I'm watching a documentary that is an update on Toki, one of the cheetahs that were rescued and reared by Simon King after their mother was killed by a lion (Toki's brother was also killed by a lion after being released).
In this programme Toki has been saved from being killed by a group of male cheetahs and has been moved to a new location to give him a chance to establish himself in a predator-proof reserve where there is less risk from lions and other cheetahs, including informing locals about Toki in the hope that no one will try to kill him.
Does anyone think this is too much interfering with nature? Is it right for people to keep stepping in to save an animal time and time again and then move that animal to a safe place?
The whole idea was to return Toki to the wild as a wild cheetah - but he is not living a wild life. People don't step in and save other injured and orphaned animals (look at Big Cat Diary for example, the one time someone did interfere it resulted in the death of Amber the cheetah!). I don't think it is right to keep jumping in to save Toki time and time again, they might as well have just stuck him in a zoo if they are so obsessed with protecting him from all the things that threaten him in the wild.
What are your views?
Millie & Fly the Border Collies
Hi Kat,sure you are rightand quite often think when they are fiming wildlife they impose on the wildlife too much and put them in danger by giving away where a animal is hiding or a bird nesting.We often wonder about putting these satalite tracking devices on birds as they were not designed to carry any extra weight and I know we get information from them but is there a possability they upset the birds own compass as one Osprey ended up in the Atlantic instead of Africa(sorry guys know some will be upset)but just wonder.Would be reassuring if someone has evidence this doesn't happen.Wonder if boys toys is not the big driver.
It does seem t that he's become a pet rather than a wild animal. but then why not. He won't know any better and I'm sure he has a really happy life, better than being stuck in a zoo, pacing, all day long.
The question' is it too much interfering in nature' ,I don;t really know but if I was in a position like Simon King with facilites etc that he has access to, would I have let them die in the wild, starving, without a parent to provide for them or to be killed visciously by other animals or would I have taken them in like he did and become precious about them.. Probably.
Its a hard one.
Susan said: It does seem t that he's become a pet rather than a wild animal. but then why not. He won't know any better and I'm sure he has a really happy life, better than being stuck in a zoo, pacing, all day long. The question' is it too much interfering in nature' ,I don;t really know but if I was in a position like Simon King with facilites etc that he has access to, would I have let them die in the wild, starving, without a parent to provide for them or to be killed visciously by other animals or would I have taken them in like he did and become precious about them.. Probably. Its a hard one.
You're right, the thing is though, the choice was made to return him to the wild but people became too attatched to him and therefore I don't think he is wild and it is a lie to even pretend he is. He's like a pet cat someone lets roam around, anything can happen but should anything happen someone would be rushing in to save him from whatever threatens him, nature or man. While the latter I fully agree with protecting him from, there is only so much protecting from nature people can do. I'm also concerned about the wanting him to breed and trying to find a mate from him. Nature selects the fittest to survive and breed - people are overriding this rule as a result of their emotions and I don't think that is a good thing, they're wanting him to breed because they are attatched to him not because he is suitable to do so.
Simon King watched many animals die on Big Cat Diary and for various other filmmaking that he has done over the years, the whole stance of those projects was not to interfere so if something died, it died if it lived, it lived. People were only there to observe and record what happened, not step in and help as this would be interfering (plus they'd have a lot of rescued animals to take care of if they did!).
I'm not really opposed to stepping in when an animal is in distress, though I question the value of rescuing some animals at times because I wonder if we are going to end up having an effect on them by increasing chances of survival and increasing a problem connected to that. What I am opposed to is this constant interference in the life of an animal that is supposed to be wild, it removes the wild from the animal and makes them almost like a pet.
michael s said: Hi Kat,sure you are rightand quite often think when they are fiming wildlife they impose on the wildlife too much and put them in danger by giving away where a animal is hiding or a bird nesting.We often wonder about putting these satalite tracking devices on birds as they were not designed to carry any extra weight and I know we get information from them but is there a possability they upset the birds own compass as one Osprey ended up in the Atlantic instead of Africa(sorry guys know some will be upset)but just wonder.Would be reassuring if someone has evidence this doesn't happen.Wonder if boys toys is not the big driver.
Sooty,
It was very sad to hear about the end of poor Deshar, but I'm sure the tracker had nothing to do with it so please don't worry!
I once saw one of those satellite tracking devices that had fallen off a red kite, someone had found it and handed it in to an RSPB reserve the day I happened to visit. It was stuck to a feather and had come off when the bird moulted, as it was meant to do. It weighed virtually nothing. I'm confident that these are not causing the birds any extra work or tiring them out. As I'm sure you know, without these devices we would be denied lots of information that helps the conservationists to protect all kinds of wonderful creatures.
Back to the question, it's so easy to become attached to animals and to blur the line between helping them and helping our own conscience. In the situation I would probably do a similar thing, desperate to keep Toki safe, but from a distance we can see it's maybe not the best thing.
I really enjoy seeing the ingenious ways film-makers are capturing their shots these days, with things like BoulderCam to get close to the animals without disturbing them or drawing the attention of predators. How lucky we are to be able to see the images we do, thanks to clever cameramen!
L.