Columbus Zoo Offers $100k for Denmark Giraffe Slated to Die

[The Straight Story]

COLUMBUS (Lisa Rantala/Kate Liebers) -- The Columbus Zoo and Aquarium said it wants to take another unwanted giraffe from a Denmark zoo before it is slaughtered.

The Columbus Zoo said it would offer $100,000 to adopt the 7-year-old giraffe from Jyllands Park Zoo.

The offer came days after a 2-year-old giraffe at Copenhagen Zoo was shot in the head, skinned and fed to the lions while visitors watched. Days later, Jyllands Park officials said it may also have to get rid of one of its male giraffes for the same reason -- to avoid inbreeding.

"We're totally against what happened at Copenhagen," said Tom Stalf, president of Columbus Zoo and Aquarium. &quot It is) absolutely tragic and in no way how any zoo in the US would manage their animals." The Columbus Zoo is offering its critical care fund to pay for the Denmark animal's transport. The fund was started after the infamous exotic animal escape at the Thompson farm in Zanesville.

http://abc6onyourside.com/shared/news/features/top-stories/stories/wsyx_columbus-zoo-offers-100k-denmark-giraffe-slated-die-29236.shtml#.Uv2-0HlPLwI

(please note that in posting this it does not mean I hate Denmark or Zoos - for the humor impaired that is sarcasm)

[MoonRiver]

1. There's something rotten in Denmark

BIG TIME!

[dawnie51]

2. Columbus Zoo is my home area.....

and we knew Jack Hanna was incensed by what had happened last week. I am not surprised to hear that he is trying to intercede. He loves Gods creatures, and cannot abide cruelty. He will use the awesome resources of our world renown zoo to do what he can to stop this. I hope he is successful. This Denmark zoo must have lost their minds. They will become pariahs in the business if they continue these practices. And Jack Hanna is not a person you'd want against you on animal matters, locally or internationally.

[aristocles]

4. Jack is a good person.

[The Straight Story]

5. I remember the Columbus Zoo from when I was a kid

And have seen how much it has improved over the years. Jack and others have done a wonderful job at making it a wonderful place and I think that is mainly driven by his genuine love of animals.

He lives down in Florida now but still has a hand in the Zoo here and it's continued growth. The people here have also stood behind the zoo by funding projects for it. Other zoos would do well to heed his words

[hamsterjill]

27. I am glad that Jack Hanna is speaking out about this publicly.

I hope he is successful in saving this giraffe.

It's absurd that the Denmark Zoo wouldn't agree to transfer the first giraffe anywhere. Very elitist of them IMHO to assert that no other zoo (and many were offering help) was "good enough" to take him.

[X_Digger]

29. It's not that no other zoo was 'good enough'--

It's that no other zoo in the EAZA breeding program had a spot available for a breeding male of this genetic line. And they don't transfer animals to non-EAZA breeding program facilities- it's a closed system that consists of only those facilities that meet their standards.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/10/opinion/giraffe-cull-argument-for/

[hamsterjill]

31. I think your post just made my point.

"they don't transfer animals to non-EAZA breeding program facilities- it's a closed system that consists of only those facilities that meet their standards."


Pretty elitist if you ask me!

[X_Digger]

32. Their goal is to save the species, not provide animals for other zoos, animal parks, or safari parks

If you want to call that 'elitist', feel free.

[avebury]

36. See my response - 35. nt

[hamsterjill]

38. It is elitist in my opinion to say that any zoo outside their group doesn't meet their standards.

If you object to that, then we have a difference of opinion, but I stand by my own opinion.

[avebury]

35. And yet they were about to send a Siberian Tiger

from the Copenhagen Zoo to the Ohio Zoo. Yet they kill their spare giraffes. Seems a bit inconsistent doesn't it?

[X_Digger]

43. To the breeding program there, yes.

I assume that they have similar genetic diversity requirements for tigers as giraffes, though each species' requirements will vary, based on how many are in captivity, how many are in the wild, etc.

[avebury]

44. The Zoo's argument on why they execute a healthy

young male giraffe loses all credibility when they are prepared to send a Siberian Tiger to the US for breeding purposes. Their giraffe might not meet their genetic criteria but it is possible that it would meet another zoo's criteria.

[X_Digger]

46. How so?

If the genetic diversity of giraffes in captivity is much more limited than tigers, then the same criteria used for both decisions can result in one being shipped to the US and the other slaughtered.

Perhaps the dwindling population of tigers in the wild also was taken into consideration.

I can think of many reasons why one might be shipped to another breeding program but the other isn't.

[avebury]

47. You don't know that the giraffe's DNA has no value

to any zoo in the US. Their excuse was that they do not transfer any animals to anyplace that is not in their zoological group yet they wanted to send a tiger to the US for breeding purposes? The fact of the matter is that they did not make any effort to find out if their giraffe has DNA that would be a good mixture for any zoo outside of Europe. The Ohio Zoo was more then willing to take one of the giraffes (even pay for it) but all the Danish zoos want to do is kill them, publicly disect them and feed them to the lions. I don't blame Jack Hanna for telling them that the Ohio Zoo doesn't want to do business with them.


Rather then breed these animals willy nilly they need to use scientific methods that result in live births that fall within their acceptable criteria. Indiscriminate breeding on their part is what results in the murder of these healthy animals.

It kind of reminds me of the genetics experiments of Joseph Mengele.

[X_Digger]

48. That's a lot of assumptions and theories. Have anything to back it up?

And avoiding inbreeding is now on the scale of Mengele? Really?

*snort*

We're done here.

[CincyDem]

3. Why the spectacle?

Not being a zoologist, it's hard for me to agree or disagree about the inbreeding concerns. Assuming those concerns are valid, it seems like the first level of the solution is to extract the animal in question from the tower. I don't think anyone has any issue with that.

The second level of the solution is what then to do with the animal. Option 1...find a new home in another zoo. Option 2...destroy it. Seems like there's a lot of agreement that this place should have taken the offers from other zoos more seriously before picking option 2.

Once option 2 was chosen (which I think was the wrong choice), the third level of the solution is how to destroy the animal. Option 1...find a quiet private space where professionals can perform the euthanasia peacefully. Option 2...make a f'ing spectacle of it and invite all the little kids in the neighborhood over to watch the local pride of lions munch down on giraffe sushi.

WTF is wrong with these guys that they make the wrong choice not once but twice ? They can't possibly be this stupid.

My thought is that, as someone else said, there's something already rotten in Denmark and these guys aren't trying to manage an inbreeding issue in future generations...they've got one in this generation. Why else work so hard to "destroy the evidence" ?

I'm amazed, given how aware Dane's tend to be of their reputation and role in the world, that someone outside the zoological community there hasn't stepped in and thrown the WTF flag on this to shut it down.

Hopefully Columbus will get a new giraffe in this round.

[Swede Atlanta]

7. Yeah, I listened to a spokesman from the zoo talk about the destruction of giraffe #1

on NPR earlier this week.

While he described the biological reasons around in-breeding and what it can do to the population of giraffes in the world's zoos. I can appreciate you don't want to have in-breeding because we know it tends to concentrate bad traits and perpetuates undesirable physical conditions.

But why destroy the animal? If you are concerned about in-breeding then neuter it. If you only want to have populations that are capable of breeding then find someplace that will take the animal but don't kill the animal.

[magical thyme]

9. the zoo says there are physiological reasons why neutering is not an option

and I can understand their concern that he not end up in a bad situation in a bad zoo.

But why the spectacle indeed? What is going on that they are advertising this, doing it in front of children, in front of the media?

To me, the spectacle around this is what is so confusing and bizarre. People seem to forget that the lions must be fed. If Marius hadn't been killed and fed to them, some other animal would have been killed to be fed to them.
Would it have been "nicer" somehow if they'd killed an antelope? A zebra? A horse? A pig?

It's the entire scenario. First they looked for other zoos to take Marius, and got multiple offers as I recall some from member zoos. Then they rejected every offer, iirc even from zoos within their conservation society.

They also have claimed they don't own the giraffe, that the conservation society (forget the name) does and that the conservation society is who made the decision.

I know Marius didn't suffer...he had a short, yet idyllic, life and never knew what was coming. If he'd been born in the wild, he could have been ripped apart alive by a lion or slowly starved to death.

But their rationale about genetics strikes me as a false claim since they had other options, and I don't understand why they felt the need for an audience to his slaughter.

[kcr]

30. Why is it so confusing and bizarre that people are upset by this?

Really, it's surprising that people are upset that a zoo animal, an animal that had a name, an animal being kept for conservation reasons as well as for display, was very public ally killed to feed to lions? Yes, I'd say that's very different then using animals like pigs, which are namelessly killed by the millions for food. It makes total and complete sense.

[magical thyme]

33. no, that the zoo is deliberately inviting children and media to watch I find confusing and bizarre

The spectacle isn't the reaction. It's that the zoo chose to publicize this and turn it into some kind of show.

I remind myself that if Marius hadn't been killed, then some other animal would have. And that make me just as sad. Sadder, because nobody cared about that animal. But I remind myself that Marius at least lived an idylllic life and died a quick, pain and fear-free death. He literally never knew what hit him.

Just because a pig is ugly doesn't have a name doesn't mean it didn't want to live too.

But then, maybe we differ because I am at least equally empathic to the animal's perspective losing it's life as to those who are observing it .

[kcr]

37. I'm really sorry. I had completely misunderstood what you were saying

Yes, I agree with you. Their inviting children and media was completely baffling to me, too. That was a huge misstep on their part and they invited every bit of the criticism they have received. If they are wondering why they're getting criticism for this, they're complete idiots.

[magical thyme]

41. it's ok. The subject is so upsetting that it is easy to misread and misunderstand....

[hamsterjill]

39. Thank you.

It makes perfect sense to me that people are outraged.

This giraffe was raised in captivity and was taught to trust humans. Now the very humans that he was taught to trust are going to execute him?

Yes...that is upsetting to me.

[magical thyme]

42. apparently my writing wasn't as clear as I thought.

That the zoo would create a spectacle by first looking for a new home, then rejecting every single offer and deciding instead to feed Marius to their lions, and then invite schoolchildren and the media to come watch the slaughter was creating a spectacle, and is what I find baffling and bizarre.

That it would create a backlash of criticism is not surprising.

I comfort myself (and maintain my sanity) over the killing of Marius by reminding myself that he lived a short, but idyllic life and died a pain and fear-free death. Had he been born wild, he could have died horribly by being ripped apart or slowly starved. So he was spared that.

And I remind myself that whether they fed the lions Marius or some other, unnamed, unloved animal from the feedlot of a slaughterhouse, the lions were going to be fed on that day.

[CJCRANE]

45. I agree. For one thing, it's incredibly bad PR.

Whatever the scientific reasons, they would have been better off bending the rules to find a new home for him.

[AAO]

10. That's the $100,000 question: Are they unable to neuter giraffes? Seems like the 1st solution.

[eggplant]

17. Well, put it this way. Do you want to be the one to hold the ladder? ;-)

[liberal_at_heart]

53. So give them a shot of birth control.

[G_j]

22. I found his tone disturbing

He almost laughed that the giraffe had been given a name. His tone seemed dismissive.

[Art_from_Ark]

6. I hope the offer is accepted

[Sunlei]

8. 100k plus transport to a good home is best for the animal.

[geomon666]

11. This will probably get turned down too.

So they can have another murder show.

[Triana]

12. This seems stupid. If you don't want them "inbreeding", then sterilize them.

Giraffes can't be sterilized/neutered? Why not do that instead of killing them?

[revolutionbrees]

21. A friend who is on the board at our local zoo "explained"

If the animal cannot be bred, it is another mouth to feed with no hopes of recouping its cost. Even if he cannot be bred with the current population, he (or his semen) can be sent out to stud at other zoos for a fee. I know our zoo has done good work with conservation and breeding programs, but he said it all breaks down to the bottom line. Some animals, such as the albino alligator, would not survive in the wild, and although he can't be bred, he is loaned out to other zoos throughout the country, again for a fee, so that keeps him a viable member of the zoo population.

[Triana]

25. Still makes no sense in Denmark case. Other orgs were willing to take the giraffe they killed.

They had offers to take the giraffe to a rescue/refuge which would have relieved Denmark zoo of the cost of keeping him. Yet, they still killed it.

It seems so cold and senseless.

[revolutionbrees]

52. I agree with you.

It is so cold and cruel.

[CFLDem]

13. Great now more zoos will resort to extortion

whenever they're hard up for money.

[JimDandy]

14. Yes... the reason for the public killing spectacle. n/t

[The Straight Story]

20. No, not really. Look at what Jack had to say:

In the meantime, Hanna said, plans for a Siberian tiger from the Copenhagen Zoo to come to the Columbus Zoo for breeding have been put on hold.

“I want no involvement with anyone (from that zoo) if this kind of killing is practiced,” he said.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/02/13/hanna-raises-money-for-giraffe.html

And also:

Hanna’s passionate speeches and interviews about the giraffe’s death apparently convinced the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, a worldwide organization with more than 6,000 members, to rethink a bland statement it released on Monday that neither condemned nor supported the Copenhagen Zoo’s actions.

In a statement yesterday, the association said its accredited zoos exchange animals and manage breeding so animals are not born that can’t be cared for throughout their lifetimes. Unneeded animals are not killed, the statement said.

The Jyllands Park zoo said on its Facebook page yesterday that it might have to euthanize one of its two male giraffes if it obtains a “genetically more valuable” animal and can’t find a new home for the unneeded giraffe.

[TBF]

23. Follow the money

is normally the answer to most questions in our capitalistic society. Sending them $100,000 will only make them greedier imo.

The whole thing is revolting.

[Myrina]

15. Spay/neuter?

I don't understand why they have to KILL it ...

[Chuuku Davis]

16. Grilled Giraffe is very tasty

sarcasm folks

I sent $50 to the Columbus zoo

[Boomerproud]

34. At least you spoke with your $$$

and that's a good thing.

[hamsterjill]

40. Thank you.

n/t

[eggplant]

18. $100,000 seems a tall order. ;-)

[flamingdem]

24. Glad they are sticking their neck out

[dawnie51]

19. The comment about extortion is troubling.....

could this horrible spectacle truly all be about money and squeezing those who can't abide this horrible destruction for profit? There are numerous other options, many in this thread. Why this horror show? I had always thought the Scandinavian countries were more enlightened than most.

[CFLDem]

26. I don't necessarily think the current spectacle is about money

but it sure as heck kicks that door wide open.

[X_Digger]

28. One of the tenets of the EAZA's breeding program..

.. is that no animal involved in the program will ever be sold.

Unless the EAZA makes an exception in this case, I expect the offer will be refused.

[jmondine]

50. I am also surprised that the AZA would let Columbus Zoo do this...

The AZA calls the shots here in North America as to which animals are added to their member zoos' collection. But who knows. The Danish giraffe might be a good fit.

[avebury]

49. With modern scientific technology, it is ridiculous that any zoo

breeds their animal indiscriminately, knowing that they will kill healthy animals because they over reach their need for that genetic strain. I would like to know why they don't use science to make sure that they only achieve animalas that fall within their desired perameters. The actions of these Danish zoos are reckless to say the least.

[MFM008]

51. not so great danes

give up the giraffe.

[liberal_at_heart]

54. I will have to make a point to visit the Columbus Zoo if I'm ever up there.

Jack Hanna is a great advocate for animals.