Who is researching whom? Yes, there is a research project going on in the Kalahari involving observation of the Meerkats. But, also, there is a TV program where the public is observing the researchers and the researched. And whether or not the researchers believe that they are doing the correct thing in not intervening with a meerkat death, the public has their own decision to make about it. First, what is interference? It is setting up cameras and lights around a meerkat family den. It is radio collaring its leader. What was natural about that? But, Flower, let it go. What was she going to do? Bite the metal band off? It kept her a slave to the cameras and lights. And exactly how did this affect the interrelationships of the different meerkat families? "Uh? What's that?" No wonder the Whiskers group got so big. It had an alien army assisting it.

What is natural for the meerkat? To be checked over and weighed each day by a giant alien being? And why are you weighing them? To see if they are sick? I doubt it, since you offer nothing to them if they are.

It is a joke that you researchers believe that you are being pure and hands-off, when your hands on every day.... except they day they need your help. What is our personal nature? And what is the meerkat's personal nature?

Mitch and Flower made a decision against the usual nature of their family to not kill the baby meerkat left by the other family. Their nature was to kill it, or leave it, as it did not belong to them. Though, they weighed the situation and came to a different conclusion. They decided through extra work of their own that this was an innocent being that needed their assistance in order to survive. And the gave it to her.

Watching the researchers watching their meerkats, they observed the cobra and they knew that the likelihood was that a meerkat would die. I bet they weren't counting on it being Flower.... because any other meerkat is just a number, a silly name, an entertainment for the show. But Flower flew in there following her nature to care for her babies, and it was she who paid the price of the researcher's nature to not interfere! Or is it their nature not to care?

What happens when in nature, a species chooses to reach out to another species, as in the Tsunami when a orphaned rhino was adopted by a tortoise? Or when a 12 week old macaque was rescued on Neilingding Island in Coangdong Province, China. It had been abandoned by his mother. He was taken to an animal hospital where he was weaned back to physical health but still showed little appetite for life. It was not until a fellow patient, a white pigeon, took him under her wing and showed him love and affection that he perked up. The two are inseparable. Also a tiger cub in China was being raised by a sow along with her piglets because his mother didn't know how to feed him. In 2005, Mi-Lu a baby deer became best friends with Lurcher (a dog mix of greyhound, collie, and deerhound) Geoffrey at the Knowsley Animal Park in Merseyside, after being rejected by her mother.

Nearly everyone has seen video clips of cats that have nursed baby chicks, picking them up delicately in their "predator" mouths, licking them clean, keeping them warm. Lots of mothers have crossed the barrier of species to aid babies in need, and lots of babies have easily crossed the barriers to find loving mothers.
All I see in a research group of people choosing to define WHAT they consider interference. This is not science---this is entertainment. The line was crossed by the research long ago. Now, the researchers watch the Meerkats "live and die". And we watch the researchers watch the Meerkats die.

This real science is simple: Humans have 'enough of a brain' that they can deny their inner animal feelings that want to reach out and help a being in need.

Researchers, when you picked up Flower to take her away, was this an interference? How long do the meerkats mourn their leader? Do they go back to where her body is? And do they know where that place is? Or did you interfere in their grief?

When you picked up Flower, did you bury her WITH the collar she proudly "wore for you?" At anytime did you think that this chunk of junk around her neck interfered with her life? Did you notice the extent of swelling above the collar? It reminded me of the metal bands they put around the bird's ankle, and vets have to cut them off as their foot swells. Or even an embedded collar. What if you found that the collar itself, unavoidably kept the swelling from the poison above the collar? And because of this, Flower's swelling actually closed off her airway? Would you still pride yourself on having not interfered?

The least you can do is not tell me that watching meerkats die was for the purity of the research. Especially Carlos, who died an awful, painful death from an infected scratch. If you're picking them up and weighing them everyday, you can't let yourself "reach across a species and give aid?"

I'm doing my own research on your research, and on your entertainment show. And I know that what has occurred is far from pure research. But, you have proven that the human is the cruelest of all.

- Flower is my friend

The Whiskers aren't successful because people research them.
The Gattaca were researched the same way-they died out.
As with the Balrog, the Starsky, and many others.

I must admit, the Radio Collar could of interfered with her airway. Yet taking it off would require drugs to calm her enough that they could remove it. I'm not sure what would of done.

Sigh....there will always be questions.

It's funny, I don't remember forummers clamoring for removal of Flower's collar while we were all happily watching her escapades over the past 2-1/2 years... tracked, followed and filmed by researchers and camera crews through the use of her radio collar.

Now that she's gone, people are pointing fingers at everyone and anyone. If you believe the researchers, camera crew, and AP are responsible for her death... then it seems to me that you and I are just as complicit in our roles as viewers as they were in their roles as scientists and film-makers.

Fortunately, most of us understand that Flower's collar was in no way responsible for her demise. And there's no evidence that her collar, or any actions of the researchers or camera crews caused her any difficulty at all during her long reign.

But if you need to find a bogeyman here... other than the very obvious bogeyman - the fatal snakebite, if that makes you feel better... then I suppose you have every right to make the effort.

Now hold on a second. I see that there have been an influx of posts here since Friday night and I completely understand why. This is an incredibly emotional and difficult time for many/most of us. But there seems to be a label being branded around here against anyone remotely questioning some of the actions by KMP. I believe many of you are using the term "conspiracy theorists". Now I know there have been some rather far fetched ideas like "the snake was planted there" or (and this is even too painful for me to type) "Flower was killed on purpose for ratings." I would agree those do sound seem like conspiracy theories. But this idea of intervention vs. non-intervention has come up before and I feel that "Flowerismyfriend" makes quite a lot of valid points many of which have been brought up before especially during the time of Carlos' death.
I personally can't stand those radio-collars and many of us have complained about them before. They're large (relatively speaking), they're bulky, they're archaic and I think they have to cause some amt. of stress and/or interference at least in the beginning. KMP says they need them in order to track the meerkats. I used to study chimpanzees in the primary rainforests of central Africa where the visibility was less than 12 inches in front of you - now that is thick forest. We had to track various troops of chimps every day and they were not radio-collared. Yes we would sometimes have to travel miles before we could find them. Miles in the unbeaten paths of virgin rainforest to find unhabituated chimps in order to collect data. In fact, most researchers do not have the luxury of having radio-collared animals to track and study. Now how is it that we all find our study subjects and collect plenty of data? I saw Rocket Dog get radio-collared at a time that we were led to believe she was pregnant and during a very stressful drought in the Kalahari. So they anesthetized a pregnant female who is an inexperienced DF who is already stressed under new leadership and who is basically starving to death? Whoah - that crossed the line for me. And then guess what - she has a miscarriage. I am not saying the anesthesia caused it. But might it have added to Rocket Dog's stress? The answer is yes.
And why do they have to weigh them 3 times a day? The producer said on the chat that it is to see that they are all eating enough food. And what if they are not eating enough food? KMP is not going to intervene right? We're going to let nature take its course, right? I just don't really get what is going on over there. Something is terribly amiss, especially in light of the growing t.b. problem. And it is not bovine t.b. as the producer said. KMP's own study showed that it is human t.b.
And before anyone jumps down my throat and says "I'm looking for someone to blame" you should know (and many of you know this already) - I love Flower - *at least* as much as the biggest Flower fans here. I am not posting this to blame anyone for her death. I am just starting to question whether all of this so called non-interference by KMP - which adds up to a lot of interference - is not harming the meerkats. I am not saying they should stop studying them - I just wonder if there are more ethical ways of going about this. Some food for thought.

Queenflower (who really should have been in bed 2 hours ago)

quote:

I am just starting to question whether all of this so called non-interference by KMP - which adds up to a lot of interference - is not harming the meerkats.

Thank-you Queenflower. Thank-you. You presented my opinions and thoughts exactly!
(with a lot more grace and articulation than I ever could!) I have never said I want the research to be abandoned or the show to stop. What I have criticized is lapses in judgement and failure to treat the meerkats ethically in the manner they deserve.

I understand people are upset over Flowers death, but to say the camera crew should interfere is wrong. The whole point is to let nature play out the way it would if we weren't there. I don't remember people saying the camera men should have gathered up the exiled kats or bottle feed the abandoned pups.Why should it be different for Flower. The camera crews are not there 24/7. They go in and get the footage they need, close ups,longshots ect. To save a meerkat would mean screwing with the research and it is in Animal Planet's contract not to do so.

I know it sucks that Flower died and I hate it. The show has a warning at the beginning that it is the life and death of a family of Meerkats. If we want only to see the "good" side of nature, I think some people are more suited to just go visit the zoo. How right would it have been to only save Flower when other kats have died? Where would it end? People patroling the plains saving animals in trouble? Just like in life sometimes nature doesn't have a happy ending.

quote:

I saw Rocket Dog get radio-collared at a time that we were led to believe she was pregnant and during a very stressful drought in the Kalahari. So they anesthetized a pregnant female who is an inexperienced DF who is already stressed under new leadership and who is basically starving to death? Whoah - that crossed the line for me. And then guess what - she has a miscarriage. I am not saying the anesthesia caused it. But might it have added to Rocket Dog's stress? The answer is yes.

This is something I had not considered and I agree with you.