Of course you may have heard of Knut the polar bear. Oh, you don't read European-based news websites and somehow missed a story that I don't think made very many headlines here in the states? In that case, click on the previous link and do a bit of homework before continuing on with this post. I would go into a bit of back story myself, but honestly, I'm trying to keep today's post short.
Knut was a big deal, though and caused his zoo a lot of hassles because of his popularity. A zoo in Nuremburg, Germany, looking to avoid the frenzy of popularity that came with the hand-fed Knut originally said that they would not take care of the cubs if two recent bear mothers were unable or unwilling to care for their offspring citing the need for nature to run its course.
Is it just me or does this sound like a ridiculous argument? The polar bears don't live in nature. They live in a man-made zoo. They have to be given food by humans to live and would not prosper if they didn't have their specialized enclosure and keepers given that Germany is not the arctic circle. So given that these cubs wouldn't know what nature is if it slapped them in their cute little furry faces, why should nature get to decide if they live or die?
I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way in the US. I've seen plenty of pictures of bottle-fed animals in American zoos and there was no media frenzy over these animals, not even the baby pandas and they're fucking cute. Seriously, I think the media frenzy would come when it was found out that the zoo was letting cute baby animals die of neglect. I'm sure there'd be jobs lost and possible criminal convictions for animal cruelty. Letting them die isn't letting nature run her course, it's neglect. Once you take an animal out of nature, it becomes your responsibility and if the animal's popularity gets out of hand, that's your fault.
And in case you were wondering, the zoo came around and saw things my way when one of the bears ate her babies. I can just hear a little kid say "Schauen Sie, bemuttern Sie! Der Mutterbär denkt, daß ihr Baby Süßigkeit ist. Das ist dumm." According the AltaVista' Babel Fish translator that's German for "Look, mommy! That mommy bear thinks her baby is candy. That's silly." They've agreed to take care of the cub of a second polar bear whose mothering abilities are currently being questioned.
4 comments:
Good lord. I thought you could actually speak German for a second there.
That panda picture is cute in a vaguely pornographic way.
I remember Knut! He as sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo adorable. I definitely see things your way on the bottle fed babies especially after i saw the first fe pictures of baby knut
I read this story yesterday as well and had the same response. They also argued that they'd let the mothers reject the babies (and eat them) so that they (the mother bears) would know better how to take care of them next time (???).
Yeah that doesn't really make sense.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that was panda-cub porno that you linked to.
But more to the point, yes, it is absurd for a zoo to be arguing about maintaining a natural life cycle for these captive animals. Of course it's not natural. They're in a zoo.
Now, give us more panda porn. And we like them young. Don't act like you don't know where to find it.
Post a Comment