(CNN) -- An online petition to save a healthy young giraffe from death has failed, despite thousands of signatures from animal lovers.

Copenhagen Zoo said it euthanized the male, named Marius, on Sunday because of a duty to avoid inbreeding.

After an autopsy, "Marius" was dismembered in front of a zoo audience that included children, and fed to the zoo's lions.

Despite online uproar over the move and reports of last-minute attempts to save the animal, the zoo in the Danish capital said it had no place for Marius in its giraffe herd.

"Our giraffes are part of an international breeding program, which has a purpose of ensuring a sound and healthy population of giraffes," Bengt Holst, scientific director at Copenhagen Zoo, told CNN. "It can only be done by matching the genetic composition of the various animals with the available space. ... When giraffes breed as well as they do now, then you will inevitably run into so-called surplus problems now and then."

Fed to the lions

Marius was killed by a bolt gun, not a lethal injection, which would contaminate the meat.

The carcass was used partly for research and partly to feed carnivores at the zoo -- lions, tigers, and leopards.

"In this case we would never throw away 200 kilograms of meat," Holst said.

He said the giraffe was 2 years old, and while he was not officially named, his keepers had called him Marius to identify him.

The giraffe's impending death had sparked outrage online, with more than 27,000 people signing a "Save Marius" petition, appealing for a last-minute change of heart.

"The zoo has raised him so it is their responsibility to find him a home," author Maria Evans wrote on the petition site.

Copenhagen Zoo said that due to a massive debate on its Facebook page, it had published a Q&...ts website.

"It is not possible to transfer the giraffe to another zoo as it will cause inbreeding," it said.

Several zoos volunteered to take Marius in.

The UK's Yorkshire Wildlife Park, which says it has a state-of-the-art giraffe house and the capacity for an extra male, was among several places which put in offers to take him.

International breeding program

Copenhagen Zoo said only zoos that follow certain rules can be part of international breeding programs.

In Europe, these are members of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. The association counts just over 300 members and under its rules, inbreeding among giraffes is to be avoided.

The association said in a statement Sunday that it supports the zoo's decision.

Despite Marius being healthy, his genes are already well represented at the zoo. Releasing the giraffe into the wild would be unlikely to succeed, Copenhagen Zoo said.

Contraceptives "have a number of unwanted side effects on the internal organs and we would therefore apply a poorer animal welfare if we did not euthanize," it said.

It also made clear that its policy was not to sell the animals.

Outside autopsy

Holst told CNN the autopsy had been performed outside, given the giraffe's size, and watched by the public, including children if their parents allowed them to.

"It is a good opportunity to invite our guests to watch. ... We are here to educate people and that is a good way to show people what a giraffe looks like," he said.

"People could come into this area if they wanted to. They came with children, without children, we had a lot of people."

He said a group of about 16 protesters had gathered outside the zoo on Sunday morning and that he had tried to speak with them.

He said all options had been explored before the decision had been made.

"We have always been very open about it, explaining why we are doing it," he said.

On average, he said some 20 to 30 animals, including goats, antelopes and wild boar, were culled for the same reason every year at the zoo.

"This is the first giraffe. ... I do not understand the outrage -- we are all used to on a current basis of animals being culled in the wild," he said.

"We have to ensure a safe healthy population for the future, and you can only have a healthy population if you control and coordinate your breeding efforts."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/09/world/europe/denmark-zoo-giraffe/index.html

Why not just castrate him?

somehow they remind me of Nazis, I mean the way they try to rationalize and justify this act which was, by all means, cruel and avoidable

I think one ratonale is it's happening in the food realm all the time, right? Cows, Pigs, Buffalo, dogs, dolphin, cat, horse... etc Just feeding stuff to people for profit instead of lions.

We kill millions of healthy chickens, pigs, cows all the time

why didn't they just put him in the cage with the lions?

why not just stop cagin animals for entertainment?

why not donate the meat to less fortunate people?

lazycrockett said:

SuperSoulFighter said:

lazycrockett said:

Why not just castrate him?

Because then he would still take up the space for another giraffe they can use for breeding. It made the Dutch tv where the manager of the zoo in Rotterdam said he understood the decision (it happens more often) but he wouldn't have it broadcast on tv with an audience of children. I totally agree with that. [Edited 2/16/14 1:11am] [Edited 2/16/14 1:12am]

But from my understanding other zoos were willing to take him even though they knew that he wasn't a breeding match.

Did a crowd seriously watch them actually kill it? That's actually the most fucked up part of this story if that is the case.

Other Zoo's offered to take the Giraffe, there was no need to murder this beautiful animal.

Comment from Axl Rose:


MARIUS

The open letter Axl tweeted:

"Over the past week I've put out a few intentionally sarcastic tweets in response to the killing of the 18 month old baby male giraffe named Marius by the Copenhagen Zoo in Denmark. And in that regard I think that without more information or a better understanding of not just how this particular breeding program works or why it's believed to be necessary and seemingly without room for exception or public opinion... to the average person it would seem that...

1.) Marius could have been spared and was a waste of a healthy young animal's life.

2.) The manner in which he was if not euthanized then disposed of seemed particularly barbaric, unnecessary and a vulgar or grotesque display of inconsideration and complete disregard for public sentiments adding a level of morbid spectacle and horrendousness difficult for most to comprehend by doing so not just in front of but for what seems some misguided or twisted sense of educational purposes for children.

and...

3.) The seemingly cold and clinical responses and attitudes regarding this unfortunate event by those involved appearing to be somewhat defiant, arrogant and even seeming somewhat perversely satisfied with themselves and their actions going as far as to express "pride" in their decisions comes off as completely heartless in regard to the animals and seems extremely disrespectful toward the general public on this issue.

Perhaps their comments were taken out of context? Perhaps there's something lost in translation? I don't know that anyone is trying to say or act in this situation as if they truly know more than these particular or any professional animal caretakers or zoologists etc. but I do know that at present plenty of lay people worldwide do not understand or approve of what took place here. And again without more information and better understanding of the breeding program and why this was deemed the appropriate course of action this event seems misguided and a crime against the very nature those in such positions are thought to be involved with as protectors and caretakers of such animals.

One can attempt to justify these choices as those taking into consideration a bigger picture scientifically but in my view there seems to be more than one perspective to that picture and it would appear that adherence to such a rigid or strict nature of such clinical focus may be disregarding the public impact of their actions.

For most normal everyday people that love, care about and enjoy animals this event has been a tragedy. An unexpected, unimaginable and what for many is most devastating a seemingly avoidable horror show that somehow seems lost on the professionals involved and those speaking for the zoo a facility that's in my opinion thought to exist for the animals, the public, educational purposes and science in as best a sense of harmony as possible. Just as it's a privilege for the public to visit, view and experience these animals it's also a privilege to work with and care for the animals and have the opportunity do so while interacting and/or working with the public.

Unfortunately somehow in this instance all or much of that seems to have been forgotten.


Axl"

https://www.facebook.com/gunsnroses/posts/10152245569699311

https://twitter.com/axlro...2287044608

Getting crack pots like Axl involved doesn't help the issue.

lazycrockett said:

Getting crack pots like Axl involved doesn't help the issue.

Sorry.

lol Axl Rose cares about a dead giraffe lol

JoeTyler said:

somehow they remind me of Nazis, I mean the way they try to rationalize and justify this act which was, by all means, cruel and avoidable

Are you a vegetarian? Do you know what lions eat every day?

I guess that's what happens when people deny reality and watch that crazy disney movies with talking animals all the time.

All I got to say is, a deer/antelope or two make a mistake in their sense of direction at our wild animal park, it didn't work out too well for a few of them. Doesn't happen often but it's been known to. Which I guess is totally different from the handlers killing one their unwanted exhibits and feeding it to the lions/tigers. So I guess that was kind of pointless.

I'm not really sure how zoos (sp?) normally feed their carnivores, obviously it's not normally on public display. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about, something had to die I know that. I wouldn't want to watch the killing process myself, I'm sure it hardens you after a while if you see it enough.

[Edited 2/21/14 17:04pm]