like I said before perhaps CAPS are not the best people to read reports by but its still a worrying article.
Ben’s Zoo
Ben’s Zoo
Dartmoor Zoo Bens Zoo, What a joke!
- Thread starter Wormy WooWoo
- Start date
reading through CAPs site they appear to be pretty naive to certain things involving not having captive animals, sadly alot of their veiws are idealist, meaning in an ideal world then yes the things they want are possible and the best way forward but realistically they are not going to happen and they should face that.
keeper19er
Active Member
Yeah, I have to agree. We Went off track.
How come Kiruna is so damned quick to say that wormy woowoo worked for the zoo. yet she cannot answer a simple question about the lioness.
I have looked on ISIS. and am surprised to find that apparently the zoo holds three animals. A serval, A jag and a tapir.
for a collection that wants to be a player this is very poor.
www.isis.org
How come Kiruna is so damned quick to say that wormy woowoo worked for the zoo. yet she cannot answer a simple question about the lioness.
I have looked on ISIS. and am surprised to find that apparently the zoo holds three animals. A serval, A jag and a tapir.
for a collection that wants to be a player this is very poor.
www.isis.org
keeper19er
Active Member
Indeed another one.
I have to admit though, this programme I actually enjoyed. As an ex keeper of Dartmoor I knew Spar, the tiger in the first series that got shot (should have put him down in a dignified way) yes I saw red.
I also worked with the wolf that died and the way it was made to basically fight to the death, was absolutely disgusting and there was no justification for it, especially when Kiruna was so quick to talk in another post how the staff were so experienced and qualified. As for the tiger darting I wont go into it.
However, to see this episode and to actually watch the re-opening of a place which means the world to me (even if I sound like I hate the place (se other posts), made me extremely happy.
So what Am I trying to say.
To Kiruna and all the rest of the staff, believe it or not I do salute you. You did something that I always wanted to do, you got the park re-opened.
I have a feeling this will come back to haunt me.
I have to admit though, this programme I actually enjoyed. As an ex keeper of Dartmoor I knew Spar, the tiger in the first series that got shot (should have put him down in a dignified way) yes I saw red.
I also worked with the wolf that died and the way it was made to basically fight to the death, was absolutely disgusting and there was no justification for it, especially when Kiruna was so quick to talk in another post how the staff were so experienced and qualified. As for the tiger darting I wont go into it.
However, to see this episode and to actually watch the re-opening of a place which means the world to me (even if I sound like I hate the place (se other posts), made me extremely happy.
So what Am I trying to say.
To Kiruna and all the rest of the staff, believe it or not I do salute you. You did something that I always wanted to do, you got the park re-opened.
I have a feeling this will come back to haunt me.
Perhaps it was filmed earlier and then 'cut' to appear in a later episode?
Last night was the first time I watched Ben's Zoo so I'm not going to comment on the controversies of previous episodes. What shone through last night was the dedication of the staff to the animals - a fantastic achievement to get their licence and the start of a long process to turn the place round.
The only disappointing thing for me was that the foxes were still on dispaly in their pit, which the zoo inspector had described as inappropriate. They should have rehoused the red foxes with another collection and re-opened with their old pit empty, with a sign up explaining why. I thought that would have sent a powerful message about how the new zoo was going to be different to the old one.
The only disappointing thing for me was that the foxes were still on dispaly in their pit, which the zoo inspector had described as inappropriate. They should have rehoused the red foxes with another collection and re-opened with their old pit empty, with a sign up explaining why. I thought that would have sent a powerful message about how the new zoo was going to be different to the old one.
ShadowMan5
Member
Bear in mind, one review of the program actually *complained* that there wasn't enough "action". That things looked like they may kick off / go wrong but didn't.
Alas, Big brother / "I'm a celeb.." means most people want to see things going horribly wrong and when things go right, well, it isn't "good TV" (Hah!)
For sure, I'm at a loss to understand why the van wasn't brought to the Tiger, or even a cage used to move it to the van. However, the Wolf thing, as upsetting as it was, does pretty much tie in to canine behaviour.
If dominance isn't asserted, things probably could of gone much worse, even in peoples pet dogs, lack of 'pack' leadership leads to most bad behaviour and stress.
As bad as it looked, don't forget, in the wild, the same thing would of happened and we can't ask the animals to remain "wild" but then step in everytime we saw non-human behaviour.
There is a lot to be commended on what the people are trying to do, though they are making mistakes. If they learn from them and move on, that's all that matters, not to learn from them is when problems start.
Sometimes, in lieu of experience, passion is all you have to deal with matters.
Time will be the ultimate tester, overall though, these animals at least now have a better chance of a higher quality of life than they did before Ben took over.
Alas, Big brother / "I'm a celeb.." means most people want to see things going horribly wrong and when things go right, well, it isn't "good TV" (Hah!)
For sure, I'm at a loss to understand why the van wasn't brought to the Tiger, or even a cage used to move it to the van. However, the Wolf thing, as upsetting as it was, does pretty much tie in to canine behaviour.
If dominance isn't asserted, things probably could of gone much worse, even in peoples pet dogs, lack of 'pack' leadership leads to most bad behaviour and stress.
As bad as it looked, don't forget, in the wild, the same thing would of happened and we can't ask the animals to remain "wild" but then step in everytime we saw non-human behaviour.
There is a lot to be commended on what the people are trying to do, though they are making mistakes. If they learn from them and move on, that's all that matters, not to learn from them is when problems start.
Sometimes, in lieu of experience, passion is all you have to deal with matters.
Time will be the ultimate tester, overall though, these animals at least now have a better chance of a higher quality of life than they did before Ben took over.
my opinion is once an animal wild or domestic is in captivity, regardless of what would happen in the wild, it is our right to do everything in our power to ease any suffering and problems.
Not saying that they dont at Dartmoor. Just my opinion is animals in captivity are just that, wild or not, they are the keepers responsibilty.
Not saying that they dont at Dartmoor. Just my opinion is animals in captivity are just that, wild or not, they are the keepers responsibilty.
I have to agree here,its not wild, its captivity, in the wild some animals would die of starvation, you wouldn't do that in captivity would you?, although I have no expereince what so ever with wolves, it was not good to see, possibly not the best way to do it and this simply could not of taken place if they had been open to the public then. Would of liked to of seen more of the inspection, particually as we had Mr Jackson for our last inspection. I applaud their work, they really are trying but was dissapointed to see the Pumas in the exact same enclousre as they were in years ago.Having said that, rome was not built in a day and I am biased towards Pumas.It must of been a nightmare to decide where to start, wherever they choose someone would of complained that something else wasn't being done. I know what its like to be thrown in at the deep end and to loose a loved one, and to have no money. I wish them all the best, new and old staff are doing a great job and no matter what anyones opinons, mine included, due to them those animals are still alive.
ShadowMan5
Member
Having watched this weeks ep. at last, I was interested to note that the "trailer" for the program was re-edited to show things unfolding in a different manner to how it actually turned out.
In the trailer, it was edited so the monkey escape seemed far more dramatic, whereas in the actual programme, the timeline of the clips was somewhat different.
This is, unfortunately, the problem with TV, you truly cannot believe what you are seeing. The whole debacle over that programme about the queen threw that into perfect focus.
I wonder now, just what impact the editing room had on the stories we are seeing, as someone with a knowledge of these things, I know video can be edited in a way to show something in a good, or a bad light.
I was surprised to see yet another escapee this week though, mind you, again, a TV problem. We are seeing "an animal a week" escape, however, just how long a period was actually filmed? At least one month since the last episode if you listen to the builder talking, so then 1 a week becomes 1 every 2 months. Still not good, but certainly gives a different perspective.
..and you'd get no disagreement from me, however, sometimes, the "cruelty" of nature can be for a very good reason. IMHO there was no "good" way to deal with the Wolf situation. Either way, something would of kicked off. If the old wolf was removed, then the others could have fought tooth and nail for dominance causing stress and injury.
Leaving it in was bad for the old wolf, it was a pity that the 'second in command' hadn't tried to assert some dominance before this rapid downturn of the old guys health.
I was just trying to view the situation from a "pack" perspective, dunno if anyone watches the Dog Whisperer, but dominance and pack leadership is the thing he tries to drum home the most. Canines just cannot operate "fully" without a clear heirarchy, when animals are in captivity, alas, this has consequences.
Indeed, in any socially grouped species, the struggle for pack dominance can sometimes be an ugly thing and when this is visible to the public, either in a zoo or on TV, it can be highly upsetting.
Not related to this topic per se, but when I saw a programme with two elephant seals fighting for dominance, I had to turn away, it was brutal and sickening, makes me wonder how an zoo with creatures handles this sort of thing. Unless the only answer is to move one of the creatures on, but then, do you move on the challenger or the old alpha? Would the challenger bring more stability or less? Not something I'd imagine that is easy to solve and not something, thankfully, I personally have to deal with.
To have the worry over such a large collection of animals must be a real test and one heck of a learning curve.
In the trailer, it was edited so the monkey escape seemed far more dramatic, whereas in the actual programme, the timeline of the clips was somewhat different.
This is, unfortunately, the problem with TV, you truly cannot believe what you are seeing. The whole debacle over that programme about the queen threw that into perfect focus.
I wonder now, just what impact the editing room had on the stories we are seeing, as someone with a knowledge of these things, I know video can be edited in a way to show something in a good, or a bad light.
I was surprised to see yet another escapee this week though, mind you, again, a TV problem. We are seeing "an animal a week" escape, however, just how long a period was actually filmed? At least one month since the last episode if you listen to the builder talking, so then 1 a week becomes 1 every 2 months. Still not good, but certainly gives a different perspective.
..and you'd get no disagreement from me, however, sometimes, the "cruelty" of nature can be for a very good reason. IMHO there was no "good" way to deal with the Wolf situation. Either way, something would of kicked off. If the old wolf was removed, then the others could have fought tooth and nail for dominance causing stress and injury.
Leaving it in was bad for the old wolf, it was a pity that the 'second in command' hadn't tried to assert some dominance before this rapid downturn of the old guys health.
I was just trying to view the situation from a "pack" perspective, dunno if anyone watches the Dog Whisperer, but dominance and pack leadership is the thing he tries to drum home the most. Canines just cannot operate "fully" without a clear heirarchy, when animals are in captivity, alas, this has consequences.
Indeed, in any socially grouped species, the struggle for pack dominance can sometimes be an ugly thing and when this is visible to the public, either in a zoo or on TV, it can be highly upsetting.
Not related to this topic per se, but when I saw a programme with two elephant seals fighting for dominance, I had to turn away, it was brutal and sickening, makes me wonder how an zoo with creatures handles this sort of thing. Unless the only answer is to move one of the creatures on, but then, do you move on the challenger or the old alpha? Would the challenger bring more stability or less? Not something I'd imagine that is easy to solve and not something, thankfully, I personally have to deal with.
To have the worry over such a large collection of animals must be a real test and one heck of a learning curve.
Would they really though...? How many wolves in this pack- was it six excluding the old leader who died? Dominance would normally be assumed by the next strongest, and oldest MALE. The females wouldn't be involved. How many other males in the group were of similar age and strength to 'Parker'(the next in line) If he had no close rival, it could simply have been a bloodless transition.
At Highland Wildlife Park they had a group of Wolves they put down a few years ago as they had all started fighting- but those were all of one sex,(males?) which is not a normal pack dynamic.
ShadowMan5
Member
The honest answer is of course, I have no idea, it may have gone very smoothly, it may not. I guess only the wolves really know the answer to that one.
I have read that sometimes, the alpha female will adopt pack leader role, granted this again may not be normal pack dynamic. Then again, in an enclosed space, in captivity, should one expect true "normal" pack behaviour?
Which is kinda my point, a pack in captivity cannot, in the true sense of the word, be considered a 'normal' pack as they do not have the range or "interests" that they would have in the wild.
I may be anthromorphosizing, but it seemed to me, Parker seemed a little at a loss at the passing of the pack leader, almost as if he hadn't quite got the whole dominance thing down and was ill prepared to suddenly go from challenger to the one likely to be challenged.
Speaking of anthromorphosizing, what did you think of the other wolves reaction to the death? I tried my hardest not to see it as them passing their respects, after all, it was likley pure curiosity as to why he wasn't moving.
I wasn't quite sure why they put him down but didn't remove him if it wasn't to allow the others to acknowedlge his passing.
As I say, when all is said and done, only the wolves truly know what would of happened had things been handled differently and if there would of been more problems and stress or less. We are after all, merely spectators, even those who looked after the wolves could only take a best guess as to what they thought may, or may not happen.
read that sometimes, the alpha female will adopt pack leader role, granted this again may not be normal pack dynamic. Then again, in an enclosed space, in captivity, should one expect true "normal" pack behaviour?
it seemed to me, Parker seemed a little at a loss at the passing of the pack leader, almost as if he hadn't quite got the whole dominance thing down and was ill prepared to suddenly go from challenger to the one likely to be challenged.
I think that is probably in a situation where there's no adult male present..
Even in captivity, I'd expect 'normal' behaviour from a group of wolves -provided there was a normal social dynamic in the group.
I also think one can sometimes misinterpret what animals are actually doing or thinking- 'Parker's (and the other wolves) behaviour could have been as much response to the extra number of people around, or to being filmed, as to the body of the dead wolf. I also sometimes think animals' reactions and perceptions of death are not quite the same as ours.
There was no harm in leaving the dead one for the others to inspect, I'm just a bit doubtful about the way it was described as 'necessary' for the other wolves to see the dead one. I think I'd have had him put down a bit earlier too as he was staggering around obviously dying, but there we are.
zoogiraffe
Well-Known Member
[/QUOTE]Pertinax;28876 [QUOTE said:
This was a completly different set of circumstances at Highland and i personnel would say it has no relevance to what happened at Dartmoor.
So do you think the Dartmoor ones would have fought if the old male hadn't been displayed for the others to see etc ?- my guess is, depending on the sex ratio and age structure in the group, that there would probably simply have been a peaceful transition.