yes indeed im reffering to you when i say harsh critics , i dont think John Aspinall was a "hobbyist" was he ? he bred endangered animals not budgereigars or hammsters , and the zoos which "litter" the english countryside , i will say again , if you want a "gorilla wilderness" then go to the Congo or Rhwanda because i think its pretty futile looking for a "wilderness" in captivity , heres a definition of wilderness
wil·der·ness
(wldr-ns)
n.
An unsettled, uncultivated region left in its natural condition, especially:
oh and here is a site for travelling to Africa to observe Gorillas in their natrual habitat maybe then your quest will be fullfilled
Thank you, but I've had the privilege of seeing wild gorillas in both Uganda and Rwanda--which only strengthened my belief that presenting these animals in as natural a context as possible is critically important for zoos.
And yes Aspinall was an amateur--in the best sense of the word (look it up)--who used his ill-gotten gambling profits to feed his animal collecting hobby. Yes he bred many animals--so did Pablo Escobar.
yes indeed im reffering to you when i say harsh critics , i dont think John Aspinall was a "hobbyist" was he ? he bred endangered animals not budgereigars or hammsters , and the zoos which "litter" the english countryside , i will say again , if you want a "gorilla wilderness" then go to the Congo or Rhwanda because i think its pretty futile looking for a "wilderness" in captivity , heres a definition of wilderness
wil·der·ness
(wldr-ns)
n.
An unsettled, uncultivated region left in its natural condition, especially:
oh and here is a site for travelling to Africa to observe Gorillas in their natrual habitat maybe then your quest will be fullfilled
I apologise for annoying you Black rhino its not my intention , its just that i find the Aspinall park bashing annoying and its evident that im not the only one , constructive criticism is ok but i think its getting a bit of a heated issue right now
wow im so glad you have seen wild gorillas in both Rhwanda and the Congo , did you take any pictures ? , you are quite a traveller ,travelling indeed broadens the mind which is so very evident from your posts , i looked "amateur" up by the way and i dont think it is how i would define John Aspinalls success with endangered animals one thing which is a bit silly is comparing Pablo Escobar to John Aspinall i think not only alot of zoochatters but a Caleno Colombian friend of mine who works for the zoologico de Cali , will be a bit confused in that comparison , John Aspinall was a gambler but i wouldnt ever compare him to a vicious Medellin thug drug lord ... i think then again i suppose you have visited south America to see for yourself....
The cool thing is gorillas don't have to be displayed in an enclosed cage like this to be happy, healthy, thriving gorillas. All you have to do is visit the gorilla exhibits in the Bronx, San Diego, Disney, Seattle, or even Chicago. One will find perfectly enriched gorillas that are breeding and living the good life in aesthetically pleasing enclosures. All you Howletts defenders seem to think you can only see thriving gorillas in an enclosed unnatural looking cage. I am not putting down this exhibit, but it is possible to show gorillas acting like gorillas in a natural environment in captivity.
I agree Blackrhino, you make a valid point that I don't think many can argue with, however the point of this argue to me is that there is some people in these world that believe these animals should not be exhibited in this way and am asking the question why?
Anyone who has visit the parks will know how they go to great length to explain to the public that they are an artificial environment which act in the same to their natural habitat, and thus providing all year round environment where they can be act much like their wild counterparts, with the added advantage that a much larger group can be held at a lower cost which we are seeing the all time how zoos are trying to cut costs.
I think its time we maybe agree to disagree on this one.
In Australia there are only 2 zoos with gorillas, in large naturalistic exhibits, and across Europe there aren't many of the Howletts-style barred enclosures left. Howletts is practically the last of its kind FOR A REASON, QUOTE]
I dont think they are going to be the last of its kind Snow Leopard Chessington is again building a new 'cage' for its gorillas and im sure other Uk Zoos will follow in this design.
Thats all im going to say on the issue and i agree with Tuan lets agree to disagree
T All you Howletts defenders seem to think you can only see thriving gorillas in an enclosed unnatural looking cage. I am not putting down this exhibit, but it is possible to show gorillas acting like gorillas in a natural environment in captivity.
Total rubbish. I would far rather see Gorillas exhibited in attractive 'naturalistic' settings any day, so long as they provide all the Gorillas' requirements to the max. The point is, even now, most of them don't go that far, while the ugly Howlettts cages do.
Case in point- probably still the best Gorilla exhibit in Europe is Apenheul's- at least the huge naturally wooded outdoor area. They have a large, thriving group and after Howletts, certainly the best breeding record in Europe. But in winter the animals can't use the outside and are often confined indoors. I don't think that is ever the case at Howletts.
Nah the Howletts gorillas are out all year round. Isn't it great how people have had to resort to bad mouthing a dead man when they can't think of anything else to say? Comments like that give this forum a bad name.
Total rubbish. I would far rather see Gorillas exhibited in attractive 'naturalistic' settings any day, so long as they provide all the Gorillas' requirements to the max. The point is, even now, most of them don't go that far, while the ugly Howlettts cages do.
That is true, of course it would be better seeing them all in real sections of woodland, but that's never going to happen without stupid amounts of hotwire and other fake stuff, leaving the gorillas with nothing to do due to all their space being taken up by electrified plants.
Edit: Except in Disney, but no other zoo can realisticly do that lol.
At Apenheul they have a very large area to use (at least an acre, probably a lot more) and I think only some of the biggest live trees are protected by hotwire, nothing else but its so large there is minimal damage.
I always get the impression at some of the other 'naturalised' exhibits, particularly those with the most expensive/lavish plantings of vegetation, that the gorillas are actually confined to quite narrow 'corridors' of bare or woodchip-floored ground in between the hotwired areas and if you looked closely you would see the 'trails' they make as a result. Is this not the situation at e.g. the Bronx exhibit, that their ability to use the whole fabulous-looking enclosure is actually an illusion? I stress this does not apply to all naturalistic exhibits but the one at Madrid seems rather to fall into this category too.
