Audio: Damian Aspinall on why he’s calling for zoos to be phased out within the next three decades

Onychorhynchus coronatus

Onychorhynchus coronatus

Well-Known Member
I've seen this guy mentioned in this forum more than once and so thought some of you might find this article/ audio interview (literally just posed on Mongabay) either interesting / thought provoking or distressing :

Audio: Damian Aspinall on why he’s calling for zoos to be phased out within the next three decades

Very strong words from Aspinall. I wasn't really expecting to agree with quite as many of the points he makes, but admittedly on some I do, however, I disagree with him on so much of his argument.
 
Last edited:
Dear @O.c., probably Damian Aspinall is phased out first as born in 1960 (so a good 59 right now) before the decade 2030 is out!

I am not saying relax though as … I seriously take exception at quite a good few of his down-trodden the usual "animal welfarist" agenda points - which for the most part are simply un true - however on the reintroduction programs per se I feel we as zoo minded people and staffers might be able to contribute more (e.g. in terms of placing surplus stock on reintroduction projects and zoos having the financial clout and network to do it … properly).
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
Dear @O.c., probably Damian Aspinall is phased out first as born in 1960 (so a good 59 right now) before the decade 2030 is out!

I am not saying relax though as … I seriously take exception at quite a good few of his down-trodden the usual "animal welfarist" agenda points - which for the most part are simply un true - however on the reintroduction programs per se I feel we as zoo minded people and staffers might be able to contribute more (e.g. in terms of placing surplus stock on reintroduction projects and zoos having the financial clout and network to do it … properly).
Click to expand...
Much as I dislike Mr Aspinall's opinions, I hope he lives longer than that ....... Partly because I'm considerably older than him!
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
Dear @O.c., probably Damian Aspinall is phased out first as born in 1960 (so a good 59 right now) before the decade 2030 is out!

I am not saying relax though as … I seriously take exception at quite a good few of his down-trodden the usual "animal welfarist" agenda points - which for the most part are simply un true - however on the reintroduction programs per se I feel we as zoo minded people and staffers might be able to contribute more (e.g. in terms of placing surplus stock on reintroduction projects and zoos having the financial clout and network to do it … properly).
Click to expand...

I feel that his points on zoos needing to do far more for in-situ conservation are spot on but while I agree with his argument on phasing out common species that don't really as such require a presence in zoos , I couldn't help but think there is an enormous hypocrisy here.

I've had a look at photos at both of his wildlife parks *cough* zoos *cough* (It is all just more PC semantics in the wording really, isn't it ?) in the zoochat gallery and it appears that he has been stocking them / turning them into safari parks with some very unendangered species like meerkats , wallabies , ostrich ,rhea,capybara, coati and lots of pretty common African and Asian ungulates etc.

To me it seems like he is saying one thing and doing an entirely different one by bringing in these animals. These actions totally contradict his own words and I was hoping the interviewer might corner him on this and ask him to clarify but it didn't happen.
 
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
I feel that his points on zoos needing to do far more for in-situ conservation are spot on but while I agree with his argument on phasing out common species that don't really as such require a presence in zoos , I couldn't help but think there is an enormous hypocrisy here.


To me it seems like he is saying one thing and doing an entirely different one by bringing in these animals. These actions totally contradict his own words and I was hoping the interviewer might corner him on this and ask him to clarify but it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

Some of the more common species at Port Lympne were brought in to 'bulk up' the safari-style nature of parts of the park, principally the African area. At both parks there are many species, both common and rarer, that have never been the subject of any reintroduction schemes from there, and seem unlikely to be so in the future. I would say that probably still covers the greater majority of species at both parks. I'm sure the interviewer would not be aware of such a situation though.
 
Pertinax said:
Some of the more common species at Port Lympne were brought in to 'bulk up' the safari-style nature of parts of the park, principally the African area. At both parks there are many species, both common and rarer, that have never been the subject of any reintroduction schemes from there, and seem unlikely to be so in the future. I would say that probably still covers the greater majority of species at both parks. I'm sure the interviewer would not be aware of such a situation though.
Click to expand...

I see , well I knew of them reintroducing gorillas and (I think ?) black rhinos back to National parks in Africa as these sorts of things tend to make the rounds on social media. But other than having a certain admiration for them for making that leap of faith with reintroduction I'm not sure how I feel about caution being thrown to the wind through speedy reintroductions given the enormous risks involved.

As you've mentioned there are a lot of commoner species kept for a safari style park. Doesn't the fact that he has brought in these animals and keeps bringing them in sort of highlight the incongruence of what Aspinall is saying ?

Because I dont really understand what he's going / aiming for here , if he is against the keeping of species which are of no conservation concern then fine and I agree with him but why on earth make one of his parks into some kind of crass safari park full of African and Asian megafauna (In the interview he keeps making references to academic papers that conclude this) which are not endangered?
 
Last edited:
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
Because I dont really understand what he's going / aiming for here , if he is against the keeping of species which are of no conservation concern then fine and I agree with him but why on earth make one of his parks into some kind of crass safari park full of African and Asian megafauna (In the interview he keeps making references to academic papers that conclude this) which are not endangered?
Click to expand...
You have to understand the history of the parks. Howletts was created initially by his father John Aspinall- he was something of a collector animal-wise and initially aquired various species from different sources- some that were endangered, a number that are not, to found his private animal collection. His original ethos was to 'befriend' large mammals like gorillas and tigers, which later transferred into another more focused second aim to 'repatriate' species into the wild by breeding them at his parks. Obviously this was only possible with certain species which are the ones they focus on mostly in their news bulletins etc. The second park at Port Lympne was originally opened to afford much-needed extra space, but became something of a financial liability as, having been forced to open his parks to the public to gain a return, its location meant it was not visited so much as the original Howletts, which was also JA's home anyway.

Damian Aspinall inherited this problem when he took over the parks. In an attempt to draw more visitors, a section of Port Lympne was developed more along the lines of a safari-style park, initially using some species of deer and antelope they already had, and also adding more (zebra, gnu, giraffe etc) and it has since seen hotel-style accomodation added too. It has all been done out of financial necessity rather than anything. But it all flies very much against his arguments for not keeping 'common' or other species not involved in reintroductions- they have a lot of those. The arguements as they relate to his own parks are not watertight by any means.
 
Pertinax said:
You have to understand the history of the parks. Howletts was created initially by his father John Aspinall- he was something of a collector animal-wise and initially aquired various species from different sources- some that were endangered, a number that are not, to found his private animal collection. His original ethos was to 'befriend' large mammals like gorillas and tigers, which later transferred into another more focused second aim to 'repatriate' species into the wild by breeding them at his parks. Obviously this was only possible with certain species which are the ones they focus on mostly in their news bulletins etc. The second park at Port Lympne was originally opened to afford much-needed extra space, but became something of a financial liability as, having been forced to open his parks to the public to gain a return, its location meant it was not visited so much as the original Howletts, which was also JA's home anyway.

Damian Aspinall inherited this problem when he took over the parks. In an attempt to draw more visitors, a section of Port Lympne was developed more along the lines of a safari-style park, initially using some species of deer and antelope they already had, and also adding more (zebra, gnu, giraffe etc) and it has since seen hotel-style accomodation added too. It has all been done out of financial necessity rather than anything. But it all flies very much against his arguments for not keeping 'common' or other species not involved in reintroductions- they have a lot of those. The arguements as they relate to his own parks are not watertight by any means.
Click to expand...

Interesting to learn about the history of these parks and their evolution to the present day. However, I still think if Aspinall wants to make some of these rather big claims for himself and his parks while also critiquing the concept of zoos in general then he really would appear to need to more closely manage the animals that are being kept at his parks and to phase out the more common and not conservation viable species.

Of course, I understand the financial motive for him not having done so, but still there is a rather large burden of proof on him to put into action his ideals regarding zoos. Especially considering the way he is currently campaigning about the way these institutions should reform.
 
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
Interesting to learn about the history of these parks and their evolution to the present day. However, I still think if Aspinall wants to make some of these rather big claims for himself and his parks while also critiquing the concept of zoos in general then he really would appear to need to more closely manage the animals that are being kept at his parks and to phase out the more common and not conservation viable species.

Of course, I understand the financial motive for him not having done so, but still there is a rather large burden of proof on him to put into action his ideals regarding zoos. Especially considering the way he is currently campaigning about the way these institutions should reform.
Click to expand...

This is why the interviews he gives have often been a source of discussion and contention on here- because the arguements he makes seem completely at odds with the lists of animals they keep themselves. If he phased out all the non-endangered/or non- conservation-viable species there wouldn't be much left-certainly not enough for people to pay to go and see. He sometimes talks about wanting to'close down' his own parks too, but the reality is it doesn't happen, instead they build new novel 'top of the range' animal-related hotel-style accomodation at Port Lympne for which visitors pay extremely high prices to use- this park continues to become more like a country club as time goes on.
 
Last edited:
Pertinax said:
This is why the interviews he gives have often been a source of discussion and contention on here- because the arguements he makes seem completely at odds with the lists of animals they keep themselves. If he phased out all the non-endangered/or non- conservation-viable species there wouldn't be much left-certainly not enough for people to pay to go and see. He sometimes talks about wanting to'close down' his own parks too, but the reality is it doesn't happen, instead they build new novel 'top of the range' animal-related hotel-style accomodation at Port Lympne for which visitors pay extremely high prices to use- this park continues to become more like a country club as time goes on.
Click to expand...

But surely some of the animals that are being kept such as gorillas , black rhino , sumatran tigers and clouded leopard would keep visitors buying tickets ?
 
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
But surely some of the animals that are being kept such as gorillas , black rhino , sumatran tigers and clouded leopard would keep visitors buying tickets ?
Click to expand...

These are quite large parks( Port Lympne is enormous actually) Just the few highest profile/ endangered species would never be enough for visitors to come and see- they would complain as most people pay to see, and expect to see, a typical 'zoo'-sized collection. Without all the fill-in species they wouldn't have that..
 
Pertinax said:
These are quite large parks( Port Lympne is enormous actually) Just the few highest profile/ endangered species would never be enough for visitors to come and see- they would complain as most people pay to see, and expect to see, a typical 'zoo'-sized collection. Without all the fill-in species they wouldn't have that..
Click to expand...

It is cases like these where admittedly I just think to myself "visitors and their complaints be damned".
 
Antoine said:
According to Zoo news digest there are rumors that Aspinall parks have left EAZA.

ZooNews Digest
Click to expand...

As FBBird says, probably more than rumours - and all four EEPs that were coordinated by Howletts and Port Lympne staff in January are now 'Vacant'. Whether he jumped or not, I don't know - but there is some very damning condemnation of Aspinall's transfer of some moloch gibbons to Java in the recent TAG reports so I suspect his days in EAZA were already numbered.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top