Public zoo operating with pet shelter?

[dt644]

Hello, everyone. It's been a while since I said hello from South Korea.

I haven't been able to come here often because I've been working as a Social Service Agent at Jinju City Hall for two years, but my service will be over soon. I hope I get to hear a lot of interesting informations again.



Back to the point, I'd like to talk about the a zoo and a pet shelter running together, like the thread title. The reason why I'm telling this topic is because it's closely related to the plan to relocate Jinyangho Zoo in Jinju City, my hometown.

In 2019, Jinju city was started to planning relocate of Jinyangho Zoo. And last year, an additional plans were made to build a Pet Support Center on some of the planned site for the zoo's relocation. This "Pet Support Center" includes pet shelter and dog playground. I think this additional plan was related to the recent attempts by various local governments in Korea to make pro-pet policies.

Bird's-eye view of the Pet Support Center of Jinju City.
Source: Jinju City Hall​

Since the announcement of the additional plan, some residents of that area have often protested near the city hall, saying their rights would be violated by animal shelters. However, the city seems to have decided to build a pet support center there.

I having worked at City Hall and scrutinized local news, Jinju City was think there will be synergy by keeping zoos and animal shelters close. Fundamentally, they would thought it would be better to arrange them together because they are both animal breeding facilities. And also, Jinju City believe that combining zoo and Pet Support Center can create developed-country style's animal-themed parks.



However, I am concerned about this newly established plan. This is because I think zoos and Pet Support Center is more likely to damage zoos than to positively affect each other. My concern is not due to the noise and odour caused by dogs, such as the claims made by residents who oppose the establishment of animal shelters.

The fundamental problem of my concern lies in Koreans' perception of zoo animals. Many visitors to Korean zoos stimulate zoo animals by throwing food and foreign substances, making noise, and trying to touch them.

I think this behavior of "bad" visitors is caused by thinking that they are like pets that can touch and feed zoo animals. Therefore, I think it is necessary to make sure to all visitors that all zoo animals are different from pet, regardless of whether they are captive wild animals or domestic animals.

But as I said earlier, this Pet Support Center has dog playgrounds, which aims to bring pets and play with them. People will bring dogs right next to the zoo and play with them, which is feared to create an atmosphere in which many visitors treat zoo animals as just pets.

Daejeon Pet Park, which Jinju City is trying to refer to the most.
Source: Daejeon Metropolitan City Hall
​

There are some other concerns, but the biggest one is as described above. Therefore, I would like to look for about public zoos operated with or near an pet shelters.

Fortunately, I know the team leader in charge of the Jinyangho zoo operation and relocation plan, so I can give him an opinion. As planned, the two facilities will inevitably affect each other, I would like to refer to the case where the two facilities operate together without any problems, and furthermore, if there is a case where they have a positive effect on each other.

 

[TinoPup]

What does "pet support center" or "pet shelter" mean there? You mention breeding, but shelters in america and europe wouldn't have breeding at them (unless an animal comes in pregnant).

There is one zoo/shelter in the USA, Popcorn Park Animal Refuge, which is both a pet rescue/adoption center and an exotic rescue/zoo. It is not a great zoo.

 

[Jana]

In my country, we have 15 zoos owned by municipality or local government. Out of these - 5 zoos run their own dog/cat shelter.

Actually, EU law totaly prohibits licensed zoos to bring in STRAY animals (pets or wildlife) due to biosecurity reasons. Czech zoos must obey it of course. If they run a pet shelter or wildlife rescue station, they dedicate a separate location and special keepers for it. So either they built the shelter in different part of the city, or they built a solid fence between both areas without any doors or gates inbetween. Entrance to both parts (zoo and shelter) is placed as far away as possible from each other and both have their separate parking lots. I havent heard complains about this setup so I guess it works well.

BTW At the same time, family dogs are allowed to enter local zoos. Its owner must show the rabies vaccination passport and keep the dog on leash. 7 out of 15 municipal zoos allow family dogs and 1 zoo even built a nice agility playground for dogs last year where visitors can take their dogs and train them while in the middle of zoo visit. You have to buy a zoo ticket for the dog, in exchange you get few paper bags (so you can clean after your dog).

I cant comment on your fear that placing a zoo and dog shelter/playground nearby will or will not support perception of zoo animals to be just pets. At least in my country, it doesnt seem to have that impact. But I have no experience with Korean public or culture so dunno.

 

[dt644]

What does "pet support center" or "pet shelter" mean there? You mention breeding, but shelters in america and europe wouldn't have breeding at them (unless an animal comes in pregnant).

There is one zoo/shelter in the USA, Popcorn Park Animal Refuge, which is both a pet rescue/adoption center and an exotic rescue/zoo. It is not a great zoo.

Thank you for the good point.

• I having worked at City Hall and scrutinized local news, Jinju City was think there will be synergy by keeping zoos and animal shelters close. Fundamentally, they would thought it would be better to arrange them together because they are both animal breeding facilities. And also, Jinju City believe that combining zoo and Pet Support Center can create developed-country style's animal-themed parks.

Please interpret the word "Breeding" in the above as "keeping animal". That's a translation error I missed, and shelters in Korea also doesn't breeding animals, but only keep them.

"Keeping animal" is "사육"(Sayuk) in Korean. But many translator programs are translate this word to "breed" at a very high probability.

Since I know this translation error, if I found this error when using the translator, I have corrected it myself so far. But I made a mistake this time. If the word "breed" comes out of nowhere while talking to Koreans, it may just mean "keeping animal", so please understand to it.


And I checked the popcorn park you gave me as an example. It looked more like a shelter than a zoo. I expected it, but I think there will be fewer cases to refer to. I feel like my hometown is planning very adventurous.

 

[TinoPup]

Thank you for the good point.

• I having worked at City Hall and scrutinized local news, Jinju City was think there will be synergy by keeping zoos and animal shelters close. Fundamentally, they would thought it would be better to arrange them together because they are both animal breeding facilities. And also, Jinju City believe that combining zoo and Pet Support Center can create developed-country style's animal-themed parks.

Please interpret the word "Breeding" in the above as "keeping animal". That's a translation error I missed, and shelters in Korea also doesn't breeding animals, but only keep them.

"Keeping animal" is "사육"(Sayuk) in Korean. But many translator programs are translate this word to "breed" at a very high probability.

Since I know this translation error, if I found this error when using the translator, I have corrected it myself so far. But I made a mistake this time. If the word "breed" comes out of nowhere while talking to Koreans, it may just mean "keeping animal", so please understand to it.


And I checked the popcorn park you gave me as an example. It looked more like a shelter than a zoo. I expected it, but I think there will be fewer cases to refer to. I feel like my hometown is planning very adventurous.

Thank you for that detailed explanation, I will try to remember it.

Yes, Popcorn Park's zoo is all rescued animals as well, you just can't adopt them like you can with the dogs and cats. They have a variety of species, from tigers and lions to squirrels and deer. But it is not a place that breeds them or participates in conservation or anything.

A few zoos here will do adoption days, where local shelters bring in dogs just for the day, but that's all the USA has.

 

[MRJ]

Here in Australia, I am not aware of a zoo of any size being associated with an animal shelter. Normally, dogs and cats are prohibited from zoos. However, there are a number of wildlife hospitals located in zoos that accept sick and injured wild animals for rehabilitation. In a couple of cases these are actually significant exhibits within the zoo.

I can understand that a local government may want to locate two or three different facilities on land they own. What worries me here is that they think there is some synergy between an animal shelter and a zoo. Any attempt to share management, staff or facilities can only be harmful to the zoo. I can see that this is something that may not be obvious to local government officials without any zoo or wildlife experience.

Interestingly I was talking to someone about efforts to increase welfare standards in smaller zoos here a couple of decades back. He mentioned the most difficult zoos were not privately owned zoos but those owned by local government. They resisted what they saw as interference form outside bodies, but were subject to constant interference from local government officials, both elected and non-elected, who knew almost nothing about animals.

 

[15399]

Any attempt to share management, staff or facilities can only be harmful to the zoo.

Depending on what is being shared, I wouldn't be so sure it can "only" be harmful. For example, I'm sure there's a lot of veterinary equipment/facilities that could be shared between the two. There's no reason that cats and dogs need to go through a different ultrasound machine than wolves and lynx, so in that regards some cooperation and sharing of veterinary resources could be of benefit to both. I'm not saying they should share veterinary staff per say, but some sharing equipment and facilities may not be harmful.

There could also be places for cooperation between the two in the realm of education, on issues such as responsible pet ownership.

Interestingly I was talking to someone about efforts to increase welfare standards in smaller zoos here a couple of decades back. He mentioned the most difficult zoos were not privately owned zoos but those owned by local government. They resisted what they saw as interference form outside bodies, but were subject to constant interference from local government officials, both elected and non-elected, who knew almost nothing about animals.

Yeah, that doesn't surprise me. Depending on the chain of commands, operations, and budget, public ownership can be either extremely beneficial or detrimental. At least in the AZA, part of the accreditation requirements involve organization structure and autonomy- which can help ensure that responsible decisions are (usually) being made on animal-related issues.

 

[MRJ]

Depending on what is being shared, I wouldn't be so sure it can "only" be harmful. For example, I'm sure there's a lot of veterinary equipment/facilities that could be shared between the two. There's no reason that cats and dogs need to go through a different ultrasound machine than wolves and lynx, so in that regards some cooperation and sharing of veterinary resources could be of benefit to both. I'm not saying they should share veterinary staff per say, but some sharing equipment and facilities may not be harmful.

There could also be places for cooperation between the two in the realm of education, on issues such as responsible pet ownership.

Fair comments, although I'm not sure that any zoo vets I know would be happy to share their wildlife facility with stray cats and dogs.

I was more concerned that keepers for instance would be seen as interchangeable with their expected level of expertise set to the lowest common denominator.