Denmark zoo asks public to donate unwanted small pets or horses to feed captive predators
Denmark zoo asks public to donate unwanted small pets or horses to feed captive predators
Will they accept corrupt politians or CEOs from other nations?
"They're eating the cats. They're eating the dogs. They're eating the pets of the people that live there"
Would they accept donatinons of politicians?
Or billionaires
What about unwanted siblings or older parents?
Too modest to ask
Do they take landlords?
No, only some species of sealords.
sadly the big three stopped making half bloods
They mention animals that are frequently raised as livestock. Chickens, Rabbits, Guinea Pigs are all mentioned. Horse is the only unusual one to me. I'd find it much more upsetting if they were accepting cats and dogs.
-Coincidentally I watched two YT videos yesterday. One was about some homesteaders that were dispatching chickens they raised for meat to share with their village. The other was about some small-time farmers that raise guinea-pigs (among other things) that were used for lawn-mowing. The farmers just anounced in that video that the guinea pigs will also be used as a food source.
Horse is not unusual as meat in the Netherlands.
It wasn't unusual in the UK either.
few parts of japan
Horse is common dog food in Australia
They eat horse in Korea as well.
Showing this to my cats to see if they stop scratching the sofa
Put a blanket over the place that she scratches and/or a scratching pole somewhere near the sofa.
Generally the more scratching poles (or carpets on the floor) they have to scratch, the less they mess with furniture.
Fuck zoos and aquariums.
It is worth noting that the article says they are euthanizing the animals before feeding. So it's not like they take a terrified pet and let the tiger rip it apart alive.
Still, not a fan of this...
The tiger got to eat and they need a meat based diet.
Option A: Feed them animals that have to bee euthanized and die either way.
Option B: Bury the animal that had to be euthanized and on top of it kill another animal so the tiger can eat.
Option A means less animals killed. Now of course we can talk about whether zoos should exist in the first place, for which there are good arguments that they should not.
Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he understand
One of my favorite lines of all time.
Fluffy meowed and meowed, but didn't get to eat. So, Fluffy scratched and clawed, but then got turned to meat.
hee, that was fresh.
I'll go ahead and add "Eaten by apex predator" to the list of insane hamster deaths.
This is all sorts of fucked up. First, why do people get pets if they are becoming unwanted. Second, why does the zoo need to ask the public for animals. Third, wtf.
Try reading the article.
"In zoos, we have a responsibility to imitate the natural food chain of the animals — in terms of both animal welfare and professional integrity," Aalborg Zoo said in a post on social media.
The zoo in northern Denmark said that chickens, rabbits and guinea pigs were an important part of the diet of its predators, which need "whole prey," reminiscent of what they would hunt in the wild.
"If you have a healthy animal that has to leave here for various reasons, feel free to donate it to us. The animals are gently euthanized by trained staff and are afterwards used as fodder. That way, nothing goes to waste — and we ensure natural behavior, nutrition and well-being for our predators," Aalborg Zoo said.
Maybe don't keep animals captive if you need to petition people bring their pets for food. Wtf. Zoos are a mistake.
WTF is this take. It's not that they can't afford food, they're trying to keep their food supply more ethical.
"In zoos, we have a responsibility to imitate the natural food chain of the animals — in terms of both animal welfare and professional integrity," Aalborg Zoo said in a post on social media.
Yup. Im not a fan of anything being kept as a pet that needs to be fed live things. It takes the whole "survival of the fittest" out of it. Breeding mice to feed to snakes, poor mice never stand a chance. And that is some bullshit. Snake catches the mouse in the wild, thats fair game. But breeding them just to be eaten alive??? Thats fucking vile.
Who's feeding anything live in this discussion?
Responsible snake owners don't feed their snak live mice
Wow, I didn't think there would be so many crazy psychos in the comments.
I can get that people might not feel as much empathy with animals than humans (get, not approve) but most of the comments are kitten-drowning level.
You get a pet, which is supposed to be a companion and basically part of your family, and you don't mind them being torn to shreds?
Okay then, I guess if your kid has a terminal cancer we can also feed him to the tiger? After all in the end it's just a bunch of meat.
Nobody's suggesting that beloved pets get donated just for the sake of feeding the animals. But if you have a pet you're planning to get rid of anyway, for whatever reason, some people would prefer to see the pet's death contribute a final something back. Put it in the same logic as organ donation. Nobody WANTS to see their loved one's corpse cut open and such, but knowing it helped somebody else in a small way can give some closure.
Not my kid, but if I'm terminal I'm gonna add "killed by some food-safe means and then fed to tigers in front of zoo patrons" to my potential death plans.
"The funeral will be at the civic building at 10am, and the viewing at 12:00 by the tiger sanctuary in Edgewater Zoo"
Okay then, I guess if your kid has a terminal cancer we can also feed him to the tiger? After all in the end it's just a bunch of meat.
That's a weird comparison, and it's honestly a sign that you are struggling with separating the two on an emotional level. Which is ironic based on your opening sentence.
You get a pet, which is supposed to be a companion and basically part of your family, and you don’t mind them being torn to shreds?
This is a fair way to feel about it, but if the question is only what is done with a body after it has been euthanized it seems more like a cultural consideration than an ethical one. Like there are cultures with strong feelings about treatment of human corpses to the point where organ donation is taboo, but that doesn't mean being ok with family members being organ donors is some awful thing.
There's a larger question about how pets and other animals are treated, and the thought of someone euthanizing a healthy pet for petty reasons is really disturbing (like stories you sometimes hear about this being done as a way to emotionally abuse someone), but that isn't exactly the fault of the zoo or its practices.
I dunno if they're psychos, exactly, I'm mostly seeing interesting takes, like the chicken coop that blew away or the fisherman. Varying degrees of "how close are you to this animal," especially since critters like mice could be a lovely pet or food for an equally lovely snake.
But yeah, couple people don't turn off their dark humor either, but that's just the internet. I don't mind it, I imagine only 1% are actually psychopaths (which is iirc the statistical average, except in business where it's 4%. And I guess politics, now).
Then again, my instance blocks certain other instances, too. Lol
in the end it's just a bunch of meat
That's why it's back on the menu, boys! The circle of life is brutal. I think everyone in these comments is just externally processing horror at the idea of sending their own pets.
Right? Fucking bunch of irrational horror-filled replies.
Yeah some of these comments were just disgusting. Do better Lemmy
I like this. Maybe it sounds bad but when I was a kid a neighbor paid me to kill all his chickens after a hurricane because it was hot and their chicken house was gone. I would have much rather he drove them to the zoo to be fed to the animals there.
Growing up on a farm we killed, plucked and processed a few hundred chickens each year. Kept us and several families in town fed with good quality meat over the winter.
It's not a bad thing to be that close to your own food production.
These were laying hens though. They would have been better off as zoo food than put in my freezer as crab bait. I don't think it's bad to be close to food production. I'm a farmer.
For one thing, you were probably really sure to keep the meat from being contaminated with animal feces, or from eating obviously sick animals.
You don't want to eat chickens that are older or that are unhealthy
I find it quite interesting how polarised this topic is.
I was reading a comment by a woman last year I think it was. Basically, her dog had gotten sick. Nothing major, but it required a bit more care than a healthy dog would. Long story short, she wanted to put it down because she couldnt be bothered. Now, my dog got sick a couple of year before. Needs injections twice a day, and then on top that, his eyes went. So he needed an op to see again. After the op it was 5 eye drops in each eye every few hours for like 4 months. It was a lot. And so far, its cost me around 15k all in, not including insurance. And no, I cant afford it.
I didnt blink when it came to caring for my dog, because thats the responsibility I took on when I got him. But others... They think its going to be all walks in the park, catching frisbees and meet cutes with attractive people. And then just toss their pets when it become inconvenient. Pets are always a weird one. Some people have compassion for living things, are other people are cunts... :)
I mean you get this same argument when it comes to people saying that life needs to be protected above all else, and ignoring people's desire for access to euthanasia. I know that i personally would not want to go on living if my quality of life was suddenly diminished beyond a certain point, especially if it was going to be an additional burden on my loved ones. Obviously pets can't make this decision or communicate it, but i don't think you have any right judging people making that choice for their own beloved animals. Putting an animal down can be an act of compassion. But some people understand that and other people are cunts. :)
“Can we…can we watch? It’s just, Sprinkles, he’s…he’s a really bad dog. Dumb as a post, humps everything and everyone, snaps at you if you try to pet him. I’d really like to see a tiger just go to town on this awful, awful dog.”
I read in another article that the zoo will "gently euthanize" your pet but I have had a vet come out to my farm and caution me about using any animal euthanized with drugs as feed for anything else due to possible bad reactions or side effects. So what is the definition of "gentle" when talking about non-drug euthanasia?
Gas them with nitrogen.
Give 'em the ol' Anton Chigurh Special.
Call it, friendo.
eww no you don't cook meat wtf
There is a big cat rescue a few hours from me that will take cattle/horse/farm animals for feed. They will also pickup fresh roadkill deer etc.
"Your kids don't love their pets anymore? Don't worry we can take care of that for you."
These animals’ food has to come from somewhere. Interesting that they’re trying to source locally…
Perhaps it sounds a bit less ghoulish in the original Danish.
Still sounds just as bad but then you have to wipe off the mashed-up pastry bits.
"Slyng 'lang øre' over til løven. Den skal jo også æde."
I mean...
It is deeply fucked up and anyone who gives the family pet to a lion should never be allowed to have pets OR children.
But a lot of people get small rodents or rabbits because they think they are just goldfish (which is a whole different level of animal abuse but...). And then they lose interest they just put it in the oubliette or "release it into the wild". So... cycle of life and all that is probably better? Same with horses. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a father like Trevor Moore who can teach them how to dispose of the body.
So yeah... I think I am okay with this? As fucked as it is?
I dont see any problem? I love my dog and i hope he wont die anytime soon. But what difference it does make if i pay 200€ to have him euthanased and cremated or have him euthnased and feed to the tiger for free?
I even asked from him and he seemed okay with it. Wagged his tail and everything.
Hell, i would gladly have my body fed to the tiger, rather than have some crook selling my family some 8000€ coffing that they see me in once.
I guess the key difference here is they specifically want healthy animals that might have otherwise been able to have been rehoused. So it’s not like when you have to put your dog down at the end if it’s life, it’s like if it had a couple good years left but you needed to move and couldn’t take him with you.
But they’re not taking dogs fwiw. Article just says chickens, rabbits, and guinea pigs. As well as maybe horses in the right circumstances.
I think it’d be pretty wild for anyone who eats meat themselves to criticize the practice of feeding a chicken to a lion. The vegans I can’t speak for but I think they would probably take issue way higher in the chain than this, such as keeping the predator animals in captivity for our amusement in the first place.
Either way I think it’s waaaaay overkill to suggest someone donating their pet rodent to a zoo shouldn’t be allowed to have children lol. The pet store you get them from feeds rodents to the snakes.
Hell, i would gladly have my body fed to the tiger, rather than have some crook selling my family some 8000€ coffing that they see me in once.
I think you're on to something. How about a tiger instead of the chair? I mean we could let the convict get a token weapon and do it in a way where people could observe it.
And btw coffins are a scam, somebody should set up a second hand coffin service. Your body gets roled away in a nice looking coffin, and off you go to the crematorium where you're dumped into the fire and the coffin goes on to the next deado.
Would you sell your dog to a person so they could eat it?
You clearly haven't been to rual america
And remember, those donations can be written off in your taxes!
What were the captives eating before?
Avocado toast
There's been a handful of studies now, finding that house cats can often (but not always) thrive on a fully plant-based diet as long as it's properly formulated. Can't help but wonder how many other animals who we assumed are "obligate carnivores," maybe, like, aren't?
Oh God not this again lmao
Put down a plate of plant and plate of meat. And then tell me with a straight face that the cat isnt a carnivore.
That's not really the argument, though. Cats are obviously, objectively, and indisputably carnivores. The question is whether they are obligate carnivores. If they can live healthily without detriment on a plant based diet, then they are not obligate carnivores. If they cannot survive healthily on a plant based diet then they literally require meat to live, in which case they are an obligate carnivore.
The moral, ethical, and health discussion around feeding cats (both house- and big-) a plant based diet is beyond my scope, but arguing whether the cat is going to go for the tuna or the spinach isn't the point. They'll clearly go for the tuna. The question is whether they need that tuna to survive, or if they could live (healthy and happily) without it, if they could get their nutrients from, and be effectively tricked by, a plant based substitute.
Yes, with an extremely customised, unnatural diet, a cat may survive a vegan diet. They rarely thrive. But the point is that they're unable to do so naturally, most cats will not understand why their food isn't what they're naturally and instinctually supposed to eat, which causes them stress.
Cats have an instinct to chew on grass for digestive purposes, but that's about it when it comes to eating plants. Getting a proper vegan diet for a cat is extremely hard to do and unnecessarily stressful for cats.
Cat food in most cases already is discarded meat not fit for human consumption. You're not exactly saving a lot of animals by forcing a cat on an unnatural diet.
If you're vegan, feed your cat meat. If you don't want to do that, don't get a cat.
Yes, with an extremely customised, unnatural diet, a cat may survive a vegan diet. They rarely thrive.
They rarely thrive? If you're going to make a claim, you need to prove it with sources.
But the point is that they’re unable to do so naturally, most cats will not understand why their food isn’t what they’re naturally and instinctually supposed to eat, which causes them stress.
Again, on your claim about cats not understanding why their food is "unnatural", and particularly about it causing them stress, you need to back up your claims, because it sounds like you're just making stuff up. In fact here's a study finding virtually no statistically significant difference in palatability differences for dogs and cats in vegan pet foods vs others.
"For 1,135 cats, consideration of 15 behavioural indicators also indicated that diet made little difference to the food-oriented behaviour of the cats studied, except perhaps that cats on vegan diets lick their food less often, and cats on conventional diets leave more food. However, the feline comparison groups (particularly, raw meat n = 54) were relatively small, so inference of differences should be treated with caution.
Although palatability is important, animal welfare also depends on a range of other factors. However, the results from our study, which concur with limited existing studies in this field, do not support views that vegan pet food may have reduced palatability, and thus compromise the welfare of dogs or cats in this manner."
Cats have an instinct to chew on grass for digestive purposes, but that’s about it when it comes to eating plants.
Have you ever had cats and house plants in the same home? They are almost guaranteed to destroy virtually anything you grow, to the point that it's important for all cat caretakers to learn about which plants are safe to grow around cats. Here's a cat losing their mind over a purple sweet potato. Here's one about a cat who loves cucumber. A cat who gets downright aggressive over ciabatta. A compilation of videos of cats who feverishely nom on corn.
Here are the facts. Yes, it is true that cats have adaptations that make them adept hunters of smaller animals. It's also true that there are a some essential nutrients they can't make and must get from dietary sources - if we're counting "natural" sources only, some of those nutrients can only be found from consuming other animals - taurine being a notable example. But if you think cats should only eat what's natural, does that mean they shouldn't be fed formulated cat food either? That isn't natural, they supplement even meat-based ones with synthetic ingredients just like companies do with the vegan-friendly formulations. From an article that goes in depth on the state of the science on plant-based pet foods:
"For those who feel wary about the idea of synthetic supplementation, it is worth noting that meat-based cat foods are also synthetically supplemented with taurine and other essential nutrients. This is because the high temperatures and pressures used during processing can degrade naturally occurring taurine, and other fragile nutrients. Synthetic supplementation is a standard and safe part of pet food formulation and is necessary to meet an animal’s nutritional needs."
And just prior to that:
"Indeed, to date, three peer-reviewed scientific studies using both large-scale survey and clinical data have found that cats fed nutritionally-sound vegan diets enjoy health benefits as good as or better than those on conventional meat-based diets."
What all of this highlights is that, far from being "obligate carnivores," cats are opportunists who will take whatever they can get, and the "obligate" part only holds for situations in wilderness scenarios. The nutrients they need don't care where they come from, and synthetically supplemented formulations meet their needs just fine.
And I really want to drive the nail in the coffin on your appeal to nature fallacy. Is it natural for cats to be domesticated? Some people go so far as to never allow their cats out of the house. That doesn't seem natural, but it is safer for those cats. It also reduces those cats destructive impact on the environment. By contrast, surely it's more natural for people to feed their cats raw diets, resulting in them getting bird flu, right? Like it or not, we have changed cats and dogs forever. That is something we need to think more critically about, because even now we are constantly shaping and reshaping everything they are, and everything they are going to be.
Getting a proper vegan diet for a cat is extremely hard to do and unnecessarily stressful for cats.
I literally just did a search of "vegan cat food" on Amazon and sure enough it had results. Availability might be somewhat less than the more established brands - I'm sure thanks in no small part to people like you who make unfounded kneejerk reactions - but in places where it is available, is it really any harder to just choose one bag of bits over another?
Cat food in most cases already is discarded meat not fit for human consumption. You’re not exactly saving a lot of animals by forcing a cat on an unnatural diet.
While it is true that some of the meat in pet foods comes from waste products, that's far from the whole story. You are trying to paint a baseless narrative to make it sound like feeding your companion animals other animals is harmless, when it's really not. From a study on the environmental impacts of diets for dogs and cats:
"If all of these groups transitioned to nutritionally-sound vegan diets, the numbers of terrestrial livestock animals spared from slaughter annually were estimated to be (in billions), in the US: dogs– 1.7, cats– 0.2, humans– 7.8, and globally: dogs– 6.0, cats– 0.9, humans– 71.3. The numbers of aquatic animals killed for food annually are far higher, and the use of nutritionally-sound vegan diets would also save billions of aquatic animals, in all dietary groups."
And on environmental impacts:
"Considering environmental impacts on land and water use, emissions of GHGs, acidifying and eutrophifying gases, and the use of biocides, very substantial impact reductions were associated with the use of nutritionally-sound vegan diets, in all dietary groups. With respect to land use, for example, if implemented globally such diets would free up land larger than the areas of the following nations: dogs–Saudi Arabia or Mexico, cats–Japan or Germany, humans–Russia–the world’s largest country, combined with India. With respect to water use, such diets would save freshwater volumes greater than all renewable freshwater in the following nations: dogs–Denmark, cats–Jordan, humans–Cuba. With respect to GHGs, such diets would reduce GHGs by amounts greater than all GHG emissions from following nations: dogs–South Africa or the UK, cats–Israel or New Zealand, humans–India or the entire EU."
If you’re vegan, feed your cat meat. If you don’t want to do that, don’t get a cat.
And what about people who already have animal companions from before they went vegan? And why shouldn't people consider plantbased formulas for their animals even if they themselves are not vegan? Sorry, but contrary to your belief, the status quo is anything but innocent. And while more research needs to be done to more deeply understand health impacts for other animals, that's something that can only happen if we push for it.
Plus, as cultivated meats become more available, that will take away every excuse you have. Sorry, but we can all do better, and that's not just limited to what we ourselves choose to eat. Like it or not, this conversation will not go away, and it will only get louder as evidence continues to get stronger - just as it has for human diets.
And to turn this back on topic, that goes for other animals in captivity as well. Notice that in my original comment I never made any declarations that we should just start feeding plants to predators. That would be irresponsible, obviously. I posed a question, and did so because, just like with dogs and cats, it's probably the case that a lot of claims about predator nutrition are more assumptions, and less science.
Let that sink in. The thing you are irrationally reacting to is a call for greater scientific understanding. Your entire comment is basically an elaborate appeal to tradition fallacy.
Trying to make your cat vegan is animal abuse.
No it isn't, unless it's done improperly. What objectively is animal abuse is feeding the ground up body parts of animals to anyone, including other animals.
https://plantbasednews.org/opinion/opinion-piece/plant-based-diets-dogs-cats/
If you're a meat eater, you don't get to frown upon this. If you're a vegan/vegetarian, you're can frown all you want. It doesn't make any difference, but if it makes you feel better, go ahead.
It's WEIRD how many meat eaters draw the line at certain animals.
yay!
:( unwanted pets :(
I'm frowning
Im a fisherman in San Diego an often catch insane amounts of tuna. I mean a 150lb tuna is more than enough for me and friends with plenty of meat to spare.
But the zoo won't take any donations.
Sucks umthat I just have to freeze it all.
Could have just offered up 15 roosters this morning. They'll go to trapping bait instead.
What do you use roosters to trap? And why wouldn't someone just eat the roosters if you weren't wanting them. Someone would probably also buy them.
We use everything. It all supports how we live. We do not use the grocery store very much and even though we are poor we actually give a lot of food away to our neighbors and friends. The roosters will be used for coyotes that are invasive species where we live and affect all the other populations that feed us.
Roosters are pretty tough and stringy. Fine for stock, not much for cooking
this is so fucked why are people so okay with this? a pet is part of a family, it's a responsibility, if theyre in the state they can be rehomed then rehome them!! half of my pets have been rescues and I've rescued hamsters too. they have so much more life in them than this! dont let them get eaten by a fucking tiger oml. these animals should be in an environment where this is not a necessity to ask the public for their pets to feed them!! most people debating this probably feed their pets biscuits and bread. I'm sure a predator like this is dying for a McDonalds ass version of its diet
I've been vege since I was 16 and this has really thrown me with how people on here are so okay with this. life shouldnt be subject to your disillusions :(
if theyre in the state they can be rehomed then rehome them
There's way more pet surrenders, etc than there are adopters. Pets WILL get put to sleep.
these animals should be in an environment where this is not a necessity to ask the public for their pets to feed them!! most people debating this probably feed their pets biscuits and bread. I'm sure a predator like this is dying for a McDonalds ass version of its diet
I see you're one of those who didn't read the article before spouting off?
"In zoos, we have a responsibility to imitate the natural food chain of the animals — in terms of both animal welfare and professional integrity," Aalborg Zoo said in a post on social media.
The zoo in northern Denmark said that chickens, rabbits and guinea pigs were an important part of the diet of its predators, which need "whole prey," reminiscent of what they would hunt in the wild.
"If you have a healthy animal that has to leave here for various reasons, feel free to donate it to us. The animals are gently euthanized by trained staff and are afterwards used as fodder. That way, nothing goes to waste — and we ensure natural behavior, nutrition and well-being for our predators," Aalborg Zoo said.
If this turns into unwanted small koala joeys needed, there is going to be a problem here.
