Swimming w/dolphins: bad idea?

Aug 2nd, 2005, 12:25 PM
  #61  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 320
JJ5: Sharking? What does that involve?

As for the rest of the thread, everyone has their own conscience to answer to. Be well educated about a subject then make the best decision for you.
memejw is offline  
Aug 2nd, 2005, 12:46 PM
  #62  
JJ5
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
There are inlets in the bays and the sharks come in (usually smallest) and they stand in the shallows where it gets narrow and club them with baseball bats or whatever is at hand, and then pick them up by the tails and through them up onto the sand to die.

They keep count, and it is usually accompanied by beer drinking.

That's sharking.
JJ5 is offline  
Aug 2nd, 2005, 12:52 PM
  #63  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 320
Ick. Thanks for enlightening me. I kind of wish I had not asked JJ5.
memejw is offline  
Aug 2nd, 2005, 04:11 PM
  #64  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 605
Sounds very similar to loan-sharking.
fehgeddaboudit is offline  
Aug 2nd, 2005, 09:54 PM
  #65  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 12,848
JJ, that's bizarre and disgusting; we lived for many yars in Clearwater (up until two years ago) and go back 4 or 5 times a year and have never heard of "sharking." Nor has it appeared in the St. Pete Times, which we still read online. I hope this is not some new blood sport that is just now becoming a fad.

SnowR, I don't approve of caging wild animals for any reason. But the initial justification of zoos by those who instituted them was so provide people with an opportunity to see wild and/or unusual animals. With the advent of IMAX theaters, video photography and other techology, people can "see" animals in their own habitat---not the pale imitation that we create for them. So now, that initial justification has devolved into a base rationalization for what people simply want to do. They just **want*** to see those animals at their convenience.

In my opinion, that is wrong.
kswl is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 07:08 AM
  #66  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,233
I don't get it. But maybe I've midunderstood.

You mean, IMAX, etc., are not "pale imitations"? Heaven help us when we start thinking that a high-tech video is the equivalent of the actual experience.

That's not mean to defend swimming-with or any cruelty to animals. But, c'mon, a video superseding the experience of being there in nature? No way.
j_999_9 is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 07:29 AM
  #67  
JJ5
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
What teenagers do for recreation may not be deemed newsworthy.

Sharking has been around for decades. My cousin has been a principal, counselor etc. near Clearwater for 20 plus years. He first told me about it back in the '80's. They now use flashlights etc. and have developed tricks to make it easier, he says.

They also have and had a bundle of "dare you games" in which the opponents, if that is the word, jump off of the bridges. They especially favor the bridges under construction. Sometimes you make it and sometimes you don't.

Some few problems we DON'T have in counseling up here.

I tend to be on the side of homo sapiens myself, especially the younger version.
JJ5 is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 07:30 AM
  #68  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,777
Bad idea. It's time we start showing respect to other creatures on this planet.

I know this is slightly off subject, but I really believe it's also time for legislation to regulate farm animal treatment. After all, they are 98% of the animals in this country; we're all so worried about our pets, but don't even think about the cruel way farm animals are kept and slaughtered.
Little_Man is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 07:34 AM
  #69  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,777
sorry, didn't even read the previous posts before I added my answer to the question. thanks to all those who brought up the farm animal question!

Personally, I'm trying very hard to become a vegetarian. After 40+ years of eating meat, it's hard, but worth it.
Little_Man is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 07:39 AM
  #70  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,658
You can do it frankie!

I've gotten myself down to fish a few times a week, beef once a month and chicken once or twice a month.

I do still have bacon on the weekends though.

Lean protein helps in the battle. I eat lots of lower fat cheese, yogurt, nuts, fruit and veggies.

Good luck!
Diana is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 08:02 AM
  #71  
TheWeasel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
kswl-

You seem to prefer to ignore the good things that parks/zoos are doing. Go to the AZA's website and educate yourself about their conservation and education programs. There are species of animals on this planet that would either no longer exist, or would be virtually extinct without the assistance of zoos. Their captive breeding programs have maintained genetic diversity and prevented extinction, while their conservation/education programs have worked to save and expand natural habitats so these species can survive in the wild. It's not all about caging wild animals so that we can look at them at our convenience, as you put it.
 
Aug 3rd, 2005, 08:13 AM
  #72  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 12,848
" a video superseding the experience of being there in nature?"

No, you still don't get it. I don't care that a video is not good enough for you---that you (the impersonal, collective "you") would prefer the experience of seeing something in the flesh. It is the zoo habitat that is the pale comparison of nature, and THAT is the concern---not the quality of video!


"It's not all about caging wild animals so that we can look at them at our convenience, as you put it." The real test of people's dedication to those conservation and preservation programs is this: would they still be in place if people couldn't come to the zoo for entertainment?

This thread is probably very annoying to the "travel only" diehards on this board, but I for one appreciate that there can be adult discussion about this topic that has remained pretty civilized. I am off now to Salt Lake City for a few days without computers, and on to Seattle for the United States Go Congress. I look forward to looking in when we return.


kswl is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 08:57 AM
  #73  
TheWeasel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
"The real test of people's dedication to those conservation and preservation programs is this: would they still be in place if people couldn't come to the zoo for entertainment? "

Well, it's impossible to know the answer to this. But I would suspect that the many dedicated people who work in conservation/preservation would continue on (albeit with a reduced budget) if zoos were closed to the general public. I believe zoos perform a valuable function in educating the public about endangered species. Could they do this without putting the animals on exhibit? Perhaps, but that wouldn't change the fact that the animals would still be captive. If putting endangered species on exhibit raises money and educates the public about their plight, which in turn helps the species survive, I don't see anything bad about it. Granted, not all animals in zoos are endangered species, but they all contribute to the educational experience.
 
Aug 3rd, 2005, 09:36 AM
  #74  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,777
appreciate your support, Diana! It's hard but worth it !
Little_Man is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 10:07 AM
  #75  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 431
Boy this thread has sure changed tone since I last checked in. I was in Tahoe for a week, happy to be away from my computer.

It really drives me nuts when people say we eat this animal so why not eat all animals. It's just a stupid argument. In our country certain things are just not accepted in our culture. Be it human rights or animal rights we look at things differently than other cultures might. We also need to educate other cultures that it is not ok to eat everthing and anything. Many biologists believe that the practice of eating bush meat in Africa is how we got AIDS. How chickens and ducks are kept before slaughter in Asia may be how we got bird flu. Bird flu could cause a flu pandemic, killing millions. So how we keep animals and what animals we eat really does matter to our health. Turns out feeding cows other cows wasn't such a great idea either. The factory farms in the Mid-West are creating runoff into the Gulf of Mexico. The runoff is causing "dead zones" where there is no oxygen. There are no fish where there is no oxygen, so if you were a commercial fisherman that might be a problem for you.
If people ate less meat it would not only be better for themselves personally, but it would also be better for our planet.
viamar is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 11:03 AM
  #76  
TheWeasel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
"Turns out feeding cows other cows wasn't such a great idea either. "

Feeding sheep to cows was the more likely cause of BSE (mad cow disease), if that's what you're referring to, but your point is still valid.

"The factory farms in the Mid-West are creating runoff into the Gulf of Mexico."

It's not just "factory" farms, but all farms, regardless of size, as well as anyone that uses any sort of fertilizer (golf courses, lawns, etc.). Eating less meat wouldn't decrease the amount of runoff into the Gulf - the land that formerly was used to raise livestock would simply be converted to cropland to grow vegetables, or subdivisions, either of which would still use fertilizer and contribute to the runoff problem.
 
Aug 3rd, 2005, 11:37 AM
  #77  
JJ5
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
Yes, exactly- the result is actually not having a famine in North America and feeding through distribution other continents on occasion.

I know farmers and I have farmed. Have you? Do you know what it takes to raise food for 6, let alone 6 million? In fact, I'm talking Cleveland, not something like NYC near which only a small portion of the food could be produced for that number of occupants.

Run off fertilizer affects our lakes which concerns me mightily as well as all the other reasons described.

But the amount of people you need to feed is immense.

Humans have eaten meat throughout their development as a species. It is what kept them alive throughout winters in cold climates. We have cannine teeth.

Maybe we should just skinny down and go back to being nominal populations like after the Black Death Plague of the Middle Ages. Or go to the agricultural methods similar to what the Chinese have lately (three or four recent centuries) used, where you lose several million people to a famine each time the rain is insufficient or too plentiful.

Ee gads, we may need to eat less all around, but going the lowest common denominator vegan route would be a whole lot more problematic than just run off or pollution.
JJ5 is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 12:07 PM
  #78  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,233
>>With the advent of IMAX theaters, video photography and other techology, people can "see" animals in their own habitat---not the pale imitation that we create for them.<<

kswl, I see that you were referring to zoos but you still seem to be advocating video as the best alternative. I'm not so sure about that.
j_999_9 is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 12:13 PM
  #79  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 431
Who said anything about going vegan?
Yes all farms can cause problems, but there are responsible and irresponsible ways to do everything. Why wouldn't you want to try to do what's healthier for everyone?
viamar is offline  
Aug 3rd, 2005, 12:40 PM
  #80  
JJ5
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,253
HA-HA-HA!

So the "responsible" way is to grow organic food with a result of 3 bushels -as opposed to a result for your definition of "unresponsible" with a yield of 30 bushels.

Hmmmmmmm! I don't think you have a meaningful grasp of the numbers of people who DO NOT grow their own food, food costs in production, or what happens to crops without some insecticides or fertilizers.
JJ5 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy -

FODOR'S VIDEO

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:39 PM.