In response to your question, "is Ned better off now?" I will ask you, "better off then what?" That is the "complicated/no easy answer" that is at the front of all animal issues that I mentioned to you. There is a young elephant in the middle of a fire storm in Cambodia, that had his leg half severed of in a wire noose trap. The census is the leg will have to be removed as it was were infected when he was found. One school of thought is that they should euthanize him, and the other school of thought is that the leg should be removed and he should then be fitted with a prosthetic leg, I assume similar to the one pictured here. What do you think? Is he "better off" if he is euthanized? Or is he "better off" with the leg removed, fitted with a prosthetic, and then lives in a sanctuary for the rest of his days? In response to your statement that we speak to different languages, "what is better off." Maybe we can get other responses also, to see if we can all understand.
What happens when a young elephant in Thailand steps on a landmine and is then fitted with a prosthetic leg, and then grows up? A bigger tool for the job!
The world's first elephant fitted with a prosthetic leg is growing so fast that she has had a larger one made for her. Mosha has had a second prosthetic leg fitted. Mosha, now three, was only seven months old when she lost her right front leg after stepping on a landmine. Close to death, she was rescued and brought to the Friends of the Asian Elephant hospital in Lampang, Thailand, where she got her first prosthetic leg in 2007.
Her home in a tropical jungle in the north of the country, near the Cambodian border, is an orphanage for elephants. Her keeper said that before the first leg was fitted she was "depressed, self-conscious and wouldn't socialise". But now the animal is getting more confident and likes to play with the other elephants.
Thousands of Thais have been injured and killed due to landmines, with a recent survey estimating there are about 100 new mine casualties each year. But it is the elephants that are the new symbol of the fight against the banned weapons.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
For A2
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
Wade, I'm happy to discuss this elephant if you want to but I see no connection to Ned's situation.
As far as this elephant goes, and others who are similarly injured/repaired, I think it completely depends on factors that I have not seen reported. How much pain are they in? For how long will that pain continue? What are his chances for survival, really? If he survives and isn't in pain, what will the quality of his life be?
As you no doubt would have predicted, I'm going right there, to the wellbeing and - yes - happiness of this elephant. Should he be kept alive to lead a miserable existence? No. I don't believe that should happen to any animal, including humans. Do I have enough information to judge whether he will be leading a miserable existence? No, and I probably never will. If Mosha notably enjoys playing with other elephants, that's probably a sign that she has a decent quality of life. It would vary depending on the elephant, the injury, the treatment, the setting.
As to Ned, however: you stated an objection to his having been confiscated, or at least to the reasons for that confiscation. Whether deliberately starved or ill with chronic digestive problems, he was taken from a life of being made to perform no matter how well or ill he was that day, by a trainer that you yourself and others have observed using cruel methods on his animals. It's my understanding that you have refused to deal with this trainer because of those methods. Is he better off than that, was my question.
Wade,
I personally would go for the prosthetic leg for the elephants, if I was in charge.
Rebecca
A2,
I don't believe I ever used the word "cruel" in regards to his methods, and I never saw him train elephants. I short time I was around him and Ned, I only saw him concerned with putting/keeping weight on him. So I didn't comment on his methods with Ned. How much weight has Ned put on in the past 3 months?
Wade
A2,
Please repost your comment. I am having internet problems today, and it got inadvertently deleted.
Wade
LOL Wade, do you think I can remember that far back?
I'll try:
I don't know how much weight has been gained; if you know, I'd love to hear. Either way doesn't affect the comment I made above. He was underfed or he was sick, perhaps still is, but is no longer being made to perform.
As to the trainer, you are probably remembering what you said better than I am. But I know that you vehemently disliked his training methods with cats. I suppose he could hate cats and treat elephants like part of the family. Do you think so?
A2,
That was part of it. With the addition of how much weight has Ned gained? The answer not much. You left out the question, what was the point of the amputated leg? That will be posted. As we analyze a radical, don't give me that "family" business. I pointed that out to you. As I pointed out the shame of the elephant/dog video from the sanctuary. Your response was so what, everybody does it. I posted it with two view points. If something is not right, it can't be right if it is to your view point, and wrong if it is not. And pointing out that everybody does it, is the same the circus pointing to other industries as being just as bad or worse. How do we define "abuse" in regards to training, if it has not been defined with a standard. The wrongness of the confiscation was it was motivated by an effort to rectify a mistake by the USDA. I suggest they pulled a Prince Albert. It is either right or wrong. No just when it fit's an agenda.
Wade
Wade - I see you have more on the amputation and I'll read that next. To reply here:
The family issue - yes, you point that out but I've been aware of it for a very long time. I think it's fair to say it in this context.
The dog/elephant thing - yes, I said everyone does it but I think I also said that it may be error but it's largely harmless error. I think it's a silly story, I don't think it means anything; I'd feel this way no matter whose elephant and whose dog.
I see your point about the confiscation. I guess mine would be that they should have done it in the first place, so in the rush to make up for having failed to take steps they didn't (in my scenario) do more than they should have to begin with. I am aware that the reality of how the USDA works is that they would never have confiscated Ned when they first saw him thin. They would have issued weighing standards and protocols and then probably ignored them, as they are doing with other elephants right now. So yeah, maybe they did rush to confiscate him out of embarrassment that they had failed to do anything meaningful the first time around. Or maybe they saw a genuine urgency and they would have done it even if they hadn't dropped the ball once. I don't know the answer. I'm glad he is where he is, though.
A2,
Case closed. It's all on the books.
Wade
Honestly, I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this, but whatever. I'm tired, too.
Post a Comment