Melbourne Zoo Melbourne zoo- Allegations
- Thread starter Zoo_Boy
- Start date
As I said in my other posts my experience in handling animals has come from some countries where more force is used. I live on a famr, have my whole life and have been around animals since I was born, my first birthday present was a lamb. I have worked and lived with elephants in Sri Lanka and Thailand for a total of 18 months. I found it quite ridiculous that some people have never smacked a dog on the nose for nipping at you, I never said it had to be hard and it is only when the dog does the wrong thing. Fair enough if you'd like me to let my dog go wandering farms killing sheep then of course I won't punish him next time he goes to wander I'll let him do it. It is the punishment that makes my dog realise that he has done something wrong. It took one time after he took off for the night, once and just a smack on the backside and now he doesn't do it, or if he does and gets caught he goes straight to his kennel . This is the same for all animals my point is and you people don't seem to be able to get it into your heads. . IF YOU LET AN ANIMAL GET AWAY WITH SOMETHING CONTINUALLY IT WILL ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF ELEPHANTS BECOME A DANGER DOWN THE TRACK. I have seen people everywhere punishing an animal for doing something wrong. Hell there was footage in a doco about Dreamworld that showed one of the handlers giving the cat a soft smack because one of the cats nipped him. And I believe that is totally acceptable. but if you don't that's your opinion. With something the size of an elephant not to act is often stupid and very dangerous.!!!
NZ Jeremy
Well-Known Member
I think everyone here understands that elephants (amongst others) need to have their behaviour managed for safety's sake, however what you don't seem to be able to grasp is the difference between control through trust and positive re-enforcement and other non-acceptable methods, i.e. violence...
Last edited:
And positive reinforcemnet is not iron clad - for sure-always going to work. Animals have personalities to. this is just ridiculous. Okay. . . . My father and uncle are professional horse trainers. they never are vionet toward the horses however if one turns it'd back on him he'll give them a smack on the arse. There is a difference one between violent force and negative force. After they smack the horse on the arse the don't run away, rather come up and put their head over thier shoulders. The horses often panicked, will calm down as soon as he goes near them as they realise if he is calm then they can be to. I personally think my uncle, who has no formal qualifications, but is so obviously talented in training animals that he is paid thousands of dollars to break in horses would no a bit more about right and wrong force than people who have a dog and a few gold fish. He says "give em back what they give you". it is too easy to be killed by these animals to let them get away with misbehaving.
If an elephants shows a behavoir that needs to be managed with physical force for not becoming a danger to humans the husbandry method needs to be changed to protected contact!!! In p.c. no elephant can become a danger to humans! But I do understand that you didn´t learn anything about p.c. and its benefits when working with elephants in Asia, Jarkari. The outdated cruel training methods from Asia are thankfully no longer considered appropriate in most western zoos!
Last edited:
in the ABC series Zoos Victoria were actually aware that the zebra mare was pregnant but in their defence they did take precautions in loading her into a modified crate. the situation wasnt ideal given that zebras are wild animals and skittish at the best of times but the fact that the zoo had spent 2 months conditioning the animal to accept the crate and people and the fact that a vet was with the animals for the trip probably helped sway opinion. that and the fact that alot was riding on the making the export happen
snowleopard and N Z Jeremy;
Your comments on this thread just betray your ignorance. You remind me of people who don't have children themselves but who take it on themselves to point out to other people where their parenting is wrong. It's great in theory until you have to make it work.
In fact, you seem to have plenty to say about anything and everything. (I bet you love the sound of your own voices!)
snowleopard, you have been a member of this forum for one month and in that time you have posted 190 comments!
N Z Jeremy, you too have been a member only a month and in that time you have posted 372 comments!
For heavens sake, both of you, GET A LIFE!
Your comments on this thread just betray your ignorance. You remind me of people who don't have children themselves but who take it on themselves to point out to other people where their parenting is wrong. It's great in theory until you have to make it work.
In fact, you seem to have plenty to say about anything and everything. (I bet you love the sound of your own voices!)
snowleopard, you have been a member of this forum for one month and in that time you have posted 190 comments!
N Z Jeremy, you too have been a member only a month and in that time you have posted 372 comments!
For heavens sake, both of you, GET A LIFE!
@Ara: you are getting a little off topic with comments in regards to the number of thread postings. People like myself, NZ Jeremy, Sun Wukong and many others are indeed relatively new to this forum and have indulged in writing and responding to a good many posts. I'm the lesser of the three that I mentioned, but the point of a forum is for zoo enthusiasts to respond to everything and anything to do with zoos. We enjoy visiting countless zoos, reading zoo literature, and discussing it with other rabid fans. If you wish to be a strong and yet silent member than that is your perogative.
I do not own an elephant, and probably only a handful of participants on this website are in contact with elephants...but hitting any animal that has already lost its freedom is abhorrent and should be condemned. Please don't become irate at forum members for speaking their mind, and there are folks on this site who are into the thousands in terms of postings so us newcomers have a long way to go before reaching those gargantuan heights!
I do not own an elephant, and probably only a handful of participants on this website are in contact with elephants...but hitting any animal that has already lost its freedom is abhorrent and should be condemned. Please don't become irate at forum members for speaking their mind, and there are folks on this site who are into the thousands in terms of postings so us newcomers have a long way to go before reaching those gargantuan heights!
NZ Jeremy
Well-Known Member
Exactly right Snowleopard... I don't feel I should be haranged for being an euthsiastic member, Ara would you rather come to the site and find no movement on the boards for days on end..?
New memebers who read through the all threads are bound to have a lot of initial posts when they feel compelled to comment on "old" threads...
New memebers who read through the all threads are bound to have a lot of initial posts when they feel compelled to comment on "old" threads...
oh
haven't watched it for several years and I really did think they didn't know.I assure you many of these elephants were just as happy if not happier than those in western zoos. No unreasonable force was used except for one Bull, who was not supposed to be moved as he was in musth and that force was used to save my life and that of his mahout.
You must be one of our muched loved animal libbers???
i think when you get past the sensationalism and consider the facts that this is really a storm in a tea-cup. it was a jab! not a stab!
im the first to concede that elephants are dangerous animals, and that protected contact is optimal. but ive been blasted on this forum before by proponents of non-protected contact when it comes to big cats. so on balance, given that Melbourne and Taronga put so much effort into acquiring animals who would work well with this system of management i think that if our zoos can keep elephants safely under these conditions than it is for the best.
of course, elephants are big animals and human life is valuable. if an elephant as big as an elephant is backing into you then a jab might be neccesary to stop it crushing you! common sense really. you might say keeping elephants in zoos isnt common sense but thats a whole other issue.
having reviewed the DEP reports for both zoos i think these animals are being looked after quite well.
the report on this issue seemed set against a backdrop of doom and gloom for zoos. i think this is crap. zoos on the whole are evolving incredibly quickly and whilst of course there are growing pains such as commercialism i think that they have a future in society. all i can think of is that EVERYONE IN MELBOURNE WAS SO SICK OF HEARING ABOUT THAT ****ING TEENAGER WITH THE YELLOW SUNGLASSES THAT THEY DECIDED A STORY ON A STABBED ELEPHANT WOULD BE A NICE CHANGE. BTW IM SICK OF HEARING ABOUT HIM. HE GIVES US GENERATION Y PEOPLE A BAD NAME!
im the first to concede that elephants are dangerous animals, and that protected contact is optimal. but ive been blasted on this forum before by proponents of non-protected contact when it comes to big cats. so on balance, given that Melbourne and Taronga put so much effort into acquiring animals who would work well with this system of management i think that if our zoos can keep elephants safely under these conditions than it is for the best.
of course, elephants are big animals and human life is valuable. if an elephant as big as an elephant is backing into you then a jab might be neccesary to stop it crushing you! common sense really. you might say keeping elephants in zoos isnt common sense but thats a whole other issue.
having reviewed the DEP reports for both zoos i think these animals are being looked after quite well.
the report on this issue seemed set against a backdrop of doom and gloom for zoos. i think this is crap. zoos on the whole are evolving incredibly quickly and whilst of course there are growing pains such as commercialism i think that they have a future in society. all i can think of is that EVERYONE IN MELBOURNE WAS SO SICK OF HEARING ABOUT THAT ****ING TEENAGER WITH THE YELLOW SUNGLASSES THAT THEY DECIDED A STORY ON A STABBED ELEPHANT WOULD BE A NICE CHANGE. BTW IM SICK OF HEARING ABOUT HIM. HE GIVES US GENERATION Y PEOPLE A BAD NAME!
Glyn, you've made up for all the Gen Y's who give you a bad reputation.
Besides "Keeper jabs elephants" as a headline won't sell any newspapers. I read an article in a US paper that said along with "elephant stabbing", four seals were blinded and a gorilla kept hidden in cage for 16 years.
Besides "Keeper jabs elephants" as a headline won't sell any newspapers. I read an article in a US paper that said along with "elephant stabbing", four seals were blinded and a gorilla kept hidden in cage for 16 years.
Whatever anyone thinks, the bottom line is that Melbourne Zoo has been making international newspapers for all of the wrong reasons. Granted, the articles over here in western Canada are puny and many people will probably not even see them...but bad publicity is always detrimental for zoos as they attempt to break out of age-old stereotypes. Jabbing/stabbing/whacking elephants with marlin spikes isn't cool news for any zoo.
there were some concerning things to come out of the article but for they had much less to do with the elephants welfare.
i have complained constantly about the zoo's baboon enclosure and this is bad exposure for the zoo with a bad exhibit. however, my gripes do not come from an animal welfare perspective. the baboon group is positively thriving, its more people's perceptions of the animals (when viewing them in such an environment) which worries me.
i think one thing that might need considering with all our major zoos here in Australia is 'future proofing' in terms of physical assets. we all know that collection planning is heading in the right direction but is this being translated, physically into assets which are going to last the next few decades and evolve along with public perception?
examples of future proofing could be.....
Western Australia's proposed development of an open-range zoo to combat demographic and population shift away from the city centre and public perception of big animals in an inner city environment
South Australia's zoos position on keeping elephants....and shifting it focus towards other charismatic species in the metropolitan facilty.....
what other ideas for 'future proofing' do forum members have for our other big zoos?
for me it would be....
+expanding both Melbourne Zoo and Taronga Zoos elephant exhibits into undeveloped areas to keep ahead of herd growth and to counter act public concerns over space.
+expanding the gorilla forest at Melbourne Zoo and streamlining the primate collection to fit projected viable species
+increased participation in programs for maned wolves, snow leopards and other similar species to ensure sustainablity.
this might seem a little off track but the articles got me thinking. as both zoos are projecting themselves as building zoos of the future and investing heavily into assets what are peoples opinions?
i have complained constantly about the zoo's baboon enclosure and this is bad exposure for the zoo with a bad exhibit. however, my gripes do not come from an animal welfare perspective. the baboon group is positively thriving, its more people's perceptions of the animals (when viewing them in such an environment) which worries me.
i think one thing that might need considering with all our major zoos here in Australia is 'future proofing' in terms of physical assets. we all know that collection planning is heading in the right direction but is this being translated, physically into assets which are going to last the next few decades and evolve along with public perception?
examples of future proofing could be.....
Western Australia's proposed development of an open-range zoo to combat demographic and population shift away from the city centre and public perception of big animals in an inner city environment
South Australia's zoos position on keeping elephants....and shifting it focus towards other charismatic species in the metropolitan facilty.....
what other ideas for 'future proofing' do forum members have for our other big zoos?
for me it would be....
+expanding both Melbourne Zoo and Taronga Zoos elephant exhibits into undeveloped areas to keep ahead of herd growth and to counter act public concerns over space.
+expanding the gorilla forest at Melbourne Zoo and streamlining the primate collection to fit projected viable species
+increased participation in programs for maned wolves, snow leopards and other similar species to ensure sustainablity.
this might seem a little off track but the articles got me thinking. as both zoos are projecting themselves as building zoos of the future and investing heavily into assets what are peoples opinions?