Listen, I agree with all what you are saying. But there are certain measures that can be taken, measures only which can be fostered or rejected by the Powers that be. These people are the Russian- Indian Government, the World Wild life foundation, and private animals rights activists like me. Yes, just like there are private owners... there are also private animal activists and groups fighting for their survival. These people all want the best for the Tigers, and the main objective is to make the Tigers safe, well bred, and happy. There is no way you can ever convince anyone that Tigers are better off in cages, those isolated incidences don't contribute fairly to the well being of Tigers. What is so bad about establishing a natural Tiger reserve in America? That way everybody else can even see them and enjoy them, maybe even establish fees and use the proceeds to manage their protection. You are forgetting that haboring Tigers privately is Illegal in virtually every country?
If they were so bad, why would they put this on their site Save The Tiger Fund http://www.savethetigerfund.org/Content/NavigationMenu2/Initiatives/CATT/default.htm
Until last year in Kansas, USA, it was legal to keep tigers in Kansas and a lot of people did. They were not trafficing in wild tigers largely because wild tigers are expensive and a gigantic pain in the ass. IFAW is so very proud that they helped pass the ban. Now tigers, lions, cougars, and even wolves are being killed to satisfy IFAW. Yes, I think that I can convince people that the tigers are better off in cages, especially when the cages are getting a lot bigger, the tigers have more enriched environments, and they are happy. You go up to a cage and see that they are friendly and playing with their toys and each other. Unhappy animals do not do that. I approached a tiger in her cage and she gave me a kiss through the wire. Only a happy animal does that. It's going to have to be good enough. I am really sick of propaganda efforts that try to neutralize facts like this. The fact is that the tigers are happy and prosperous. Harping on the idea of a "market" for wild tigers is ludicrous when most private owners have no worldly use for such a market, when the market exists in spite of them and is thousands of years old, and when your proposed solution actually reduces the number of the animals that you are allegedly trying to save. I am also sick of the idea that just because we can't do what you think of as a perfect job of caring for tigers, you think that such efforts should be banned. IFAW's really got its foot in its mouth complaining about tiger farming and hoping to get it banned. There are thousands of tigers in those farms and fewer than that in the wild. They are succeeding where nature fails. Even if some gargantuan effort could stop poaching and human encroachment, much more modest efforts succeed in creating large populations of living tigers. I do not accept the idea that those tigers aren't tigers. Read a few books about biology. Stop trying to get people to accept some stupid out of the clouds ideology that mislabels living tigers as non-living drones. Give it up and stop trying to control people.
They push for bans on the trade in tigers and tiger parts. That is the biggest threat to the species because private owners can and will raise tens of thousands of tigers to fill market demand, which means that the market creates homes for tens of thousands of tigers. The Save the Tiger Fund people want to stop people from creating homes for tens of thousands of tigers.
One more thing: It is a lie, and a deliberate lie at that, that legal farming cannot bring down the price. The price of a poached tiger has been said to be as high as $300,000 by the time that it is parted out. The price of a carcass is an extremely small amount of this. Most of it is because of the black market. A carcass from a tiger farm or park, just as likely the owner will pay someone to haul it off. There is also the lack of the burden of having to evade the law, and that burden is a large part of the expense. The way I see it, adding up the facts that I know to be true, the Save the Tigers Fund cannot possibly be telling us the truth about private ownership of tigers. They already know these facts and they deliberately and knowingly tell us an untrue version of the facts. I'm going to be glad when you people are finally defeated and people stop giving you money. I used to think that places like that actually did something to help the animals until I realized that they were the ones who demanded that people give up their pets and companions to be slaughtered. Once again, I do not accept the excuse that it "creates a market." The market has been there for thousands of years. We can't create it. We can only find ways to satisfy while keeping the species alive.
Save The Tiger Fund, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. http://www.savethetigerfund.org/Con...nitiatives/CATT/FactsandFallacies/default.htm
"FACTS: Wild tigers can be saved more easily and at far less expense by protecting the habitat and prey of existing wild tiger populations." Not a fact. Millions are spent failing to protect the preserves and they are like black holes for money. Farms can actually make money and hire people. Farms are going to wind up being the largest source of tigers and tiger parts, and this will override any benefits from poaching. Also, as I said, anyone who says that poached animals are not expensive is LYING.
LOL. It still doesn't change the facts. Anyway, If millions are actually spent and laws are enforced there should be no problem, at least on paper. (LOL)So farms can hire people and reserves can't? Oh...Isn't that cute?..... Lets feel sorry for the poor little one everybody...he's trying to create jobs for us. Listen here, you are now making up silly excuses. Whatever private farms can do the Government can do even 10 times better...if they wanted to. You are now making me laugh here. What else are you going to say next?
You've just shown me the kind of retard you are today. Anything outside the government is open for corruption. What the fuck are you going to do when a bandit of armed men come to rob you of your Tigers? You are going to...call the cops? Of cause in countries like America your options are more feasible, but when you live in Asia thats another case. You don't seem to know how the world works and clearly don't seem to know anything about anything..either.
One fact I see here is that IFAW and the Save the Tiger Fund people are refusing to analyze the actual cost of farmed animals versus poached animals. They can't do this and maintain the hold on their own market which is tax-deductible donations. A quick idea: A poached animal is unlikely to even make it to the market. There is a lot of money spent from the time someone first buys it until it reaches wherever it is going. He has to bribe park rangers, other officials, and he has to pay whoever chops it up. Then he has a product that may be worth as much as $300,000, and it's illegal, so he risks going to jail. Compare that to quite possibly being able to buy a carcass which comes from a tiger that, when alive, was entirely payed for by donations, fees for tourism, and maybe some government subsidies.
(laughs) You are such a retard. Wild Tigers Eat natural game, they don't get sick as often, they don't get depressed as often, and they are truely and naturaly solitary. They have been existing for years. In captive, owners have to buy huge amounts of meats to feed them, pay exorbitant vet bills for sicknessess, medical check ups, e.t.c Besides, the Government and NGO's budget is usually bigger than any private owner. So why and how can the Save the Tiger Fund be making these up? Well, it doesn't seem to have any trouble making it to people's farms does it? But you are the one that said buyers have the money to afford catering for the animal, so this shouldn't be a problem for the middleman, he will always be reinbursed for his efforts. Really, I wonder why he didn't think about that before Well, a carcass will not make rich Americans like Mike Tyson happy would it? Maybe some people want them alive, maybe some want them DOA, ever thought of that. I mean, what is causing their decline then?
Good advice...but its hard...I guess I just have too, and face the fact; Tigers are eventually going to be extinct
But if we farm them there will be tens of thousands of them, and that doesn't fit any reasonable definition of extinct. One fact that we have to face is that organizations like IFAW have made conscious decisions to be unreasonable about this, so that if they defeat their own alleged purpose, they won't care and they quite possibly don't know. Private ownership has already succeeded in increasing the number of tigers in the world. The activists whose view you are unsuccessfully selling are trying to prevent people from increasing the number of tigers. I don't care if those tigers are what you consider to be unfit to live. They can live, they can perpetuate their species, and with farms and other private owners, they will never go extinct. There are many live tigers in the U.S. who can reproduce and they can satisfy all reasonable demand for living tigers by private owners, so poaching doesn't enter into it anymore. I'm not crazy enough to demand that a tiger or its descendants be destroyed because they were poached, either. Fact it, you're part of the problem now, not part of the solution.
I don't have the right to decide that tiger parts are not necessary for someone's health or traditions. How would I even know that, anyway? The fact is, that I know how to preserve the tiger without facing those questions at all. First we preserve the tiger, then if we have other concerns, we face them. What you have going is a strange little ideological war that puts the other concerns ahead of saving the tiger. You have redefined saving the species as "saving the species the way that Save the Tiger Fund and IFAW dictate." I reject that definition. Saving the tigers is saving the tigers. Save them their lives worry about the stuff that you think is so tragic. You lost me when you started to dictate what kind of animals I could own and got the law to force people to give them up to have them destroyed.
It's difficult to believe that captive-bred cats are 'tame' compared to wild-bred cats. Too few generations to have developed a distinct variety. While they might have been trained to be 'tame', their offspring could just as easily be trained to be 'wild'. Condors were saved from certain extinction by a captive breeding program that brought every last wild Condor into the program, where they were caged and bred. Since then, a small percentage have been released into the wild, where they are now surviving (but not 'thriving'). The hope is to establish an expanding wild-breeding population so that captive-breeding can be eliminated. It appears that Metakron is, sadly, correct. The illegal poaching that continues (not only for tigers, but rhinos, elephants, gorillas, etc.) will likely eliminate wild specimens, much to the detriment of the ecology (as well as ourselves as humanity). A captive breeding program, to maintain a wide gene pool, could work to allow re-introduction into the wild in a more-enlightened future, along the lines of what we've done for the Condor (they were down to just 27 birds left, when they were 'brought in' to a captive breeding program). The Condor habitat has been improved tremendously, which is what is now allowing them to at least breed and multiply in the wild, even though they are not yet rapidly expanding. Ideally, preserving the wild habitat is the best method. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world, and at times might have to accept a less-than-ideal method.
Well, the existence of a better method, even conceding that being in the wild is better, does not rule out the usefulness of the captive breeding method. It also does not mean that we do not have the right to own animals.
