keepdiggin 9,559 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 it could of been sent to another zoo. Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Why though? It had no significance to a breeding programme or as a park attraction and would only have been transfered because "it's sad to shoot it". Something has to be shot to feed the lions and the opportunity was taken to educate school children on Giraffe anatomy and a rare opportunity to see lions feed on a natural prey. IMO culling it sent out a good dose of reality and was a great experience to give the kids of the real world. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
clipo 871 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 how would you transport a 20ft giraffe over seas?? Link to post Share on other sites
Huan72 687 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 So we are breeding to keep a strong gene pool but not caring about the individual healthy animal in establishments that insist they are breeding for conservation and species longevity. All very clinical I am sure, but a clear example of how mans intellect has outrun his wisdom. If zoos were breeding for food, or to manipulate genetics to create desired characteristics as in breeds, it would be different, but zoos say they are breeding to ensure species survival, whilst killing a perfectly healthy animal. Also if a healthy animal can be killed, I must think that they are not endangered and if they are not endangered, what are they doing breeding them in zoos. For our entertainment, if that is the case then zoos need to be honest about their intentions and purpose and not hide behind the "conservation" label. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
clipo 871 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Why though? It had no significance to a breeding programme or as a park attraction and would only have been transfered because "it's sad to shoot it". Something has to be shot to feed the lions and the opportunity was taken to educate school children on Giraffe anatomy and a rare opportunity to see lions feed on a natural prey. IMO culling it sent out a good dose of reality and was a great experience to give the kids of the real world.yes cause giraffe anatomy is helpful in everyday life them lions would of been well fed reguardless of the giraffe being killed or not!!! just a waste of a young healthy animal imo 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Why though? It had no significance to a breeding programme or as a park attraction and would only have been transfered because "it's sad to shoot it". Something has to be shot to feed the lions and the opportunity was taken to educate school children on Giraffe anatomy and a rare opportunity to see lions feed on a natural prey. IMO culling it sent out a good dose of reality and was a great experience to give the kids of the real world. yes cause giraffe anatomy is helpful in everyday life them lions would of been well fed reguardless of the giraffe being killed or not!!! just a waste of a young healthy animal imo Oh well in that case then what's the point in teaching biology at all? It was educational, like going to the zoo in the first place................ is that hard for you to figure out? Yeah of course the lions would have been fed........... something has to be shot though doesn't it? Link to post Share on other sites
keepdiggin 9,559 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 well said clipo. Link to post Share on other sites
Accip74 7,112 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Born,,,gte,,,ect,,,, I don't think the lads on here really give a feck,,, I know I don't ,,,, I think it was more the zoos reasoning,,, saying about breeding,,, when a quick snip would solve the problem,,, or even just moving a female when she's in season... On the other side ,, I love the fact they got the kids involved,,, I think more zoos should do that with feeding times ect,,,or maybe they do,,,,can any zoo keepers tell us ? I wasn't a keeper, but yeh, it's all about getting the kids involved really, their short on reasons to justify their existence, because most of the animals they keep will never be part of a conservation project.........so they really push the education side of things........ But saying that, the place I was at was very commercial......it was a business, plain & simple, investment was for long term profit........for example......purchasing a Rhino for maybe £60,000 from an African game reserve, then shipping back to England, to live in a relatively small enclosure.......I feel that's hard to justify for any reason other than for making money. I do think they are good for kids & adults to learn though........I met adults who didn't know the difference between a lion & a tiger lol..... 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Tiercel 6,986 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Bloody hell, I cannot believe some of the posts on this topic. The same people who are decrying the giraffes death would think nothing about killing a deer or fox. It was animal husbandry simple as, as has been said it happens every day. Nothing untowards about it. TC 6 Link to post Share on other sites
stabba 10,745 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 But it took 2 years to decide it wasn't fit for breeding. From birth they knew this girraffe's genetic make-up and knew it wasn't fit for breeding. So why keep it 2 years before deciding it's lion fodder. Doesn't matter to me either way but i feel the zoo fcuked up big time and it'll do there gate reciepts no good at all. Nor it's public relations. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 a waste of a young healthy animal imo Couple of million male chickens and thousands of male dairy cows which are surplus to requirements get killed every year and all, what about them? Guess they don't count because that don't make for good headlines in the media.. Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 But it took 2 years to decide it wasn't fit for breeding. From birth they knew this girraffe's genetic make-up and knew it wasn't fit for breeding. So why keep it 2 years before deciding it's lion fodder. Doesn't matter to me either way but i feel the zoo fcuked up big time and it'll do there gate reciepts no good at all. Nor it's public relations. What about someone working hard to breed a strain of terriers? You won't know which ones will make the grade until they've grown up and been tested, bit pointless culling them as soon as they're born.. No different to this IMO.. Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,763 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I guess it depends how they judged the animals genetic worth? That may have been possible at birth, it may not. Maybe it was considered valuable while a juvanile as an attraction. As an adult it had no value. I'm just speculating. Link to post Share on other sites
mushroom 12,883 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I see nothing wrong with it tbh Link to post Share on other sites
keepdiggin 9,559 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 lol killing a deer\fox is not the same as killing a healthy captive born animal. The giraffe could of been sent to another zoo it could of also been castrated. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts