iwakar
crush the fences
- Joined
- May 2, 2007
- Messages
- 4,877
- Instinctual Variant
- sx/sp
Zoos and animal parks generally present one perspective and animal rights groups present an oppositional one as to whether or not captive animals are a conservation effort, or a destructive business. Is the net result positive or negative? Do they solve an existing problem or create the problem? This may be a "Which came first? The chicken or the egg?" discussion considering the collective decline of global animal habitat. Maybe they're a necessary evil... a stop-loss effort to buy time until we resolve some of our environmental and human population crises.
This popped into my head after reading an article about OSHA's decision to investigate SeaWorld following several trainer deaths. The author's question is whether or not the trainers have a dangerous job. I think that's a no-brainer; they do. I think the better question to ask is if it's worth it. And maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I don't have concrete data on the populations of thousands of different species, aquatic and terrestrial, but I doubt "uniform flourishing" is the scientific community's conclusion.
I also wonder whether people consider captive animals as a source of entertainment ethically acceptable? If we pretend for a moment that we lived in a homeostatic world where conservation was no longer an issue for animals, would we/could we still justify zoos, animal safaris, and oceanariums? Would standing behind "education" be feasible? Your thoughts.
This popped into my head after reading an article about OSHA's decision to investigate SeaWorld following several trainer deaths. The author's question is whether or not the trainers have a dangerous job. I think that's a no-brainer; they do. I think the better question to ask is if it's worth it. And maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I don't have concrete data on the populations of thousands of different species, aquatic and terrestrial, but I doubt "uniform flourishing" is the scientific community's conclusion.
I also wonder whether people consider captive animals as a source of entertainment ethically acceptable? If we pretend for a moment that we lived in a homeostatic world where conservation was no longer an issue for animals, would we/could we still justify zoos, animal safaris, and oceanariums? Would standing behind "education" be feasible? Your thoughts.