Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
seeder

A very sad, depressed Polar Bear

17 posts in this topic

Is this the world's saddest animal? Tragic photos show plight of lonely polar bear as it struggles to cope with 40C heat in Argentine zoo

Arturo sits in concrete enclosure at Mendoza Zoo in sweltering heat

Said to be depressed since long-term friend Pelusa died two years ago

29-year-old's lonely life is causing him to display 'abnormal behaviour'

Campaigners including Cher have called for him to be moved elsewhere

This is Arturo, a polar bear living in South America who has been called the ‘world’s saddest animal’.

He sits in a concrete enclosure at Mendoza Zoo in Argentina in temperatures of up to 40C (104F) and is said to have been depressed since his long-term friend Pelusa died two years ago.

It is claimed the 29-year-old’s lonely life is causing him to display abnormal behaviour, including tilting his head and showing his teeth while pacing back and forth and rocking from side to side.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2690467/Is-worlds-saddest-animal-Fears-mental-health-polar-bear-Arturo.html#ixzz37MHtV6tz

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is really shameful, they should either put him out of his misery or send to zoo that care for him properly. Those people are some really heartless bast**ds, for sure.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That`s one of the reasons why I don`t like zoos.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoos are, or should be, a thing of the past. Once upon a time a zoo existed to showcase animals from other countries that couldn't be seen unless captured and displayed... a hundred years ago many had never seen an elephant and so it was a novel idea...

But is there still any need for them? I dont think so. Kids grow up in the digital age, any info needed is a few clicks away, in fact more can be learned about animals from the net than from simply viewing an animal in captivity.

Last week we had the crying Elephant, now this. And none of it is really new news, its been going on for as long as zoo's have operated. Shall we start a campaign for 'no more zoo's'?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

104F is no condition to keep a polar bear in. Poor thing, at the very least it needs a LARGE pool of water and some toys to play with to keep himself occupied. For goodness sake, 104F would be too hot for me and I don't have a thick fur coat! he desperately needs to be able to keep cool.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last week we had the crying Elephant, now this. And none of it is really new news, its been going on for as long as zoo's have operated. Shall we start a campaign for 'no more zoo's'?

Costa Rica is closing all it's zoos. They have also banned circus animals and sport hunting.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they said the bear was doing stuff like tilting its head and baring its teeth, is it perhaps because it suffered heat stroke and ended up with neurological damage?

I mean, what ignorant sot keeps a polar bear out in 104 degree heat? Even where they come from it never gets that hot (as far as I know anyways) or at least not for more than a day or so. The poor thing is old and from the looks of it, not properly cared for either. I just can't fathom how people can be this ignorant and careless when they have living beings under their "care".

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's entirely possible that the zoo doesn't have the means to get rid of the bear, other than shooting it. It's very easy to claim that they should get rid of it, or set it free, or build a giant refrigerated pool for it, but everything costs money.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's entirely possible that the zoo doesn't have the means to get rid of the bear, other than shooting it. It's very easy to

claim that they should get rid of it, or set it free, or build a giant refrigerated pool for it, but everything costs money.

And its easy to claim that the situation is caused by the lack of money. Thats a very bad argumentation. Its the responsibility

of the zoos management to provide the animals with an environment thats at least similar to their natural environment. If a

lack of money does not support such setup and the zoos management place such animals in a zoo with a inadequate

environment, they have failed and just act for economic benefits but to the disadvantage of the animal/s. And icebears do

not need a refrigerated pool BTW but a pool thats big and deep enough.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And its easy to claim that the situation is caused by the lack of money.

Which no one is doing. But which is a far more likely possibility than sheer malice.

Thats a very bad argumentation. Its the responsibility of the zoos management to provide the animals with an environment thats at least similar to their natural environment. If a lack of money does not support such setup and the zoos management place such animals in a zoo with a inadequate environment, they have failed and just act for economic benefits but to the disadvantage of the animal/s.

So? Who cares who's responsibility it was? The bear is still suffering. And I sincerely doubt it is raking in so much cash the zoo is unwilling to part with it or upgrade its living conditions.

And icebears do not need a refrigerated pool BTW but a pool thats big and deep enough.

I neither know enough about polars beats to confirm that, nor really care about it too much, as it doesn't change the nature of the argument one wit. Nor, for that matter, am I limiting the reasons for inaction to money. It just tends to be the number one cause in situations like this.

Another is simply that I have no real reason to trust the animal activists over the zoo. The claims of the bear's situation are pretty much entirely visual, with the pictures showing us what is presumably a sad bear (I don't know what polar bears look like normally, so I can't judge). The offer was made to transfer the bear to a polar conservatory, but we already know it is 29 years old, where polar bears generally barely make it to 25. What are the chances that it is going to survive the trip, to say nothing of an entirely new environment, along with a bunch of younger aggressive polars wandering around? It's like drugging an octogenarian, taking them out of the middle-income home they have lived in all their lives, and putting them in an apartment in a low income neighborhood. If the goal is to reduce stress, I am doubtful this would accomplish it.

Simply put, the bear is very old. It lost it's lifetime companion two years ago. It probably knows it's getting to the end of its life. Yeah, it probably isn't acting normally. And there is probably little that can be done about it, money or otherwise. But until malice is evidenced, I am not going to condemn the people who have taken care of it well enough for it to live four years longer than the average. That does not make sense.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to look at this video but thanks for bringing it to people's attention. I hope the polar bear will be taken somewhere else so that it's not lonely anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always tend to find Zoo's to have tight budgets, if they are going to eventually move the bear, then they'll need to close the enclosure or find another animal, either way its losiny money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which no one is doing.

It was exactly your argumentation:

It's very easy to claim that they should get rid of it, or set it free, or build a giant refrigerated pool for it, but everything

costs money.

So? Who cares who's responsibility it was?

My argument in regard to the responsibility wasn`t directed to the present, it was directed to the past:

If a lack of money does not support such setup and the zoos management place such animals in a zoo with

a inadequate environment, they have failed and just act for economic benefits but to the disadvantage of the animal/s.

The bear is still suffering.

Yeah and thats frustrating also from the point of view that the bear issue did not occurred last week first, the issue with

the whole zoo is steady since years already and nothing has been changed so far and thats the shame.

http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUserReviews-g312781-d1752081-r190146907-Jardin_Zoologico-Mendoza_Province_of_Mendoza_Cuyo.html

And I sincerely doubt it is raking in so much cash the zoo is unwilling to part with it or upgrade its living conditions.

Again, a lack of money isn`t an excuse in any kind. It`s quite simple: you cannot run a bakery if you have no money to buy

the flour. But the zoos management continues to try to run their bakery.

Another is simply that I have no real reason to trust the animal activists over the zoo. The claims of the bear's situation are pretty much

entirely visual, with the pictures showing us what is presumably a sad bear

.

My judgement about the bear`s bad situation isn`t based on an assumption if he looks sad or not. The fact that the bear`s pool is just

50cm deep is reason enough to judge that something is not ok there. There is a pic where the bear lie flat in that pool and the bear is

not doing so to give a funny motive for Japanese tourists, the animal just try to avoid a heat shock and it seems that these just 50cm

aren`t a deep in that such a big animal, and thats normaly not at home in regions with ambient temperatures >40C, can get the required

cooling effects.

There is absolutely no space for arguments based on money issues or some "yes, but..." attempts. Just to keep in mind, we are talking

about a zoo in Argentinia here and not about a zoo in Somalia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was exactly your argumentation:

My argument was that the zoo may not have the resources. Money is the first resource people think about. More to the point, it was that one should not condemn others without hearing all the facts.

Again, a lack of money isn`t an excuse in any kind.

No, it isn't. It's a reason. Assuming it actually is a reason, which it doesn't seem to be in this case.

It`s quite simple: you cannot run a bakery if you have no money to buy

the flour. But the zoos management continues to try to run their bakery.

The zoo already bought the flour a long time ago. The bear is there and there is nothing that can be done about that, regardless of whether it is making money or not.

My judgement about the bear`s bad situation isn`t based on an assumption if he looks sad or not. The fact that the bear`s pool is just 50cm deep is reason enough to judge that something is not ok there.

A fact, is it?

50 cm is a little less than 20 inches. That's lower than the average chair.

1osopolar-800x600.jpg

Does this bear look like he stands 20 inches at the chest?

There is a pic where the bear lie flat in that pool and the bear is not doing so to give a funny motive for Japanese tourists, the animal just try to avoid a heat shock and it seems that these just 50cm aren`t a deep in that such a big animal, and thats normaly not at home in regions with ambient temperatures >40C, can get the required cooling effects.

The obvious question, then, is whether or not the pool actually is 50 cm deep. The only place I have found this number is in the activist reports. Just like the only pictures they post is of him lying in the shallow end.

I found this news report on how the multi-national medical team (gotta love the publicity) that examined the bear stated that the bear would probably not survive moving to Canada (or at least, long thereafter).

Included is a clip of Arturo going for a dive into his pool, completely submerged.

There is absolutely no space for arguments based on money issues or some "yes, but..." attempts.

Not on money, as Canada apparently offered to pick up the tab, however there is a most definite "Yes, but..." in operation here. The bear is a geriatric. He's at the upper limit of lifespan. You think he is stressed now? Try uprooting him from his home for practically his entire life and moving him to a completely new environment with a bunch of other bears around that he has never met before. Assuming he wakes up from the sedation, that is.

Just to keep in mind, we are talking about a zoo in Argentinia here and not about a zoo in Somalia.

And yet you have no problem believing reports that the only polar bear in Argentina is being kept in a 50 cm deep pool. Nor do you contest that he has been taken care of so well he has passed the average lifespan of polar bears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the attention will attract some needed $$ for the zoo to update the living conditions a little. I wouldn't bother moving him though. Too risky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoos are, or should be, a thing of the past. Once upon a time a zoo existed to showcase animals from other countries that couldn't be seen unless captured and displayed... a hundred years ago many had never seen an elephant and so it was a novel idea...

But is there still any need for them? I dont think so. Kids grow up in the digital age, any info needed is a few clicks away, in fact more can be learned about animals from the net than from simply viewing an animal in captivity.

I disagree. I like zoos. Digital pics and vids do not do the animals justice. Seeing with your own eyes is fantastic.

I do think zoos should have a higher standard of cleanliness and support for the animals, although I'm not sure how far you can go with the budgets most have.

So do you boycott zoos and leave the animals with worse living conditions or do you go to the zoos and support them so they can give the animals better living conditions. Quite a quandary for those who do not like zoos.

Zoos also help in keeping threatened animals from going completely extinct. http://www.zooborns.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.