This is a odd subject really and the BBC could have picked better subject to do a story on, as I understand it the tiger did have a PM and it's death could not have been prevented. Most if not all zoo's have dead animals or parts of animals in their freezers and there is nothing wrong with that, if a animal is dead, use it, every part of it, for educational purpose. Now I am not a Noahs Ark fan, but taking a animal from a circus and freezing it's dead body has bog all to do with breeding them to go back to the circus!
Noah's Ark Zoo Farm Zoo admits connection with circus
- Thread starter Peter Dickinson
- Start date
-
- Tags
- martin lacey sherwood zoo
Chester Zoo did that in 1978 by accident I think. Its in Guinness World Records as the Rarest Elephant only saw it today.
Gentle Giant
Well-Known Member
Chester Zoo did that in 1978 by accident I think. Its in Guinness World Records as the Rarest Elephant only saw it today.
Yes, I remembered I saw him when I was young at Chester Zoo. Motty was the name after George Mottershead, the founder of Chester Zoo.
Motty the Hybrid Elephant
Last edited:
The involvement of the circus was no big secret. It was fairly widely known by the zoo comunity, including BIAZA (remember that the BIAZA Animal Transaction Policy does not forbid the disposition or aquisition of animals from circuses, merely does not recomend it). As I have mentioned before, the GBC has dealt with other BIAZA collections in recent years.
If you don't like circuses thats fine but you shouldn't expect everyone to hold the same opinion as you. Mr Bush, as do many in the zoo world, accepts that circus tigers are usually physically fit and make as good display animals as any of the conservation dependent subspecies found in most zoos. This is just an example of two parties cooperating to sustain a captive population of a taxa and in that repect is no different to zoos swapping animals with each other.
If you disagree with zoo-tigers taking up space that could be used for rarer taxa then lets get rid of all the Raccoons, Meerkats, Grant's Zebras, Eland, Stiped Skunks, Rheas, Mara, Short-clawed Otters, White Tigers and really continue the homogonisation of our zoo collections. This opinion surely suggests an uneasiness with the very concept of captiviy. If you think that captive individuals of EEP species are simply involuntary martyrs then its probably time to rethink whether you are a zoo-enthsiast or not.
On the subject of the Inside Out documentary, whether you agree with the the whole circus issue or not you can't deny that the programme was heavily one-sided and lacked the objectivity one should expect from the BBC.
By exressing horror and disgust at NA wanting to use parts of the carcass for 'educational purpose' Dr Stephen Harris (who was heavily involved with the campaign to ban foxhunting) has just dismissed every museum, university and nearly every zoological garden in the country in one fell swoop. This was by far the most cringeworthy moment in the entire documentary. His arguments were neither scientifically nor legally based and seemed dominated by his personal tastes.
Bush's green-ness was quite apparent in his interview.
I've not known a zoo that doesn't have dead animals or their parts in a freezer somewhere - awaiting post mortem examination or preparation for an educational specimen. It is common practice and absolutely not an issue.
As tizer said above, despite the speculation in this thread and elsewhere the tigress died from an unavoidable condition that was not the fault of the zoo.
I don't like Noah's Ark that much but I do think the documentary and subsequent publicity were short-sighted and sensationalist and the anti arguments naiive and overplayed.
If you don't like circuses thats fine but you shouldn't expect everyone to hold the same opinion as you. Mr Bush, as do many in the zoo world, accepts that circus tigers are usually physically fit and make as good display animals as any of the conservation dependent subspecies found in most zoos. This is just an example of two parties cooperating to sustain a captive population of a taxa and in that repect is no different to zoos swapping animals with each other.
If you disagree with zoo-tigers taking up space that could be used for rarer taxa then lets get rid of all the Raccoons, Meerkats, Grant's Zebras, Eland, Stiped Skunks, Rheas, Mara, Short-clawed Otters, White Tigers and really continue the homogonisation of our zoo collections. This opinion surely suggests an uneasiness with the very concept of captiviy. If you think that captive individuals of EEP species are simply involuntary martyrs then its probably time to rethink whether you are a zoo-enthsiast or not.
On the subject of the Inside Out documentary, whether you agree with the the whole circus issue or not you can't deny that the programme was heavily one-sided and lacked the objectivity one should expect from the BBC.
By exressing horror and disgust at NA wanting to use parts of the carcass for 'educational purpose' Dr Stephen Harris (who was heavily involved with the campaign to ban foxhunting) has just dismissed every museum, university and nearly every zoological garden in the country in one fell swoop. This was by far the most cringeworthy moment in the entire documentary. His arguments were neither scientifically nor legally based and seemed dominated by his personal tastes.
Bush's green-ness was quite apparent in his interview.
I've not known a zoo that doesn't have dead animals or their parts in a freezer somewhere - awaiting post mortem examination or preparation for an educational specimen. It is common practice and absolutely not an issue.
As tizer said above, despite the speculation in this thread and elsewhere the tigress died from an unavoidable condition that was not the fault of the zoo.
I don't like Noah's Ark that much but I do think the documentary and subsequent publicity were short-sighted and sensationalist and the anti arguments naiive and overplayed.
Good post, I guess this is no different to any other anti zoo stuff that gets spouted by CAPS and the like.
Edit: Although CAPS do claim on their site that the vet admitted to not actually doing a complete PM on the tiger. Is there any truth in that I wonder?
Edit: Although CAPS do claim on their site that the vet admitted to not actually doing a complete PM on the tiger. Is there any truth in that I wonder?
Last edited:
johnstoni
Well-Known Member
In a way, I'm glad that Noah's Ark is finally getting picked on, but I'm misguided - its not for the reasons I would like (and I'm not referring to their religious teachings).
To be honest, this issue has been bubbling away under the surface for some years. In the following Biaza publication, there is a slightly unnerving article on 'animal byproducts', and legislation around 'feeding zoo animals to zoo animals'. It is widespread for dead animals to be used in some other way after their death, or, as I suspect, to be bred specifically to be 'culled' and fed to other species.
BIAZA Public Access
I think its easy to debate whether this is right or wrong, perhaps easier to do if the zoos were state funded US institutions, but they're not, and like it or not, UK zoos know its not really okay to decieve the paying public about where some of their animals go, or what happens to them when they die. As stupid as some folk may think the public are for objecting to stuff like this, they are the financial backers of the national UK zoological collection, spread across its many institutions.
As for circuses, its for governments to legislate, I wouldn't expect zoos to boycott trading with them, although I would expect the traffic to be very much one way, given the public perception of animal circuses.
To be honest, this issue has been bubbling away under the surface for some years. In the following Biaza publication, there is a slightly unnerving article on 'animal byproducts', and legislation around 'feeding zoo animals to zoo animals'. It is widespread for dead animals to be used in some other way after their death, or, as I suspect, to be bred specifically to be 'culled' and fed to other species.
BIAZA Public Access
I think its easy to debate whether this is right or wrong, perhaps easier to do if the zoos were state funded US institutions, but they're not, and like it or not, UK zoos know its not really okay to decieve the paying public about where some of their animals go, or what happens to them when they die. As stupid as some folk may think the public are for objecting to stuff like this, they are the financial backers of the national UK zoological collection, spread across its many institutions.
As for circuses, its for governments to legislate, I wouldn't expect zoos to boycott trading with them, although I would expect the traffic to be very much one way, given the public perception of animal circuses.
Simon McGlary
Well-Known Member
My main objection to Noahs Ark is a point of principle as an atheist and evolutionist. Too much scientific evidence points in the direction of evolution with nothing obvious in favour of creation. As I am of the opinion of zoos having a role to play in education I think it is important to present the scientific facts.
As regards using animals that are endangered in circuses, I have a problem to an extent with that. In a way it's good to show animal behaviour but there can be better ways than in circuses. Feeding and the regular training sessions that fo in with all zoo animals. Training in zoos today is to make vet checks much easier and uses the animals natural behaviours.
If the animals are transported well and looked after well when the circus has arrived at the locations, receieve regular vetinary checks, are not an endangered species and are not in anyway mistreated I have no problems with animals in circumstances then.
Circus animals spending their "retiremnt in zoos or animal parks works for me. Going from zoos to circuses doesn't really work for me, especially modern zoos.
As regards using animals that are endangered in circuses, I have a problem to an extent with that. In a way it's good to show animal behaviour but there can be better ways than in circuses. Feeding and the regular training sessions that fo in with all zoo animals. Training in zoos today is to make vet checks much easier and uses the animals natural behaviours.
If the animals are transported well and looked after well when the circus has arrived at the locations, receieve regular vetinary checks, are not an endangered species and are not in anyway mistreated I have no problems with animals in circumstances then.
Circus animals spending their "retiremnt in zoos or animal parks works for me. Going from zoos to circuses doesn't really work for me, especially modern zoos.
