Tigers and other animal ethics/welfare issues

AquaticAmbi · #1 09-06-2006, 07:32 PM

(copy and paste ftw!)

:

As always, I love your tiger-themed room, Havoc. But... do you not view white tigers as a negative subject? Of course, they're gorgeous, but the only ones you ever see are the rare, perfect white tigers, which are still mutants of the bengal.. You never see those deformed ones (which I believe make up the majority of white tigers) that result from all the massive imbreeding in zoos and whatnot. To support their popularity is to support this on-going captive breeding that causes so many tigers pain. Your thoughts?

Hee, took an animal ethics course and visited a big cat rescue a few weeks ago. Pardon the off-topic-ness.

Havoc · #2 09-07-2006, 03:00 AM

*Blinks*

Well, inbreeding is being avoided as much as possible by zoo's the last decade or so. Actualy, I have seen very few misformed white tigers to be quite honest. I don't see them as a negative subject, but I don't see them as a real species that needs to be preserved either. Siegfried and Roy chose to do so, and by that they are the only one's actively doing that as far as I know.

AquaticAmbi · #3 09-07-2006, 07:51 AM

:

*Blinks*

Well, inbreeding is being avoided as much as possible by zoo's the last decade or so. Actualy, I have seen very few misformed white tigers to be quite honest. I don't see them as a negative subject, but I don't see them as a real species that needs to be preserved either. Siegfried and Roy chose to do so, and by that they are the only one's actively doing that as far as I know.

Hmm, since you've actually worked with big cats, I know your insight is trustworthy... perhaps zoos in the Netherlands are doing a bit better ethically, but I still doubt that inbreeding is as low as you say because the only way to get baby white tigers for certain is to breed a white tiger with another white tiger. As there are so few whities, inbreeding is bound to be common. And like I said, of course you don't see many deformed white tigers... The imperfect white tigers in the litter are usually "put down" as no one would ever want one. A great number of zoos in America are ethically opposed to breeding white tigers, but at the same time, there are other zoos and people that only care about profit and have no problem with it.

(Hah, maybe I should do some thread splitting if it's needed.)

Havoc · #4 09-07-2006, 11:28 AM

A lot of zoo's that are not part of a big orginisation or something often just breed for the summer so the public can see cubs of any species, and then need to dispose of them when high season is over. Then they are either killed or send to a shelter, and those are quickely filling up all over the place. It's a shame people use animals this way. Yet nothing is done about it.

Official breeding between official zoo's is done using bloodlines, pretty much just like in race horse breeding. White tigers, like I said, can't officialy be bred, but occasionaly a zoo gets permission (like the zoo I go to for photography, they got permission to breed white tigers a couple of years back). But yea, there are also the exotic animal traders who just grab to random animals and sees what happens to sell the cubs. Adult White's can go for more then $40.000, and cubs for over $70.000 in legal cirquits and for a few hundred in the illegal animal trade.

(Might be a good idea to split XD)

AquaticAmbi · #5 09-07-2006, 07:47 PM

Hmm, a good subject for forum-wide discussion: zoos.

I've always been pretty naîve about zoos, thinking they were nothing but happy places that wanted nothing more than to educate people and help in conservation of the animals. My eyes have really been opened recently about zoos and other ethical issues of animal welfare. Most zoos (in the US and worldwide) don't live up to this ideal image that most people believe.

Garg, too tired to actually give any examples at this moment, but here's some videos for starters.

http://www.api4animals.org/gallery/d...album=16&pos=0
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71700313<br />

This is, of course, if anyone else out there feels great compassion for the ethical treatment of animals besides Havoc and me.

Havoc · #6 09-08-2006, 02:30 AM

Let me whip out a post I wrote a few minutes ago on a similar subject. This is about the Haley Hildebrand case. For those who don't know what it was about, Haley Hildebrand posed with a Siberian Tiger at one of these 'backyard zoo's' for her graduation party. The tiger attacked and killed her, and the Hildebrands have been chasing after a statewide ban eversince.

:

On the matter of the Hildebrand case, I've been following that incident in the news and I don't want to play Devil's Advocate here, but it's also in my opinion that the way the tiger was handled was far from profesional and lacked any kind of savety. I don't mind photoshoots, but for heavens sake if you're going to do that then at least know what you're doing. This guy merely thought it was save just because 'it went without error the first hundred times'. Thats assuming, and assuming is something you should NEVER EVER do around big cats, especialy when in direct contact with them.
Secondly, reports indicate the man was holding the tiger on nothing more but a simple leash, which forms no protection what so ever. The tiger is still able to move and lunge at people when he so desires.
After concidering all this, I do say that it was the 'trainer' being careless. Does that mean he should have his animals taken away? No ofcourse not. But he should at least be told very firmly that he shouldn't be acting as if he's an experienced trainer if he doesn't know what he's doing. Maybe simply don't allow direct contact anymore at his place at all.

In turn, do the Hildebrands have any basis for a statewide ban on big cat contact? No, not realy. While I do support a lot more control over these kind of 'back yard zoo's', simply because people running them often have the illusion that they are an expert in what they do, I'm not supporting the idea of banning them all together as do I don't like the Hildebrands motives for trying to do so.
Only a 3 year old and mentaly unstable people don't know that a tiger is a dangrous animal that could kill you. If I would want my picture taken and I see the trainer sitting there with a huge tiger that I don't know, holding him on nothing more then a leash, then I'm going to pass on that because I'm not trusting a man who I see doesn't know how to handle a huge Siberian Tiger.
But that's from an experienced person's point of view. From a normal view, you'd expect a trainer to know what he's doing so if he comes walking around with a tiger on a leash and says it's okay, who are you to doubt him?

And how this kind of savety regulation is going to get animals killed is beyond me. It might if they force owners to get rid of their animals. But otherwise it will only save more animals lifes because not as many have to be put down after an attack of any kind.
Anyone having a backyard zoo, just one tiger as a pet, or an official sanctuary should be checked up on regularly and made sure that savety is the top priority. Anyone not being able to see the logic in that, or anyone failing to understand why these savety measures are needed, do not deserve to keep big cats, period.

looney-bin · #7 09-08-2006, 04:28 AM

Havoc wins. He has alot of wins. :P

Hobo · #8 09-08-2006, 07:35 AM

Tigers suck. I've been running around for 18 years and none have ever killed me, and i'm weak!

Havoc · #9 09-09-2006, 03:57 AM

While we are on the subject of being killed by big cats, this is why you should never leave your car in a Safari Park:

Warning, graphicaly intense!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3sATcyuAC...elated&search=
Warning, graphicaly intense!

DarkHoodness · #10 09-20-2006, 02:28 PM

It's sad when animals suffer because of human idiocy or through pure greed, like those tigers Havoc mentioned, which is why I protested once against a local zoo that kept it's animals in very small cages - It was shut down soon afterward.

But it's the same with circuses that use animals - Something that is overlooked all too often in the name of cheap entertainment and tradition.

I mean, Zoos are okay IMO if the zoo keepers respect the animals they look after, educate people and give each animal enough space, keeping them as happy as possible, while at the same time, preserving rare species that are near-extinct in the wild (probably thanks to human activity, mind you). . . Animal circuses on the other hand do none of those, and don't respect the animals as they should. They are kept in small, confined spaces most of the time, and are forced to perform while out of thier confined spaces. I don't agree with that at all - It doesn't educate anyone. That's not how wild animals normally behave. . .

But then it's funny when humans suffer because of thier own idiocy, when they don't respect creatures, like that cameraman in the vid Havoc posted above me (provided the animals don't suffer afterward as a concequence). Sickening, sure, he was killed infront of his wife and kids in a brutal way, but then he shouldn't of been an idiot and gotten out of his car infront of a pack of (probably hungry) lions. . . He didn't respect the lions, and he payed the price. Pretty much like this guy:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/5364058.stm

:

"I bit the panda on its back but its fur was too thick," Mr Zhang recalled.

He went on: "No one ever said they would bite people. I just wanted to touch it."

I really don't get how someone can be so stupid. I suppose it doesn't suprised me after what I've seen over the years, and the stuff Havoc said here, but NEWSFLASH! :P Wild animals or semi-wild animals kept in captivity WILL bite you if you provoke them, even if they look cuddley.

But yeah. Respect. It's important. And it pisses me off a lot when people don't respect the other species - Including our domesticated ones.