• snooggums@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16 days ago

      If they were born and raised in captivity their odds of survival are pretty low. Like someone who always lived in a large city and never went camping being dropped off in Alaska odds of survival.

      Rehabilitation only helps so much without the actual experience of growing up with other members of their species in the wild.

      • Cybersteel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Why not let the rules of nature decide? Unlike human society, that lets the weak rule the strong, only the strong may survive in the wild. That is natural selection.

        • k0e3@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          It’s not natural selection if we yanked them out of the natural order and kept them from acquiring the skills necessary to survive in the wild in the first place.

          • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            If you consider people as part of the natural order, then it is in fact natural selection. This isn’t a commendation of our place in nature.

            • k0e3@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 days ago

              People always say this as some sort of “gotcha” statement, but what we do to them is clearly very different from their normal life cycle and something we have the will to stop doing or somehow make up for the damage unlike other natural events like volcanoes erupting or meteors striking.