Loro Parque ...

[Janet]

SeaWorld's announced that they're stopping the Orca breeding programme, after stopping their live shows last November. Loro Parque has six of their Orcas in Tenerife, and they've expresed "surprise" over SW's announcement and are seeking an urgent meeting.

I must say that I love Loro Parque, but I've always felt really uncomfortable about the Orcas ... and it has nothing to do with the fact that one of them totally drenched me, even sitting in the "safe seats" ...

The dolphins too, for all they're fabulous to watch, don't really belong in a place like that, to my mind. I'm not even sure that I'm happy with the zoo element - though I adore the penguins, and think their enclosure is fantastic ...

The whole Orca thing has tarnished Loro Parque's (deservedly wonderful)reputation, I think, having them there, and they do such great work.

But will parrots alone just make enough money to keep it open?

[Myrtle Hogan-Lance]

I do not like zoos full stop, though I have to put up my hand and say that I have been to many and that I benefitted as a kid from being able to observe animals close up.  I will never forget the magnificence of the tigers at the Pretoria Zoo.  I love the penguins and love looking at all the animals.  My mind was changed once I began observing animals in the wild at the parks in South Africa.  That is where they belong. 

An orca breeding program is really cruel; keeping those animals in tight captivity is beyond cruel. 

It is a tough question as being able to see wild animals close up makes humans who will never have a chance to see them in the wild appreciate them. 

[Janet]

Here's an interesting thing ... LP has released a statement, and I'm hanged if I can unravel their meaning! It's obviously cleverly worded ...

* we abide by Seaworld's decisions because the orcas are theirs;
* they say no breeding programme;
* we also abide by the EU's decisions because we're in the EU;
* the EU insist that breeding is a right of all creatures;
* we're educators first and foremost, and will be incorporating the changes following the guidelines that SeaWorld will be establishing in the United States
* we will not adopt any decision that would contradict the principles of well-being or jeopardize the conditions in which the group of orcas finds themselves in its facilities.
* Any decision will always be implemented in full compliance with the European Community legislation and with the knowledge and concurrence from the competent authorities

seems to me they're saying we'll abide by SW's no breeding programme AND the EU's insistence on the right to breed.

Normally when something is so carefully worded as to be this meaningless, summat's up ...

HERE is the statement, and there's a toggle top right to change languages.

[minesadorada]

I find it hard to distinguish the difference morally between zoo-keeping and pet-keeping.

Both involve a kindly loss of liberty (and dignity, if it can be applied to an animal) for the purpose of entertaining human beings.

Is anyone saying that zoo animals aren't loved and cared for in the same way as pets?

I think both are morally wrong for roughly the same reasons.  We have no moral right to control other animals' lives except in self defense, food or other needed resources.  I don't include ersatz children or idle entertainment as a 'needed resource'.

[Janet]

I sort of agree, at least I can see where you're coming from, but some species - domesticated dogs and chickens, for example - are now a symbiotic species. I think they need us as much as we need them, so the question of their "freedom" is a red herring ...

(and there's nothing wrong with keeping red herrings, I think, as long as the tanks are big enough ... )

[Myrtle Hogan-Lance]

Dogs are so domesticated they would not survive without humans now.  I can only speak for myself that I do not keep mine for entertainment, though they are incredibly entertaining.  They are fabulous creatures it is a privilege to have in my family.  They just happen to have tails.  And before Perikles says it, fart a lot.

[minesadorada]

I sort of agree, at least I can see where you're coming from, but some species - domesticated dogs and chickens, for example - are now a symbiotic species. I think they need us as much as we need them, so the question of their "freedom" is a red herring ...

(and there's nothing wrong with keeping red herrings, I think, as long as the tanks are big enough ... )

I agree with you more than that.

Just think what domestication has done to the survival and population numbers of obscure species such as:
Cows, Pigs, Chickens, Sheep, Rabbits, Cats, Dogs, and many aquatic species..

Jared Diamond's book ´Guns, Germs and Steel' (recommended) explains how we have domesticated all available animals, and why (for example) Zebras or other animals are not suitable.

Each of these species had small populations 100,000 years ago - and some (such as the Asian precursor to chickens) may have been doomed to extinction by now via habitat destruction for all we know.

Whenever I hear the arguments from vegetarians about the welfare of animals, I think of the millions of 'favoured' (i.e. edible and pettable) species that have benefited from a population explosion in the last few thousand years.

My moral argument is - at what price?  Domesticated animals are significantly 'stupider' than their wild ancestors - as you would expect, given our use of them and their modified lifestyle.  It is unlikely a domesticated food animal or pet would survive 'in the wild'.

Is that a price that they are justified to pay in our moral sphere in order to gain a such a survival advantage?

[minesadorada]

Dogs are so domesticated they would not survive without humans now.  I can only speak for myself that I do not keep mine for entertainment, though they are incredibly entertaining.  They are fabulous creatures it is a privilege to have in my family.  They just happen to have tails.  And before Perikles says it, fart a lot.

I don't know enough about dogs, but I think cats (a recent adoption by Humans) survive just fine in a warm climate like Tenerife.  They breed until the kittens outstrip the local food supply, whereupon the population stabilizes (through kitten starvation)

Dogs can only survive in the wild if they band together in packs - whereupon they become 'un pet-like' and get culled.

[Myrtle Hogan-Lance]

Think you are right about that.  Whereas I cannot objectively pronounce on the morality, I do know the love I see in my dogs' eyes and they know it in mine. 

I personally doubt that the orcas love their keepers.  I could be wrong!!

[minesadorada]

Think you are right about that.  Whereas I cannot objectively pronounce on the morality, I do know the love I see in my dogs' eyes and they know it in mine. 

I personally doubt that the orcas love their keepers.  I could be wrong!!

I would suppose it is knowing the biology about pets and zoo animals.

We know dogs are social animals and can be fooled into thinking of a Human pet owner as an ersatz dog pack leader. (Try that trick with an undomesticated Wolf!)

How about Orcas? Does the same trick work? I guess most zoo animals whose social nature is pack-like (a good many, including Human Beings) and are kept apart from unsocialised brethren could be described as happily domesticated.  How would they know? How would the 'keeper' tell?

The point about diminished intelligence of long-domesticated pets/food animals muddies the water.  A stupid captive may be loved and happy but I doubt the moral justification for breeding stupid captives for entertainment/love, though I can somehow reconcile their use as food.

This is where I differ from the veggies☺