FW: [EthologicalEthics] Digest Number 1249 - Tigers

[Guest guest]

Dr. John, thanks for posting this. As an alumni of CU Boulder and having met

Marc, my wish is that folks listen to him. He knows what he is talking

about, after spending a lifetime working in the field. Unfortunately many

members of the press who report on animals consider his views " pie in the

sky " and " irrelevant " when these issues are some of the most pressing in the

effort to safeguard wildlife. But as Marc pointed out once in his own

backyard, habitat is everything. At that time wild cats were attacking

joggers and eating kittens in Boulder Colorado, as in this state there are

national forests and private backyards/public transportation routes that

butt up right against each other; habitat is shared with wildlife and

humans. Extreme right-wingers proposed shooting the cats (and the food

supply, deer) as a solution and moderate left-wingers suggested rounding the

cats up and relocating to zoos and other areas. Marc's voice was amongst a

few others that suggested other more rational and sustainable solutions.

Marc has shown through research that animals must be conserved in the wild,

protecting not just a single species - as zoos do - but that whole

eco-systems can be preserved with careful planning and simple human

willingness, generosity & perseverance.

 

What is needed is a change in outlook. For example, as a former resident of

BLM land in Colorado (shared habitat, but not called that) I had to change

my outlook on wildlife. Bears, coyotes, mountain lions, wolves, and naughty

raccoons were there first - it was their territory - I was just renting

space that actually belonged to them by historical birthright. Even though

my own specie's history was one of extermination to eliminate problem

encounters with wild neighbors, there was no reason to perpetuate this

mistake that had left my own new home almost bear-less and wolf-less.

Leaving a hot apple pie soaked in honey to cool on an open window sill,

while being an American tradition, was just not something you would do in

this environment. Doing so would just be stupid, and if I were to be so, did

I then have the right to call Animal Control when there was a kitchen full

of creatures feasting? Yet this attitude is still the prevailing one (me

human, the boss, you animal, just an animal). With people moving into wild

habitat without even realizing it, the issues really become confused.

(American developers, in cahoots with local governments, continue to move

people into wild habitats in the name of progress and growth, often

side-stepping national law, and then create an array of problems like those

in Colorado.) And of course this is a global problem and not just an

American one: the economics of global capitalism dictate a confrontation,

yet with a change of outlook, conflict can be avoided.

 

Human lives must be lost in order to cohabitate with wildlife. We are on the

food chain of many mammals and reptiles, and hell even insects. Realizing

that, coming to terms with that, and accepting that can reduce the suffering

of all beings worldwide. This emotion of long-lasting retaliation is

uniquely human (you kill my child, and I will hunt you and your family down

forever in revenge). But we have enough therapists in this century to

overcome that one, no? The idea that animals have rights is not a new one,

and hell we have lawyers in the world to overcome any problems there as

well. We just need a change of outlook on the habitat that we share with

other creatures. Giving up on the idea that we can do that is not human at

all, as we have shown the capacity for intense perseverance in all that we

do. Just as a crow will persevere to crack a nut, we too can persevere and

co-exist with others within the natural world. Without building zoos to

captivate certain species. Without relocating wildlife to another area to be

relocated again and again later down the road. Without breeding in

captivity in the name of conservation. We can live within the natural world

without destroying it for other life forms and ultimately ourselves. We can

do it. But we have to work in that regard, and not against ourselves and

fellow denizens.

 

Working hard for all, is this all that hard to do? Many folks will tell you

that there is no perfect world, and that we must do what we can with what

little we have, and when push comes to shove it¹s all about ³me .² There is

overwhelming proof that none of this is the case. Holistic approaches in

science and environmental planning produce good news all the time. And the

very definition of human satisfaction lies in how much others are helped by

our actions. The idea that we can¹t create a perfect world is just the

pronouncement of the lazy and defeated. We can solve problems one at a time,

individually, and also on a global scale, without precluding one or the

other. That is our nature. It is in the very nature of humanity, that all of

nature can be preserved - and while at the moment things look bleak, that

again is just an outlook that can be changed by hard work, perseverance,

and/or a meditation on putting pie out to cool.

Best regards,

Jigs, animalNEPAL

 

³You can do it²

- Chogham Trungpu Rinpoche,

Boulder, Colorado

 

> Dr John Wedderburn <john

> <jwed

> Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:54:23 +0800

> AAPN List <aapn >

> FW: [EthologicalEthics] Digest Number 1249 - Tigers

>

>

>

>

> EthologicalEthics

> [EthologicalEthics ]

> Thursday, December 27, 2007 8:57 PM

> EthologicalEthics

> [EthologicalEthics] Digest Number 1249

>

>

> 1. REDECORATING ZOOS: LET'S REMEMBER THAT TIGERS AREN'T COUCHES - Lette

> Posted by: " BEKOFF MARC " marc.bekoff

> Wed Dec 26, 2007 5:40 am ((PST))

>

> letters

>

> Dear Editor - would you please publish this is a letter to the editor in

> your paper concerning the recent tiger attack

> (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/26/MN0LU4M2T.DTL & t

> sp=1)

> at the San Francisco Zoo ... many thanks, Marc Bekoff, Professor, University

> of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado

>

> Homepage: http://literati.net/Bekoff

> Marc Bekoff and Jane Goodall (EETA): www.ethologicalethics.org _______

>

> REDECORATING ZOOS: LET'S REMEMBER THAT TIGERS AREN'T COUCHES

>

> Once again there's been a horrific tragedy centering on a captive animal. At

> the San Francisco Zoo, Tatiana, a four-year old Siberian tiger, escaped from

> her jail cell - that's what her cage was to her - and mauled a man to death

> and severely injured two other visitors. As a result, Tatiana was killed. A

> year ago Tatiana had attacked a keeper and chewed his arm. Tatiana had lived

> for a time at the Denver Zoo and was shipped to San Francisco because the

> zoo there wanted to redecorate their facility. These innocent victims

> suffered because large carnivores simply do not belong in zoos, and neither

> should these sentient and emotional beings be shipped here and there as if

> they were couches. Tigers and other animals have a point of view on what

> happens to them and they don't like being treated as if they are inanimate

> objects. So, it's not surprising that at some point when they regain their

> freedom they do what's natural to them. They aren't bad or evil, they're

> highly evolved natural born killers who don't like being imprisoned. When

> will zoos learn this lesson? How many more innocent people and animals will

> have to be injured or killed? When will zoos stop displaying animals who are

> there for the zoo's financial benefit? Robert Jenkins, director of animal

> care at the San Francisco Zoo said " We don't know how it was able to get

> out, " ... " The tiger should not have been able to jump (out).

> This is the first thing we will be investigating. " Isn't it about time that

> he and others including the Association of Zoos and Aquariums start

> investigating how to rid zoos of these animals and send them off to

> sanctuaries so they can live out their lives with dignity?

>

> Marc Bekoff, Professor

> University of Colorado, Boulder

> Ecology and Evolutionary Biology

> http://literati.net/Bekoff

>

>

> 2. S.F. tiger maulings probed: Experts find it hard to believe the big

> Posted by: " BEKOFF MARC " marc.bekoff

> Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:35 am ((PST))

>

> http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/593164.html

>

> S.F. tiger maulings probed: Experts find it hard to believe the big cat

> escaped on its own By Carrie Peyton Dahlberg - cpeytondahlberg

> Published 12:00 am PST Thursday, December 27, 2007

>

> If a Siberian tiger escaped on its own to fatally maul a teenager at the San

> Francisco Zoo, it would be a feat that reshapes what is known about the

> powerful but ponderous animal.

>

> " They don't jump very high and they don't jump very far, " said Ron Tilson,

> one of the nation's top tiger authorities who helped write the guidelines on

> how to safely restrain and care for zoo tigers.

>

> " Think of a sumo wrestler "

> much too massive for leaping

> and that's the tiger, said Tilson, director of conservation at the

> Minnesota Zoo.

>

> While Tilson is trying to keep an open mind about early accounts that

> suggested the tiger somehow crossed a wide moat and a tall fence, " something

> about this is just contrary to too much history " of observed tiger behavior,

> he said.

>

> San Francisco Zoo officials have said that no door was unlocked when a tiger

> named Tatiana left its enclosure on Christmas Day, killing 17-year-old

> Carlos Sousa Jr. of San Jose and injuring two other young men.

>

> The two injured men, reportedly brothers who knew Sousa, were in stable

> condition at San Francisco General Hospital Wednesday. They were expected to

> make a full recovery from deep bites and claw wounds on their heads, necks,

> arms and hands, said Dr. Rochelle Dicker.

>

> The zoo was closed Wednesday as police opened a criminal investigation,

> saying they were ruling nothing out, from carelessness to a purposeful

> attempt to let the tiger loose.

>

> The zoo will remain closed today, but could open Friday.

>

> Tatiana was displayed in a pit-like grotto, separated from the public by a

> 15-foot-wide moat, a small strip of land beyond the moat, and then a

> stucco-like fence that rose 20 feet high on the tiger's side, said zoo

> spokesman Paul Garcia.

>

> " There's no way " a tiger could get past such barriers on its own, said Mary

> Lynn Haven, who keeps 175 tigers and about 100 other big cats at a sanctuary

> outside Knoxville, Tennessee.

>

> Her sanctuary, called Tiger Haven, keeps tigers behind chain-link fences

> 12 feet high.

>

> That's common for private facilities, said Tilson, and tigers don't go over

> those 12-foot fences, even though zoos are advised to make their walls a

> little taller: at least 16 feet high, with a tilting edge atop that.

>

> Tilson said the committee that prepared those enclosure guidelines for zoos

> had hundreds of years of combined experience working with tigers.

> Committee members took every piece of evidence about the animals' jumping

> ability, then added a few feet to ensure safety.

>

> " We did not want our names on a document that said this is how far a tiger

> jumps, and then have one clear a zoo moat, " he said.

>

> Siberian tigers have a long reach, and can stretch 12 feet from toe to toe,

> but when they're leaping, the waistline of their body doesn't get much

> farther than 5 to 8 feet off the ground, he said.

>

> Unlike more nimble cats, they rarely climb trees.

>

> For Tilson, the Christmas Day carnage at the San Francisco Zoo was tragic

> not only for the young men involved, but also for an " extraordinarily rare "

> animal that he helped bring into the world.

>

> As coordinator of the nation's species survival plan for tigers, Tilson

> heads a group that chooses each potential mother and father, selecting for

> genetic diversity and other factors before shifting the animals from zoo to

> zoo for breeding.

>

> Only about 400 Siberian tigers, also known as Amur tigers after the Amur

> River basin in Russia, remain in the wild, said Tilson. Another 147 are

> housed in U.S. zoos.

>

> It was unclear Wednesday evening whether Tatiana made a leap unknown in the

> annals of tiger captivity, or whether she was somehow aided, by either

> neglect or a deliberate act.

>

> " We're still conducting an investigation, it's still inconclusive, and we're

> working with the Police Department, " Garcia said.

>

> Police Chief Heather Fong told reporters Wednesday that the department has

> opened a criminal investigation to " determine if there was human involvement

> in the tiger getting out or if the tiger was able to get out on its own. "

>

> She wouldn't comment on whether the tiger was taunted.

>

> Because the zoo has no video surveillance, police said, the investigation

> will be based on witness statements and physical evidence.

>

> The San Francisco Chronicle reported that authorities think all three men

> were attacked near Tatiana's enclosure, and then the tiger followed the two

> survivors toward a zoo cafe, where she attacked a second time.

>

> Officers who arrived soon after the 5 p.m. maulings shot the tiger. The two

> surviving young men, 19- and 23-year-old brothers, were hospitalized and

> underwent surgery for their injuries.

>

> Once the tiger got loose, it's not surprising that she attacked, said

> Tilson. The only surprise was that two of her three victims survived.

>

> " Tigers are alpha predators. They hunt and kill animals for meat, and that

> includes humans, " he said.

>

> Along with police, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums will also review

> exactly what happened in San Francisco.

>

> The association posted a press release on its Web site saying that the San

> Francisco Zoo would have to make a full report to the association's

> accreditation committee.

>

> However, the association has had " a huge problem with enforcement " in the

> past in responding to animal deaths and escapes, said Marc Bekoff, a

> University of Colorado, Boulder, professor emeritus and a critic of zoos.

>

> " I think the AZA cares very much about people and animal safety, but they're

> too lax and too slow, " said Bekoff, whose book " The Emotional Lives of

> Animals " was published earlier this year.

>

> An association spokesman did not return calls from The Bee on Wednesday.

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>Isn't it about time that ... the Association of Zoos and Aquariums start

>investigating how to rid zoos of these animals and send them off to

>sanctuaries so they can live out their lives with dignity?

 

 

I have a theory that before people go around making this kind

of recommendation in public places & with a straight face, they

should seriously investigate the quality of sanctuary situations

available to big cats, the length of the waiting list for those

situations, the lack of land and funding for expanding them, and

the number of sanctuaries that are perennially on the brink of

bankruptcy because they don't have the revenue streams that

AZA-accredited zoos attract.

 

In September 2006, for example, nearly 250 large carnivores

were in imminent jeopardy of losing their sanctuary placements just

in the state of Colorado, when three of the largest sanctuaries in

the U.S. simultaneously ran into crises due to loss of financial

support in two cases and the death of the founder in the third.

 

Reality is that of the approximately 60 sanctuaries in the

U.S. that house big cats, just a handful offer the cats anything

more than room and board in a corn crib cage, in which they pace in

circles all day. Even the biggest and best big cat sanctuaries don't

offer big cats a better life than AZA-accredited zoos.

 

Meanwhile, because of the extreme financial demands of

housing and feeding large carnivores, most sanctuaries that house

them become quasi-roadside zoos. While they nominally may not be

open to the public, they depend for much of their income on hosting

group tours, camera safaris, picnics & wedding receptions, etc.,

and because they can barely afford to pay staff, they often rely

upon an ever changing cadre of volunteers to do most of the work.

 

The net result is that the animals are every bit as much

exposed to unfamiliar people and associated stresses as they would be

in an AZA zoo.

 

How do the animals respond?

 

The recent fatality at the San Francisco Zoo was reportedly

the first fatal injury to a zoo visitor caused by an escaped animal

at an AZA-accredited zoo since the AZA was formed in 1960.

 

Barely three weeks earlier, a keeper was critically injured

by a tiger at the Shambala Preserve sanctuary near Los Angeles.

 

Senior caregiver Joanna Burke, 36, was killed in July 2006

by an elephant at the Elephant Sanctuary in Hohenwald, Tennessee.

 

Visitor Haley Hilderbrand, 17, was killed by a Siberian

tiger in August 2005 at the Lost Creek Animal Sanctuary in Mound

Valley, Kansas.

 

Volunteer St. James Davis lost his nose, testicles, left

foot, an eye, and several fingers to a March 2005 attack by an

escaped chimp at the Animal Haven Ranch in southern California.

 

Cougar Bluff (Illinois) sanctuary cofounder Allison Brent

Abell was killed by a lion at the sanctuary in February 2004.

 

 

And so it goes. Relative to the numbers of people involved,

the numbers who are killed and injured by animals at sanctuaries is

astronomically higher than the numbers who are killed and injured at

zoos. If attacks at zoos show something is wrong with zoo care, the

frequency of attacks at sanctuaries show something is even more wrong

there--perhaps in part because sanctuary animals are severely

understimulated by their environments.

 

Proponents of the notion that zoo animals should all be sent

to sanctuaries instead typically assert at this point that the zoos

should be made to pay for quality sanctuary care, as opposed to what

is presently available. But where are the zoos going to get the

money, if they are not exhibiting animals?

 

Personally, I am not in favor of breeding zoo animals. I

would like to see the AZA scrap its conservation pretenses, and

evolve into a network of educational rehabilitation and rescue

centers -- which would still be zoos, to the public, and would

therefore still have magnitudes more capacity for fundraising than

any sanctuary that exists.

 

Reality, meanwhile, is only a handful of U.S. sanctuaries

raise funding equivalent to the budget of even the smallest

AZA-accredited zoos. The sanctuary community cannot even accommodate

all the exotic and dangerous animals who are confiscated in drug

raids, let alone any sizeable part of the zoo animal population.

 

For better or worse, zoos are where zoo animals are, and

where they have their best chance at a decent life.

 

Railing against zoos in favor of sending the animals to

sanctuaries that don't really exist and can't exist due to lack of

any practical and reasonable source of funding is merely sending hot

air skyward.

 

 

 

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236

 

Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

 

[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

for free sample, send address.]