India's Richest Family Building World's Largest Zoo
- Thread starter Smaggledagle
- Start date
So the guy who can afford to import tens and thousands of animals (and skirt international trade laws) somehow can’t afford to hire an army of security guards to keep visitors in check? Yeah right
If you don’t expect “ordinary people” then why even announce the whole world your silly “little” pet project. As far as I know, millionaires who have menageries and breeding projects, such as Al Busta, Rum Creek and Will Ferrel, usually try to keep it to their animals under the wraps, only known by the animal industry or those interested in it. Yet Anant and co. feel like they have to flex whatever they do for the public to know through news outlets or obnoxious social media posts, only for Anant to look down on the public (who I assume are patrons for his family’s business, thus funding Anant’s dream project)
Not only do I feel irritated that laws are being broken over this, but I feel sad for the children in the region (assuming they could even afford entering the menagerie in the first place) who will never get to be marveled or inspired by the greater animal kingdom Vantara could have offered.
At least it would be pretty easy with such an amount of money to build a smaller on show area with non breeding animals and still having enough space and money for an large off show breeding space for (rarer) species.
splendens
Well-Known Member
This video shows that the facility also keeps black-footed cats and spider-tailed horned vipers Pseudocerastes urarachnoides (in one of 10 venomous snake rooms!), another species with very questionable captive backgrounds...
The amount of rare reptiles kept by this facility seems enormous, the older inventory reports show species such as Australian longnosed waterdragon Gowidon longonostris, humpnosed lizard Lyriocephalus scutatus, and 3 different Brachylophus, many of these seem extremely hard to acquire legally such as the Australian species.
The amount of rare reptiles kept by this facility seems enormous, the older inventory reports show species such as Australian longnosed waterdragon Gowidon longonostris, humpnosed lizard Lyriocephalus scutatus, and 3 different Brachylophus, many of these seem extremely hard to acquire legally such as the Australian species.
Mr. Galante seems to get worse with every advertisement gig. Frogs are reptiles now, eh? "Surplus of other zoos"...sure.
Never open a venomous snake enclosure without looking. Not even when it's tiny juveniles. Speaking of which: tailing those tiny guys might end badly...
Never open a venomous snake enclosure without looking. Not even when it's tiny juveniles. Speaking of which: tailing those tiny guys might end badly...
Without speaking of the continuous AI image and footage use despite clear evidence that they're not environmental friendly, so much for biology and conservation...Mr. Galante seems to get worse with every advertisement gig. Frogs are reptiles now, eh? "Surplus of other zoos"...sure.
Ironically, India has a tradition of literary texts going back literally millennia, telling that the rich have obligations to poor people and society, not just flaunt their wealth.
I suspect that not all of these extremely rare animals are really kept, and actually live long and well. Others may be misidentified, invented, or are just purchased on a whim and then die or are passed further.
I wonder if any Western zoo approached them to join breeding programs and what was the response? I can understand that the guy is not willing to collaborate with Indian zoos, which often have sub-par enclosures. But good zoos?
Last edited:
To be clear I don't know much about the environmental impact of AI, but I've heard from people with good authority that the impact is far less than is often claimed. Given how people currently seem to vilify AI for everything these days, I would not at all be surprised if that's true.
That being said AI images should be used by a science communicator like Galante.
I am sure Anant deludes himself to think that he already meets those obligations by calling his pet project a rescue and “educating” the common folk throughout his menagerie’s socials instead of letting them visit the zoo itself.
Indeed; fake pictures are rather fitting for a professional faker.
No, because paying for a stock image or an artist's work or just giving credit to an image of public use that still has a crafter is much better, both for virtue and for gain of the people involved, because paying a stock image or an artist assures somehow that the quality will be maintained; then you have misrepresentation and deception, which is in the ordinary for such media, I highly suggest you watch this other YouTuber commenting over Galante's channel to not give this "scientist" a penny's worth of income (ironically, galante in Italian means something or someone tacky, of high regard and good taste, in line with Galateo rules, something he's quite off from).
There's a lot of differing opinions on the carbon output, but I keep hearing the water systems to keep the processing centers cool are so intensive they're actually starting to dry up the local aquifers. And they haven't even been around all that long. The other side of it is I keep seeing AI generated pictures of the fires over in Europe, with things obviously not quite right. Yet they circulate anyway. Thus an unexpected environmental impact is that people can use AI to make places seem better or worse than they actually are, if nobody's careful.
More to the point, AI images in a supposedly conservation oriented situation is plain misinformation. You're supposed to be showing and educating us on what actually exists in the world, not show us some rendering of a computer's recreation. The amount of photoshopped, AI, and otherwise falsified images being posted as real in many "nature groups" online is disgusting.
This claim about using a very high volume of water is actually specifically the claim I keep hearing refuted.
OkapiJohn
Well-Known Member
Nuremberg Zoo refused an offer to send its surplus baboons to Vantara, "preferring" to cull the animals instead. I think no serious Western zoo is much in tune with Vantara.
I feel like there's significant suspicions and distrust of a facility when culling is chosen even with an open rehome offer. Which I dare say the suspicion is warranted given the overall appearances.
I've never watched any of these before, because Galante is a pillock, but I skim-watched this one and just thought "what an idiot" when I heard him state that this zoo "houses every known species of reptile from every corner of the globe".
I had to look up the definition of pillock. Hope that doesn't make me one 
Zz123
Well-Known Member
Did Nuremberg Zoo choose to cull the baboons out of concern for their own reputation or for the welfare of the animals? Although Vantara has been suspected of having some animals from questionable sources, these remain only suspicions. Moreover, their care after acquiring the animals—such as the condition of the enclosures, feeding, and general management—has been reported by many visitors to be good or even better than the standards of some other zoos.
I believe Nuremberg Zoo prioritized protecting their reputation over animal welfare. It’s easier for them to kill the baboons and end the issue, using the polished excuse of caring for animal welfare. How truly disgusting.
Actually their reputation took a heavy hit. They have received death threats over it.
Just as a point, the zoo isn't open to the public so it doesn't have regular "visitors" - anybody going there is by invitation of the richest family in India. None of them are going to be saying anything bad about the place...
Zz123
Well-Known Member
Nuremberg Zoo could have sent someone to inspect the facility before sending the baboons. If the place was truly bad, they would have had clear answers.