WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Captive & Domesticated Animals
Zoos, Circuses, Safaris: A Gallery of Captivity
Zoos, Circuses, Safaris: A Gallery of Captivity
|
Zoos, Circuses, Safaris: A Gallery of Captivity
|
Siberian tiger and African lion
 *This image is copyright of its original author
Siberian tiger and African lion
 *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
Siberian tiger and African lion
 *This image is copyright of its original author 
I'm making a serious inquiry:
can we, as all supposed animal lovers, STOP posting anything related to circus's and these Chinese animal farms? It's animal torture. Circus's are cruel and barbaric, there's a reason countries around the world are banning them. And these animal farms are even worse. What's the purpose of giving these awful organisations publicity here? So we can all look at a big cat living a horrible life or ignorant people's amusement? "A Gallery of Captivity" has two entirely different meanings for a tiger in a circus vs a tiger living in an acreddited zoo or wildlife sanctuary. There's simply NO REASON for any of these disturbing images and videos to be posted here. It's not my website, you can all do what you want but for all the GOOD this site has to offer, this is just a black eye.
So that the victims do not speak, there is no crime in this world. And if all those who suffer are silent, the world will become a paradise full of happiness and joy.
The perfect world exists only in fairy tales, Cruel things have been happening, even if unwilling to face, it still exists. Check it again, ''Zoos, Circuses, Safaris ... A Gallery of Captivity.'' The Official trailer for Blood Lions, a documentary that exposes the terrible truth behind the predator breeding and canned lion hunting industries in South Africa. 
@Betty :
We like to see the "struggle for life" characteristic of the natural order (predators hunting some preys, predators or other animals fighting each other) but we're sick to see the human barbarity (slaughter, hunting, canned hunting and so on). Paradox ? I don't think so. We can be amazed in front of the beauties of a wild world which disappears and frankly digusted by the actions of a living being aberration which, for a long time, proclaims to have been created just like God. The chinese people discovered the consumer society after the european people. Their zoos and parks are as squalid as the european zoos of the XIXth century. Perhaps at the end of this century, they would discover and promote the ecological welfare but it will be benefical only for them, the wild big predators having disappeared. In the meantime they seem cruel and inhuman in the worst cases, just curious and cold in front of a different life from their own in the best cases. I know that we don't live in a perfect world as you say. Since two years now, I'm member of the "Four Paws" association against the canned hunting. I'm even sponsoring a lion in South Africa. I know what happens in our lovely planet ruled over by the human order. I only choose not to watch such video you post. They would make me nauseous. Just like seeing full of people in cars, full of people in supermarkets, news of war and politics, in short all our disgusting hypocrisie in process and progress.  (01-16-2018, 09:50 AM)stoja9 Wrote: I'm making a serious inquiry: A 'serious inquiry' directed at the posters and owners of this forum deserves a serious answer from one of the co-owners. In order to be clear, I'll add right away that I agree with one remark of your post and disagree with all others, meaning we entered the department of serious disagreement. A - SUMMARY OF YOUR POST AND A FEW REMARKS a1 - Style. Your post has quite a few outspoken opinions. There is a direct connection between the way you present ideas and the tone of the debate that will follow. If you present opinions in a way not that different from those involved in some kind of fundamentalism, you can't expect a civilized and balanced exchange of ideas. It will affect the quality of the debate, that is. If the issue at hand is of vital importance, chances are the debate will not produce a result. a2 - Message. Your post is about the way captive animals are treated in circuses (a) and Chinese animals farms (b). You want to convince posters to stop posting anything related to circuses and animal farms. You also adviced the owners to ban any kind of publicity from 'awful organisations' involved in mistreatment of animals. a3 - Presentation. Your post suggests that all animals in all circuses and all animal farms are treated in a disrespectful, if not 'barbaric' and 'cruel' way. If you present an opinion in this way, posters with a different opinion will think twice about participating. This means it's likely that the debate will attract those interested in absolutes. As they, more often than not, prefer an all-out over anything else, chances are that the conclusion will be black or white as well. Can a conclusion of this nature have an effect on a situation that can result in mistreatment? Not likely, as those involved in decisions usually try to stay away from it. That, if interested in a follow-up, leaves pressure groups and violent confrontations between those in favour and those opposing the conclusion. In other words: acting in this way will often result in polarisation, if not outright violence. a4 - Conclusion. In order to convince others reading this thread, you distinguish between 'accredited zoos' and 'wildlife sanctuaries' on one hand and 'awful organisations' like circuses and animal farms on the other. To wind up the concert, you adviced the owners to remove the 'black eye' once and for all. B - RESPONSE As I already responded to the essentials of your post in the previous paragraph, I'll use this one to show you that the world I saw isn't black and white, but very different. I'll also inform you about those involved in the war against circuses in particular and the consequences of the ban that followed. Before I start, you need to know that I visited a lot of private facilities, rescue centers, 'accredited zoos', 'wildlife sancuaries', not-accredited zoos, circuses and facilities closed to the general public in quite a few countries. I measured and weighed big cats in a number of facilities, assisted vets in others and interviewed dozens of sponsors, directors, vets, trainers, keepers, transporters and others. Many of these interviews were long, and I mean long. Apart from that, I participated in projects. I also assisted many people involved in training, education and research. Apart from those mentioned above, I cooperated with board-members of organisations involved in animal welfare in some way. As a result of my experience, I got to a few opinions. And that's what they are: opinions. I'll start with zoos and facilities you 'approved' and will compare them to the 'awful organisations' you didn't. The zoos I saw were generally well-managed and healthy in most respects. Those involved in a breeding-program cooperated with 'accredited' institutions. Every now and then, reports were published. Although some of the people I met were prepared to assist me to a degree, most saw me as an intruder, an outsider or an unknown, and possibly dangerous, entity. Some had a genuine interest in animals, but most saw a zoo as just another job or as a vehicle to move up. Most of the 'awful organiations' you mentioned above were run by people who lacked any kind of formal training. Same for the others them employed. Very often, however, they were interested in animals and eager to learn. When I called to say hello, I usually was received with warmth and genuine interest. They took a lot of time to answer questions and they assisted me whenever possible. I noticed time and again that nearly all I met were involved with the animals they had. And the other way round. This regarding private facilities and rescue centers. Most circuses I visited were quite large and run like any other business. This means that they only employed a few. Most others got a contract for a season. Same for trainers. If he or she lived up to expectation, he got another year. As to the animals I saw in zoos and facilities you approved and those in facilities you didn't. The zoo animals were properly fed and all that, but they not seldom seemed to suffer from a mental condition of some kind. Some were just plain bored, but others were very bored or bored to death. To say they were parodies of their wild relatives would be an understatement. Although some cats lived to old age, most didn't get even close. To me, they often represented the ultimate result of 'not to be'. Cats living in 'awful organisations' were very healthy as a rule. They practised a lot, interacted with many animals and had a strong bond with the trainer. Although most animals enjoyed circus life, others did not. These no-performers and those involved in brawls had to be separated from the others. Most trainers kept these outsiders as long as they could, because they didn't want them to perish in 'accredited zoos' or worse. About animal welfare organisations and their members. I cooperated with quite a few on the future of facilities, zoos and things like that. The cooperation nearly always resulted in a total failure. The reason was a lack of interest of those connected to welfare organisations. That and a lack of knowledge. Although they seemed very interested in animals, they, regarding big cats, knew next to nothing. They were in it for something else. Based on what I know, I'd say that quite a few of them suffered from a troubled past. To them, nearly anyone connected to zoos, facilities and circuses was an enemy. An enemy they, this time, were going to beat one way or another. In the end, they did. The reason was they knew about pressure. When the ban on exotic animals had become a reality, trainers lost their job, income and their animals. Journalists, inspired by activists, often report about exceptions. The more terrible the consequences, the better. Over here, they hardly ever report about everyday life. If they do, those involved in animals bottom the list. This is why the public doesn't know that the ban resulted in the destruction of many big cats and the mental destruction of those that cared about them. In this way, a complete culture was destroyed by people out for revenge. Revenge on those who mistreated them when they couldn't defend themselves. They didn't have the courage to go after them when they had the opportunity to do so, but selected those who, like them, couldn't defend themselves: exotic animals and those who cared about them. They didn't solve any problem, that is. They just deposited it on the plate of the next generation. The difference most of them will never see a big cat interacting with people and other animals. All this to say that animal abuse was a myth? No. I see plenty of abuse. Every few weeks, a facility with chickens or pigs burns down. As a rule, all animals, often many thousands, perish. I see abuse on animals markets. I see abuse on farms run by people with big problems. Most of all, I see abuse on the streets. People with pets. Why is it that those who pose no threat were targeted in particular? And how about these 'awful institutions'? I visited quite a few in Europe. I talked to people who really know about (exotic) animals. People out for those who ignore or break rules in the world they know so well. I'm not saying I came up empty, but abuse was not often seen. It nearly always is an individual thing that can happen anywhere. People who abuse animals usually are known for other problems as well. In most cases, they are removed and endicted. C - CHINA I know you got a thing going with China. I understand, but what would you say if I selected a number of cases in which Americans were indicted for animal abuse and then use the image I created to get to an opinion about all Americans? And what would happen if I started a series on extinctions initiated by people in western countries in the recent past in far away countries? Generalisations seldom produce anything of value, no? Same for accusations. China has a long history, of which we know next to nothing. A pity, as it is very interesting. Culture often is a result of many centuries of development. Politics, however, is a very volatile thing. In the previous century, China, like many other countries, struggled with many problems. Some time after World War Two, Chairman Mao ordered 'The Great Leap Forward'. The campaign to eradicate problems included a war on wildlife. It had terrible consequences for many species. Although some individuals in Shaanxi survived the unslaught, the Chinese tiger, Panthera tigris amoyensis, was functionally extinct in the late sixties. In that period (1950-1980 roughly), other tiger subspecies in other regions (Bali, Java and the Caspian region) were also exterminated. A few decades ago, China, still ruled by the Communist Party, opened up. It had many positive effects, but the trade in tiger bones also crossed the border. As a result of the devastating consequences, a debate about trafficking erupted some time ago. Although the trade is still very much alive, it had a positive effect in China. The attitude is changing and it had very real results. In Manchuria, tigers are now protected. There will be a very large reserve near the Russian border and research is done in central China. I discussed a number of interesting studies and articles in the tiger thread. Opinions can change in a few decades, but changing a culture takes much more time. it's very likely that the trade in bones will continue in some way or another, that is. I hope the Chinese authorities will keep up the pressure, as the trade now extented to other species (lions and jaguars). As to tiger farms. Those interested in bones will go for the real deal whenever possible. Wild tigers, for this reason, are still poached everywhere, but it's more difficult than before and, more important, the costs have risen significantly. For this reason, dealers, to a degree, included bones of farm cats. You can declare a war on dealers, but the result will be no different from the war on alcohol in the twenties of the last century or the war on drugs today. The demand is too strong and there's too much money involved in trafficking. Crime pays. As simple as that. Tiger farms can ease the pressure on wild tigers. Another advantage is that some captive animals could be used for repopulating empty reserves. I agree that all of this is a far cry from what those interested in wildlife would like to see, but that's humanity for you. For this reason, education is all-important. Much more so than a war on bone dealers. D - FORUM POLICY I agree that some of the videos posted in this thread are disturbing, if not worse. Should we decide for a war on this kind of videos and focus on the opposite? This forum, as announced at the top of your screen, is about those making their home in the natural world. If you go over the threads we have, the conclusion is that we're good for our word. Wild animals come first. The problem is that they are on the backfoot nearly everywhere. Many species are walking the edge. The reason is us. The human population has exploded in the last century. Wild country has disappeared at an alarming rate. The result, apart from climate change and plenty of extinctions, is that most of us have lost contact with nature. Through this forum, we offer them "... a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future ... ". It is about the last part in particular. If we continue in the way we do, there will be, wildlifewise, not much of a future. The Chinese need time to change their culture, but so do we. Time, however, is running out. We need to change a few things and we need to do it fast. There are two ways to get there. We could start a war on destruction or we could start a debate about the way we act. If we debate, ideas are exchanged. We think it is about that in particular, as debating and cooperation are the best tools to change views. In the end, it is about respect for the planet we live on and respect for other creatures using her. This also means we need to reserve room for them. If people are made aware of this vital insight, chances are that videos that hurt the soul will sooner or later disappear. If we ban them, the opposite will happen. Anything that is banned will become attractive in some way. It is, however, not about money, but about other values. Insight starts with good information, good education and interacting. Good information is true information: we need to know what is going on in order to respond in the best possible way, I measn. The best ideas emerge during debates. In order to get there, good information (facts) is needed. Selection at the gate will result in the opposite. This forum offers the opportunity to exchange ideas. The condition is respect, not something else. 
A captive Lion and Tiger attack a horse during a circus. One of kany reasons I'm against animals in circuses . (noticeble their limited hunting skills in comparison with their wild once)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ircus.html (01-16-2018, 01:50 PM)Betty Wrote: So that the victims do not speak, there is no crime in this world. And if all those who suffer are silent, the world will become a paradise full of happiness and joy. oh, you of all people can just shut the fuck up. Literally ALL you ever post is stuff from these animal farms. (01-17-2018, 04:01 AM)Jeffrey Wrote: A captive Lion and Tiger attack a horse during a circus. One of kany reasons I'm against animals in circuses . (noticeble their limited hunting skills in comparison with their wild once) Oh...no no....apparently, we're supposed to "appreciate that" sort of stuff. 
(01-17-2018, 08:46 AM)stoja9 Wrote:Do not be mad, dear brother, You should 're supposed to' appreciate that" andersen's fairy tales.(01-16-2018, 01:50 PM)Betty Wrote: So that the victims do not speak, there is no crime in this world. And if all those who suffer are silent, the world will become a paradise full of happiness and joy. 
& what @
He presents them to us doesn't mean he endorses those. You make it sound in #1,099 like those "zoos & sanctuaries" are some kind of paradise... In a proper case, like in the rescue/breeding centers you are not gonna be able to see animals very well. If it's not completely out of bounds, then enclosures are large & far away, with enough private space. Not just 1 hectare of fake habitat funnelled towards a not-soundproof glass. (01-17-2018, 04:01 AM)Jeffrey Wrote: A captive Lion and Tiger attack a horse during a circus. One of kany reasons I'm against animals in circuses . (noticeble their limited hunting skills in comparison with their wild once) The video was posted by PC not so long ago. It resulted in the exchange on this page. Just saying. Opinion on what you saw appreciated, Jeffrey. Thanks for the input. My advice is to use another source of information. The Daily Mail, to put it mildly, isn't the most reliable of newspapers. Reading it online can have consequences for your computer as well (adds). As to the circus in China. Based on what I have, chances are that a ban is likely in the near future. A wild cat needs a lot of time to learn how to hunt. Only those who graduate will survive. Captive big cats, as you noticed, are mere shadows of their wild relatives. The poor horse had a scare, but it did very well. I've seen mixed acts in Europe. It takes an experienced trainer to do it right. Accidents between captive big cats and large captive herbivores were few and far between, but they happened. In the great majority of cases, the cats failed. Half a century ago, when quite a few had been caught in the wild, things were different. (01-17-2018, 08:46 AM)stoja9 Wrote:(01-16-2018, 01:50 PM)Betty Wrote: So that the victims do not speak, there is no crime in this world. And if all those who suffer are silent, the world will become a paradise full of happiness and joy. See no evil, hear no evil is one option. If we don't want to know about it and select at the gate, chances are it will continue. If it's noticed and discussed, things will change sooner or later. This the reason we need to discuss the black eye. I know you strongly disagree, but Betty has a point. There's no need for disrespect. If you disagree, use arguments. Way more difficult, but interesting. Same for your summary of the effort to explain our position regarding the black eye. I know you disagree, but there's no need to enter sarcasm. In the end, the aim of all of us is to prevent crappers learning at the cost of those who can't defend themselves. The disagreement is about the method used to get there. I could ask Mike Tyson to explain our position, but chances are the authorities will disagree. A debate is slow, but it will have more effect. It is about consensus and laws. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 4 Guest(s) |