Why do you support or why are you against zoos?
I've only heard a few things about the issues but this is what little i've picked up.
pros
>research
>prevent extinction
dunno what kind of research tho
cons
>animal rights
>been in captivity for too long to be released back into the wild
I'm interested in knowing more about the issue
Do your own homework
As you said, there are pros and cons. Zoos can also are also great for children, but you could say that it might be smarter to take your kids to birdwatch or something if you want spark their interest in nature.
>>2079723
>>animal rights
surely you mean animal welfare? the animal rights groups are usually idiots who anthropomorphise too hard. animal welfare would make more sense as it can be hard to ensure freedom to express natural behaviours is followed, especially with captive wild animals.
>>been in captivity for too long to be released back into the wild
it's usually the offspring of zoo stock who are rehabbed for release in the wild
>>2079725
i don't go to school
>>2079739
animal welfare is a part of animal rights.
>>2079730
but if these animals suffer, shouldn't we not let them suffer unnecessarily? if they would be happier in a reservation or in the wild wouldn't that be better?
pros
>plenty of zoos do have 'appropriate' enclosures
>zoos who do enrichment and want to keep their animals from being miserable
>access to vet care
>won't get ripped apart by predators
>no worry about getting ripped apart by predators so little to no stress(most are numb to people gawking at them)
>good way to teach kids and get people interested in learning, working and helping animals. thus it also helps wild animals
Zoos have come along way. There's pros and cons, and there's good zoos and bad zoos. I'm always happy to hear about zoo closure expansions, and no doubt in the future there will also be more pressure to continue to improve.
>>2079742
animal welfare is proving best possible care for captive animals, in accordance to the 5 freedoms
animals rights is thinking animals should have equal rights to humans, not giving as much thought to things like natural behaviours(which is a big part of welfare) and instead anthropomophising hard
they're not really all that similar.
A zoo with great and constantly improving welfare standards will still get picketed and abused by animal rights groups, as they just think all the animals should be set free regardless of the welfare standards of each particular zoo. A good zoo will be treated the same as a shit zoo by animals rights campaigners
>>2079745
>>no worry about getting ripped apart by predators so little to no stress(most are numb to people gawking at them)
there's studies, including ongoing ones, that show the animals aren't necessarily as habituated and unaffected by zoo crowds as first thought. I think a recent one I read was focused on penguins. It's something zoos need to work on, providing more cover or giving the animals an area which is out of site.
>>2079755
I don't think you need a study to figure that out but I have heard of studies from endocrinologists testing the 'stress levels' of zoo animals. I do think it depends on the species, what kind of enclosure they have and then can come down to individual animals. Obviously them having cover and allowing them to get away is good, though. It sucks not being to see all the animals you want to see and all but its much better for them instead of being forced into the open.
I feel bad for animals behind glass since christ people never stop banging on it.
>A zoo with great and constantly improving welfare standards will still get picketed and abused by animal rights groups, as they just think all the animals should be set free regardless of the welfare standards of each particular zoo. A good zoo will be treated the same as a shit zoo by animals rights campaigners
I also agree with this. It's very black and white when it comes to animal rights groups - slightly less animal welfare groups. Sometimes I wonder if they even really believe what they are making a fuss about it and their real intention is just to see some change. I mean, what sounds more clickbait? "x wants zoo to close" or "x wants a bigger enclosure for groundhogs"? People will pay attention to the bigger outcry and get involved if they make it seem worse than it is because it obviously puts more pressure on the zoos.
>>2079745
Your pros also justify having tigers as house-pets.
I think it's a matter of what is natural and right for the animals. I don't think that saying they will be free from predators is a good reason to keep them locked up.
I think your points are naive, we should do what's best for the animals naturally and let them live in their natural habitats, i under no cercumstances think that ”it's a good way to teach children” is a good argument, we are talking about keeping animals captive, your children have no rights to these animals.
>>2079755
>animals rights is thinking animals should have equal rights to humans
This is laughably false, ofcourse if you were talking about american animal rights movements, then yeah sure.
>>2079762
Natural doesn't automatically equal good or best. A lot of terrible things are perfectly natural. That's why we made the epidural.
>>2079758
>I do think it depends on the species, what kind of enclosure they have and then can come down to individual animals.
Oh of course, 100% does.
>slightly less animal welfare groups.
Welfare groups are things like the RSPCA or whatever similar someone may have in their country. Animal welfare is a good cause and something I myself strive to improve all the time.
I personally don't see any of the wanting bigger enclosure being misrepresented as a group wanting to close a zoo, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does happen. I'm thinking more along the lines of the captive animal protection society, peta, groups like that.
Actually OP, for your homework, you should look at the keeping of non endangered animals in zoos. One of the main aims of any good zoo is conservation, because of this some argue that it is pointless for a zoo to keep a non endangered animal as resources can instead go to a species that needs it. I agree with this view point myself - why keep ring tailed coatis when mountian coatis can be kept instead, and more learned about the species.
>>2079765
I live in europe.
Animal rights is about gaining equal rights for humans and animals.
animal welfare is humane treatment and good husbandry in accordance to best known scientific knowledge. You can campaign for animal welfare and not believe that humans and animals should have equal rights.
>>2079767
What purpose does an animal serve in captivity?
If it's just for a sideshow attraction and not for anything else, then i really don't think we should have zoos.
I never meant to impky that they wouldn't be harmed or killed in nature but if there's no reasoning to keep them there other then "look a monkey!" It doesn't seem right. And as i mentioned in this post >>2079762
Saying that they will be better off captive, let's us easily justify people having exotic pets and we all aggree(i think) that people shouldn't have exoctic pets like tigers and lions.
>>2079768
>conservation
Do you preservation by that? If so, in what way is that nessecary? If you only are going to keep them captive for the rest of their lives, in what do you preserve the species other than in your little bubble in the zoo? When i think preservation i think of reinvigoration of the species in the wild and helping that population regrow from human or other behavior.
You're talking about learning from species and that might be a solid argument but that wouldn't mean species like tigers or lions, species we might just have exhousted of knowlegde. As you said why keep x speices when we don't know enough of y.
>>2079772
In many ways i think you're trolling me. But i'll bite, when you say equal rights, what do you mean by that? If a cow kills my son, do we have to hold a trial against that cow?
>>2079762
I think your points are naive if you think that zoos shouldn't be around at all since you seem to think leaving wildlife alone is what we should do. Well, you're not wrong - but you're completely unrealistic and it's not going to happen so you instead should be focusing on how to improve the lives of animals that are already in captivity. My personal exclusion to this cetaceans but thats just like, my opinion, man. But even then, just get with the times. There will be more animals that will rely on zoos for survival. Hopefully it will only be temporary before the species can be released back into the wild, but it's still a long way to go. Protected parks can only do so much.
Education is a valid reason. While little Timmy may not grow up to punch poachers in the face, they raise public interest which obviously gets more people involved, be it donating money to various related causes or allowing internships for people who will work at the zoo, or go off to other fields revolving around it. Less people would be working with animals if they had no choice but to fuck off to another country. Yes, zoos are mostly a side show attraction but as I mentioned before - everything has it's pros and cons and also as I mentioned before, people like you have a very black and white image of the world and how things work. It's your way or no way.
>>2079783
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11634363/Chimps-deserve-human-rights-activists-argue-in-New-York.html
>>2079783
It's not a view point I subscribe to, i couldn't tell you. It's shit like peta thinking people should keep pets. It's breaking into fur farms and releasing a load of american mink into the wild in Europe with little thought or care on how it will affect wildlife there, because all they want is for the animals to be set free. That's how I have had animal rights explained to me. In contrast, an animal welfare group would look to educate more on how best to keep the pet, or if against fur farming, would look to find somewhere else for the american mink to go instead of just releasing them straight out into the wild where they fuck up local eco-systems.
>>2079781
I think we may be viewing conservation and preservation as the same thing then? There's a number of species which have been reintroduced back to the wild from zoo populations. Arabian oryx, European bison and nene just to name a few. Soon to include the Amur leopard too, which I think is good and needs to be an aim of zoos.
keeping something just for the sake of it, with no aim, is not what I agree with.
>>2079789
>people should keep pets
I meant them thinking people shouldn't keep pets, not should! oops.
Assuming the animal's enclosure is huge and they have all they need, are they unhappy to be kept in the zoo? They get food for free, no need to hunt, they don't get attacked, they have mates all around and shelter.
>>2079787
Wasn't this just a storm in a teacup? The media blowing it out of proportion.
Anyway it doesn't make much sense as they seem to have concluded. Human rights are human rights, animal rights are animal rights. There is too large a gap with our cognitive abilities.
>>2079787
>america
>>2079785
We can't leave wildlife alone, we are actively destoying it.
The purpuse of this thread isn't to talk about animal welfare in the sense that zoos should be closed for lacking of or we should improve but rather why do we have zoos at all.
saying that we need zoos to have a hands on experience with animals to support animal welfare is futile, that would be like saying that you need to know someone with cancer before you're willing to support treaments and research.
You constantly assert you alligence to the zoos without questioning why we need them at all. Insulting me won't do you any good.
>>2079789
>keeping something just for the sake of it, with no aim, is not what I agree with.
And that's essential what >>2079785 is saying, the zoos have been here and always be here, so deal with it. I might be exatorating but i don't thinki'm too far off. What do you think of the normal kind of zoo, with giraffes, lions ect.? Some of these zoo groups share and sell animals inbetween them. But little we kno, will these animals or any of their offspring be released into the wild at all?
>>2079723
Zoo's.
>research
This can not be simplified. The amount of information we learn about animals from having them in cavity is massive.
>saving endangered species
>breeding programs
>saving species from disease
>animal awareness
>raising money
>education
>making people appreciate animals
Cons.
>some zoo enclosures are too small
>some zoo's in shit hole countries treat the animals like crap
>>2079789
Just to add to your examples - horse slaughterhouses / the sale of horsemeat here in the US. Instead of improving on conditions and abuse, it just got banned because the 'poor horsies' who don't think twice about eating any other farm animals. Horses got pretty fucked over when that was banned due to the sudden surge of unwanted horses and we are still having problems with feral horses in our ecosystem because PETAshits won't let anyone do anything about them to get them into a controlled population size despite them being an invasive, domestic species that are a negative impact. Horses are so romanticized that people cannot look past anything but that.
Australia also has an issue with them but I don't know their situation as well.
Same with dogs, really. People flip out over puppies and health dogs getting euthanized because they want to live in this big happy world where everything is OK and not address the real issues.
>>2079797
>saying that we need zoos to have a hands on experience with animals to support animal welfare is futile
You are more likely to care, want something and become more emotionally invested in something if you see it in person. And yes, actually. If someone you knew had or died of cancer, you would get more involved with it, wouldn't you? So that argument is 'futile'.
>You constantly assert you alligence to the zoos without questioning why we need them at all. Insulting me won't do you any good.
Why do I have to explain every little thing to you? That should have gone without saying, even though I already mentioned that in a previous post. I can't hold your hand for everything and once again you missed the point despite just basically repeating my point about how we aren't just going to leave wildlife alone(poaching, leveling forests, etc). In fact, you haven't acknowledged or disputed anything so I'm not sure why you're here.
>>2079745
cons
>predators have nothing to rip apart
>>2079800
No one is going to visit a zoo with two giraffes, a tiger and some pigeons that wandered in. A zoo cannot make money charging people $14 to see that. They are very expensive. Enclosures alone can go well into the 40 million. On top of that, zoos may also fund conservation projects. AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums claim to fund over 2500 conservation projects, for example.
>>2079801
saving endangered species and breeding programs should be the same, as you're not saving anything by putting it in captivity without any plans for future release.
>saving species from disease
I don't nessecarily agree with that, if the desease can be proven to have been caused by humans or if the ecological impact of the disappereanse of this species would be too high, then i think we should do what we can. I don't agree with the statement that we should save wildlife animals from nature itself and that includes deseases.
>animal awareness
>rising money
>education
>making people appreciate animals
All these things can be done without having a zoo.
Research is the only big key here for zoos, as i asked above, if we know enough about species x, why do we keep displaying them to a crowd, if all what we can possibly know about x is known, then shouldn't we stop having them in zoos?
>>2079807
A more interesting topic is why you're so anti zoo's.
>>2079797
>why do we have zoos at all
Well they started as the menageries just for entertainment. i suppose there are many in the world that are still purely entertainment.
They moved towards scientific research and good zoos gained goals in education, conservation and research. On a lot of zoo websites you will often see references to these three things, such as the ZSL website. But there's the argument that they cannot do these things without bringing in paying customers, so that's how we get the zoos we have now.
>>2079800
>What do you think of the normal kind of zoo, with giraffes, lions ect
Depends on the aim of the zoo and your definition of a 'normal' zoo. Here, the majority of zoos are registered and part of breeding programmes. I know elsewhere in the world, zoos can just pop up on the roadside and create shit like ligers for purely human entertainment and ego. Taking normal zoo on what I view as a normal zoo here, and looking at larger animals, I don't see the poiont in keeping any of them without having a plan or thinking about creating a plan to reintroduce into the wild to help wild populations. An example, Rothschild giraffes are one of the rarest giraffe subspecies in the wild. They are very, very common among European zoos. I myself have not heard of anything about reintroduction programmes for them to help the subspecies in the wild yet. Until I do, I don't feel comfortable keeping them in captivity. When it comes to lions, I've noticed more zoos looking towards keeping Asiatic lions instead of African lions, as Asiatic lions need more assistance. This, I understand, and with the new developments such as London zoos Asiatic lion enclosure, hopefully reintroduction programmes will come down the line. I know that ZSL have recently received the go ahead form the Russian government to work towards reintroduction of the Amur leopard, which will hopefully go well and be another success.
(cont...)
>>2079812
(...cont) Good zoos will often focus just as much on smaller species, such as Durrell zoo. When it comes to conservation, this zoo has done a lot worldwide. Its founder had what were at the time revolutionary ideas on zoos. Durrell often focuses more on the smaller species, though will look at larger as well. Smaller species are just as important as larger ones, they're just a lot less popular with the paying public. Another example would be Bristol zoo, which has a pair of asiatic lions and a band of gorillas as the only large animals in the collection.
>>2079804
that's why zoos often carcass feed, as enrichment for the predators to have something to dissect.
>>2079803
I meant it as a futile argument. I don't agree with these sort of appeal to emotions you americans like to push with everythin, no offense meant just an observation. But by that logic we should have a house filled with cancer patiences locked up and you can go through and look at them and feel sorry for them to then give an donation in the end of the tour. This is straight up manipulation of our human emotions, i very much do not aggree with that kind of appeal to emotions.
If you could calm doen and stop being so overly aggresive maybe i'd care nore to engade with you.
I have never said we should leave wildlife alone, that's something you assert because you already came here with a biased against anybody talking or even questioning zoos, i have no further matter to be had with you.
>>2079807
>wildlife animals from nature itself and that includes deseases
Sometimes the diseases can be spread due to human impact, so they are a lot more far reaching than they would otherwise be. Or even a disease that one population of a species has evolved and adapted to being spread to a new location where the species has not been able to evolve and adapt to it as they have never been exposed to it before
>>2079803
Exactly. It's like reading the book animal machines and coming up with the five freedoms, compared to reading the book animal machines and coming up with animal liberation. Sure, animal liberation makes great points, but overall the five freedoms are a lot better for animals both now and in the future
>>2079815
I think you and i are alot more alike than that of the zoo-zealot in this thread.
I do think they should be doing something other than just breeding for show.
What would you think of a sort of government exclusive zoo? No more people to watch the animals, they will be left in peace and programs that have goals will be worked on.
>>2079817
And that's why i said that if we can prove that humans caused it we should help, that includes all formps of human nature activity like flying around the world with animals and diseases.
>>2079816
You are taking examples too literally and misconstruing them. Capitalizing on peoples emotions may be manipulative, but it works. Again, you are more likely to help a cause if it effects you or if it's front of your face. This also applies to just usual shit like regular stores.
You are also assuming that I am 100% for zoos. I am not. I just don't think they are going away and I can see what 'good' they may be doing so I chose to focus on how zoos can improve, which you can't seem to grasp. I'm not mad, you just aren't providing a substantial alternative to zoos that we don't already have.
>>2079821
>What would you think of a sort of government exclusive zoo? No more people to watch the animals, they will be left in peace and programs that have goals will be worked on.
Unrealistic, just like your expectations.
>>2079821
It's good in theory, but would not work in practice. People would not be happy with so much government money, their taxes essentially, going towards a zoo they cannot visit at all. It owuld also create a monopoly on what governments get what animals. Look at the Chinese government and the panda! The panda has little conservation value there is very little space for them to be re-released into should there be a re-introduction programme, and they do not do well in captivity as seen by how hard it is to get them to breed. Instead, the chinese government uses them as good PR/ambassadors to China, and makes a lot of money by charging so much for other countries to 'rent' the pandas from them for a few years. There's too much possibility for corruption.
The good zoos are usually run more like charitable trusts, and are doing well, generally. Should they have unlimited money, I am sure that many would work less towards the entertainment/business aspects and focus on the research, conservation and education. The entertainment side is currently needed for the business, though most the time the entertainment is brought into the education aspect, particularly for children.
Zoos often have a lot of animals off display as part of breeding programmes too. They will also block an enclosure from public view if the species within is breeding and sensitive to too much noise/etc. I've seen this a lot with bird of prey enclosures. I would like this to happen across more species, personally, but currently the zoos need to bring people in for the money so they can continue in conservation efforts, and nothing gets people in like baby animals. a lot of places will keep new young off display until they are several weeks old though, which is good.
>>2079815
>that's why zoos often carcass feed, as enrichment for the predators to have something to dissect.
I guess that's better than just feeding them hamburger but I always thought it seemed cruel to deny them the chance to hunt like nature intended
>>2079825
>focus on how zoos can improve
This is a view I agree with in all aspect of animal management. Another example is that slaughter houses are not going to go away, so instead let's work to improve them. In much the same way that Temple Grandin did and is doing. She likes cows. She knows that they are going to be farmed for meat. So she works to improve the life they do get right up until the moment of death. That's admirable.
>>2079830
>hunt like nature intended
In the wild, most hunts are unsuccessful. You can't just put say a gazelle in with a pride of lions and say it's as nature intended. In the wild, the gazelle would have a higher chance of escaping than the lion has of catching it. In captivity, there is no chance of escape. It's all good and well looking at the predators, but the same considerations of 'like nature intended' need to be given to the prey.
That's why instead, zoos will feed whole carcasses. They will also use things such as the Fota zoo cheetah run, where the cheetah needs to chase after the food to get it. Or the common one of tying food up high on poles and such so that the tiger or leopard needs to work to get the food.
>>2079821
>What would you think of a sort of government exclusive zoo? No more people to watch the animals, they will be left in peace and programs that have goals will be worked on.
My local zoo (Calgary, Canada) actually has a special non-public facility for exactly that. At the side facility they work on breeding a handful of endangered species, including whooping cranes. This conservation facility can only be seen during a guided tour held about twice yearly that you have to sign up for in advance. It's pretty neat.
Zoos keeping threatened and endangered animals safe, prompting kids and adults to learn about animals, providing research hubs for scientists and conservationists, raising awareness to ecological impacts and illegal trade markets and war economies.
Only real cons are when people just make shitty zoos. I will say that once you take away the general wilderness dangers, and then animals get complacent and slothish , most can get depressive or slowly lose their sharpness, but domestication will always take its toll.
>>2079825
This sort of argument to appeal to emotions in this way, even that it works, is highly questionable morally speaking. The welfare of animals is a moral issue and doing these sort of appeals is manipulative.
>I just don't think they are going away
Whether they are going away or not is completely irrelevant to the discussion.
I want to understand the two main sides for and against zoos, i'm not going to go launch a crusade against or for zoos, when the discussion is over.
>providing a substantial alternative to zoos
i have no idea where you got the idea that i wanted an alternative, if zoos serve no other purpose but to display animals in captivity, then they might as well go away but if you look at the different arguments in this thread, i do think they have a purpose beyond just making money. They can be used as an extremely important research tool, a way to reinvigorate nature from what humans have done to it and much more.
>Unrealistic, just like your expectations.
doesn't matter what's realistic or not, that's not at all how you explore ideas. if anything that comes your way is going to be dismissed with "unrealistic" then you're not worth having a quality discussion with.
I don't like larger animals in enclosures, most of them always need to be active and moving most the day. Unfortunately with the way humanity continues to ignore all other wildlife for profit - zoos might be the last bastion of hope for any other animal other than us soon enough which is sad and disgusting.
>>2079830
>I always thought it seemed cruel to deny them the chance to hunt like nature intended
Somehow I think the prey animals would disagree, no? A lot of hunts don't exactly end cleanly and the prey dies painfully and terrified. Not saying a slaughterhouse is nice, I think zoos here raise / slaughter at least some of their own meat to make sure it's chemical / hormone etc free
>>2079860
>doesn't matter what's realistic or not, that's not at all how you explore ideas.
That's exactly how it works you dumb fuck. People don't have to agree with your suggestions, and he offered a counter opinion.
>>2079889
>Somehow I think the prey animals would disagree, no?
who cares, prey animals are fgts
Would it be a good idea to feed zoo animals with the meat of criminals like psychopaths and rapists?
>>2079896
Edge aside, I don't think average human meat would be particularly clean or good for animals anyway.
>>2079889
>counter opinion.
>That's exactly how it works dumb fuck
that was nothing more than an attempt at shutting down the conversation. insults won't get you anywhere. And no, that's not how you have a rational conversation about ideas.
>Arguments against zoos consist of "Bad zoos do X"
I'm not sure what there is to discuss, the problem seems to be zoos and their staff not being willing to put in the proper effort to keep these animals properly, not a problem with the concept. Yes, to an extent they are there to entertain, because we find animals and nature fascinating. But they're primarily there to teach.
>>2079896
there are cheaper routes to get human meat than psychopaths and rapists you retard. like, i dunno. the morgue? there are fresh young bodies created every single day. if you want to make a tirade about psychopaths don't try to be unique and just call for their balls to be chopped off if you're so content with reducing us to barbarism and eye-for-an-eye logic. 'cuz you look like a retard
i can't be assed to read this entire lengthy thread but i just wanted to say that zoos promote the ownership of "exotic" pets such as tigers apparently if you have enough money zoos will breed whatever the fuck you want and there are more privately owned tigers than there are in the wild which is shitty
i think they serve a useful purpose for very specific fields (animation comes to mind, needing to see how particular animals move and look in 3d space) but videos kind of make up for it. it's not the same but it's better than nothing.
also a personal issue, my city zoo is kind of a hassle to get to and as someone as lazy as myself cant be assed to make that trip so why bother spending the time and money it take to get there when you could get a similar effect for free
i'm probably glazing over a lot of crucial points but i have the feeling that they've already been discussed in this thread and i hope i might have discussed some previously unexplored areas
also it seems like the go to fourth date for boring white couples
Depends entirely on the zoo. The one by my home has very high standards and the more intelligent animals are interacted with by employees regularly.
I've also been to shitty zoos where most animals are just put in cages or concrete pits, but it's been a long time since I've seen those. Are they still around?
>>2079745
another pro is animals don't have to face loss as often. A lot of mammals and birds get attached to their own loved ones. In the wild, much can happen. In a zoo, they'll most likely stay together until old age or sickness.
>>2079896
As >>2079902 said. A lot of zoos actually feed their large cats horse instead of beef as it's better for them. I couldn't tell you in what way though. Human meat would likely be bad.
>>2079995
Good zoos registered with the proper associations wouldn't do this. They would lose their registration, and therefore the ability to trade animals between institutions and possibly lose some of their animals animals altogether. Those shitty zoos you get that pop up on the roadsides in some countries? I wouldn't be surprised if they did.
Zoos are necessary to prevent some animals from going extinct and to teach the populace. But I agree that some more sociable/intelligent animals are fucked up by being in there. But zoos are necessary.
>>2080052
>A lot of zoos actually feed their large cats horse instead of beef as it's better for them. I couldn't tell you in what way though.
Maybe it has something to do with the fat content? Cattle has been bred a lot fattier and juicier over time. Horse meat is very lean in comparison.
>>2080611
Possibly, but you can get lean beefs.
I think some zoos do still feed beef, so it might just be cost related over any other benefit
>>2080611
horse meat is unfit for human consumption because it's largely unregulated.
it's often not even good enough to be turned into commercial pet food.
>>2080618
A lot of countries eat horse meat. The first time I tried it was when I was stationed in Japan. It is also sold in China,Germany and Europe and im sure a lot of third world countries. It use to be one of the main ingredients in dog food.
>>2079836
>In the wild, most hunts are unsuccessful. You can't just put say a gazelle in with a pride of lions and say it's as nature intended. In the wild, the gazelle would have a higher chance of escaping than the lion has of catching it. In captivity, there is no chance of escape. It's all good and well looking at the predators, but the same considerations of 'like nature intended' need to be given to the prey.
I wonder if it would be possible to design an exhibit that houses a predator and prey species together so that the predator can hunt for some of its food but without making it a slaughterhouse where the prey doesn't have a chance. It would probably need to be pretty large, maybe larger than practical.
>>2080618
Horse meat from any random dead horse tends to be unfit for human consumption. Horse meat that is butchered, for which the horse must be registered for, checked by a vet prior to the butchering, and be all in the clear before anything happens, is fit for human consumption. That's at least how it works in my country.
>>2081236
>Horse meat that is butchered, for which the horse must be registered for, checked by a vet prior to the butchering, and be all in the clear before anything happens, is fit for human consumption.
and that's a very small percentage of all horse meat available.
I'm speaking in general terms.
>>2080645
you're mentioning places with poor food regulation.
>>2081429
>I'm speaking in general terms.
Of something that's hardly on-topic, since the conversation was fairly obviously about the potential pros of the kind of horse meat that a zoo would deem safe to give to its animals. Which is fairly unlikely to be the poorly regulated kind unless it's a really shitty zoo.
>>2081446
you failed when you replied to bugguy
>>2081452
You're right. I'll stop now.
>>2081446
>Which is fairly unlikely to be the poorly regulated kind
it's unlikely to be human-grade horse, as it's expensive.
Another perfectly good thread ruined by bugguy.
>Just another day in /an/
>>2081500
I just skip over his comments. He is dead to me.
Your average pet horse is given dewormers and other medication that has not been approved for use in animals intended for human consumption. Some other countries have more lax regulations about that kind of thing but, mostly, in the the countries where there is significant demand for horsemeat, certain breeds of horse are raised expressly for meat. Like beef cattle, some breeds of horse have been bred to economically gain muscle mass - like the Boulonnais in France.
The US actually outlawed using horsemeat in commercially-prepared pet food in the 70's.
A friend of mine keeps his old retired horses on pasture until they start to decline. They he calls the local zoo and they come out with a trailer and a winch. They shoot the horse in the skull in the yard and then winch the carcass onto the trailer and bring it to the zoo where it is fed to the big cats. If the horse was euthanized with barbiturates, the carcass would not have been usable. The zoo doesn't pay for the carcass and my friend doesn't have to dig a hole or pay for carcass disposal. So I'm guessing part of why zoos might choose horsemeat is, as was previously mentioned, economics. Dead horses have essentially become a waste byproduct in this country.
Anyhow, that's what I know about horse meat and zoos.
>>2079762
theres a massive difference between keeping a wild animal professionally and trying to make it a pet.
