Echoes

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@ichikawa_zoo Remove the aggressive monkeys so you won't be endangered or tame them, what benefit do you get from raising them, only to harm you...control them & set some rules to the rough ones, even w/o the viewers, they are already rough & do fight, humans aren't the real cause.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@I_love_Luigigi @ichikawa_zoo Well said, train their monkeys to be more tamed, since no harm should also apply among animals, not just to humans...making the viewers as if they are the cause of their fights.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@ichikawa_zoo Your visitors are already few...if you like, you might as well limit up to 100 only in that area...

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@YVemula5063 What if the person who opens and closes the gate and feeds him inside are still his old caretakers? So, it might look more of training him to hide and be separated during feeding... so does that achieve the goal of true integration?

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@YVemula5063 Critical thinking is needed. If the purpose is to separate him with the caretakers, who opens the gate and who feeds him there? Another human being. That defeats the purpose... how does that break a human bond? He can be detached to the old, but still is dependent on another.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@YVemula5063 Wow, so there's a gate, locked behind bars, entrapping him...is that freedom of choice?

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@YVemula5063 https://t.co/zWHMkgVxxJ

[Echoes @rycreate08]

Is Punch being grabbed to get in during feeding? Is this freedom of choice? They can touch & force Punch to get in while the aggressive monkeys remain untouched. What kind of care is that, forcing an animal? That's harming him, making him feel helpless, no choice but to comply.😤

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Is Punch an experiment to test, where his feelings don't count?

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Myth 3: "He has a choice to go in, choosing a peaceful indoor area." For choice to exist, there must be the freedom to say "no" and walk away. There's a gate that prevents him from coming back outside. They're using their power to control him than for him to voluntarily follow.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Myth 2: "This is standard behavioral conditioning."
He isn’t learning to live without people. He’ll still link feeding to a human—now to someone who isolates and locks him. They’re not breaking a bond; they’re etching a coercive, stressful one into his memory.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Myth 1: "They are doing this to break his attachment to humans."
Who guides Punch through the gate? Who lures him inside? Who locks the gate? All by humans. How can anyone claim this breaks his attachment when every single step of this process completely relies on humans?

[Echoes @rycreate08]

Myth 4: “The schedule will strategically remove his habits.”

Stretching which days he’s allowed out is scheduled psychological deprivation. Using structural locks, high‑pressure luring, & forced separation to change his habit is still coercion, not earning his trust to follow.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

Is Punch being grabbed to get in during feeding? Is this freedom of choice? They can touch & force Punch to get in while the aggressive monkeys remain untouched. What kind of care is that, forcing an animal? That's harming him, making him feel helpless, no choice but to comply.😤

[Echoes @rycreate08]

Myth 3: "He has a choice to go in, choosing a peaceful indoor area." For choice to exist, there must be the freedom to say "no" and walk away. There's a gate that prevents him from coming back outside. They're using their power to control him than for him to voluntarily follow.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

Myth 2: "This is standard behavioral conditioning."
He isn’t learning to live without people. He’ll still link feeding to a human—now to someone who isolates and locks him. They’re not breaking a bond; they’re etching a coercive, stressful one into his memory.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

Myth 1: "They are doing this to break his attachment to humans."
Who guides Punch through the gate? Who lures him inside? Who locks the gate? All by humans. How can anyone claim this breaks his attachment when every single step of this process completely relies on humans?

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Who guides Punch through the gate? Who lures him inside? Who locks him behind bars? All humans.

How does this break a human bond? It doesn’t. He still associates and relies on humans for food—now with someone who isolates and confines him. That’s what’s etched in his memory.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Locking a highly social, intelligent animal in isolation is not 'preventing attachment', it is active psychological deprivation. How does it feel to be trapped &separated from others when fed, not just the caretakers? That feels more like a punishment, than positive training.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

@monkeynearpunch Humane animal welfare relies on voluntary cooperation built over time with patience. If a facility uses structural locking, high-pressure luring, & forced separation to change his habit, they are choosing to dominate/overpower him than to earn his trust to voluntarily cooperate.

[Echoes @rycreate08]

It does break the bond with his old caretakers, but it reinforces a new bond by force, if the caretaker is new. He is still depending on a caretaker for food. If the grabbing is true, he may feel petrified that he will be grabbed again for food.