The statement I made did NOT state that it was ok. No keeper (at least not any respectable one) would ever tell you that they were ok with the animals death. What I did TRY to point out in that statement was that these sharks have not been housed in solitary. They have been kept with other species of Bamboo, and those other species have thrived. This prooves many things: 1. Water qualities were maintained, 2. Food was supplied, 3. Necessary conditions and requirements were met. How do I know that - well for one, I know their Facility personally, for another, if any of the above were lacking or absent, there would be no sharks in that particular holding who wouldn't have suffered. So, with process of elimination, you can forget about poor husbandry. But still there is the question on why they died. Well, like any scientist will tell you, you start big and work your way down. Considering these animals all came from the same supplier and were generally the same size, it is reasonably assumed that they were the same (or about the same) age. This indicates that they may have come from the same litter. Which leads us to the breeding issue - were they concieved out of repeated incest from a few adults? We can't be sure but that would be a likely conclution. Another might be that the parents may have possesed a degenertative disorder that was passed to the young. Even still it could have nothing at all to do with genetics, it could simply be the species as a whole that is poor in captivity. A genetic issue was only one of many theories, one which has neither been prooved nor denied and therefore it cannot be thrown off the table completely. Lets say it had nothing to do with breeding, lets move to another theory: Habitat. You made a comment about the shark's particular preferences when it came to habitats. Perhaps you are right, maybe their requirements DO vary greatly from those of other species of Bamboo. Perhaps they do require cooler waters, more depth, a different diet... who knows? No one, and why - because there has been very little research done on this particular species to lend such valuable information on any reliable basis. That in its self is a huge detriment to the species should it be housed in captivity, simply because it does in fact become a trial and error of sorts for the keepers, but on the flip side, it is ONLY by our trial AND errors that this information is gained, and applied for future sucess. Each new species, or those of which have no extreme precedence require huge amounts of research. You are focusing on these 7, and naturally so, since this may be the first time you have been introduced to something like this, but you have to keep in mind that the only reason we know what we know of ANY animal, aquatic or otherwise, is because of the dedicated individuals from many fields who devoted their time and energy into understanding the lives and needs of each animal. With any species, there is loss, and sometimes monumental. It is how we learn. Yes it sucks that these sharks died, but it is not fair of you to just assume that it was due to negligence on their behalf.
You said that we had stated they died for "no reason", when infact, I never said that and I don't recall anyone else saying that either. What was said is "unknown reasons" or "no apparent reason", that is not the same as "no reason", it just means that there is no clear reason which has been revealed, which on its own only makes it all the more frustrating for the team. I see your points you are trying to make, I do, however it seems like you are just convincing yourself that they willingly killed them. You mentioned something about these deaths not occuring if they were in the wild....ok, but then how would you know whether they did or did not occur? You wouldn't know, because they would be in the wild. We know so little about this species, we cannot possibly speculate what does or does not, could or could not happen in the wild, because we have no solid point of reference to make such a comparison, in order to ensure quality care. We just can't at this point. I see your frustration, and believe me, your fire is appreciated, if every person cared as much as you seem to, we would be in a far better condition than we presently are when it comes to the ocean, conservation and awareness. If you want to place blame, if you need to have a finger to point, then fine, but only to the point that they weren't armed with enough information on the animal, and that this was only an issue because the species is such a mystery at this point in time, and with that, that this was territory which few have attempted to chart, one which will demand more time, dedication and research. But in placing the blame, do so with respect and understanding that at no point did they expect, nor want this to happen. No one wants animals to die, that is NEVER something a keeper is fine and dandy with. The simple facts of this matter are that 7 babies died, we don't know why at this point but they are trying to figure it out - But in order to figure it out, living ones are needed in order to work such a process of elimination. More may die in the search for information, but it is only through our trials and errors which we come to learn. No animal has ever come with a "How-To" manual clipped to their ***. We must figure it out for ourselves. You said ealier that they should not try again, but just leave them in the wild - understood, but then how would we ever truley know how they live, what they eat, diseases they may suffer from, waters which they prefer, methods in which they reproduce?? We couldn't. So now you may be thinking "well why do we need to do that anyways, why can't we just leave them alone?" - well, in time, we could just decide to do that, but for now, how can we ensure that this species will be preserved, and thrive in the wild, if we do not yet know how to maker certain of that? This animal is already rare, so how are we to demand it's conservation with little to no information thus far? It's a cycle, and I know it can seem redundant without me going into it all the way. To you it may seem like we are talking in circles, but that is only because everything, sucess, failure, knowledge - lack thereof, conservation, life, death, and so on - they are all linked, and I can only hope some of this will make sense.
There is a lot more I could say to try and explain it to you, but doing so in a post is extremly hard considering it completly one sided on my part until you reply. At this point I feel like I am talking in circles, LOL, I mean there are only so many things to say in order to get the point across, and yet I see us saying them over and over, as if it will do any good. Like I said before, I appreciate your fire, you seem to care a lot, but I don't know how else to explain it unless we were to talk on the phone or whatever to adress each issue and question one at a time. In a post there is only so much I can explain, LOL and I am starting to confuse myself in trying to explain it in so many ways, LOL. I dunno, I do understand your points, I see your frustrations, and I respect them - I care that you care, I do ok. It's just that there is so much you don't see that we do, so much you don't experience - that we do, that there is just no way to make you really see it how we see it, and make it sink in. I suppose you will come to whatever conclusion you want, I just hope you take what we say into consideration should you agree to disagree with us.
