lifestyle

Life's no hoot for owls in Tokyo cafes, activists say

27 Comments
By James Clayton-Daniels

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

If they put the animals first they would close down these places. Tethering and caging birds is incredibly cruel anyway - these are night birds, hunters, being kept indoors in brightness. It is abuse, pure and simple, and keeping them alive in order to maintain an industry is not less abusive.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Cruelty for what? Disgusting.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Part of the dark side of kawaii culture. Nature can't be allowed to be natural, it has to be confined, commodified, and constrained in order to fit the product consumers will pay for. Japanese consumers are generally not as greedy as people from my own country, but when it comes to fluffy, their appetites know no limit.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

A LOT if this also applies to Japanese """zoo's""""

OK a few cats in a café fine, but owls....not a good idea imo you only mess them up as most are mostly nocturnal doh!!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

When you put an animal into a non natural environment for the "Cute" factor you cease to be recognised as an individual just a commodity.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Unfortunately many J ppl just don't get wildlife or even pets and simply don't know 'how' to (and sometimes 'why') care for animals, what to do/not do, what's animal abuse/or not etc.

Their lack of sensitivity and attitudes towards animals is often mind-blowing. Many simply have no idea.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

These cafes are just wrong.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Generally speaking - in Japan many still have an insatiable appetite for confining and showing animals (wild & otherwise) in circumstances far removed from their natural or preferred comfortable environment.

Zoos etc for money, exist all over the world, which imo is degrading in most cases, but in Japan the places where animals are confined for the paying public number in 100s & 100s.

Pandering to the "kawaii" needs of customers, has little to do with 21stC animal care.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I went to a zoo in another country that 'displayed' the nocturnal animals only at, ready? Night. The zoo had a night ticket price just for the nocturnal animals. An Australian zoo allowed people to hold a koala (a traditionally solitary creature) but one koala 'worked' only for about 10 minutes maximum.

What would happen if these owl cafes were only open when the owl was awake? ie. Night. Bankruptcy or only drunks would show up. That's why the owl is forced to be awake and fondled when it would rather be asleep dreaming of delicious dead mice.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Is there a limit to what they'll put in these cafes? The food must be plain awful if they're resorting to "employing" every single damn animal on the planet.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Those amimal cafe also exist in other countries like malaisya, london, etc.

JT reports majorly about Japan.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

When they think of animal abuse, people think of kicking or hitting animals, but it isn’t limited to that,” Okada added. “Confining an animal to a small space is certainly a form of abuse. Showing them off like products is also a stressful situation. They can’t move and drink freely.”

Well, I guess this womanhas never been to the Okinawa zoo, it's a disgrace.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

This article is written by someone who has no idea about owls. owls are stationary most of the time. They basically only fly to catch prey. In owl cafes they are fed correctly. Kept out of the harsh environment. They are not abused. The owls have been around humans since they were in eggs. They also have imprinted with their humans so they see them as family.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

"...how to play with them..."

FFS! They are not toys.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

@LogicalFallacyKiller

This article is written by someone who has no idea about owls

I'd say the same about your post. I really don't know where to begin. Such staggering arrogance that you believe these creatures appreciate their imprisonment.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

How do we know what animals prefer or appreciate?

We don't as we cannot communicate with them and thus we project/attribute our own feelings onto them.

Don't the Bible state that animals are there for us, etc

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

@LogicalFallacyKiller

You are obviously an expert. Open the cafe windows at the end of the day, see how many of them fly back in the morning.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

They might leave but can/will they survive in the wild?

Or starve to death or fall prey to predators?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

, and when the owls look tired, they can rest,” she said.

How the hell would they know? The arrogance of humans is mind-boggling. What a disgusting practise.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I would never put any animal locked up in a tiny cage for my own pleasure just for a couple of minutes a day. I would have a dog/cat though and let them run all over the house

3 ( +4 / -1 )

No animal should be used for human entertainment. This includes: cafes, zoo's and aquariums. It is cruel and demonstrates a complete lack of compassion towards the animals well being...

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Shut them down.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I like owls but I won't be going to any of these cafes. It's cruel to keep owls in a noisy, brightly lit environment. These places should only exhibit animals that are used to bright lights and noise, for example crows or pigeons. The one in Sendai has diversified to pigs and meerkats.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

browny1MAR. 05, 2017 - 11:17AM JST

Generally speaking - in Japan many still have an insatiable appetite for confining and showing animals (wild & otherwise) in circumstances far removed from their natural or preferred comfortable environment.

You mean dogs, cats, hamsters, parrots, budgerigars and so on kept as pets at homes in America?

towingthelineMAR. 06, 2017 - 10:27AM JST

No animal should be used for human entertainment. This includes: cafes, zoo's and aquariums. It is cruel and demonstrates a complete lack of compassion towards the animals well being...

Why stop there? What about pet animals?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Why stop there? What about pet animals?

It's a fair point, but there are differences in some animals. Dogs and cats have been genetically domesticated over hundreds of years, as have horses and other species. They may become feral, but never again wild. Whilst other animals (such as parrots) may be tamed, their natural wild urges remain. Owls are wild animals & totally unsuitable as pets or cafe curios; if you visit an owl cafe you're funding their cruelty.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

CH3 - thank you.

I was commenting on Japan - Not pet owners in America, please keep on topic.

I explicitly said "confining & showing".

While animal enclosures of all sorts are world wide - the sheer number of facilities here is huge. From the hundreds of animal cafes to zoos to aquariums to caged animals at tourist spots, you are never far from seeing confined animals on show.

And while not making a direct comment on "cafes" as I've never entered one and never wish to, but I have seen quite a few other facilities which frankly leave a lot to be desired in the ways of animal welfare. Dirty, cramped, boring, noisy with gaggles of giggling paying customers wiilling to be wowed by the experience. For example a sight seeing spot in my prefecture has monkeys in a cage for no ther reason than - well - to have monkeys in a cage. And also for the paying customers to have something to look at while slurping their ice-creams. A miserable miserable sight.

But people love the "kawaiiness"

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Ok, people....will you thumb me down, or answer my question?

If, as most on here claim, it is "wrong" to do this to these animals, then there must be a corresponding moral law that prohibits this. Any moral law necessitates a corresponding moral framework as its grounding.

My question simply is, which moral framework are you appealing to when the claim is made that it is wrong to cage these animals?

Note: to claim that it is obvious and does not require the grounding to be articulated is merely to say, "You are wrong for not agreeing with me." Furthermore, to claim that there is no moral law that prohibits this, but that it is a social convention would be to admit that a society may deem it correct to cage these animals and one would be mistaken to assert that it was wrong for "them" to cage them.

So, which will it be? Thumbs down, or putting your money where your mouth is?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites