the horror of captive marine mammals

Kel Varnsen

chadwick wrote:

frickin sad ass people. i love a reptile house at a zoo but i know it is very wrong and it makes me very sad. i've never been to a marine animal park. i have been to a few zoos and they are huge and disappointing. at the end of the day people suck.

I have been to a handful of zoos and I think they are actually very important to have. I mean most of them (and all of the ones I have been too) aren't just set up to show animals off (this isn't victorian times), but are set up as actual research facilities, which allow humans to learn about animals and how they behave. Plus most major zoos have chairities set up that try to help with animal conservation in the wild. Plus there are a number of animals, that if it were not for zoos, would be completely extinct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinct_in_the_Wild

So yea it might suck for that one elephant in the zoo, but I think it benefits elephants as a whole (and the same goes for other species.

polaris_x

uhhhh ... like maybe it's because the bear is in a prison!?? ...

***********************

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/3-newborn-pola ... 15029.html

The Toronto Zoo says three newborn polar bear cubs have died.

Aurora, an 11-year-old female polar bear, gave birth to one female and two male cubs on Dec. 6, the zoo said in a news release on Monday.

One of the male cubs died shortly after it was born, and the two others died on Sunday. The zoo said it wasn't clear how the second two cubs had died and that tissue samples will be analyzed.

The zoo said that the silver lining in the deaths was that Aurora showed maternal instincts for the first time, after rejecting three cubs last year, only one of which survived.

"The fact that Aurora was doing everything right this time is a huge step in the right direction," said Maria Franke, the zoo's curator of mammals.

Polar bears are considered critically endangered, with between 20,000 to 25,000 wild polar bears worldwide — about 60 per cent of those in Canada.

"The information gained throughout Aurora's breeding has allowed us invaluable information that we can learn from and share with our counterparts," the zoo said.

brianlux

Here's a movie that tells two great stories about two women who do the right kind of things to help animals. A beautiful and inspiring story narrated by Morgan Freeman:

http://www.imax.com/borntobewild/

pandora

When the kids were small we loved the zoo..
Milwaukee has a very fine zoo.
My favorite the aviary house where the birds fly free.
The kids loved monkey island, also free type habitat.

The very best though was the polar bear swimming ...
an underwater viewing area as well as above.
The animals seemed happy making us happy too.

The sad thing ... will the ones in captivity in the future be the lucky ones?
The disappearing habitat and environment changing the wild world
forever.

blackredyellow

cincybearcat wrote:

I understand some people's feelings about zoos, sea world, etc.

I think differently though. I think it depends on the zoo/place. Without them, I think there are a lot of people that will never see some of these animals up close. And I think it's important because out of sight, out of mind. Kids can learn about animals from all over the world and learn to have an appreciation for them, a love for them.

There is a balance that is hard to identify.

Many modern zoos take care of their animals pretty well (and are regulated). Like you said, this gives people a chance to see and appreciate animals up close. Sure, we can watch the Animal Planet channel, but nothing compares to being up close with animals.

It's impossible to quantify, but how many people who have become helpful to animals (professionally, charitably, spreading awareness, etc), started that way because of seeing wild animals in a zoo as a child, or whatever? Would they have become how they are without that exposure?

And the pet analogy is a good one... zoo animals are un-naturally contained, and often "perform" for food/attention, but same with pets.

catefrances

blackredyellow wrote:

...And the pet analogy is a good one... zoo animals are un-naturally contained, and often "perform" for food/attention, but same with pets.

our dog does not perform for food or attention. he is played with as part of our pack and thats what packs do. that play is needed for a social animal.. ALL social animals. he also hunts for birds in our yard.. which makes me smile.

Riverrunner

redrock wrote:

Killer whales - or any other animal - have absolutely no place in being kept in unsuitable enclosure, not even fit for an animal half their size, only to be 'taught' tricks and made to perform on command. This for our perverted pleasure. Whether it's seaworld or circuses - same thing. Why would we even want to watch these animals behaving in an unnatural way is beyond me. Similarly with zoos. Though some of the more reputable ones (which are few and far in between) do provide some valuable conservation research, most are dreadful for the animal. Even some of the best ones. How can anyone think it's absolutely fine to keep animals who roam and run for miles and miles a day in an enclosure they can walk around in a few minutes. Sure, some of these animals are bred in captivity some would say.... So then it's ok to keep them so one can say they saw a 'real' tiger. A shadow of a tiger, o say. Let the children watch documentaries where the animal is shown in it's natural habitat, doing natural things.

Note that I am not against ' proper' zoos or sanctuaries as they can have a purpose. But keeping animals in unfit connditions and making perform is cruel.

I agree with you.