San Diego Zoo Pandas are leaving San Diego Zoo

St. Louis does want pandas and has for many years: their master plan includes a complete overhaul of the Red Rocks area, replacing it with the Silk Road, containing most of the charismatic Asian megafauna (including giant pandas) as well as a few overlooked Asiatic ungulates and nocturnal animals. But it’s not an immediate priority. Their announced new projects include Primate Canopy Trails, a reimagining of the Children’s Zoo, and the entire development of the new safari park. I would venture to guess that they are waiting for the panda leases in DC, Memphis, and Atlanta to expire first. That way, a group of American zoos can negotiate with the Chinese government as a united front, dictating financial terms, and not get screwed in the process. China would rather have some pandas in the US than no pandas at all. But we’ll see.

As an aside, I saw that people mentioned replacing the SDZ panda exhibit with one for Chinese giant salamanders. Are these difficult to breed/keep alive in captivity? St. Louis had a pair about ten years ago that mysteriously died shortly after being put on exhibit.
 
imaginarius said:
As an aside, I saw that people mentioned replacing the SDZ panda exhibit with one for Chinese giant salamanders. Are these difficult to breed/keep alive in captivity? St. Louis had a pair about ten years ago that mysteriously died shortly after being put on exhibit.
Click to expand...

I don’t think these are necessarily difficult to keep in captivity, but breeding does seem to be a thing that no zoos over here in Europe have managed to crack. A lot of places with them currently have either young animals, unsexed animals or a combination of both - so that could also play a part. Certainly the only zoos that I expect might be able to get some breeding done here with the numbers they currently have are London Zoo, Pairi Daiza, (each have four animals, who are currently relatively young) or Prague (who have close to 20 animals of different ages).
 
I don't know if we overestimate the importance of exhibiting Giant Pandas in the US here - for both, the Chinese and the Americans. Not only geopolitical and strategic, but also financial considerations have their limits.

For the Chinese: Do we win that much strategic power when we claw back the Pandas or no longer rent them as we lose money?
For the US government/authorities: How big is the impact for our image, when Giant Pandas are no longer on exhibit in our zoos?
For the US zoos: Do we win that much additional visitors and reputation as we have to pay for the rent?

From the moment as Giant Pandas were no longer a gift from China but became a rental good/merchandise instead (and more and more zoos got them), the "importance" of showing them has sunken rapidly imo.

By the way: This came from one who likes seeing Giant Pandas in a zoo...
 
zoomaniac said:
I don't know if we overestimate the importance of exhibiting Giant Pandas in the US here - for both, the Chinese and the Americans. Not only geopolitical and strategic, but also financial considerations have their limits.

For the Chinese: Do we win that much strategic power when we claw back the Pandas or no longer rent them as we lose money?
For the US government/authorities: How big is the impact for our image, when Giant Pandas are no longer on exhibit in our zoos?
For the US zoos: Do we win that much additional visitors and reputation as we have to pay for the rent?

From the moment as Giant Pandas were no longer a gift from China but became a rental good/merchandise instead (and more and more zoos got them), the "importance" of showing them has sunken rapidly imo.

By the way: This came from one who likes seeing Giant Pandas in a zoo...
Click to expand...

Everyone likes seeing pandas. But you’re right, it shouldn’t be this complicated. An endangered animal should never be leveraged as a political bargaining chip, or extorted to foreign countries for vast sums of money. If China really cared about saving them, they would do what it is best for the animals, not their bottom lines. But they only care about their bottom lines.
 
imaginarius said:
Everyone likes seeing pandas. But you’re right, it shouldn’t be this complicated. An endangered animal should never be leveraged as a political bargaining chip, or extorted to foreign countries for vast sums of money. If China really cared about saving them, they would do what it is best for the animals, not their bottom lines. But they only care about their bottom lines.
Click to expand...
The very same argument can be used and projected on almost any other nation that view nature and conservation as an after thought. Looking at North America this, this very much includes present day USA, Canada, Mexico, while on the other side of the Atlantic in Europe ... at large the situation is not much better. The mantra "all in the name of economic progress and growth" is getting slimmer every day.
 
ShonenJake13 said:
I don’t think these are necessarily difficult to keep in captivity, but breeding does seem to be a thing that no zoos over here in Europe have managed to crack. A lot of places with them currently have either young animals, unsexed animals or a combination of both - so that could also play a part. Certainly the only zoos that I expect might be able to get some breeding done here with the numbers they currently have are London Zoo, Pairi Daiza, (each have four animals, who are currently relatively young) or Prague (who have close to 20 animals of different ages).
Click to expand...
I disagree: Wien - Schoenbrunn and Berlin - Zoo have shown that this is quite possible. Within the US, SD-Zoo was the first to accomplish natural mating and successful conception (without resorting to AI).
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
The very same argument can be used and projected on almost any other nation that view nature and conservation as an after thought. Looking at North America this, this very much includes present day USA, Canada, Mexico, while on the other side of the Atlantic in Europe ... at large the situation is not much better. The mantra "all in the name of economic progress and growth" is getting slimmer every day.
Click to expand...

Oh for sure, no country is innocent when it comes to this. But pandas are almost unique in that 1) they are beloved by the public almost everywhere and 2) they are only found within a tiny geographic range entirely located in the borders of one country. That gives China unique leverage to monopolize them and do what they do. The only other species I can think of for which the aforementioned criteria also apply is the koala, and Australia is almost entirely as guilty when it comes to conserving that species, too — zoos must “rent” them, either directly or from the San Diego Zoo. But unlike the giant panda, not every koala, including its future progeny, in the world is the property of the Australian government.
 
What I am trying to say is that Healthy Planet conservation requires significant investment and makes economic sense globally. That is not restricted to P.R. China.

That the Chinese authorities have opted for a financial model to partially fund their giant panda conservation program in terms of size is only a tiny spill on the plate required for conserving P.R. China's conservation of natural resources, plant and animal life. Actually the "almost tuppence" amounts (over the 10-year deals) "raked" in from this abroad dwarf into insignificance what investment is required in giant panda conservation or habitat conservation in panda areas.

To be fair, this is not restricted to P.R. China and all countries generally spend significantly more / even huge amounts on military, industrial complex or the gig economy over preserving nay restoring our Planet to a life and liveable state. It is no wonder that in the current atmosphere (no pun intended) globally we are still ignoring the challenges of this day and age, e.g. biodiversity loss, wholesale habitat destruction, climate change, failure to invest in clean energy, transiting to non toxic farming, mining and industry (all economic costs never incurred into any business model yet of most, nay almost all business ventures and simply spread over future generations to rectify).
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
What I am trying to say is that Healthy Planet conservation requires significant investment and makes economic sense globally. That is not restricted to P.R. China.

That the Chinese authorities have opted for a financial model to partially fund their giant panda conservation program in terms of size is only a tiny spill on the plate required for conserving P.R. China's conservation of natural resources, plant and animal life. Actually the "almost tuppence" amounts (over the 10-year deals) "raked" in from this abroad dwarf into insignificance what investment is required in giant panda conservation or habitat conservation in panda areas.

To be fair, this is not restricted to P.R. China and all countries generally spend significantly more / even huge amounts on military, industrial complex or the gig economy over preserving nay restoring our Planet to a life and liveable state. It is no wonder that in the current atmosphere (no pun intended) globally we are still ignoring the challenges of this day and age, e.g. biodiversity loss, wholesale habitat destruction, climate change, failure to invest in clean energy, transiting to non toxic farming, mining and industry (all economic costs never incurred into any business model yet of most, nay almost all business ventures and simply spread over future generations to rectify).
Click to expand...

You’re right, we do not invest nearly enough into conservation and stemming the multitude of human-induced causes of biodiversity loss. And it’s not just China, it’s everywhere. I guess the thing that irks me about China and the panda situation the most is that the loan fees DON’T all go to panda conservation — half of it does, but the other half goes straight into the pockets of the Chinese government to spend as they please. And that only applies to the countries with pandas that have enacted legislation forcing 50% of their panda fees to go into conservation efforts. The countries without those laws put $1 million per year per panda straight into Xi’s pocket. I cannot condone that.
 
imaginarius said:
You’re right, we do not invest nearly enough into conservation and stemming the multitude of human-induced causes of biodiversity loss. And it’s not just China, it’s everywhere. I guess the thing that irks me about China and the panda situation the most is that the loan fees DON’T all go to panda conservation — half of it does, but the other half goes straight into the pockets of the Chinese government to spend as they please. And that only applies to the countries with pandas that have enacted legislation forcing 50% of their panda fees to go into conservation efforts. The countries without those laws put $1 million per year per panda straight into Xi’s pocket. I cannot condone that.
Click to expand...
Your right and it shouldn’t be decided by who Xi likes, it should be decided by who can care for them best. The price and loan time are bad enough, to the point where zoos just don’t want to deal with the struggles of acquiring pandas anymore
 
Westcoastperson said:
Your right and it shouldn’t be decided by who Xi likes, it should be decided by who can care for them best. The price and loan time are bad enough, to the point where zoos just don’t want to deal with the struggles of acquiring pandas anymore
Click to expand...

Yep. And frankly, I am very uncomfortable knowing that some of that panda money may wind up paying for the mainland Chinese security forces who are used to subvert democracy and quell political dissent in Hong Kong and elsewhere. That’s several million dollars per year from the US alone that winds up who knows where, but not to help pandas. No thanks.
 
imaginarius said:
Yep. And frankly, I am very uncomfortable knowing that some of that panda money may wind up paying for the mainland Chinese security forces who are used to subvert democracy and quell political dissent in Hong Kong and elsewhere. That’s several million dollars per year from the US alone that winds up who knows where, but not to help pandas. No thanks.
Click to expand...
It's a thought that truly makes me shutter that pandas are used to silence Hong Kong and fund concentration camps for religious people and those who oppose the Chinese Communist party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top