Brights Zoo Brights Zoo News
- Thread starter drill
- Start date
Aardwolf
Well-Known Member
Private Facebook group, ostensibly got zookeepers (hence the name), though it seems these days like it’s mostly former keepers and volunteers
In all honesty, I don't follow the US forums a whole lot, so was unaware of this (not that it would have changed wether I would have posted this or not). My post was no slight towards him, just stating the facts presented.
He gave some fair comments and explaination on the Facebook post, highlighting that giraffe populations are generally inbred due to their low founder base in the US. I do still think the pairing was unacceptable, but that's just my opinion and would welcome more discourse
Aardwolf
Well-Known Member
Ah, so that was you. It's interesting, because they all seemed 100% sure that it was someone else, a former employeeIn all honesty, I don't follow the US forums a whole lot, so was unaware of this (not that it would have changed wether I would have posted this or not). My post was no slight towards him, just stating the facts presented.
He gave some fair comments and explaination on the Facebook post, highlighting that giraffe populations are generally inbred due to their low founder base in the US. I do still think the pairing was unacceptable, but that's just my opinion and would welcome more discourse
Wait, you think I created the anonymous post?
Edit, I see why you might think that from what I said. I was referring to my original post on ZooChat, not the Facebook post... I've no idea who created the Facebook post.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
I've tried to find the post and I can't even find the group!
Could you include a link to the post? Or if that's not allowed, screenshot the discussion and post it here?
This giraffe has attracted significant attention for better or for worse, and I'd hate for information about her pedigree to get lost in the shuffle.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
How about a link then? You can share it with me privately if you don't want to post it where the general public can see it.
I can tell you first hand the owner is an egotistical a hole. His girrafes are always breeding. The females are always pragnant. would not be surprised if the babys parents where also it's sister father's son or something ridiculous. Everyone of his animal are breeding. He might as well as be a dealer of animals. He would sell your grandmother a water buffalo bull if she asked for one. When I first heard the news, the first thing that crossed my mind was why did something zoo cool and amazing happen at his place. He also said he has not thought about breeding the baby yet. Guarantee when shes old enough, she will get bread. Hes seeing dollar signs. Why not breee a female giraffe that 150k each off spring.
Last edited:
That would not be appropriate on this forum.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
I think what makes it inappropriate is the manner in which the information was obtained and then presented. The pedigree of this animal was gathered from ZIMS data and then shared on a zoo-employee-only Facebook group. The pedigree posted on the Facebook group is a direct screenshot from the ZIMS pedigree module. Neither of those sources are public sources of information. Neither are something that just anyone off the street could have access to — that’s what makes it inappropriate to share on the forum. It is not necessarily inappropriate to discuss the animal in question, its condition, or the implications of its pedigree, but it is inappropriate to share direct information and data that is not yours to share.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
I'd make the argument that it's inappropriate for pedigree information to be hidden from the zoo-going public in the first place. Other industries that involve animals are quite happy to disclose pedigree information - Dog showing and horse racing to name two prominent examples.
Why is the zoo industry allowed to be different? Especially since stuff like ZIMS wasn't always hidden from the public, that only changed around a decade ago. This relatively recent lack of transparency is not only frustrating for zoo enthusiasts, but also makes the zoo industry look like it's trying to hide.
Transparency is directly related to social license to operate. Hiding even something relatively benign like an animals (An animal that is of heightened interest to the public no less!) pedigree because of "privacy concerns"... it's not a good look. And it's going to eventually bite the zoo industry in the butt.
Animal Rights Nutjobs already hate zoos enough as is, let's not give them something else to use against them, okay?
To speak of 'animal rights nutjobs'...
I recall recently on Peta.org I was looking there and was surprised to see that zoos in general did not - or at least, not anymore have their own space on the website. There are some words about 'roadside zoos', aquariums, circuses.... but interestingly not good-quality zoos.
Though I will say that on many other animal rights websites the anti-zoo sentiment is much still there... though on some of these even there is a nuanced viewpoint on the subject matter every once in a while. Blind pigs and truffles, if you may...
I think part of why it went private was because of activists - beforehand they were able to access the data and were able to expect and plan ahead a great deal more effectively. They still lie whether they have the correct information or not, what matters to them is whether things fit their narrative. The less information is available to them, the more they're kept guessing until things have already happened.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
Allowing Animal Rights Nutjobs to terrorize the zoo community is not sustainable. Withholding information from the interested public just because somebody might try to use it for nefarious purposes is unacceptable.