What was the biggest lie that you ever heard from anti-zoo people?

Zooplantman said:
Once you have called someone an idiot (along with a few additional insults) you have ended the debate. Too late then to influence her thinking.
Click to expand...
Good point, maybe if I were really in control of myself I would have done something else. Apologies for the late reply btw, I was typing and then my parents called for me to get my stuff and get in the car for school.
 
I have noticed something pretty interesting.

I'm an advocate for reforming American wildlife management and what I've just noticed is that all of them are in favor of red wolf reintroduction and conservation, but at the same time, some of them are against zoos. My response is...

"Well, who has done more for red wolves than zoos!? While we're on the topic, who's also done more for Mexican wolves than zoos have!? Say what you want about state wildlife management, but leave the zoos and zookeepers alone!!"

I've heard the argument that zoos are prisons. To this, I show them a zoo exhibit and say "...Does this look like a prison to you?"

I've heard the argument that zoos don't help in the conservation of endangered species.

Not true, aza accredited zoos have partnerships with conservation organizations that they help support and they help in reintroducing animals into the wild. In fact, you look at history, captive breeding has helped save several animals from extinction.

I've heard zoos are only for entertainment.

Also not true, zoos work to educate the public. And animal rights activists will say things like "Not that many people learn anything from their zoo trip!"

My response is "The zoos try to teach the public, the visitors themselves choose whether or not they learn something at the zoo and many choose not to learn anything. So it's not the zoos that suck in this department. The public sucks."

Also, anti-zoo people are against zoos, yet they're all for sanctuaries. Why are zoos bad yet sanctuaries are fine? Both have animals on display for the public, and both enrich the lives of animals, So why are zoos bad but sanctuaries are fine? I do not get the logic here at all"

Another one. "Zookeepers are cruel".

Me: "Oh shut up. Go on a zookeepers YouTube channel and you'll see that's not even remotely the case."

Seriously, zookeepers love their animals. They don't make them into pets, but they love working with them. In fact, the reason the zookeeper position isn't high paying is that the ability to work with animals makes that job so attractive. They do their job out of love, not money.

One last note. Any animal-rights activist reading this and not believing a thing I'm saying, let me ask you this. If zoos are so bad, then why are there TV shows about what goes on behind the scenes at zoos such as The Secret Life of the Zoo and Crikey! It's the Irwins? And why do zoos also give behind-the-scenes tours to visitors? And why do the zoo staff have no issue with someone making YouTube videos when going behind the scenes such as videos on the day in the life of a zookeeper? Seems to me that if zoos were bad they wouldn't be open to any of that since there would be stuff they wouldn't want us to know.
 
Pantheraman said:
My response is "The zoos try to teach the public, the visitors themselves choose whether or not they learn something at the zoo and many choose not to learn anything. So it's not the zoos that suck in this department. The public sucks."
Click to expand...
100% this.
 
Here's a bunch of stuff an anti-zoo person has told me.

"If you knew how many times they move animals around from zoo to zoo, you’d be shocked. And one of my podcast somewhere I think there’s some statistics… I’m a little fuzzy right now but I’ll see what I can find"

"Do you ever watch any of those reality series about behind the scenes at the zoo? It’s not about the animals, it’s all about the people in the invasive treatments they do all the time, and moving animals from one place to another. The keepers say they’re in it because they love animals, no they’re in it so they can have hands on as many animals as possible and do as many invasive treatments in the name of health and well-being. ********. Animals in captivity have an over abundance of illnesses because of captivity than they have in the wild"

"Serious disease and health issues abound in all species in captivity. And that doesn’t even begin to cover the sale and trade of captive breeding programs.
Tampa zoo is an incredible example of how ****ed up a zoo can be… And they love to televise it all under the guise of conservation"

I just thought I'd post this here.






 
Pantheraman said:
Here's a bunch of stuff an anti-zoo person has told me.

"If you knew how many times they move animals around from zoo to zoo, you’d be shocked. And one of my podcast somewhere I think there’s some statistics… I’m a little fuzzy right now but I’ll see what I can find"

"Do you ever watch any of those reality series about behind the scenes at the zoo? It’s not about the animals, it’s all about the people in the invasive treatments they do all the time, and moving animals from one place to another. The keepers say they’re in it because they love animals, no they’re in it so they can have hands on as many animals as possible and do as many invasive treatments in the name of health and well-being. ********. Animals in captivity have an over abundance of illnesses because of captivity than they have in the wild"

"Serious disease and health issues abound in all species in captivity. And that doesn’t even begin to cover the sale and trade of captive breeding programs.
Tampa zoo is an incredible example of how ****ed up a zoo can be… And they love to televise it all under the guise of conservation"

I just thought I'd post this here.
Click to expand...

I am sorry that you had to hear that and I am sorry that people actually believe this bologna. This is what I consider an example of jumping to conclusions and taking things out of context. About their comments regarding animals moving from place to place, tell them to look up AZA Species Survival Plans and EAZA Ex-Situ Programmes. Hell, tell them to look up taxonomic advisory groups!
 
Last edited:
Pantheraman said:
Here's a bunch of stuff an anti-zoo person has told me.

"If you knew how many times they move animals around from zoo to zoo, you’d be shocked. And one of my podcast somewhere I think there’s some statistics… I’m a little fuzzy right now but I’ll see what I can find"

"Do you ever watch any of those reality series about behind the scenes at the zoo? It’s not about the animals, it’s all about the people in the invasive treatments they do all the time, and moving animals from one place to another. The keepers say they’re in it because they love animals, no they’re in it so they can have hands on as many animals as possible and do as many invasive treatments in the name of health and well-being. ********. Animals in captivity have an over abundance of illnesses because of captivity than they have in the wild"

"Serious disease and health issues abound in all species in captivity. And that doesn’t even begin to cover the sale and trade of captive breeding programs.
Tampa zoo is an incredible example of how ****ed up a zoo can be… And they love to televise it all under the guise of conservation"

I just thought I'd post this here.
Click to expand...
I don't know where the guy who said what he said heard all that, but this is beyond bu11$hit. UngulateNerd's reply is so perfect that the only way I can back it up is by a show of righteous indignation.
 
PETA claims that even under the circumstances of the best zoos they are still feeling lonely, and cannot choose a partner. But if you go to check out the animals in some of the best zoos in the world such as Singapore Zoo, Rotterdam Zoo, Zurich Zoo and San Diego Zoo, you will find out that their conclusion is definitely wrong. PETA is not just stupid, but pure bad.
 
Unenlagia90 said:
PETA claims that even under the circumstances of the best zoos they are still feeling lonely, and cannot choose a partner. But if you go to check out the animals in some of the best zoos in the world such as Singapore Zoo, Rotterdam Zoo, Zurich Zoo and San Diego Zoo, you will find out that their conclusion is definitely wrong. PETA is not just stupid, but pure bad.
Click to expand...

I had never even heard of PETA until I read it here.

So I looked them up and found this.

Zoos | Animals Are Not Ours to Use for Entertainment | PETA UK

It sounds like zoos and PETA really don't like each other. Yet both seem to want to protect animals.
 
Dabhidh said:
I had never even heard of PETA until I read it here.

So I looked them up and found this.

Zoos | Animals Are Not Ours to Use for Entertainment | PETA UK

It sounds like zoos and PETA really don't like each other. Yet both seem to want to protect animals.
Click to expand...

Here in Scotland we also have another group who are "protecting species health and welfare".

Conservation & Wildlife Management | Scottish Land & Estates (scottishlandandestates.co.uk)

Their work also involves "country sports"

Country Sports | Scottish Land & Estates (scottishlandandestates.co.uk)
 
Dabhidh said:
Here in Scotland we also have another group who are "protecting species health and welfare".

Conservation & Wildlife Management | Scottish Land & Estates (scottishlandandestates.co.uk)

Their work also involves "country sports"

Country Sports | Scottish Land & Estates (scottishlandandestates.co.uk)
Click to expand...
I think you are reaching in any attempt to equate those two organisations together. I’d advise some more research before thinking Scottish wildlife management is like PETA.

There are many animal welfare groups and whether you’ve heard of PETA or not I’d guess you are aware that some of these groups are more radical / less likely to engage in debate etc than others.

I’d also point back to looking at valid academic research for proof points when reading any assertion made by groups on controversial topics like zoos can be.
 
I've noticed that here in Italy many people believe that tigers and lions are often sleeping because the keepers drug their water because otherwise they'd be dangerous
 
Lafone said:
I think you are reaching in any attempt to equate those two organisations together. I’d advise some more research before thinking Scottish wildlife management is like PETA.

There are many animal welfare groups and whether you’ve heard of PETA or not I’d guess you are aware that some of these groups are more radical / less likely to engage in debate etc than others.

I’d also point back to looking at valid academic research for proof points when reading any assertion made by groups on controversial topics like zoos can be.
Click to expand...

I am not reaching for anything other than trying to understand what the different views are. That's why I'm looking at old threads here.

And I'm afraid I'm not very aware of the different animal welfare groups or what their aims are. When I was younger I had a job and a family and there was little time for much else. Now I'm retired I can start to learn.

What you say about different groups being less likely to engage in debate is sad I think. They say animals have no voice, so the only voice they can have comes from the people who are concerned for their welfare. It would be better if people who disagree could at least talk to each other and try to solve some of their differences.
 
Lafone said:
I think you are reaching in any attempt to equate those two organisations together.
Click to expand...
Dabhidh said:
I am not reaching for anything other than trying to understand what the different views are. That's why I'm looking at old threads here.

And I'm afraid I'm not very aware of the different animal welfare groups or what their aims are. When I was younger I had a job and a family and there was little time for much else. Now I'm retired I can start to learn.

What you say about different groups being less likely to engage in debate is sad I think. They say animals have no voice, so the only voice they can have comes from the people who are concerned for their welfare. It would be better if people who disagree could at least talk to each other and try to solve some of their differences.
Click to expand...

Well worth reading around the background and views of the different organisations as sadly they don’t always work together and often have very different views.

PETA is opposed to all pets and euthanised a lot of animals which many people regard as pretty far outside the pure animal welfare message that you see from many other animal based organisations.

They make some good points on some things but their overall philosophy is to take a strictly hard line about animals (no pets, no meat, no meat products, no captive populations even to save them, no animal breeding, no animal related sports such as riding etc etc) and naturally this upsets people who disagree with them. They’ve also been (in my view rightly looking at the evidence) accused of being highly sexist in their marketing campaigns which seems par for the course - they seem content to upset just about anyone to get into the news. I don’t think they would stop at lying or playing fast and loose with the truth to get their message across - that’s where this sort of activism often ends up.

I think PETA should be allowed to think whatever they like but I’d urge some caution when viewing their messages.
 
Lafone said:
Well worth reading around the background and views of the different organisations as sadly they don’t always work together and often have very different views.

PETA is opposed to all pets and euthanised a lot of animals which many people regard as pretty far outside the pure animal welfare message that you see from many other animal based organisations.

They make some good points on some things but their overall philosophy is to take a strictly hard line about animals (no pets, no meat, no meat products, no captive populations even to save them, no animal breeding, no animal related sports such as riding etc etc) and naturally this upsets people who disagree with them. They’ve also been (in my view rightly looking at the evidence) accused of being highly sexist in their marketing campaigns which seems par for the course - they seem content to upset just about anyone to get into the news. I don’t think they would stop at lying or playing fast and loose with the truth to get their message across - that’s where this sort of activism often ends up.

I think PETA should be allowed to think whatever they like but I’d urge some caution when viewing their messages.
Click to expand...

Don't worry I am that long in the tooth I read most things with a degree of scepticism.

I googled the sexist point and got a good laugh. The first two results which came up were from the Sun and the Daily Mail. Both reported there was public anger about PETA using scantily clad women for their dairy campaign. For people who are not familiar with these titles, they have a long history of using a lot of scantily clad women to sell their newspapers. The phrase "pot calling the kettle black" came to mind.

There was a BBC documentary about dairy not long ago. I was not aware dairy cows had to produce a calf each year to produce milk and the new born calf was usually very quickly taken from the cow. This was upsetting to both calf and cow. The documentary said, however, one dairy farm did not do this, got less milk and its milk was more expensive. On the plus side the welfare for both cow and calf - which were kept together - was better. That BBC documentary was subject to public comment on the BBC website and there was near complete public support for paying more for milk in order not to separate cow from its new born calf.

People can be kind if they actually know what is going on.
 
Dabhidh said:
Don't worry I am that long in the tooth I read most things with a degree of scepticism.

I googled the sexist point and got a good laugh. The first two results which came up were from the Sun and the Daily Mail. Both reported there was public anger about PETA using scantily clad women for their dairy campaign. For people who are not familiar with these titles, they have a long history of using a lot of scantily clad women to sell their newspapers. The phrase "pot calling the kettle black" came to mind.

There was a BBC documentary about dairy not long ago. I was not aware dairy cows had to produce a calf each year to produce milk and the new born calf was usually very quickly taken from the cow. This was upsetting to both calf and cow. The documentary said, however, one dairy farm did not do this, got less milk and its milk was more expensive. On the plus side the welfare for both cow and calf - which were kept together - was better. That BBC documentary was subject to public comment on the BBC website and there was near complete public support for paying more for milk in order not to separate cow from its new born calf.

People can be kind if they actually know what is going on.
Click to expand...

BBC One - Panorama, A Cow's Life: The True Cost of Milk?
 
Dabhidh said:
Don't worry I am that long in the tooth I read most things with a degree of scepticism.

I googled the sexist point and got a good laugh. The first two results which came up were from the Sun and the Daily Mail. Both reported there was public anger about PETA using scantily clad women for their dairy campaign. For people who are not familiar with these titles, they have a long history of using a lot of scantily clad women to sell their newspapers. The phrase "pot calling the kettle black" came to mind.

There was a BBC documentary about dairy not long ago. I was not aware dairy cows had to produce a calf each year to produce milk and the new born calf was usually very quickly taken from the cow. This was upsetting to both calf and cow. The documentary said, however, one dairy farm did not do this, got less milk and its milk was more expensive. On the plus side the welfare for both cow and calf - which were kept together - was better. That BBC documentary was subject to public comment on the BBC website and there was near complete public support for paying more for milk in order not to separate cow from its new born calf.

People can be kind if they actually know what is going on.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use the Sun or the Daily Mail as references..they come up in Google at the top of searches because lots of people who are not well informed about much click on them, not because they are useful. That's how google often works - it pays to look rather more closely. Can't say I find the sexism on either side amusing myself but it takes all sorts.

I was referring to the language PETA used, which was widely reported in reputable publications.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top