Zahra Ullah, CNN
(CNN) -- Could another zoo in Denmark kill a giraffe named Marius?
To some animal lovers, it sounds too terrible to be true, but zoo leaders say it's anything but a tall tale.
Just days after the Copenhagen Zoo killed a male giraffe named Marius to avoid inbreeding, another zoo said it might follow suit.
Jyllands Park Zoo said Thursday it may also have to "euthanize" one of its male giraffes -- coincidentally, also named Marius -- if a female is brought in to breed.
Zoologist Jesper Mohring-Jensen told CNN that Jyllands Park Zoo joined the same breeding program as the Copenhagen Zoo last year, which means it can't have too many giraffes with the same genetic makeup.
The zoo currently has two male giraffes, he said.
One, Marius, is not deemed useful to the program but is a useful companion to the genetically valuable second giraffe, which is in fact an older brother of the Marius killed in Copenhagen.
The zoo wants the second giraffe to mate, so it must bring in a female giraffe.
"At the moment, they are doing very well and are keeping each other company, but if there are some genetically more valuable giraffes in the program that need the space, we have to decide what to do with him," said Mohring-Jensen.
"We will of course try to place him in a suitable zoo, but if that is not possible, we might have to euthanize him. The program will give us notice well in advance, so I think we will have a good chance of placing him."
It's thought that no decision is imminent, "so the problem is not acute," he said.
Death threats
The killing of the Copenhagen Zoo's Marius opened wide divisions between animal lovers and zoo officials concerned about maintaining the genetic diversity of giraffes in the program.
Staff at the zoo received death threats as debate raged online over the killing, which took place despite a petition signed by thousands of animal lovers.
But Lesley Dickie, executive director of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria, a European body governing 345 institutions, said those protesting were missing the point.
"I'm afraid that when we have limited space in zoos -- and it's limited because of problems in the wild, of course, and more and more animals need our help -- then we sometimes have to make these really tough decisions," he said.
'Surplus problems'
Bengt Holst, scientific director at the Copenhagen Zoo, told CNN the decision was made for the greater good of the giraffe population.
"Our giraffes are part of an international breeding program, which has a purpose of ensuring a sound and healthy population of giraffes," he said.
"It can only be done by matching the genetic composition of the various animals with the available space. ... When giraffes breed as well as they do now, then you will inevitably run into so-called surplus problems now and then."
The Copenhagen Zoo's Marius was shot by a veterinarian with a rifle as he leaned down to munch on rye bread, a favorite snack.
After a necropsy, the giraffe was dismembered in front of an audience that included children and fed to the zoo's lions, tigers and leopards.
Quote from: Tonitrus on February 13, 2014, 04:58:43 PM
Quote from: Liep on February 13, 2014, 04:54:28 PM
The Chechen president wants to adopt the 2nd Marius. It's been officially named "Giraf-gate". :bleeding:
Did someone tell him that it's not a miniature giraffe?
:lol:
Animal rights activists are scum.
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=5762790
QuoteFive indicted for mink farm attacks
Published: tisdag 21 januari kl 17:06 , Radio Sweden
Five young men and women were indicted by a district court on Tuesday for numerous attacks on mink farms and their owners in different parts of the country, TT reports.
The five are accused of serious threats, arson, criminal damage and trespassing.
Three of them, a two men and one woman, are currently in custody. According to the prosecutor, the three - a 32-year-old man from Gothenburgh, 24-year old man from Örebro and a 22-year-old woman from Kumla - are behind the most serious parts of the crimes.
Among others, they tried to force a man in Hjo to abandon his plans to become a mink farmer, by sending a letter threatening the man and his family, and by visiting his house at night, attacking it with axes and crushing a window.
Another ax and a bomb that did not explode were placed in the mailbox of the man's sister. They have also visited the family tomb at a graveyard in Södertälje, digging up the grave stone and replacing it by a stone with the inscription "XX never became a mink farmer".
They also visited the man's potential business partners and threw a firebomb which did not detonate against the house of his accountant.
The prosecutor tells TT there is reason to believe she will demand several years in prison for the three most active in the case.
All five deny the charges, except for the 22-year-old woman, who admits to arson against a garage belonging to another man wanting to start a mink farm in Lidköping.
They should have skinned the Giraffe and auctioned the coat off.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 13, 2014, 08:36:02 PM
They should have skinned the Giraffe and auctioned the coat off.
They're not allowed to traffic in commercial animal parts.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 13, 2014, 08:36:02 PM
They should have skinned the Giraffe and auctioned the coat off.
:hmm: I don't think that would've saved him.
Quote from: DGuller on February 13, 2014, 09:11:40 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 13, 2014, 08:36:02 PM
They should have skinned the Giraffe and auctioned the coat off.
:hmm: I don't think that would've saved him.
Would've saved the skin, though.
I wouldn't mind having a genuine giraffe-skin coat :)
QuoteJack Hanna raises cash to save 2nd giraffe
By Kathy Lynn Gray The Columbus Dispatch • Friday February 14, 2014 6:31 AM
As worldwide outrage continues over the killing of a healthy giraffe in Denmark on Sunday, Jack Hanna has raised more than $100,000 to bring a second Danish giraffe threatened with slaughter to Ohio.
Hanna, emeritus director of the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, said yesterday that it took him just three phone calls to raise the money after he heard on Wednesday that the Jyllands Park zoo in Denmark might kill a healthy giraffe in its care.
He said the Wilds animal preserve in Muskingum County, which the Columbus Zoo oversees, has 9,000 acres and plenty of room to house more than the six giraffes it has now.
“No matter what kind of living creatures you have in a zoo, there’s a responsibility for zookeepers to take care of them throughout their lifetime,” Hanna said. “If we don’t do that, we shouldn’t have zoos.”
On Sunday, the Copenhagen Zoo killed a 2-year-old giraffe that had been born there. Veterinarians shot the giraffe in the head with a bolt pistol — the type used in slaughterhouses — then cut it up in front of visitors and fed parts of it to lions.
Zoo officials said the giraffe’s genes were not needed; they turned down opportunities to move the giraffe elsewhere and said allowing visitors to watch it being cut up was educational.
Hanna’s passionate speeches and interviews about the giraffe’s death apparently convinced the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, a worldwide organization with more than 6,000 members, to rethink a bland statement it released on Monday that neither condemned nor supported the Copenhagen Zoo’s actions.
In a statement yesterday, the association said its accredited zoos exchange animals and manage breeding so animals are not born that can’t be cared for throughout their lifetimes. Unneeded animals are not killed, the statement said.
The Jyllands Park zoo said on its Facebook page yesterday that it might have to euthanize one of its two male giraffes if it obtains a “genetically more valuable” animal and can’t find a new home for the unneeded giraffe.
The European Association of Zoos and Aquaria, which supported the Copenhagen Zoo’s actions, said it would not support killing one of the Jyllands Park giraffes.
Columbus Zoo director Tom Stalf said yesterday that what happened in Copenhagen should never happen again.
“There are so many other options,” he said.
The Columbus Zoo, for example, has 11 giraffes: eight castrated males, one male for breeding and two females. Plans already are in place to house any offspring produced by breeding.
“When you plan, you can ensure that you’re giving the animals in your care great care and long lives,” Stalf said.
“I’m encouraging the zoos in Denmark to manage their population and know where the offspring is going to go before putting a male and a female together.”
In the meantime, Hanna said, plans for a Siberian tiger from the Copenhagen Zoo to come to the Columbus Zoo for breeding have been put on hold.
“I want no involvement with anyone (from that zoo) if this kind of killing is practiced,” he said.
He said he has not yet talked to Jyllands Park officials about how much it might cost to buy the giraffe, but he plans to set up a fund to save any giraffes threatened with slaughter at zoos.
“I’m going to put in a nice amount to start the whole thing,” he said.
For now, he said, people can donate to the Columbus Zoo and indicate what their donations are for.
“We have a responsibility to these animals to breed them and watch their gene pool, but we don’t have the right to shoot the animal and say that’s educational,” he said.
“It’s a sad thing to think that human beings betrayed that beautiful giraffe. As long as I’m alive, I’ll do everything I can to stop it.”
[email protected]
@reporterkathy
And that's all I've been saying, aside from people that work at the Copenhagen Zoo I've not really heard any zoo professionals saying this complies with normal practice. Culling is a necessary thing that is based on having too many animals and nowhere to home them, which was explicitly not the situation in Copenhagen. An organization with 6,000 zoos as members worldwide is now against the practice and even the European Association has said they wouldn't support the Jylland Zoo doing this, when it's just talking about doing the exact same thing as what the Copenhagen Zoo did. It all makes it obvious to me that indeed the Copenhagen Zoo wasn't acting within norms.
Or that they have taken a PR hit.
At this point anything anyone says is driven almost completely by the need to not get beaten up by a largely irrational public. You won't get anything honest out of a zoo while the public is foaming at the mouth like this.
Quote from: Berkut on February 14, 2014, 10:51:14 AM
At this point anything anyone says is driven almost completely by the need to not get beaten up by a largely irrational public. You won't get anything honest out of a zoo while the public is foaming at the mouth like this.
I dunno, I think the fact that pretty well known/respected American zookeepers were offering to pay to transport the giraffe out of Copenhagen, not to mention similar efforts in the UK, is more telling. Most zoos run on a mixture of public funds, donations, and admission fees and usually don't just offer to waste limited resources for no reason. The fact that other professionals in the same field were willing to put their money where their mouths were prior to them putting the animal down and before it had made such a news impact tells me a good bit in and of itself.
My understanding has always been the larger animals are fairly limited resources in zoos and thus valuable on various fronts (both in terms of money as well as prestige in having the animals, increased interest from the public in having the animals etc), so I really don't see much evidence or really any evidence that the culling of large mammals for solely genetic reasons, when the animals could have been easily rehomed, is a common practice among zoos. That's quite different from culling less valuable animals that other zoos have no real interest in, or culling animals that are "problem" animals in terms of behavior or something and can't be housed with others of their species.
Yet oddly EAZA said that they do it for biodiversity and spacing reasons...
http://world.time.com/2014/02/10/marius-the-giraffe-not-the-only-animal-zoos-have-culled/
QuoteAlthough considered a last resort ("we don't do it even once a year," says von Houwald of her zoo), euthanasia is a regular tool for biodiversity and population management in many European zoos. In the past few years, river hog piglets, pygmy hippos, tigers, antelopes, bison, and zebra have all been put down in European zoos for biodiversity reasons. Although EAZA has figures from recent years, it does not release them because of their sensitivity. "We're not ashamed of euthanizing animals," says Williams-Mitchell. "But we don't want to publicize it either. "
Anyway, I'm a hunter and meat eater, I have no problem with animals being put down by captive bolt devices and my understanding is that's the standard practice for cattle and swine slaughter across the world. But a for-profit company that buys animals for slaughter for meat production is acting in the expected way, society accepts it and pays them for it as they are producing a product we want. A zoo is held to a different standard because they are almost always quasi-public institutions, even where they are privately ran if you hold yourself out as a zoo you're saying you're an entity that is trying to educate the public about wildlife and are engaged in wildlife conservation. So when a zoo behaves completely opposite of that it's worthy of scorn even if you have no problem with slaughterhouses.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on February 14, 2014, 10:59:32 AM
So when a zoo behaves completely opposite of that it's worthy of scorn even if you have no problem with slaughterhouses.
I don't know. I think this incident underscores some bizarre attitudes regarding nature and what we think is appropriate for children to see. So many of the outraged voices have complained about how the zoo had the temerity to let children see a dissection and see one wild animal eat another wild animal.
Quote from: garbon on February 14, 2014, 10:58:09 AM
Yet oddly EAZA said that they do it for biodiversity and spacing reasons...
http://world.time.com/2014/02/10/marius-the-giraffe-not-the-only-animal-zoos-have-culled/
QuoteAlthough considered a last resort ("we don't do it even once a year," says von Houwald of her zoo), euthanasia is a regular tool for biodiversity and population management in many European zoos. In the past few years, river hog piglets, pygmy hippos, tigers, antelopes, bison, and zebra have all been put down in European zoos for biodiversity reasons. Although EAZA has figures from recent years, it does not release them because of their sensitivity. "We're not ashamed of euthanizing animals," says Williams-Mitchell. "But we don't want to publicize it either. "
I'm pretty sure that's an article that's already been posted in this thread. The guy you're quoting is just saying they euthanize animals for genetic reasons as a last resort, the only real difference between EAZA and the rest of the world is the rest of the world is willing to castrate unwanted animals while EAZA takes the (frankly stupid) position that castration / sterilization is worse than euthanasia [mammals have been routinely sterilized for thousands of years by humans.] He goes on to drone about how they can't just turn it over to some random person, but several major, internationally respected zoos offered to take Marius. The idea that an EAZA zoo could only release an animal to another EAZA is asinine, and is undermined by the fact that EAZA zoos trade animals with American zoos and other zoos around the world all the time. I would not in fact be surprised to learn that EAZA zoos regularly agree to let other zoos take unwanted animals when those zoos compensate them for their costs. I'm assuming this case is quite different because it was so publicized, I doubt many or even any other zoos were offering to take things like hog piglets etc. As for tigers, from what the article says German zoo workers were actually ruled guilty of criminal conduct when they euthanized tiger cubs so probably not a great reference point.
You said before you weren't reading articles. ;)
Quote from: garbon on February 14, 2014, 11:02:20 AMI don't know. I think this incident underscores some bizarre attitudes regarding nature and what we think is appropriate for children to see. So many of the outraged voices have complained about how the zoo had the temerity to let children see a dissection and see one wild animal eat another wild animal.
It wasn't a necropsy, was just a butchering for meat production purposes. I'd say it was of limited value educationally, I wouldn't have a problem with a kid seeing that but I'd probably say they'd learn a lot more seeing a chicken or pig butchered because that actually relates to food the kid eats. Butchering a giraffe doesn't really give any serious academic knowledge to anyone, it's not like a High School dissection where you have to pin/identify different organs or etc.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on February 14, 2014, 11:10:49 AM
Quote from: garbon on February 14, 2014, 11:02:20 AMI don't know. I think this incident underscores some bizarre attitudes regarding nature and what we think is appropriate for children to see. So many of the outraged voices have complained about how the zoo had the temerity to let children see a dissection and see one wild animal eat another wild animal.
It wasn't a necropsy, was just a butchering for meat production purposes. I'd say it was of limited value educationally, I wouldn't have a problem with a kid seeing that but I'd probably say they'd learn a lot more seeing a chicken or pig butchered because that actually relates to food the kid eats. Butchering a giraffe doesn't really give any serious academic knowledge to anyone, it's not like a High School dissection where you have to pin/identify different organs or etc.
So no knowledge for the sake of knowledge in your world? :(
Also, what about my second contention?
If only people were this upset about all the species going extinct in the wild as they are about this one giraffe.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on February 14, 2014, 11:10:49 AM
Quote from: garbon on February 14, 2014, 11:02:20 AMI don't know. I think this incident underscores some bizarre attitudes regarding nature and what we think is appropriate for children to see. So many of the outraged voices have complained about how the zoo had the temerity to let children see a dissection and see one wild animal eat another wild animal.
It wasn't a necropsy, was just a butchering for meat production purposes. I'd say it was of limited value educationally, I wouldn't have a problem with a kid seeing that but I'd probably say they'd learn a lot more seeing a chicken or pig butchered because that actually relates to food the kid eats. Butchering a giraffe doesn't really give any serious academic knowledge to anyone, it's not like a High School dissection where you have to pin/identify different organs or etc.
I don't know what the difference is between a necropsy and an autopsy, but an autopsy was done before the butchering and it was done in public.
Did they discover the cause of death?
Quote from: sbr on February 14, 2014, 12:15:21 PM
I don't know what the difference is between a necropsy and an autopsy, but an autopsy was done before the butchering and it was done in public.
Indeed. Those of us who actually read up on this know that the Copenhagen Zoo always autopsies animals that die in its care. Not to determine cause of seath, but to advance their knowledge of how these animals develop in captivity.
A necropsy is an autopsy. The word is generally used in place of the common autopsy by drama queens.
I think the only other difference language-wise is that sometimes people will use necropsy when referring to an autopsy on animals.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 14, 2014, 12:18:54 PM
Did they discover the cause of death?
^_^
Foul play has been ruled out.
Quote from: garbon on February 14, 2014, 01:58:52 PM
I think the only other difference language-wise is that sometimes people will use necropsy when referring to an autopsy on animals.
An autopsy is generally considered a post-mortem primarily to determine cause of death; a necropsy is generally a post-morten for research purposes. As you note, necropsies are mostly done on animals, where there isn't a legal need to determine cause of death.
Autopsy is the common term for both post-mortem types, though.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on February 14, 2014, 02:21:42 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 14, 2014, 12:18:54 PM
Did they discover the cause of death?
^_^
Foul play has been ruled out confirmed.
He was shot in the back of the head!
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 14, 2014, 03:13:13 PM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on February 14, 2014, 02:21:42 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 14, 2014, 12:18:54 PM
Did they discover the cause of death?
^_^
Foul play has been ruled out confirmed.
He was shot in the back of the head!
:o
My 2014 movie pitch:
Double Indemnity remake, only this time set in Copenhagen instead of L.A. and giraffes instead of people and a rifle instead of a train and genetic diversity instead of lust/greed.
Will Barbara Stanwyck's ankles still have a prominent role?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 14, 2014, 03:13:13 PM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on February 14, 2014, 02:21:42 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 14, 2014, 12:18:54 PM
Did they discover the cause of death?
^_^
Foul play has been ruled out confirmed.
He was shot in the back of the head!
But in a manner that was both lawful and consistent with the zoo's practices. Thus, not foul play.
"Zoos" rhymes with "Jews", you know. I'mma jus' sayin'.
QuoteThousands of zoo animals killed in Europe yearly
STOCKHOLM (AP) - People around the world were stunned when Copenhagen Zoo killed a healthy 2-year-old giraffe named Marius, butchered its carcass in front of a crowd that included children and then fed it to lions.
But Marius' fate isn't unique - thousands of animals are euthanized in European zoos each year for a variety of reasons by zoo managers who say their job is to preserve species, not individual animals. In the U.S., zoos try to avoid killing animals by using contraceptives to make sure they don't have more offspring than they can house, but that method has also been criticized for disrupting animals' natural behavior.
___
HOW OFTEN ARE LARGE MAMMALS KILLED IN ZOOS?
U.S. and European zoological groups refuse to release figures for the total number of animals killed. But David Williams Mitchell, spokesman of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria, or EAZA, estimates an average zoo in its 347-member organization annually kills about five large mammals, which adds up to 1,735. The number doesn't include zoos and animal parks that don't belong to the association.
Animal rights groups suggest numbers are much higher. The Associated Press contacted 10 zoos in Europe - two refused to comment, four said they never kill any animals unless severely ill and four said they kill between one and 30 animals every year. Two zoos in the U.S. said they only ever kill animals for "quality of life reasons."
___
WHY ARE ANIMALS KILLED?
Zoos euthanize animals because of poor health, old age, lack of space or conservation management reasons. EAZA policy for zoos in Europe suggests euthanasia may be used as a last resort to achieve a balanced population within breeding programs - Marius was killed to prevent inbreeding. But Williams Mitchell insists only "a fraction of 1 percent" of the killings are for such reasons.
The idea is to maintain a group of genetically healthy animals in zoos that can be used to reintroduce the species into the wild.
There's a philosophical divide between U.S. and European zoos over best practices. The U.S. Association of Zoos and Aquariums said incidents such as the giraffe killing "do not happen at AZA-accredited zoos."
Mike McClure, general curator at the Maryland Zoo in Baltimore, says his zoo's policies theoretically allow for killing animals for breeding purposes or lack of housing but it's not something his zoo has done. Generally, he says, animals are only killed due to old age or ill health.
In Asia, the parent company for the Singapore Zoo said in a statement that "euthanasia of animals is necessary to maintain the health and welfare of the herd, as overcrowding could lead to injuries, stress and disease outbreak. "
"All animals in zoos die at some point and maybe zoos forgot to tell people," said Jens Sigsgaard, director at the Aalborg Zoo in Denmark, which, like the Copenhagen Zoo, performs open dissections of animals for educational purposes.
___
WHAT KINDS OF ANIMALS ARE KILLED?
Both endangered species and other animals are killed at zoos.
EAZA says five giraffes have been killed in European zoos since 2005. In addition to Marius, Copenhagen Zoo says it kills 20-30 antelopes, llamas, goats and other animals yearly.
The Jyllands Park Zoo in Denmark said it may have to kill another giraffe soon for similar reasons as in Marius' case. But a spokesman for Jack Hanna, emeritus director of the Columbus Zoo, said Friday that Hanna has raised more than $100,000 in pledges to save that giraffe.
Aalborg Zoo in Denmark kills up to 15 animals a year, including red river hogs, antelopes and capybaras, while Skansen Zoo in Stockholm says it euthanized one bear and one Eurasian lynx last year and Helsinki Zoo killed one Alpine ibex.
Some zoos also raise pigs, goats and cattle to feed their carnivores.
___
WHAT DO ZOOS DO TO AVOID KILLING ANIMALS?
When animals reproduce, most zoos first try to find another one in their network they can send the offspring to. A German zoo this week said it would send a monkey to the Czech Republic because he's produced so many offspring that he would soon start having children with his own relatives.
Zoos generally avoid selling the animals on the open market, fearing they will end up in poor conditions. Some European zoos and most zoos in the U.S. choose to use contraceptives or sterilization or separate males and females to avoid breeding more animals than they can house.
Sharon Dewar, spokeswoman for the U.S. animal Population Management Center, says animals are recommended to "breed only when sustainable housing for any offspring can be assured."
That approach is dismissed as "totally wrong" by Bengt Holst at the Copenhagen Zoo, who says breeding is important for an animal's well-being.
EAZA's Williams Mitchell says there is an ongoing discussion and expects Marius' case to intensify the debate.
Cheryl Asa, director of the AZA Wildlife Contraception Center, says just because contraceptives are used it doesn't mean an animal will never breed. She also says "most of us are very happy to have our pet dogs and cats spayed and neutered."
___
WHAT DO CRITICS SAY?
Animal rights groups say Marius' case highlights what they believe is the overall problem with zoos. The Captive Animals' Protection Society says its studies show at least 7,500 animals and perhaps many times more are considered "surplus" at European zoos at any one time. Its director Liz Tyson says the only solution to the problem is not to visit zoos.
Will Travers, president of the Born Free Foundation, questioned whether the zoos' breeding programs contribute that much to conservation. He says research by his foundation has shown the majority of species kept in zoos aren't threatened with extinction in the wild and called for an immediate review of EAZA's euthanasia policies.
___
Associated Press reporters Brett Zongker in Washington, David Rising in Berlin, Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow, Matti Huuhtanen in Helsinki, Elaine Ganley in Paris, Satish Cheney in Singapore, Jorge Sainz in Madrid and Barry Hatton in Lisbon contributed to this report.
© 2014 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
QuoteAnimal rights groups say Marius' case highlights what they believe is the overall problem with zoos. The Captive Animals' Protection Society says its studies show at least 7,500 animals and perhaps many times more are considered "surplus" at European zoos at any one time. Its director Liz Tyson says the only solution to the problem is not to visit zoos.
That is the only solution? There is no other possible way to manage this? Are Zoos politically independent in Europe or something?
Indeed. The best possible solution is for all the animals to be used for traditional Chinese medicine.
Eh, animal rights wacko are short sighted and generally stupid.
In the mid '90 moonlighted at Northwest trek here in Washington. The park had an explosion of white tail/black tail cross breed. State wouldnt let the park turn the animals loose, like what the wackos wanted. It would upset the ecosystem or some shit. Nor would the state pay to euthanize them or have federal animal damage control come in. So the park was left in a catch 22. That's where I came in. Myself and the park curator went around after the park closed and thinned the herd so to speak for several months. The State or the Feds didnt have a problem with it, but the wackos went ape shit. Hence I was bestow with a most endearing nickname, "Wildlife Assassin". Any deer that was killed was bagged and fed to the wolves and later the grizzlies. No, I did not take any venison home. It was against the contract.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930205&slug=1683894
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19930201&id=zUJWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=juoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=3913,81726
http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/1993/feb/15/letter-blood-on-its-hands/?print=1
The next year I was slated to pack into the Olympics for three one week culls to deal with a major goat problem. Didnt make that, too bad, Army got in the way. :P
IIRC the finnaly tally was around 57.
Quote from: garbon on February 14, 2014, 11:08:20 AM
You said before you weren't reading articles. ;)
I have no problem reading articles you post, only an objection to a certain individual that I haven't taken seriously in years and whose existence I find to be objectionable due to massively unpleasant personality and extremely boring style of discussion.
Quote from: sbr on February 14, 2014, 12:15:21 PMI don't know what the difference is between a necropsy and an autopsy, but an autopsy was done before the butchering and it was done in public.
It's an English term of art nit pick, an M.E. or similar performs autopsies on humans and would exclusively refer to their work product as an autopsy. A necropsy is the equivalent procedure when done on a non-human animal and all veterinarians I've known use the term necropsy and never the term autopsy. [Vets do this not for the legal purposes that human physicians do, but because some animal owners are interested for various reasons in trying to ascertain cause of death of their animal.] The words are basically synonyms but I've never heard an M.D. refer to the procedure on a human cadaver as a necropsy and I've never heard a vet refer to the procedure on a non-human animal as an autopsy.
We're at it again, killing lions and what not.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CRphcAyWIAAP1q4.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlnyXiM9AVU
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/denmark/11934130/Danish-zoo-dissects-lion-in-front-of-children.html