Little exposition first: About three weeks ago my grandmother found a juvenile hedgehog foraging on the road inside the estate where she lives. So worried, she took it in, brought it to the vets and had it weighed etc. She didn't have a suitable place to keep it though, and on-top of owning a dog, decided to entrust in to my care (we having an odd number of cats, hah!), but I still had a rather large guinea pig cage lying around which I was able to get back in order.
First two weeks went fine, fed it 1/3 of a tin of dog food per day in two feedings, gave it a hot water-bottle at night, made sure it had clean water/bedding etc. Though during that time my brother started complaining about it, specifically that it was scratching at the bars and climbing up the sides. (Something of a telltale heart?) His stance on the matter that it was undeniably 'cruel' due to the animal's clear determination to find a way out of the cage, despite the fact that it was otherwise in no way distressed. He was to be kept till November until he reached a suitable weight of between 500-600 grams (only being around 220g at the time)
To cut things short, my brother complained enough and the Hedgehog was given back to my grandmother who released into her garden, where I've seen it is thankfully still being fed. To be honest, I think this is a better solution for the time being. Now to the crux of the matter:
I confronted my brother on the issue, his stance was as follows:
It's cruel and against nature to take animals and put them in cages (regardless of the circumstances)
I don't necessarily disagree with this in principle, but it's hardly true to say that this should never occur.
However, I rebutted with the fact that without aid the animal could a: have starved, and b: been run over quite easily.
To which I got of course: Well that's just nature, we shouldn't get involved!
Ignoring for a moment the issue of being unable to find sustenance, that issue in itself brought on by the Human need for habitation, and to expand, inevitably overcoming territories that these kind of animals frequent. But, that is what it is. I do accept that our needs come first.
But...what baffled me was that he stated outright, that the latter issue (of being run over by a car) was also perfectly fine and natural, because the Hedgehog should just learn to deal with such encounters. The exchange ended quite rapidly at that point once I accused my brother of being a hypocrite. I suspect one or both of us will be nursing this the rest of the night :/
So, for your discussion pleasure this evening:
To what lengths should one go to aid one's local wildlife? And, does it point to a hypocrisy to be against human intervention to -aid- animals, yet to be perfectly fine with indirect intervention that harms animals as long as it isn't premeditated?
First two weeks went fine, fed it 1/3 of a tin of dog food per day in two feedings, gave it a hot water-bottle at night, made sure it had clean water/bedding etc. Though during that time my brother started complaining about it, specifically that it was scratching at the bars and climbing up the sides. (Something of a telltale heart?) His stance on the matter that it was undeniably 'cruel' due to the animal's clear determination to find a way out of the cage, despite the fact that it was otherwise in no way distressed. He was to be kept till November until he reached a suitable weight of between 500-600 grams (only being around 220g at the time)
To cut things short, my brother complained enough and the Hedgehog was given back to my grandmother who released into her garden, where I've seen it is thankfully still being fed. To be honest, I think this is a better solution for the time being. Now to the crux of the matter:
I confronted my brother on the issue, his stance was as follows:
It's cruel and against nature to take animals and put them in cages (regardless of the circumstances)
I don't necessarily disagree with this in principle, but it's hardly true to say that this should never occur.
However, I rebutted with the fact that without aid the animal could a: have starved, and b: been run over quite easily.
To which I got of course: Well that's just nature, we shouldn't get involved!
Ignoring for a moment the issue of being unable to find sustenance, that issue in itself brought on by the Human need for habitation, and to expand, inevitably overcoming territories that these kind of animals frequent. But, that is what it is. I do accept that our needs come first.
But...what baffled me was that he stated outright, that the latter issue (of being run over by a car) was also perfectly fine and natural, because the Hedgehog should just learn to deal with such encounters. The exchange ended quite rapidly at that point once I accused my brother of being a hypocrite. I suspect one or both of us will be nursing this the rest of the night :/
So, for your discussion pleasure this evening:
To what lengths should one go to aid one's local wildlife? And, does it point to a hypocrisy to be against human intervention to -aid- animals, yet to be perfectly fine with indirect intervention that harms animals as long as it isn't premeditated?
