We kill thousands of animals every day for meat consumption either by humans or other animals. We waste little thought on these pigs, cows, sheep or whatever other animals we happily eat on a daily basis.
Had the lions not had the giraffe-meat they would have needed another source. Another animal killed. Whats so special about the giraffe to make it excempt? - the cute eyes? Cows have lovely eyes too - but we chose to forget when eating steak don't we?
As for doing the dissection in front of children it is good thing that they see it. If anything this debate shows that way too many people around the world grow up with way too much distance to the realities of life (and death). I applaud the parents who take the oppertunity to educate their children. I grew up on a farm. I used to help out as a small child when we butchered animals at home (goes back a bit). It gave me a healthy dose of realism that I wish all children had a bit more of these days.
With all this in mind it hardly matters whether the zoo had much scientific reason to kill this specific animal or not. It sounds to me like they had good reasons - but as I said - it hardly matters. It was either this animal or another. Everything else is emotional "pollution" of the subject. Or should i start a campaign against brits and australians killing and eating rabbits - just because i have a pet rabbit and find it insanely cute? Should i start threatening people who would hurt rabbits? Drop the emotions and look at the facts...
Its easy to make a lot the killing of the giraffe in the zoo, as so many have, but there were ample reasons to do so. The giraffe could not be used for breading purposes, he was taking up room, he was of no interest to other zoos and they didn't want him to be sold to be abused in private collections.
The decision to kill this poor giraffe was absolutely cruel, barbaric, and going contrary to the main mission of Zoos, which is to inspire all of us to love animals. It looks like the concept of loving animals is completely alien to the Zoo's administrators. There were many different options available to them, killing the animal should have been an absolutely last resort. Boycott Copenhagen Zoo!
Even if their arguments not to keep him are valid, there were offers to rescue him!!!!! So why to insist in killing him? Why to compare this to was in Syria or other dreadful events in our world? This was an incredible act of cruelty, indiference, disrespect for other life forms, it has been dissapointing, it has impacted the opinion I had of this country. They have a prime minister more interested in looking at herself than looking around to take a stand.
Killing the giraffe might have been seen as moral if he had some kind of condition that meant he was going to die quickly anyway, and it would be better to use him for lion food than to discard the remains. But if the reasons were as given, that just seems like an awful reason.
The Danish zoo's murder of their healthy giraffe was an appalling and enraging act of brutality by an industry I have previously defended as being pro conservation. Even if they could not use this giraffe to breed, they were his guardians, he depended on them. A trust was broken. This zoo should have its accreditation revoked.
The fact that they said the reason this giraffe had to die was because of faulty genes is completely ridiculous. The giraffe was happy and healthy and they choose to kill the animal for no good reason. Why would they dismember it and feed it to lions in front of others? Very horrible.
No, I do not agree with killing an animal because there is not enough room and the animal is not found to be interesting enough. The giraffe could have been donated to another zoo if it was not wanted in longer at that particular zoo. Animals are living entities and should not be treated as if they are not a valuable part of the world. That was a cruel and selfish act of the zoo owners.