Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



This is an archived forum, so it is here for read-only purposes only. We are not accepting new members and members cannot post any longer. Members can, however, access their old private messages. Strawberry Fields was open from 2006 until 2011. There is a Strawberry Fields Beatles Forum on Facebook. If you are registered with Facebook, join us at the group there!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
"Good" vs "Bad" Zoos; Your opinion
Topic Started: Nov 2 2008, 05:31 PM (1,330 Views)
Aimee Wilbury
STOP CHANGING THIS ADMINS
What, in your opinions, are the difference between "good" and "bad" zoos?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark Stephen Baker
Member Avatar
Administrator & Moderator
The good ones are better.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dorfliedot
Member Avatar
Beatlelicious
Mark Baker
Nov 2 2008, 05:34 PM
The good ones are better.
:lol:

It how they take care of their animals. and, how they make the place safe for the animals and people that come visit it. also, plenty of TLC for the animals.
Posted Image
Add Glitter to your Photos
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
I think the good ones are the ones where they give their animals room to move and not keep them in small cages. The San Diego Zoo comes to mind.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

The Good Zoo Guide Online

Can you remember the very first time you ever went to a zoo? Didn't the animals seem amazing? The very first time you ever saw an elephant - can you recall how huge it seemed, how unbelievable its trunk was, how extraordinary it was that this great fantastic creature was actually there, sharing the world with you? If you live close to a zoo, then for you it is probably still 'The Zoo'. It may still have affectionate memories for you, memories of strange exotic creatures, and curious smells; a place full of beasts with a power to fascinate, intimidate, or amuse.

But perhaps your memories of the zoo are not so pleasant. Perhaps your last impression of the zoo was not of an astonishing place full of playful monkeys and towering giraffes, but of the sad and listless eyes of a poor wild animal imprisoned in a hopelessly unsuitable cage. For zoos are not always exotic and exciting places. They may be cruel, dank, and depressing. And however startling our first impressions of the zoo might have been, we soon begin to look at the world with clearer, more critical eyes. We no longer visit the zoo to marvel at the sheer size of the elephants or to gasp at the jaws of the lions, and we start to question the ethics of it all.

Most countries have at least one national zoo. Britain, for example, has over eighty mammal collections that might properly be called zoos, the United Sates has over two hundred, and there is a huge variation in their quality. Most of us can intuitively recognise a bad zoo when we have the misfortune to visit one. Yet there seem to be very few rules to help us determine which zoos, if any, deserve to be called 'good zoos'.

To begin with, is there really such a thing as a good zoo at all in the new 'green' millennium'Green Decade' of the nineties? Can zoos really justify their existence in the light of the new environmental realism that we all have to face, or do they simply exist to satisfy a rather old fashioned appetite for the curious and the macabre? Is there really a case for caging animals any more, especially now that we have television wildlife programmes to satisfy our thirst for knowledge of the wild world, and we have theme parks to take the family to on a Sunday afternoon? Today we are all becoming 'green consumers'. We have green supermarkets, and green products from washing powder to petrol. How green are our zoos?

If you begin to ask zoo directors these questions, you will soon come across a fairly standard reply. Modem zoos, they will explain, are no longer the consumers of wild animals and the fairground attractions that they once were. Today's zoos are sanctuaries for rare and endangered animals, they are educators of our children, teaching us all to love and appreciate the wildlife of our planet, and they are centres of academic research. Well they would say that, wouldn't they.

The Good Zoo Guide Online aims to discover whether there is any truth in these claims. Zoos stake a claim to four fundamental objectives - conservation, education, research, and recreation. But just how these objectives are perceived, and what emphasis is accorded to each one, varies considerably from zoo to zoo. These days recreation tends to be considered insufficient justification for depriving animals of their freedom. Half a century ago it may have been quite acceptable to keep a solitary animal in close confinement just for our amusement, but perceptions have changed. Today we expect more of our zoos. We hear of 'Animal Rights'. We think of animals as being 'exploited' - a concept unknown during the formative years of zoos. So we must look towards conservation, education, and research if we are to justify our modem zoos. But are these really just a smokescreen, a fiction behind which nothing has really changed?

The Good Zoo Guide Online takes each of these issues in turn, and explores the way that Zoos are facing up to them. If we take zoos at their face value, we should be able to judge, albeit subjectively, whether they pay more than lip service to conservation, education, and research. If they do, then perhaps, just perhaps, they deserve to be called 'good zoos'.

And surprisingly, or unsurprisingly, depending upon your prejudices or your point of view, the evidence suggests that there are still plenty of good zoos. Some of them undoubtedly deserve to be listed among the best zoos in the world. Others at least deserve more local recognition. The best zoos are bold and innovative. They are not shackled by the vestigial ideas of the post-war years. They do not believe that the only way to attract visitors is to keep just the nursery-book species. They understand that every animal has its own peculiar environmental, behavioural, and emotional demands, and they design their enclosures accordingly. They understand too that the human animals, as visitors to the zoo, must have their needs catered to as well. Most of all they recognise that many of the world's animals are now in imminent danger of extinction, and that zoos may represent the only way to escape the eternal condemnation of every future generation of mankind for allowing these unique species to disappear forever. In a very real sense these zoos are among the 'greenest' institutions in the world.

Many of these issues are complex and controversial. But there is a growing consensus that there are good zoos. They deserve our patronage, and we in turn can learn from them, and can gain a great deal of pleasure from visiting them. This guide attempts to identify those good zoos. Please help by contributing your own zoo reviews, by sending us zoo guides and zoo literature, and by advertising on our pages.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
I talked to someone about zoos one time and they said if it weren't for zoos a lot of the species would be extinct and zoos should be a tool to educate people in conservation and saving animals. And I have to agree with that. I don't agree with having the animals in cages though. All zoos should have more open areas for the animals to roam around, as I said like the San Diego Zoo.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BeatleBarb
Member Avatar

Back in the 60s and 70s I use to frequent the San Francisco Zoo quite a bit. After a while, I remembering it seeming very run down and the animals weren't thriving. The whole experience became depressing to me and I haven't been back since.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
iscreamer1
Member Avatar
Baking Fairy Cakes
I was at the San Diego Zoo and I was shocked at some of the enclousures. It was not what I expected at all. To my mind it is not a "good" zoo. The Phoenix zoo is a wonderful zoo. Lots of free roaming space for all the animals with an attempt to simulate the natural environment for most of them. They have a great monkey enclosure that has one area with a huge window where you can come "face to face" the all sorts of primates. It's a great place, except in the summer when it is too dang hot!
Laughter is the shortest distance between two people - Victor Borge

Posted Image


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

"2008 Family Favorite Winner" --Carolina Parent Magazine, 2008

Ranked "#1 Zoo in U.S. for North American animal exhibits" --From the book "America's Best Zoos" by Nyhuis and Wassner

The Asheboro North Carolina Zoo invites you to an adventure as BIG as all outdoors

Visit the North Carolina Zoo for fun with family and friends, for face-to-face animal encounters, to enchant and educate children or perhaps to enjoy the glorious gardens. Connect with wildlife from two different continents as you explore 500 acres of exhibits carefully constructed to resemble natural habitats. Walk from Africa’s grasslands to North America’s Arctic coast.

Learn how the Zoo works to conserve and protect wild things and wild places.

Escape to the forests and streams of North Carolina’s beautiful Central Piedmont. Located at the foot of the Uwharrie Mountains, the Zoo is just outside the charming southern town of Asheboro.

Zoos introduce people to animals. Each year, approximately 700,000 visitors from all 100 counties in North Carolina and all 50 States of the US travel to Asheboro, North Carolina, to visit with our animals. The Zoo is home to approximately 1,100 individual specimens representing more than 200 species.

Animal List
Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
The most depressing zoo I remember going to see was the Melbourne Zoo in Melbourne, FL. That place wasn't a true zoo, because the animals were in these tiny cages and you could tell how unhappy they were. I remember getting spit at by a not too friendly llama.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Being that the animals are out of their natural environment, I think all zoos are bad.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
Nov 4 2008, 02:50 AM
Being that the animals are out of their natural environment, I think all zoos are bad.
Would a dog or cat inside your house be out of their natural envrionment? How about a mouse or a rat? Some animals adapt better than others to being in the zoo environment and some zoos do a better job than others simulating that natural environment in order to preserve endangered or threatened species. Breeding programs that release animals back into their natural environment are an essential part of some zoo programs and provide the animals with a better chance than they would have on their own. The American Bison and California Condor two examples.

Condor numbers dramatically declined in the 19th century due to poaching, lead poisoning, and habitat destruction. Eventually, a conservation plan was put in place by the United States government that led to the capture of all the remaining wild condors in 1987. These 22 birds were bred at the San Diego Wild Animal Park and the Los Angeles Zoo. Numbers rose through captive breeding and, beginning in 1991, condors have been reintroduced into the wild. The project is the most expensive species conservation project ever undertaken in the United States. The California Condor is one of the world's rarest bird species. In August 2008, there were 332 condors known to be living, including 156 in the wild.

Zoo Conservation

Up to now, only a few species such as the Przewalski’s Horse, the American Bison, or the California Condor could be saved from extinction and reintroduced to the wild. The American Bison, for example, was close to extinction at the beginning of the twentieth century. In 1907, the Bronx Zoo led by William T. Hornaday was the first zoo to help the American Bison Society with its reintroduction project, sending 15 bison to the Wichita Forest Reserve in Oklahoma. Other reservation herds were established in succeeding years using additional zoo-bred animals. By 1933, there were 4,404 bison in the United States and 17,043 in Canada. Although most species maintained in zoos are not endangered, and those that are will likely seldom be released into natural habitats, biologist Colin Tudge emphasizes the urgency of ex-situ conservation in zoos in the face of increasing threat to natural habitats.

In 1993, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA), formerly known as the International Union of the Directors of Zoological Gardens, produced its first conservation strategy. In November 2004, WAZA adopted a new strategy that sets out the aims and mission of zoological gardens of the twenty-first century. The captive breeding of endangered species is coordinated by cooperative breeding programs. Under the auspices of WAZA, 182 International Studbooks are kept. These studbooks are coordinated by the Zoological Society of London. About 810 animal species and subspecies are managed under cooperative breeding programmes at the level of the regional association members such as the Species Survival Plan (SSP), established 1981, or the European Endangered Species Programme (EEP), established 1985.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
I'm sorry but I still hate zoos. How many animals died on their way from their natural habitat to another country and then to another country, once again. You think the animals were created and born at the zoo? To give the example of dogs and cats is a poor example. We still have coyotes and wolves who do live in their natural environment-or what passes for that these days. Damn the people who think it's cool to crossbreed and damn the people who buy the crossbred animal. Rats and mice pretty much still live out in the open. They, however, were not trapped to be brought out here. They came on boats because of the food on them. Lions, tigers, bears, alligators, crocs, and the like are trapped to be brought to other countries. Not all are trapped for research and what you could vaguely call protection of the species. I say vaguely because who does the most harm to animal species but humans. We kill them for food (not necessarily for our survival anymore), we kill them for clothing, and we kill them out of our own pleasure. If we really wanted to protect them, we would stop killing them.

No, you'll never sell me on what is supposed to be good regarding zoos.

As for the condors, I live very close to an area that helped with the species. It is not a zoo, they lived out in the open and not in cages. They were captive but they had no bars to keep them in, just the need to survive and get healthy. The Wildlife Waystation, a very famous place, has a lot of wild animals. Animals that even zoos don't want. They are in enclosures, no cages. The animals are allowed to live out their natural life without any fear of being killed by humans and any fear of having to perform for humans either. They are protected by the humans who live and volunteer there.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JeffLynnesBeard
Member Avatar
Administrator & Moderator
I don't really agree with the idea of zoos either, Cathy. However, my definition of a good contemporary zoo would be one which plays an important part in the conservation of endangered species and one which also acts as a rescue home for sick or mistreated animals, using the admission fee from supporters of the zoo to do invaluable work. The San Diego Zoo is a good example of a modern, responsible zoo, but - of course - it is not perfect. It has to balance attracting enough people to the place to keep it in business with its ecological values. It isn't easy.
...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bill
Member Avatar

Whether zoos were ever a good idea in the beginning is a moot point.

The fact is that they exist. Their animals are domesticated. Putting them back in the wild would be every bit as cruel as taking a wild animal and putting it straight into a zoo.

How many of us here have pets that we love like family? None of them are in their proper place according to nature, but most of them are happy having never known the wild. Nobody cites abusive pet owners as evidence that pet ownership is fundamentally unethical. Likewise, the existence of a few bad zoos does not mean that all zoos are bad or that the majority of them don't look after their animals extremely well.
Put a puppet on it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JeffLynnesBeard
Member Avatar
Administrator & Moderator
I have to agree with you, Bill. As much as I dislike the idea of capturing and holding captive animals for our entertainment, it has happened for centuries and many modern zoo owners have inherited an ethically questionable legacy. As you say, it would be just as cruel to release the animals back into the wild - most wouldn't last five minutes - and I have to admire and support the organisations who make the most of their resources and expertise to help endangered species have a better chance of survival.

I believe that the majority of the developed world accepts that old-fashioned zoos are no longer ethically acceptable and that they will not attract the amount of visitors that a well-run zoo with an ecological conscience will. The last time I went to San Diego zoo, for example, I was positively encouraged by all of the things they do to protect wildlife. It made me want to visit again some day to see how they're doing.
...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
Nov 5 2008, 07:19 AM
I'm sorry but I still hate zoos. How many animals died on their way from their natural habitat to another country and then to another country, once again. You think the animals were created and born at the zoo? To give the example of dogs and cats is a poor example. We still have coyotes and wolves who do live in their natural environment-or what passes for that these days. Damn the people who think it's cool to crossbreed and damn the people who buy the crossbred animal. Rats and mice pretty much still live out in the open. They, however, were not trapped to be brought out here. They came on boats because of the food on them. Lions, tigers, bears, alligators, crocs, and the like are trapped to be brought to other countries. Not all are trapped for research and what you could vaguely call protection of the species. I say vaguely because who does the most harm to animal species but humans. We kill them for food (not necessarily for our survival anymore), we kill them for clothing, and we kill them out of our own pleasure. If we really wanted to protect them, we would stop killing them.

No, you'll never sell me on what is supposed to be good regarding zoos.

As for the condors, I live very close to an area that helped with the species. It is not a zoo, they lived out in the open and not in cages. They were captive but they had no bars to keep them in, just the need to survive and get healthy. The Wildlife Waystation, a very famous place, has a lot of wild animals. Animals that even zoos don't want. They are in enclosures, no cages. The animals are allowed to live out their natural life without any fear of being killed by humans and any fear of having to perform for humans either. They are protected by the humans who live and volunteer there.
Zoos exist and won't disappear overnight. They may not be the best way to study, conserve and give an appreciation of wild animals to people who will never travel to their native habitats, but I think some zoos are doing the best job they can to put the emphasis on keeping animals safe, happy and healthy. If you do not like the idea of animals kept in cages, then I am certain you also disapprove of keeping parakeets and canaries in cages, horses in barns, fish in aquariums, etc.; however, it is highly unlikely that all of the animals kept in cages or outside captivity areas either at homes, farms, zoos, veterinary hospitals, animal shelters or a research facilities will be released any time soon.

Maybe you could give some alternatives as to how these animals could be kept, studied, conserved and rehabilitated without being held captive in some manner? If you disagree that the San Diego Zoo was not responsible for bringing the Condor back from the brink of extinction and you live near the facility that did, please post a link to the site so we can see how the Condor was saved without being held captive in some manner.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Apparently the Sespe Condor Sanctuary in the Los Padres National Forest has no direct link but there are many websites and stories that talk about it. They do have birds in captivity but they also allow them to be out in the wild. The sanctuary is over 50,000 acres. This is the best that I could find that describes what is done there:

http://www.lpfw.org/about/critters/californiacondor.htm

There are conservancies, California is big on those, as well as wetlands, and wild animal parks where the animals are not caged up and allowed to be as natural as possible.

And just to let you in on something, the California Condor is still on the endangered species list.

If you want a zoo just for conservancy and study, than go to some colleges. One that's about 8 miles from where I live has an exotic animal program where they study behavior and such.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Great article. I learned that lead ammunition poses a significant risk to captive-reared Condors released back into the wild. I am not certain about the differences between how large birds are kept and bred at zoos, as opposed to this program, but I did find another interesting site that talks about it.

Defenders of Wildlife: Condors Take Flight Again

"The idea that we could have saved them without the [captive-breeding] program is just false," says Jesse Grantham, a biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who is the California condor coordinator for the recovery program. "We could have bought up all the land in Southern California and it wouldn't have done it."

"We waited until we got down to 22 birds in the wild, and then we almost lost them," he adds. "Now we're essentially trying to recreate a species."

It's been a difficult run. Condors are giants in the bird world, and not easy to catch or handle. To capture the birds, biologists had to use cannon nets set up at bait stations, as well as the old Native American technique of setting pit traps—placing someone in a hole below a carcass to grab the bird's legs when it came to feed. With so few left, no mistakes could be made—even one death would have been catastrophic.

By most accounts, the captive-rearing program has been successful. From the 27 birds in the original captive flock in 1987, more than 250 birds have been hatched at the four breeding locations—San Diego Wild Animal Park, Los Angeles Zoo, the Peregrine Fund's World Center for Birds of Prey in Idaho and the Oregon Zoo. The captive birds are kept isolated from humans, but reared as young chicks by human-held puppets made to look like adult condors. More recently, biologists have been stressing the importance of allowing captive mentor adults to show the chicks the ropes.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Adilah
Member Avatar

When I was a child I loved to visit the zoo. All the exotic animals fascinated me. When I began to study ethology I learned how damaging they are.

Their educational purpose is antiquated. One can learn far more about any animal by reading the works of people like Jane Goodall and Aubrey Manning, utilising academic research available on-line, or even watching the programmes of David Attenborough. No animals need be imprisoned and exploited in these methods.

Zoos that breed animals often find themselves with a surplus. These "extras" are usually sold as food or for medical experiments. The animals that are not sold are most often killed.

Those of us who have studied animals in their natural environment are generally horrified at what we see in zoos. No matter how nice the enclosures are, they are still enclosures. They are unnatural, unhealthy and incarcerating. Social animals need each other to survive, just as do humans. Many species roam expansive areas not only for food, but also to commune with their fellow species and re-acquaint themselves with seldom-seen family members. Solitary animals need their privacy. Some find it impossible to function while under constant observation. We are only beginning to understand the impact of stress on their health.

Some species are damaged more than others in captivity. Loxodonta africana is greatly connected to its family. In captivity it will enter what can be described as insanity. Imagine being taken from your home and never seeing your family again. Most dolphins rely on echo-location for orientation. Confinement in a tank prohibits this function. These animals are completely robbed of one of their senses. Imagine being blindfolded the rest of your life. The examples are almost endless.

Zoos have saved only one species from extinction, while killing thousands of animals every year. Equus ferus przewalskii and Bison bison were saved by conservation efforts in wildlife preserves, sanctuaries and breeding facilities closed to public entertainment. Only Gymnogyps californianus was successfully bred both in and out of zoo confines, and most can never live in the wild. Wildlife preserves and sanctuaries are an infinitely better option for ex-situ conservation than any zoo. Zoos can provide funding and zoological expertise, but they cannot save a species without forcing that species to live its entire existence in captivity. Almost all species bred in captivity can never be re-introduced into the wild, and there is debate whether any can. In-situ conservation is by far the best way to preserve a species.
"We call 10 American deaths a catastrophe. One hundred European deaths are a tragedy. One thousand Asian deaths are a shame. And 10,000 African deaths we call a Monday." - Lissa (1981-2007) ÇáÓáÇă Úáíßă ćŃÍăÉ Çááĺ ćČŃßÇĘĺ
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maccascruff
Sing the Changes
I never liked going to zoos as a child and I refuse to go as an adult. I can't stand the way the animals are treated. I know that zoos won't go out of business overnight, but I won't be supporting them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
Okay, I was hedging on saying this, but so those who are against zoos are basically saying that they would rather see some species go extinct and they would rather people not see the animals? I know someone mentioned reading a book, but I'd rather see the animal up close. Seeing an animal in person is better than seeing some on film.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I was going to get a puppy, but after reading a few replies above, I decided to get a book on puppies instead. It's much more convenient and I can get the same pleasure than from actually owning one. :whistle:

I also released all of my exotic salt-water fish back into the wild. I hope they do well in our local reservoir. :innocent:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
Yeah, it's "Free Your Pet" day. If you have birds, fish, dogs, or cats it's time to set them free, because it's so cruel to keep them in cages. Oh yes, it is. If you keep a pet, you're cruel.

*being sarcastic above*
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Someone should create a human zoo, there are so many bizarre exotic ones...
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Love Sculpture
Nov 6 2008, 09:14 PM
Someone should create a human zoo, there are so many bizarre exotic ones...
:giggle: A true statement if I ever heard one!

The San Diego zoo has this reputation which may be slightly outdated but no doubt it was a pioneer for animal research and replicated habitats. My opinion of zoos is that they should be rehabilitation centers which are open to the public. Their first purpose should be care, their second should be repopulating, their third should be researching and their final should be entertaining. No animal should be in a zoo for the sole purpose of our entertainment.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bill
Member Avatar

Love Sculpture
Nov 6 2008, 09:14 PM
Someone should create a human zoo, there are so many bizarre exotic ones...
We call it Parliament.
Put a puppet on it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Love Sculpture
Nov 6 2008, 09:14 PM
Someone should create a human zoo, there are so many bizarre exotic ones...
Absolutely! :clap: There have been human life exhibits but they didn't run for long as the humans didn't like being watched and caged.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
BlueMolly2008
Nov 6 2008, 07:00 PM
Okay, I was hedging on saying this, but so those who are against zoos are basically saying that they would rather see some species go extinct and they would rather people not see the animals? I know someone mentioned reading a book, but I'd rather see the animal up close. Seeing an animal in person is better than seeing some on film.
If you would read Adilah's excellent post, you would understand why I hate zoos and why your statement is so wrong.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Lapislee, your article states the Los Angeles Zoo. So that you know, that zoo has one of the worst records in animal care in the US. They used to be one of the top zoos in the world but their ranking has plummeted when many of their animals were found dead in their enclosures, were very sick, and some were dying due to neglect.

Adilah's excellent post said it best. Thank you Adilah! I do have one minor correction to that post though. The condors you are talking about. There are some that are living out in the wilds now. It took several years to start being successfully introduced to the wild but so far they are having some luck in the wild. I do believe, however, that they have been returning to the sanctuaries.

Lapislee, you wanted to know where else (other than the San Diego Zoo) the condors are being rescued. You also wanted a website. The Sespe Condor Sanctuary has no website and the one I posted was the closest I could find. I live about 20 miles from there.
Edited by beatlechick, Nov 7 2008, 02:50 AM.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) Code of Ethics and Animal Welfare

Preamble

The continued existence of zoological parks and aquariums depends upon recognition that our profession is based on respect for the dignity of the animals in our care, the people we serve and other members of the international zoo profession. Acceptance of the WAZA World Zoo Conservation Strategy is implicit in involvement in the WAZA.

Whilst recognising that each region may have formulated its own code of ethics, and a code of animal welfare, the WAZA will strive to develop an ethical tradition which is strong and which will form the basis of a standard of conduct for our profession. Members will deal with each other to the highest standard of ethical conduct.

Basic principles for the guidance of all members of the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums:

(i) Assisting in achieving the conservation and survival of species must be the aim of all members of the profession. Any actions taken in relation to an individual animal, e.g. euthanasia or contraception, must be undertaken with this higher ideal of species survival in mind, but the welfare of the individual animal should not be compromised.
(ii) Promote the interests of wildlife conservation, biodiversity and animal welfare to colleagues and to society at large.
(iii) Co-operate with the wider conservation community including wildlife agencies, conservation organisations and research institutions to assist in maintaining global biodiversity.
(iv) Co-operate with governments and other appropriate bodies to improve standards of animal welfare and ensure the welfare of all animals in our care.
(v) Encourage research and dissemination of achievements and results in appropriate publications and forums.
(vi) Deal fairly with members in the dissemination of professional information and advice.
(vii) Promote public education programs and cultural recreational activities of zoos and aquariums.
(viii) Work progressively towards achieving all professional guidelines established by the WAZA.
At all times members will act in accordance with all local, national and international law and will strive for the highest standards of operation in all areas including the following:

1. Animal Welfare

Whilst recognising the variation in culture and customs within which the WAZA operates, it is incumbent upon all members to exercise the highest standards of animal welfare and to encourage these standards in others. Training staff to the highest level possible represents one method of ensuring this aim.

Members of WAZA will ensure that all animals in their care are treated with the utmost care and their welfare should be paramount all times. At all times, any legislated codes for animal welfare should be regarded as minimum standards. Appropriate animal husbandry practices must be in place and sound veterinary care available. When an animal has no reasonable quality of life, it should be euthanased quickly and without suffering.

2. Use of Zoo and Aquarium Based Animals

Where "wild" animals are used in presentations, these presentations must:-

(a) deliver a sound conservation message, or be of other educational value,
(b) focus on natural behaviour,
(c) not demean or trivialise the animal in any way.

If there is any indication that the welfare of the animal is being compromised, the presentation should be brought to a conclusion.

When not being used for presentations, the "off-limit" areas must allow the animal sufficient space to express natural behaviour and should contain adequate items for behavioural enrichment.

While the code focuses on zoos and aquarium based "wild" animals, the welfare of domestic animals, e.g., sheep, goats, horses, etc., in, e.g, petting zoos should not be compromised.

3. Exhibit Standards

All exhibits must be of such size and volume as to allow the animal to express its natural behaviours. Enclosures must contain sufficient material to allow behavioural enrichment and allow the animal to express natural behaviours. The animals should have areas to which they may retreat and separate facilities should be available to allow separation of animals where necessary, e.g., cubbing dens. At all times animals should be protected from conditions detrimental to their well-being and the appropriate husbandry standards adhered to.

4. Acquisition of Animals

All members will endeavour to ensure that the source of animals is confined to those born in human care and this will be best achieved by direct zoo to zoo conduct. The advice of the appropriate Species Co-ordinator should be sought before acquiring animals. This will not preclude the receipt of animals resulting from confiscation or rescues. It is recognised that, from time to time, there is a legitimate need for conservation breeding programs, education programs or basic biological studies, to obtain animals from the wild. Members must be confident that such acquisitions will not have a deleterious effect upon the wild population.

5. Transfer of Animals

Members will ensure institutions receiving animals have appropriate facilities to hold the animals and skilled staff who are capable of maintaining the same high standard of husbandry and welfare as required of WAZA members. All animals being transferred will be accompanied by appropriate records with details of health, diet, reproductive and genetic status and behavioural characteristics having been disclosed at the commencement of negotiations. These records will allow the receiving institution to make appropriate decisions regarding the future management of the animal. All animal transfers should conform to the international standards and laws applying to the particular species. Where appropriate, animals should be accompanied by qualified staff.

6. Contraception

Contraception may be used wherever there is a need for reasons of population management. The possible side effects of both surgical and chemical contraception, as well as the negative impact on behaviour, should be considered before the final decision to implement contraception is made.

7. Euthanasia

When all options have been investigated and the decision is taken that it is necessary to euthanise an animal, care will be taken to ensure it is carried out in a manner that ensures a quick death without suffering. Euthanasia may be controlled by local customs and laws but should always be used in preference to keeping an animal alive under conditions which do not allow it to experience an appropriate quality of life. Whenever possible a post-mortem examination should be performed and biological material preserved for research and gene conservation.

8. Mutilation

Mutilation of any animal for cosmetic purpose, or to change the physical appearance of the animal, is not acceptable. Pinioning of birds for educational or management purposes should only be undertaken when no other form of restraint is feasible and marking animals for identification should always be carried out under professional supervision, in a way that minimises suffering.

9. Research Using Zoo Based Animals

All zoos should be actively involved in appropriate research and other scientific activities regarding their animals and distribute the results to colleagues. Appropriate areas of research include exhibit design, observations, welfare, behaviour, management practices, nutrition, animal husbandry, veterinary procedures and technology, assisted breeding techniques, biological conservation and cryopresentation of eggs and sperm. Each zoo undertaking such research should have a properly constituted research committee and should have all procedures approved by a properly constituted ethics committee.

Invasive procedures designed to assist in medical research are not to be performed on zoo animals however the opportunistic collection of tissues during routine procedures and collection of material from cadavers will, in most cases, be appropriate.

The well-being of the individual animal and the preservation of the species and biological diversity should be paramount and uppermost in mind when deciding upon the appropriateness of research to be undertaken.

10. Release-to-the-Wild Programmes

All release-to-the wild programmes must be conducted in accordance with the IUCN/ SSC/Reintroduction Specialist Group guidelines for reintroduction.

No release-to-the-wild program shall be undertaken without the animals having undergone a thorough veterinary examination to assess their fitness for such release and that their welfare post-release is reasonably safeguarded. Following release, a thorough monitoring program should be established and maintained.

11. Deaths of Animals Whilst in Care

Unless there are sound reasons not to do so, each animal which dies in captivity, or during a release to the wild program, should undergo post-mortem examination and have a cause of death ascertained.

12. External Wild Animal Welfare Issues

While this code of practice is designed for animals held within Zoos, Aquariums, Wildlife Parks, Sanctuaries, etc., WAZA abhors and condemns ill-treatment and cruelty to any animals and should have an opinion on welfare issues for wild animals external to its membership.

WAZA requires that:

• The taking of animals and other natural resources from the wild must be sustainable and in compliance with national and international law and conform with the appropriate IUCN policy.
• Any international trade in wild animals and animal products must be in compliance with CITES and the national legislation of the countries involved.

WAZA opposes:

• Illegal and unsustainable taking of animals and other natural resources from the wild, e.g. for bush meat, corals, fur or skin, traditional medicine, timber production.
• Illegal trade in wild animals and wild animal products.
• Cruel and non-selective methods of taking animals from the wild.
• Collecting for, or stocking of animal exhibits, in particular aquariums, with the expectation of high mortality.
• The use, or supply of animals for “canned hunting”, i.e. shooting animals in confined spaces, or when semi tranquilised or restrained.
• Keeping and transporting of animals under inadequate conditions, e.g., the keeping of bears in confinement for extraction of bile, dancing bears, roadside zoos or circuses / entertainment.

WAZA and its members should make all efforts in their power to encourage substandard zoos and aquariums to improve and reach appropriate standards. If it is clear that the funding or the will to improve is not there, WAZA would support the closure of such zoos and aquariums.

This document was prepared on the basis of the 1999 Code of Ethics and the 2002 Code of Animal Welfare. It was adopted at the Closed Administrative Session of the 58th Annual Meeting, held on 19th November 2003 at San José, Costa Rica.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mia Culpa
Member Avatar
This space intentionally left blank.
BlueMolly2008
Nov 6 2008, 07:00 PM
Okay, I was hedging on saying this, but so those who are against zoos are basically saying that they would rather see some species go extinct and they would rather people not see the animals? I know someone mentioned reading a book, but I'd rather see the animal up close. Seeing an animal in person is better than seeing some on film.
Who's saying this? Is there some invisible text here I can't read?

What you're seeing in zoos is nothing like what you see in nature. What you see on film is what you'd see in nature.
If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mia Culpa
Member Avatar
This space intentionally left blank.
LapisLee
Nov 6 2008, 07:25 PM
I was going to get a puppy, but after reading a few replies above, I decided to get a book on puppies instead. It's much more convenient and I can get the same pleasure than from actually owning one. :whistle:

I also released all of my exotic salt-water fish back into the wild. I hope they do well in our local reservoir. :innocent:
You don't know the difference between domesticated and wild animals?
If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
Mia Culpa
Nov 8 2008, 04:51 AM
LapisLee
Nov 6 2008, 07:25 PM
I was going to get a puppy, but after reading a few replies above, I decided to get a book on puppies instead. It's much more convenient and I can get the same pleasure than from actually owning one. :whistle:

I also released all of my exotic salt-water fish back into the wild. I hope they do well in our local reservoir. :innocent:
You don't know the difference between domesticated and wild animals?
Well, they're animals, so technically there's no difference according to some people here. Any animals in cages shouldn't be kept in them, which means birds and other pets. I'm not being ridiculous, I'm being real.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mia Culpa
Member Avatar
This space intentionally left blank.
BlueMolly2008
Nov 6 2008, 09:08 PM
Yeah, it's "Free Your Pet" day. If you have birds, fish, dogs, or cats it's time to set them free, because it's so cruel to keep them in cages. Oh yes, it is. If you keep a pet, you're cruel.

*being sarcastic above*
That's not sarcastic. That's bitchy.
If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Mia Culpa
Nov 8 2008, 04:51 AM
LapisLee
Nov 6 2008, 07:25 PM
I was going to get a puppy, but after reading a few replies above, I decided to get a book on puppies instead. It's much more convenient and I can get the same pleasure than from actually owning one. :whistle:

I also released all of my exotic salt-water fish back into the wild. I hope they do well in our local reservoir. :innocent:
You don't know the difference between domesticated and wild animals?
Are exotic fish wild or domesticated? How about snakes and lizards that are commonly kept in cages in homes? What about exotic birds? How is keeping these animals in cages any different from keeping animals in wildlife preserve areas at zoos?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
LapisLee
Nov 8 2008, 05:27 AM
Mia Culpa
Nov 8 2008, 04:51 AM
LapisLee
Nov 6 2008, 07:25 PM
I was going to get a puppy, but after reading a few replies above, I decided to get a book on puppies instead. It's much more convenient and I can get the same pleasure than from actually owning one. :whistle:

I also released all of my exotic salt-water fish back into the wild. I hope they do well in our local reservoir. :innocent:
You don't know the difference between domesticated and wild animals?
Are exotic fish wild or domesticated? How about snakes and lizards that are commonly kept in cages in homes? What about exotic birds? How is keeping these animals in cages any different from keeping animals in wildlife preserve areas at zoos?
In answer to your question, exotic fish were never wild they were bred. The fish that you buy in the store, or I should say most as some were bred from wild fish, were never wild. Wild birds should stay that way......wild. BTW there have been wild parrots that fly over my area, parrots that were likely once a pet. I found a fascinating site that talks about the history of cats and dogs. As most of us know, cats were revered by the Egyptians who made the killing of a cat punishable by death. Apparently dogs have been domesticated for over 10,000 years and were used as hunters of food by the first humans.

History of dogs: http://www.allaboutdogsandcats.com/Dogs/HistoryOfTheDog.html

History of cats:
http://www.allaboutdogsandcats.com/HistoryOfTheCat.html

I am against the breeding of animals for our selfish purposes. As for reptiles, I love them but would not want to keep them for myself. They are not pets and should never be sold as pets.
Edited by beatlechick, Nov 8 2008, 11:08 PM.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Exactly why animals should be adopted and never bred. I feel like breeding and buying exotic animals is a slap in the face to the animals left behind and the people who pick up the pieces.

I can't stand to see birds in cages and fish in bowls. I can't even keep my cats inside when they are scratching to get out.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
Nov 8 2008, 11:05 PM
LapisLee
Nov 8 2008, 05:27 AM
Mia Culpa
Nov 8 2008, 04:51 AM
LapisLee
Nov 6 2008, 07:25 PM
I was going to get a puppy, but after reading a few replies above, I decided to get a book on puppies instead. It's much more convenient and I can get the same pleasure than from actually owning one. :whistle:

I also released all of my exotic salt-water fish back into the wild. I hope they do well in our local reservoir. :innocent:
You don't know the difference between domesticated and wild animals?
Are exotic fish wild or domesticated? How about snakes and lizards that are commonly kept in cages in homes? What about exotic birds? How is keeping these animals in cages any different from keeping animals in wildlife preserve areas at zoos?
In answer to your question, exotic fish were never wild they were bred. The fish that you buy in the store, or I should say most as some were bred from wild fish, were never wild. Wild birds should stay that way......wild. BTW there have been wild parrots that fly over my area, parrots that were likely once a pet. I found a fascinating site that talks about the history of cats and dogs. As most of us know, cats were revered by the Egyptians who made the killing of a cat punishable by death. Apparently dogs have been domesticated for over 10,000 years and were used as hunters of food by the first humans.

History of dogs: http://www.allaboutdogsandcats.com/Dogs/HistoryOfTheDog.html

History of cats:
http://www.allaboutdogsandcats.com/HistoryOfTheCat.html

I am against the breeding of animals for our selfish purposes. As for reptiles, I love them but would not want to keep them for myself. They are not pets and should never be sold as pets.
How does that differ from this, as posted above under the WAZA guidelines for zoos?

4. Acquisition of Animals

All members will endeavour to ensure that the source of animals is confined to those born in human care and this will be best achieved by direct zoo to zoo conduct. The advice of the appropriate Species Co-ordinator should be sought before acquiring animals. This will not preclude the receipt of animals resulting from confiscation or rescues. It is recognised that, from time to time, there is a legitimate need for conservation breeding programs, education programs or basic biological studies, to obtain animals from the wild. Members must be confident that such acquisitions will not have a deleterious effect upon the wild population.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

JeffLynnesBeard
Nov 5 2008, 08:15 AM
I don't really agree with the idea of zoos either, Cathy. However, my definition of a good contemporary zoo would be one which plays an important part in the conservation of endangered species and one which also acts as a rescue home for sick or mistreated animals, using the admission fee from supporters of the zoo to do invaluable work. The San Diego Zoo is a good example of a modern, responsible zoo, but - of course - it is not perfect. It has to balance attracting enough people to the place to keep it in business with its ecological values. It isn't easy.
Just bumping a few good posts that also support my points.

To begin with, is there really such a thing as a good zoo at all in the new 'green' millennium' Green Decade' of the nineties? Can zoos really justify their existence in the light of the new environmental realism that we all have to face, or do they simply exist to satisfy a rather old fashioned appetite for the curious and the macabre? Is there really a case for caging animals any more, especially now that we have television wildlife programmes to satisfy our thirst for knowledge of the wild world, and we have theme parks to take the family to on a Sunday afternoon? Today we are all becoming 'green consumers'. We have green supermarkets, and green products from washing powder to petrol. How green are our zoos?

If you begin to ask zoo directors these questions, you will soon come across a fairly standard reply. Modem zoos, they will explain, are no longer the consumers of wild animals and the fairground attractions that they once were. Today's zoos are sanctuaries for rare and endangered animals, they are educators of our children, teaching us all to love and appreciate the wildlife of our planet, and they are centres of academic research.

The Good Zoo Guide Online aims to discover whether there is any truth in these claims. Zoos stake a claim to four fundamental objectives - conservation, education, research, and recreation. The Good Zoo Guide Online takes each of these issues in turn, and explores the way that Zoos are facing up to them. If we take zoos at their face value, we should be able to judge, albeit subjectively, whether they pay more than lip service to conservation, education, and research. If they do, then perhaps, just perhaps, they deserve to be called 'good zoos'. And surprisingly, or unsurprisingly, depending upon your prejudices or your point of view, the evidence suggests that there are still plenty of good zoos. Some of them undoubtedly deserve to be listed among the best zoos in the world.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Bill
Nov 5 2008, 08:24 AM
Whether zoos were ever a good idea in the beginning is a moot point.

The fact is that they exist. Their animals are domesticated. Putting them back in the wild would be every bit as cruel as taking a wild animal and putting it straight into a zoo.

How many of us here have pets that we love like family? None of them are in their proper place according to nature, but most of them are happy having never known the wild. Nobody cites abusive pet owners as evidence that pet ownership is fundamentally unethical. Likewise, the existence of a few bad zoos does not mean that all zoos are bad or that the majority of them don't look after their animals extremely well.
Another good point, that has yet to be refuted.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
So I take it you like zoos and consider them to be good. I don't and consider them to be bad. I don't believe in their conservation programs nor the way they study the animals. Not when we have had good conservationists who studied them in their own habitat. Today at the local Los Angeles Zoo was a bunch of protestors protesting the way the zoo is treating the elephants and hating the enclosures. I totally agree with them. In the past this zoo had been threatened on being closed down because of their practices now you're telling me that their practices are good ones and I have to trust them because they are helping some species? No way.

I have to say that this is an excellent post from Adilah and warrants being shown here:

Quote:
 
When I was a child I loved to visit the zoo. All the exotic animals fascinated me. When I began to study ethology I learned how damaging they are.

Their educational purpose is antiquated. One can learn far more about any animal by reading the works of people like Jane Goodall and Aubrey Manning, utilising academic research available on-line, or even watching the programmes of David Attenborough. No animals need be imprisoned and exploited in these methods.

Zoos that breed animals often find themselves with a surplus. These "extras" are usually sold as food or for medical experiments. The animals that are not sold are most often killed.

Those of us who have studied animals in their natural environment are generally horrified at what we see in zoos. No matter how nice the enclosures are, they are still enclosures. They are unnatural, unhealthy and incarcerating. Social animals need each other to survive, just as do humans. Many species roam expansive areas not only for food, but also to commune with their fellow species and re-acquaint themselves with seldom-seen family members. Solitary animals need their privacy. Some find it impossible to function while under constant observation. We are only beginning to understand the impact of stress on their health.

Some species are damaged more than others in captivity. Loxodonta africana is greatly connected to its family. In captivity it will enter what can be described as insanity. Imagine being taken from your home and never seeing your family again. Most dolphins rely on echo-location for orientation. Confinement in a tank prohibits this function. These animals are completely robbed of one of their senses. Imagine being blindfolded the rest of your life. The examples are almost endless.

Zoos have saved only one species from extinction, while killing thousands of animals every year. Equus ferus przewalskii and Bison bison were saved by conservation efforts in wildlife preserves, sanctuaries and breeding facilities closed to public entertainment. Only Gymnogyps californianus was successfully bred both in and out of zoo confines, and most can never live in the wild. Wildlife preserves and sanctuaries are an infinitely better option for ex-situ conservation than any zoo. Zoos can provide funding and zoological expertise, but they cannot save a species without forcing that species to live its entire existence in captivity. Almost all species bred in captivity can never be re-introduced into the wild, and there is debate whether any can. In-situ conservation is by far the best way to preserve a species.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
Nov 9 2008, 07:45 AM
So I take it you like zoos and consider them to be good. I don't and consider them to be bad. I don't believe in their conservation programs nor the way they study the animals. Not when we have had good conservationists who studied them in their own habitat. Today at the local Los Angeles Zoo was a bunch of protestors protesting the way the zoo is treating the elephants and hating the enclosures. I totally agree with them. In the past this zoo had been threatened on being closed down because of their practices now you're telling me that their practices are good ones and I have to trust them because they are helping some species? No way.
The point of this thread is that there are good zoos and bad zoos. I believe there are good zoos, which follow the WAZA guidelines above and there are bad zoos, which do not. I agree that conservationists do good work, but how many children have learned to love and appreciate animals from reading books by conservationists as opposed to seeing animals in a zoo or keeping them at home?
Quote:
 
When I was a child I loved to visit the zoo. All the exotic animals fascinated me. When I began to study ethology I learned how damaging they are. Their educational purpose is antiquated. One can learn far more about any animal by reading the works of people like Jane Goodall and Aubrey Manning, utilising academic research available on-line, or even watching the programmes of David Attenborough. No animals need be imprisoned and exploited in these methods.

Do you draw a distinction between domesticated animals such as dogs, cats, fish, birds, reptiles, etc. that are kept in enclosed areas? What about farm animals such as horses, cows, pigs, chickens, goat, sheep, etc.? Should all animals kept at veterinarians, animal shelters, farms, home aquariums and dog houses or on chains be released? WAZA states that zoo animals be raised from captivity, so you cannot use that argument to differentiate between pets and animals kept at zoos.
Quote:
 
Zoos that breed animals often find themselves with a surplus. These "extras" are usually sold as food or for medical experiments. The animals that are not sold are most often killed.

Those would be the 'bad zoos'. Show me a link where the San Diego or Washington National Zoo has been found to engage in these practices please.
Quote:
 
Those of us who have studied animals in their natural environment are generally horrified at what we see in zoos. No matter how nice the enclosures are, they are still enclosures. They are unnatural, unhealthy and incarcerating. Social animals need each other to survive, just as do humans. Many species roam expansive areas not only for food, but also to commune with their fellow species and re-acquaint themselves with seldom-seen family members. Solitary animals need their privacy. Some find it impossible to function while under constant observation. We are only beginning to understand the impact of stress on their health.

Once again, how are zoos any worse than farms, animal shelters, veterinarians or aquariums? Do you also believe that humans should be released from the captivity of prisons? What alternatives do you suggest for housing criminals?
Quote:
 
Zoos have saved only one species from extinction, while killing thousands of animals every year. Equus ferus przewalskii and Bison bison were saved by conservation efforts in wildlife preserves, sanctuaries and breeding facilities closed to public entertainment. Only Gymnogyps californianus was successfully bred both in and out of zoo confines, and most can never live in the wild. Wildlife preserves and sanctuaries are an infinitely better option for ex-situ conservation than any zoo. Zoos can provide funding and zoological expertise, but they cannot save a species without forcing that species to live its entire existence in captivity. Almost all species bred in captivity can never be re-introduced into the wild, and there is debate whether any can. In-situ conservation is by far the best way to preserve a species.

You are advocating allowing animals to go extinct as opposed to being kept alive in captivity? I don't doubt that wildlife preserves and sanctuaries are better places for animals, but how soon do you think zoos will be completely replaced by these? I also am certain that you can produce a link demonstrating that thousands of animals are being killed by zoos each year. Please do so.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dorfliedot
Member Avatar
Beatlelicious
My rabbit loves his cage. he loves his free food. He seems very content.
Posted Image
Add Glitter to your Photos
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
People here want animals to go extinct from what I can see. That is what you call loving animals? :-/
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
BlueMolly2008
Nov 9 2008, 09:08 AM
People here want animals to go extinct from what I can see. That is what you call loving animals? :-/
With quotes like this, I QUIT!

Molly, where do you see the part where any of us who are against zoos are saying let them go extinct? None of us are. We just don't want to see them in a zoo. If that is all a zoo is good for, than go to some of the local colleges that also do that type of work.

What we are saying is that animals are best studied in their own habitat.

Lapislee, believe me there are many kids who have never been to a zoo yet they know what zoo animals look like. Many kids are brought up watching nature shows. Take a look at Animal Planet. Sure they don't necessarily get to see the animal live but the ideal situation is for them to be in their own natural habitat and not there for our own amusement.

Quote:
 
Do you draw a distinction between domesticated animals such as dogs, cats, fish, birds, reptiles, etc. that are kept in enclosed areas? What about farm animals such as horses, cows, pigs, chickens, goat, sheep, etc.? Should all animals kept at veterinarians, animal shelters, farms, home aquariums and dog houses or on chains be released? WAZA states that zoo animals be raised from captivity, so you cannot use that argument to differentiate between pets and animals kept at zoos.


The last time I looked, dogs and cats are not necessarily kept in cages. My cat lives in our house where she has free range. My brother's dogs lives in my house where they also have free range. Birds and reptiles can live very successfully in the wild once freed, whereas pets such as dogs have a problem as do some cats. Once an animal is domesticated, it is harder for them to go back to their wild roots.

I think you are taking this enclosure part a bit to far. BTW, some zoos do still buy their animals from the wild.

BTW, I feel the same way about pet stores who sell animals. I won't patronize them. I don't want to see an animal caged up. And throw animal shelters in there, too.

Let's put this zoo thing this way, if there were to be a human exhibit that would last for more than 2 months and you were one of the humans picked to be in it, would you want to be caged up with no tv, radio, newspapers, books, nothing that is now in your life? Oh yeah, and you get to be a text subject for future reference.
Edited by beatlechick, Nov 9 2008, 10:52 AM.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pythonesque
Member Avatar

blimey,Beatle Chick,you took the thoughts right out of my mind


:thumbsup:
Listen to the colour of your dreams
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
Oh Cathy, I guess we'll have to disagree about this. I was being a bit "out there" because I just am getting sick of people saying zoos are bad. I think some zoos need to be improved, but I don't think there should be a ban on them.
I might sound a bit hypocritical, but I agree with you, Cathy, on pet stores and selling animals. I know Pet Smart doesn't technically do that, they have an area where they take shelter animals from the ASPCA and they have people adopt, which I think is better. Most pets, like dogs and cats that are sold in pet stores are from either people who are bad breeders or they are from kitten/puppy mills. I had a friend who purchased a kitten once from a pet store and it had a life long issue with not being able to cough up fur balls.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Gerald Durrell's (founder of Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust and Jersey Zoo) policy for zoos:

-The primary purpose of a zoo should be to act as a reserve of critically endangered species which need captive breeding in order to survive.

-They can serve the secondary purposes of educating people about wildlife and natural history, and of educating biologists about the animal's habits.

-Zoos should not be run for the purposes of entertainment only, and non-threatened species should be re-introduced into their natural habitats.

-An animal should be present in the zoo only as a last resort, when all efforts to save it in the wild have failed.

Durrell's ideas about housing zoo animals also brings his priorities to the fore. The bases on which enclosures at Jersey are built:

-Enclosures should be built keeping in mind — firstly, the comfort of the animal (including a private shelter), secondly for the convenience of the animal keeper, and finally for the viewing comfort of visitors.

-The size of an enclosure should depend on how large their territories might be.

-The companions of an animal should reflect not only ecological niche and biogeographic concerns, but its social abilities as well — how well it gets on with other members of its species and other species.

-Every animal deserves food of its choice, sometimes made interesting by variation; and a mate of its choice; and a nice, and interesting environment.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page)
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Dorothy
Nov 9 2008, 09:04 AM
My rabbit loves his cage. he loves his free food. He seems very content.
how do you know?

Would you like to be in a cage eating for free?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

BlueMolly2008
Nov 9 2008, 04:11 PM
Oh Cathy, I guess we'll have to disagree about this. I was being a bit "out there" because I just am getting sick of people saying zoos are bad. I think some zoos need to be improved, but I don't think there should be a ban on them.
I might sound a bit hypocritical, but I agree with you, Cathy, on pet stores and selling animals. I know Pet Smart doesn't technically do that, they have an area where they take shelter animals from the ASPCA and they have people adopt, which I think is better. Most pets, like dogs and cats that are sold in pet stores are from either people who are bad breeders or they are from kitten/puppy mills. I had a friend who purchased a kitten once from a pet store and it had a life long issue with not being able to cough up fur balls.
Zoos ARE bad.

Animals deseve their freedom because they are born free. A baby lion is more independent than many adult men.


If one animal is found hurt, the zoos should take are of them and give them back to the nature when they are healed.

Animals won't be extinct because they aren't in the zoo. There weren't zoos 2.000 years ago.

About pet shop, after drinking a suspicious water dogs and cats get lazy and sleep almost all day, isn't it weird? Sad.

Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
This is my last post here on this thread, because I guess I'm the only person who thinks zoos are okay. I feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall.

Everyone let your pets free, because that's what you guys are basically saying. I'm done.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
BlueMolly2008
Nov 9 2008, 04:59 PM
This is my last post here on this thread, because I guess I'm the only person who thinks zoos are okay. I feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall.

Everyone let your pets free, because that's what you guys are basically saying. I'm done.
You just don't get it. For one thing, domesticated animals would have a hard time being reintroduced into the wild. They would likely die or get very sick so what you are saying is release your pets to the wild and let them die or get very sick. See what you say can be turned around back to you.

What Fiona posted is probably the best argument for zoos but just the same, I don't like them.

Again, I ask which of you would take part in a human exhibit at a zoo where you have no tv, no radio, no music, no newspaper, no nothing that is so much a part of your life now. You would have to be subjected to being poked and prodded for science.

Quote:
 
If one animal is found hurt, the zoos should take are of them and give them back to the nature when they are healed.


Michelle, while I agree with most of what you have said I have to ask you how would you go about doing this? First of all you would have to transport that animal to a zoo. I know where I live we do have living in the hills surrounding my city mountain lions, bears, deer, foxes, owls, turkey vultures, hawks, coyotes, and some other wildlife that I can't think of at the moment. We do transport them to places like the Wildlife Waystation (housing primarily sick and injured animals or old animals discarded by private and public zoos) and animal sanctuaries to check on their health before they are taken to areas where no humans live. Unfortunately there are times when the feds feel that animal has to be killed because they are to close to humans. There was a big stink here when a couple illegally had a full grown tiger and it got away from its' enclosure and was seen in the hills about 4 miles from my house. It was finally caught near a school. Because of its' proximity to this school, it was killed as it was thought to be a threat. What was not known was this animal had been declawed and defanged. How much crueler can you get to some of the most beautiful creatures on earth? There was a huge outpouring of anger and grief that the authorities would kill it, even by the parents of the kids who went to this school, before it was found that this tiger had no defenses. It was a sad situation. It's a sad situation that us humans are encroaching on to the wild turf, too.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
pythonesque
Nov 9 2008, 01:59 PM
blimey,Beatle Chick,you took the thoughts right out of my mind


:thumbsup:
Why thank you! :blush:
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Question and answer time. All questions are 'Yes' or 'No'.

1. Do you think that all zoos are bad and should be closed?

2. Do you think that keeping all animals in cages is bad and should be outlawed?

3. Do you draw a distinction between zoo animals and farm animals, medical research animals and pets?

4. If so, should all of these in the second group also be released from captivity and further captivity outlawed?

5. Do you think that threatened or endangered species should be kept in captivity if it will save them from extinction?

6. If reading a book or watching a film gives children the same love and appreciation for animals as observing them in zoos, then should all pet stores where animals are bred and held captive be closed and outlawed, since children can gain the same appreciation for animals from reading a book or watching a film as from pet ownership and it is impossible to raise pets without some form of captivity?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
Nov 9 2008, 06:44 PM
BlueMolly2008
Nov 9 2008, 04:59 PM
This is my last post here on this thread, because I guess I'm the only person who thinks zoos are okay. I feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall.

Everyone let your pets free, because that's what you guys are basically saying. I'm done.
You just don't get it. For one thing, domesticated animals would have a hard time being reintroduced into the wild. They would likely die or get very sick so what you are saying is release your pets to the wild and let them die or get very sick. See what you say can be turned around back to you.

What Fiona posted is probably the best argument for zoos but just the same, I don't like them.

Again, I ask which of you would take part in a human exhibit at a zoo where you have no tv, no radio, no music, no newspaper, no nothing that is so much a part of your life now. You would have to be subjected to being poked and prodded for science.

Quote:
 
If one animal is found hurt, the zoos should take are of them and give them back to the nature when they are healed.


Michelle, while I agree with most of what you have said I have to ask you how would you go about doing this? First of all you would have to transport that animal to a zoo. I know where I live we do have living in the hills surrounding my city mountain lions, bears, deer, foxes, owls, turkey vultures, hawks, coyotes, and some other wildlife that I can't think of at the moment. We do transport them to places like the Wildlife Waystation (housing primarily sick and injured animals or old animals discarded by private and public zoos) and animal sanctuaries to check on their health before they are taken to areas where no humans live. Unfortunately there are times when the feds feel that animal has to be killed because they are to close to humans. There was a big stink here when a couple illegally had a full grown tiger and it got away from its' enclosure and was seen in the hills about 4 miles from my house. It was finally caught near a school. Because of its' proximity to this school, it was killed as it was thought to be a threat. What was not known was this animal had been declawed and defanged. How much crueler can you get to some of the most beautiful creatures on earth? There was a huge outpouring of anger and grief that the authorities would kill it, even by the parents of the kids who went to this school, before it was found that this tiger had no defenses. It was a sad situation. It's a sad situation that us humans are encroaching on to the wild turf, too.
What do you mean Cathy?

What I mean is, for example, in my country there are many zoos, but when a wild animal is found hurt somewhere, they treat the animal and give back to the nature when it's healed. They only keep in the zoo the animal that can't return to its natural habitat because it won't survive.

If we call a zoo and tell them there's an animal hurt, they transport the animal.

And there are many ONGS who take care of animals, animals rights etc.

There is a project there called TAMAR, where they help to preserve the sea turtle, but they make it at the beach, they don't treat them in zoos. You can check their website to read more about it.

http://www.tamar.org.br/ingles/



Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jacaranda
Member Avatar

Domesticated animals should not be released to fend for themselves, because no animal that is accustomed to being fed and housed with humans can survive on their own, or if they do (for example, feral cats) it is not for very long and it is with a very diminished quality of life. To do such a thing would be cruel.

That would go for all animals. Generations of animals have been bred in captivity in zoos and could not be re-introduced into the wild either. Young animals might be able to return to nature but only after intensive training on what it would be like to be wild.

We as a species have created both situations. I honestly do not think it is possible to turn back the clock on domesticated animals after thousands of years and return them to their wild selves. We could dismantle zoos as a relic of our more primitive past and maybe we eventually should, however, for the time being, there are some good zoos and many bad ones.

The one of the principal dilemmas of animal conservation is that the natural habitat for all the wild animals is being destroyed by man through pollution, global warming and deforestation -- hence the unfortunate (at least in the eyes of some) state of zoos being of at least some assistance in the conservation of particular animals, such as those whose habitats are being destroyed while they dwindle in population.

According to the World Conservation Union: "A total of 15,589 species of plants and animals are known to face a high risk of extinction in the near future, in almost all cases as a result of human activities. This includes 32% (one in three) of amphibian species, 24% (one in four) of mammal species, 12% (one in eight) of bird species, 25% (one in four) of conifers and 52% of cycads (an ancient group of plants)."

Posted Image
"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through." General Melchett, Blackadder Goes Forth




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bill
Member Avatar

I think Star Trek has a lot to say about this.

No, stay with me, this is going somewhere....

It seems that some want to follow the Star Trek Prime Directive of no interference. That's a nice ideal but it isn't always possible. Man's own habitat cannot help but interfere with that of animals. So the question becomes how best to minimise and mitigate the interference.

It's the uncertainty principle. The mere act of observing a situation can change the situation. So while humans and animals must coexist, there can be no coexistence without influence. So the debate is not whether we should have an impact on how animals live because there's simply no way we can't. The debate is over how best to manage the unavoidable.
Put a puppet on it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I absolutely agree with the above post and see zoos as necessary evils that need stricter enforcement of the WAZA guidelines. Anyone that thinks 'no animals should kept in cages' needs to rethink the repercussions of such an edict and the effect it would have on society. If one claims that captive-raised zoo animals are distinctly different from animals used in the food industry, medical research or kept as farm animals or pets, then one needs to clarify exactly what that distinction is. Which anti-zoo person will be the first to draw those distinctions or answer my six simple 'Yes' or 'No' questions? If the points are not relevant or significant, then explain why that is the case.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
When the hell did medical research animals, something I oppose, get tossed into the mix? And yes, there is a distinction. Vivisection should not be an option. I have seen some horrible videos, uncut, of what happens to monkeys just to see how humans would act when a huge block of concrete hits them on the head. Or how companies like Max Factor would test their make-up on the eyes of a cat just to see how a human may react to that make-up. Why test on animals something that is for humans?

There most certainly is a distinction between zoo animals, farm animals, and pets. Zoo animals are looked at by hundreds of people on a daily basis and are in distinct enclosures. They are used, poked, and prodded for medical reasons and for our entertainment. Farm animals, a good deal of where I live still has ranches and you see them or hear them a good deal. You see the cows, sheep, and horses along the roadside with fencing around so they don't get hit or they graze up in the hills. They may still be in enclosures but their enclosures can be several acres of nothing but land. For the organic, free-range, non-RsBT injecting rancher there is no poking or prodding. For the corporate ranchers, well let's just say they should be run out of business for treating the animals the way they do. Thankfully California has just passed a proposition to restrict such farming.

Pets, for the most part are no longer wild and can not expect to live a good life outside of a home.

You answer my questions first before I consider answering yours.

Bill, yes us humans are encroaching upon wild territory. I have seen in my community that they are trying to accompany the wild life by having areas where they can have safe passage from one hill to the next whilst going over a moderately busy freeway. There has been less dead animals seen on the freeway since this corridor has been built.

Lisa, nicely said! :clap:
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Michelle, thank you for clarifying what you said. In my area we are lucky in that an injured animal does not necessarily have to go to the zoo to be rehabbed. There are sanctuaries and the Wildlife Waystation that deals with wildlife of all kinds. There is also another wildlife sanctuary that is even bigger that is run by actress Tippi Hedren called Shambala Preserve, an exotic cat sanctuary. Here is their website: http://www.shambala.org/. As you can see, children can get educated and see the wildlife up close and personal in a more natural setting.

Here is the website for the other sanctuary, Wildlife Waystation: http://www.wildlifewaystation.org/common/page.php?ref=home
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
I know I said I wasn't going to comment, but why hasn't anyone anti-zoo answered the questions? If you're so anit-zoo you should be able to answer them? What are you so afraid of?
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
BlueMolly2008
Nov 10 2008, 07:45 AM
I know I said I wasn't going to comment, but why hasn't anyone anti-zoo answered the questions? If you're so anit-zoo you should be able to answer them? What are you so afraid of?
What are you pro-zoo people afraid of answering my questions that I asked.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pythonesque
Member Avatar

at the end of thhe day,animals should not be in cages.period.
Listen to the colour of your dreams
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jacaranda
Member Avatar

pythonesque
Nov 10 2008, 12:32 PM
at the end of thhe day,animals should not be in cages.period.
While that is an idealistic statement along the "Star Trek" lines that Bill spoke of earlier, it ignores the reality of the millions of domesticated animals around the world that cannot survive if they were released.
Posted Image
"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through." General Melchett, Blackadder Goes Forth




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
 
What are you pro-zoo people afraid of answering my questions that I asked.

Not at all.
beatlechick
 
Being that the animals are out of their natural environment, I think all zoos are bad.
Here is your first argument. You did not exclude farm animals, such as alpacas, llamas, ostriches and emus, that are also out of their natural environment. You also did not exclude animals used for research purposes such as mice, rats, ferrets, guinea pigs, rabbits, hamsters and monkeys (as well as cats and dogs). You did not exclude pets, because you later say that they cannot be reintroduced into the wild and are 'human-raised'; however, the vast majority of zoo animals are also 'captive-raised' and also cannot be reintroduced into the wild.
beatlechick
 
I'm sorry but I still hate zoos. How many animals died on their way from their natural habitat to another country and then to another country, once again. You think the animals were created and born at the zoo? To give the example of dogs and cats is a poor example. We still have coyotes and wolves who do live in their natural environment-or what passes for that these days. Damn the people who think it's cool to crossbreed and damn the people who buy the crossbred animal. Rats and mice pretty much still live out in the open. They, however, were not trapped to be brought out here. They came on boats because of the food on them. Lions, tigers, bears, alligators, crocs, and the like are trapped to be brought to other countries. Not all are trapped for research and what you could vaguely call protection of the species. I say vaguely because who does the most harm to animal species but humans. We kill them for food (not necessarily for our survival anymore), we kill them for clothing, and we kill them out of our own pleasure. If we really wanted to protect them, we would stop killing them.

Here is your second argument, that zoo animals are trapped in their natural habitats and transported to another country. This is only true of 'bad zoos' and is demonstrably false for 'good zoos'. You also condemn crossbreeding without thinking about how many animals outside of zoos, such as horses, cows, dogs, cats and other farm animals and pets have been and are being crossbred. Do you also condemn the crossbreeding of dogs and cats? Finally, you point out that humans do the most harm to animals and state that humans must stop killing animals. Does this apply to all animals in the human food chain and do you believe that a vegetarian lifestyle should be mandated by governments? Here is what the WAZA guidelines state:

4. Acquisition of Animals

All members will endeavour to ensure that the source of animals is confined to those born in human care and this will be best achieved by direct zoo to zoo conduct. The advice of the appropriate Species Co-ordinator should be sought before acquiring animals. This will not preclude the receipt of animals resulting from confiscation or rescues. It is recognised that, from time to time, there is a legitimate need for conservation breeding programs, education programs or basic biological studies, to obtain animals from the wild. Members must be confident that such acquisitions will not have a deleterious effect upon the wild population.

5. Transfer of Animals

Members will ensure institutions receiving animals have appropriate facilities to hold the animals and skilled staff who are capable of maintaining the same high standard of husbandry and welfare as required of WAZA members. All animals being transferred will be accompanied by appropriate records with details of health, diet, reproductive and genetic status and behavioural characteristics having been disclosed at the commencement of negotiations. These records will allow the receiving institution to make appropriate decisions regarding the future management of the animal. All animal transfers should conform to the international standards and laws applying to the particular species. Where appropriate, animals should be accompanied by qualified staff.
beatlechick
 
As for the condors, I live very close to an area that helped with the species. It is not a zoo, they lived out in the open and not in cages. They were captive but they had no bars to keep them in, just the need to survive and get healthy. The Wildlife Waystation, a very famous place, has a lot of wild animals. Animals that even zoos don't want. They are in enclosures, no cages. The animals are allowed to live out their natural life without any fear of being killed by humans and any fear of having to perform for humans either. They are protected by the humans who live and volunteer there.

Apparently the Sespe Condor Sanctuary in the Los Padres National Forest has no direct link but there are many websites and stories that talk about it. They do have birds in captivity but they also allow them to be out in the wild. The sanctuary is over 50,000 acres. This is the best that I could find that describes what is done there:

http://www.lpfw.org/about/critters/californiacondor.htm

If you want a zoo just for conservancy and study, than go to some colleges. One that's about 8 miles from where I live has an exotic animal program where they study behavior and such.

You point out that zoos are poor at conservation and give the Sespe Condor Sanctuary as an example of a better conservation practice. How do you think captive-raised condors were bred there? The 53,000 acre sanctuary is where the Condors were released after the captive-breeding program was successful. This is from your own website:

"Despite these protections, condor populations continued to decline, and 1982 marked the lowest population numbers for the condor, with less than two dozen birds in the wild and three held in captivity. By 1986 the wild population was so low that the controversial decision was made to catch the remaining nine condors and breed them exclusively in captivity to maximize genetic diversity and survival of the chicks. The last wild condor was captured in the Los Padres National Forest’s Sespe Condor Sanctuary in April 1987.

After five years of captive breeding, wildlife biologists began to release condors back into the wild in 1992 at the Sespe Condor Sanctuary. The release program got off to a rough start, however, with several condor deaths, and the birds were recaptured. The condor program was reevaluated, and changes such as power line and human aversion programs were implemented to minimize the threats to the released condors."


Also, how does a college with an 'exotic animal program' study their behavior without keeping them in cages?
beatlechick
 
Lapislee, your article states the Los Angeles Zoo. So that you know, that zoo has one of the worst records in animal care in the US. They used to be one of the top zoos in the world but their ranking has plummeted when many of their animals were found dead in their enclosures, were very sick, and some were dying due to neglect.

You also make many points about what zoos do wrong; however, these points are generally examples taken from 'bad zoos' that do not follow the WAZA guidelines. The entire point of this thread is to determine if there are any 'good zoos' and what makes them different from 'bad zoos'.
Aimee Wilbury
 
What, in your opinions, are the difference between "good" and "bad" zoos?

You say that all zoos are bad, but I believe that some zoos are good. The WAZA guidelines are the Gold Standard for the practices that a 'good zoo' should follow. You have ignored these guidelines and pointed out practices of 'bad zoos' that do not follow these guidelines.

World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) Code of Ethics and Animal Welfare

What I would suggest is that instead of generalizing about what all zoos are like from the practices at bad zoos, you tell us what is wrong with zoos that follow the WAZA guidelines. Did you even read them?
beatlechick
 
In answer to your question, exotic fish were never wild they were bred. The fish that you buy in the store, or I should say most as some were bred from wild fish, were never wild. Wild birds should stay that way......wild. BTW there have been wild parrots that fly over my area, parrots that were likely once a pet. I found a fascinating site that talks about the history of cats and dogs. As most of us know, cats were revered by the Egyptians who made the killing of a cat punishable by death. Apparently dogs have been domesticated for over 10,000 years and were used as hunters of food by the first humans.

I am against the breeding of animals for our selfish purposes. As for reptiles, I love them but would not want to keep them for myself. They are not pets and should never be sold as pets.

Once again, would breeding animals for farms and pets be considered 'selfish purposes' or more altruistic? How is the keeping of captive-raised reptiles as pets any different from the keeping of captive-raised exotic fish as pets? Please remember that until you post evidence to the contrary I will assume that 'good zoos' follow the WAZA guidelines stating "All members will endeavour to ensure that the source of animals is confined to those born in human care".
beatlechick
 
So I take it you like zoos and consider them to be good. I don't and consider them to be bad. I don't believe in their conservation programs nor the way they study the animals.

I think I answered that clearly enough: The point of this thread is that there are good zoos and bad zoos. I believe there are good zoos, which follow the WAZA guidelines above, and there are bad zoos, which do not. I agree that conservationists do good work, but how many children have learned to love and appreciate animals from reading books by conservationists as opposed to seeing animals in a zoo or keeping pets at home?
Adilah
 
Zoos that breed animals often find themselves with a surplus. These "extras" are usually sold as food or for medical experiments. The animals that are not sold are most often killed.

I am still waiting on a link that gives evidence for this claim from a 'good zoo' that follows the WAZA guidelines.
Adilah
 
Zoos can provide funding and zoological expertise, but they cannot save a species without forcing that species to live its entire existence in captivity. Almost all species bred in captivity can never be re-introduced into the wild, and there is debate whether any can. In-situ conservation is by far the best way to preserve a species.

Would this also apply to the Sespe Condor Sanctuary, that removed condors from their natural habitat and captive-bred them before re-releasing them into the 53,000 acre sanctuary?
beatlechick
 
Lapislee, believe me there are many kids who have never been to a zoo yet they know what zoo animals look like. Many kids are brought up watching nature shows. Take a look at Animal Planet. Sure they don't necessarily get to see the animal live but the ideal situation is for them to be in their own natural habitat and not there for our own amusement.

If kids do not need to observe animals in person to learn about them, then this should apply equally to pets, which are also raised in captivity in cages or enclosures and exist primarily for our 'amusement'.
beatlechick
 
The last time I looked, dogs and cats are not necessarily kept in cages. My cat lives in our house where she has free range. My brother's dogs lives in my house where they also have free range. Birds and reptiles can live very successfully in the wild once freed, whereas pets such as dogs have a problem as do some cats. Once an animal is domesticated, it is harder for them to go back to their wild roots.

I think you are taking this enclosure part a bit to far. BTW, some zoos do still buy their animals from the wild.

BTW, I feel the same way about pet stores who sell animals. I won't patronize them. I don't want to see an animal caged up. And throw animal shelters in there, too.

I am pretty sure that cats and dogs are being kept in cages at pet stores, animal shelters, veterinarians, medical research facilities and in peoples' homes. Zoos that that buy their animals from the wild are not following WAZA guidelines and would be classified as 'bad zoos'. What is your precise definition of an enclosure so that I can understand what you really mean? Here is an example of an enclosure from a good zoo:

"Located just south of Asheboro, the North Carolina Zoo is seated on a 1,500 tract of land in the Uwharrie Mountains. Approximately 500 acres of this property have been developed into one of the largest "natural habitat" zoos in the United States. You won't find cages made of steel and concrete here! Our animals are given enclosures that mimic their natural habitats to include trees, ponds, rocks, grass and dirt."
beatlechick
 
You just don't get it. For one thing, domesticated animals would have a hard time being reintroduced into the wild. They would likely die or get very sick so what you are saying is release your pets to the wild and let them die or get very sick. See what you say can be turned around back to you.

As opposed to animals in zoos that are also captive-raised?
beatlechick
 
Let's put this zoo thing this way, if there were to be a human exhibit that would last for more than 2 months and you were one of the humans picked to be in it, would you want to be caged up with no tv, radio, newspapers, books, nothing that is now in your life? Oh yeah, and you get to be a test subject for future reference.

Again, I ask which of you would take part in a human exhibit at a zoo where you have no tv, no radio, no music, no newspaper, no nothing that is so much a part of your life now. You would have to be subjected to being poked and prodded for science.

Is this question really relevant to why animals should not be kept in zoos? We are still talking about animals, not humans. Here is what the WAZA guidelines permit:

9. Research Using Zoo Based Animals

All zoos should be actively involved in appropriate research and other scientific activities regarding their animals and distribute the results to colleagues. Appropriate areas of research include exhibit design, observations, welfare, behaviour, management practices, nutrition, animal husbandry, veterinary procedures and technology, assisted breeding techniques, biological conservation and cryopresentation of eggs and sperm. Each zoo undertaking such research should have a properly constituted research committee and should have all procedures approved by a properly constituted ethics committee.

Invasive procedures designed to assist in medical research are not to be performed on zoo animals however the opportunistic collection of tissues during routine procedures and collection of material from cadavers will, in most cases, be appropriate.

The well-being of the individual animal and the preservation of the species and biological diversity should be paramount and uppermost in mind when deciding upon the appropriateness of research to be undertaken.

I will answer your most recent post next, but I wanted to make certain you felt that I had read your posts and answered most of your questions. Let me know if I have missed anything. :P
Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Great, now I know that you can place quotes. You still have not answered my question.

Another point is, I do not like zoos and that will not change. You do, and that also will not change.

Animals that have been domesticated can not be let free. Zoo animals have a better chance than homebred animals but they would have problems. The ideal situation would be to stop putting them in zoos.

Enclosures. A cage where the animal has little free-range, such as most enclosures at a zoo, is to small. An enclosure where they have acres to roam is what should be for captive animals.

Case in point: Zoo Life Causes Animal Stress

Study: Zoo-Life Causes Animal Stress
Bob Beale, ABC Science Online

Polar Bears In Confinement

Oct. 2, 2003 — Animals that range freely over large distances in the wild — such as bears and elephants — are much more likely than other species to suffer from stress and behavioral problems in zoos, according to a new study.

The confinement of such species should be fundamentally improved or phased out, assert Ros Clubb and Georgia Mason, of the Animal Behavior Research group at the University of Oxford, in a report today in the British journal Nature.

"Our results show, to our knowledge for the first time, that a particular lifestyle in the wild confers vulnerability to welfare problems in captivity," they said.

A polar bear's typical enclosure size, for example, is about one-millionth of its minimum home-range size.

Some species may be so significantly affected by a lack of room to roam that the development of some regions of their brains may be impaired, the report said.

The researchers recorded the frequency of infant mortality and stereotypical pacing — the most prevalent and clearly defined behavioral problem — in 35 species of caged carnivores.

For each species they also looked at all available field reports about the size of its home range, its daily travel distance, the time it spends in general activity and foraging, and on how reliant the animal is on hunting.

"Among the carnivores, naturally wide-ranging species show the most evidence of stress and/or psychological dysfunction in captivity, a finding that is cause for concern given the difficulties of conserving such species in situ," they said.

"Husbandry of these species in captivity is therefore in need of improvement, such as provision of extra space."

The research helps to explain why species such as ring-tailed lemurs and snow leopards, which have small home ranges, do well in captivity while others are prone to poor health, behavioral problems and breeding difficulties.

The problem lies not so much with the standard of care in zoos but from "constraints imposed on the natural behavior of susceptible animals."

"Preventing natural behavior patterns in animals can give rise to stress and frustration, and impair the development of brain regions that are involved in behavioral sequencing, thereby reducing the animals' ability to behave flexibly and appropriately," they said.

The study suggests that zoos and similar establishments should consider not keeping the vulnerable species and concentrate instead on those that respond better to life in captivity.

Posted Image

Zoo Visitors Stress Out Gorillas

Zoo Visitors Stress Out Gorillas
By Jennifer Viegas, Animal Planet News

type size: [A] [A] [A]


Sept. 26, 2005 — Zoo animals often seem to ignore the presence of human visitors, but new research suggests that is not always the case for captive gorillas, which repeatedly become agitated and anxious when large numbers of people approach their exhibit.

The research, published in the current journal Applied Animal Behavior Science, is the first analysis on the influence of visitors on the behavior and welfare of zoo-housed gorillas.

"We noticed more behaviors suggestive of relaxation, such as increased resting, during low visitor density, and more behaviors suggestive of agitation, such as repetitive rocking, group-directed aggression and self-grooming during high visitor density," said the study's author, Deborah L. Wells.

Wells, a senior lecturer in the School of Psychology at Queen's University Belfast, Ireland, explained to Discovery News that she studied six western lowland gorillas housed together at Belfast Zoological Gardens in Northern Ireland. The gorilla group includes both wild-born and captive-born males and females of different ages.

The gorillas were observed for four hours a day on 20 busy days, when the average number of visitors was around 1,288. The gorillas also were observed on 20 quiet days, usually on weekdays when an average of six people visited the zoo.

During these periods, Wells documented known gorilla behaviors, such as standing, sitting, resting, grooming, aggression, playing, walking, running, climbing, socializing and banging on the viewing window. She also recorded "abnormal" behavior, like repetitive teeth clenching, body rocking and spinning.

Visitors seemed to have no effect on basic behaviors, such as standing, walking and socializing.

When few visitors were present, however, the gorillas tended to relax and rest more. When the zoo was crowded, the gorillas often banged on the viewing window, exhibited all of the abnormal behaviors, repeatedly groomed themselves and fought more often.

Wells said visitors could affect all primates, not just gorillas. Since it is hard to know when zoos will be busy or not, she said factors other than visitor group size could lessen the possible human impact.

"Primates are more likely to be excited by zoo visitors if they appear in large numbers, display erratic behaviors, elicit high levels of noise or deviate greatly from the norm in terms of their physical appearance, for example height, clothing," said Wells, adding that some zoos even play classical music, which seems to soothe the animals and drown out visitor noise.

Mark Challis, acting zoo manager at Belfast Zoological Gardens, said he agreed with Wells that humans might affect some animals.

However, he added, "Not all animals are bothered by crowds or noise. Some species and individuals (appear to be) ambivalent, (while) some appear to enjoy the presence of visitors."

Challis said zoos should be sensitive to the requirements of animals, and that exhibits can be designed to benefit both animals and humans.

He said, "Where it is necessary and relevant, efforts such as the maintenance of species in relevant social groups, off-show areas for retreat, restricted areas of viewing for visitors, sympathetic enclosure design with a knowledge of the species' biology in mind, use of closed-circuit television, or something similar, to show animals even if (they are) 'off-show,' are all relevant."

Following the study, the zoo installed camouflage netting to the viewing area of the gorilla enclosure, which seemed to help reduce some of the abnormal behaviors and infighting.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Now as for selling the animals for meat, here is a recent case:

German Zoo Sold Animals as Meat

Quote:
 
German zoo sold animals as meat

A mayor in eastern Germany has filed charges against workers at his local zoo for shooting animals and selling them as meat.

A spokeswoman for the mayor's office said deer were among the animals killed and sold by workers at Erfurt Zoo without permission over a number of years.

"The case is now with the state prosecutors," said the spokeswoman, declining to give further details.

The German Animal Protection League demanded a review of controls at the zoo and at all other institutions with animals in the state of Thuringia.

"We are worried this is only the tip of the iceberg," said Wolfgang Apel, president of the league, who also said the case raised serious questions about the zoo's management.

Die Zeit newspaper quoted an anonymous zoo employee as saying the number of animals had been declining and: "It is high time something is done about it."

Erfurt Zoo, home to lions, elephants and giraffes as well as horses, donkeys, sheep and goats, declined to comment.

Animal rights campaigners and federal authorities have previously complained about the zoo's imports of wild elephants from South Africa.

Reuters


I know this isn't indicative of zoos but this is rather disturbing:

Chinese Zoo Puts on a Show but Mistreats Animals

Quote:
 

Chinese Zoo Puts On a Show, but Mistreats Animals
Xiongsen Park is rumored to sell tiger meat
REPORTERS NOTEBOOK by BETH LOYD
BEIJING Friday, February 8th 2008—


The Xiongsen Tiger and Bear Park in Guilin, China, has long been a favorite target of international animal rights groups because of the live animal sacrifices and the taunting and torture of animals that have been performed there for years, to mostly enthusiastic audiences.

The Guilin zoo is one of China's largest, boasting a tiger farm with over 1,300 cats and scores of other animals.

It is also the prime example of the shocking practice that is common at zoos and animal parks across China, which make them seem more like a sick circus than the kind of zoos you find in the west.

Animal rights groups have been critical of the treatment of animals here for years. But it's been going on virtually unabated.

But as the Beijing Olympics approach, critics hope new light will be shed on the controversial zoos.

Rock star Paul McCartney said he will boycott the Beijing Olympics after seeing footage of another controversial Chinese tradition: The wholesale slaughter of cats and dogs for their fur.

Critics charge the animals are often beaten and skinned alive or thrown into vats of boiling water. "I wouldn't even dream of going over there to play, in the same way I wouldn't go to a country that supported apartheid. This is just disgusting. It's against every rule of humanity, " McCartney told The Guardian newspaper in 2005.

At most zoos in China, the routine is similar: Tiger and bear trainers prod and poke the animals in order to provoke them. Tigers are trained to ride around the ring atop apparently petrified horses.

At some zoos, lions and tigers are fed live chickens, goats and even horses, triggering a feeding frenzy as the cats devour their hapless prey in front of visitors.

And the tourists seem to love it.

When we visited Guilin recently, I had read reports that the animal park's restaurant was selling tiger meat and so, armed with a small video camera, we went to see if it was true. Upon entering the park, things seemed normal. Tigers and bears were in large pens and visitors snapped photos. It was when we went to see the "show" that the true nature of the place became clear. And what we found afterwards was arguably more disturbing.

As the performance opened, about 20 tigers were led into a ring and lined up next to one another. Trainers began to poke at them, attempting to get them aggravated, so they would growl for the audience. Then, two terrified horses were brought into the ring, the tigers were put on their backs and they ran around the ring several times, much to the crowd's delight. One tiger was then placed atop a large ball and forced to roll on top of it while a trainer poked him with his stick.

Several tigers had to jump through rings of fire and those that resisted were prodded until they did. Then, the circus trainers led the tigers out and brought in a dozen black bears. The miserable-looking bears were also forced to perform acrobatic-type stunts. One trainer repeatedly yanked on the chain leash around one bear's neck and hit the animal several times. When the bears were led off, a goat came into the ring and walked a tightrope with a small monkey on its back, also at the urging of a trainer's metal prod.

Admittedly, it is pretty amazing to see. But for one who is accustomed to American zoos and circuses, it seems disgusting when you see the way the animals are treated by the trainers. And it is not just the trainers that approve of these practices.

After the show was over, we took a tour of the place. In one area, visitors are allowed to take fishing poles with apples on the hooks. Then, they are allowed to get close to a pen of black bears and they can tease them with the apples. The eager bears chase the apples, tripping over one another.

Then we encountered the worst of it. A tiger was placed atop a box out in the open. It had a chain leash around its neck. The tiger appeared to be drugged, although the trainers told us it was just sleepy. For about one dollar, tourists can get close to the lethargic tiger and pet it or take photos.

After seeing this, it was time to get out of there. On our way out, we went to the shop to see what was being sold and found tiger bone wine, an elixir that is allegedly made from the bones of dead tigers and sells for more than $100. The wine has been made for centuries in China and is purported to help sufferers of arthritis and rheumatism, but it has come under criticism more and more as tigers worldwide have become an endangered species. China banned the sale of tiger parts in 1993. Xiongsen has tried to persuade the Chinese government to ease restrictions on the sale of tiger bone wine, but they were denied again last year. Still, operating within some murky gray area, the Xiongsen Tiger and Bear park is still allowed to openly sell the wine within its walls.

The restaurant that allegedly sold tiger meat was closed the day we went, perhaps because of the recent reports and the criticism that ensued.

But many would argue that the selling of tiger meat is perhaps just the tip of the iceberg of practices at Chinese Zoos that should be reevaluated.


Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures


http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=4263150
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
More abuse, only it's from home:

http://www.helpelephants.com/la_zoo_bios.html

Quote:
 
Los Angeles Zoo
Billy
Male Asian elephant
Born ~1985; 20 years old
At L.A. Zoo since 1989 (16 years)

Billy was caught in the wild and forcibly taken from his native home of Malaysia, as part of a trade between the L.A. Zoo and the Malaysian Game Department. Billy lives on approximately one-quarter acre at L.A. Zoo. In the wild, elephants can walk 30 miles in a day. There are roughly 640 acres in one mile.

With no other elephants near him, Billy lives an unnatural, solitary life at the Zoo. While male elephants are often kept separate from other elephants in zoos, in the wild males can display social connections, residing in bachelor herds or frequenting areas with female elephants, sometimes moving from family to family. In India, younger bulls join with older bulls to crop raid.

For many years Billy has been displaying stereotypic behavior in the form of repetitive head bobbing that goes on for extended periods of time. Stereotypic behavior is often viewed as an indicator of poor welfare, caused by factors such as restriction of movement, size of enclosure, social isolation, and lack of complexity in the physical environment. Billy has experienced all of these factors at the L.A. Zoo. In fact, Billy was routinely chained each night, likely from the time of his arrival at L.A. Zoo in 1989 until 1994, for approximately 12 to 14 hours each night. It was during this period that a keeper reportedly physically abused Billy by using electric shock on him.

Experts state that stereotypic behavior can lead to foot problems such as nail cracks (which Billy already has), abscesses and abrasions to the sole of the foot. Foot-related problems are one of the leading causes of euthanasia in captive elephants in the United States.

Gita
Female Asian elephant
Born ~1958; Died from captivity-related causes in 2006 at age 48
Lived at L.A. Zoo since 1959 (47 years)

Gita was taken from her family in India specifically to be exhibited at the L.A. Zoo, and spent her life confined to small exhibits. During the last years of her life, Gita occupied half of an approximately 6200 square foot off-exhibit area with Ruby - giving Gita a little more than five percent of an acre. In the wild elephants can travel up tens of miles per day; there are roughly 640 acres in just one mile.

According to former zoo personnel, Gita and the other elephants were kept in chains for 12 to 14 hours overnight, a practice that lasted for years. Before her untimely death, Gita's body showed the results of her being forced to stand on hard surfaces in cramped quarters, and the years of being chained. She suffered for decades from chronic foot infections and arthritis - the two leading causes of euthanasia in captive elephants in the U.S. - as detailed below.

Gita suffered from painful, chronic foot abscesses in the nails and soles of the feet since at least 1976. Many of Gita’s abscesses appeared on more than one toe and often on more than one foot. Through the years Gita suffered continuously from this condition accompanied by lameness. Arthritis was first recorded in 1985 and persisted throughout the remainder of her life.

Gita was treated with pain killers and anti-inflammatory drugs for years. A July 6, 1997 Los Angeles Times article reported that Gita was receiving a 3,000 milligram dose of Adequan once a month for her arthritis, at a cost of $150, administered with a "very long needle." Other drugs include the NSAIDs Banamine and Phenylbutazone, the latter of which was administered both for arthritis as well as "acute pain" from the constant cutting away at Gita's abscessed feet.

Medical history excerpts: "8/7/77: Rt. Rear sole appears to be nearly completely underun (sic) by abscess…"
"11/9/78: Curetted left fore and right fore foot -- blacked areas extending from open abscess (foot rot) areas back into nail."
"1/9/89 and 1/11/89: Unwilling &/or unable to raise trunk above horizontal…Showers of microemboli from the abscessed foot to the central nervous system are a possibility."
"11/28/89: (L) rear lameness - drags foot…Same syndrome as seen in September..."
"2/9/91: …very sore on both front legs today. Hesitates to walk on either front leg..."
"7/24/91: ...All toes on left lateral forelimb were opened for drainage..."
"5/16/04: AK trimmed almost entire nail wall off, leaving only the growth bed..."

Ruby
Female African elephant
Born ~1961; 44 years old
Arrived at L.A. Zoo in 1987 and lived there until 2003 (16 years); transferred to Knoxville Zoo, Tennessee, in 2003 and then returned to L.A. Zoo in November 2004

Ruby has known nothing but separation, loss, and grief in captivity, first being forcibly taken from her home country of Africa and then shuttled between an animal park, the circus and zoos.

Ruby was taken from her mother and herd to be sold for pubic display. She was exhibited at the now-defunct Lion Country Safari in Orange County, Calif., where she gave birth to a male calf in 1980. When Lion Country Safari closed, Ruby and her baby were sold to Circus Vargas (1983), where they were forcibly separated from one another. In the wild, Ruby's calf would have remained with her until 14 years of age. (Ruby's son died of "unknown means" at age 14, one year after being transferred to Scott Riddle's facility.) Circus Vargas transferred Ruby to the L.A. Zoo in 1987.

Ruby suffered yet another loss in 1997 when one of her companions, Annie, reportedly died from salmonella infection, with later evidence of tuberculosis. Ruby watched her friend slowly die overnight, as Annie was left unattended and "found dead" in the morning. In a 1997 letter, then zoo director Manuel Mollinedo acknowledged the existence of emotions in elephants when he stated: "…it is not surprising that because of their nature, she [Ruby] would mourn the loss of a friend."

In May 2003, despite public outcry and a taxpayer lawsuit, L.A. Zoo trucked Ruby out in the middle of the night, sending her to the Knoxville Zoo in Tennessee and separating her from her friend of 16 years, Gita. However, Ruby never integrated into the elephant group in Knoxville, spending 18 months physically separated from the other elephants. According to an L.A. Times article (11/14/04), while in Knoxville Ruby often appeared "listless and a little angry," and L.A. Zoo director John Lewis claimed that "her behavior toward other elephants also changed."

Ruby was returned to Los Angeles in November 2004. She is now warehoused in an off-site area unavailable to public, along with Gita, though there is a fence separating the two old friends. Why the zoo has failed to re-integrate the two companions is unknown.

There is still a possibility that the L.A. Zoo will transfer Ruby to yet another zoo - which would be particularly cruel after reuniting her with long-time companion Gita.


Finally someone gets it!

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx/?news=335762

Quote:
 
LA councilman gets celeb help in zoo elephant move
Oct. 22, 2008, 6:36 AM EST
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Bob Barker, Alicia Silverstone and other celebrities are joining a city councilman's effort to move elephants from the Los Angeles Zoo to a massive sanctuary where they can roam free — or at least close to it.

Councilman Tony Cardenas, accompanied by several celebrities at a news conference Tuesday, announced his desire to halt construction of the zoo's elephant habitat and use the money to build a 60-acre sanctuary operated by the zoo.

"We need to get those elephants out of the LA Zoo," Cardenas said.

Cardenas filed two motions Tuesday at the City Council meeting to reallocate what's left of the $39 million approved for the elephant exhibit and open the sanctuary in the northern San Fernando Valley. He said the 3 1/2-acre "Pachyderm Forest" at the zoo will be too small to keep elephants happy and healthy.

Los Angeles Zoo officials said they intend to complete the project, which will house 11 African elephants and a breeding program. Zoo director John Lewis said construction is one-third complete and about $10.2 million has been spent.

Cardenas said he was one of the council members who approved the new facility in 2006, but "ever since then, it really hasn't set well with me."

Cardenas said he decided the city's elephant exhibit needed drastic changes after visiting Ruby, a former zoo elephant, at the Performing Animal Welfare Society sanctuary in Stockton.

"You could see in her eyes, she looked healthy. She was interacting with the other elephants," he said.

At the news conference, which included celebrity animal lovers Barker, Silverstone, Robert Culp and Esai Morales, the councilman played a video of the zoo's only pachyderm, Billy. The elephant was seen bobbing his head — a behavior that animal advocates say is caused by the psychological stress of living in confinement.

Barker said Cardenas' proposal is "the perfect solution" for Billy and other elephants scheduled to arrive at the zoo.

Lewis defended the zoo's care of the elephant, saying Billy bobs his head when zoo personnel come to feed or care for him.

"Is it a normal elephant behavior? No. Is it pathological? No. It's a Billy behavior," Lewis said.

Cardenas said a sanctuary would cost $10 million. The unfinished elephant habitat at the zoo could be turned over to giraffes, saving the city $20 million, he said.

A City Council panel will review the proposal Nov. 6.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

beatlechick
 
Great, now I know that you can place quotes. You still have not answered my question. Another point is, I do not like zoos and that will not change. You do, and that also will not change. Animals that have been domesticated can not be let free. Zoo animals have a better chance than homebred animals but they would have problems. The ideal situation would be to stop putting them in zoos.

What is your question? I feel as though I invested plenty of time answering your questions and you did not even attempt to answer six 'Yes' or 'No' questions that I posted earlier. I am not trying to change your mind, I am simply supporting the supposition that not all zoos are 'bad'. Most of your examples have been taken from 'bad zoos', which do not follow WAZA guidelines. You need to show how zoos following those guidelines, which do not encourage taking animals from the wild, torture, killing 'extras' or selling animals for meat are bad. I can give examples of vegetarians that commit crimes, but that doesn't make all vegetarians criminals. By the way, which zoos have you actually observed first hand? I will grant you that the LA Zoo sounds like a bad zoo.

I also agree that some animals should not be kept at zoos except under dire circumstances, such as those facing extinction. Even your own article is not against zoos, it is against the conditions that several species are kept and suggests these remedies:

"Animals that range freely over large distances in the wild — such as bears and elephants — are much more likely than other species to suffer from stress and behavioral problems in zoos, according to a new study. The confinement of such species should be fundamentally improved or phased out, assert Ros Clubb and Georgia Mason, of the Animal Behavior Research group at the University of Oxford, in a report today in the British journal Nature."

"Husbandry of these species in captivity is therefore in need of improvement, such as provision of extra space." The research helps to explain why species such as ring-tailed lemurs and snow leopards, which have small home ranges, do well in captivity while others are prone to poor health, behavioral problems and breeding difficulties. The problem lies not so much with the standard of care in zoos but from "constraints imposed on the natural behavior of susceptible animals." The study suggests that zoos and similar establishments should consider not keeping the vulnerable species and concentrate instead on those that respond better to life in captivity.


From your next article we also do not see complete condemnation of zoos, but a study suggesting that one species is affected adversely by large numbers of people approaching their exhibit. They also suggest improvements to alleviate the problem, but do not state that zoos be closed and animals set free, as you would like.

Zoo animals often seem to ignore the presence of human visitors, but new research suggests that is not always the case for captive gorillas, which repeatedly become agitated and anxious when large numbers of people approach their exhibit. Mark Challis, acting zoo manager at Belfast Zoological Gardens, said he agreed with Wells that humans might affect some animals. However, he added, "Not all animals are bothered by crowds or noise. Some species and individuals (appear to be) ambivalent, (while) some appear to enjoy the presence of visitors." Challis said zoos should be sensitive to the requirements of animals, and that exhibits can be designed to benefit both animals and humans.

He said, "Where it is necessary and relevant, efforts such as the maintenance of species in relevant social groups, off-show areas for retreat, restricted areas of viewing for visitors, sympathetic enclosure design with a knowledge of the species' biology in mind, use of closed-circuit television, or something similar, to show animals even if (they are) 'off-show,' are all relevant."

Following the study, the zoo installed camouflage netting to the viewing area of the gorilla enclosure, which seemed to help reduce some of the abnormal behaviors and infighting.


As for your other articles, I agree that many zoos that do not follow WAZA guidelines are bad zoos and probably should be shut down and have the animals transferred to better zoos, wildlife sanctuaries or released, if possible. Remember: just because you can find examples of 'bad zoos' does mean that all zoos are bad.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
JeffLynnesBeard
Member Avatar
Administrator & Moderator


Cathy, Lee,

Although I commend you both for continuing a civil and interesting debate, perhaps the time has come for you both to agree to disagree? Although the posts are getting longer and longer, it doesn't really seem as if either of you are going to concede any ground.

By all means continue to debate if you want to, but I thought you both may appreciate the view from an 'outsider', albeit one who is a vegetarian and believes strongly in animal welfare.
...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
JeffLynnesBeard
Nov 12 2008, 02:45 AM


Cathy, Lee,

Although I commend you both for continuing a civil and interesting debate, perhaps the time has come for you both to agree to disagree? Although the posts are getting longer and longer, it doesn't really seem as if either of you are going to concede any ground.

By all means continue to debate if you want to, but I thought you both may appreciate the view from an 'outsider', albeit one who is a vegetarian and believes strongly in animal welfare.
I kind of stated that earlier on this page but it got lost with more debating. Sorry Andy.

I have basically quit. I have said my piece.

Lapislee my question was asked before yours were but it is now a moot point.
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I have had an epiphany and am now in the early planning stages of a guerilla operation that will free all of the animals from zoos, pet stores, animal shelters, research facilities, farms and, eventually, all homes where non-domestic species are being held captive or being abused. We won't be able to release the animals to their original breeding grounds due to logistical, financial and time constraints; however, we possess a list of all wildlife sanctuaries, conservation areas, National Parks and wooded areas close to large metropolitan areas where many major zoos are located. See below for a list of initial targets, which include no more than 1,000,000 animals, once non-accredited zoos, circuses, petting farms, etc. are factored in.

Type of Animal Total Number of Individual Animals

Amphibians 14,916
Birds 57,115
Fish 339,195
Invertebrates 239,925
Mammals 53,189
Marine Mammals 1,260
Reptiles 29,573

If, for some reason, you are not prepared to 'join the revolution', you can still report zoo violations here:

Zoo Insiders

Stage Two will require operatives at all major universities, medical research facilities, pharmaceutical companies, farms and defense establishments that use animals for pure research such as genetics, developmental biology, behavioural studies, as well as applied research such as biomedical research, xenotransplantation, drug testing and toxicology tests, including cosmetics testing. Animals are also used for education, breeding, and defense research. We really need to free these animals and return medicine to it's state prior to animal testing circa the 1880s when Louis Pasteur demonstrated the germ theory of medicine by inducing anthrax in sheep.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the total number of animals used in the US in 2005 was 1.2 million, but this does not include rats and mice, which make up about 90% of research animals. The 9 million mice and rats should do well in university research facilities once allowed to roam free. According to the 2002 USDA Animal Care Report, a total of 1,087 active research facilities (at 1,961 sites) are registered with the USDA (those with only birds, mice and/or rats are not required to register with the USDA).

If for some reason, you are not able to 'join the revolution', find more information about animal testing here:

Laboratory Primate Advocacy Group

Stage Three will be the most labor intensive as we must use a media blitz to convince owners of exotic pets to release them back into the wild or go home-to-home and release them the 'old fashioned' way. Although around 63 percent of all U.S. households (71.1 million) are pet owners, most only own cats and dogs (163 million animals), many of which merely need to be freed from cages, backyard 'enclosures' and those kept horribly restrained on chains. These cats and dogs, probably less than 10-20 million, can be redistributed to owners who do not confine them improperly. The main objective will be to release to the wild 'exotic' pets, such as freshwater fish (142 million), small animals (24 million), birds (16 million), horses (14 million), reptiles (13 million) and saltwater fish (10 million). [Pescatarians will NOT be allowed to particpate in this phase of the project. Sorry.]

If, for some reason, you are unable to 'join the revolution', report cases of pet abuse here:

Pet Abuse

This is a list of Association of Zoos and Aquariums member zoos and aquariums.

Name Address City State/Country

Abilene Zoological Gardens 2070 Zoo Ln Abilene Texas
Adventure Aquarium 1 Riverside Dr Camden New Jersey
Africam Safari Park 11 Oriente #2407 Puebla Puebla, Mexico
African Safari Wildlife Park 267 S Lightner Road Port Clinton Ohio
Akron Zoological Park 500 Edgewood Ave Akron Ohio
Albuquerque Biological Park 903 10th St SW Albuquerque New Mexico
Alexandria Zoological Park 3016 Masonic Dr Alexandria Louisiana
Alameda Park Zoo White Sands Blvd at 10th St Alamogordo New Mexico
Aquarium of the Americas 1 Canal St New Orleans Louisiana
Aquarium of the Bay The Embarcadero at Beach St
Pier 39 San Francisco California
Aquarium of the Pacific 100 Aquarium Way Long Beach California
Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum 2021 N Kinney Rd Tucson Arizona
Atlantis Paradise Island Nassau Bahamas
Audubon Zoo PO Box 4327 New Orleans Louisiana
Belle Isle Aquarium (closed April 3, 2005) PO Box 39 Royal Oak Michigan
Bergen County Zoological Park 216 Forest Ave Paramus New Jersey
Bermuda Aquarium, Museum and Zoo PO Box FL 145 Flatts Bermuda
Binder Park Zoo 7400 Division Dr Battle Creek Michigan
Biodôme de Montreal 4777 Pierre-de-Coubertin Montreal Quebec, Canada
Birch Aquarium at Scripps Institute of Oceanography USCD, 9500 Gilman Dr La Jolla California
Birmingham Zoo 1 Wild Pl Birmingham Alabama
Blank Park Zoo 7401 SW 9th St Des Moines Iowa
Boonshoft Museum of Discovery 2600 Deweese Parkway Dayton Ohio
Bramble Park Zoo PO Box 910 Watertown South Dakota
Brandywine Zoo 1001 N Park Dr Wilmington Delaware
BREC's Baton Rouge Zoo PO Box 60 Baker Louisiana
Brevard Zoo 8225 N Wickham Rd Melbourne Florida
Bronx Zoo 2300 Southern Blvd Bronx New York
Brookfield Zoo 3300 Golf Rd Brookfield Illinois
Brookgreen Gardens PO Box 3368 Pawleys Island South Carolina
Buffalo Zoo 300 Parkside Ave Buffalo New York
Busch Gardens Africa PO Box 9158 Tampa Florida
Buttonwood Park Zoo 425 Hawthorn St New Bedford Massachusetts
Cabrillo Marine Aquarium 3720 Stephen M. White Dr San Pedro California
Caldwell Zoo PO Box 4785 Tyler Texas
Calgary Zoo 1300 Zoo Road NE Calgary Alberta, Canada
Cameron Park Zoo 1701 N 4th St Waco Texas
Cape May County Park Zoo 4 Moore Rd Dn 801 Cape May County Court House New Jersey
Capron Park Zoo 201 County St Attleboro Massachusetts
Central Florida Zoological Park PO Box 470309 Lake Monroe Florida
Central Park Zoo 830 5th Ave New York New York
Chahinkapa Zoo PO Box 490 Wahpeton North Dakota
Charles Paddock Zoo 9305 Pismo Ave Atascadero California
Chattanooga Zoo at Warner Park 1101 McCallie Ave Chattanooga Tennessee
Chehaw Wild Animal Park 105 Chehaw Park Rd Albany Georgia
Cheyenne Mountain Zoo 4250 Cheyenne Mount Zoo Rd Colorado Springs Colorado
Chicago Zoological Society 3300 Golf Road Brookfield Illinois
Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Gardens 3400 Vine Street Cincinnati Ohio
Cleveland Metroparks Zoo 3900 Wildlife Way Cleveland Ohio
Clyde Peeling's Reptiland 18628 US Route 15 Allenwood Pennsylvania
Columbus Zoo and Aquarium PO Box 400 Powell Ohio
Como Zoo and Conservatory 1225 Estabrook Drive Saint Paul Minnesota
Connecticut's Beardsley Zoo 1875 Noble Avenue Bridgeport Connecticut
Cosley Zoo 1356 Gary Avenue Wheaton Illinois
Coyote Point Museum 1651 Coyote Point Drive San Mateo California
Dakota Zoo PO Box 711 Bismarck North Dakota
Dallas World Aquarium 1801 N Griffin Street Dallas Texas
Dallas Zoo 650 So. R.L. Thorton Fwy Dallas Texas
David Traylor Zoo of Emporia PO Box 928 Emporia Kansas
Denver Zoological Gardens 2300 Steele Street Denver Colorado
Detroit Zoological Park PO Box 39 Royal Oak Michigan
Dickerson Park Zoo 3043 North Fort Springfield Missouri
Disney's Animal Kingdom PO Box 10000 Lake Buena Vista Florida
El Paso Zoo 4001 E Paisano Drive El Paso Texas
Ellen Trout Zoo 402 Zoo Circle Lufkin Texas
Elmwood Park Zoo 1661 Harding Blvd Norristown Pennsylvania
Erie Zoo PO Box 3268 Erie Pennsylvania
Fort Wayne Children's Zoo 3411 Sherman Blvd Fort Wayne Indiana
Fort Worth Zoo 1989 Colonial Parkway Fort Worth Texas
Fossil Rim Wildlife Center PO Box 2189 Glen Rose Texas
Franklin Park Zoo 1 Franklin Park Road Boston Massachusetts
Fresno Chaffee Zoo 894 W Belmont Ave Fresno California
Georgia Aquarium 225 Baker Street Atlanta Georgia
Gladys Porter Zoo 500 Ringgold Street Brownsville Texas
Great Plains Zoo and Museum 805 S Kiwanis Avenue Sioux Falls South Dakota
Greenville Zoo 150 Cleveland Park Drive Greenville South Carolina
Grizzly Discovery Center PO Box 996 West Yellowstone Montana
Happy Hollow Park & Zoo 1300 Senter Road San Jose California
Have Trunk Will Travel 27575 Hwy 74 Perris California
Henry Doorly Zoo 3701 S 10th St Omaha Nebraska
Henry Vilas Zoo 702 S Randall Avenue Madison Wisconsin
Henson Robinson Zoo 1100 E Lake Drive Springfield Illinois
Honolulu Zoo 151 Kapahulu Avenue Honolulu Hawaii
Houston Aquarium 410 Bagby Street Houston Texas
Houston Zoo 1513 N Macgregor Drive Houston Texas
Hutchinson Zoo PO Box 1567 Hutchinson Kansas
Indianapolis Zoo PO Box 22309 Indianapolis Indiana
International Animal Exchange 130 E 9 Mile Road Ferndale Michigan
International Crane Foundation PO Box 447 Baraboo Wisconsin
International Exotic Feline Sanctuary PO Box 637 Boyd Texas
Jackson Zoological Park 2918 W Capitol Street Jackson Mississippi
Jacksonville Zoological Gardens 370 Zoo Parkway Jacksonville Florida
John Ball Zoological Garden 1300 W Fulton Street Grand Rapids Michigan
John G. Shedd Aquarium 1200 S Lake Shore Drive Chicago Illinois
Kangaroo Conservation Center 222 Bailey Waters Road Dawsonville Georgia
Kansas City Zoological Park in Swope Park 6800 Zoo Drive Kansas City Missouri
Knoxville Zoological Gardens PO Box 6040 Knoxville Tennessee
Landry's Downtown Aquarium - Denver 700 Water Street Denver Colorado
Lee Richardson Zoo 312 Finnup Drive Garden City Kansas
Lehigh Valley Zoo 5150 Game Preserve Rd. Schnecksville Pennsylvania
Lincoln Children's Zoo 1222 S 27th Street Lincoln Nebraska
Lincoln Park Zoo in Lincoln Park 2001 N Clark Street Chicago Illinois
Lion Country Safari 2003 Lion Country Safari Road Loxahatchee Florida
Little Rock Zoo 1 Jonesboro Drive Little Rock Arkansas
Living Desert Zoo and Gardens 47900 Portola Avenue Palm Desert California
Living Desert Zoo & Gardens State Park PO Box 100 Carlsbad New Mexico
The Living Seas PO Box 10000 Lake Buena Vista Florida
Los Angeles Zoo and Botanical Gardens 5333 Zoo Drive Los Angeles California
Louisville Zoological Garden PO Box 37250 Louisville Kentucky
Lowry Park Zoo 1101 W Sligh Avenue Tampa Florida
Lubee Bat Conservancy 1309 NW 192nd Avenue Gainesville Florida
Memphis Zoo 2000 Prentiss Place Memphis Tennessee
Mesker Park Zoo & Botanic Garden 2421 Bement Avenue Evansville Indiana
Miami Metrozoo 12400 SW 152nd St / One Zoo Boulevard Miami Florida
Mill Mountain Zoo PO Box 13484 Roanoke Virginia
Miller Park Zoo 1020 S Morris Avenue Bloomington Illinois
Milwaukee County Zoological Gardens 10001 W Bluemound Road Milwaukee Wisconsin
Minnesota Zoo 13000 Zoo Blvd Apple Valley Minnesota
Monterey Bay Aquarium 886 Cannery Row Monterey California
Montgomery Zoo PO Box 3313 Montgomery Alabama
Aquarium and Rain Forest at Moody Gardens 1 Hope Blvd Galveston Texas
Mote Marine Aquarium 1600 Ken Thompson Parkway Sarasota Florida
Museum of Science Science Park Boston Massachusetts
Myakka City Lemur Reserve PO Box 249 Myakka City Florida
Mystic Aquarium & Institute for Exploration 55 Coogan Blvd Mystic Connecticut
Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens 1590 Goodlette-Frank Rd Naples Florida
Nashville Zoo 3777 Nolensville Road Nashville Tennessee
National Aquarium in Baltimore 501 E Pratt St
Pier 3 Baltimore Maryland
National Aviary Allegheny Commons West Pittsburgh Pennsylvania
New England Aquarium Central Wharf Boston Massachusetts
New York Aquarium Surf Avenue at West 8th Street Brooklyn New York
New York State Zoo 1 Thompson Park Watertown New York
Newport Aquarium One Aquarium Way Newport Kentucky
North Carolina Aquarium at Fort Fisher 900 Loggerhead Road Kure Beach North Carolina
North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores PO Box 580 Atlantic Beach North Carolina
North Carolina Aquarium on Roanoke Island PO Box 967 Manteo North Carolina
North Carolina Zoo 4401 Zoo Pkwy Asheboro North Carolina
Northeastern Wisconsin (NEW) Zoo 4418 Reforestation Road Green Bay Wisconsin
Northwest Trek Wildlife Park 11610 Trek Drive E Eatonville Washington
Conservation and Research Center 1500 Remount Road Front Royal Virginia
Oakland Zoo PO Box 5238 Oakland California
Ocean Park Hong Kong Ocean Park Road Aberdeen Hong Kong
Oglebay's Good Zoo Rt. 88 N Wheeling West Virginia
Oklahoma City Zoological Park 2101 NE 50th St Oklahoma City Oklahoma
Oregon Coast Aquarium 2820 SE Ferry Slip Road Newport Oregon
Oregon Wildlife Foundation 8375 Steel Bridge Road Sheridan Oregon
Oregon Zoo 4001 SW Canyon Road Portland Oregon
Palm Beach Zoo at Dreher Park 1301 Summit Blvd West Palm Beach Florida
Philadelphia Zoo 3400 W Girard Avenue Philadelphia Pennsylvania
Phoenix Zoo 455 N Galvin Pkwy Phoenix Arizona
Pittsburgh Zoo & PPG Aquarium One Wild Place Pittsburgh Pennsylvania
Point Defiance Zoo & Aquarium 5400 N Pearl St Tacoma Washington
Potawatomi Zoo 500 S Greenlawn Avenue South Bend Indiana
Potter Park Zoological Gardens 1301 S Pennsylvania Avenue Lansing Michigan
Prospect Park Zoo 450 Flatbush Avenue Brooklyn New York
Pueblo Zoo 3455 Nuckolls Avenue Pueblo Colorado
Queens Zoo 5351 111th St Flushing New York
Racine Zoological Gardens 2131 North Main Street Racine Wisconsin
Reid Park Zoo 1100 S Randolph Way Tucson Arizona
Ripley's Aquarium 1110 Celebrity Circle Myrtle Beach South Carolina
Ripley's Aquarium of the Smokies 88 River Road Gatlinburg Tennessee
Riverbanks Zoo PO Box 1060 Columbia South Carolina
Riverside Park and Zoo 1600 S Beltline Hwy W Scottsbluff Nebraska
Roger Williams Park Zoo 1000 Elmwood Avenue Providence Rhode Island
Rolling Hills Wildlife Adventure 625 N Hedville Road Salina Kansas
Roosevelt Park Zoo PO Box 538 Minot North Dakota
Rosamond Gifford Zoo One Conservation Place Syracuse New York
Sacramento Zoo 3930 W Land Park Drive Sacramento California
Safari West 3115 Porter Creek Road Santa Rosa California
Saint Louis Zoo 1 Government Drive Saint Louis Missouri
Salisbury Zoological Park PO Box 2979 Salisbury Maryland
San Antonio Zoological Gardens & Aquarium 3903 N. Saint Mary's Street San Antonio Texas
San Diego Zoo PO Box 120551 San Diego California
San Diego Wild Animal Park 15500 San Pasqual Valley Road Escondido California
San Francisco Zoo 1 Zoo Road San Francisco California
Santa Ana Zoo 1801 E Chestnut Avenue Santa Ana California
Santa Barbara Zoological Gardens 500 Ninos Drive Santa Barbara California
Santa Fe Community College Teaching Zoo 3000 NW 83rd St Gainesville Florida
Scovill Zoo 71 S Country Club Road Decatur Illinois
Seattle Aquarium 1483 Alaskan Way
Pier 59 Seattle Washington
SeaWorld Orlando 7007 SeaWorld Drive Orlando Florida
SeaWorld San Antonio 10500 SeaWorld Drive San Antonio Texax
SeaWorld San Diego 500 SeaWorld Drive San Diego California
Sedgwick County Zoo 5555 W Zoo Blvd Wichita Kansas
Seneca Park Zoo 2222 Saint Paul St. Rochester New York
Sequoia Park Zoo 531 K St Eureka California
Shark Reef at Mandalay Bay 3950 Las Vegas Blvd. South Las Vegas Nevada
Six Flags Marine World 2001 Marine World Pkwy Vallejo California
Smithsonian National Zoological Park 3001 Connecticut Avenue NW Washington D.C.
South Carolina Aquarium 100 Aquarium Wharf Charleston South Carolina
Squam Lakes Natural Science Center P.O. Box 173 Holderness New Hampshire
St. Augustine Alligator Farm Zoological Park 999 Anastasia Blvd. Saint Augustine Florida
St. Catherines Island Center 182 Camellia Road Midway Georgia
Staten Island Zoo 614 Broadway Staten Island New York
Sunset Zoological Park 2333 Oak Drive Manhattan Kansas
Tautphaus Park Zoo PO Box 50220 Idaho Falls Idaho
Tennessee Aquarium PO Box 11048 Chattanooga Tennessee
Texas State Aquarium 2710 N Shoreline Blvd Corpus Christi Texas
The Butterfly House 15193 Olive Boulevard St. Louis Missouri
The Florida Aquarium 701 Channelside Drive Tampa Florida
The Maryland Zoo in Baltimore Druid Hill Park Baltimore Maryland
The Texas Zoo 110 Memorial Drive Victoria Texas
The Wilds 14000 International Road Cumberland Ohio
Toledo Zoological Gardens PO Box 140130 Toledo Ohio
Topeka Zoo 635 SW Gage Blvd Topeka Kansas
Toronto Zoo 361A Old Finch Avenue Scarborough Ontario
Tracy Aviary 589 E 1300 S Salt Lake City Utah
Trevor Zoo Millbrook School Road Millbrook New York
Tulsa Zoo and Living Museum 5701 E 36th St N Tulsa Oklahoma
University of Nebraska Callitrichid Research Center 6001 Dodge Street Omaha Nebraska
Hogle Zoo 2600 Sunnyside Avenue Salt Lake City Utah
Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre PO Box 3232 Vancouver British Columbia
Virginia Aquarium 717 General Booth Blvd Virginia Beach Virginia
Virginia Zoological Park 3500 Granby Street Norfolk Virginia
Walter D. Stone Memorial Zoo 1 Franklin Park Road Boston Massachusetts
Western North Carolina Nature Center 75 Gashes Creek Road Asheville North Carolina
White Oak Conservation Center 581705 White Oak Road Yulee Florida
Wild Canid Survival & Research Center PO Box 760 Eureka Missouri
Wildlife Safari PO Box 1600 Winston Oregon
Wildlife World Zoo 16501 W Northern Avenue Litchfield Park Arizona
Wonders of Wildlife Museum & Aquarium 500 W Sunshine Springfield Missouri
Woodland Park Zoo 601 N 59th St Seattle Washington
Zoo Atlanta 800 Cherokee Avenue SE Atlanta Georgia
Zoo Boise 355 Julia Davis Drive Boise Idaho
Zoo de Granby 525 rue St-Hubert Granby Quebec
ZOOAMERICA North American Wildlife Park 100 W Hersheypark Drive Hershey Pennsylvania
ZooMontana 2100 S. Shiloh Road Billings Montana

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!! :P
Quote Post Goto Top
 
BlueMolly2009
Member Avatar
LOLcat Freak
Can we stop posting these long posts? My finger is tired from scrolling. :yes: Couldn't you just post a link or something?
I'm done with commenting on the "good zoo" vs "bad zoo" issue because I won't change anyone's mind and I am getting too emotional over it.
Molly
Myspace
My Twitter
My FriendFeed
My Facebook
Posted Image
Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Sorry. I just wanted to impress my colleagues with the scope of the problem we are facing. :-/
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aimee Wilbury
STOP CHANGING THIS ADMINS
Whats the difference between cages and enclosures? They can both be big and small. Only thing I can think of is the material surrounding it.
Edited by Aimee Wilbury, Nov 13 2008, 11:51 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Aimee Wilbury
Nov 13 2008, 11:50 AM
Whats the difference between cages and enclosures? They can both be big and small. Only thing I can think of is the material surrounding it.
Well, the North Carolina Zoological Park in Asheboro, North Carolina has a 500-acre enclosure for herd animals and no cages made of steel or concrete. The San Diego Wild Animal Park, The Saint Louis Zoological Park and National Zoological Park in Washington, DC are also rated highly.

Top Zoos in the United States
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aimee Wilbury
STOP CHANGING THIS ADMINS
I used to believe all zoos were evil, but after playing a computer game (It was called "Wildlife Zoo" -- can't quite remember the publisher) I changed my mind. Strange?
Only problem I had with the game was the fact I kept flooding out the enclosures. :blush: Some of the animals liked to swim, so I dug out a hollow and put a pump in and it overflowed.
Edited by Aimee Wilbury, Nov 14 2008, 08:07 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I am glad we now know part of your motivation for starting this monolithic thread. I learned a lot about what zoos do right and wrong while doing my research for this thread. I wish we could just shut down all of those little side-of-the-road-type zoos where the animals are kept in small cages like pets and never get a chance to get out.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Aimee Wilbury
Nov 14 2008, 08:07 PM
I used to believe all zoos were evil, but after playing a computer game (It was called "Wildlife Zoo" -- can't quite remember the publisher) I changed my mind. Strange?
Only problem I had with the game was the fact I kept flooding out the enclosures. :blush: Some of the animals liked to swim, so I dug out a hollow and put a pump in and it overflowed.
:huh:
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mia Culpa
Member Avatar
This space intentionally left blank.
That's not strange at all. If you're more connected to a fantasy world than reality.
If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beatlechick
Member Avatar
In Paul's Arms!
Mia Culpa
Nov 19 2008, 03:45 AM
That's not strange at all. If you're more connected to a fantasy world than reality.
Absolutely! :yes:
Posted Image Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · Things We Said Today · Next Topic »
Add Reply


"Treasure these few words"