My library has a pongo pongo requirement

But other than that what is to be done?

As many as 4,500 primates face having nowhere to go when the government bans people from keeping them as pets, a BBC science presenter has warned.

Dr Ben Garrod, a primatologist who is presenting two new science-based shows for the broadcaster, said that while he welcomed the expected policy announcement, which is currently in the consultation stage, there remained concerns about where to accommodate the animals if they are confiscated.

He said: “We think there are 4,500 privately owned primates in the UK, even if we banned it tomorrow what do you do with these 4,500 animals that can live decades? We don’t have the facilities to confiscate them off people.

It appears that we’ve got that not thinking thing going on again. It’ll be illegal to keep them. But zoos won’t want them, or couldn’t take them. And?

So what will happen to them? Presumably be put down. Which will be a grand victory for the protection of animal rights, won’t it?

20 thoughts on “My library has a pongo pongo requirement”

  1. Mitch has it.

    A sensible law would grandfather in existing pets and prohibit breeding or importing new ones.

    Worked a treat with the dangerous dogs act, didn’t it.

  2. “We think there are 4,500 privately owned primates in the UK, even if we banned it tomorrow what do you do with these 4,500 animals that can live decade?”

    Release them in Surry.

    “A sensible law would grandfather in existing pets and prohibit breeding or importing new ones.”

    Sensible? A sensible law would be to leave the people alone. If you don’t want primate pets, don’t have one.

  3. “Sensible? A sensible law would be to leave the people alone.”

    So it’s OK if the queers take their monkeys to the parade?

  4. WTF is it all about anyway?

    Many people being attacked by dangerous chimps are they? It must cost a fortune to look after such an animal nor are there many of them. And the fucking state think that they are going to confiscate people’s pet in order to put them down?

    Anyone trying that with my pet–a small dog admittedly–would pay for his attempt with his life. And I would be aim to take the war to whichever cunt came up with the idea,

    Those with monkey-money so to speak might well have means enough to invest in a few projectile weapons to boot.

    They can stuff their law anyway but at least Mitch’s idea has some sense. Those who think to use this as a demo of their “power” need a lesson.

  5. ‘Just say “No new ones”’: Christ, no. We’ll end up with a government neutering service.

    Anyway, the owners should teach their chimps to identify as dogs.

  6. More virtue signalling, like our park board that has banned marine mammals from the aquarium onsite, forgetting 2 facts.

    1. They are rescue animals so if it stops they will have to stop rescuing dolphins and porpoises along with seals and otters, so more dead marine mammals, but hey at least that’s nature I guess.
    2. The aquarium is the biggest money earner in the park (or maybe 2nd after car parking) people want to see marine mammals and if they aren’t there then numbers will fall and park visitors overall will fall and the aquarium is a non-profit that puts money back into environmental research. So less money for ‘good’ causes

    There is also the point that the late Gerald Durrell made about being an environmentalist and running a zoo, the best way to get people to give you money to protect animals is for them to see and interact with them as much as possible.

  7. There is also the point that the late Gerald Durrell made about being an environmentalist and running a zoo, the best way to get people to give you money to protect animals is for them to see and interact with them as much as possible.

    I’ve said for a while that people should be allowed to get as close as they like to zoo animals.
    “Want to pet the lion sir? Excellent. £10 admin fee, sign this waiver, off you go.”
    It might teach the environmentalists that nature is a harsh mistress, that these cute animals they see lying around on nature documentaries are actually killers and extremely dangerous.

    Who cares if a few chimps get culled? Horrible creatures. Violent, strong and blood thirsty.

  8. Bloke in Costa Rica

    CD: yes. A band of chimps in the wild makes your average Einsatzgruppe on the Eastern Front look like the Salvation Army out collecting for soup kitchens. The one that went crazy a while back and attacked a woman literally tore her face off.

  9. “so more dead marine mammals, but hey at least that’s nature I guess”

    True. Man abhors death. Nature doesn’t; it’s part of the program.

  10. All that matters these days is that the banners feel good and that the public sees their virtue. Consequences are for other people.

  11. @Chernyy_Drakon

    Made me think “Planet of The Apes” could happen if we screw up and every country became Venezuela

    Then I remember Apes have watched humans building “homes” for >100,000 years and not copied.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *