The Great Primate Debates - Part 1

From the beginning of time, at least the time when humans began to take the creatures of our world out of their natural habitats and into our own, humans have argued over methodologies and philosophies of their care. What may seem "politically correct" for one person may seem outrageous to another. The world of non-human primates is no different.

I have heard and read numerous arguments, the pros and cons of anything imaginable when it comes to a discussion about primates in the private sector. The most controversial debate spanning decades of debates is that issue itself. Is it "politically correct" to allow the private sector to engage in co-habitating with our close relatives?

One train of thought by the purists, also known as the animal rights activists, is leave the non-human primates in their natural habitat, regardless of the fact their habitat is diminishing daily by leaps and bounds. This group of like-minded people would prefer to let nature run its course, allowing extinction to overtake whichever primates fall beneath its cloak of death. I have heard some go to the extreme of declaring they would even go to the extreme of promoting euthanasia for all those primates presently in captivity, rather than allow them to live in these captive conditions. Others who disagree support the position that the private sector, individuals or large facilities, may be the only means by which certain species of primates are not lost to extinction forever. Those people hope for a time when the earth is healed enough to allow these creatures to be reintroduced into their original habitat. There are some studies and programs doing just that now. The Golden-lion Tamarin is one such species that has been bred in captivity, taught survival skills and then re-introduced into a natural setting. People have argued the point of primates in the private sector do not have the worry of predators or wondering where their next meal is coming from. These same people do have to assure the primates in their care have an enriching environment to stimulate the primates' emotional and physical well being.

Another point of contention within the private sector itself is that of altering any non-human primate. Alterations may be as seemingly insignificant as the reduction of the canine teeth or as extreme as the removal of fingertips to prevent fingernails from inflicting damage to a human caretaker. Neutering either gender is another hotly debated issue. There are those who insist castration or hysterectomies will inhibit the natural aggressive behaviors of a non-human primate as it matures, Others loudly protest this is not true, nor have there been any conclusive studies to prove this issue.

Go To Page: 1 2