How does animal welfare affect a zoo?

Panda_Fan

Panda_Fan

Well-Known Member
Everyone on zoochat knows what animal welfare is, but in case anyone doesn't know, animal welfare is when a zoo tries to give the best posible life for their resident with different methods, like enrichment with toys or having interspecies with other animals, as well as having suficient space and a well nutrition. Sometimes zoos have been affected (I'm not saying the affect is negative) because of this.
What's your opinion and would love to see examples from zoos that you know.
Thanks for everything and hope you enjoy!:)
 
I'll start by saying that the SDZ has made a lot of changes to have the beast animal welfare for some animals.
For example the takins (which were a favourite of mine) were moved to make space for the new "Panda Ridge" complex, since that was a condition on getting bach the pandas.
It's alse been rumored that the SDZ has phased the reeinder in favour for the needed expansion to polar bear habitat.
Even before that both koalas and elephants recived new areas to make better their welafre. A lot of other animals need expansions or new habitas, but that's another topic.
 
Better welfare = less chances of unwanted publicity from the animal rights people. Bad welfare = rightfully bad reputation and ultimately reduced attendance.

A smaller zoo near me in the Atlanta area -- I admittedly forget its name -- has been under fire recently for a multitude of welfare issues. For a while they weren't even open because their problems ran so deep and they were in such hot water. I don't know if they are open by now or not, but at the peak of the story, nobody wanted to go there because nobody wanted to give their money to a facility that was known to be outright neglecting their animals.

There will still be people who don't care and go anyways, but there are reasons why dumpy roadsides with animals in cages don't draw the crowds AZA zoos do, and a big one is that people would simply rather see animals in their prime condition. That can have some pretty significant implications for finances and can become a positive feedback loop if they aren't able to pull the income to afford better facilities.
 
BearMinimum said:
A smaller zoo near me in the Atlanta area -- I admittedly forget its name -- has been under fire recently for a multitude of welfare issues. For a while they weren't even open because their problems ran so deep and they were in such hot water. I don't know if they are open by now or not, but at the peak of the story, nobody wanted to go there because nobody wanted to give their money to a facility that was known to be outright neglecting their animals.
Click to expand...
Was this Yellow River (formerly "Game Ranch", now "Wildlife Sanctuary")? I never visited prior to their closure a few years ago, but from what I've seen and read, it seems like it was a truly ghastly place. I'm talking cougars in corn crib cages, bears in concrete pits ghastly. It got bought out a few years ago and I've visited a handful of times since then, and it seems like the place has turned around dramatically and is continue to move in a progressive direction. It's not without its problems still, but I think they've been taking visible steps to expand upon or replace old habitats with newer ones full of suitable enrichment. Now the corn crib cages are only used as extensions to other habitats, and the bears have a surprisingly sizeable wooded enclosure with a stream and various forms of enrichment. I'm quick to call a place out when I feel as if they have genuine issues, but I think the current owners' hearts are in the right place and their actions reflect upon that.

Maybe that's not the one you're thinking of (I know there are several facilities in the Atlanta area), but it's the one that came to mind when you mentioned that they'd closed down.
 
biggest_dreamer said:
Was this Yellow River (formerly "Game Ranch", now "Wildlife Sanctuary")? I never visited prior to their closure a few years ago, but from what I've seen and read, it seems like it was a truly ghastly place. I'm talking cougars in corn crib cages, bears in concrete pits ghastly. It got bought out a few years ago and I've visited a handful of times since then, and it seems like the place has turned around dramatically and is continue to move in a progressive direction. It's not without its problems still, but I think they've been taking visible steps to expand upon or replace old habitats with newer ones full of suitable enrichment. Now the corn crib cages are only used as extensions to other habitats, and the bears have a surprisingly sizeable wooded enclosure with a stream and various forms of enrichment. I'm quick to call a place out when I feel as if they have genuine issues, but I think the current owners' hearts are in the right place and their actions reflect upon that.

Maybe that's not the one you're thinking of (I know there are several facilities in the Atlanta area), but it's the one that came to mind when you mentioned that they'd closed down.
Click to expand...

Oh gosh, no that isn't the one... I've heard of that place's name but I had no idea it used to be so bad. Ugh.

I don't keep close tabs on roadsides so there's probably a lot happening in that side of things that I'm not aware of.

The one I was talking about was Noah's Ark, which has always been quite popular, so it might be able to recover (and might have already done so). It does look like they're back to being open to the public. But they drew a lot of ire when their welfare investigations were ongoing in the past year or two, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who hears their name and thinks of that stain on their record.
 
biggest_dreamer said:
Was this Yellow River (formerly "Game Ranch", now "Wildlife Sanctuary")? I never visited prior to their closure a few years ago, but from what I've seen and read, it seems like it was a truly ghastly place. I'm talking cougars in corn crib cages, bears in concrete pits ghastly. It got bought out a few years ago and I've visited a handful of times since then, and it seems like the place has turned around dramatically and is continue to move in a progressive direction. It's not without its problems still, but I think they've been taking visible steps to expand upon or replace old habitats with newer ones full of suitable enrichment. Now the corn crib cages are only used as extensions to other habitats, and the bears have a surprisingly sizeable wooded enclosure with a stream and various forms of enrichment. I'm quick to call a place out when I feel as if they have genuine issues, but I think the current owners' hearts are in the right place and their actions reflect upon that.

Maybe that's not the one you're thinking of (I know there are several facilities in the Atlanta area), but it's the one that came to mind when you mentioned that they'd closed down.
Click to expand...

Oh wait, I definitely do know this place. I looked up some photos and I actually remember using a photo of their bear pit in a presentation I did at university. The presentation was fairly broad in scope, but I specifically included photos of this facility (and if I recall, an unattractive USDA report as well, but that may have been for another place) to exemplify places with poor welfare that don't represent what contemporary zoos stand for.

I included a side-by-side of Birmingham Zoo's black bear enclosure for comparison. I can only assume if my audience had to choose between these two facilities, they would rather visit the latter, regardless of their feelings on animal welfare; hideous enclosures like that subtract from the experience of viewing the animals themselves. So this actually does tangentially relate to my first comment.

It's great to hear about their turnaround. I tend to be very skeptical of unaccredited facilities but ZooChat has encouraged me to open my mind a bit. Looks like a fairly nice little place from some more recent pictures, maybe I'll check them out sometime
 
remar said:
Isn't every Zoo in the world affected by animal welfare?
Click to expand...
Junky/bad zoos aren't really afected to this logic . I get your point of view, but I would like if you know specific examples that happened at a zoo you know or that you've heard of.
 
Xavier GM said:
Everyone on zoochat knows what animal welfare is, but in case anyone doesn't know, animal welfare is when a zoo tries to give the best posible life for their resident with different methods, like enrichment with toys or having interspecies with other animals, as well as having suficient space and a well nutrition. Sometimes zoos have been affected (I'm not saying the affect is negative) because of this.
What's your opinion and would love to see examples from zoos that you know.
Thanks for everything and hope you enjoy!:)
Click to expand...
Ethically, obviously. For me, the well-being in zoos and aquarias should be put to the highest standard for animals kept in captivity (Especially since zoos supposed to take care and conserved their threatened animals).

Though sadly, this view are somewhat ruled out in my observation towards Indonesian facilities. The standard are always are; large exhibits and fat animals, not other also pressing issues like mental health, enrichment, feasibility of maintenance, etc. This only made worse when zoo and aquaria animals are often relegated to role and care similar to house pets.
 
Rizz Carlton said:
Ethically, obviously. For me, the well-being in zoos and aquarias should be put to the highest standard for animals kept in captivity (Especially since zoos supposed to take care and conserved their threatened animals).

Though sadly, this view are somewhat ruled out in my observation towards Indonesian facilities. The standard are always are; large exhibits and fat animals, not other also pressing issues like mental health, enrichment, feasibility of maintenance, etc. This only made worse when zoo and aquaria animals are often relegated to role and care similar to house pets.
Click to expand...
I agrre with you. I really don't like whe people say animals need a lot of space, when in reality there are other things at play that, if not included, could be very harmful to the animal.
 
Xavier GM said:
@BearMinimum I got confused, so, yes, you're absolutley right! Sorry for any confusion.
What is the name of the Netflix film about? I'm courious to see it.
Click to expand...

I'm referring to Tiger King! Of course it was about more than just animal welfare, but that was the aspect that was most damaging to the facility itself. A lot of these crappy zoos fly under the radar simply because people don't know about them. Nobody in the general public knew about Wynnewood Animal Park unless they were local. After Tiger King, their name is practically synonymous with very poor welfare.

As much as I hate to make reference to it, this effect can be observed with Blackfish as well --- SeaWorld's reputation still hasn't recovered, despite how greatly exaggerated that film was.

So zoos can honestly be harmed by public perception of their welfare, as if the public is under the impression that welfare issues exist, heavy criticism is drawn whether or not they actually do. An operation like SeaWorld can handle that to an extent but a smaller zoo like Wynnewood, forget it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top