Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by Chatha, Nov 17, 2006.

1. ### Chathabig brown was screwed upRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,867
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?

3. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
The "Save the Tiger Fund" is one of the biggest threats to the species.

5. ### Chathabig brown was screwed upRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,867
How? Any evidence?

7. ### Chathabig brown was screwed upRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,867
If they were so bad, why would they put this on their site

Save The Tiger Fund

8. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
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.

9. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
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.

Messages:
5,502

17. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
Tough. Get over it. Live with it.

18. ### Chathabig brown was screwed upRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,867
(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?

19. ### Chathabig brown was screwed upRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,867
Good advice...but its hard...I guess I just have too, and face the fact; Tigers are eventually going to be extinct

20. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
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.

21. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
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.

22. ### Walter L. WagnerCosmic Truth SeekerValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,551
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.

Last edited: Dec 1, 2006
23. ### MetaKronRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
5,502
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.