Dublin Zoo Dublin zoo news

dirty harry said:
kesho has been seprated from the rest group for over a month,he has had contact with one female mayani,so he will be better adjusted when he reaches London zoo to been away from his troop...
Click to expand...

Did any of the others show any sign they have missed him. Particularly 'Alf'?
 
alf

alf was fine,he has been playing alot with his younger brother evindi,he has taken on the role of big brother now,the gorrilla troop is doing brilliant
 
dirty harry said:
alf was fine,he has been playing alot with his younger brother evindi,he has taken on the role of big brother now,the gorrilla troop is doing brilliant
Click to expand...

I'm pleased it all worked out so well. Kesho had to go sometime, but its good to know Alf adjusted okay and still has his younger brother to play with.

Any recent news on when the new enclosure might be started?
 
Would also appreciate news on developments with new gorilla exhibit (as I would with) as well as when the bull Asiatic elephant is due in.
 
elephants and gorilla's

bull house will start in one months time,will take between 5 and 6 months to finish,gorilla area hopefully within 16months will be finished
 
Hi, I read in the recent Zoo Matters magazine thoovie left for Whipsnade. I am surprised they split up Hoovie and Heidi, as I thought they brought her in to be his partner. Would it not have been better to send Henri?
 
kiang said:
The zoo looks to top 960'000 visitors for the year as well as importing a male Asian elephant from Hamburg this year, some of the highlights from an interview with director Leo Oosterweghel.

What?s new at the zoo | The Post
Click to expand...

I wonder why the Director said this:
"Oosterweghel has no time for anyone who tries to create a ‘‘Disney construct’’ of the animal world. ‘‘These are wild animals, often highly intelligent; one cannot show them disrespect," he said."

I'm guessing that Oosterweghel has never been to Disney's Animal Kingdom in Orlando, Florida. If he had, he would know that Disney has created one of the world's great zoos, and there is nothing cheap about it or disrespectful to the animals there.

I was just at the Dublin Zoo (in late November) and greatly enjoyed my time there. Two memories:

1. The elephants were amazing as they played in their pool. They were jumping on top of each other, dunking each other, and other antics that made them look like playful human children. Wonderful to watch! Are they always this playful?

2. The wolves also made an impressive memory on me, as they ran back and forth as a pack in their long wooded habitat, apparently anxious to be fed. When their meal (a big hunk of meat) arrived, this large pack tore the meat apart within minutes. Wow!
 
ANyhuis said:
I wonder why the Director said this:
"Oosterweghel has no time for anyone who tries to create a ‘‘Disney construct’’ of the animal world. ‘‘These are wild animals, often highly intelligent; one cannot show them disrespect," he said."

I'm guessing that Oosterweghel has never been to Disney's Animal Kingdom in Orlando, Florida. If he had, he would know that Disney has created one of the world's great zoos, and there is nothing cheap about it or disrespectful to the animals there.
Click to expand...

I can assure you Mr. Oosterweghel is very aware of the design excellence of Disney's Animal Kingdom. He has used Jones and Jones Architects--the "zoo designers of record" for Animal Kingdom--to plan the elephant and future gorilla exhibits in Dublin. I would guess his comments relate to the extreme anthropomorphism long a hallmark of the Disney corporate culture.
 
Andy DC said:
Hi, I read in the recent Zoo Matters magazine thoovie left for Whipsnade. I am surprised they split up Hoovie and Heidi, as I thought they brought her in to be his partner. Would it not have been better to send Henri?
Click to expand...

My guess is Whipsnade asked for the younger male perhaps, or maybe they thought Henri was too old to move, or too big a favourite at Dublin. Heidi could breed with either male, doesn't really matter which(she already had one unsuccessful calf fathered by Henri)
 
Yes you were right, a keeper told me today that Heidi has been taken off the contraceptive pill and they hope for calves in the future. It was recommended by the Studbook keeper that Hoovie be sent and alsoHenri and Heidi make a good genetic match. It is good for all the hippos, as Hoovie gets a new family and Henri gets hippo company again, as every time I saw him he was seperated from Hoovie and Heidi in the smaller outside area behind the house. At least now he has the full exhibit and a mate to keep him happy.

About what the Director said, I can see his point of view in a way, I think he is trying to avoid the commercialism that 'Disney' brings. I too have been to Animal Kingdom and it is a magnificent place with wonderful exhibits, but it still has 'rides' like roller coasters etc. and perhaps he means he is keeping it very animal based.
 
Glad to hear that about Dublin remaining a 'serious' Zoological collection. IMO other attractions like Funrides and rollercoasters put a place into a different category- as an adventure/theme park etc and I really don't think these have any place in Zoological Gardens. In places like Chessington and Flamingo Park which are really pleasure parks with a zoo attatched, the animal collection, however good and well displayed, is always a subsidiary attraction, not the main one as I believe it should be.
 
I totally agree. There is a reason they are referred to as 'Zoos' and not theme or adventure parks. They attract a slightly different audience. If you were to visit Florida you might visit Animal Kingdom, Busch Gardens or Sea World for its animals, but its attractions also play a huge part. It is a kind of 50/50 thing with them, although they do still contribute to conservation it is a different experience.
While you would go to a zoo like Miami Metro Zoo just to see the animals.
 
reduakari said:
I would guess his comments relate to the extreme anthropomorphism long a hallmark of the Disney corporate culture.
Click to expand...

Really? To be honest, I had to look up that word, anthropomorphism, as I wasn't familiar with its meaning. What I found was "the attribution of human form or behaviour to a deity, animal, etc". Is this really a bad thing about Disney? So they have a bunch of animal movies (Jungle Book, Lion King, Finding Nemo, etc), in which animals have human-like personalities. How is this bad for the animal world? I think it only makes people (especially children) love the animals more! Have you ever seen kids get excited when they see a meerkat or warthog in a zoo? Would they even care about these animals, if not for Timon and Pumba? Or how many times have I seen children light up with they see a clownfish, calling it "Nemo", or even more amusing, calling a blue tang a "Dory fish"? I simply don't see how this is bad in any way.

I also don't see how this has anything to do with the "Disney corporate culture". Certainly Disney is a huge capitalistic corporation, a company that has over the years raked in billions of dollars. But most Americans (and I dare to say many non-Americans) would agree they've earned their profits from the pure joy they've brought to the world. Of course they haven't been without mistakes, and they've paid a financial price when they've made errors.

Funny thing -- I think it's not Disney, but the animal rights extremists who are the worst violators of anthropomorphism. They are the ones who say zoos are "animal prisons" and assume that animals would never want to have their "freedom" taken away. Of course, I often remind these folks that animals do not understand purely human concepts of "freedom" and "liberty".
 
ANyhuis said:
Really? To be honest, I had to look up that word, anthropomorphism, as I wasn't familiar with its meaning. What I found was "the attribution of human form or behaviour to a deity, animal, etc". Is this really a bad thing about Disney? So they have a bunch of animal movies (Jungle Book, Lion King, Finding Nemo, etc), in which animals have human-like personalities. How is this bad for the animal world? I think it only makes people (especially children) love the animals more! Have you ever seen kids get excited when they see a meerkat or warthog in a zoo? Would they even care about these animals, if not for Timon and Pumba? Or how many times have I seen children light up with they see a clownfish, calling it "Nemo", or even more amusing, calling a blue tang a "Dory fish"? I simply don't see how this is bad in any way.

I also don't see how this has anything to do with the "Disney corporate culture". Certainly Disney is a huge capitalistic corporation, a company that has over the years raked in billions of dollars. But most Americans (and I dare to say many non-Americans) would agree they've earned their profits from the pure joy they've brought to the world. Of course they haven't been without mistakes, and they've paid a financial price when they've made errors.

Funny thing -- I think it's not Disney, but the animal rights extremists who are the worst violators of anthropomorphism. They are the ones who say zoos are "animal prisons" and assume that animals would never want to have their "freedom" taken away. Of course, I often remind these folks that animals do not understand purely human concepts of "freedom" and "liberty".
Click to expand...

The attribution (or imposition) of "humanness" to animals certainly cuts both ways. Yes, it can inspire love and interest, but also leads to the "Bambi syndrome" of which animal rights extremists represent the worst offenders. The carcass feedings of wolves you saw in Dublin would be unlikely to be tolerated by most US zoo audiences for this very reason--the disconnect between the fantasies created by Disney (and others) and the reality of the true nature of the animals and their relationships to one another.

I also suspect Mr. Oosterveghel may not be comfortable with the relentless commercialism of the Disney park, which as brilliantly as it is designed never lets you forget it exists primarily to provide a profit to its shareholders.
 
reduakari said:
The attribution (or imposition) of "humanness" to animals certainly cuts both ways. Yes, it can inspire love and interest, but also leads to the "Bambi syndrome" of which animal rights extremists represent the worst offenders. The carcass feedings of wolves you saw in Dublin would be unlikely to be tolerated by most US zoo audiences for this very reason--the disconnect between the fantasies created by Disney (and others) and the reality of the true nature of the animals and their relationships to one another.

I also suspect Mr. Oosterveghel may not be comfortable with the relentless commercialism of the Disney park, which as brilliantly as it is designed never lets you forget it exists primarily to provide a profit to its shareholders.
Click to expand...

I see your points about the "Bambi syndrome" and the carcass feeding. You're right, that was a real thrill for me, much because I'd never seen such a thing in an American zoo.

But one thing must be remembered -- Disney does NOT claim that there Animal Kingdom park is a "zoo". They say it's a theme park. Many of us zoo lovers are the ones who are pointing out that it's, in reality, a "zoo within a theme park". I personally continue to contend that it's one of the better zoos in America, if not the world. Its Kilamanjaro Safari ride is the most realistic African safari you can take without actually going to Africa. I guess I struggle with why Disney is so quickly criticized. It does things differently, for sure, but it also does them well.

As for providing a profit for its shareholders, that's a good thing, isn't it? That's pure American capitalism, which is the opposite of socialism. Most Americans (and many Europeans) happen to be very pro-capitalism and very anti-socialism. As long as its capitalistic ventures aren't done at the expense of the animals, I fail to see what's wrong with turning a profit.
 
ANyhuis said:
I see your points about the "Bambi syndrome" and the carcass feeding. You're right, that was a real thrill for me, much because I'd never seen such a thing in an American zoo.

But one thing must be remembered -- Disney does NOT claim that there Animal Kingdom park is a "zoo". They say it's a theme park. Many of us zoo lovers are the ones who are pointing out that it's, in reality, a "zoo within a theme park". I personally continue to contend that it's one of the better zoos in America, if not the world. Its Kilamanjaro Safari ride is the most realistic African safari you can take without actually going to Africa. I guess I struggle with why Disney is so quickly criticized. It does things differently, for sure, but it also does them well.

As for providing a profit for its shareholders, that's a good thing, isn't it? That's pure American capitalism, which is the opposite of socialism. Most Americans (and many Europeans) happen to be very pro-capitalism and very anti-socialism. As long as its capitalistic ventures aren't done at the expense of the animals, I fail to see what's wrong with turning a profit.
Click to expand...

To an American this may be (even if I would add the "to some" in there). Plus: lso, if all Americans would vote you would have a completely different political landscape.

However, we in Europe beg to differ. And since this is a ZooChat forum pse do not start us on any political angle with the term of "anti-socialism" (as if "socialism" or Labour Party is a dirty word)? :cool:

Back on the original theme of this topic: I would say that commercialism nor antropomorphism are primary goals and/or the target audience for most European zoos. Besides, this would not sit easily with the WAZA ethics of conservation and zoos where we have 3 primary roles: education, conservation and entertainment.

Further to this, I would say that in Europe in the last 2 decades there has been a noticeable departure from the pure entertainment side of a zoo as an adventure park with most zoos and f.i. the old safari parks coming up with masterplans, collection plans, adding endangered species vs. the old safari park with just an African veldt for cover and not much else to see or do or learn.

Surmise: this is not to say that I personally have a quarrel with any pure entertainment, just that I do not view a zoo (or a "good" zoo for that matter) to be anything other than a science-based cultural facility with a serious interest in conservation and conservation education and maintaining a representative animal and plant collection.

I guess that there just is a fundamental difference in perceptions here. Which is :cool:! There is variety in diversity :D!
 
Now fully back on topic: any of our Irish resident forumsters and respected correspondents have anything to add on important new species or births to be expected at Dublin Zoo in 2011 (other than the now well known project to bring out the old breeding ele bull from Hamburg)? :)
 
Disney`s Kilimanjaro safari may be stunning landscaping, but it`s too bad that you can`t see the elephants for longer then a few seconds because they are rushing you through it on a fake poacher`s chase.

I am very glad that Dublin Zoo has no intention to copy that!!
 
Perhaps a hippo calf, depends how long Heidi has been off the contraceptive pill.

As for the 'Disney' discussion, it brings a lot of good things, but it can also take a lot. I agree with the personification of animals in films as it sparks interest in the species and I don't feel it takes much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top