Species mixing disaster...big time!

edward · Mar 26, 2005

to paraphrase a friend of mine

the amount of knowlege and skill a person has is often directly proportional to the amount of time a person was worked with the animal and the numeber of specimens lost in that time.

Ed

mike · Mar 26, 2005

I've wanted to get down to the Monterey Bay Aquarium to see the great white since I heard they had caught one. I was there a few years ago, and can say it is truly an amazing facility.

On the zoo debate, I don't understand how a person can criticize zoos when they have non-domestic animals as pets of their own. But that's an aside. I like the analogy a former professor of mine used. He compared animals in zoos to ambassadors. The animals may be out of their natural environment, but they have a good life, and give the general public a chance to be inspired by that animal. An in being inspired, people will be more likely to want to protect natural populations of these animals.

One of my favorite parts of going to a zoo or aquarium is to hear the comments of people looking at these creatures in wonder and awe.

Best,

Mike

edward · Mar 26, 2005

That is one of the biggest problems with conservation today. Too many people have no connection/interest in the animals. This causes a resulting apathy that is a serious problem in getting people to care enough to try and protect the animals.

Ed

nicholas · Mar 26, 2005

Me: Everything aside, animals do belong in the wild, simple as that. The shark has basically been abducted and is now being exploited and used as a research subject. Useful knowledge can be gained by its captivity, which is great, but we all know where its place really is.

Ed: Hi Nicholas,
That is an interesting statement given that you have at least one species in your collection that in all probability was wild caught and there is a second that is probably wc.

...Are you trying to outwit me? All I am saying is that we're like aliens, abducting animals for our desires. I'm more in favor of letting animals do their thing without our interference, but it's complete anarchy, and people will have their fun (including me.) I love animals, and I DO keep several of them close to home, so of course I am going to express my concern for them, when I see fit. I think the idea of a zoo, whether it is personal, or a business, is . It's irony when I step back and see us destroy everything, out of our fascination for it.

(Message edited by xamphibiax on March 27, 2005)

foster · Mar 27, 2005

Hi Nicholas,
I do not believe that Ed was trying to outwit you. He was just pointing out that your opinions regarding keeping animals in zoos come off as seeming somewhat hypocritical seeing as you keep wild animals in captivity yourself. I understand your point however, even the best institutions that display animals in naturalistic settings with lots of room can at times seem "wrong" somehow. I generally refrain from getting into these ethical debates however unless one is a strict vegetarian and uses no animal products whatsoever (a point could even be made against keeping domesticated animals) then we have to accept the fact that humans have and always will "use" animals for a variety of purposes. As Ed pointed out, a zoo or aquarium can be a wonderful way to educate the general public about the natural world. I can personally think of many more less desirable scenarios that many of these display animals could otherwise be in. OK, I'll stop now.
Chip

nicholas · Mar 27, 2005

Yeah, funny. It's not worth arguing. Ill thoughts are best kept masked. It's obvious I know it's hypocritical, and it's obvious everyone else knows zoos aren't all they are cracked up to be.

...And I might as well add I have been vegan for four years. Not that it makes me an authority on ethics.

Domesticated animals... yeah, scary... they breed and breed and have no homes.

(Message edited by xamphibiax on March 27, 2005)

joe · Mar 27, 2005

I think we're getting issues mixed up here.

1. As I see it, this isn't a problem with species mixing. The possible issues with the Great White have to due with the tank size and the argument some make that no creatures should be in zoos (or at least that this specific creature shouldn't be captive--whether alone or with other species seems to make no difference to that argument). I see a species mixing issue if: you mix species from different biospheres together (and one species is not immune to what another carries or another species proliferates and makes the second extinct b/c the first isn't designed to deal with the second). That isn't the case here--none of these fish are apparently incompatable in the "wild" and this appears to represent a a collection of critters that do exist in some mix in their natural habitate. I"m not arguing this is the same as their natural habitate, only that this is not the same as mixing Triturus Karelinii and Notophalamus viridiscens Dorsalis.

2. There may be an apparent argument that it makes poor sense to keep a great white captive (just as there are counter arguments). But that isn't an argument against the current setup, only an argument that either a bigger tank is necessary OR it shouldn't be kept at all.

3. I'm not a big fan of mixing species--especially when it comes to newts. Most newts survive in the wild b/c (a) they poison animals that eat them (so if you have enough newts and are will to see some attrition, you'll get survivors b/c the other critters will die off or learn not to eat them). That doesn't sound like much of an option for the pet enthusiast; or (b) there is so much space they have plenty of room to escape possible predators (again, not much of an option for the pet enthusiast).

Thus, while I'm generally against mixing species (even when it's a natural collection of animals that usually co-exist), there are certainly instances when I find it ethically acceptable and even educational.

pin-pin · Mar 28, 2005

Hm, this is a debate that I don't particularly want to touch with a 10-foot pole, but I wanted to clarify on my original comment.

Zoos and aquariums and other professional collections get away with mixing animals due to: 1) Research about the proper environment as well as habitat of the animals mixed, 2) constant supervision of each set-up (job vs. hobby) and 3) an on-site veternarian or animal care specialist in case anything goes wrong.

I personally stress not mixing any species for the "normal salamander owner" because the general population want a pet not a job. Most of us (ok Paris you don't have to brag...*cough*) don't have immediate access to Baytril or even something simple such as the ingredients for Holtfreter's Solution. We don't spend 8 hours a day cleaning, feeding, and observing our amphibians.

My original comment was just that I was surprised (and saddened) that it was the great white shark that killed something in that tank, as it was one of the smallest inhabitants.

edward · Mar 28, 2005

snip "Yeah, funny. It's not worth arguing. Ill thoughts are best kept masked. It's obvious I know it's hypocritical, and it's obvious everyone else knows zoos aren't all they are cracked up to be."

Hi Nicholas,
I made the comment because you made a belief statement without anything to support it from a hypocritical point of view (as you keep animals at home). I was not trying to "outwit you" as I did not think we were in a battle of wits.

If "ill thoughts are best kept masked" then why are you making them public?

Snip "I think the idea of a zoo, whether it is personal, or a business, is ••••••.

And you continue the negative comments after admitting to being hypocritical.
Are you trying to be offensive? Your stance would be similar to me taking a soap box (and for a hypothetical example here I will use your veganism) and stating that veganism is purely a quasireligious action by people who want to feel superior that does nothing to improve the enviroment. This is in essence the action that you have taken.

Ed

nicholas · Mar 29, 2005

Only veganism is more a decision not to eat animals, based on the fact that they have to endure a long, drug out and torturous process, in order to get to the dinner table. There is nothing religious about it, becuase it is not supernatural or divine.

I guess the main thought in my head is: here is a shark, swimming around a tank, bumping into and eating it's occupants. Is this a good thing? Should we glorify this? No,.

(Message edited by xamphibiax on March 29, 2005)

(Message edited by xamphibiax on March 29, 2005)

edward · Mar 29, 2005

I see my point was completely missed, I can only belive that this a deliberate attempt at misunderstanding the point as you continue with the behavior.

Ed

nicholas · Mar 30, 2005

OK. Zoos are both positive and negative, like most everything else. I was pointing out some the negative, and even went as far as saying they were faulty. We're both policing the internet, and it's getting tedious and redundant. I will take the initiative to go my own way.

I leave you with a gift...

(Message edited by xamphibiax on March 30, 2005)

jeff · Oct 2, 2005

This thread was a good read hehe

Species mixing disaster...big time!

edward

Guest

mike

Active member

edward

Guest

nicholas

Guest

foster

Guest

nicholas

Guest

joe

New member

pin-pin

Guest

edward

Guest

nicholas

Guest

edward

Guest

nicholas

Guest

jeff

Guest

Settings Notifications

Options