It was unclear how many deaths would eventually be linked to the "cuts and gravy" style food produced by Menu Foods, but scientists said Friday they expected more would be announced.
The substance in the food was identified as aminopterin, a cancer drug that once was used to induce abortions in the United States and is still used to kill rats in some other countries, state Agriculture Commissioner Patrick Hooker said.
The federal government prohibits using aminopterin for killing rodents in the U.S. State officials would not speculate on how the poison got into the pet food, but said no criminal investigations had been launched.
-- AOL News
This is a troubling case, hitting to the heart of pet owners and animal lovers. As with Fast Food Nation, it also highlights the importance of regulation, which surely does not stop all harms, but does help. To take a turn of phrase, "lax regulation has consequences," and I rather not have people like the current bunch who surely are more on that side of the line than many possible alternatives. Also, if criminal, why no criminal investigation? Are such "accidental" deaths/harms, often involving humans too, not really to be taken seriously?*
I first heard about the cute baby polar bear on the often informative news summary bits on the "Rachel Maddow Show" (Air America), saving cute animals sure to tug heartstrings. But, why of not so cute animals? And, what of the aftermath, after we say our "oohs?" Or, after someone says "Save the Polar Bears, Kill the Polar Bear!!!" as proof animal rights sorts are nuts? From AOL News:
Albrecht told The Associated Press his beliefs were more nuanced than reported by Bild, though he applauded the debate the article had started.
He explained that though he thought it was wrong of the zoo to have saved the cub's life, now that the bear can live on his own, it would be equally wrong to kill him.
"If a polar bear mother rejected the baby, then I believe the zoo must follow the instincts of nature," Albrecht said. "In the wild, it would have been left to die."
The German animal rights organization "Four Paws" argued along similar lines, saying it would not be right to punish the cub for a bad decision made by the zoo.
Other activists have also argued that current treatment of the cub is inhumane and could lead to future difficulties interacting with fellow polar bears.
"They cannot domesticate a wild animal," Ruediger Schmiedel, head of the Foundation for Bears, told Der Spiegel weekly in its Monday edition.
Albrecht cited a similar case of a baby sloth bear that was abandoned by its mother last December in the Leipzig city zoo and killed by lethal injection, rather than being kept alive by humans.
But Knut belongs to the Berlin Zoo, and their veterinarian Andre Schuele, charged with caring for him, disagrees.
"These criticisms make me angry, but you can't take them so seriously," Andre Schuele said. "Polar bears live alone in the wild; I see no logical reason why this bear should be killed."
Schuele also argued that given the increased rarity of polar bears in the wild, it makes sense to keep them alive in captivity so that they can be bred.
"Polar bears are under threat of extinction, and if we feed the bear with a bottle, it has a good chance of growing up and perhaps becoming attractive as a stud for other zoos," Schuele said.
It's actually not a simple matter. Raising animals in captivity is surely not a guilt free enterprise with no problems. "Wild animals" in other words very well might not be best served by living in cages and raised by humans. I'm not sure how we "save" things by raising them in artificial conditions. This might work on some level, but there very well can be problems, especially with certain species. It is especially troubling if they don't have their mother to ease the way.
I know some critics would be wary about our trying to interfere with nature in some other ways, maybe even being a critic of Al Gore (I like him, and it's trivial, but yeah, he did gain some weight). The fact we are dealing with a zoo animal to begin with makes it different than it might be in other cases, but the matter is not as simple as some make it out to be.
Still, as Rachel noted, killing animals might not be the best way for animal rights groups to get donations.
[Lest I leave it at that, some environmental/animal sorts do respect a sort of "circle of life" approach that results in deaths of animals. They aren't just for saving individual animals, which is simply unworkable in the aggregate. I'm not a big fan of hunting and the like in the promotion of such ends, but it is worth thinking about as a general principle.]
---
*Also from the same source:
Experts advise owners to call their veterinarian if a pet has eaten recalled food and shows symptoms of possible kidney failure. An animal could be in trouble if it:
· Stops eating
· Appears tired and lifeless
· Seems excessively thirsty
· Urinates much more than usual
· Vomits
· Has diarrhea
· Seems to have abdominal pain