Polar Bear cubs left to die. » Nuremberg Zoo

Polar Bear cubs left to die.
07-01-2008

This is an article about a german zoo. we hav3e had many discussions about hand rasing, what are everyones thoughts on this...

Zoo leaves polar bear cubs to starve

07-01-2008

Well this is what the animal rights people wanted. Now let's see them raise a fuss over it, as I'm sure that they will do.

07-01-2008

Hopefully the mother polar bear feels her maternal instincts kick in, but perhaps being surrounded by concrete and glass leaves her a tad confused.

07-01-2008

"We expect to be branded as being cruel to animals. The fact is in nature, if something goes wrong, it goes wrong," he told the newspaper.

This seems to be one confused deputy zoo director intent on a bit of a social experiment... I would pull the cubs for hand raising...

I wonder how the zoo vet feels about it...

07-01-2008

This is going to be an interesting case, especially for zoo staff in general (not just the vets)-and lawyers... §2 (1) of the German Animal Protection Law states that the person or organisation that keeps an animal has to make sure to feed, care and accommodate it according to its needs. If the zoo decides to let them starve to death (which I doubt; most likely, they're going to either bottlefeed them or euthanize them), the local anti-zoo lobby, among them notorious Mr. Frank Albrecht, would have the possibility to nail them down to that.
The circumstances of the births are also quite interesting; both females are now pregnant, so the still very new(!) exhibit wasn't actually properly designed for a case like this right from the start; the male is now housed elsewhere in a kind of provisional way...
I do like the Nuremberg Zoo, not just because of its "lion-hearted" (a little pun) public justification of the feeding of surplus ungulates as whole carcasses to their carnivores; yet recent public developments, like the turmoil about the dolphin deaths, the dolphin lagoon etc. makes it appear in a somehow bad light-which the anti-zoo lobby is eager to feast upon.

07-01-2008

Huh..? You like the place because it bold and seems to make a few gaffes..?

07-01-2008

You gotta be kidding me, you can't do it right can you?

To my understanding, social interaction in the early years of life are very very important in the life of a polar bear later on. If it's raised by humans it will exhibit the same problems gorilla's seem to get later on, not gettin along socially with animals of the same species, difficulty to breed, being overly agressive and interested by humans and ending up alone and worhless, more or less.

Therefore, the only reason to save these animals would be if they were genetically highly important, but i don't think they are. There also doesn't seem to be a high interest from other zoo's to take in more polar bears (the trend seems to be to phase them out in most zoo's) so i don't really see why this zoo should do all it can to prevent nature from taking it's course, how harse it is.

Whatever it'll do, it'll get criticized for it anyway...

08-01-2008

@NZ Jeremy: Here we go again...If You ever have the chance to visit Nuremberg's zoo, do so-then You might know why I like the zoo. What I especially like is said bold way they address in the public problems other zoos keep quiet about or make a big fuss around (see carcass-feeding at Bronx Zoo): for example "getting rid" of surplus ungulates no other zoo wants (instead of giving them to shady animal dealers who give them to who-knows...) by killing them according to official German Slaughter laws and feeding their big cats etc. now and then the whole carcasses.
@jwer: It depends on the individual case-and if the animal can be re-integrated into the social group (which isn't in Polar bears the same problem as in the more social gorillas etc.). WHY should the zoo do it? See the German law mentioned above.

08-01-2008

I wasn't having a go at you Sun, I just didn't understand what you meant...

08-01-2008

I think the Zoo is making the right decision here. There is a big difference between Knut`s case and these cubs in Nuremberg - the mothers in Nuremberg cared for their babys and they did survive the first weeks. One of the mothers cares for them very well, while the other leaves the cub(s) often. But the cub is alive and the mother does nurse it!! So why removing the cubs? They probably had a bigger chance of survival if hand-reared from now on (hand-rearing polar bear cubs from day 1 is much more difficult), especially the cub whose mother leaves it often is at risk, but she needs the possibility to practice and gain experience. I don`t really understand why the zoo is making such a fuss about it, officially announcing that they would let the cubs starve.

08-01-2008

@Yassa: I'm pretty sure it's not the zoo making the fuss, but the media, jumping the gun and grossly exaggerating the situation to fabricate an eye-catching headline. As the example of "Knut" showed, nothing gets the public so emotionally agitated as abandoned zoo Polar bear cubs...And at the Nuremberg zoo, at least the zoo management (not the poor zoo staff that is now going to be harassed more or less friendly by the public) might be interested in attracting more public interest-to sell more tickets...

@NZ Jeremy: Did the second post of mine then reach its target? (fingers crossed...)

08-01-2008

I also think that they should let the mother take care of them. Even if there only is a minimal chance that they will survive, she needs the practice. Then maybe the next litter of cubs will survive.

__________________
I am Toddy, the zoo-enthusiast from Denmark!
Different zoos visited: 77
Favourite animals: Aardvarks and manatees.
Website: www.zoos.dk

08-01-2008

It is unsolvable dilemma - should zoo be natural or minimise suffering?

In any case, I imagine animal activists are twisting and turning. Previously they wanted Knut better dead than raised by man. What now?

BTW, Nurnbergen zoo polar bear enclosure is one of the best - big and grassy. Better not to park foreign car anywhere in the city, though.

08-01-2008

There are many factors pointed out here, but two ring true for me:

How will the zoo justify its Conservation message if it doesn't do every it can to save members of a species that recently got moved "up" to threatened status (please cite)..? If you factor in the German laws pointed out by Sun the zoo sounds like it is setting itself for legal ramifications... Surely these outweigh the "benefits" of leaving them in the enclosure..?

@Sun... Yes thank you muchly... Please don't think I'm trying I'm to start an argument every time I ask a question of you, thats not my intention...

08-01-2008

Update: The local newspapers are reporting today that the 2 cubs of the female who showed good maternal behavoir are gone, probably being eaten by the mother after having died from natural causes. The cub of the mother who had been neglecting it has been seen for the first time and is alive and well.

@ Sun W.: I agree, but why is the zoo fuelling these reports? They are honest, but if I were the director, I had only given the info that cubs have been born and that there is a risk because the mother are unexperienced. Why giving the public details about one female not caring well for the cubs although the keepers didn`t know details about the cub`s condition? After the Knut-mania last year and all the discussion about Leipzig`s decision not to rear the sloth bear cubs, I had kept the whole issue much more quiet. But maybe the director wants to discuss this stuff to educate the public and doesn`t care about negative media reports...