Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: How should we use animals?

Voters
52. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1.1 Eating meat is OK

    45 86.54%
  • 1.2 Eating meat is wrong

    7 13.46%
  • 2.1 Using products from live animals (e.g. dairy) is OK

    42 80.77%
  • 2.2 Using products from live animals (e.g. dairy) is wrong

    6 11.54%
  • 3.1 Testing on animals for medical purposes is OK

    35 67.31%
  • 3.2 Testing on animals for medical purposes is wrong

    11 21.15%
  • 4.1 Testing on animals for cosmetic purposes is OK

    9 17.31%
  • 4.2 Testing on animals for cosmetic purposes is wrong

    38 73.08%
  • 5.1 Using animals in circuses is OK

    21 40.38%
  • 5.2 Using animals in circuses is wrong

    24 46.15%
  • 6.1 Keeping animals in zoos is OK

    36 69.23%
  • 6.2 Keeping animals in zoos is wrong

    13 25.00%
  • 7.1 Hitting pets is OK

    13 25.00%
  • 7.2 Hitting pets is wrong

    29 55.77%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 139

Thread: Animal Rights

  1. #101
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Reiku's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-08-04
    Location
    Pismo Beach, CA
    Posts
    138


    Country: United_States





    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    Mycernius, I tolerate Christians coming up to me. In fact, when I see a group of them circling about outside a Starbacks, I often place myself in their path so that they talk to me about their superstition. You should see it, after a few minutes they raise eyebrows to others that have not decended upon me yet and soon they are all in a frenzy around me. It is quite fun to see them in that state.
    Hah, I guess we have something in common after all--I've been doing the same thing with the animal rights people on this forum, haven't I?
    Baka ningen.

  2. #102
    Banned Achievements:
    Recommendation Second Class1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-04-04
    Posts
    1,720


    Country: United States



    Just thought I would throw in another shameless plug for my brother's great novel: Atomik Aztex by Sesshu Foster. If you believe in animal rights you need to rush out and but the novel right away. (Check out the blog at: http://www.citylights.com/blog/) The protagonist in "his" reality is a high aztec priest who has nightmares of an alternate reality where he a slave who slaughters pigs for a living at the Farmer John Vernon plant. As such it can be viewed as an oblique criticism of the industrialized meat processing industry- which is graphically described in the "nightmares" Zenzotli has.

    Questions from the blog site:
    there's a bumpersticker that says, "meat is murder". do you feel that the industrial process of food is well-hidden from you? does food and your place in the industrial food process matter?

    and
    a reviewer for the san antonio mercury wrote: "The result is a clever psychodrama of false consciousness and misidentification, brought into stark relief by the visions that torment our Aztek protagonist: He dreams that he is a "slave" in a meat-packing plant in Southern California." what role does "false consciousness and misidentification" play in the novel? what role does "false consciousness and misidentification" play in life?

  3. #103
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    I posted the following earlier and wondered if anyone could address the bolded -- if they have information showing success:

    >I am wondering if a zoo has ever been successful at saving an animal from extinction and then reintroducing it and that the recovery of that species was catagorically due to the zoo`s intervention and that agreed to by the majority of zoologists and biologists. I don`t think that has ever happened. I could be wrong. If that has happened many times then I think that zoos have demonstrated their worth as a kind of "ark" for animals. But, if that has not happened, I think they are using that as an excuse to justify their continued existance in the face of declining visitors and more harsh criticism of them in recent years.<


    "Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet."
    --Albert Einstein

  4. #104
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tokis-Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-09-05
    Location
    England, Somerset
    Age
    34
    Posts
    290


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    I posted the following earlier and wondered if anyone could address the bolded -- if they have information showing success:
    >I am wondering if a zoo has ever been successful at saving an animal from extinction and then reintroducing it and that the recovery of that species was catagorically due to the zoo`s intervention and that agreed to by the majority of zoologists and biologists. I don`t think that has ever happened. I could be wrong. If that has happened many times then I think that zoos have demonstrated their worth as a kind of "ark" for animals. But, if that has not happened, I think they are using that as an excuse to justify their continued existance in the face of declining visitors and more harsh criticism of them in recent years.<
    Can you give any examples when an endangered animal at a zoo has a suitable habitat to go back to? Its well known that zoo's have helped save many animals from the brink of extinction, but it is pointless returning them back to the wild if their natural habitats cannot support them properly, which is why most endangered animals on breeding programs end up in zoo's being there in the first place. You seem to want to get rid of all zoo's, which is just ridiculous right now looking from many of the animals point of view in how they fair.

  5. #105
    The Hairy Wookie Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Mycernius's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-02-05
    Location
    Hometown of George Eliot
    Age
    49
    Posts
    916
    Points
    21,649
    Level
    44
    Points: 21,649, Level: 44
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 1
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    English
    Country: UK - England



    Quote Originally Posted by Tokis-Phoenix
    Can you give any examples when an endangered animal at a zoo has a suitable habitat to go back to? Its well known that zoo's have helped save many animals from the brink of extinction, but it is pointless returning them back to the wild if their natural habitats cannot support them properly, which is why most endangered animals on breeding programs end up in zoo's being there in the first place. You seem to want to get rid of all zoo's, which is just ridiculous right now looking from many of the animals point of view in how they fair.
    The Mexican Grey wolf. They used ones in captivity to breed from and released them into the wild in areas where they were wiped out.
    Here is a link:
    http://www.fws.gov/ifw2es/mexicanwolf/
    I saw a programme on the TV about it. I have just had to find it, as I couldn't quite remember the extact species

  6. #106
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Silverbackman's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-03-05
    Posts
    102


    Country: United_States



    Eating meat is most definitely okay. We are omnivores by definition and meat played a big role in the development of our species's brain. I think it is okay to eat most species except humans and other great apes (only in rare circumstances when they are dead and you are starving, is it okay to consume humans and great apes).

    Dairy products from non-human animals are perfectly fine, don't see anything wrong with that.

    Zoos and circuses are okay as long as the animals are kept in a healthy clean environment.

    It depends on the animal when it comes to animal tests. Using great apes maybe unethical, I haven't decided on that. However using rats IMO are okay.

    If by cosmetic you mean furs and skins, I am partially against it. Well, if you use the furs of mass-bred farm animals like sheep then it is okay I guess. Using wild animals for some of these is a definite no no . Poaching is immoral and cruel and is a major reason why many animals are becoming endangered.

    I don't suggest people hitting their pets unless it is a last resort and the pet is being really bad. I doubt it will do much though. When doing it though people must do it in a non-abusive way.

  7. #107
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered
    SortOf's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-02-06
    Location
    `do K
    Age
    32
    Posts
    24


    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: United States



    I think its ok to eat animals, as long as there not human like such as apes and monkeys. Cows, pigs, chickens, turkey, rabbits and things of that nature are all ok. I however don't think something like a dog, or cat should be eaten because it possesses a certain level of intelligence.

    Its ok for animals to have rights, to an extent, as long as they don't impose on the rights of humans or cause inconvenience for them. But nothing is going to stop me from picking up a hamburger, eating bacon and eggs for breakfast, or having a steak on a night out.

  8. #108
    Banned Achievements:
    Recommendation Second Class1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-04-04
    Posts
    1,720


    Country: United States



    In California: Big Horn Sheep, California Condor, Pronghorn, Musk Elk, Golden Trout...

  9. #109
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by Mycernius
    The Mexican Grey wolf. They used ones in captivity to breed from and released them into the wild in areas where they were wiped out.
    Here is a link:
    http://www.fws.gov/ifw2es/mexicanwolf/
    I saw a programme on the TV about it. I have just had to find it, as I couldn't quite remember the extact species
    Looked at the page. Didn`t see anywhere in there that a zoo was mentioned as being responsible for the program or for saving the Mexican Grey Wolf from extinction. Perhaps my eyes are bad and I missed it. If so, please point it out to me.

  10. #110
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    I still haven`t seen any animals, let alone many, that have been saved from the brink of extinction and reintroduced successfully and recovered because of zoos.

    In most cases, as far as North American endangered animals are concerned, the US Fish and Wildlife Services is the leading org spearheading the efforts. Zoos seem to be tagging along here and there but that in no way allows them to claim responsibility.

    Again, are there many animals that have been saved from extinction by zoos, successfully reintroduced and recovered because of their leading efforts? I still haven`t seen that in one case, let alone many. Can someone show me a case study where a zoo has lead the way at saving a species, reintroducing it, and then it being successfully recovered?

  11. #111
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    bossel's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-09-03
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    790


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    I still haven`t seen any animals, let alone many, that have been saved from the brink of extinction and reintroduced successfully and recovered because of zoos.
    Really nice how you try to define the conditions in a way that they can't be met.

    Of course I don't agree with your conditions. I just want to give some examples of animals which were successfully re-introduced:

    Lammergeier in the Alps
    European Lynx in Switzerland & in the Harz, Germany
    Wisent in Eastern Europe
    European Beaver in Bavaria

    There are numerous other re-introduction projects ongoing.

  12. #112
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Really nice how you try to define the conditions in a way that they can't be met.
    Wrong.

    They can be met. They are not defying any laws of physics.

    They are not met because zoos do not take a leading role in saving animlas from extinction for recovery and reintroduction. If they have, have they ever been successful to where the animal has recovered?

    Do you have any examples that show a zoo has been responsible in many cases of saving an animal from the brink of extinction, then reintroducing it and it has recovered?

  13. #113
    The Hairy Wookie Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Mycernius's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-02-05
    Location
    Hometown of George Eliot
    Age
    49
    Posts
    916
    Points
    21,649
    Level
    44
    Points: 21,649, Level: 44
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 1
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    English
    Country: UK - England



    Normally when something says breeding from captive animals, it usually infers a zoo or animal sanctuary. Not unless people are breeding them from animals that are kept away from the public eye. If you want to see the word zoo, click on captive management in the link I provided. This is part of the text:
    Quote Originally Posted by captive management
    Mexican wolves are routinely transferred among the zoos and other SSP holding facilities in order to facilitate genetic exchange, thus maintaining the health and genetic diversity of the captive population. The SSP maintains the goal of housing a minimum of 240 wolves in captivity at all times to ensure the security of the species in captivity, while still being able to produce surplus animals for reintroduction.

  14. #114
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Is there a specific statement lauding zoos or any zoo in particular for being responsible for saving an endangered animal from extinction, reintroducing a species and then that species recovering -- and that statement recognized largely by by peers, conservationists, media, etc...? I am not talking about sanctuaries or official conservation orgs. I am asking about zoos and their leadership in this area. What species have zoos unequivicably been responsible for saving, reintroducing and causing them to recover?

    I have yet to see a case study presented stating specifically that zoo so and so successfully saved species X from extinction, reintroduced that species, and that species recovered. If zoos are going to wrap themselves in this cloak of saving endangered species, then they should be honest that they serve merely as an ark, and as of yet, their ark has been on a one way trip where their animals will not be, or never will be allowed to disembark.

    When zoos have been cited in case studies, for the most part they are relegated to support status and their mission in the recovery plan is not anything that could not be performed by sanctuaries or other non-zoo orgs.

    In effect, zoos as they are now, are not essential for animal recovery. Sanctuaries without the spectacle of a festival/carnival like atmosphere of entertainment and cotton candy could perform the duties of protecting and mating animals for reintroducing.

  15. #115
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tokis-Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-09-05
    Location
    England, Somerset
    Age
    34
    Posts
    290


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by SortOf
    I think its ok to eat animals, as long as there not human like such as apes and monkeys. Cows, pigs, chickens, turkey, rabbits and things of that nature are all ok. I however don't think something like a dog, or cat should be eaten because it possesses a certain level of intelligence.
    Its ok for animals to have rights, to an extent, as long as they don't impose on the rights of humans or cause inconvenience for them. But nothing is going to stop me from picking up a hamburger, eating bacon and eggs for breakfast, or having a steak on a night out.
    Actually pigs are more intelligent than both cats and dogs on average, with cats being pretty much at the botton of the IQ table with the animals you listed. To simply not eat certain animals due to their intelligence, well then, that would open up alot of animals for eating while stop other commonly consumed animals for eating.
    I think part of it boils down to culture in your country(as all countrys will have certain animals that are more acceptable to eat than others, for example is quite acceptable to eat dogs in china, whale in japan, and horses in germany, but these sorts of animals are not really acceptable in places like england etc), and what animals are commonly kept as pets, as i do believe that when people keep a particular type of animal as a pet they appreiciate it alot more for it is and refrain from eating its species/type.
    I think its fine to eat any animal though as long as it has been specifically raised for human consumption in a humane and morally correct enviroment/conditions and also killed in a humane mannor, and its species is not rare or endangered or anything- even better if its species itself was specifically bred for human consumption like the modern cow or sheep. Then you can apply intelligence if you want, although alot of farm animals are a heck of a lot more intelligent than people give them credit for like pigs, which is why i stopped eating pig as i just didn't like the thought of eating one of the most intelligent animals in the world that is so close to us in so many ways- but thats another story.

    Animal rights is important, to say though animal rights is only worth upholding when it doesn't create inconvenience for people is such a vague thing to say it could be used to justify all mannor of bad things for example chickens should be battery farmed because it creates cheap chicken meat, and if it was stopped chicken meat prices would go through the roof and be inconvinient for people, which would be just wrong- theres nothing good about a battery chickens life whatsoever, and they have no basic needs attended to them for like enough space to turn around and take more than one step in front of them.

    So no, i dont think that animal rights should just be applied when it is convinient enough for people. I think it just be applied logically with an awareness of morality involved. For example, unlike strongvoicesforward here, i do think people should have the right to farm animals for human consumption, but on the other hand i think if they are to be farmed for human consumption they should be done so in a humane and morally correct mannor with the animals in question basic need properly attended too(i.e. enough space, good diet, social requirements met, keep in good health etc).
    True, we evolved to eat meat along with our veg, and to raise a human child on a diet of veg and meat plus associated foods once weaned off the breast is still by far the best way to raise a healthy child, but we should still do so in a morally correct and humane mannor as far as the animals are concerned because we are human beings and we know the we have the ability of such awareness over such things and thus i think we should use it, not just applied to when it is convinient for us, but when the animal chosen for consumption has its best interests at heart too for the length of its life too :) .

  16. #116
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tokis-Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-09-05
    Location
    England, Somerset
    Age
    34
    Posts
    290


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    Is there a specific statement lauding zoos or any zoo in particular for being responsible for saving an endangered animal from extinction, reintroducing a species and then that species recovering -- and that statement recognized largely by by peers, conservationists, media, etc...? I am not talking about sanctuaries or official conservation orgs. I am asking about zoos and their leadership in this area. What species have zoos unequivicably been responsible for saving, reintroducing and causing them to recover?
    I have yet to see a case study presented stating specifically that zoo so and so successfully saved species X from extinction, reintroduced that species, and that species recovered. If zoos are going to wrap themselves in this cloak of saving endangered species, then they should be honest that they serve merely as an ark, and as of yet, their ark has been on a one way trip where their animals will not be, or never will be allowed to disembark.
    When zoos have been cited in case studies, for the most part they are relegated to support status and their mission in the recovery plan is not anything that could not be performed by sanctuaries or other non-zoo orgs.
    In effect, zoos as they are now, are not essential for animal recovery. Sanctuaries without the spectacle of a festival/carnival like atmosphere of entertainment and cotton candy could perform the duties of protecting and mating animals for reintroducing.
    Actually your initial question was more like this;
    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    Rika- shinya, could you tell me which animal species have been saved by zoos so that they did not die out? After they were saved, which 'saved species' has ever been reintroduced successfully after all wild populations of them had no longer existed?
    Which is kinda different from question you just asked.
    But anyways..
    People here have given you plenty of examples of saving animals from extinction by zoo's, if the particular zoo's hadn't of existed many of those animals would or will have died out. And thats a fact.
    To say or imply that zoo's have no place in wildlife conservation is very ignorant because they have shown plenty of examples of where they do have an important place in wildlife consservation. Or are you only interested when the species in question that has been saved once again thrives in its natural habitat?
    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    When zoos have been cited in case studies, for the most part they are relegated to support status and their mission in the recovery plan is not anything that could not be performed by sanctuaries or other non-zoo orgs.
    In effect, zoos as they are now, are not essential for animal recovery.
    Plus, in my original post to the question you posed to rika, i gave you plenty of cases where zoo's can perform acts of wildlife conservation that the wildlife researves in question cannot- you should take this into note.

  17. #117
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    A lot has been said, but a case study, let alone many, has still not been put forth that says a zoo saved an animal from extinction, reintroduced it, and then it has recovered.

    The point is, zoos are not mainly about ecology, conservation, or even education. They are primarily entities centered on entertainment. Can anyone show me what percentage of a zoo`s profits are plowed into land purchases for maintaining environments for endangered species? Have zoos been investing heavily in this or just lightly, when looking at their total profits? What percentage is being allocated for species reintroduction?

    Again, as for mating animals so that they don`t die out, sanctuaries nestled in large natural settings or other places without the festival like atmosphere can perform those duties without having to have animals on display for finger pointing, laughing kids and their high percentage of obese American parents drinking a beer, or lapping ice cream in a cone.

  18. #118
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    bossel's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-09-03
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    790


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by strongvoicesforward
    Have zoos been investing heavily in this or just lightly, when looking at their total profits?
    Er..., which profits?
    Well, I don't know about US zoos, but in Germany they rely heavily on grants & subsidies.

  19. #119
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Er..., which profits?
    lol. Yes, good point. A lot of zoos are struggling. I guess I mean their bottom line. At the end of the year when they tally everything up, are they ahead, behind, breaking even? If ahead, how much and what percent of that is put into saving species from extinction and reintroducing them?

    Well, I don't know about US zoos, but in Germany they rely heavily on grants & subsidies.
    Good point. The populace these days just do not feel like voting for keeping zoos around with their money through attendance.

    Struggle struggle zoos,
    Your education and conservation we know are a ruse.
    It`s a prison in fact,
    With flowery words that you try to wrap.
    Last edited by strongvoicesforward; 28-02-06 at 08:09.

  20. #120
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered
    SortOf's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-02-06
    Location
    `do K
    Age
    32
    Posts
    24


    Ethnic group
    German
    Country: United States



    I liked sea world, you got to see alot of things most zoos dont have.

  21. #121
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by SortOf
    I liked sea world, you got to see alot of things most zoos dont have.
    Yeah, like dolphins who are often taken from the sea after their mothers and many others in their pod have been killed. Why would an aquarium want to spend more time training an adult when it is easier to do so with the young ones? Only thing is, it means ripping them away from their families -- like a brutal kidnapping.

    But hey, what`s a little kidnapping and causing stress and having some degree of mortality rate in transportation so long as it makes people laugh, ooh and ahhh at jumps through hoops and swimming pool volleyball, right?

    And, if that isn`t enough to make you gush with joy at their imprisonment, they may even be able to click you a Happy Birthday tune.

  22. #122
    Southern Sun Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Duo's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-04-03
    Location
    The EU capital
    Posts
    655
    Points
    12,140
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,140, Level: 33
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 510
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Belgium



    That sounds very sad... but then I remebered that it also happens to humans on regular basis so in comparison to that these kidnapped dolphins are at times treated better than their human counterpart

  23. #123
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by Duo
    That sounds very sad... but then I remebered that it also happens to humans on regular basis so in comparison to that these kidnapped dolphins are at times treated better than their human counterpart

    Yes, it is sad if we can look pass all the goofy antics they are made to do in order to get the audience to laugh and gush at how cute, or how human they are.

    I don`t accept the reasoning that the 'crime' of killing one`s parents and kidnapping them is mitigated just because their life from then on in some aspects might have someone fawning over them or lavishing them with treats because they performed a routine they were trained to do. And, just because a human is treated worse in some cases is no reason to accept, blindly ignore, and not speak out against the wrong that is perpetrated on animals.

  24. #124
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    Hi SortOf, I know this is the second time I have used your quote to make my point about aquariums, but it is an interesting topic and not so different from zoos. My remarks are not really directed toward you, but toward this same mentality of enjoyment that many have at seeing creatures in captivity.

    Quote Originally Posted by SortOf
    I liked sea world, you got to see alot of things most zoos dont have.
    Taking animals out of the ocean and putting them in our man-made worlds makes them vulnerable to disasters that we have no control of. Why should these animals be put at risk for our amusement?

    On October 24, last year, Hurricane Wilma pounded Florida, and Miami`s Seaquarium`s 250,000 gallon reef park was devastated, killing more than a thousand fish. Only 2 fish survived.

    The only good result from it is the fish were uninsurable and now because of that and light gate sales since 911, the park is now 2 million dollars in the red. Being closed for 16 weeks (because of Wilma`s damage) as they went to the ocean to catch sea life for replenishing the aquarium has really hurt them. They are not willing to buy creatures from dealers that raise them. They prefer to get their specimens on the cheap by going out and plundering the oceans, imprisoning all those who come to their nets.

    It will be nice if gate prices go up to cover the losses so that more would decline to visit these vulnerable water prisons.

  25. #125
    I'm back. Achievements:
    1 year registered
    strongvoicesforward's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-12-05
    Posts
    1,298


    Ethnic group
    The primordial soup
    Country: Japan



    What was I educated about a polar bear in a larger than 'normal' enclosure at a zoo I had visited in the past?

    I learned how it behaved in captivity. It performed stereotypical repetitive motions known as Ozoochosis. These animals are often referred to as being zoochotic.

    Several years ago the Polar Bear in the Manila Zoo of the philipines became green because of algae growing on its fur. I guess Philipinos learned that polar bears become green sometimes.

    The zoos and aquarium parks also teaches us that people think the aligator area is a wishing well and seeing all the pennies in the bottom, I have to wonder if they were wishing for the poor animal to be released into the wild. But maybe not -- for I did see some pennies directly on the back of the animal. I guess those people thought getting a penny on the creature meant more good fortune.

    Don`t take my word for it. Look at what an employee of one of these places says about it:

    One addition, however, is the placement of signs reading ``Please do not throw objects at these live animals. Coins will injure and poison them.''

    This doesn't stop anyone. Every day, people gather around the swamp and toss pennies, nickels and occasionally larger denominations into the water and atop the alligators. If the creatures open their toothy mouths, people will rush to land a coin inside.

    ``One of the big problems is that nickel and zinc are fairly toxic to the animals,'' Howell says as he sprays hundreds of coins toward the drain. ``If it gets in their mouth, they can die from it.''

    He figures it's the ``wishing-well syndrome'' -- people get near a small body of water, and their first instinct is to toss in a coin. That this particular body of water is occupied by monstrous-looking creatures that have changed very little in 80 million years apparently is of little concern.

    ``I've picked up nails, tacks, condoms, foreign coins of all kinds, wine glasses,'' Howell says, shaking his head. But he doesn't want to say anything negative about the aquarium's paying customers. He knows how his toast is buttered.
    See full story HERE.

    Yes, indeed. He has a job, earning money -- all comes down to money and exploitation of animals -- why would you want to upset the applecart for an animal`s benefit when you are making a pretty penny off the back of another creature?

    Ohhhhh... conservation and education at work for the public. We sure do learn a lot, don`t we?

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-03-19, 14:12
  2. Animal testing, your feelings?
    By Tokis-Phoenix in forum Nature & Environment
    Replies: 155
    Last Post: 20-06-06, 07:03
  3. Fighting Animal Exploitation/Cruelty
    By strongvoicesforward in forum Nature & Environment
    Replies: 173
    Last Post: 17-06-06, 15:28
  4. Animal speech
    By RockLee in forum Nature & Environment
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 22-05-06, 09:06

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •