Zoos and climate change education

I genuinly think many collections are turly missing a trick to create a great climate change exhibit, perhaps showcasing those species most at risk or at different types of risk. The issue is so broad it really doesnt take much to exhibit it in some form or another at collections
 
Isn't this merely a reflection of America's view of climate change though? ("It aint happening. And I know it aint happening because GWB said so.")

Zoos are in a great position to educate visitors, so it is unfortunate that this influential guy has the following opinion according to the article:

Yet many managers are fearful of alienating visitors — and denting ticket sales — with tours or wall labels that dwell bleakly on damaged coral reefs, melting ice caps or dying trees.

“You don’t want them walking away saying, ‘I paid to get in, I bought my kid a hot dog, I just want to show my kid a fish — and you are making me feel bad about climate change,’ ” said Paul Boyle, the senior vice president for conservation and education at the Association of Zoos and Aquariums.
 
This is seriously debated in zoos and aquariums (at least in the US). Some consider it imperative that the conservation case be made while others are concerned about the institution's bottom line and therefore assume they should avoid controversy. It is a shame that science remains controversial (hello Mr. Darwin). At least as creepy is the fact that zoos and aquariums are so nervous about addressing human population growth

On another note, does it seem like the New York Times has taken a sudden interest in the philosophical discussions going on in zoos and aquariums? Isn't this the third such article in as many months? I wonder what is causing this interest and what impact, if any, there will be. After all, the NYTimes articles are reprinted by media around the country and around the world.

@nanoboy - You suggest that this is a particularly American debate. How is this issue approached in the UK and elsewhere?
 
Zooplantman said:
@nanoboy - You suggest that this is a particularly American debate. How is this issue approached in the UK and elsewhere?
Click to expand...

The article was an American one, directed at American zoos, so in this case it is a particularly American debate.

I'll let the Europeans comment on how this "issue" is approached there, but in Australia, it isn't an "issue". So evolution is considered scientific fact, and is taught in schools, and at zoos.

Climate change is considered to be real - hell, big business here has to pay a 'carbon tax' to offset their carbon emissions, which trickles down as an increase in the cost of goods and services to the average joe. It doesn't get more factual than that! Zoos are no different, in climate change is part of the educational talks that goes hand-in-hand with animal conservation. I want to believe that our aquariums really push the 'climate change' message, but I'm not an aqua-man, so I'll let the other Aussies comment. But, to reiterate, evolution and climate change are (for the most part) accepted in Australia, so much so that it is taught in schools, and they are not taboo topics.
 
nanoboy said:
The article was an American one, directed at American zoos, so in this case it is a particularly American debate.

I'll let the Europeans comment on how this "issue" is approached there, but in Australia, it isn't an "issue". So evolution is considered scientific fact, and is taught in schools, and at zoos.

Climate change is considered to be real - hell, big business here has to pay a 'carbon tax' to offset their carbon emissions, which trickles down as an increase in the cost of goods and services to the average joe. It doesn't get more factual than that! Zoos are no different, in climate change is part of the educational talks that goes hand-in-hand with animal conservation. I want to believe that our aquariums really push the 'climate change' message, but I'm not an aqua-man, so I'll let the other Aussies comment. But, to reiterate, evolution and climate change are (for the most part) accepted in Australia, so much so that it is taught in schools, and they are not taboo topics.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that (and apologies for mislocating you).
This was the case in the US as well, but things have changed. I believe that in a couple of years Neaderthal will be the language taught in our schools
 
Just as an aside, I thought I might add that currently I'm holidaying Tokelau, where the highest point above sealevel is between two and three metres. The government - and people - are well aware that sometime within the next 50 - 100 years their homeland will completly disappear under water as the sea levels rise.

:(

Hix
 
Last edited:
nanoboy said:
The article was an American one, directed at American zoos, so in this case it is a particularly American debate.

I'll let the Europeans comment on how this "issue" is approached there, but in Australia, it isn't an "issue". So evolution is considered scientific fact, and is taught in schools, and at zoos.

Climate change is considered to be real - hell, big business here has to pay a 'carbon tax' to offset their carbon emissions, which trickles down as an increase in the cost of goods and services to the average joe. It doesn't get more factual than that! Zoos are no different, in climate change is part of the educational talks that goes hand-in-hand with animal conservation. I want to believe that our aquariums really push the 'climate change' message, but I'm not an aqua-man, so I'll let the other Aussies comment. But, to reiterate, evolution and climate change are (for the most part) accepted in Australia, so much so that it is taught in schools, and they are not taboo topics.
Click to expand...

Evolution isn't part of the curriculum in NSW. It can be taught but is no longer a key focus area. Adaptations have taken its place. atleast for the lower stages anyway. Having said that we offer an evolution of ozbiota day here every few months and it seems quite popular. As for climate change, nanovoy is right on it. if you live in Australia and don't know about it you have to get out from under your rock. on top of the carbon tax we had a bungled insulation scheme and a successful solar power program.
 
@zooplantman: no dramas! No need to apologise, because I did not feel mislocated at all.

@Jarkari: I spoke to some teacher folks yesterday, and found out the following:

- Climate change and sustainability are not formally taught in Victoria, but it is because of oversight and the curriculum not being up-to-date, rather than not wanting to offend people. It is definitely taught indirectly in science (greenhouse effect) and through projects. It is also an elective in Year 12.

- Evolution is taught formally in Victoria, but religious schools would often treat evolution as an alternative explanation. (i.e. "We believe God created us, but other people believe in evolution which states that....").

- I spoke to an Education Officer at one of the Victorian zoos, and she said that they definitely talk about evolution and climate change in their sessions with school kids. Climate change is never an issue, because sceptical Aussies are in the minority (I think, as you mentioned, we just like to whinge about paying extra for stuff). However, interestingly, evolution is shunned upon by religious/fundamental schools, so much so that teachers have stopped her talks mid-sentence when she mentioned evolution, and have asked her to change the topic. This is never an issue with state-funded schools though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top