It's perfectly natural to want to criticize people for ignorance (and, often enough, for outright stupidity). And, I think it's perfectly OK to do that in (relative) privacy. Lord knows I've seen other threads similar to this one, even on professional forums such as those run by the AAZK. I think swapping these kinds of stories serves as a safety valve, if you will. A stress reliever, one that probably prevents many of us from simply losing it in such situations, and going postal on the visitor(s) in question.
As much as some people might deserve to be on the receiving end of such an outburst, I've always believed the best way to try and snap them out of this abundance of nature-deficit disorder is to, put simply, "lead by example." In short, if you have the time, become a volunteer or docent at your local zoo. Work to correct the very thing you can't stand to see, and which should not be allowed to grow any farther than it already has!
For those who may be wondering -- yes, I've had to do this plenty of times, particularly when I'm working with raptors. My wife and I have assisted our falconry mentor with more than a few public presentations, and we invariably get asked questions about these huge, intimidating-looking birds sitting quietly on our gloved fists.
It's not so much the info you provide in response as in HOW you provide it. Throw too much technical info into your response, convey the impression "You should know this," and you will lose your audience quicker than if a sudden downpour descended on where you're standing.
You run a similar risk by making your replies too simple. No one likes to be talked down to, even if they don't know what the specific term means. Convey that impression, and you will also lose your audience very quickly indeed.
The right way to handle questions is intermix your responses with questions of your own. In short, don't think of it as a bland query-response function. Think of it as an opportunity to start a conversation. Example: "No, they're definitely not pets. Think of them as colleagues, or as fellow predators. Would you like to know how to tell the difference?"
(as an aside: Pets generally cannot survive on their own if they choose to take off for the wild, while most raptors can indeed do so).
This same method works no matter what type of animal you're discussing, from egrets to elephants, from binturongs to blue whales. Heck, it works with just about any subject on which you're knowledgeable and the other person is not.
Now, with the above said -- NEVER expect that you will, single-handedly, eradicate all ignorance, and certainly never expect you'll be able to cure true stupidity. You can't, on either count.
HOWEVER -- If you can change just ONE person's mind per day, if you can make them interested in or caring about something they never did before, you will have more than done your job.
I may be biased, but I also happen to believe controlled interactive programs are probably one of the single best tools in any zoo's arsenal to deal with ignorance. While certainly not practical for all animals, such a program, properly designed and run, can provide equal amounts of enrichment for animals and public alike. I think the opportunity to provide some serious hands-on education to the public is self-evident.
Even as I type this, the Alabama Gulf Coast Zoo has developed (and continues to develop) some of the most amazingly well-done interactive programs I've ever seen. Most recently, they included tiger cubs (and you haven't really lived until you've done the classic tiger 'chuff' at a cub and had them literally rear up, brace their front paws on your shoulders, and gaze straight into your eyes in response), and they've also just started programs with wallabies. It is my understanding they're going to do lemurs next.
Interactive programs are a relatively new thing. Oh, other parks have had such things for a while (the West Coast Game Park, Bandon, Oregon, comes immediately to mind), but I think even they could learn something from the folks in Alabama.
Happy travels.
As much as some people might deserve to be on the receiving end of such an outburst, I've always believed the best way to try and snap them out of this abundance of nature-deficit disorder is to, put simply, "lead by example." In short, if you have the time, become a volunteer or docent at your local zoo. Work to correct the very thing you can't stand to see, and which should not be allowed to grow any farther than it already has!
For those who may be wondering -- yes, I've had to do this plenty of times, particularly when I'm working with raptors. My wife and I have assisted our falconry mentor with more than a few public presentations, and we invariably get asked questions about these huge, intimidating-looking birds sitting quietly on our gloved fists.
It's not so much the info you provide in response as in HOW you provide it. Throw too much technical info into your response, convey the impression "You should know this," and you will lose your audience quicker than if a sudden downpour descended on where you're standing.
You run a similar risk by making your replies too simple. No one likes to be talked down to, even if they don't know what the specific term means. Convey that impression, and you will also lose your audience very quickly indeed.
The right way to handle questions is intermix your responses with questions of your own. In short, don't think of it as a bland query-response function. Think of it as an opportunity to start a conversation. Example: "No, they're definitely not pets. Think of them as colleagues, or as fellow predators. Would you like to know how to tell the difference?"
(as an aside: Pets generally cannot survive on their own if they choose to take off for the wild, while most raptors can indeed do so).
This same method works no matter what type of animal you're discussing, from egrets to elephants, from binturongs to blue whales. Heck, it works with just about any subject on which you're knowledgeable and the other person is not.
Now, with the above said -- NEVER expect that you will, single-handedly, eradicate all ignorance, and certainly never expect you'll be able to cure true stupidity. You can't, on either count.
HOWEVER -- If you can change just ONE person's mind per day, if you can make them interested in or caring about something they never did before, you will have more than done your job.
I may be biased, but I also happen to believe controlled interactive programs are probably one of the single best tools in any zoo's arsenal to deal with ignorance. While certainly not practical for all animals, such a program, properly designed and run, can provide equal amounts of enrichment for animals and public alike. I think the opportunity to provide some serious hands-on education to the public is self-evident.
Even as I type this, the Alabama Gulf Coast Zoo has developed (and continues to develop) some of the most amazingly well-done interactive programs I've ever seen. Most recently, they included tiger cubs (and you haven't really lived until you've done the classic tiger 'chuff' at a cub and had them literally rear up, brace their front paws on your shoulders, and gaze straight into your eyes in response), and they've also just started programs with wallabies. It is my understanding they're going to do lemurs next.
Interactive programs are a relatively new thing. Oh, other parks have had such things for a while (the West Coast Game Park, Bandon, Oregon, comes immediately to mind), but I think even they could learn something from the folks in Alabama.
Happy travels.
Last edited:
), and the gangsters. I used to have about 20 friends, in secondary school I now have more then 500 of them in all catogories. I promise you, you will fit in somewhere!
