Guest guest Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Greenwashing Zoos Topics: animal rights | international | marketing | science Source: Sydney Morning Herald, June 20, 2007 David Hancocks, a former director and architect of zoos in the United States and Australia, is skeptical of the conservation benefits often claimed by zoos. While many zoos tout breeding as a success story, Hancocks sees it as " merely basic zoo business: zoos must breed their animals to preserve their collections. Hardly any animals born in zoos are introduced to the wild. " Despite this, he wrote in an opinion column, " They nonetheless loudly position themselves as leaders in wildlife conservation. In truth, government and non-government agencies are most successful in restoring habitat and reintroducing wild species. Zoos play an occasional minor role - and want all the glory. " While a supporter of what he describes as a handful of the " best zoos, " he is not persuaded by the claims of many zoos that their re-designed enclosures improve conditions for the animals: " The new zoos, sans cages, make visitors feel better, but it is all deception. The animals typically have no contact with living plants, separated from them by electric wires. " Yet such greenwashing attracts more visitors. When I see the price that you pay I don't wanna grow up I don't ever want to be that way I don't wanna grow up Seems that folks turn into things that they never want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007  If it weren't for zoos, the average urban/suburban dweller would have NO contact with wildlife other than squirrels, pigeons and rats. Such people would probably have no interest in doing anything to preserve wildlife, either. Zoos serve the very valuable function of turning people into animal lovers, conservationists and species preservationists. IMHO it is better that a few wild animals live in captivity than that all become extinct because nobody cares about them. - fraggle vegan-network ; vegan chat ; TFHB ; hef Wednesday, June 20, 2007 12:48 PM Greenwashing Zoos Greenwashing ZoosTopics: animal rights | international | marketing | scienceSource: Sydney Morning Herald, June 20, 2007David Hancocks, a former director and architect of zoos in the United States and Australia, is skeptical of the conservation benefits often claimed by zoos. While many zoos tout breeding as a success story, Hancocks sees it as "merely basic zoo business: zoos must breed their animals to preserve their collections. Hardly any animals born in zoos are introduced to the wild." Despite this, he wrote in an opinion column, "They nonetheless loudly position themselves as leaders in wildlife conservation. In truth, government and non-government agencies are most successful in restoring habitat and reintroducing wild species. Zoos play an occasional minor role - and want all the glory." While a supporter of what he describes as a handful of the "best zoos," he is not persuaded by the claims of many zoos that their re-designed enclosures improve conditions for the animals: "The new zoos, sans cages, make visitors feel better, but it is all deception. The animals typically have no contact with living plants, separated from them by electric wires." Yet such greenwashing attracts more visitors.When I see the price that you payI don't wanna grow upI don't ever want to be that wayI don't wanna grow upSeems that folks turn into thingsthat they never want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 I agree, very few zoos have captive breeding programmes for endangered species, and most are about making money at the expense of confined wild animals. Very few animals have anywhere near the amount of space they require, so it is cruel in my opinion. The Valley Vegan..............fraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote: I disagree while some conservation happens in zoos, the majority is just a freak show. Shows are set up to draw people in, so they bring in "hyped" or popular animals...so you end up with things like white tigers, ligers, er wot have you. too much of a zoo is just people gawking at "the funny animals". IMO, setting up critters for our enjoyment just belittles them in the minds of almost everyone. sure some kid might see an animal in a zoo and go "wow, neat..i'd like to learn more", but i fear most just go "neat, look at the monkeys, lets agitate them cuz its funny" something wrong with placing an animal behind bars just for our enjoyment...i doubt very many elephants are happy stuck in their confinement... if someone wants to see animals, and can't afford/can't travel to go see em where they reside..well, there are a billion programs on tv about em....read a book..look on the net... sorry, for me, saying "putting a few in captivity is ok" is akin to saying "its ok to experiment on a few animals, because think of all the lives it saves..." er "its ok if some people are downtrodden, as long as it helps the rest of us out" my opinion of course... Oom Yaaqub Jun 20, 2007 10:12 PM Re: Greenwashing Zoos  If it weren't for zoos, the average urban/suburban dweller would have NO contact with wildlife other than squirrels, pigeons and rats. Such people would probably have no interest in doing anything to preserve wildlife, either. Zoos serve the very valuable function of turning people into animal lovers, conservationists and species preservationists. IMHO it is better that a few wild animals live in captivity than that all become extinct because nobody cares about them. - fraggle vegan-network ; vegan chat ; TFHB ; hef Wednesday, June 20, 2007 12:48 PM Greenwashing Zoos Greenwashing ZoosTopics: animal rights | international | marketing | scienceSource: Sydney Morning Herald, June 20, 2007David Hancocks, a former director and architect of zoos in the United States and Australia, is skeptical of the conservation benefits often claimed by zoos. While many zoos tout breeding as a success story, Hancocks sees it as "merely basic zoo business: zoos must breed their animals to preserve their collections. Hardly any animals born in zoos are introduced to the wild." Despite this, he wrote in an opinion column, "They nonetheless loudly position themselves as leaders in wildlife conservation. In truth, government and non-government agencies are most successful in restoring habitat and reintroducing wild species. Zoos play an occasional minor role - and want all the glory." While a supporter of what he describes as a handful of the "best zoos," he is not persuaded by the claims of many zoos that their re-designed enclosures improve conditions for the animals: "The new zoos, sans cages, make visitors feel better, but it is all deception. The animals typically have no contact with living plants, separated from them by electric wires." Yet such greenwashing attracts more visitors.When I see the price that you payI don't wanna grow upI don't ever want to be that wayI don't wanna grow upSeems that folks turn into thingsthat they never want When I see the price that you pay I don't wanna grow up I don't ever want to be that way I don't wanna grow up Seems that folks turn into things that they never want Peter H Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 i wasn't speaking of roadside attractions either take a look at any major zoo...bronx, san diego, los angeles, denver, etc...some animals get space, and then there's the monkey cages..or the meerkat moat, or wotever cramped places designed so PEOPLE can see the animal no zoo wants to design something where the paying customers never see the reclusive animal... sure, you might have one or two places specially designed so the nocturnal creature can hide..but, most displays are designed so people can go "hey, lookit the funny animal..can i have popcorn now..." Oom Yaaqub Jun 22, 2007 12:07 AM Re: Greenwashing Zoos [[ I agree, very few zoos have captive breeding programmes for endangered species, and most are about making money at the expense of confined wild animals. Very few animals have anywhere near the amount of space they require, so it is cruel in my opinion.]] I wasn't referring to roadside attractions. A zoo is supposed to be a scientific institution and if it is making a profit something is seriously wrong--they should lose their credentials. Roadside "zoos" shouldn't be allowed to exist at all. I grew up attending a zoo that didn't charge admission--the National Zoo in Washington, DC. Today I regularly visit the National Aviary in Pittsburgh, which consists of a series of huge free flight naturalistic habitats. People can walk through, but only along paths. There is plenty of room for privacy for the birds. Do you know how many young people start their careers in biology, veterinary medicine, etc., by volunteering at wonderful places like that? I guess I'm lucky because I've always lived near excellent zoos that really were in the business of breeding endangered species as well as educating the public. Not that there isn't plenty of room for improvement at even the best zoos, of course. I would rather see fewer species with ample room and enrichment for the ones they do have. If they don't have room for the big cats, say, then obviously they shouldn't keep them. It's hard to deny that zoo animals do live longer, healthier lives than their wild counterparts, something that obviously isn't true of human prisoners. When I see the price that you pay I don't wanna grow up I don't ever want to be that way I don't wanna grow up Seems that folks turn into things that they never want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 apparently they do run away.... they just have radio transmitters so, if one runs away from free food, they just go track em down and capture them Oom Yaaqub Jun 22, 2007 3:40 PM Re: Greenwashing Zoos  [[no zoo wants to design something where the paying customers never see the reclusive animal...]] There is free admission at several major zoos like the one in Washington, DC, and even the zoos that charge DON'T get most of their funds that way. Even if zoos were focused primarily on the public, today nobody wants to look at animals behind bars in a barren environment. The trend is on habitats as natural as possible. I've spent all day at the aviary in Pittsburgh just trying to spot a particular reclusive species, often with no luck. But it's still a wonderful, soul-refreshing place to be for those of us who don't have an actual rainforest available. Urban people NEED these places, and the animals benefit too. The aviary has regular summer time outdoor shows with trained parrots and other species. They are not clipped or pinioned in any way, so how come they don't just fly away? On a few occasions they have "spooked" and taken off, but they always come back, even though the city is full of tree covered, inaccessible cliffs that would seem tempting to a bird. The same goes for the golden marmosets that range freely at the National Zoo in DC. Why don't they scamper off to live free in Rock Creek Park? The last time I was there, a native deer had wandered onto the zoo grounds. People were trying to chase her back into the park. She knew a good thing when she saw it, I guess. I realize there a lot of ignorant people who bring their kids to the zoo with the "look at the monkey, have some popcorn" mentality, but they shouldn't be allowed to spoil it for the rest of us. Zoos at their best can be a symbiotic experience for the humans and animals alike. We need to think in terms of improving them, not abolishing them. When I see the price that you pay I don't wanna grow up I don't ever want to be that way I don't wanna grow up Seems that folks turn into things that they never want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 i think we'd be better off building parks and greenzones, then tossing money into caging animals saying "why don't they fly away" doesn't really work fer me tho..some do, and, its also like asking "why didn't the african slaves run away in the 1850's?" ..some did...some where caught..some were killed... i see deer in oakland all the freakin time...doesn't mean this is ideal habitat fer em.... Oom Yaaqub Jun 22, 2007 3:40 PM Re: Greenwashing Zoos  [[no zoo wants to design something where the paying customers never see the reclusive animal...]] There is free admission at several major zoos like the one in Washington, DC, and even the zoos that charge DON'T get most of their funds that way. Even if zoos were focused primarily on the public, today nobody wants to look at animals behind bars in a barren environment. The trend is on habitats as natural as possible. I've spent all day at the aviary in Pittsburgh just trying to spot a particular reclusive species, often with no luck. But it's still a wonderful, soul-refreshing place to be for those of us who don't have an actual rainforest available. Urban people NEED these places, and the animals benefit too. The aviary has regular summer time outdoor shows with trained parrots and other species. They are not clipped or pinioned in any way, so how come they don't just fly away? On a few occasions they have "spooked" and taken off, but they always come back, even though the city is full of tree covered, inaccessible cliffs that would seem tempting to a bird. The same goes for the golden marmosets that range freely at the National Zoo in DC. Why don't they scamper off to live free in Rock Creek Park? The last time I was there, a native deer had wandered onto the zoo grounds. People were trying to chase her back into the park. She knew a good thing when she saw it, I guess. I realize there a lot of ignorant people who bring their kids to the zoo with the "look at the monkey, have some popcorn" mentality, but they shouldn't be allowed to spoil it for the rest of us. Zoos at their best can be a symbiotic experience for the humans and animals alike. We need to think in terms of improving them, not abolishing them. When I see the price that you pay I don't wanna grow up I don't ever want to be that way I don't wanna grow up Seems that folks turn into things that they never want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 >i think we'd be better off building parks and greenzones, then >tossing money into caging animals > >saying " why don't they fly away " doesn't really work fer me >tho..some do, and, its also like asking " why didn't the african >slaves run away in the 1850's? " ..some did...some where caught..some >were killed... > >i see deer in oakland all the freakin time...doesn't mean this is >ideal habitat fer em.... heh, i have been watching a coyote in my backyard for the last hour, lounging in the setting sun. and i'm in the middle of urban san diego (but right next to the sprawling balboa park, where they live). the come around looking for squirrels, gophers, and my formerly indoor/outdoor cats yoshimi and bruce (who became indoor companions once wile e. started hanging out). blake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 [[heh, i have been watching a coyote in my backyard for the last hour, lounging in the setting sun. and i'm in the middle of urban san diego (but right next to the sprawling balboa park, where they live). ]] Here in Pittsburgh, it's routine to see see wild turkeys, deer and hawks in parks and cliff sides within the city limits. (I'm sure we have coyote too but the Eastern coyote is pretty wary.) I think we still need a chance to see tropical animals, arctic animals, etc. People who fall in love with polar bears in a really good exhibit are people who are going to care about global warming enough to change their lifestyle. When you've spent as many hours as I have in tropical zoo environments you become especially passionate about saving the world's rain forests. In fact this is why I became a vegetarian in the first place. Of far greater importance is that zoos are places where animals are studied in order to better protect the same species in the wild. Why does nobody understand that accredited zoos do not make a profit? http://www.waza.org/conservation/wzacs.php#chapter9 Basically, if you can justify keeping a dog, cat, or any other domesticated animal, it's hard to criticize zoos per say. OTOH it's easy to criticize actual practices of specific zoos. No accredited zoo should be allowed to keep a particular species just because it is large, popular with the public, or for the sake of a "complete collection." If they don't have the space and wherewithal to keep them properly then they have no right to do so. Is this really so different than how most of us feel about cats and dogs, BTW? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 "Basically, if you can justify keeping a dog, cat, or any other domesticated animal, it's hard to criticize zoos per say. " I so tottally disagree........animals in zoos are not rescued animals as my companions are. The Valley Vegan................Oom Yaaqub <oomyaaqub wrote: [[heh, i have been watching a coyote in my backyard for the last hour, lounging in the setting sun. and i'm in the middle of urban san diego (but right next to the sprawling balboa park, where they live). ]] Here in Pittsburgh, it's routine to see see wild turkeys, deer and hawks in parks and cliff sides within the city limits. (I'm sure we have coyote too but the Eastern coyote is pretty wary.) I think we still need a chance to see tropical animals, arctic animals, etc. People who fall in love with polar bears in a really good exhibit are people who are going to care about global warming enough to change their lifestyle. When you've spent as many hours as I have in tropical zoo environments you become especially passionate about saving the world's rain forests. In fact this is why I became a vegetarian in the first place. Of far greater importance is that zoos are places where animals are studied in order to better protect the same species in the wild. Why does nobody understand that accredited zoos do not make a profit? http://www.waza.org/conservation/wzacs.php#chapter9 Basically, if you can justify keeping a dog, cat, or any other domesticated animal, it's hard to criticize zoos per say. OTOH it's easy to criticize actual practices of specific zoos. No accredited zoo should be allowed to keep a particular species just because it is large, popular with the public, or for the sake of a "complete collection." If they don't have the space and wherewithal to keep them properly then they have no right to do so. Is this really so different than how most of us feel about cats and dogs, BTW? Peter H Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 I agree that cats and dogs different from zoo animals because they are domesticated. Zoo animals have not been domesticated, are not tamed and would likely do a lot better in the wild than our pets would. We dont' go into the wild to capture our dogs and cats that we have in hour homes. They've been domesticated for generations, their genetics have been changed from their wild ancestors. If Zoo animals are rescued, wouldn't that be called a sanctuary, not a zoo? Zoos are places for animals to be on display. The exposure to these beautiful creatures could help sensitize our children to animals in general, but it may also teach them that it's OK to jail our animals just like we jail our humans. Having pets/companions, I get to enjoy their personalities and to see them as sentient beings. Most of the public who view zoo animals don't get to live with them, enjoy their personalities or see them as sentient beings. The public walks by, observes them if they are lucky, and leaves them behind. They don't have to assume any responsibility for their well being. Marcy - Peter VV Sunday, June 24, 2007 7:13 AM Re: Greenwashing Zoos "Basically, if you can justify keeping a dog, cat, or any other domesticated animal, it's hard to criticize zoos per say. " I so tottally disagree........animals in zoos are not rescued animals as my companions are. The Valley Vegan................Oom Yaaqub <oomyaaqub (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote: [[heh, i have been watching a coyote in my backyard for the last hour, lounging in the setting sun. and i'm in the middle of urban san diego (but right next to the sprawling balboa park, where they live). ]] Here in Pittsburgh, it's routine to see see wild turkeys, deer and hawks in parks and cliff sides within the city limits. (I'm sure we have coyote too but the Eastern coyote is pretty wary.) I think we still need a chance to see tropical animals, arctic animals, etc. People who fall in love with polar bears in a really good exhibit are people who are going to care about global warming enough to change their lifestyle. When you've spent as many hours as I have in tropical zoo environments you become especially passionate about saving the world's rain forests. In fact this is why I became a vegetarian in the first place. Of far greater importance is that zoos are places where animals are studied in order to better protect the same species in the wild. Why does nobody understand that accredited zoos do not make a profit? http://www.waza.org/conservation/wzacs.php#chapter9 Basically, if you can justify keeping a dog, cat, or any other domesticated animal, it's hard to criticize zoos per say. OTOH it's easy to criticize actual practices of specific zoos. No accredited zoo should be allowed to keep a particular species just because it is large, popular with the public, or for the sake of a "complete collection." If they don't have the space and wherewithal to keep them properly then they have no right to do so. Is this really so different than how most of us feel about cats and dogs, BTW? Peter H Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 >I agree that cats and dogs different from zoo animals because they are >domesticated. Zoo animals have not been domesticated, are not tamed and >would likely do a lot better in the wild than our pets would.]] Some of the animals we think of as zoo animals, such as Asian elephants, are in fact domesticated. The more intelligent zoo animals are generally treated as if they were domesticated, at least to some extent. Elephants are worked with daily, as are seal lions and many other species. In the Pittsburgh zoo, the elephants are walked daily throughout the grounds prior to opening hours. This continues even though a keeper was accidentally killed not too long ago. The committment to the animals' well being takes precedence even over the keeper's safety. That's what I call a first rate zoo. [[ We dont' go into the wild to capture our dogs and cats that we have in hour homes. ]] Zoos don't do this either except when necessary to maintain essential genetic diversity. The focus is on preserving the species. There are definitely cat breeders who introduce wild blood into their lines--that means hybridization with closely related wild species. This is where some of the new breeds intended to resemble wild cats came from. The same is true for dogs that are intentionally crossbred with wolves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 Ok, got it. Zoos don't capture the animals they keep. And they get walked around before they are put back on display for the public. But, it's still not a sanctuary. It's still a zoo. The animals are kept and they are on display. They are not in their native habitat, and they are not free to come & go as they please. Many people own pets as some sort of display piece as well. I don't agree with this style of pet "ownership". I didn't intend to have pets, but they were abandoned and needed a home. Instead of zoos, why wouldn't you be advocating for wild animal sanctuaries? - Oom Yaaqub Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:59 AM Re: Greenwashing Zoos >I agree that cats and dogs different from zoo animals because they are >domesticated. Zoo animals have not been domesticated, are not tamed and >would likely do a lot better in the wild than our pets would.]]Some of the animals we think of as zoo animals, such as Asian elephants, are in fact domesticated. The more intelligent zoo animals are generally treated as if they were domesticated, at least to some extent. Elephants are worked with daily, as are seal lions and many other species. In the Pittsburgh zoo, the elephants are walked daily throughout the grounds prior to opening hours. This continues even though a keeper was accidentally killed not too long ago. The committment to the animals' well being takes precedence even over the keeper's safety. That's what I call a first rate zoo.[[ We dont' go into the wild to capture our dogs and cats that we have in hour homes. ]]Zoos don't do this either except when necessary to maintain essential genetic diversity. The focus is on preserving the species. There are definitely cat breeders who introduce wild blood into their lines--that means hybridization with closely related wild species. This is where some of the new breeds intended to resemble wild cats came from. The same is true for dogs that are intentionally crossbred with wolves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 [[i so tottally disagree........animals in zoos are not rescued animals as my companions are.]] Some of them are, as a matter of fact. Also, although I commend you for taking in rescues, most people don't get their pets that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 [[instead of zoos, why wouldn't you be advocating for wild animal sanctuaries?]] It isn't either/or. I'm very much in favor of wild animal sanctuaries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 sorry i just think we'd be better of with parks, wildlife areas and the like, the "zoos", which when you boil it down, are just prisons for our enjoyment... Oom Yaaqub Jun 24, 2007 3:41 AM Re: Greenwashing Zoos [[heh, i have been watching a coyote in my backyard for the last hour, lounging in the setting sun. and i'm in the middle of urban san diego (but right next to the sprawling balboa park, where they live). ]] Here in Pittsburgh, it's routine to see see wild turkeys, deer and hawks in parks and cliff sides within the city limits. (I'm sure we have coyote too but the Eastern coyote is pretty wary.) I think we still need a chance to see tropical animals, arctic animals, etc. People who fall in love with polar bears in a really good exhibit are people who are going to care about global warming enough to change their lifestyle. When you've spent as many hours as I have in tropical zoo environments you become especially passionate about saving the world's rain forests. In fact this is why I became a vegetarian in the first place. Of far greater importance is that zoos are places where animals are studied in order to better protect the same species in the wild. Why does nobody understand that accredited zoos do not make a profit? http://www.waza.org/conservation/wzacs.php#chapter9 Basically, if you can justify keeping a dog, cat, or any other domesticated animal, it's hard to criticize zoos per say. OTOH it's easy to criticize actual practices of specific zoos. No accredited zoo should be allowed to keep a particular species just because it is large, popular with the public, or for the sake of a "complete collection." If they don't have the space and wherewithal to keep them properly then they have no right to do so. Is this really so different than how most of us feel about cats and dogs, BTW? When I see the price that you pay I don't wanna grow up I don't ever want to be that way I don't wanna grow up Seems that folks turn into things that they never want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.