Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Compassion??
We rescued a magpie with a broken wing. He had survived 10 days without being able to fly, and had previously successfully evaded us. Last Sunday however I found him on his back being attacked by around 6 other magpies. He was in a weak and exhausted state when we caught him. The vets refused to see him...So we took him to a local animal rescue centre. He is now in an aviary with another flightless crow. The crow had previously lived with a magpie 'friend' who had died a few weeks ago. Neither can be released due to his flightless state and the 'Abandonment of Animals Act' (1960) which says if the animal can't survive in the wild then it can't be released. I am so sad that he is now in captivity. My hope was that his injury was treatable, but it appears not. I wonder whether we have worsened his suffering by not letting nature take its course. We can't home him with us, although I would like to as I feel responsible for him, as we have a dog.
Was this a compassionate act or should I leave any wild animal alone in future?
Was this a compassionate act or should I leave any wild animal alone in future?
0
Comments
With warmth,
Matt
It is no fault of yours that there might be endless ramifications of any single act you do in good faith and out of love. A swami once explained to me that all our vision is like tunnel vision, and that we must accept that limitation in all humility. We see so very little and therefore must accept that fact that we dwell in that "cloud of unknowing."
As for the magpie itself, I'd argue that it is better off emotionally at least, having people care for it. A much brighter and warmer fate than just being allowed to starve, dehydrate, and freeze to death in pain, I'd think, in the event the others hadn't finished him off completely.
Why would this not be considered a compassionate act?
You acted out of loving kindness towards this magpie, who was in pain and suffering. I think it was extremely kind to take the time to care for this bird. Imagine how you would feel if you were an animal in its place - alone, in pain, and frightened. A much larger creature comes along and saves you, takes you to a place where you can be healed, and even though you are unable to live back in the wild because of your injuries, you are at least cared for with kindness and compassion.
Yes, on the one hand you could have "let nature take its course," but clearly you didn't feel that it was the right thing to do at the time. Perhaps the magpie would have continued to suffer or even encountered a worse fate (tortured or tormented by misguided people, used as a toy by a cat, etc). The crow who lost a friend would still be alone.
I think it would be much crueler to see an animal suffering and do nothing if you had the opportunity and ability to help.
I believe your actions were extremely beneficial and compassionate. Even though you can't take the magpie home, he's being taken care of by people who work to help injured and abandoned animals. He's where he needs to be, and thanks to you he will be safe and loved by his crow friend
You did the right thing by saving the bird's life. Wild creatures can adapt and live quite happily in captivity if they're not strong enough to go back to the wild.
.
I did think it odd that the magpie turned up for the crow just after he'd lost his aviary mate. It seemed 'right' somehow. The compromise is that we're going to pay for the birds' care - both of them. The rescue centre is full to bursting and short of money.....
It's true that his fate at the hands of his species-mates was the way of nature, but you did a compassionate thing none the less.
Mtns