Noah's Ark Zoo Farm Creationist Zoo causes dismay

I think johnstoni and zebedee101 have summed this one up quite nicely - why is it always the atheists that speak the most sense in religious debates!
I think it's because they're more likely to have read into both sides of the argument, as most Christians I know couldn't tell you the first thing about evolution whereas most atheists could tell you all about it and even quote the bible in places.
And Johnstoni, I think the yellow lab tied up is a breach in Biaza? Also I'd guess the hybridising zebras on purpose is, and the rhino house is mighty small.
 
Michalea's Animal Road trip

I haven't visited, and won't because of the creationist ideology - although that does make me curious to see the place but if you didn't see Michaela's Animal Road trip part 12, I would recommend watching it on demand five. For me it answered some questions and raised others. Do other collections grease their giraffes' hooves on a daily basis...?
 
Do other collections grease their giraffes' hooves on a daily basis...?
I've never heard of that before, is that good or bad?
 
Not something I was aware of, so if it is unecessary I think it is probably bad. They were also rubbing mud onto a rhino that had a wallow in its paddock, so it sounds like unecesary handling for the keepers' benefit rather than that of the animals to me.
 
a breach in Biaza? Also I'd guess the hybridising zebras on purpose is, and the rhino house is mighty small.

Technically, Grants & Chapmans Zebra are two races of the same species so they cannnot be accused of hybridisation. 'Mixing races' is a more accurate description and might still be frowned on, but not as seriously I think.
 
Technically, Grants & Chapmans Zebra are two races of the same species so they cannnot be accused of hybridisation. 'Mixing races' is a more accurate description and might still be frowned on, but not as seriously I think.

Pertinax,

We might have some rope for contention here ...!

The are indeed subspecies of E. burchelli, but I do feel + think that it is our responsibility to have even at the subspecific level conform to the natural state (if genetic mixing or overlap occurs it the wild ..., it might not be so bad at thing ...).

In most cases subspecies - allthough genetically very difficult to separate - conform to zoo-geographical boundaries and widely varying habitats (the evolutionary stamp/onus of speciation may already be in force there ...) and are unable to cross those naturally.

In these cases I would advocate we do not do in captivity what does not occur in the wild. After all, what is the rationale for maintaining stocks of wild animals, if we do not do our utmost to have these of pure-bred stock, of known origins and known lineages and known paternity. It is the very basic fabric of planned and/or cooperative breeding programmes.

Other than that, I contend you technical remarks.

Cheers,

K.B.
 
I'm not condoning mixing races of Plains Zebra either, just doubting it is sufficient to have Noah's Ark blacklisted from organisations like BIAZA ?
 
Not something I was aware of, so if it is unecessary I think it is probably bad. They were also rubbing mud onto a rhino that had a wallow in its paddock, so it sounds like unecesary handling for the keepers' benefit rather than that of the animals to me.
The mud wallow looked pretty dry when I visited, so I imagine it would benefit them somewhat.
 
Watch the programme if you can, I got the impression that the contact was primarily for the keeper's satisfaction but you may disagree. Clearly there are benefits from the animals being used to regular handling but I can't see that putting a giraffe in a glorified crush every day to oil its hooves is necessary. If a mud wallow dries out, surely you add water to it...
 
Clearly there are benefits from the animals being used to regular handling but I can't see that putting a giraffe in a glorified crush every day to oil its hooves is necessary. If a mud wallow dries out, surely you add water to it...

This is where Farm practices seem to have overlapped (probably unnecessarily) into the management of their wild species. 'Crushes' are used for cattle and hoof-oiling is a treatment (I think?) for horses. They probably need to draw more of a distinction between the way they manage domestic and wild animals.
 
I agree, that's the impression I got from the programme. They only had one giraffe at the time and the tigers were shown arriving, so it was some time ago.
 
They still have one giraffe. They claim to have selected a female but that was 2006 I think... So yeah.
 
They still have one giraffe. They claim to have selected a female but that was 2006 I think... So yeah.
The way i understand it the only way they wil get a female Giraffe is if they but one,as they will not get one via the studbook because of their stated intention to breed from them even if they have hybrids.
 
Wonder if you have to be religious or haqve the same views to work there , wonder wat the keepers think of the place they work , though i am sure they do there best.
 
Wonder if you have to be religious or haqve the same views to work there , wonder wat the keepers think of the place they work , though i am sure they do there best.
If I remember when they were advertising for an experienced Big Cat Keeper,the advert started must want to work in a christian enviroment.
 
because of their stated intention to breed from them even if they have hybrids.

Their desire to breed from Mixed race Tigers, and different races of zebras and Giraffe appears to be in direct contravention of one of the scientific premises of captive breeding.e.g. keeping species pure. Is this because the Religious aspect differs somewhat- e.g. 'they are all God's creatures'- or is it a lack of understanding/interest in good animal husbandry, or perhaps a mixture of both?:confused:
 
If I remember when they were advertising for an experienced Big Cat Keeper,the advert started must want to work in a christian enviroment.

Wonder if that means you cant be a different religion or sexuality though i suppose they wouldnt say that but just not employe people who do not meet their religious standards so to speak.
 
Their desire to breed from Mixed race Tigers, and different races of zebras and Giraffe appears to be in direct contravention of one of the scientific premises of captive breeding.e.g. keeping species pure. Is this because the Religious aspect differs somewhat- e.g. 'they are all God's creatures'- or is it a lack of understanding/interest in good animal husbandry, or perhaps a mixture of both?:confused:
You realy don`t want me to try and answer that one as I would probably end of getting myself and this website into alot of trouble!!
 
The advert said "must be willing to work in a christian environment", so I guess it means they have to go along with it, but don't necessarily have to believe it.
 
Last edited:
You realy don`t want me to try and answer that one as I would probably end of getting myself and this website into alot of trouble!!

Well the first individual on thin ice is NAZF, but I agree with zoogiraffe ... no point in discussing that one. I assume we all agree that NAZF entire philosophy is in direct contravention of any scientifically based zoo management and hence disqualifies itself from EAZA, ESB/EEP programmes alltogether.

Having said that how NAZF was admitted to BIAZA is beyond me. I do hope that EAZA is more sensible in this ... we do not need to evade this subject matter for better or for worse.
 
Back
Top