Sterilising Grey Squirrels, a nonsensical idea.

All squirrels have similar habits and behaviours. Wiping out the greys and increasing the population of reds will only make the reds pests. Contraception is a nonsense approach.

Sterilising grey squirrels seems extreme.

The plan of sterilising most or all grey squirrels in the U.K. to save the red squirrel from extinction seems extreme and unworkable. But it has recently been greeted with glee by conservationists, foresters, the news media and especially by everybody who thinks they are just rats with bushy tails. Many are wishing for total eradication, but can we be realistic for a moment.

Sadly, there are estimates of only 150,000 red squirrels surviving in the U.K. mainly in Scotland compared with 2.7 million greys marauding as aliens across the rest of the country destroying our forests, causing climate change, attacking and passing on disease to the reds and a whole list of other indiscretions. Meanwhile the angelic reds can do no wrong.

Surely a squirrel is a squirrel is a squirrel.

But surely a squirrel is a squirrel is a squirrel the world over and all species have similar eating and behavioural habits. The reason reds do such little damage in the UK is that they are only 150,000 of them, so what if we tilt the balance the other way and have 2.7 million reds. What happens then? I suspect we would soon target them as the number one villain and cull them. Red squirrels are known to strip bark, destroy trees, etc, etc. and in large numbers will be just as destructive at debarking trees, invading your loft space, eating birds eggs and all the other complaints we have against greys.

The logistics seem overwhelming

Meanwhile the researchers and scientists  who have come up with this squirrel contraceptive idea have spent over 4 years of a 5 year research project developing this and hope to put a plan in place by 2024. It is described as an innovative idea which will provide an effective, less labour intensive method for managing or eradicating greys.

Sounds wonderful, but seriously, is it less labour intensive. How much money and manpower will it take to replenish and check these feeders and what about the costs of manufacturing them, supplying, servicing and positioning them. Probably more than the cost of the damage they allegedly cause.

If those involved seriously think they will be able to make inroads into the number of greys, which they admit are prolific breeders, it will entail an astronomical amount of feeders. The logistics would appear to be impossible.

Grey squirrels sterilising
Many people find them entertaining and like having grey squirrels around.

Still welfare issues

Yes, its better than shooting, trapping and poisoning them but the use of sterilising could involve mental and physiological suffering by them not being able to nuture young. There are other alternatives already in use to curb wildlife. Is it time to just let nature takes its course or allow some disorder in nature and in this case spend the money on establishing more breeding and release programmes.

I personally feel it would be money better spent sterilising urban rats considering the health and hygiene risks they pose. Anyone out there researching that?

Zoo animals need more protection from foolhardy humans.

The demise of Eko, an endangered tiger at Naples zoo, is another example of why zoo animals need more protection from foolhardy human visitors.

The death by shooting of Eko, an endangered tiger at Naples Zoo, is another example of why zoo animals need more protection from human visitors. The emphasis should be more on keeping the animals safe from us rather than the other way round.

Killing endangered captive animals through no fault of their own.

Captive zoo animals, particularly endangered species, must feel pretty positive about their lives and existence. They are more often than not pampered as valued inmates, usually part of a breeding programme and are celebrity attractions. Little do they realise though that in the blink of an eye they can be killed through no fault of their own.

Incidents over the last couple of decades have proved that it is an unfortunate fact that no zoo animal is completely safe at the hands of their humans keepers. Recently, (December 2021) yet another endangered animal had its life cut short by the idiotic behaviour of a human. This time it was a  critically endangered Malaysian tiger named Eko in the Naples Zoo in Florida. The unfortunate animal was shot and wounded, then sedated and finally died of his injuries all because of failures in health and safety, staff training and our desire to treat all animals as fluffy beings

The zoo was quick to issue a statement that Eko was much loved and died quickly from internal bleeding. They have set up a conservation fund for people to honour his death and asked the public to respect the feelings of the staff. I am sure Eko would have been pleased.

Zoo animals need more protection from foolhardy humans.

His early death was caused by a contract cleaner, who decided to put his arm through the bars to presumably stroke Eko who grabbed and mauled the arm of this unfamiliar human who was invading his space. The comment from the zoo was “This was a tragic encounter at our world-class zoo facility.” Hardly world class if they allow unsupervised outsiders to behave in such a manner.

Eko the tiger joins many others who over the years have suffered similar fates. It has become a regular habit for us to kill critically endangered captive animals through no fault of their own.

In September 2021 another tiger was shot and killed at the Delhi Zoo when a young man decided to jump down into its enclosure. And of course there is the case of the infamous shooting of 17 year old Harambe, the endangered lowland gorilla, who was shot by a Cincinnati zoo marksman when a child fell into his enclosure.

Harambe gorilla with child in moat Cincinnati zoo
Harambe was shot and killed even though he didn’t appear aggressive.

Human life will always take precedence over that of an animal.

Zoo officials were afraid for the child’s life and although the zoo was criticised for not doing more to save the child and Harambe, Mr Holloway, a zoo spokesman stated, screams from the crowd further agitated Harambe and it’s a horrible call to have to makebut human life will always take precedence over the animal.

Zoo animals are also regularly killed in the name of research and conservation, a practice called zoonasia and mainly kept hidden from the public. This was highlighted in the case of Marius the giraffe at Copenhagen Zoo who was killed because he didn’t fit the criteria for breeding his species. His death was covered worldwide in the press and social media.

There has been much discussion worldwide in the past of the dangers to the public visiting zoos particularly after each fatal incident. It has been estimated that there have been 256 injuries to the public and keepers over the last 26 years but only 33 deaths. This figure seems rather conservative. But it is more a question of how many animals the zoos are killing.

Time to keep captive endangered species away from the public.

The moral of the story for captive zoo animals is that their life is at the discretion of zoo scientists, veterinary surgeons, zoo directors and the actions of the public.  Although animals like Harambe and Eko may be sentient, are endangered and protected species, are disappearing at an alarming rate in the wild and maybe doing there bit for conserving their species by being part of a breeding program, none of this saves them or is of any consequence if they react to some stupidity on our part.

We will never save the life of an animal at the expense of a human, but we could accept they are wild animals and not retaliate when a human causes an incident. And if we are serious about saving species by zoo breeding, keep the animals away and out of view of the public so they can get on with the business of breeding undisturbed like humans prefer.