People and their "noble" notions
Tuesday, March 20th, 2007 01:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
basildestinyKnut the Baby Polar Bear
So here's the breakdown of this story. Two baby polars bears were born and rejected by their mother in December. One bear died, the zoo intervened and managed to save one of the bears. They named him Knut and he's a healthy guy.
Animal Rights' activists and some politicians are saying that the bear should not have been rescued. It should have been allowed to die as nature intended. And the zoo should now kill the polar bear. The bear would be better off dead.
Opponents to the life of the bear cite an example of a bear who was saved in such a way and he later wandered into a populated area and had to be shot. There's been no suggestions of releasing this bear, but there are hopes that he could become a stud in the captive polar bear population since they are becoming endangered.
It's all so silly. I remember when I first started watching nature shows with my husband. He said he hated them because the filmmakers didn't interfere. They just allowed animals to die. I can understand how that is hard to see. Especially knowing that it is our job to be caretaker to the animals.
This is much like having a pet. It's not identical. With pets, we often do the match making ourselves. And so obligate ourselves to ensure our pets give birith without issue. Or make sure they don't breed. With my female Cardigan, she is not big enough to have puppies. Cardigan Corgi puppies are long and can get caught in the birth canal. And she weighs 14 pounds when the breed standard is 20 - 30 pounds for a female. My male Cardigan had to be neutered for cancer concerns. He had an undescended testicle.
With this zoo animal, you take on similar responsibilities.
I just can't imagine calling for the execution of a baby animal. How strange is that?
~Jay
So here's the breakdown of this story. Two baby polars bears were born and rejected by their mother in December. One bear died, the zoo intervened and managed to save one of the bears. They named him Knut and he's a healthy guy.
Animal Rights' activists and some politicians are saying that the bear should not have been rescued. It should have been allowed to die as nature intended. And the zoo should now kill the polar bear. The bear would be better off dead.
Opponents to the life of the bear cite an example of a bear who was saved in such a way and he later wandered into a populated area and had to be shot. There's been no suggestions of releasing this bear, but there are hopes that he could become a stud in the captive polar bear population since they are becoming endangered.
It's all so silly. I remember when I first started watching nature shows with my husband. He said he hated them because the filmmakers didn't interfere. They just allowed animals to die. I can understand how that is hard to see. Especially knowing that it is our job to be caretaker to the animals.
This is much like having a pet. It's not identical. With pets, we often do the match making ourselves. And so obligate ourselves to ensure our pets give birith without issue. Or make sure they don't breed. With my female Cardigan, she is not big enough to have puppies. Cardigan Corgi puppies are long and can get caught in the birth canal. And she weighs 14 pounds when the breed standard is 20 - 30 pounds for a female. My male Cardigan had to be neutered for cancer concerns. He had an undescended testicle.
With this zoo animal, you take on similar responsibilities.
I just can't imagine calling for the execution of a baby animal. How strange is that?
~Jay
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-03-21 12:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-21 02:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-21 02:57 am (UTC)What makes them think "nature" has any intentions for zoo animals? Don't they know that zoo animals are little more than... municipal pets?