View Full Version : Should this little bear be put down?
tucool
20th March 2007, 19:59
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/20032007/397/bear-cub-0.html
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6668/2895479614bearcubsb8.jpg
I beleive it has the right to life, regardless of how it was brought up... just like you would expect for any human.
If bottlefeeding an animal is more cruel than killing it, something is wrong.
gemini
20th March 2007, 20:10
Its not wrong right now, because it can be cared for propperly.
But what happens in a few years when the bear is the size of a small bus. A bear is a bear and it will easily kill anyone without a second thought.
Delicate, but not so much as to warrent putting it down.
tucool
20th March 2007, 20:13
Bears are bred in relative captivity successfuly in 'conservation' areas and zoo's, I imagine the bear will be no more difficult to take care of than its mother (who is in the same zoo)
Killy
20th March 2007, 20:29
**** no
if the zoo can look after all the needs of the bear why does it matter if it's "domesticated" or not? as tucool said if they can look after an adult bear then they should be able to bring this up fine.
they have said that it'll be hard to get the bear to interact with other bears "in the wild" but as they've also said polar bears do live by themselves in the wild so what's the problem?
Semajal
20th March 2007, 20:47
Gemini- a hand reared bear in a zoo is unlikely to kill people. Most animals wont randomly attack people anyway. I agree with kill, there is no reason to put it down. It could well help with breeding programs and has also raised awareness of polar bears. This is just the animal rights nuts finding something else to vent about. Yet i dont see them going to india or other countries where endanged animals are being wiped out to try and stop it...
catbeef
20th March 2007, 20:55
i saw the lions at longleat, THEY WERE MANIACS AND ATTACKED THE CARS EIGHT PEOPEL DIED OMG!!!
Vikx
20th March 2007, 21:09
let it live, or just move it to another zoo if the one its at cant cope.... it makes me sad that the *animal well fair lot* want to just kill it...instead of giving it a chance...
ccxo
20th March 2007, 21:33
Animal activists are idiots- the bear has the best chance at the zoo and like the zoo said in the wild polar bears are in decline so they need to be bred in captivity.
Demonic
20th March 2007, 21:45
The Animal Rights Activists in questions should really get put down themselves.
Semajal
20th March 2007, 22:07
2nd demonic's idea
gemini
20th March 2007, 22:58
I prefer to call them animal rights terrorists.
Did you hear a while ago about them threatening the staffs children at that research place. Some of them have to check for bombs underneath their car every day.
I do agree though that there is no need for it to be put down.
ccxo
20th March 2007, 23:29
I prefer to call them animal rights terrorists.
Did you hear a while ago about them threatening the staffs children at that research place. Some of them have to check for bombs underneath their car every day.
I did hear quite a bit about that- quite a few of the directors etc had to take a different route to work everyday because of animal rights terrorists- anyone remember the grandmother that was dug up and stolen because of her family's business rearing guinea pigs for animal research- done by animal rights terrorists.
lyn
21st March 2007, 06:22
I did hear quite a bit about that- quite a few of the directors etc had to take a different route to work everyday because of animal rights terrorists- anyone remember the grandmother that was dug up and stolen because of her family's business rearing guinea pigs for animal research- done by animal rights terrorists.
I heard about the grandmother, i have no idea how digging her body would help things and stop the family business. As for the bear cub he should be allowed to live, alot of animals are hand reared to help with there survival. It's not uncommon at all. I'm sure if it was a cow or a sheep we wouldn't even hear about it but because it's a cute cub they want to make a huge thing out of it.
No wonder a lot of animals are ending up extinct if this is the way the animal rights people think things should go. Maybe if one of them gets ill they shouldn't get medical treatment, i bet they change there minds quickly after that.
BaNZ
21st March 2007, 10:04
In China/ HK polar bear paws is a delicacy. I think it cost as much as what I earn for an entire year.
Pru
21st March 2007, 10:53
I've just recently started volunteering at a zoo/animal park, and we had a discussion similar to this last week, we were saying that if the animal has been abandoned or its mother has died, then hand rear it because it deserves to live and you should do you best to try and let it have a natrul life, but if someone had taken an animal away from its mother just for the sake of doing that, then its wrong. I personaly can't see the problem with this bear cub, i mean it deserves to live, and if that means hand rearing then so be it, once its old enough to eat for itself i can immagine the zoo staff would distance themselves from it anyway.
Strych
21st March 2007, 15:28
I'm really not seeing the thrust of the "animal welfare" camps argument. Surely killing any animal (other than humane euthanasia) is against thier whole ethos?
Omnituens
21st March 2007, 15:32
Jesus Christ, it's a polar bear! Get back on the snowmobile!
Screwball
21st March 2007, 15:56
well tbh as its well and ok i should think its cruel to put it down, if it was suffering from pain or any uncomfort then yes. If the animal was brought up with humans/surroundings im a bit touchy with the subject as i think regardless of people being able to give it a good life eg enclosure , vacination, that it should be in the wild where it belongs "free" in certain terms. I know im sounding like a **** but i really feel stongly for animal rights. Obviously if its been brought up from birth by humans then they should take responsibility of making it have a good life as they have stoped if from its natural habitat, if u get any of tht :P
Say_Ten
21st March 2007, 17:32
It'd be dead without our intervention...
Jingles
21st March 2007, 21:17
Humans interferred to keep it alive, humans have the moral obligation to try to wean it back into its natural state.
Rich
21st March 2007, 21:23
/end
Say_Ten
22nd March 2007, 08:58
Humans interferred to keep it alive, humans have the moral obligation to try to wean it back into its natural state.
I don't see that being feasible tbh, polar bears learn from their mum how to hunt etc. We're simply not equipped to teach them how to survive in the wild.
UberMonkey
22nd March 2007, 11:01
....it cant survive on its own, so we kill it... that seems wrong...
if a human is handicapped in any way, we make allowances to help them lead a full life... but if a polar bear wont be able to survive in the antartic, just kill it? ><
i don't think it should be killed... and i dont think anyone has the right to say it should be.
Jobabob
22nd March 2007, 12:15
if a human is handicapped in any way, we make allowances to help them lead a full life...
its not a human, its a bear and bears are UNSTOPPABLE KILLING MACHINES. We must strike now before they take over the WORLD
Afty
22nd March 2007, 12:25
I don't see that being feasible tbh, polar bears learn from their mum how to hunt etc. We're simply not equipped to teach them how to survive in the wild.But this guy will spend the rest of his natural life in a zoo - he's not going to be released to the wild.
Say_Ten
22nd March 2007, 12:51
Wasn't suggesting he was, I was arguing against "returning to it's natural state". You're slipping afty!
RocketKnight
22nd March 2007, 13:24
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6668/2895479614bearcubsb8.jpg
I bet it tastes like chicken.
/licks lips
Really though, might as well keep it in the zoo. It will bring in more customers which will generate more cash to spend on looking after the animals.
evs
22nd March 2007, 13:57
2 thoughts on this
1. Polar bears are (in general) solitary animals in the wikd, and though they do like to roam territories, it *shouldnt* get big 'pack disowning' problems. In fact due to the amount of visitor's its likely to get over the course of its life, its more likely to get annoyed at all the attention, so to put it down due to being abandoned - it's not a big deal.
2. Not all animal rights activists are idiots or 'animal terrorists', as per normal its the small few that take the limelight and news from the majority.
Afty
22nd March 2007, 14:11
Wasn't suggesting he was, I was arguing against "returning to it's natural state". You're slipping afty!Argh! My apologies, I utterly misread the first part of your post.
jaffy
24th March 2007, 16:22
poor little bastard
i think the zoo have done wrong in making him so domesticated - if you watch the video they treat him just like a puppy.. i am surprised that a zoo would look after him this way.. but then they are the experts, maybe it's in his best interests to give him this sort of interaction..
but then at the same time, im sure that those shots were carefully selected to show how cute he is, and how awful it would be to put him down. Im sure he has plenty of "alone time" just like any little polar bear would.. its not like hes goin back to his keepers house every night is it?
like everyone else is saying, he should have a chance. when he gets big enough to be a threat he can be a regular zoo polar bear like all the others, all over the world. just perhaps with a little more understanding for the keepers than he would otherwise have.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.