Snow Leopard killed

Asha said:
OK so I'm not the animal contained behind bars. in a cage etc but I do know what it is to have "freedom" in so far as being able to wander about in my own environment, to interact with whomever / whatever I wish, to search food of my choice and eat when and where I please…...The list goes on!

It is not natural to confine any living creature, including ourselves and indeed it can have a detrimental effect psychologically.
Do we REALLY have a right to inflict suffarance on any animal? Is it not enough that we are often quite "happy" to inflict hurt ( physical and psychological) on each other which in itself is quite sad and sick.

I don't expect people to agree with me, nor am I attempting to start a debate.
I have simply voiced my personal opinion and perhaps ( like other folks opinions) it may give food for thought to some who have never considered that these places of "entertainment" ( ie zoos / animal parks ) are not necessarily in the best interests of the animals that reside in them regrdless of our attempt to make them as "comfortable" as possible.
Nature knows best, not us!
Click to expand...

While in an ideal world we would not have a reason to have zoo's, the world we have is imperfect (and we have a lot of responsibility for this).

Which leaves a dilemma on how to go forward from where we are now (as we cannot change the mistakes of the past, just hope not to repeat too many of them!)

There are a number of species (and Snow Leopards are one of them), who's numbers in the wild are critically low - if we don't take positive action, there is a strong likelihood that they will become extinct.

There are programs to preserve existing habitat, and to expand it. To create 'safe' areas for them to live in the wild, free from human interference.
But land is a finite resource, and there is lots of competition for it, so creating such reserves takes both time and money.

In the meantime, we have zoo's etc. who are able to ensure an alternative safe environment - not an ideal one, but one that does ensure the species survival.
Very occasionally, something goes wrong, as in this case, but that is very much the exception - we are right to be upset by it, but it's all part of the imperfect world we live in.

On the more general subject of zoos and captive animals - an alternative viewpoint is that they are as much 'educational' as 'entertainment' - they provide a wealth of information about the animals they have, their natural habitat. They inform and inspire - many sponsor animals to provide additional funding, which helps research, etc. Of course, some zoos are better than others (just as for humans, some places are better to live than others - and for many their choice is almost as restricted as that of the animals, but that's a different discussion), but they are getting better as time goes on. and more is known and understood.
It's an imperfect situation, but currently the best one we have available.
 
Cobra said:
We know no different, we have never experienced the super rich life style and don't miss it.
Click to expand...
SFTPhotography said:
that's not the natural order of things - they might know no different but their instincts etc won't like it.
Click to expand...

I get the impression that Steve's point ' of which I fully agree) is that instictively, capitivity is not natural and simply unhealthy to the living being….hence my comment:

Asha said:
It is not natural to confine any living creature, including ourselves and indeed it can have a detrimental effect psychologically.
Click to expand...

Inability to live as nature intended is enough to drive us or any animal completely nuts…..although some of us don't need to be confined to achieve that goal:D
 
Faldrax said:
While in an ideal world we would not have a reason to have zoo's, the world we have is imperfect (and we have a lot of responsibility for this).

Which leaves a dilemma on how to go forward from where we are now (as we cannot change the mistakes of the past, just hope not to repeat too many of them!)

There are a number of species (and Snow Leopards are one of them), who's numbers in the wild are critically low - if we don't take positive action, there is a strong likelihood that they will become extinct.

There are programs to preserve existing habitat, and to expand it. To create 'safe' areas for them to live in the wild, free from human interference.
But land is a finite resource, and there is lots of competition for it, so creating such reserves takes both time and money.

In the meantime, we have zoo's etc. who are able to ensure an alternative safe environment - not an ideal one, but one that does ensure the species survival.
Very occasionally, something goes wrong, as in this case, but that is very much the exception - we are right to be upset by it, but it's all part of the imperfect world we live in.

On the more general subject of zoos and captive animals - an alternative viewpoint is that they are as much 'educational' as 'entertainment' - they provide a wealth of information about the animals they have, their natural habitat. They inform and inspire - many sponsor animals to provide additional funding, which helps research, etc. Of course, some zoos are better than others (just as for humans, some places are better to live than others - and for many their choice is almost as restricted as that of the animals, but that's a different discussion), but they are getting better as time goes on. and more is known and understood.
It's an imperfect situation, but currently the best one we have available.
Click to expand...

The primary imperfection on this planet is US !
 
Asha said:
capitivity is not natural and simply unhealthy to the living being….hence my comment:
Click to expand...
Do they actually know they are in captivity? no, they have a "range" in which to feed sleep and if they are lucky ;) breed.
Animals in the wild "range" for food & water. If its on their "doorstep" they have no need to "range" for miles.
In the wild, they won't leave green pastures to go elsewhere just in case the grass is actually greener,
and possibly risk ending up on someone else's menu.
Predators expand a lot of energy running down a meal. They have to be 100% sure that the "intake" is greater than the "output"
If not, every-time they hunt and kill, they are on a downward spiral.

Going back to my previous post, there is no need for the flight or fight instinct there is no need to go hunting for food, there is no need to be constantly on
the look out for predators ... all stress inducing parts of their lives. (which is a killer even in animals)
Animals in captivity tend to live longer than those in the wild. I think they do ok :)
 
I am in two minds about keeping animals in captivity, on the one hand seeing Bears and large cats pacing from side to side or rocking back and fro makes me very uneasy.
I know that animals act from instinct to a large extent so just because they are bred in captivity does not change the instinctive behaviour e.g. elephants need the herd, it's instinctive.
On the other hand there is the obvious advantage of breeding projects ... I think of the Great Crane Project where the Cranes have been reintroduced because of captive breeding but the offspring largely now live in the wild.
As a species, we (man) were charged with 'having dominion over the animals and birds' and we have messed up big time ... we decimate their environment, have brought a huge number of species to extinction and another huge number are in danger of extinction.
I have visited zoos and animal parks, like many other people but I feel very uneasy about the whole animals in cages aspect.
 
Last edited:
SFTPhotography said:
A big nature reserve I’m all for but a small enclosure in a zoo isn’t the same.
Click to expand...
gramps said:
on the one hand seeing Bears and large cats pacing from side to side or rocking back and fro makes me very uneasy.
Click to expand...
I totally agree, but thankfully the days of the small enclosure or barred cages are largely behind us, but then again, I did say at my opening post there are "zoos" and there are "zoos"
So I wouldn't be surprised if they still exist

gramps said:
e.g. elephants need the herd,
Click to expand...
Again I agree, and all the places I have visited have had a herd to greater or lesser extent, with a Matriarch, a bull and calf(s)
That doesn't mean to say that there aren't places with singletons, just that I've never come across them.

Of course, don't forget that zoos are inspected regularly, and can be shut down, if the animals are deemed to be suffering in any way.
 
gramps said:
On another note, maybe it's time for certain humans to be permanently put in barred cages!
Click to expand...
What the hell makes people do this? :(
 
Cobra said:
Animals in captivity tend to live longer than those in the wild.
Click to expand...

Perhaps they do live longer so fair enough although there is "Quality of life" to consider;)

Cobra said:
I think they do ok
Click to expand...

Much as I accept that you pose some valid points, we're going to have to agree to dissagree with this:)
 
Asha said:
Perhaps they do live longer so fair enough although there is "Quality of life" to consider;)
Click to expand...
As above #44 I've explained about that ;)

Asha said:
we're going to have to agree to dissagree with this:)
Click to expand...
We can't all agree about everything :)
 
Here’s some facts from PeTA


1. Between 3,000 and 5,000 healthy “surplus” animals are “culled” (ie, killed) by European zoos each year.

Remember when everyone was outraged after Copenhagen Zoo killed Marius the giraffe and dissected him in front of children? Poor Marius was just the tip of the iceberg.

2. More than 90 per cent of the species kept by zoos are not endangered in the wild.

If you think zoos are mainly about conservation, you’re wrong.

3. Zoos haven’t changed as much as they’d like us to think.

Most of them still exhibit the same big “showy” animals, such as elephants and big cats, as they did in the 1820s – despite growing scientific evidence that these animals’ welfare needs can never be adequately met in captivity.

4. On average, elephants in zoos live only half as long as wild elephants.

Scientists believe that stress and obesity are the main causes of this shocking statistic. Captive elephants also frequently suffer from painful arthritis and foot conditions as a result of being kept on concrete floors and denied the chance to roam.

5. Most zoos are resistant to improving conditions.

When the Detroit Zoo in the US decided to move the elephants to a sanctuary, it faced backlash from the wider zoo industry. And zoos’ reactions to studies showing how animals suffer in captivity have been described as “negative and hostile”.

6. A study has found that around 80 per cent of carnivores engage in stereotypic behaviour in captivity.

This abnormal and repetitive behaviour, such as pacing and head shaking, serves no useful purpose, and it’s hardly ever seen in the wild. Scientists believe it reflects psychological damage.

7. SeaWorld still won’t admit that captivity is harmful to orcas, despite a wealth of research.

When asked for scientific evidence for the company’s claims, the marine park’s chief veterinarian could only cite “experiential evidence”.

8. Only a tiny 3 per cent of British zoos’ expenditure goes towards conservation projects in the field.

And that money is failing to have any real impact on conserving species.

9. Zoos’ claim that using animals as “ambassadors” helps with conservation efforts doesn’t hold up.

“There’s no evidence that seeing animals in zoos changes people’s opinion”, one expert said.

10. Around 400 pandas have been bred in captivity, but only five have ever been released – and only three of those survived.

Even though millions of pounds are being spent on efforts to reintroduce pandas into the wild, these efforts are unsustainable as long as the animals’ habitat continues to be destroyed.

11. Zoos’ captive-breeding programmes generally don’t work and send the wrong message.

Zoos have failed to save even the most “charismatic” animals, such as the great white rhino, from extinction (there are now only three of these rhinos left in the world). And they offer false hope that science can “clean up the mess” caused by humanity’s wide-scale environmental damage, distracting us from making meaningful change that will really help animals, wild or otherwise.
 
Cheffievrs said:
Here’s some facts from PeTA


1. Between 3,000 and 5,000 healthy “surplus” animals are “culled” (ie, killed) by European zoos each year.

Remember when everyone was outraged after Copenhagen Zoo killed Marius the giraffe and dissected him in front of children? Poor Marius was just the tip of the iceberg.

2. More than 90 per cent of the species kept by zoos are not endangered in the wild.

If you think zoos are mainly about conservation, you’re wrong.

3. Zoos haven’t changed as much as they’d like us to think.

Most of them still exhibit the same big “showy” animals, such as elephants and big cats, as they did in the 1820s – despite growing scientific evidence that these animals’ welfare needs can never be adequately met in captivity.

4. On average, elephants in zoos live only half as long as wild elephants.

Scientists believe that stress and obesity are the main causes of this shocking statistic. Captive elephants also frequently suffer from painful arthritis and foot conditions as a result of being kept on concrete floors and denied the chance to roam.

5. Most zoos are resistant to improving conditions.

When the Detroit Zoo in the US decided to move the elephants to a sanctuary, it faced backlash from the wider zoo industry. And zoos’ reactions to studies showing how animals suffer in captivity have been described as “negative and hostile”.

6. A study has found that around 80 per cent of carnivores engage in stereotypic behaviour in captivity.

This abnormal and repetitive behaviour, such as pacing and head shaking, serves no useful purpose, and it’s hardly ever seen in the wild. Scientists believe it reflects psychological damage.

7. SeaWorld still won’t admit that captivity is harmful to orcas, despite a wealth of research.

When asked for scientific evidence for the company’s claims, the marine park’s chief veterinarian could only cite “experiential evidence”.

8. Only a tiny 3 per cent of British zoos’ expenditure goes towards conservation projects in the field.

And that money is failing to have any real impact on conserving species.

9. Zoos’ claim that using animals as “ambassadors” helps with conservation efforts doesn’t hold up.

“There’s no evidence that seeing animals in zoos changes people’s opinion”, one expert said.

10. Around 400 pandas have been bred in captivity, but only five have ever been released – and only three of those survived.

Even though millions of pounds are being spent on efforts to reintroduce pandas into the wild, these efforts are unsustainable as long as the animals’ habitat continues to be destroyed.

11. Zoos’ captive-breeding programmes generally don’t work and send the wrong message.

Zoos have failed to save even the most “charismatic” animals, such as the great white rhino, from extinction (there are now only three of these rhinos left in the world). And they offer false hope that science can “clean up the mess” caused by humanity’s wide-scale environmental damage, distracting us from making meaningful change that will really help animals, wild or otherwise.
Click to expand...


:agree::clap:

Cobra said:
Ah yes PETA :rolleyes:
Its not as though they have any kind of agenda ...
Click to expand...
Marc said:
FTFY ;)
Click to expand...

Having followed PeTA for many years and it is quite possible that all that they say is not 100% true, however, , it would only be fair to remain with an open mind that those who support zoos, animal parks, animal transportation, etc, possibly have "agendas" too and try to make us "beleive" what they want us to;)
 
Asha said:
Having followed PeTA for many years and it is quite possible that all that they say is not 100% true, however, , it would only be fair to remain with an open mind that those who support zoos, animal parks, animal transportation, etc, possibly have "agendas" too and try to make us "beleive" what they want us to;)
Click to expand...

I have no agenda but I have seen the conservation work that many zoos do. PETA's agenda goes well beyond ensuring that animals are treated ethically, they are not the benign animal lovers that the portray themselves as.
 
DemiLion said:
. They know less about animal husbandry than a well used snot-rag.
Click to expand...

OK!.... if you say so :rolleyes:

Was it mentioned that EVERYTHING Peta has to say is correct?.....No I beleive not!

Open mindedness…..It's a bit like patience, it's a virtue;)
 
Marc said:
I have no agenda but I have seen the conservation work that many zoos do. PETA's agenda goes well beyond ensuring that animals are treated ethically, they are not the benign animal lovers that the portray themselves as.
Click to expand...

Animal rights groups tend to be some of the most violent and intimidating extremists out there but I am under no illusions that zoo's are good for these animals.
 
Cobra said:
That doesn't mean to say that there aren't places with singletons, just that I've never come across them.
Click to expand...

Paignton Zoo has a single female elephant. She did have a companion but the companion had to be euthanised some years back, leaving Duchess on her own. Being partially sighted, she would be bullied by any newcomers so will stay a singleton. https://www.paigntonzoo.org.uk/duchess
 
Last edited:
Rich cheers for the reply,I am slightlyaware of Mr Corbet not terribly so last of the big game hunters,did alot of work with man eaters...maybe did something conservation wise afterwards?? I've got a hunch there is a reserve somewhere. Ha ha I wrote to you earlier(didn't have time to finish and post) .... OMG another anecdote,with my ref to them not harming humans,seems more learned folks (with a proper memory lmao) have more to say see below . Rich yes alot because it's complicated and I get torn The biggest thing that bothers me though is this right thing,apex predators seem to have no rights on this island

Cobra said:
Granted, there are zoos and then there are "zoos" the better zoos...
Many creatures in zoos are bred in captivity, they know no different, their life expectancy is greatly increased, they no longer have to hunt for food,
to survive. The females no longer have to hunt or forage for food, to produce milk, to feed the young.
Survival rate is very high in the off spring. If they should get sick or damaged some kind "thing" fixes them up.
They have no predators to hide from, no wild deer to hunt down, as some kind "thing" throws half a cow or indeed a bale of hay / bamboo and other vegetable matter, in their pens regularly as nature intended.

As for Snow leopards after several inquires and searches.
They all say pretty much the same as the one quoted.


Snow leopard expert Dr Tom McCarthy also says, “I can say with much certainty that humans in snow leopard habitat are in no danger from these big cats. Snow leopards have simply never been known to attack people. Even when they are cornered by herders who find them in their livestock corrals snow leopards do not try to attack. I have captured many of the cats, and even when they are in a snare, they do not act aggressively towards me as I work to sedate them – they just try to avoid me.”
Click to expand...


Chris thanks for this last bit ,I'm ruddy hopeless, but was sure there was something out there about snow leopards not being terribly aggressive towards us. I didn't realise when cornered there is still no history of them attacking us. It makes it worse reading your post no known aggression towards humans an expert saying he is aware that they don't attack when cornered. Mate I'm very aware that this cat would have had all manner of stressors in it's escaped situation. But essentially if DR Tom is correct (and you have indicated other sources..0................... they killed him simply because of an imagined potential to harm us. One could say and prove on paper a cow is more dangerous.


Mate would you do me a massive favour,you can probably access papers/ knowledge I can't.(you boffins oft have secret science stashes i've been told:D)................ the european lynx,recorded cases of aggression to man /fatalities are there any? many? none??

human life is just that special to us,I just wonder if the lynx was returned if it does actually present a threat to us physically

I'd have 'em back here tomorrow,HMMM that one I saw so close all those years back was seen by others, sure, but old lynx exmoor beastie never hurt anyone did he:).

Chris that snow leopard I'd have got in the ruddy pen with him i'd lay odds he wouldn't hurt anyone. (probably get eaten lmao. ) Haha that lynx turned me white never been so scared and I was driving mind not much between you and those eyes in a soft top MG midget shivvers..

Thank you if you do try to find anything, and cheers again for the words from Dr Tom et al

what a crying shame !!

stu
 
Asha said:
:agree::clap:
Having followed PeTA for many years and it is quite possible that all that they say is not 100% true, however, , it would only be fair to remain with an open mind that those who support zoos, animal parks, animal transportation, etc, possibly have "agendas" too and try to make us "beleive" what they want us to;)
Click to expand...
I have no problem with people supporting animal welfare charities, but PETA are fanatical hypocrites and that makes them dangerous.
Its always worth digging in the back ground if *you* are going to support any charity
https://www.petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/#petakills


Nod said:
Paignton Zoo has a single female elephant. She did have a companion but the companion had to be euthanised some years back, leaving Duchess on her own. Being partially sighted, she would be bullied by any newcomers so will stay a singleton. https://www.paigntonzoo.org.uk/duchess
Click to expand...
That's a shame, I didn't know that :(


Stuart Philpott said:
Mate would you do me a massive favour,you can probably access papers/ knowledge I can't.(you boffins oft have secret science stashes i've been told:D)................ the european lynx,recorded cases of aggression to man /fatalities are there any? many? none??
Click to expand...
Let me do a bit of research and get back to you :)
 
Cheffievrs said:
10. Around 400 pandas have been bred in captivity, but only five have ever been released – and only three of those survived.

Even though millions of pounds are being spent on efforts to reintroduce pandas into the wild, these efforts are unsustainable as long as the animals’ habitat continues to be destroyed.
Click to expand...

So are you saying that trying to save a species from extinction by breeding them in captivity is a waste of time ?

I for one would rather not see this stunning creature go extinct which is possibly what would happen if they were all
released
 
Gremlin said:
So are you saying that trying to save a species from extinction by breeding them in captivity is a waste of time ?

I for one would rather not see this stunning creature go extinct which is possibly what would happen if they were all
released
Click to expand...

There is (globally) potentially that captive breeding is seen by some in power as a salve on their consciousnesses i.e. "they" are riding on the coattails of the empassioned organisations and charity groups doing good work to protect in captivity what are the most endangered! But still habitat is willfully lost such as in the news not long ago re: Orangutan losses due to destruction of forestry in the race to increase Palm Oil production.

Sadly I fear that without much needed joined up thinking across the globe more of the most inconic species will disappear in the wild in my lifetime. Yes, captivity and captive breeding programs are far from perfect but what other choice do we have???

PS though specifically about Earth's forests, does anyone recall the film (thinks have remembered right?) called Silent Running?
 
Box Brownie said:
There is (globally) potentially that captive breeding is seen by some in power as a salve on their consciousnesses i.e. "they" are riding on the coattails of the empassioned organisations and charity groups doing good work to protect in captivity what are the most endangered! But still habitat is willfully lost such as in the news not long ago re: Orangutan losses due to destruction of forestry in the race to increase Palm Oil production.
Click to expand...

In many of these places we have no control, think ivory trade, although this is now banned there is still a huge black market for it so it
will always be seen as a lucrative thing by poachers etc.
Sadly it's a trade like many others driven by greed and it could be that in the future the only way some creatures will survive is by captive breeding, think
Przewalski's horse which went extinct bu has be revived by selective breeding
As for re-introducing wolves. bear. lynx in the uk, yes I would love to see it happen but we are far to densely populated for this to happen you just
have to look at the problems with wild boar etc. people are told nor to feed interact but they don't listen
 
SFTPhotography said:
So you'd rather it killed some folk or run that risk. Sadly it appears the tranquilliser wasn't the viable option. I personally value human life above that other species (Unless the person getting killed is an utter scumbag)
Click to expand...
In some respects yes its natural instinct for a species to protect its own. However we as humans seem to think that we own this planet, that all other animals are inferior beings, and we can play god so to speak. When in the wild animals kill humans, which is their natural instinct when other species enter their territory, we then go out and kill that animal. We collect animals with hunting instincts put them in confined spaces then kill then when they find a way to get out.

If we are going to roam this planet doing as we please with other species then we should have a greater responsibility towards them, especially when we supposedly care for these animals enough to have an endangered list (endangered from humans no doubt). There's only about 4000 snow leopards left so its almost criminal that this one has been eradicated by such sequence of circumstances.

As for the "people make mistakes". Agreed, however this is not the first time humans have captured an animal caged it, it escape and killed. I was under the impression that if Humans think they are the supreme being on the planet they learn from their mistakes. Simply notching it down to a mistake is quite blaze, because its just saying oppppsiiiieeeee, my bad, and just carrying on.
 
Last edited:
Stuart Philpott said:
thank you kind sir !!
Click to expand...
From what I've been able to find out, so far no one has been killed by a lynx, there are a couple of reports of attacks by pet / captive Bob Cats( Lynx Rufus) ( it also seems they can keep them as pets in the USA)
A handful of attacks by wild ones, but when they were shot, all were suffering from Rabies !

European Lynx ( lynx lynx) I've found nothing to suggest that anyone has been mauled by one. Although they do attack and kill sheep in the wild.
 
Cobra said:
Although they do attack and kill sheep in the wild.
Click to expand...


That's how they caught Flaviu when he escaped from DZP. He killed 4 sheep (IIRC) and they tempted him into a trap with the carcases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top