#the vast majority of animals in zoos are not members of endangered species. | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

figureinthedistance · 2 years ago

Text

its insane to have any basic awareness of capitalism being bad but to be fully convinced that zoos are helpful + beneficial for animals, as individuals or in terms of species as a whole. like ok i guess this one industry has leaders motivated by longsighted compassion.

same exact thing w farms n abbatoirs truly insane to think this one industry wont have issues w the unilateral power handed to workers over beings w literally no avenue for recourse. but lets talk more abt how nurses are bullies

#the vast majority of animals in zoos are not members of endangered species.#every single zoo in the US + europe has to regularly sedate animals + put them on antidepressants #the idea tht zoos benefit conservation efforts is nonsense given tht there is never any intention of reintroducing animals in2 the wild #so therefore wild populations cant benefit even if critically endangered species are kept in zoos #many zoos euthanize healthy young animals if they stop being commercially viable #none of these things are secrets

4 notes · View notes

manessha545 · 11 months ago

Photo

Botanical Gardens and Zoo in Guyana

No trip to Georgetown would be complete without a visit to the Botanical Gardens – one of Georgetown’s popular recreation parks. The Botanical Gardens houses one of the most extensive collections of tropical flora in the Caribbean and are laid out with ponds, canals, kissing bridges and a bandstand.

In 1877, Government voted $72,000 to establish the Gardens, and John Frederick Waby, the first gardener, arrived in Georgetown from the United Kingdom in December 1878. He spent 35 years in Guyana landscaping one of the finest tropical gardens in our region.

These gardens have a huge variety of tropical flowers and one of the finest collection of palms, as well as lovely lilies. An example of the gardens vast collection are the lotus and the immense Victoria Regia Lily, Guyana’s national flower.

The first attempt to establish a Zoo dates back to 1880, but the members of the Royal Agricultural Society were opposed to the idea. However in 1952, the Zoological Park was declared open.

The Guyana Zoo is also located within the Botanical Gardens and exhibits a variety of the world’s most impressive species of indigenous flora and fauna from the large and virgin rainforests of Guyana.

Some exciting representatives of these groups include the following species:

Mammals: jaguar, puma, tapir, giant otter, white faced saki monkey, capuchin monkey, tayra, a family of two-toed sloths and manatees. Birds: eagles and hawks (raptors), parrots, toucans and owls. Reptiles: rattlesnakes, spectacled caiman, anacondas, mata mata turtle, and emerald tree boa.

Some endangered species (animals with low population numbers in the wild) can also be found at the zoo. For example, harpy eagles, jaguars, a giant otter and West Indian manatees. The Zoo is currently undergoing major renovation and refurbishing works under the ‘Three Parks Initiative” a project of the Ministry of Natural Resources & the Environment.

Botanical Gardens and Zoo | Explore Guyana

413 notes · View notes

ms-hells-bells · 3 years ago

Note

Do you think there are any valid criticisms of veganism? eg small scale animal agriculture in restoration of soil, keeping rare breed animals for their survival etc ? (these obviously don’t focus on the issue of morality and the relationship of humans with animals, more on environmental reasons for veganism)

we can restore soils with nutrient fixing plants. search up crop rotation, it prevents soil nutrient deficiency in the first place. in fact, in africa they are reversing severe desertification by planting particular trees, that hold moisture from rain in the soil, blocking sun exposure from the soil, and by shedding plant matter, and the dead matter of animals they attract, the soil is once again naturally replenished. we do not need invasive species to do so. in fact, livestock species shouldn't even be on most continents. the vegan idea is to simply stop breeding them, they are eventually no more in places they don't naturally exist in the wild, and the native herbivores of the land can do their part in the ecosystem. the only exception would be where all the native herbivores have been killed, MAYBE we'd eventually have some wild herbivores there, but even that's risky because we don't know how it'd impact the food chain and current competitive niches or those biomes.

the next thing with veganism, that is not only your next question, but links to what i've said above, livestock use the vast majority of farmed land, directly and indirectly, in the world. once they're no more, crops being fed directly to humans take an 8th of the land that livestock need, and we are also developing incredible new ways of growing crops, like vertical farming, and also genetic modification is incredible when not overexploited and owned by capitalist monsters. so, with the rest of the land, it could be regrown into the native plants that used to be there, we'd have native forests back. and those native forests would be of immediate help of endangered species. and not just that, they could be turned into reserves, that are kept pest free and the animals have plenty of land to roam around on, and aren't disturbed by humans, and can once again exist on an equal level. we may monitor them, check for offspring to keep track of numbers, put trackers in the very critically endangered species, keep major protection on them, but reserves are the optimal way of saving species. in zoo breeding programs, most animals actually have significantly lower breeding rates, likely due to the stress of the small area, noises, smells, not being able to live their natural way, not being in their traditional environment.

this is the best we can do to try and help them while respecting their lives and reducing fear and stress as much as possible. and if some species still go extinct, then that's just what happens. they don't owe it to us to keep their species going, we have no right to push their species to keep going with major interference and forced breeding. of course, it would be best if we're able to reverse our damage because it's our fault in the first place, and losing any species forever is a tragedy, but we also shouldn't keep controlling and dominating and interfering with the living members of these species to such extreme levels such as keeping them in captivity in small enclosures from birth to death, and putting them together to push them to breed under highly stressful circumstances. many extremely endangered species in captivity have high rates of inbreeding that they would not normally do in the wild because for a lot of these species, they split off from their families and find mates, or they travel far and wide to look for mates, or they live in groups diverse and interchanging enough to avoid major inbreeding. the living animals are the biggest priority, and deserve to live their lives as peacefully as we can make it.

tldr: we created these problems, it's up to us to solve them without further exploiting and harming animals. they don't deserve that.

17 notes · View notes

bfenvs3000-blog · 5 years ago

Text

Summer Mussels

Not having a specific prompt for blog number four opened up a lot of possibilities for things to write about, so many that it became almost overwhelming. After thinking about it for a while though I’ve finally settled on a topic. This summer I had the opportunity to work with Fisheries and Oceans Canada as a student fisheries technician, specifically on the mussel field crew. This was the first job that I had gotten that was actually in my field, making it even more exciting. Beginning this job, I had very minimal knowledge about mussels beyond that native mussels were beneficial in lakes and streams. Thankfully training started with mussel identification and it surprised me to learn that there 41 species of freshwater mussels living just in Ontario. The diversity between species amazed me, and I enjoyed learning the specific distinguishing characters of each species such as bumps over the shells, size and shape, or shell patterns.

Mussels on display in the lab with their feet out. These mussels were returned to the stream they were collected from after three days. Photo take by me.

Once water levels went down in June, that’s when field season really began. The majority of the work we conducted was population surveys in rivers in Walkerton, the Canard River in Windsor, and in the Grand River area. Each mussel that we found was categorized by species and measured, some sites would produce populations in the hundreds so I’m sure you could imagine how long this process would take in that case! It was amazing to me that a river with water that reached only to the top of my boots could contain so much life just below the sand or between the rocks.

This position also offered the opportunity to increase awareness and educate youth about the vast amount of biodiversity within Ontario. It was a great experience to introduce biodiversity and the connectedness of animals to the environment and see how this new information was exciting and fun for the kids. Similarly, it was always nice when members of the public would take an interest in the surveys we were conducting when a work site was close to hiking trails or property lines. From the road some of the streams we sampled looked like nothing would ever live there, so for people passing by to hear that there is a population of mussels there was often a surprise.

These six species were collected from a very muddy stream. An example of life in an unexpected place! Photo taken by another crew member.

Over the course of the summer I was able to work with professionals in the environmental science field and have the opportunity to learn about everything that goes into conducting research on endangered species and how that information will then be used to protect species that are at risk or on the endangered list. Additionally, I was able to work alongside other students with similar interests in science and the environment. This experience not only provided me with a new interest in freshwater mussels but also new friendships with people I may not have met otherwise. Climbing over fallen trees in a narrow cold stream really functioned as a bonding experience in our case!

Mussel crew students after completing a survey site. Photo taken by another crew member.

Throughout the summer I had the opportunity to gain experience in my field of interest, work alongside people with similar interests, and learn scientific procedures that I found really exciting. Thanks to this incredible experience working for Fisheries and Oceans Canada I feel as though it has given me insight into where I want to take my career and how I want to use the knowledge that I have gained from attending university.

If anyone is interested in learning about mussels Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Toronto Zoo have developed an app called Clam Counter where you can track any mussel sightings you come across on nature walks and explore the huge range of mussels species here in Ontario.

Edit: Also wanted to mention that all of the mussels collected for measurements and abundance counts were returned to the streams where we found them :)

2 notes · View notes

a-for-anne-blog-blog · 6 years ago

Text

PDF from the Internet

http://www.worldanimalfoundation.net/f/Panda.pdf

PANDA FACT SHEET

STATUS: Endangered DESCRIPTION: Pandas are famous for their black and white markings. The legs, shoulders, ears and oval patches around the eyes are black, and the rest of the coat is white. Good tree climbers, pandas can also swim to escape predators. Pandas use an enlarged wrist bone that looks like a thumb to grasp objects like bamboo. SIZE: Pandas weigh an average of 200 to 300 pounds and reach six feet in length. POPULATION: Only 1,000 pandas exist in the wild and 60 in zoos. LIFESPAN: The panda’s lifespan in the wild is unknown but in captivity averages more than 20 years.

RANGE

The shrinking range of the panda is limited to parts of Szechuan, Shensi and Kansu provinces in central and western China.

HABITAT: The panda lives in thick bamboo and coniferous forests (evergreens with seed cones) at 8,500 to 11,500 feet elevation. FOOD: Pandas feed mostly on bamboo, a tall woody plant full of fiber. The panda’s digestive system does not absorb the fiber, so it must eat a lot. Pandas also eat flowers, vines, tufted grasses, green corn, honey and rodents. BEHAVIOR: These solitary animals spend most of their days feeding. Although they live in cold forests, pandas do not hibernate. They move to lower elevations during winter to keep warm and to higher elevations in summer to stay cool. They do not have permanent homes but sleep at the bottom of trees and under stumps and rock ledges. OFFSPRING: After a gestation period of 125 to 150 days, a mother panda gives birth to one or two young, but only one survives. Eyes open at six to eight weeks, and the cub starts to move around at three months. Weaned at six months, the cub becomes independent after a year. GENERAL INFORMATION: The giant panda lives in mountainous regions, such as Sichuan and Tibet. Since the latter half of the 20th century, the panda has become an informal national emblem for China, and its image is found on many Chinese gold coins. Despite being taxonomically a carnivore, the panda has a diet that is overwhelmingly herbivorous. The giant panda eats shoots and leaves, living almost entirely on bamboo. Pandas are also known to eat eggs, the occasional fish, and some insects along with their bamboo diet. These are necessary sources of protein. Like other subtropical mammals, the giant panda does not hibernate. For many decades the precise taxonomic classification of the panda was under debate as both the giant panda and the distantly related red panda share characteristics of both bears and raccoons. However, genetic testing seems to have revealed that giant pandas are true bears and part of the Ursidae family. Its closest bear relative is the Spectacled Bear of South America. Giant pandas are an endangered species, threatened by continued habitat loss and by a very low birthrate, both in the wild and in captivity. Poaching is uncommon; killing a panda was punishable in China by death until a 1997 law changed the penalty to 20 years imprisonment. The giant panda has an unusual paw, with a "thumb" and five fingers; the "thumb" is actually a modified sesamoid bone. The giant panda has a short tail, approximately 15 cm long. The giant panda has long been a favorite of the public, at least partly on account of the fact that the species has an appealing baby like cuteness that makes it seem to resemble a living teddy bear. The fact that it is usually depicted reclining peacefully eating bamboo, as opposed to hunting, also adds to its image of innocence. Though the giant panda is often assumed docile because of their cuteness, they have been known to attack humans, usually assumed to be out of irritation rather than predatory behavior. Giant pandas can usually live to be 20 30 years old. THREATS: Habitat loss to increasing human populations; poaching; periodic bamboo die-offs. CAPTIVITY: While zoos and aquariums may appear to be educational and conservation-oriented, most are designed with the needs and desires of the visitors in mind, not the needs of the animals. Many animals in zoos and aquariums exhibit abnormal behavior as a result of being deprived of their natural environments and social structures. Some zoos and aquariums do rescue some animals and work to save endangered species, but most animals in zoos were either captured from the wild or bred in captivity for the purpose of public display, not species protection. The vast majority of captive-bred animals will never be returned to the wild. When the facility breeds too many animals they become "surplus" and often are sold to laboratories, traveling shows, shooting ranches, or to private individuals who may be unqualified to care for them. PROTECTION: *Cites Appendix I, Endangered Species Act *Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, an international treaty with more than 144 member countries. Appendix I listed species cannot be traded commercially. Appendix II listed species can be traded commercially only if it does not harm their survival.

0 notes

theleafyqueen · 8 years ago

Note

Some aspects of veganism are idiotic. The zoo is fine. You do realize that many zoos take care of those endangered animals? Oh and I'm for animal testing. I'd rather test medication on an animal before a human

I think youre either gross or very uneducated about this.

Zoos:From an animal rights standpoint, we do not have a right to breed, capture and confine other animals, even if they are endangered. They are also endangered BECAUSE OF US. We can’t help them without locking them in cages and putting them on display for large quantities of money? Being a member of an endangered species doesn’t mean the individual animals have fewer rights. Animals in captivity suffer from stress, boredom and confinement. Intergenerational bonds are broken when individuals get sold or traded to other zoos, and no pen or even drive-through safari can compare to the freedom of the wild. Baby animals bring in visitors and money, but this incentive to breed new baby animals leads to overpopulation. Surplus animals are sold not only to other zoos, but also to circuses, canned hunting facilities, and even for slaughter. Some zoos just kill their surplus animal outright.The vast majority of captive breeding programs do not release animals back into the wild. The offspring are forever part of the chain of zoos, circuses, petting zoos, and exotic pet trade that buy, sell and barter animals among themselves and exploit animals. Ned the Asian elephant was born at an accredited zoo, but later confiscated from an abusive circus trainer and finally sent to a sanctuary. Removing individuals from the wild will further endanger the wild population because the remaining individuals will be LESS genetically diverse and will have more difficulty finding mates. If people want to see wild animals in real life, they can observe wildlife in the wild or visit a sanctuary. A TRUE sanctuary does not buy, sell, or breed animals, but takes in unwanted exotic pets, surplus animals from zoos or injured wildlife that can no longer survive in the wild. If zoos are teaching children anything, it’s that imprisoning animals for our own entertainment is acceptable. The argument that children will have more compassion animals they can see live does not hold water. Not one of today’s children has ever seen a dinosaur, yet kids are crazy about them.

At least one study has shown that elephants kept in zoos do not live as long as elephants in the wild.The federal Animal Welfare Act establishes only the most minimal standards for cage size, shelter, health care, ventilation, fencing, food and water. For example, enclosures must provide "sufficient space to allow each animal to make normal postural and social adjustments with adequate freedom of movement. Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition, debility, stress, or abnormal behavior patterns.“ Violations often result in a slap on the wrist and the exhibitor is given a deadline to correct the violation. Even a long history of inadequate care and AWA violations, such as the history of Tony the Truck Stop Tiger, will not free the animals.Sanctuaries also rehabilitate wildlife and take in unwanted exotic pets, without breeding, buying and selling animals like zoos do.Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as people. There have even been incidents of zoo animals eating other zoo animals. Im done ranting about that one, I used multiple sources.

As for testing on animals, no dude.

The fact is that we already do test new drugs on people. No matter how many tests on animals are undertaken, someone will always be the first human to be tested on. Because animal tests are so unreliable, they make those human trials all the more risky. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has noted that 92 percent of all drugs that are shown to be safe and effective in animal tests FAIL in human trials because they don’t work or are dangerous. And of the small percentage of drugs approved for human use, half end up being relabeled because of side effects that were not identified in tests on animals.Humans are much different than people. We dont need to be making beagles blind or bunnies without limbs. Taking healthy beings from a completely different species, artificially inducing a condition that they would never normally contract, keeping them in an unnatural and stressful environment, and trying to apply the results to naturally occurring diseases in human beings is dubious at best. Physiological reactions to drugs vary enormously from species to species (and even within a species). Penicillin kills guinea pigs but is inactive in rabbits. Aspirin kills cats and causes birth defects in rats, mice, guinea pigs, dogs, and monkeys. And morphine, a depressant in humans, stimulates goats, cats, and horses. Further, animals in laboratories typically display behavior indicating extreme psychological distress, and experimenters acknowledge that the use of these stressed-out animals jeopardizes the validity of the data produced.

Every year in the U.S., animal experimentation gobbles up billions of dollars (including 40 percent of all research funding from the National Institutes of Health), and nearly $3 trillion is spent on health care. While funding for animal experimentation and the number of animals used in experiments continues to increase, the U.S. still ranks 42nd in the world in life expectancy and has a high infant mortality rate compared to other developed countries. A 2014 review paper co-authored by a Yale School of Medicine professor in the prestigious medical journal The BMJ documented the overwhelming failure of experiments on animals to improve human health. It concluded that “if research conducted on animals continues to be unable to reasonably predict what can be expected in humans, the public’s continuing endorsement and funding of preclinical animal research seems misplaced.”

The most significant trend in modern research is the recognition that animals rarely serve as good models for the human body. Human clinical and epidemiological studies, human tissue- and cell-based research methods, cadavers, sophisticated high-fidelity human-patient simulators, and computational models have the potential to be more reliable, more precise, less expensive, and more humane alternatives to experiments on animals. Advanced microchips that use real human cells and tissues to construct fully functioning postage stamp–size organs allow researchers to study diseases and also develop and test new drugs to treat them. Progressive scientists have used human brain cells to develop a model “microbrain,” which can be used to study tumors, as well as artificial skin and bone marrow. We can now test skin irritation using reconstructed human tissues (e.g., MatTek’s EpiDermTM), produce and test vaccines using human tissues, and perform pregnancy tests using blood samples instead of killing rabbits.

Experimentation using animals persists not because it’s the best science but because of archaic habits, resistance to change, and a lack of outreach and education.

In other words

WE HAVE SO MANY OTHER OPTIONS THAT WORK BETTER AND COST LESS.

Now go do some reading and when you know more about shit, you can argue with me. This was pitiful.

This shit shouldn’t just have to be an aspect of veganism. You dont have to vegan to not be barbaric.

99 notes · View notes

kristablogs · 5 years ago

Text

‘Tiger King’ would have been more disturbing if it had focused on the big cat trade

"Albino" tigers are often just captive individuals bred for specific, atypical features. (Uriel Sobaranes/Unsplash/)

This story originally featured on The Conversation.

Netflix’s new docuseries Tiger King takes viewers into the strange world of big cat collectors. Featuring eccentric characters with names like Joe Exotic and Bhagavan “Doc” Antle, the series touches on polygamy, addiction, and personality cults, while exploring a mysterious disappearance and a murder-for-hire.

To Allison Skidmore, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who studies wildlife trafficking, the documentary didn’t bring enough attention to the scourge of captive big cats.

A former park ranger, Skidmore first started studying the issue in the US after the infamous death of Cecil the Lion in Zimbabwe in 2015. She was shocked to learn about how little oversight there was stateside. We asked her about the legality, incentives, and ease of buying and selling tigers.

How many captive tigers are in the US?

Unfortunately, there’s no straightforward answer. The vast majority of captive tigers are crossbred hybrids, so they aren’t identified as members of one of the six tiger subspecies—the Bengal tiger, Amur tiger, South China tiger, Sumatran tiger, Indochinese tiger, and Malayan tiger. Instead, they’re classified as “generic.”

Less than 5 percent—or fewer than 350—of tigers in captivity are managed through the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, a nonprofit organization that serves as an accrediting body in the US. They ensure accredited facilities meet higher standards of animal care than required by law.

All the rest are privately owned tigers, meaning they don’t belong to one of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums’ 236 sponsored institutions. These are considered generic and fall outside of federal oversight.

There’s no legal requirement to register these generic tigers, nor a comprehensive national database to track and monitor them. The best educated guess puts the number of tigers at around 10,000 in the US. Estimates put the global captive tiger population as high as 25,000.

In comparison, there are fewer than 4,000 tigers in the wild—down from 100,000 a century ago.

The new docu-series <Tiger King> gives viewers a glimpse of the poorly regulated exotic-animal trade in the US. (Netflix/)

How do tigers change hands?

The Endangered Species Act and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna prevent the importation of tigers from the wild. So all tigers in the US are born in captivity, with the rare exception of an orphaned wild cub that may end up in a zoo.

Only purebred tigers that are one of the six definitive subspecies are accounted for; these are the tigers you see in places like the Smithsonian National Zoo and generally belong to the Species Survival Plan, a captive breeding program designed to regulate the exchange of specific endangered species between member zoos in order to maintain genetic diversity.

All other tigers are found in zoos, sanctuaries, carnivals, wildlife parks, exhibits, and private homes that aren’t sanctioned by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. They can change hands in any number of ways, from online marketplaces to exotic animal auctions. They can be bought for as little as $800 to $2,000 for a cub and $200 to $500 for an adult, which is less expensive than many purebred dog puppies.

Can I legally buy a tiger?

The US is plagued with complicated and vague laws concerning tiger ownership.

However, there are no federal statutes or regulations that expressly forbid private ownership of tigers. State and local jurisdictions have been given this authority, and some do pass bans or require permits. Thirty-two states have bans or partial bans, and 14 states allow ownership with a simple license or permit. Four states —Alabama, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Nevada—have no form of oversight or regulation at all.

An overarching, cohesive framework of regulations is missing, and even in states that ban private ownership, there are loopholes. For example, in all but three states, owners can apply for what’s called a “federal exhibitor license,” which is remarkably cheap and easy to obtain and circumvents any stricter state or local laws in place.

You now need a permit to transport tigers across state lines, but there’s still no permit required for intra-state travel.

What’s in it for the owners?

Some see it as a business venture, while others claim they care about conservation. I consider the latter reason insincere.

Many facilities promote themselves as wildlife refuges or sanctuaries. These places frame their breeding and exhibition practices as stewardship, as if they’re contributing to an endangered animal’s survival. The reality is that no captive tiger has ever been released into the wild, so it’s not like these facilities can augment wild populations. A true sanctuary or refuge should have a strict no breeding or handling policy, and should have education programs dedicated to promoting conservation.

Bottle-feeding at a ‘pseudo-sanctuary’ in Southern California. (Allison Skidmore/)

Ultimately, tigers are big money makers, especially tiger cubs. The Animal Welfare Act allows cub petting from eight to 12 weeks of age. People pay $100 to $700 to pet, bottle-feed, swim with, or take a photo with a cub.

None of these profits go toward the conservation of wild tigers, and this small window of opportunity for direct public contact means that exhibitors must continually breed tigers to maintain a constant supply of cubs.

The value of cubs declines significantly after 12 weeks. Where do all these surplus tigers go? Unfortunately, due to a lack of regulatory oversight, it’s hard to know.

Since many states don’t account for their live tigers, there’s also no oversight regarding the reporting and disposal of dead tigers. Wildlife criminologists fear that these tigers can easily end up in the black market where their parts can cumulatively be worth up to $70,000. There’s evidence of US captive tigers tied to the domestic black market trade: In 2003, an owner of a tiger “rescue” facility was found to have 90 dead tigers in freezers on his property. And in 2001, an undercover investigation led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ended up leading to the prosecutions of 16 people for buying, selling and slaughtering 19 tigers.

What role does social media play?

Posing with tigers on social media platforms like Instagram and on dating apps has become a huge problem. Not only can it create a health and safety risk for both the human and tiger, but it also fosters a false narrative.

If you see thousands of photos of people with captive tigers, it masks the true problem of endangered tigers in the wild. Some might wonder whether tigers are really so endangered if they’re so easy to pose with.

The reality of the wild tiger’s plight has become masked behind the pomp and pageantry of social media. This marginalizes meaningful ideas about conservation and the true status of tigers as one of the most endangered big cats.

0 notes

scootoaster · 5 years ago

Text

‘Tiger King’ would have been more disturbing if it had focused on the big cat trade

"Albino" tigers are often just captive individuals bred for specific, atypical features. (Uriel Sobaranes/Unsplash/)

This story originally featured on The Conversation.

Netflix’s new docuseries Tiger King takes viewers into the strange world of big cat collectors. Featuring eccentric characters with names like Joe Exotic and Bhagavan “Doc” Antle, the series touches on polygamy, addiction, and personality cults, while exploring a mysterious disappearance and a murder-for-hire.

To Allison Skidmore, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who studies wildlife trafficking, the documentary didn’t bring enough attention to the scourge of captive big cats.

A former park ranger, Skidmore first started studying the issue in the US after the infamous death of Cecil the Lion in Zimbabwe in 2015. She was shocked to learn about how little oversight there was stateside. We asked her about the legality, incentives, and ease of buying and selling tigers.

How many captive tigers are in the US?

Unfortunately, there’s no straightforward answer. The vast majority of captive tigers are crossbred hybrids, so they aren’t identified as members of one of the six tiger subspecies—the Bengal tiger, Amur tiger, South China tiger, Sumatran tiger, Indochinese tiger, and Malayan tiger. Instead, they’re classified as “generic.”

Less than 5 percent—or fewer than 350—of tigers in captivity are managed through the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, a nonprofit organization that serves as an accrediting body in the US. They ensure accredited facilities meet higher standards of animal care than required by law.

All the rest are privately owned tigers, meaning they don’t belong to one of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums’ 236 sponsored institutions. These are considered generic and fall outside of federal oversight.

There’s no legal requirement to register these generic tigers, nor a comprehensive national database to track and monitor them. The best educated guess puts the number of tigers at around 10,000 in the US. Estimates put the global captive tiger population as high as 25,000.

In comparison, there are fewer than 4,000 tigers in the wild—down from 100,000 a century ago.

The new docu-series <Tiger King> gives viewers a glimpse of the poorly regulated exotic-animal trade in the US. (Netflix/)

How do tigers change hands?

The Endangered Species Act and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna prevent the importation of tigers from the wild. So all tigers in the US are born in captivity, with the rare exception of an orphaned wild cub that may end up in a zoo.

Only purebred tigers that are one of the six definitive subspecies are accounted for; these are the tigers you see in places like the Smithsonian National Zoo and generally belong to the Species Survival Plan, a captive breeding program designed to regulate the exchange of specific endangered species between member zoos in order to maintain genetic diversity.

All other tigers are found in zoos, sanctuaries, carnivals, wildlife parks, exhibits, and private homes that aren’t sanctioned by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. They can change hands in any number of ways, from online marketplaces to exotic animal auctions. They can be bought for as little as $800 to $2,000 for a cub and $200 to $500 for an adult, which is less expensive than many purebred dog puppies.

Can I legally buy a tiger?

The US is plagued with complicated and vague laws concerning tiger ownership.

However, there are no federal statutes or regulations that expressly forbid private ownership of tigers. State and local jurisdictions have been given this authority, and some do pass bans or require permits. Thirty-two states have bans or partial bans, and 14 states allow ownership with a simple license or permit. Four states —Alabama, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Nevada—have no form of oversight or regulation at all.

An overarching, cohesive framework of regulations is missing, and even in states that ban private ownership, there are loopholes. For example, in all but three states, owners can apply for what’s called a “federal exhibitor license,” which is remarkably cheap and easy to obtain and circumvents any stricter state or local laws in place.

You now need a permit to transport tigers across state lines, but there’s still no permit required for intra-state travel.

What’s in it for the owners?

Some see it as a business venture, while others claim they care about conservation. I consider the latter reason insincere.

Many facilities promote themselves as wildlife refuges or sanctuaries. These places frame their breeding and exhibition practices as stewardship, as if they’re contributing to an endangered animal’s survival. The reality is that no captive tiger has ever been released into the wild, so it’s not like these facilities can augment wild populations. A true sanctuary or refuge should have a strict no breeding or handling policy, and should have education programs dedicated to promoting conservation.

Bottle-feeding at a ‘pseudo-sanctuary’ in Southern California. (Allison Skidmore/)

Ultimately, tigers are big money makers, especially tiger cubs. The Animal Welfare Act allows cub petting from eight to 12 weeks of age. People pay $100 to $700 to pet, bottle-feed, swim with, or take a photo with a cub.

None of these profits go toward the conservation of wild tigers, and this small window of opportunity for direct public contact means that exhibitors must continually breed tigers to maintain a constant supply of cubs.

The value of cubs declines significantly after 12 weeks. Where do all these surplus tigers go? Unfortunately, due to a lack of regulatory oversight, it’s hard to know.

Since many states don’t account for their live tigers, there’s also no oversight regarding the reporting and disposal of dead tigers. Wildlife criminologists fear that these tigers can easily end up in the black market where their parts can cumulatively be worth up to $70,000. There’s evidence of US captive tigers tied to the domestic black market trade: In 2003, an owner of a tiger “rescue” facility was found to have 90 dead tigers in freezers on his property. And in 2001, an undercover investigation led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ended up leading to the prosecutions of 16 people for buying, selling and slaughtering 19 tigers.

What role does social media play?

Posing with tigers on social media platforms like Instagram and on dating apps has become a huge problem. Not only can it create a health and safety risk for both the human and tiger, but it also fosters a false narrative.

If you see thousands of photos of people with captive tigers, it masks the true problem of endangered tigers in the wild. Some might wonder whether tigers are really so endangered if they’re so easy to pose with.

The reality of the wild tiger’s plight has become masked behind the pomp and pageantry of social media. This marginalizes meaningful ideas about conservation and the true status of tigers as one of the most endangered big cats.

0 notes

bharatiyamedia-blog · 5 years ago

Text

4 Seasons Launching Manta Belief Expeditions Aboard 3-Deck Catamaran

http://tinyurl.com/y2f8rs3m As vacationers flock in growing numbers to this island paradise, a conservation mission primarily based at considered one of its prime resorts is defending the nation’s most celebrated residents. I used to be surveying the impossibly white sand and Technicolor-turquoise Indian Ocean outdoors my seaside villa on the Four Seasons Resort Maldives at Landaa Giraavaru—a blinding, 44-acre island resort within the nation’s distant northern Baa Atoll—when the ring of the cell phone I’d obtained at check-in solely 20 minutes earlier than shattered my paradisiacal revelry. “The workforce simply noticed them,” stated a pleasant voice from reception. “Please head to the pier as quickly as potential in the event you’d like to affix.” I pulled on my swimsuit and hopped on my monogrammed cruiser bike, peddling to the dock alongside the sprawling resort’s sandy lanes within the shadow of towering coconut palms and emerald jungle foliage. Quickly a small group of friends and I have been aboard a speedboat, snorkel gear in hand, as we whizzed towards Hanifaru Bay, one of many world’s most vital feeding websites for reef manta rays. We jumped into the cool, crystalline water, following our information with eyes educated under the floor. Immediately, a dozen reef mantas emerged from the sun-streaked blue depths as if from one other universe, drifting towards us slowly via the shifting currents. Recognized collectively (together with oceanic manta rays and satan rays) as mobulids, reef mantas are among the world’s most enigmatic creatures, with a decidedly imposing anatomy—their wingspan can attain over 13 ft—that contrasts starkly with their consummately mild nature. As they have to maintain water flowing over their gills as a way to breathe, manta rays are born into an existence of perpetual movement; in a mean 50-year lifetime, they journey tens of hundreds of miles feeding on zooplankton, among the smallest animals within the sea. Light Giants The mind and inquisitiveness of manta rays, which have the biggest mind of all fish, makes for actually mesmerizing encounters with these benevolent behemoths. Floating facedown just a few ft under the ocean’s floor, I attempted to remain stock-still as one swam straight towards me as if taking part in a recreation of rooster, its colossal, winglike pectoral fins flapping hypnotically. When some six ft away, my curious new pal subtly modified course, dipping just a few ft under me as I stared down at its again in sheer awe. To look at reef mantas on this pristine habitat is to look at an underwater ballet choreographed by nature, these achingly swish “birds of the ocean” gliding and somersaulting via the cerulean depths to a soundtrack of silence. At about 5,000 rays and counting, the Maldivian reef manta inhabitants is the largest-known on earth by a measurable margin. The truth that a wealth of scientific information about them exists in any respect owes nearly fully to the Maldivian Manta Ray Project (MMRP), the flagship analysis mission of the Manta Trust, a U.Okay.-based charity devoted to the worldwide conservation of those charismatic creatures. Based in 2005 and headquartered within the Marine Discovery Centre at 4 Seasons Landaa Giraavaru, the MMRP collects information in regards to the nation’s manta inhabitants, their actions, and the way the surroundings, tourism, and human interactions have an effect on them. It’s the brainchild of Manta Belief CEO and founder Man Stevens, who’s working diligently together with his workforce to guard these singular animals because the vacationer inflow to this idyllic island nation continues to develop. Stevens first encountered the Maldivian reef mantas when he was employed as a marine biologist and dive information on the Four Seasons Explorer, the model’s Maldivian luxurious liveaboard yacht, in 2003. “I used to be captivated,” says Stevens, a British marine biologist and now one of many world’s foremost consultants on the species. Wanting to study extra, he searched on-line for fundamental details about mantas—reminiscent of their life-span and the way typically they reproduce—to just about no avail. “I keep in mind considering, ‘Perhaps I can begin a analysis mission on them,’” he remembers. 4 Seasons Resort Maldives In 2005, Stevens approached Armando Kraenzlin, at present regional vp of 4 Seasons Maldives who was then normal supervisor of Four Seasons Maldives at Kuda Huraa, to gauge Kraenzlin’s curiosity in supporting a potential mission. Kraenzlin informed him that 4 Seasons Landaa Giraavaru, then below building, would have an on-site marine analysis middle that might function command central for Stevens’s analysis. Shortly thereafter, the Maldivian Manta Ray Undertaking was born. “4 Seasons Maldives has been our greatest supporter for the reason that starting,” Stevens says. “With out them, we’d by no means have been in a position to launch the mission.” A Shifting Panorama Amid New Challenges Since its inception, the MMRP has recognized some 4,700 reef manta rays (by way of the distinctive spot patterns on their undersides) from 60,000 photo-identification sightings. Moreover making a research-backed code of conduct and multimedia toolkit to teach vacationers and operators about how you can swim with manta rays, the MMRP’s notable record of achievements, together with the designation of the Baa Atoll as a Unesco Biosphere Reserve in 2011—the one one within the 1,200-island nation—and the inclusion of all manta and satan rays within the Appendices of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (the Bonn Convention) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The MMRP’s efforts have additionally led to the designation of Hanifaru Bay and Anga Faru as two of 42 marine protected areas (MPAs) within the Maldives. Hanifaru Bay—whose distinctive form concentrates planktonic meals, thus attracting massive numbers of manta rays and whale sharks—has turn into one thing of a mannequin for sustainable manta tourism within the nation. As soon as overrun by boats stuffed with snorkelers and divers—“it was an absolute zoo,” says Stevens—the bay is now strictly monitored by rangers, funded via a charge guests pay to entry the MPA, which is usually dealt with straight by the resorts. Hanifaru’s administration coverage has banned diving fully and limits the variety of vacationer boats on-site to 5 at a time, with a most of 80 vacationers within the water concurrently. With tourism momentum within the Maldives exhibiting no indicators of abating—1.5 million guests are anticipated this 12 months, in contrast with 1 million in 2013—the MMRP’s subsequent lofty aim is to work with the Maldivian authorities to implement government-sanctioned laws, just like the plan in place at Hanifaru, that may apply to all 300-plus manta aggregation websites throughout the nation’s 26 atolls. Presently, the vast majority of these websites—which embody 73 “cleansing stations,” distinguished spots alongside the reef the place mantas collect to have parasites faraway from their our bodies by small fish known as cleaner wrasses—stay fully unregulated. In consequence, divers congregate at these viewing hotspots to watch the motion and take pictures, typically scaring off the mantas and damaging coral reefs within the course of. “These locations are the place tourism pressures are at their biggest,” Stevens says. “We have to take a carrot-and-stick method that rewards conscientious operators with certifications and different methods to advertise themselves and penalizes people who behave badly.” A big colony of orange solar coral (Tubastraea faulkneri) on an outcrop surrounded by reef fish. North Malé Atoll, Maldives. Adam Broadbent On condition that manta tourism already generates over $8.1 million in direct income for the Maldivian financial system—which is 80% depending on tourism—the nation’s vested curiosity in defending this inhabitants appears clear. However contemplating the litany of different challenges dealing with the creating nation, together with local weather change (because the world’s lowest-lying nation, a majority of the Maldives’ 1,200 islands could also be underwater inside a long time) and coral reef bleaching (which has severely broken the vast majority of its reefs since 2014), Stevens acknowledges that it’s more likely to be a sluggish course of. “We’ve a great relationship with the Ministry of Setting, and I’m hopeful that one thing will occur within the subsequent few years,” Stevens says. “However I don’t count on miracles both.” Within the meantime, friends at 4 Seasons Landaa Giraavaru can work together with these mild giants throughout manta season, which spans from June via early November, by way of a spread of singular actions together with Manta Ray Scientist for a Day and its Manta on Name service. For the latter, you’ll obtain a devoted “manta cellphone” (as I did), get a name each time the MMRP workforce alerts resort employees to a sighting close by, after which have 30 minutes to move to the dock and be whisked off to swim amongst them. A seaside villa on the 4 Seasons Landaa Giraavaru within the Maldives. 4 Seasons Resort Maldives In September, 4 Seasons will even launch Manta Belief Expeditions aboard the 4 Seasons Explorer, its three-deck, 22-person catamaran, which is the Maldives’ quickest and most luxurious floating resort. Accompanied by Stevens and different MMRP workforce members, you’ll partake in each side of the manta analysis expertise, together with taking ID pictures and recording important environmental info. The MMRP employees now quantity 15 within the Maldives and have expanded into different atolls via their work with a handful of different high-end resorts, together with Six Senses Laamu in Laamu Atoll. “We solely wish to work with operators which are genuinely invested in serving to the surroundings,” Stevens says. As well as, the Manta Belief is at present collaborating on 25 affiliate tasks in international locations together with Mexico, Brazil, and New Zealand. In the meantime, the wealth of unprecedented information the MMRP has collected informs the mantas’ ongoing safety, each within the Maldives and different far-flung corners of the world. “In the event you don’t know what number of people comprise a inhabitants, or how typically they’re in a position to reproduce, you possibly can’t decide the influence of the threats they face,” Stevens explains. “This information permits us to reply key life historical past questions which are important to the administration and conservation of the whole species.” Extra must-read tales from Fortune: —Meet the trailblazer who needs to carry a sake trail to Arkansas —This island escape is Italy’s best-kept secret —These are the best and worst airlines, in response to J.D. Energy —Summer time Journey Information: must-have gadgets and accessories for jetsetters —Take heed to our new audio briefing, Fortune 500 Daily Follow Fortune on Flipboard to remain up-to-date on the newest information and evaluation. Source link

0 notes

newstwitter-blog · 8 years ago

Text

New Post has been published on News Twitter

New Post has been published on http://www.news-twitter.com/2017/02/16/huffington-post-republicans-look-to-modernize-read-weaken-the-endangered-species-act-15/

Huffington Post: Republicans Look To 'Modernize' (Read: Weaken) The Endangered Species Act

WASHINGTON — With control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, Republicans wasted no time taking aim at the Endangered Species Act ― a move many fear will have serious implications for the more than 1,600 plants and animals under its protection.

On Wednesday, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing called “Oversight: Modernization of the Endangered Species Act” at which Republicans attacked the 43-year-old law as being broken and in need of an overhaul.

In his opening remarks, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the committee chairman, said the ESA “isn’t working today” and “we should all be concerned.”

“States, counties, wildlife managers, home builders, construction companies, farmers, ranchers and other stakeholders are all making it clear that the Endangered Species Act is not working today.”

Seeming to ignore the fact that the planet is facing a biodiversity crisis, Barrasso noted that of the 1,652 U.S. species listed as either threatened or endangered, only 47, roughly 2.8 percent, have been delisted because of their recovery.

“As a doctor, if I admit 100 patients to the hospital and only three recover enough under my treatment to be discharged, I would deserve to lose my medical license,” he said.

Bloomberg via Getty Images

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, says the Endangered Species Act needs an overhaul.

This Republican-led attack on the ESA is nothing new. During the 114th Congress alone, 130 separate bills and amendments, the vast majority sponsored by members of the GOP, sought to weaken the law, according to a list compiled by Defenders of Wildlife. Already this session, several anti-ESA measures have popped up, including a bill introduced by Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) that would require federal agencies to review and consider the economic effects of listing a species as threatened.

In an interview with E&E News in December, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) spoke candidly about his intentions for the conservation law, saying, “Repeal it and replace it.”

Republican lawmakers have made it clear they aren’t satisfied with the law. But there appears to be little, if anything, to support the notion that the majority of Americans agree with them.

A 2015 poll found that 90 percent of registered voters support the law. And late last year, another poll found that 70 percent of voters opposed eliminating protections “for some at-risk wildlife species such as the gray wolf or the greater sage grouse,” that would prevent them from being safeguarded by the ESA.

Among the panelists at Wednesday’s hearing were former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service directors Daniel Ashe and Jamie Rappaport Clark; former Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal; James Holte, president of the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation; and Gordon Myers, executive director of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.

Ashe, who is now president and CEO of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, acknowledged the ESA is not perfect but said it is “the world’s gold standard” and is working well to save species from extinction. He warned against starting the debate with the assumption that the law is broken.

“As this Congress considers its future, your goal should be to make it stronger, faster and better for the 21st century, because life literally depends upon it,” Ashe said.

Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, told the committee that the law is not broken and does not need to be fixed. Yet it has “become a lightning rod for those who want less oversight and less protection from government,” she said.

“In my over 35 years of experience, talk of ‘modernizing’ the Endangered Species Act has amounted to one thing: a euphemism for undermining and weakening the statute,” Clark said.

The biggest issue facing the ESA, Clark added, is not the need for modernization but rather for funding.

Freudenthal, Holte and Myers all agreed that the act, signed by President Richard Nixon in 1973, needs work. Among their primary complaints were that it has failed in its goal of recovering species to a point where they can be removed from the list and that states and private landowners often feel ignored by the federal agencies tasked with administering the act.

“Congress intended for the ESA to protect species from extinction; however, it prioritizes species listing over actual recovery and habitat conservation,” Holte said. “Reform of the ESA should include a focus on species recovery and habitat conservation that respects landowners.”

Because of other congressional meetings and votes happening at the same time, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) was the lone Democratic member of the committee to speak. He stressed the importance of keeping in mind the ESA’s purpose: to prevent extinction and restore species at risk.

“I, for one, am reluctant to do anything to compromise the successes we’ve achieved,” he said.

This post has been harvested from the source link, and News-Twitter has no responsibility on its content. Source link

0 notes

mavwrekmarketing · 8 years ago

Link

WASHINGTON With control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, Republicans wasted no time taking aim at the Endangered Species Act a move many fear will have serious implications for the more than 1,600 plants and animalsunder its protection.

On Wednesday, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing called Oversight: Modernization of the Endangered Species Act at which Republicans attacked the 43-year-old law as being broken and in need of an overhaul.

In his opening remarks, Sen. John Barrasso(R-Wyo.), the committee chairman, said the ESA isnt working today and we should all be concerned.

States, counties, wildlife managers, home builders, construction companies, farmers, ranchers and other stakeholders are all making it clear that the Endangered Species Act is not working today.

Seeming to ignore the fact that the planet is facing abiodiversity crisis, Barrasso noted that of the 1,652 U.S. species listed as either threatened or endangered, only 47, roughly 2.8 percent, have been delisted because of their recovery.

As a doctor, if I admit 100 patients to the hospital and only three recover enough under my treatment to be discharged, I would deserve to lose my medical license, he said.

Bloomberg via Getty Images

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, says the Endangered Species Act needs an overhaul.

This Republican-led attack on the ESA is nothing new. During the 114th Congress alone, 130 separate bills and amendments, the vast majority sponsored by members of the GOP,sought to weaken the law, according to a list compiled by Defenders of Wildlife. Already this session, several anti-ESA measures have popped up, including a billintroduced by Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) that would require federal agencies to review and consider the economic effects of listing a species as threatened.

In an interview with E&E News in December, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) spoke candidly about his intentions for the conservation law, saying, Repeal it and replace it.

Republican lawmakers have made it clear they arent satisfied with the law. But there appears to be little, if anything, to support the notion that the majority of Americans agree with them.

A 2015 poll found that 90 percent of registered voters support the law. And late last year, another poll found that70 percent of votersopposed eliminating protections for some at-risk wildlife species such as the gray wolf or the greater sage grouse, that would prevent them from being safeguarded by the ESA.

Among the panelists at Wednesdays hearing were former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service directorsDaniel Asheand Jamie Rappaport Clark;former Wyoming Gov.Dave Freudenthal;James Holte, president of the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation; and Gordon Myers, executive director of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.

Ashe, who is now president and CEO of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums,acknowledged the ESA is not perfect but said it is the worlds gold standard and is working well to save species from extinction. He warned against starting the debate with the assumption that the law is broken.

As this Congress considers its future, your goal should be to make it stronger, faster and better for the 21st century, because life literally depends upon it, Ashe said.

Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, told the committee that the law is not broken and does not need to be fixed. Yet it has become a lightning rod for those who want less oversight and less protection from government, she said.

In my over 35 years of experience, talk of modernizing the Endangered Species Act has amounted to one thing: a euphemism for undermining and weakening the statute, Clark said.

The biggest issue facing the ESA, Clark added, is not the need for modernization but rather for funding.

Freudenthal, Holte and Myers all agreed that the act, signed by President Richard Nixon in 1973, needs work. Among their primary complaints were that it has failed in its goal of recovering species to a point where they can be removed from the list and that states and private landowners often feel ignored by the federal agencies tasked with administering the act.

Congress intended for the ESA to protect species from extinction; however,it prioritizes species listing over actual recovery and habitat conservation, Holte said. Reform of the ESA should include a focus on species recovery and habitat conservation that respects landowners.

Because of other congressional meetings and votes happening at the same time, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) was the lone Democratic member of the committee to speak. He stressed the importance of keeping in mind the ESAs purpose: to prevent extinction and restore species at risk.

I, for one, am reluctant to do anything to compromise the successes weve achieved, he said.