Colchester Zoo 2003 - Red River Hog exhibit

Baldur said:

I never said we needed all to be keepers, have degrees or have written papers. I'm purely a zoo enthusiast myself too. It just bothered me that he used a word such as 'rubbish' to describe this exhibit and then commenting on its suitability to house a species without going into exactly what makes it unsuitable. Not having any zookeeper experience, I try to avoid to comment on zookeeping matters myself. It is the same as writing a film review and say "This film sucked."

Click to expand...

But you did say that he could only comment on whether the exhibit was good or bad if he was a zoo keeper, had a degree in zoology and had written papers on the subject. I don't have any of those qualifications but post anyway, and if we all did have to complete this list of criteria, this forum would cease to exist. Therefore, I think it somewhat unnecessary.

As he put it made it sound as if he had professional knowledge in how to keep the species. A more appropriate word would perhaps have been 'Unimpressive'. That word does not imply any (supposed or actual) knowledge of the husbandry of the species.

What is Zoo Chat turning in to?

Do we have rules now for how to comment on photos?

This is silly. If that is my opinion then that is fine. I do not have have zoo keeping experience and I did not have alot of time to spend on the post so I just quickly put down what I thought of it.

lechweoryx said:

What is Zoo Chat turning in to?

Do we have rules now for how to comment on photos?

This is silly. If that is my opinion then that is fine. I do not have have zoo keeping experience and I did not have alot of time to spend on the post so I just quickly put down what I thought of it.

Click to expand...

Like I said earlier, we should not be required to have qualifications to post on here and if this was a necessary criteria then this site would likely become obsolete. However, simply saying that an enclosure is rubbish without giving any reasons is neither helpful or constructive and, if we all did this, it would probably lead to ZooChat becoming obsolete as well. If you don't have time to post a proper response, bookmark the page and return when you have more time to develop your ideas. Not only will branding zoos rubbish without any justification give that zoo a bad reputation (whether they deserve it or not), but also this site as the zoo community will come to see us as a new branch of animal rights activists and stop listening to the valid criticisms that we offer.

Redpanda, I couldn't agree more. I regret my mention of papers and degrees as it seems to have caused some misunderstanding. My degree is in Tourism, I would hate if as a result I couldn't be on Zoochat. The Yahoo newsgroup Zoo Biology is for the zoo pros and they can keep it; I subscribe but I'm only an observer. I apologise if I offended anyone.

There are in the region of 30.000 photos uploaded on Zoochat. It would be the easiest thing for us to go quickly through them and brand with simple yet powerful descriptions and phrases; positive (like wonderful, great, astonishing, amazing, beautiful) or negative (like rubbish, ridiculous, horrendous, shocking) without going into what exactly makes it so beautiful or so shocking; much less making any comments for improvement. Criticising exhibits without offering advice or opinion on improvement at the same time is not going to raise Zoochat's respect among professionals in zoos. I know for a fact that some think already this forum is a joke and wouldn't consider an idea or suggestion from here, regardless of how solid it may be.

My rule of thumb is that I try not to comment on photos unless I have seen the respective exhibit myself. Photos can foul and often they only show a small part of the exhibit.

Have a look at the following photo for an example of a typical spontaneous comment, from one of our youngest members, here calling Bristol Zoo's old camel paddock the worst exhibit he's ever seen.

http://www.zoochat.com/55/camel-enclosure-1984-a-47865/

Chances are that he was born well after it was demolished so he is judging it from an old photo taken from one angle. So a fair comment? Everyone can see it was a bare concrete paddock, but the minimum is to have seen it first before using such strong words.

I hope I have made my point clear here.

Why didn't he get a lecture?

lechweoryx said:

Why didn't he get a lecture?

Click to expand...

Because I think most people are getting bored of giving him a lecture, only for him to do exactly the same thing a week later.

Is it a regular thing?

lechweoryx said:

Why didn't he get a lecture?

Click to expand...

I have told him to be careful a few times before.

You may laugh but I'm only trying to help you. I'm not exactly old (29) but something tells me I'm at least a decade older than you so I can now give you the same advise I was given years ago. If you don't think your reputation here doesn't matter, then please ignore my advise, but if you want respect here, you must be careful about what you say. There is no such thing as a 'wrong' opinion as long as you can back it up. What you say here will stay for years to come and can be referred to by others.

Cheers

A decade and 4 years