34 Stingrays Dead at Calgary Zoo

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Dan02

My thoughts too, does the cat care to ponder if the mouse is his equal before he eats it?? No, because it's part of the food chain, on which the ecosystems around the Earth are based. We humans are the top predator.

I'm not sure I believe that after reading the Spider thread.

[killer_carlson]

While Sowa is entitled to his opinion, I am entitled to mine.

I have precious little respect for PETA or their endeavours. I find them reprehensible and repugnant. One day they will cross the line and will be banned as being eco-terrorists and I won't shed a tear at all.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

While Sowa is entitled to his opinion, I am entitled to mine.

I have precious little respect for PETA or their endeavours. I find them reprehensible and repugnant. One day they will cross the line and will be banned as being eco-terrorists and I won't shed a tear at all.

I will because then they'll go back to riding public transit while stinking of patchouli oil.

[PsYcNeT]

I love the irony of PETA's founder stating that lab animals would (and do) gladly give their lives to produce the insulin she needs to control her diabetes.

Or how pet ownership is disgusting and sick.

The problem is, PETA takes funding and charity from animal lovers (who usually own pets) and never quite fully discloses their position on animal rights (ie, absolutely, positively, and unabashadly equal in every sense...pets = slaves).

This is to not even mention how their disruption of Edward Taub's neurological experiments in the early 1980's set neuroscience (and the treatments of OCD and other ailments) back about 20 years. Thanks for the alzeimers PETA!

[AC]

I thought this image from a biology textbook was fitting:


The US Department of Health and Human Services have said that "it is no exaggeration to say that almost every form of conventional medical treatment, such as drugs, vaccines, radiation or surgery, rests in part on the study of animals".

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I love the irony of PETA's founder stating that lab animals would (and do) gladly give their lives to produce the insulin she needs to control her diabetes.

Or how pet ownership is disgusting and sick.

The problem is, PETA takes funding and charity from animal lovers (who usually own pets) and never quite fully discloses their position on animal rights (ie, absolutely, positively, and unabashadly equal in every sense...pets = slaves).

This is to not even mention how their disruption of Edward Taub's neurological experiments in the early 1980's set neuroscience (and the treatments of OCD and other ailments) back about 20 years. Thanks for the alzeimers PETA!

Can you elaborate on these issues?

I don't know much about PETA other than the provocative images they put on billboards and advertisements (which I've never actually seen outside of mainstream media stories about these things).

The one poster involved in this thread who has actually been a member of the organization doesn't seem to think having a pet is disgusting and sick. It doesn't sound like he'd use the term "pet ownership" to describe the arrangement he was with a dog that he lives with, but still.

And this Alzheimer's stuff, I've never heard of that but I'm certainly willing to learn. Either way, Alzheimers disease can't be blamed on any organization other than the one that designed the human nervous system.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

One day they will cross the line and will be banned as being eco-terrorists and I won't shed a tear at all.

I was just pondering that the other day as well. As a group they seem quite close to the line.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I love the irony of PETA's founder stating that lab animals would (and do) gladly give their lives to produce the insulin she needs to control her diabetes.

Ah more misinformation Ingrid Newkirk does not have diabetes. Another member does I believe she is a VP. I don't blame you though because I did a search on it and a lot of websites have that wrong.

Or how pet ownership is disgusting and sick.

They don't believe that at all. Well they don't like calling it ownership. Many ranking PETA members have companion animals. If they thought it was sick they wouldn't adopt out animals to homes. They believe in a perfect world that animals would all live in the wild in their natural habitat and we would just be observers.
Here's PETA's position on "pets"
http://www.peta.org/campaigns/ar-petaonpets.asp

The problem is, PETA takes funding and charity from animal lovers (who usually own pets) and never quite fully discloses their position on animal rights (ie, absolutely, positively, and unabashadly equal in every sense...pets = slaves).

It's funny that PETA pretty clearly outlines their beliefs on their website, so all these people would have to do is actually go to www.peta.org before they donate.

This is to not even mention how their disruption of Edward Taub's neurological experiments in the early 1980's set neuroscience (and the treatments of OCD and other ailments) back about 20 years. Thanks for the alzeimers PETA!

Taub was convicted on six counts of animal cruelty which was overturned on a loophole. That state laws can't be applied to federally funded research. The NIH cut his funding after the case.

And finally PETA will never be labeled an ecoterrorist organization. It is far too intelligently run to ever cross the line. If it is ever labeled one then the US gov't would be crossing the line. They have been center of FBI investigations for years that never yielded anything. Also the IRS has investigated them several times and also never came up with anything.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Sowa

Ah more misinformation Ingrid Newkirk does not have diabetes. Another member does I believe she is a VP. I don't blame you though because I did a search on it and a lot of websites have that wrong.

That doesn't detract from the point. Where would this VP be without animal testing? Seems they have no problem with animal testing if it pro-longs their life. But yeah, vigilant vegans/animal rights groups = hypocrits... that's not really front page news.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

That doesn't detract from the point. Where would this VP be without animal testing? Seems they have no problem with animal testing if it pro-longs their life. But yeah, vigilant vegans/animal rights groups = hypocrits... that's not really front page news.

So the argument actually is that the insulin is derived from a cows pancreas. Insulin failed animal testing because it gave the animals birth defects. Also the testing in animals led scientists to believe that it was a liver disease and later on in human experiments they discovered that it was in fact a pancreatic disease. Her argument (right or wrong) is that the animals that insulin is derived from are already dead (it's gathered from slaughterhouses) and that animals would want her to live as she can continue to fight the fight. What are other examples of animal rights hypocrisy as I haven't been informed of any of these?

[BlackArcher101]

Wow, has this thread ever gone off-topic.

Everytime it's bumped I expect to see some news regarding the rays, alas... there is nothing.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Sowa

It is not the dumbest goal actually. They (including me) believe animals are equal to humans therefore using an animal for medical testing is akin to using humans. We also survived thousands of years without animal testing and some of the advances in science could be to blame for some of the diseases we now face. Some of them believe that having pets and interfering with them is wrong (including Ingrid Newkirk the founder), but others don't mind companion animals, they don't like the word pet because it implies ownership, count me in that boat. I see my dog as my best friend not as an item that I possess and I protect him (as he does I) and he gives immeasurable joy.

We did, but our life expectancy was less than half of what it is now and lots of children didn't make it past infancy. The achievements in the advancements of medicine has been one of the greatest accomplishments of the human race, and medical testing on animals has been a very important part of that. Anyways since we disagree on such a fundamental level (humans and animals being equal) we probably shouldn't get this thread even more off topic (which was kind of my fault anyways).

[FlamingLonghorn]

Animal deaths 'inevitable'

R.J. Bailot, with animal rights group Zoocheck Canada, said he was not surprised by the animal's deaths.
"If people are going to be able to see these animals and put their hands in their water, it's inevitable that these animals are going to die. It's a mockery of wildlife," he said.
Bailot also said these types of exhibits are not educational because it provides people with "a false image of wildlife.
"Tourists are going to now think they can interact with stingrays," he added.
He also criticized the fact that the stingrays had their tail barbs removed to prevent them from harming people, which he compared to "declawing a grizzly bear, simply for entertainment purposes for humans and children."
The zoo has lost several animals over the past two years, including four gorillas and six-year-old Hazina the hippo.

from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/13/cgy-stingray-deaths.html?ref=rss This is why some zoos are bad...

[JiriHrdina]

Honestly though I don't consider Zoocheck a credible source. I'm not saying they are right or wrong - but anything they say - I simply don't really put much value in.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Sowa

[b]

This is why some zoos are bad...

Sure, some zoos are bad, but the Calgary Zoo itself is one of the premier zoological institutions in the world, with some of the best and most state-of-the art animal enclosures - not to mention its participation in international breeding programs, ecological conservation efforts, etc. etc.

It's the one thing I tell anyone who's going to Calgary to visit while they are in town. I understand the emotional reaction that some people have to the idea of keeping animals in cages, but that's all it is - an emotional reaction - one that is not supported by reason when the situation is examined thoughtfully.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Honestly though I don't consider Zoocheck a credible source. I'm not saying they are right or wrong - but anything they say - I simply don't really put much value in.

I know nothing of that particular organization, but I do agree that it's pretty cruel to dismember an animal for the enjoyment of humans. It's like taking a dog and pulling out all its teeth to make sure it doesn't bite while being put in a box for people to come pet and bother.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Sowa

I know nothing of that particular organization, but I do agree that it's pretty cruel to dismember an animal for the enjoyment of humans. It's like taking a dog and pulling out all its teeth to make sure it doesn't bite while being put in a box for people to come pet and bother.

That's there spin on it anyways. Again - I need another more credible organization to weigh in before I judge.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Sowa

I know nothing of that particular organization, but I do agree that it's pretty cruel to dismember an animal for the enjoyment of humans. It's like taking a dog and pulling out all its teeth to make sure it doesn't bite while being put in a box for people to come pet and bother.

Or like de-clawing a cat (which happens all of the time by pet lovers)?

[Dan02]

because de-clawing them is much worse then killing them.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Sowa

[b]

from http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/13/cgy-stingray-deaths.html?ref=rss This is why some zoos are bad...

I'd like a 'real' opinion about the incident, not some biased animal rights activist group.