I asked them the very same question on Twitter; I got a boilerplate response with no actual answer.
Anti Zoo and Aquarium lobbying.
- Thread starter cliffxdavis
- Start date
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Could you post the actual answer they gave ?
I would be interesting in reading and dissecting it even if it is just a meaningless word salad.
“Hi Sam, some more information is available via the link. The existing Zoo Animals Fund is there to provide funding for animal care due to financial difficulties. What is being proposed is extra funding to ensure zoos and aquariums continue to exist and grow.“
Pro zoo organizations and zoo fans don't try to tug the heartstrings of people to raise funds by anthropomorphizing animals.
Zoological organizations only try to justify themselves by bringing up conservation which could be refuted by using the fact that non endangered species, such as meerkats, are kept or how in situ programs are effective. Respectable zoos could give these organizations the moon on a stick or even work with them to eliminate "common enemies" but organizations like CAPS/F4A . These organizations are stubborn
Which is why I agree a dance off followed by a robot fight is the best idea to show which idea shall stand.
How can any business or institution, let alone zoos, grow during the pandemic? This just shows how F4A is in a clown world.
Also has F4A ever celebrated the closure on Living Coasts?
littleRedPanda
Well-Known Member
Many of their arguments are quite robotic, so I'd be afraid of them winning that contest too easily.
Yes (up to individual discretion if you want to give them clicks): a) Devon Zoo Closes Down for Good!
b) Animals From Closed Devon Zoo To Be Rehomed (with obligatory image of a species not held at LC)
They have also had Borth in their sights for quite some time and reacted similarly last week:
a) https://twitter.com/freeanimalsuk/status/1359548663752765446
b)BREAKING: Borth Zoo Set to Permanently Close!
Pretty nasty to enjoy the demise of others. I'm sure they wouldn't like it if people celebrated the demise of their organization.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I don't really agree with you on that point because to some extent (obviously not on the same level that animal rights activists do) both pro-zoo organizations and zoo fans (and in conservation in general) do somewhat anthropomorphize animals to raise funds and for publicity.
I think that when done in moderation and tactfully there is ultimately nothing wrong with that kind of anthromorphism as a means to an end.
Regarding the dance off followed by the robot fight, what a wonderful idea !
I don't really agree with you on that point because to some extent (obviously not on the same level that animal rights activists do) both pro-zoo organizations and zoo fans (and in conservation in general) do somewhat anthropomorphize animals to raise funds and for publicity.
I think that when done in moderation and tactfully there is ultimately nothing wrong with that kind of anthromorphism as a means to an end.
Regarding the dance off followed by the robot fight, what a wonderful idea !
Yes but they don't take this anthropomorphism as reality.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Yes, exactly, there is definitely a distinction.
Conversely perhaps the overwhelming majority of animal rights activists do have that kind of solipsism with the way and extent that they anthropomorphize animals.
Carrie Symonds wants animals to run free. So why is she working for a zoo? | Catherine Bennett
A rather brutal and entertaining read.
A rather brutal and entertaining read.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I think Bennett must have been browsing through the zoochat threads and taken on board some of our meerkat criticism.
Well, just give the pro-zoo people a robot like Tombstone or Eruption, and the anti-zoo people a literal RC racing car, and then we'll see who wins "too easily".
(Oh, for those who don't know, Tombstone is a robot with a massive horizontal spinning bar and Eruption is a robot with a very powerful flipper. They are among the most feared robots in the USA and UK respectively and have won many events, including televised ones)
? What is this all about, excuse my ignorance!
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Lol sorry, I am going to have to take responsibility for this as I started with the animal rights dance off protest comment which gradually with other posters became a more elaborate scenario involving robots.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
So I don't really understand at all what they are getting at with this comment.
On their website it is pretty clear from what they have written that these are outright anti-zoo activists and too entrenched / invested in that stance to see the nuance. They seem to be about destroying zoos as institutions rather than reforming them.
In contrast with their comment to you it appears that they are opting for a more nuanced approach and a progressive approach to zoos that recognises that there is a justification for high quality zoos and to improve these institutions through reform.
So what actually even is their stance then ?
Now, this particular kind of attitude deeply saddens me. Of course I'm a tiny bit biased when I say that I absolutely love zoos, their history, species, everything about them. My whole life seems to be devoted to them at the moment and visiting them is one of my biggest passions, and of course there are some zoos in the world which are certainly not the best in terms of their animal's wellbeing but generally most zoos are doing an excellent job at conservation work and keeping certain species in healthy populations in captivity, whereas in the wild, their situation is far worse so I just don't understand this kind of hate attitude towards them.
It makes me wonder whether these people have ever even been to a zoo in recent times to see all of the important conservation work they continue to do. And personally, I see nothing 'cruel' about seeing animals such as a mob of Meerkats in an exhibit at a zoo, what's wrong with that? As long as they're well-cared for and have some decent living conditions what's the problem? This kind of outlook on zoos (and others like aquariums, safari parks, etc.) just makes me very angry at the singlemindedness of these people. My god I can rant when I want to
[bump apology]
I don't really think that those behind Freedom For Animals or other such groups have much any interest in zoology or wildlife conservation.
What I have noticed in my time looking at these groups... they tend to focus mainly on large and popular animals and are often quick to leap out whenever a negative headline shows itself. And the solution they present is always clear-cut and and wide-ranging; 'close the zoos'.
In addition it feels to me a prevalence of something I have seen quite a bit in all forms of modern activism. Many of those who shout the largest about their cause of choice have nothing to do, as an individual, with the given cause. But at least doing something towards the 'greater good' feels good somehow. And so to recruit such enthusiasts, these groups tend to do a lot of boiling down. Boil down ostensible points and evidence to snappy facts, sieve out any nuance that may be present, chop up the talking points into catchy slogans, stir finely - Recruitment stew. Perfect for the masses to eat.
If it ever is that these groups manage to achieve their pipe dream of closing all the zoos in the world, then there will be less interest in zoology overall. Even if these groups will rejoice. I recall seeing one post from such group with a giant inflatable reindeer; of course a Rudolph-esque caricature of a reindeer anyways. With comments to the effect of, 'the public doesn't need real reindeer!' 'This is the only reindeer they need!'
I don't say this in defense of all live reindeer events everywhere ... but I find that these groups find it just as well that animals like reindeer are to be cosigned to caricature... doesn't give me the impression they care much about conservation and such of real reindeer. I digress.
The public will be less informed about zoology; whilst those with deep pockets and oil wells will continue exploiting the fleeting riches where live the dik-diks, giant cockroaches, and tapir. There may well be some left who chant save the rainforest... but then the public may ask why the rainforest needs saving, unaware of all that lives there. In my opinion, zoos are a good buffer against that maligned future.
On a tangent sorta thing... I can't help but notice... sometimes when I use Facebook on a mobile device I get adverts from some animal advocate groups in Europe pertaining to one or other animal who needs help, signature, donation, or all three. And at some point it came to me how inefficient this way of doing things is ... if what these groups wanted was to see a future without these dancing bears, tortured monkeys, lonely elephants... I think they would attempt to put more pressure onto governments to introduce legislation against these. Even if it is not feasible to do. The fact they resort to showing distressing pictures of sickly animals so to get donations and such tells me otherwise. As if there has to be a constant flow of those in need of help to keep these groups in business.
I don't really think that those behind Freedom For Animals or other such groups have much any interest in zoology or wildlife conservation.
What I have noticed in my time looking at these groups... they tend to focus mainly on large and popular animals and are often quick to leap out whenever a negative headline shows itself. And the solution they present is always clear-cut and and wide-ranging; 'close the zoos'.
In addition it feels to me a prevalence of something I have seen quite a bit in all forms of modern activism. Many of those who shout the largest about their cause of choice have nothing to do, as an individual, with the given cause. But at least doing something towards the 'greater good' feels good somehow. And so to recruit such enthusiasts, these groups tend to do a lot of boiling down. Boil down ostensible points and evidence to snappy facts, sieve out any nuance that may be present, chop up the talking points into catchy slogans, stir finely - Recruitment stew. Perfect for the masses to eat.
If it ever is that these groups manage to achieve their pipe dream of closing all the zoos in the world, then there will be less interest in zoology overall. Even if these groups will rejoice. I recall seeing one post from such group with a giant inflatable reindeer; of course a Rudolph-esque caricature of a reindeer anyways. With comments to the effect of, 'the public doesn't need real reindeer!' 'This is the only reindeer they need!'
I don't say this in defense of all live reindeer events everywhere ... but I find that these groups find it just as well that animals like reindeer are to be cosigned to caricature... doesn't give me the impression they care much about conservation and such of real reindeer. I digress.
The public will be less informed about zoology; whilst those with deep pockets and oil wells will continue exploiting the fleeting riches where live the dik-diks, giant cockroaches, and tapir. There may well be some left who chant save the rainforest... but then the public may ask why the rainforest needs saving, unaware of all that lives there. In my opinion, zoos are a good buffer against that maligned future.
On a tangent sorta thing... I can't help but notice... sometimes when I use Facebook on a mobile device I get adverts from some animal advocate groups in Europe pertaining to one or other animal who needs help, signature, donation, or all three. And at some point it came to me how inefficient this way of doing things is ... if what these groups wanted was to see a future without these dancing bears, tortured monkeys, lonely elephants... I think they would attempt to put more pressure onto governments to introduce legislation against these. Even if it is not feasible to do. The fact they resort to showing distressing pictures of sickly animals so to get donations and such tells me otherwise. As if there has to be a constant flow of those in need of help to keep these groups in business.
Lafone
Well-Known Member
It's interesting you note they focus on large and popular animals when their latest report (whether one likes the content or not) actually focuses on mobile zoos and animals being carted around the country to jump off peoples heads for money (Chincillas as it happens were doing that, is that sensible or right?). I recommend reading it - some of it seems to me to be poor practice and I don't think it is right to have tortoises thrown about for fun. I don't agree with their overall agenda and highly biased content in some cases but they have documented some things which might concern any reasonable person. Three years since the thread was raised means they have written other things in the meantime.
They are also running a campaign to stop reindeer going to events to be patted etc - one can argue that as long as they are treated correctly this isn't a big deal but we would hopefully all want to see them cared for properly and is it a good thing to have reindeer in a xmas market or should they be in a zoo? Of course Freedom for animals would say neither (which I regard as a nonsense argument) but there is going to be a readership for this sort of campaign and perhaps it needs a better counter than 'these people are loonies'. Are animals simply there for our entertainment with few limits? I'd hope not myself.
I don't agree with these one agenda organisations, nor the overarching aim of this one but if we simply dismiss them and all they have to say as irrelevant because they think it we are probably just lowering ourselves to their level.