SabreFan1

@Salmonberries outside of how you FEEL about this, and what your preconceptions are, what can you say that would categorically define this as a cruel action?

If we're comparing apples to apples, this is no different from a tiger taking down a deer in the plains of India, the only thing that's changed is the environment, and that the aspects of certain things are controlled by people instead of the laws of nature.

Just because the environment changes, does that really necessitate that the rules of engagement or feeding practices should also change?

Changing the method of feeding a wild animal from what it's used to, to what we determine is more rational and forgiving for our conscience is not the same thing as what is the right thing to do.

@VanGnomeIf it were up to me, for-profit zoos wouldn't exist.  But yes, I am against taking a domesticated donkey that was also another attraction at the zoo and driving it over to the wild tiger's den and feeding it live to the tigers.  In my opinion, it's unnecessary.  In your opinion, it's fine.

Most of those tigers would never survive well in the wilds of Asia at this point so in this case the argument of rehabilitation is irrelevant.  The investors know this and they want to sell them off to recoup some of their continuing costs, but they aren't even allowed to move them by court order.

@VanGnome I don't think I'd care to witness a live donkey being fed to a tiger on a family outing at the zoo.

But maybe that is just me.