Zoo kills giraffe, feeds it to the lions, tears of rage flood the net

[Dinwar]

Sometimes my friend will eat a twix, and he strips all of the chocolate and caramel off before eating the biscuit, so I can image how disturbing the scene must have been to watch.

You get over that quickly. I mean yeah, I sympathize with the prey--I know what it's like to be stalked by something, nearly defenseless, and know that there's a very good chance you're not making it out of there alive. I can't imagine what being mauled to death is like, but it can't be fun. At the same time, though, to act on that sympathy is to condemn the predator to starvation and an even more agonizing death (I know what starvation is like too). SOMEONE is going to die in a predator/prey scenario. For the predator to live, the prey must be killed. If the prey isn't killed, the predator dies. It's harsh and cruel, but it's the way nature works. Once you realize that, you can observe such scenes with a bit more objectivity; sure, it's gruseome to watch the prey get devoured, but at the same time the predator is usually one, maybe two meals from starvation himself, and desperate.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

You get over that quickly. I mean yeah, I sympathize with the prey--I know what it's like to be stalked by something, nearly defenseless, and know that there's a very good chance you're not making it out of there alive. I can't imagine what being mauled to death is like, but it can't be fun. At the same time, though, to act on that sympathy is to condemn the predator to starvation and an even more agonizing death (I know what starvation is like too). SOMEONE is going to die in a predator/prey scenario. For the predator to live, the prey must be killed. If the prey isn't killed, the predator dies. It's harsh and cruel, but it's the way nature works. Once you realize that, you can observe such scenes with a bit more objectivity; sure, it's gruseome to watch the prey get devoured, but at the same time the predator is usually one, maybe two meals from starvation himself, and desperate.

There is a great skit in an episode of That Mitchell And Webb Sound (a series I recommend to all btw), with a nature documentary film crew.

Basically a lion is going to kill an animal, and one of the crew is morally outraged. The director insists it's natures way, and they can't interfere. The crewman ignores him and goes to shoo away the lion.

The lion proceeds to eat the crewman, and the sound guy questions whether they should intervene. The director, obviously getting good footage, repeats that it's nature's way, and they can't interfere.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Yeah! Once I had Animal Planet in my cable package. They had a feature about animal police, in the US and other places. These people went around and saved mistreated animals (and prosecuted the owners). All fine, except ... Ever so often they encountered a totally emaciated horse, or a deranged fighter dog. Or other poor creatures way beyond reasonable repair.

And they took them in, often with great trouble, and traumatizing them further in the process, gave them a thorough examination and then put them up for adoption, except for a few a few basket cases which were "humanely euthanized".

Excuse me, but the most humane thing to do with quite a lot of these poor creatures would be a rifle bullet, right where they were found. (Rant over)

Hans

Sometimes true for humans, but don't talk about that.

 

[Rasmus]

Seems there are a few sociopaths and psychopaths on this board who actually enjoy the idea.

Lions eat meat. For a lion to eat, some animal has to die.

The question here was not "should the giraffe be killed", but "what's better? If we have a cow, a giraffe, or a horse killed?"

Turns out that killing the giraffe was a good option.

Many parts of it have been given to various researches for various purposes, and the lions got fed that day.

One animal is dead, but that would always have been the result.

Am I psychopath for understanding that much?

Should it have been done in front of those who were interested?

Nobody was forced to be there, I assume, and the children were there with the permission of their parents, I'd hope. That being said, I think it should be shown: It's what happens. It's how lions get fed: They are given dead animals to eat.

Does that make me a sociopath?

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Sometimes my friend will eat a twix, and he strips all of the chocolate and caramel off before eating the biscuit, so I can image how disturbing the scene must have been to watch.

Is there any other way to eat a Twix?

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

Kids get bombarded with cartoons and stories where anthropomorphized Lions rescue Gazelles from evil Hyenas, and Tiger's eat cakes with their friend the Wild Pig. Is it any wonder we get adults that want to stick their heads in the sand about the realities of the natural world?

Heck, I'm quite a pragmatic guy myself; but the combination of Disney as a kid, and being disconnected the production of the meat I eat, has me squeamish in ways people in the past would probably find ridiculous.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

Is there any other way to eat a Twix?

Oh no, the sickness has spread from patient zero!

 

[Jim_MDP]

Lions eat meat. For a lion to eat, some animal has to die.

The question here was not "should the giraffe be killed", but "what's better? If we have a cow, a giraffe, or a horse killed?"

Turns out that killing the giraffe was a good option.

Many parts of it have been given to various researches for various purposes, and the lions got fed that day.

One animal is dead, but that would always have been the result.

Am I psychopath for understanding that much?

Should it have been done in front of those who were interested?

Nobody was forced to be there, I assume, and the children were there with the permission of their parents, I'd hope. That being said, I think it should be shown: It's what happens. It's how lions get fed: They are given dead animals to eat.

Does that make me a sociopath?

In order of my bolding...

Yes, the director said they had done it before.

Yes, he said the parents gave permission and I presume attended. The children asked questions and had a lesson including anatomy. Mayhaps I'd be less a squeamish Nancy had I seen such as an urban youth versus just knowing how I get my dinner.

You and me both, I guess.

 

[dann]

US ambassador intervenes:

Rufus Gifford

Ambassador, U.S. Embassy Denmark

Hundreds of you have reached out to me about the death on Sunday of Marius the 18-month old giraffe at the Copenhagen Zoo. I was unaware of it before it happened. As an animal lover, a WWF supporter, and the partner of a man who has dedicated his life to animals (Stephen is a veterinarian and spent his whole life working with animals large and small) I find the situation to be disturbing and the video hard to watch. I have also read numerous articles about the reasoning and justification for his killing and talked to Stephen about it at length. Despite being personally troubled by the action, I also understand the zoo is trying to teach the public about the species, the complexity of life for zoo animals and the life of giraffes in the wild.

Stephen and I will visit the Zoo soon to try and understand why they do what they do. I will keep an open mind until I hear all the different perspectives which is my responsibility.

Rufus

 

[Camillus]

I haven't read the full thread, but why did the zoo kill it first? Why not allow the lions to do so? Or the hyenas. I mean, it's not ENTIRELY ecologically incorrect to kill it first--lions are notorious for stealing other animals' kills--but it's a bit curious.

The Zoo had to consider the safety of the lions. Giraffes are big and quite capable of inflicting serious injury on a lion, particularly one that has no experience of hunting. I've been closer than I'd like to a charging angry bull Giraffe and it is only funny in retrospect. It was not funny at the time when the ground was shaking.

 

[Jim_MDP]

US ambassador intervenes:

He's being a pillock... but doing it diplomatically. Screw 'im.

 

[Jim_MDP]

The Zoo had to consider the safety of the lions. Giraffes are big and quite capable of inflicting serious injury on a lion, particularly one that has no experience of hunting. I've been closer than I'd like to a charging angry bull Giraffe and it is only funny in retrospect. It was not funny at the time when the ground was shaking.

I wouldn't go play with a unknown giraffe, much as I'd like to pet a docile one, but... unless I missed something about the zoo housing both together, what the hell are you talking about?

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

I wouldn't go play with a unknown giraffe, much as I'd like to pet a docile one, but... unless I missed something about the zoo housing both together, what the hell are you talking about?

It's right there in the quote he was responding to:

I haven't read the full thread, but why did the zoo kill it first? Why not allow the lions to do so?

 

[Jim_MDP]

It's right there in the quote he was responding to:

Ah crap and damn. Thanks JG, and sorry Camillus, I read your post as considering the facility a wildlife park (though lions and giraffe together would be extra wild) versus a zoo.

Thanks again and now back to our regularly scheduled outrage (though poorly represented so far).

 

[drelda]

He's being a pillock... but doing it diplomatically. Screw 'im.

Yes - its a shame the Ambassadors statement didn't fully support the zoos actions. I guess he felt he needed to show some sympathy for the howling masses complaining to him.

However it seems he is openly gay - so he scores big points for that given his high profile position. I'll forgive him wussing out on the giraffe thing given he hasn't wussed out at all about his personal life.

Oh, and apparently I'm a sociopath... I always had my suspicions...

- Drelda

 

[Polaris]

Yeah! Once I had Animal Planet in my cable package. They had a feature about animal police, in the US and other places. These people went around and saved mistreated animals (and prosecuted the owners). All fine, except ... Ever so often they encountered a totally emaciated horse, or a deranged fighter dog. Or other poor creatures way beyond reasonable repair.

And they took them in, often with great trouble, and traumatizing them further in the process, gave them a thorough examination and then put them up for adoption, except for a few a few basket cases which were "humanely euthanized".

Excuse me, but the most humane thing to do with quite a lot of these poor creatures would be a rifle bullet, right where they were found.

(Rant over)

Hans

I'd be on that job maybe a week before I greeted the "owner" of one of those animals with a shotgun butt to the bridge of the nose.

 

[Dinwar]

The Zoo had to consider the safety of the lions. Giraffes are big and quite capable of inflicting serious injury on a lion, particularly one that has no experience of hunting. I've been closer than I'd like to a charging angry bull Giraffe and it is only funny in retrospect. It was not funny at the time when the ground was shaking.

I suspected it was something like that. Like I said, it's not a huge deal--lions get as much if not more food via stealing kills than doing their own killing anyway, so it's still perfectly in line with their insticts to have the zoo keepers put the dead giraffe in the cage for them.

Yes - its a shame the Ambassadors statement didn't fully support the zoos actions. I guess he felt he needed to show some sympathy for the howling masses complaining to him.

It's a zoo--an educational establishment. Allowing the lions to chow down on a giraffe is an example of exactly the type of thing zoos are supposed to teach: natural behavior of animals the public otherwise would never get to see. If the public doesn't like it, that's THEIR problem, not the zoo's. Personally, I think it'd be a great SOP for a zoo to feed animals that needed to be put down to their natural predators.

Does that make me a sociopath?

If you're getting off on it, yes. Otherwise, no. There is nothing sociopathic about saying "We wanted to teach about nature--there it is."

 

[dann]

Yes - its a shame the Ambassadors statement didn't fully support the zoos actions. I guess he felt he needed to show some sympathy for the howling masses complaining to him.

Apparently he retracted his first statement and now tells people to calm down. His husband is a veterinarian and they'll visit the zoo in Copenhagen within the next month or so, which doesn't give the impression that he considers it to be an urgent case.
http://www.bt.dk/danmark/amerikansk...ge-marius-sagen-bag-sig-jeg-forstaar-godt-koe

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Axl Rose weighs in with his informed opinion: NSFW

http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/gu...rose-weighs-in-on-danish-giraffe-controversy/

 

[marplots]

Lions. Murderous scum, every single one.

Ban them!

There's not going to be any justice or sense of resolution until one of the lions is killed and fed to the giraffes.