The Times has printed a short article on UK zoos.
£225m Chester Zoo project to bring Man and animal closer - Times Online
£225m Chester Zoo project to bring Man and animal closer - Times Online
Chester Zoo Positive report in The Times
- Thread starter bongorob
- Start date
Quite a good article, if a little short, but in reality, this isn't a major national news story.
However, these paragraphs got my attention:
"There are still strong critics of zoos, most notably Will Travers, of the Born Free Foundation. The wildlife charity argues that zoos should be phased out, with endangered animals that need to be in captivity for breeding programmes being kept in large purpose-built enclosures shut to the public.
Mr Travers estimated the proportion of zoo turnover devoted to conservation at less than 7 per cent, which he regarded as derisory – the target should be 40 per cent, he said. He added that the education element at zoos was of questionable value. "
If a zoo was giving 40% of it's turnover to conservation, would it even be making enough money to continue running the zoo?
However, these paragraphs got my attention:
"There are still strong critics of zoos, most notably Will Travers, of the Born Free Foundation. The wildlife charity argues that zoos should be phased out, with endangered animals that need to be in captivity for breeding programmes being kept in large purpose-built enclosures shut to the public.
Mr Travers estimated the proportion of zoo turnover devoted to conservation at less than 7 per cent, which he regarded as derisory – the target should be 40 per cent, he said. He added that the education element at zoos was of questionable value. "
If a zoo was giving 40% of it's turnover to conservation, would it even be making enough money to continue running the zoo?
taun
Well-Known Member
I think the most import fact is he has contridicted himself, by saying all zoo's should be shut down and only animals that need to be in captivity be in closed facilities to the public. Then slates the zoos for not giving enough of there turnover to support conservation!
You either want them to be shut down or not
And anyway if zoos were not around some of the conservation projects would be in need of some badly needed funding.
zoogiraffe
Well-Known Member
Yep but that whats Bill Travers and Born Free are all about contridictions,as its alright for them to keep Big Cats in enclosures because they have rescued them from the hell of been kept in a ZOO,but what is the difference???????????Because it sure as hell beats me and from the photos i`ve seen of when they had Big Cats in the U.K before they took them to Africa if a zoo had had kept them in those enclosures there would have been an out cry to rescue them from the ZOO in question.I think the most import fact is he has contridicted himself, by saying all zoo's should be shut down and only animals that need to be in captivity be in closed facilities to the public. Then slates the zoos for not giving enough of there turnover to support conservation!
You either want them to be shut down or not
And anyway if zoos were not around some of the conservation projects would be in need of some badly needed funding.
Last edited:
A listeners' feedback on Radio 4's PM last night in response to the Will Travers interview earlier in the week in which he was critical of Chester Zoo's plans was definitely pro-zoo . Amongst points made were - a lot of people cannot afford to go to see animals in the wild in Africa so a zoo is the only way of seeing a giraffe ; a so called 'virtual zoo' with no animals would not attract visitors . Hear hear !
When Born Free had cats in the UK, Born Free Supporters were also allowed to visit the facility. Although the numbers were restricted, it really stank of hypocricy - we aren't a zoo because the visitors are against zoos and are paying us to visit and fund our conservation program. A friend of mine that visited was a former zoo big cat keeper, his comment was those that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and that they should get their own house in order before criticising others.
Sorry if this is off thread
zoogiraffe
Well-Known Member
I couldn`t agree more now back to the thread,its about time the pressstarted giving ZOO`S positive PR as in some areas they are 1 of the largest single employers in the area concerned.
Theres something that Born Free are missing.
1.Closing all zoos down means most of the animals will have to be put down.
2.Animals are happy in zoos.They are looked after very well,fed very well,And Treated in terms of illnesses very well.
3.They keep animals themselves in big enclosures and feed them like other zoos do - its the same thing be it in Africa or not!
4.Most zoos do do a lot of conservation work giving money to EAZA charitys or ones that they choose.
5.You cannot make money from keeping animals!
Born Free are living in a world over 40 years ago - The Zoo World has changed ALOT in 40 years
Sorry for my rather biased opinion its just what i think.
Regards
1.Closing all zoos down means most of the animals will have to be put down.
2.Animals are happy in zoos.They are looked after very well,fed very well,And Treated in terms of illnesses very well.
3.They keep animals themselves in big enclosures and feed them like other zoos do - its the same thing be it in Africa or not!
4.Most zoos do do a lot of conservation work giving money to EAZA charitys or ones that they choose.
5.You cannot make money from keeping animals!
Born Free are living in a world over 40 years ago - The Zoo World has changed ALOT in 40 years
Sorry for my rather biased opinion its just what i think.
Regards
I think the only way a zoo can spare 40% of turnover is to sell hard drugs to visitors.
taun
Well-Known Member
1. Not necessarily
2. Not completely true as there are still examples of boredom (if there board they are not happy)
3. There is now comparison for being free and wild!
4. True, however animals are still facing extinction.
5. Yes you can other wise, there wouldn't be any zoos
This sort of blind love, blinds us from improving on the circumstances animals live in. Even in a really good enclosure there can be improvements and we should continue to try and improve the welfare of animals in our care
Yes i do agree Tuan but Born Free are trying to close down all zoos but with no zoos where will the many animals go? and with being free and wild there is no comparrison at all. but some zoos - John Aspinall Foundation with Gorillas are realising them into the wild and are hopefully in the next 10-20 years be sending Barbary Lions back.
These things are never talked about by Born Free
These things are never talked about by Born Free
taun
Well-Known Member
Many animals (mostly all animals bar carnivores and hand reared animals) could be quickly acclimatised to go back into the wild.
Don't get me started on Barbary Lions!
They are not talked about, however some opposition is all ways good because it means we strive to prove them wrong (which means making the life’s better for the animals).
taun
Well-Known Member
If the zoo only made enough to look after its animals, they wouldn't beable to improve there enclosures.
So they do make money from animals!
I do agree that most of the time money is spent upkeep and improving, but you cannot blindly say "you cannot make money from animals?"
Okay sorry about that but it isnt the most money making thing you can do and all money is used for Enclosures,Conservation Projects,Animal Care etc
Yes i do agree with you with the barbary lions they cannot be purebreds! and i think could be rather inbred.
Yes and with some opposition can make the zoo world stronger with new methods working well etc.
Thanks for your opinions Tuan.
Yes i do agree with you with the barbary lions they cannot be purebreds! and i think could be rather inbred.
Yes and with some opposition can make the zoo world stronger with new methods working well etc.
Thanks for your opinions Tuan.