this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
141 points (89.0% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5237 readers
1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Yet zoos also kill perfectly healthy creatures, however, because they are seen as "surplus"

So it's not like they are being just held there while they are healing and then released once they are healed

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26356099

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is bizarre. Why do European zoos refuse to use contraception as population control rather than... Well I hope that giraffe was the exception.

Odd but I think the US zoos are slightly more ethical on this one.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If you look further at the article you'll find it's hardly an exception:

but executive director Dr Lesley Dickie estimates that somewhere between 3,000 and 5,000 animals are "management-euthanised" in European zoos in any given year.

[–] Slowy 5 points 11 months ago

It depends on the species. It’s one thing to neuter a giraffe but if you have a flock of peacocks or a colony of 40 bats you are probably not going to do surgery on all of them, it’s also very hard on some of the smaller animals. Making an effort to keep only females or males would be an option for some species but not all, as they won’t always show their full range of behaviour.

The article does point out a lot of it is small rodents, but also things like tadpoles or fish. It can be extremely difficult to control their breeding (or even identify their sex without cutting them open) yet detrimental to their welfare to allow them to be overstocked. The real solution here is probably not invasive birth control techniques (even restraining an animal to pill them can be very taxing), it is more effort to share surplus animals with other zoos, wildlife refuges, wild release etc with particular attention to those that are prone to being culled. But again, transport is a huge stressor for animals, so you have to consider that the potential benefit to them should be more than the risk of worse welfare.

[–] x4740N 1 points 10 months ago

This comment seems more like an inflammatory responses based on the wording used

It doesn't seem like a logical response at all