Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: LA Times article about "Ruby"
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Energy Independence, Environment, Science and Technology > Energy, Environment, Science and Technology Issues Archive
catchawave
As 40 billion non human animals die at human hands every year, it is gratifying to see the suffering of one animal, Los Angeles's poor elephant, Ruby, form the basis of a discussion of the larger issue -- the way human society treats other animals.

The Tuesday, November 16, Los Angeles Times has a lead article (cover of the Metro section, pg B1) headed, "Soft Heart Under Her Thick Skin?; Observers look for signs of emotion in Ruby, back at the L.A. Zoo after a reportedly unhappy stay in Tennessee."

Rather than focusing just on Ruby's return to the Los Angeles Zoo, Patricia Ward Biederman introduces the more general topic of animal emotion. She writes:

"Naturalist Charles Darwin wrote about animal emotions, but for much of the 20th century to say an elephant was sad was to be guilty of anthropomorphism, the unscientific projection of human feelings on animals.

"Today, an increasing number of scientists believe that animals have emotions.

"Whether those emotions are comparable to human ones is another matter."

The article includes quotes like this one from John Capitanio, associate director for research at the California National Primate Research Center: "We don't know what love looks like, in spite of what animal activists would say. When we see a chimp cuddling its infant, we don't know if its internal feeling state is the same as what humans feel when they embrace their children."

But it is balanced by some by Marc Bekoff, a professor of animal behavior at the University of Colorado at Boulder, who is described as "An animal activist as well as a scientist." He says that sad animals "mope around, they don't eat." He makes the wild suggestion that how the animal seems to be is more than likely how he is, just as "Usually when we see a person who seems to be sad, they are sad."

You can read the full article on line at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ru...1,1672848.story

It presents a great opportunity, not just for letters about Ruby, but about the way our society treats members of other species.

The Los Angeles Times takes letters at: letters@latimes.com

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.



Yours and the animals',

Karen Dawn




(DawnWatch is an animal advocacy media watch that looks at animal issues in the media and facilitates one-click responses to the relevant media outlets. You can learn more about it, and sign up for alerts at http://www.dawnwatch.com/.

To unsubscribe, go to www.DawnWatch.com/unsubscribe.php. If you forward or reprint DawnWatch alerts, please do so unedited -- leave DawnWatch in the title and include this tag line.)
JJswans
I'd like to see the AZA butt out when it comes to the decisions being made about the welfare of zoo elephants. The AZA has interfered with both the Detroit zoo and the San Francisco zoo when those two entities wanted to send their elephants to sanctuaries. I suspect that may be one of the reasons that Ruby wasn't sent to a sanctuary too. She was sent to the Knoxville zoo, and instead of making the short trip to the Tennessee sanctuary, they ship her all the way back to Los Angeles, which is likely to only be temporary until they find some other zoo to send her to.

The AZA doesn't seem to interfere when it comes to sending excess zoo animals to canned hunting ranches - why are they interfering with sending animals to sanctuaries?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.