Should've the gorilla been shot?

[fabulouslyghetto]

The gorilla should have been tranquilized.

Tranquilizers don't work like the movies where you hit the target and they instantly and comically fall to the ground with z's floating above their head. It takes time, in that time a wild animal could become temperamental and even more of a danger to the child.

I wish it hadn't been done and I doubt that justice will be served in the form of holding the parents accountable for their negligence although in a just world they would, but a human child's life was in imminent danger and the zoo employees responded accordingly.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Apparently there are 360 gorillas in captivity in the U.S. Their "breeding program" today avoids the issue of inbreeding, but has inherited a legacy of inbreeding from a previous era. Of course, there's still an idiotic population bottleneck that the tiny number represents. It might work to maintain a small population of captive animals, but does it help the wild population? Organizations like the Wildlife Conservation Society say "no." Major zoos decline to state an opinion at all.

Estimates for the numbers in the wild vary from 30,000 to 200,000. Due to significant and massive threats, the species is considered at immediate threat of going extinct in the wild. Humans are chopping down their forests, hunting them for meat and pets and they're threatened by ebola. It's disingenuous to imply that their number is robust.

Tranquilizers don't work like the movies where you hit the target and they instantly and comically fall to the ground with z's floating above their head .

Silly me.

 

[sixthson]

Zoltan, just because some of us here believe the zoo made the right decision doesn't mean we don't care about what happened. It's awful. Difficult decisions are often made on the spur of the moment with no time for a huddle to get opinions from others. It must have been a very painful decision for the person who ordered the kill, afterall, he loves the animals or he wouldn't be there.

 

[swmjck]

Shoot the mother..save the gorilla...

My first thought was exactly what you wrote. I hope a video surfaces of what the mother was doing while her child was wandering away and fell into where the gorilla was. Guesses are either texting or talking on the phone, after all those things are more important than caring for your child.

 

[spooky]

The bottom line... get rid of all zoos. If you really want to see an animal, go see it in its natural habitat.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

The bottom line... get rid of all zoos. If you really want to see an animal, go see it in its natural habitat.

Agreed.

I don't mind at all places that take endangered species in order to attempt to save a species from going extinct. But I feel like going to these places merely to gawk at animals for our entertainment is archaic and should be done away with.

I know this stuff doesn't happen all the time and it isn't some epidemic or anything, but again having to kill any animal regardless of it being endangered or not because of human neglect happens enough to where it is too much.

Humans have done enough harm to plenty of species and we continue to do harm in places where we take them to be protected. If we can't protect these animals in the man made habitats we create to protect them because of the general public, then the general public should be out of the equation.

 

[Kahaih]

The bottom line... get rid of all zoos. If you really want to see an animal, go see it in its natural habitat.

Do you want us to build roads, hiking trails, observation towers, hotels, fast food restaurants, airports, gun shops, camping supply malls/outlets, etc. in or next to these natural habitats – turn the natural habitats into zoos?

Or are you just telling us to go swim naked with the stingrays?

 

[gsdx]

First off the Zoo apparently did not have good enough barriers they should be sued. Second I think I would have tried a tranquilizer shot first with another ready to shoot to kill!

You haven't been reading the responses, have you?

 

[zoltanspawn]

You haven't been reading the responses, have you?

Perhaps he just hasn't been persuaded by them? Some of us agree with lambdaboy on these issues, and have made reasonable arguments in agreement with him. Have you read those?

 

[mikey3000]

Wow, I don't know who is hated more, the guy who shot the gorilla or the mother who actually had the nerve to reproduce and ruin the world.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

I haven't see anyone say they hated the guy who shot and killed the Gorilla or they hated the Mother. People are saying their opinions on other options they thought should have been taken and a bit more responsibility from the Mother where this situation wouldn't have happened in the first place.

 

[Kahaih]

Wow, I don't know who is hated more, the guy who shot the gorilla or the mother who actually had the nerve to reproduce and ruin the world.

Please don't exclude yourself from the list of possibilities. You started this thread.

 

[eddielee]

You're not paying attention. The issue that's raised so much ire isn't simply the killing of an animal, but the killing of an endangered animal.

Of course I'm paying attention and I know that the animal is endangered, but that does not change my response.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Of course I'm paying attention and I know that the animal is endangered, but that does not change my response.

Your post introduced an animal rights group to this thread, PETA. They are barely relevant to the global discussion that's going on, and hardly representative of the diverse groups criticizing Harambe's death.

 

[Cormac135]

This is how it all started people.

" Justice for Harambe "

" Ape Lives Matter "

 

[eddielee]

Your post introduced an animal rights group to this thread, PETA. They are barely relevant to the global discussion that's going on, and hardly representative of the diverse groups criticizing Harambe's death.

I consider them relative to the topic, of course there are other groups and individuals who are criticizing what has happened. The natural habitat of the Gorilla is in a fragile state, and even though people are trying to protect them, poachers and angry farmers are a problem. I have mixed emotions about having gorillas in zoos. If some great tragedy would strike, and all of the gorillas in their natural habitat were killed, then the only gorillas left would be those in the zoo. It's a tricky situation. If we can increase protection for the gorillas natural mountain habitat, and have a good stable enviroment with a growing gorilla population, that would be ideal. Still, those gorillas that are in zoo's should stay there, because if released, they may not adapt to the new enviroment, and worse they may be in more danger. At some point in the future, we can work on not placing endangered animals in captivity.

 

[zoltanspawn]

It's a funny thing being in a hopeless situation.

We yearn for things to be different.

But at some point we have to abandon what we think is the right thing to do, because it's untenable.

*

Obviously, I'm someone who is absolutely disgusted by our abuse of the natural world. And obviously, I think the right thing to do is to try to preserve it. But the reality is that it's almost certainly too late for us humans to reverse the course of destruction we've wrought.

Perhaps instead of advocating a noble last stand against our endless egregious abuses, we ought to just embrace them?

As eastofeden put it, we're locusts. Maybe we ought to be locusts? Breed, consume, destroy, migrate. If the mass extinction we are perpetrating is inevitable, then let's get it on?

I wish I could be that sort of ubermensch, but at the end of the day I'm a sappy romantic that just doesn't want to abandon my sense of right.

Nothing personal, I like myself a lot and most people, too (even you disagreeable Jubbers). But I'd be quite happy if our specie's demise was suddenly accelerated.

 

[mikey3000]

Please don't exclude yourself from the list of possibilities. You started this thread.

In all sincerity, I think it was the right thing to do at that moment, though tragic that such a beautiful beast had to die. If it was any of your children/nieces/nephews/Godchildren/Grandmas/Grandpas who tumbled into that pit, I doubt anyone would expect anything less too. I do believe that, as suggested earlier, the containment fence is only three feet high, the zoo is definitely liable. Sure the moat may keep the animals in, but it doesn't keep people out.

 

[Alistair]

Agreed.

I don't mind at all places that take endangered species in order to attempt to save a species from going extinct. But I feel like going to these places merely to gawk at animals for our entertainment is archaic and should be done away with.

I know this stuff doesn't happen all the time and it isn't some epidemic or anything, but again having to kill any animal regardless of it being endangered or not because of human neglect happens enough to where it is too much.

Humans have done enough harm to plenty of species and we continue to do harm in places where we take them to be protected. If we can't protect these animals in the man made habitats we create to protect them because of the general public, then the general public should be out of the equation.

But people going to "gawk" at the animals is what pays to keep the endangered species fed, and cared for.

 

[zoltanspawn]

But people going to "gawk" at the animals is what pays to keep the endangered species fed, and cared for.

Should endangered species be "fed" and "cared for"?

Or should they enjoy a habitat where human intervention isn't necessary?

Animals ought to be able to thrive without people paying for their existence.