Edinburgh Zoo Edinburgh Zoo news 2011 #1

Anger at zoo's 'ghoulish' autopsy show - Scotsman.com News
EDINBURGH Zoo has been heavily criticised over plans to stage a post mortem of an animal in front of a paying live audience.
The visitor attraction announced the move on its website and is selling tickets at £20 per head for the event on August 23.

The post mortem will involve the dissection of a "large mammal", although a spokeswoman for the zoo admitted they were as yet unsure what animal would be used for the event, or where it would come from.

The move has been dubbed a "callous money-spinner" by an Edinburgh animal welfare group, while the UK charity PETA has said the move would not sit well with many members of the public.

However, Hugh Roberts, the new chief executive of the trust that runs the zoo, said the event will be of educational value.

The autopsy will be carried out by a member of the zoo's world renowned veterinary team, and is being organised to help educate members of the public about animal biology.

A spokesman for the city charity OneKind said: "This seems a really staggering thing to do at a point when the zoo doesn't need to court any more controversy. It's sending out the entirely wrong message that these (animals] are exhibits that can be put out on display even when they're dead."

The spokesman said charging £20 for tickets just two months after the zoo published income losses of £2 million would widely be interpreted as a money-making drive.

He added: "The zoo makes great pains to highlight what an educational organisation it is, but this smacks of unwavering commercialism.

"I could understand possibly an educational aspect to host this for the public as a scientific demonstration, if it were free."

A spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) said: "Whilst the idea of paying to view the dissection of a cadaver may not sit well, what's truly disturbing is the unnatural and miserable life animals are forced to endure in confined zoo environments."

The zoo previously attracted criticism after it hosted a live cow autopsy as part of the Edinburgh International Science Festival last April.

The event, which cost £11, was billed in the festival programme as being a way to find out what makes a cow interesting. However, following a campaign by several animal welfare charities, more than 100 people e-mailed Science Festival director Simon Gage calling for the event to be scrapped.

This latest educational event is being billed as "a fascinating insight into animal biology", giving the audience a chance to "see at first hand what the inner workings of a large mammal really look like."

A warning has been posted on the website that no one under 16 will be admitted.

Labour MSP Elaine Murray branded the proposed public dissection "ghoulish".

She said: "It sounds like a Victorian thing.

"People have mixed feelings about zoos and this isn't going to help them feel kindly towards them.

"I know the zoo may have financial difficulties, but I don't think this is appropriate at all."

Hugh Roberts, chief executive of the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, which owns Edinburgh Zoo, said: "Educating people about animal lifecycles and behaviour is central to our work as a conservation body.

"Through scientific events such as this, we can help promote this understanding."
Click to expand...

and one of the comments below the article:
"I can't believe animal welfare groups are campaigning for the better treatment of an animal which is already dead! One assumes they're not going to kill something just to do the autopsy."
:D
 
Pertinax said:
They've probably still got a couple of young Red River Hogs in the freezer- they could use them.
Click to expand...

You have just taken the words................, great minds think alike! quite frankly this beggars belief, what are these people trying to do?, close the place down?
 
TARZAN said:
You have just taken the words................, great minds think alike! quite frankly this beggars belief, what are these people trying to do?, close the place down?
Click to expand...

I actually think the event sound brilliant, in and of itself - I'd love to go if were nearer.

In the context of the recent controversies, however... it seems, in the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby, a 'couragious' decision - I hope they can weather the storm.

I also find the involvement in animal welfare organisations in the debate laughable - as pointed out, they're hardly going to kill a zoo animal to run the event.
 
Maguari said:
I actually think the event sound brilliant, in and of itself - I'd love to go if were nearer.

In the context of the recent controversies, however... it seems, in the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby, a 'couragious' decision - I hope they can weather the storm.

I also find the involvement in animal welfare organisations in the debate laughable - as pointed out, they're hardly going to kill a zoo animal to run the event.
Click to expand...

"Weather the storm" that this "show" will create, why create an unnecessary storm which will no doubt turn into yet another P. R. disaster for this loss making zoo?
 
TARZAN said:
"Weather the storm" that this "show" will create, why create an unnecessary storm which will no doubt turn into yet another P. R. disaster for this loss making zoo?
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. It would be brilliant idea in normal conditions - but in the current climate up there I think Edinburgh really ought to avoid any publicity involving dead animals just for a while.
 
Maguari said:
Oh, I agree. It would be brilliant idea in normal conditions - but in the current climate up there I think Edinburgh really ought to avoid any publicity involving dead animals just for a while.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that,I do not wish to turn this into another red river hog culling or Guy the gorilla stuffing argument, I would like to think I have moved on from that as I have had some interesting and enjoyable discussions on here since with the members I have had rows with. Perhaps Edinburgh Zoo are trying to cash in on the popularity of the television programme, Inside Nature's Giants? Yes these dissections are of value to people with biolgical and vetinary science interests and also to people like yourself who have an interest in zoology, however I am of the opinion that these dissections also have an appeal to a certain element of society who l are interested in these dissections for other reasons, reading the newspaper comments regarding this the word ghoulish is mentioned more than once.If this event had been free of charge to people who have a scientific interest all well and good, but they are charging £20 per head for the tickets.
 
TARZAN said:
reading the newspaper comments regarding this the word ghoulish is mentioned more than once.
Click to expand...

In fairness, the whole article reeks of the distinctly unfriendly attitude towards the zoo that its coverage in the Scotsman always gets.


TARZAN said:
If this event had been free of charge to people who have a scientific interest all well and good, but they are charging £20 per head for the tickets.
Click to expand...

I really don't see how charging makes any difference - it won't make a significant difference to who is likely to come, and the zoo makes some cash for its (by its own admission) depleted coffers. Fair play to them, I say.

The only issue for me is that this is a very odd move politically-speaking just at the moment.
 
TARZAN said:
You have just taken the words................, great minds think alike!
Click to expand...

Couldn't resist it! ;) I don't actually have a problem with the concept of a public autopsy- but it does seem a rather bizarre idea for Edinburgh Zoo to be pushing at the present time, after all the bad publicity they've had recently, as its bound to invoke more critisism from some circles.
 
It is usual at this time of year for friends and colleagues to ask about what zoo to take their families to during the Summer holidays, that is which zoos do I recommend when they are away on holiday or which zoos to visit on just a day visit from home here in the North East. In previous years I have always recommended a trip to Edinburgh, better still by travelling by train and admiring the wonderful views while travelling up the East coast.Unfortunately, however I cannot find it in my heart to recommend Edinburgh due to recent events which have occurred there lately, my advice will be to invest in a couple more gallons of petrol and go to Chester, hopefully my opinion of Edinburgh will change in the future but this £20 a head ticket to see a zoo animal being cut up does nothing at all to make me change my opinion, in fact it makes me more annoyed.
 
I think it's a brilliant idea to be honest. We have a zoo that seriously needs money, an animal that needs an autopsy, and a public willing to pay to see it (whether it be because they are genuinely interested in mammal biology and/or zoology and its pracitices, or whether they just want to see something cut up).

Pros:
- The animal will get its autopsy. They're not going to have killed the animal specifically for the autopsy.
- Edinburgh Zoo will make money from this event. At the moment, I believe EZ really needs money - so charging in my mind is a better option than having it free.
- Another reason I think this, if it is £20 a head (a fair bit) then in my mind it will mostly be the people that are genuinelly interested that will pay to see it. Imagine if it were free, how many (can't think of a better word) chavs would go just to cause problems and because they think it'd be ace to see an animal get butchered. I see the charge as crowd control, rather than commercial (anybody agree?)

Cons:
- Yes, the negative publicity - but it is only negative publicity because that's the way we've twisted it and decided to view it. If we looked at the event in a different light, it would be good publicity - nothing is being harmed, the zoo is trying to raise money for the improvements that the people screaming 'commercial' are criticizing them for not making, a load of people interested in biology will learn something of value to them. If anything, I see this as being brave and continuing to do what a research-focused zoo should do!
 
Javan Rhino said:
I think it's a brilliant idea to be honest. We have a zoo that seriously needs money, an animal that needs an autopsy, and a public willing to pay to see it (whether it be because they are genuinely interested in mammal biology and/or zoology and its pracitices, or whether they just want to see something cut up).

Pros:
- The animal will get its autopsy. They're not going to have killed the animal specifically for the autopsy.
- Edinburgh Zoo will make money from this event. At the moment, I believe EZ really needs money - so charging in my mind is a better option than having it free.
- Another reason I think this, if it is £20 a head (a fair bit) then in my mind it will mostly be the people that are genuinelly interested that will pay to see it. Imagine if it were free, how many (can't think of a better word) chavs would go just to cause problems and because they think it'd be ace to see an animal get butchered. I see the charge as crowd control, rather than commercial (anybody agree?)

Cons:
- Yes, the negative publicity - but it is only negative publicity because that's the way we've twisted it and decided to view it. If we looked at the event in a different light, it would be good publicity - nothing is being harmed, the zoo is trying to raise money for the improvements that the people screaming 'commercial' are criticizing them for not making, a load of people interested in biology will learn something of value to them. If anything, I see this as being brave and continuing to do what a research-focused zoo should do!
Click to expand...

I am of the opinion that whatever money Edinburgh zoo takes at the pay box to watch this dissection will be lost many fold by the lost revenue the bad publicity this will generate. You claim that they are being brave by staging this, I suggest they are being stupid as I am certainly not of the opinion that all publicity is good publicity.
 
TARZAN said:
I suggest they are being stupid as I am certainly not of the opinion that all publicity is good publicity.
Click to expand...

The publicity that putting down the young River Hogs engendered certainly wasn't good for them. IMO it was a ridiculous and crass decision- all the more so given they currently have seven of them without any apparent problems of 'overcrowding'.

I do wonder if the publicity this autopsy idea will create will also do them harm publicitywise, though I'm not personally against it- it is certainly a ground-breaking idea but perhaps a rather strange one at this stage. I hope it works well for them.
 
TARZAN said:
I am of the opinion that whatever money Edinburgh zoo takes at the pay box to watch this dissection will be lost many fold by the lost revenue the bad publicity this will generate. You claim that they are being brave by staging this, I suggest they are being stupid as I am certainly not of the opinion that all publicity is good publicity.
Click to expand...

I agree, it is negative publicity - what I am arguing is that I don't see WHY it should be bad publicity. Essentially, I am pointing out why I don't believe a negative spin is justified, other than the fact the animal rights charities and the Scotsman want some reason to bitch about the zoo, and without thinking it through and taking into consideration that this is NOT a bad, evil event that (I suppose they believe) the animal has been deliberately killed for, it is them that have put a negative spin on it. Unfortunately for the zoo, the public listens to such nonsense so long as it's in the papers.

Just hoping somebody out there gets where I'm coming from. It is the papers fault that the zoo is getting bad publicity, not the zoos. I believe the zoo is doing the right thing here :cool:
 
TARZAN said:
£20 a head ticket to see a zoo animal being cut up does nothing at all to make me change my opinion, in fact it makes me more annoyed.
Click to expand...

Just in the interest of accuracy, it specifically says they don't know where the animal will come from - it could easily be a farm animal as previously or a wild/managed red deer stag, for example.
 
Maguari said:
Just in the interest of accuracy, it specifically says they don't know where the animal will come from - it could easily be a farm animal as previously or a wild/managed red deer stag, for example.
Click to expand...
You are correct, it has not been stated what animal this will be or where it will come from. I would like if I may to mention the television programme Inside Nature's Giants broadcast two years ago when Crumple the elephant was dissected.I recall to speaking to someone from the publicity department at Whipsnade about this. I was told that Whipsnade had been contacted by this programmes makers, however they were told that Whipsnade wanted nothing to do with this whatsoever, indeed the person I spoke to was dismayed that Z.S.L. had appeared in this programmes end credits as apparently London had given the programme makers certain zoological facts and figures relating to the Asian elephant,Knowsley also appeared in the credits as there live Asian elephants had been filmed to be included in the programme. However the zoo that supplied Crumple's body to be dissected in the programme ,i.e. Blackpool was not mentioned at all,I wonder why?
 
TARZAN said:
You are correct, it has not been stated what animal this will be or where it will come from. I would like if I may to mention the television programme Inside Nature's Giants broadcast two years ago when Crumple the elephant was dissected.I recall to speaking to someone from the publicity department at Whipsnade about this. I was told that Whipsnade had been contacted by this programmes makers, however they were told that Whipsnade wanted nothing to do with this whatsoever, indeed the person I spoke to was dismayed that Z.S.L. had appeared in this programmes end credits as apparently London had given the programme makers certain zoological facts and figures relating to the Asian elephant,Knowsley also appeared in the credits as there live Asian elephants had been filmed to be included in the programme. However the zoo that supplied Crumple's body to be dissected in the programme ,i.e. Blackpool was not mentioned at all,I wonder why?
Click to expand...

Sorry,I meant to say Woburn not Knowsley, for some reason I often get their names mixed up.
 
TARZAN said:
You are correct, it has not been stated what animal this will be or where it will come from. I would like if I may to mention the television programme Inside Nature's Giants broadcast two years ago when Crumple the elephant was dissected.I recall to speaking to someone from the publicity department at Whipsnade about this. I was told that Whipsnade had been contacted by this programmes makers, however they were told that Whipsnade wanted nothing to do with this whatsoever, indeed the person I spoke to was dismayed that Z.S.L. had appeared in this programmes end credits as apparently London had given the programme makers certain zoological facts and figures relating to the Asian elephant,Knowsley also appeared in the credits as there live Asian elephants had been filmed to be included in the programme. However the zoo that supplied Crumple's body to be dissected in the programme ,i.e. Blackpool was not mentioned at all,I wonder why?
Click to expand...

Blackpool has had a long history of dealing with animal-libbers outside their front gate, and not helped by claims of cruelty with regards to the hands-on approach to the elephants. I think Blackpool wisely didn't attract attention to themselves that the elephant disection on ING was Crumple. This has nothing to do with the education (and entertainment) value of the show (which I do rate highly), but the public perception of an individual that they may have cherished seeing in the living flesh lying opened up on the floor would be to much to bear. Like it or not we tend to be a soppy species.

My personal thought on the Edinburgh event - poorly thought out given all of the controversy in the past months. I'm sure many of the staff at the zoo probably rolled their eyes and thought 'here we go again' upon hearing about the public dissection.
 
tetrapod said:
Blackpool has had a long history of dealing with animal-libbers outside their front gate, and not helped by claims of cruelty with regards to the hands-on approach to the elephants. I think Blackpool wisely didn't attract attention to themselves that the elephant disection on ING was Crumple. This has nothing to do with the education (and entertainment) value of the show (which I do rate highly), but the public perception of an individual that they may have cherished seeing in the living flesh lying opened up on the floor would be to much to bear. Like it or not we tend to be a soppy species.

My personal thought on the Edinburgh event - poorly thought out given all of the controversy in the past months. I'm sure many of the staff at the zoo probably rolled their eyes and thought 'here we go again' upon hearing about the public dissection.
Click to expand...

I disagree. There have been 2 previous post mortems where the public could buy a ticket and both done for exactly the same reasons as this one, the only difference is this one comes after all the other controversy which although some could definitely have been avoided by the zoo has generally been stirred up by the local papers. They report on certain happenings at the zoo and put this spin on it if it can possibly be seen as negative. There have been many things the zoo has publicised on it's website, on Twitter, Facebook etc that have been great i.e. the work they do with the DNA scientists who are working towards preventing wildlife crime, their involvement with the rescue and rehabilitation of northern rockhoppers after the oil spill near Tristan da Cunha. Why have the papers not reported on any of these interesting stories and if they have, why are people not commenting on what a good job the zoo are doing? Because only negative, sensationalist stories appear to sell papers and most people can only criticise instead of praise, it's the way of the world it seems.

If more people attended events like these to be educated by professional staff such as zoo vets then there wouldn't be as many people visiting zoos that are ignorant of the real facts about animals and their care and perhaps the same people could then make a comment or judgement based on real knowledge/experience.

Yes the zoo could just not do events like these and fall into line with all the other organisations that only do the cute and cuddly approach but are we not then just promoting only one side of the animals which is not actually realistic. People should know that animals die, attack each other, attack people, defaecate, urinate etc etc. That's real and that's exactly why I like animals, they are not real life fluffy toys that we can all buy versions of because we think they're cute (that's the reason why there is a pet trade of exotic animals that largely end up with poor solitary animals of all species sitting neglected in someones back garden).

Organisations like PETA should perhaps start publicising/critiscising/saving the many, many animals kept as pets illegally and legally that are much more deserving of anyones concern than the animals kept properly in zoos of a good standard (as these animals have professional, caring staff concerned for them). For them to spend time condemning this event which involves a dead animal (which is still treated respectfully by the vet) when there are thousands of animals being neglected and mistreated in so many ways (whether knowingly or unwittingly by their owner) is a waste in my opinion.
I commend the zoo for just getting on with something already planned and not bowing down to misinformed opinion and biased journalism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top