Is the zoo depressing?

strandroad

It is depressing, if wild animals in captivity bother you in general (otherwise it's not).

Personally, in the age of HDTV and amazing filming options we now have I don't see the need to display animals like this at all. Watching National Geographic one can experience a tiger's life much better than observing it from afar in its bored, ringfenced glory.

lostboy75

I know this wont change any ones views on this, but

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Perspective

This was the email response that WWF sent in regards to questions about their stance on zoos…


Responsible, well-managed zoos and aquariums have a vital role to play in the conservation of wildlife and its habitat. This position statement applies to zoos and aquariums that meet the rigorous accreditation standards of the American Zoo and Aquarium Association (AZA), based on criteria that include conscientious animal care, high quality education initiatives, and strong conservation programs.
A crucial service provided by zoos and aquariums is educating people of all ages about biodiversity, habitat protection, and conservation. Through creative exhibits, informative signs, lecture series, volunteer and mentoring programs, outreach with schools, and special events, zoos and aquariums can make lessons about biodiversity and conservation come alive. Most people will probably never encounter a tiger or a shark in the wild. Seeing them in zoos and aquariums may be the only opportunity they ever have to meet these fascinating animals up close, and this may be the spark that triggers them to care more about conservation. No one wants a day to come when zoos and aquariums are the only remaining refuge for endangered species, and these institutions have a unique ability to convey messages about the importance of protecting these species in their wild habitats. These messages have truly hit their target when visitors go home with a heightened sense of purpose, inspired to do their part to save threatened wildlife.
Many zoos and aquariums also provide support in a variety of ways to conserve endangered species in the wild and protect their habitat. One way is through direct financial support; zoos and aquariums donate millions of dollars each year to field conservation projects around the world. WWF strongly encourages all zoos and aquariums that exhibit endangered species in captivity to find ways to invest in conserving these species in their native habitats – and do so in coordination with each other and other funding organizations to maximize effectiveness. Zoos and aquariums can also promote conservation in other ways, such as conducting field research, training foreign wildlife management personnel, undertaking environmental education and outreach in local communities living in close proximity to endangered wildlife, and influencing wildlife conservation legislation and policy. WWF commends zoos and aquariums for their achievements in these areas and hopes to see their involvement continue to expand.
Measures like the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, and Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) prevent zoos from bringing endangered wild animals into captivity under all but the most exceptional circumstances. Fortunately, thanks to advances in captive propagation, well-run zoos are now able to maintain genetically healthy, self-sustaining populations of many species through their own breeding programs and exchanges with other zoos. A modest number of these breeding programs have produced, or are producing, populations of endangered species to reintroduce to the wild. Under certain extraordinary conditions, reintroductions may help shore up populations in steep decline, or even restore a species to an ecosystem from which it had vanished. This conservation approach remains highly experimental, however, and is no substitute for protecting species in their natural habitat. WWF strongly believes that in most cases, conservation dollars are best spent to reduce habitat loss and other threats to endangered species in the wild.

cormie

That's a pretty comprehensive reply from The WWF and makes them sound great. I'm sure these AZA zoos are probably working closely with The WWF and given that the zoos are operating legally, The WWF are probably doing their best to make these legal businesses as good as possible for the animals, but they sum it up in their last sentence saying "WWF strongly believes that in most cases, conservation dollars are best spent to reduce habitat loss and other threats to endangered species in the wild."

Don't mess with the habitats in the first place and there's little need for any conservation efforts. I also didn't like the part about exchanges with other zoos, which is basically breaking up families, again, have a look at that Blackfish documentary and see how the mother reacted when her young was taken from her. Heartbreaking to watch, can only imagine what it's like to be either of them. Of course this happens in animal farming too.

As the question is "Is the zoo depressing" I guess it depends on the child and parents. If they see animals purely as commodity of humans, be it for food, entertainment or what have you and never stop to think about the fact the animals actually have feelings and emotions and wouldn't choose to be there if they had the choice, then they wouldn't be effected at all and would purely see it as another day out where their entertainment is priority. If the visitors are coming from a more compassionate background, they probably will find it depressing to see captive animals.

On a lighter note, this is hilarious and slightly educational:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_la5XiQJdk

uck51js9zml2yt

We have an annual family pass which is great value. My son loves it and we can just pop in for an hour or so and leave without feeling guilty that we're not getting value for money.

I remember it as a kid 40 years ago and its come on in leaps and bounds since the days of the mad polar bears and cigarette smoking chimps.

FunLover18

cormie wrote: »

Don't mess with the habitats in the first place and there's little need for any conservation efforts. I also didn't like the part about exchanges with other zoos, which is basically breaking up families, again, have a look at that Blackfish documentary and see how the mother reacted when her young was taken from her. Heartbreaking to watch, can only imagine what it's like to be either of them. Of course this happens in animal farming too.

As the question is "Is the zoo depressing" I guess it depends on the child and parents. If they see animals purely as commodity of humans, be it for food, entertainment or what have you and never stop to think about the fact the animals actually have feelings and emotions and wouldn't choose to be there if they had the choice, then they wouldn't be effected at all and would purely see it as another day out where their entertainment is priority. If the visitors are coming from a more compassionate background, they probably will find it depressing to see captive animals.

cormie I agree with you on some points however I don't think the morality of zoos is as black and white as you make out. It's easy to say "don't mess with the habitats" but it's impossible to actually enforce such an attitude. Human society is founded on adapting habitat and utilising, in our greed it has gotten out of hand and we're now obsessed with luxuries that are unnecessary. One would think it would a relatively easy thing to do to say "Listen, humans of the world, we don't actually need palm oil in our shampoo. What say you, we ditch it, then we can stop destroying the natural habitat in Indonesia."

As a race we're incapable of such behaviour, and palm oil is one very small example. No doubt cormie you're contributing to the loss of habitats in your own miniscule way. So, we can't NOT mess with the habitats, we cannot control ourselves from destroying these habitats or even killing the wild habitants. However we have advanced morally, and most importantly we have advanced in our knowledge of the natural world, and in many other ways which allow us to control the existential future of many species. Zoos are one the ways of doing this, as pointed out above they contribute to preserving species which either humans or nature would have previously allowed to go extinct. You say species going extinct is part of nature and you're right but humans have done so much to alter the path of nature in so many negative ways I say why not try and the opposite.

Yes, the animals are stripped of their freedom and are kept in "habitats" which are far too small, there's no debating that. However they are also safe, they may be torn from their families and shipped across the globe to environments they aren't used to but they are not torn limb from limb by predators, they are well looked after (in the most case, and in particular Dublin zoo), they are not abused or tortured, and they are loved, by their keepers, and by the visitors. I love the zoo, I always have and yes there is a sadness to it because as pet owner I firmly believe that animals have personalities and can tell emotions and I don't like seeing the individuals in such circumstances, but they are better off than a lot of domesicated animals.

You're also right that zoos were originally started for entertainment value and to certain degree that aspect remains, but the money the zoo receives does hugely contribute to the up keep and maintenance, and I think its fantastic that zoos (particularly Dublin Zoo, the oldest zoo in the world) have evolved and adapted so that they are now actually contributing to the welfare of their residents (arguably not the indivuals but the species as a whole) and I sincerely hope that in the very very distant future (when the human race has advanced even further than we already have) zoos will have played a vital part in the rehabilitation of nature,

...

God, that all sounds terribly sentimental and sanctimonious; maybe years after the rehabilitation a heartwarming tearjerker will be made by the then equivalent of Spielberg. It's honestly how I look at it though. I'm not overly happy with the situation, and I would disagree strongly with anyone who sincerely believes that zoos are the best we can do for animals.

OP!! OP!! You don't need to read all the above, just take your kid to the zoo! If you're not happy with it tell em why and they can form their own views.

Miaireland

I was there last year and found the elephant enclosure very upsetting. It seemed very small and the animals looked depressed and miserable.

billie1b

Jerrica wrote: »

The zoo is a lovely day out for kids of all ages. Dublin Zoo staff treat all animals with the utmost respect, care and compassion and are involved in a number of European and Worldwide breeding and conservation programs. More details from their website here.

It's a fantastic teaching resource for kids who would otherwise never get to see many of these animals up close and personally, and strives towards education, not just entertainment.

I cant agree with you on one thing there, we went the zoo 2 years ago with the kids and we were looking at the Giraffes, the Giraffe came over to the fence and started picking leafs from the tree and eating them. A few of the kids, mine included started giving leafs to the Giraffe and a zoo keeper comes flying over in a golf buggy, climed the fence partially and started hitting the Giraffe in the face with a stick. A few of the kids started crying and he said 'its the only way to treat beasts like this', I have never been back to the zoo after that. I'm not saying most staff dont treat the animals well but this guy certainly didnt and the bloke in the buggy with him was just laughing, when a few of us questioned him he jumped in the buggy and drove off, I will never give Dublin Zoo my money ever again after witnessing that

Piliger

billie1b wrote: »

I will never give Dublin Zoo my money ever again after witnessing that

Oh right ... so one person was rude to me in a shop in Spain, and I'm never going back to that country !! FFS.

The Zoo can be depressing, if you only look at it from one perspective. But life is not like that. Life is about perspective and proportionality and the bigger picture. And a far more depressing factor in Dublin zoo is the outrageous cost !

I don't like to see animals caged. But then again what is the alternative ? Over my lifetime the space and conditions for animals in Dublin zoo has been transformed enormously. They have FAR more space and ar FAR better cared for. My last visit, a year or so ago was good.

billie1b

Piliger wrote: »

Oh right ... so one person was rude to me in a shop in Spain, and I'm never going back to that country !! FFS.

The Zoo can be depressing, if you only look at it from one perspective. But life is not like that. Life is about perspective and proportionality and the bigger picture. And a far more depressing factor in Dublin zoo is the outrageous cost !

I don't like to see animals caged. But then again what is the alternative ? Over my lifetime the space and conditions for animals in Dublin zoo has been transformed enormously. They have FAR more space and ar FAR better cared for. My last visit, a year or so ago was good.

Its not that anyone was rude, it was the way he treated the animal, if they can do that in front of people I can only imagine what they are doing when people are not there.

wench

cormie wrote: »

I also didn't like the part about exchanges with other zoos, which is basically breaking up families

If you don't engage in exchanges of animals, what do you propose happens when the animals reach maturity. Who are they going to breed with? Their parents & siblings?
It is natural in many species for the males in particular to leave the family and seek out new opportunities.

Tayla

billie1b wrote: »

................a zoo keeper comes flying over in a golf buggy, climed the fence partially and started hitting the Giraffe in the face with a stick. A few of the kids started crying and he said 'its the only way to treat beasts like this', I have never been back to the zoo after that. I'm not saying most staff dont treat the animals well but this guy certainly didnt and the bloke in the buggy with him was just laughing, when a few of us questioned him he jumped in the buggy and drove off, I will never give Dublin Zoo my money ever again after witnessing that

Did you make a complaint against him?

billie1b

Tayla wrote: »

Did you make a complaint against him?

Yes, us and 3 other families, they told us we were confused in what we witnessed and he didn't hit the Giraffe. Never heard anything after that

toshiba2010

it is if you are a monkey :):) LOL only kidding it,s a great bit of crack so it is .

cormie

FunLover18 wrote: »

cormie I agree with you on some points however I don't think the morality of zoos is as black and white as you make out. It's easy to say "don't mess with the habitats" but it's impossible to actually enforce such an attitude. Human society is founded on adapting habitat and utilising, in our greed it has gotten out of hand and we're now obsessed with luxuries that are unnecessary. One would think it would a relatively easy thing to do to say "Listen, humans of the world, we don't actually need palm oil in our shampoo. What say you, we ditch it, then we can stop destroying the natural habitat in Indonesia."

As a race we're incapable of such behaviour, and palm oil is one very small example. No doubt cormie you're contributing to the loss of habitats in your own miniscule way. So, we can't NOT mess with the habitats, we cannot control ourselves from destroying these habitats or even killing the wild habitants. However we have advanced morally, and most importantly we have advanced in our knowledge of the natural world, and in many other ways which allow us to control the existential future of many species. Zoos are one the ways of doing this, as pointed out above they contribute to preserving species which either humans or nature would have previously allowed to go extinct. You say species going extinct is part of nature and you're right but humans have done so much to alter the path of nature in so many negative ways I say why not try and the opposite.

Yes, the animals are stripped of their freedom and are kept in "habitats" which are far too small, there's no debating that. However they are also safe, they may be torn from their families and shipped across the globe to environments they aren't used to but they are not torn limb from limb by predators, they are well looked after (in the most case, and in particular Dublin zoo), they are not abused or tortured, and they are loved, by their keepers, and by the visitors. I love the zoo, I always have and yes there is a sadness to it because as pet owner I firmly believe that animals have personalities and can tell emotions and I don't like seeing the individuals in such circumstances, but they are better off than a lot of domesicated animals.

You're also right that zoos were originally started for entertainment value and to certain degree that aspect remains, but the money the zoo receives does hugely contribute to the up keep and maintenance, and I think its fantastic that zoos (particularly Dublin Zoo, the oldest zoo in the world) have evolved and adapted so that they are now actually contributing to the welfare of their residents (arguably not the indivuals but the species as a whole) and I sincerely hope that in the very very distant future (when the human race has advanced even further than we already have) zoos will have played a vital part in the rehabilitation of nature,

...

God, that all sounds terribly sentimental and sanctimonious; maybe years after the rehabilitation a heartwarming tearjerker will be made by the then equivalent of Spielberg. It's honestly how I look at it though. I'm not overly happy with the situation, and I would disagree strongly with anyone who sincerely believes that zoos are the best we can do for animals.

OP!! OP!! You don't need to read all the above, just take your kid to the zoo! If you're not happy with it tell em why and they can form their own views.

I agree with a lot of what you say above too. There's nothing particularly wrong with an animal getting torn apart by a predator, that's just nature Humans are indeed a blight on the planet and I guess I'm just being idealistic in that all animals could be re-homed back to the wild (or as close to it as possible given that they haven't been brought up practising their instincts), the zoos could shut down and those working in conservation projects in zoos could be deployed to similar projects elsewhere. That of course is never going to happen, well, maybe some day

wench wrote: »

If you don't engage in exchanges of animals, what do you propose happens when the animals reach maturity. Who are they going to breed with? Their parents & siblings?
It is natural in many species for the males in particular to leave the family and seek out new opportunities.

Well I guess that's my point that they should be able to leave the family to seek new opportunities, all this is decided for them in a zoo.

Billy Mays

DellyBelly wrote: »

I disagree. The zoo is a fanatastic resource. My kids love it and it has improved over the years. The welfare of the animals seems to be the highest priority. The feeding of the seals and penguins is a highlight.

I'm waiting to bring my kids to the circus if one comes our way so they can see some of the amazing tricks animals can do. We don't have much money so wouldn't have the means of seeing these animals in the wild...

I honestly can't tell if you're on a wind up here or not.

Who or what is the feeding of the seals a highlight for? The seal enclosure in the zoo is a disgrace. A crappy little pool for them to swim around in circles all day. Brilliant.

Circuses are great aswell. Keeping large animals in tiny cages for most of their lives and in a lot of cases physically abusing them, then taking them out once a day to make them jump through hoops of fire for the entertainment of people, just like they do in the wild.

I suppose they are a necessity though because some people find this entertaining and they can't afford to go and see these animals in their natural habitat.

kylith

anncoates wrote: »

Haven't been for about 2 or 3 years but I thought it had improved a lot from when I was a younger.

They were working on that African Savannah/Plains (?) section when I was there and it looked like it was going to be good: a big large open, co-mingled space modelled on natural habitat.

Ditto. Even a few years ago I was impressed by how much it had improved.

pwurple

I suppose I have been spoilt over the years with Fota Wildlife Park in Cork, as that's where we went during my childhood. I've been to dublin zoo twice and found it very depressing compared to that.

Found that story about the tapir attack on the child last year disturbing as well. Why put newborn animals in that situation?

strandroad

Reading about the Copenhagen giraffe reminded me of this thread. Animals are commodity in zoos after all.
http://m.independent.ie/top-stories/protests-as-shot-zoo-giraffe-fed-to-lions-in-front-of-children-29994416.html