Awake again

[andrewducker]

Erin didn't go out last night, having decided at 8:00 that she'd "have a quick nap" and then go out at 10pm, I woke her up at 10:00 and demanded that she phone Jen to tell her she wasn't coming out at all. I crashed out shortly thereafter (ok, 11:30) and was therefore surprised to find myself awake at 6:50. Damn, damn, damn.

Still, I feel awake, and I'm not going to be up late this weekend, what with Mum visiting. Weather permitting, Friday will be spent showing her Dean Village (the old part of Edinburgh where the water mills used to be. Not many people even know it's there) and then Edinburgh Zoo (which I've had highly recommended to me). I'm not entirely sure about zoos in general, but I'm going to give it a go and see what the conditions are like. I can always leave if I feel the animals are being particularly mistreated.

[Poll #162886]

Comments

[rollick.livejournal.com]

I always fall between the cracks on your polls.

I think some zoos are disgusting. The ones that are poorly maintained, where the animals are miserable and unhealthy, should be shut down. Good zoos, however, aren't just fun, they're generally deeply involved in important conversation work, breeding animals that are endangered in the wild and helping maintain the species, not to mention educating people about animals.

[heron61.livejournal.com]

While bad zoos are horrors, there honestly aren't that many bad zoos left in the US. In addition to being an excellent way to get all people interested in animals (and also great fun), they are also vital. W/o zoos we would have lost a number of species already and will lose many more in the next few decades.

We need to make certain that sufficient wilderness exists for all species and to stop all of the various sorts of extermination going on, but even if this is possible (I think it is, but I'm expecting that some local human population crashes will be needed to help this along - thankfully, this looks likely). However, until sufficient wilderness has been protected, zoos are essential to keep species from going extinct in the meantime. Even when a species is merely getting rare in the wild, zoos can provide an excellent way to both study animals so as to find ways to protect them from diseases caught from humans or domestic animals and as a reservoir for genetic diversity.

IMHO, people who find zoos horrible and disgusting evils that should be abolished don't actually care about animals, they care about ideology. I have little patience with anyone who cares more about nonsense like "animals being free" than about animals being alive, and yet I have heard a number of people in California who claimed (falsely in my opinion) that they honestly love animals say that California Condors would be better dead than in zoos and captive breeding programs. I often wonder if such people would commit suicide if they were arrested. As you have likely noticed, I have very strong feelings about this issue.

[sarcaustik.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. I think there's a big difference between the idea of zoos now and zoos 20 or 30 years ago. The emphasis seems to be moving away from "entertainment"; just looking at animals in cages, to education and conservation. The concept of wildlife or safari parks also seems a lot more popular therse days and more attention is paid to the idea of observing animals in a close approximation of their natural environment as opposed to in cages.

[allorin.livejournal.com]

Ach, yer poll is rubbish.

Edinburgh zoo, in particular, is a bloody good zoo IMHO. That have a great conservation programme, and are doing a lot for some of the more endangered species. They also recognise where zoo just cannot have certain animals on display, and now, for example, no longer have an Elephant House.

Sadly, not all zoos are like Edinburgh zoo. However, it deserves your support.

Oh, and Dean Village is fantastic, but you should try and head down to Crammond too, if you have time. There's a wee tea shop on the waterfront that does lovely sandwiches. 'Tis very nice, if the weather is fair.

[andrewducker]

From what I understand, most zoos are now an awful lot better than they were 10-20 years ago, at least in this country and the US. Obviously, in less developed/rich countries the situation isn't as good.

Where's crammond?

[odheirre.livejournal.com]

I so agree with you. I'm thinking specifically of Wildlife Prairie Park in Illinois, where they focus on animals native to the area, don't put them in cages, and do educational programs on the animals. I'd hate to lump that place in with a zoo where they just box up the animals and have them there for show.

[allorin.livejournal.com]

"merely getting rare"

Heh.

[allorin.livejournal.com]

Eh.... I only know how to get there by car. West of Leith. Waaay West of Leith. 'Tis pretty.

[derumi.livejournal.com]

Well run zoos are great, they can help keep animals around, and get people interested in keeping them around. Poorly run zoos just add to the blight.

[kimberly-a.livejournal.com]

I can't stand zoos with little cages, but I'm excited by the prospect of zoos in which the animals roam free in larger enclosures that more closely approximate their natural habitats. There's a zoo like this in Seattle, which I was very enthusiastic to go to but ended up not having the time.

I think it's a wonderful thing to get to see various animals (relatively) close up, and I do think that it encourages caring about animals and species conservation. But the prison-style zoos are not a good solution.

[moniqueleigh]

I'm quite impressed with the majority of zoos in the US. There's still a lot of room for improvement, but even those zoos are aware of the problems and are working to correct the problems.

[darkoshi]

while in theory zoos or wildlike park-style places could range from acceptable to even nice places for animals to live, and i can see the benefit of them in getting more people interested in animals, in general i do not approve of zoos.

i hear too many stories still of animals being taken from the wild, such as young elephants being taken from their mothers, in order for them to be sold to zoos, for me to think of them as good things.

neither do i particularly agree that keeping endangered animals for breeding purposes is a laudable thing. certainly, it is beneficial in the sense that future humans would still be able to encounter live specimans of these species, but to me that is a selfish human goal. humans have usually been the main cause of these animals becoming endangered, and then they want to "fix the problem" by captive breeding. i think we deserve to live with the results of our actions... destroy habitats, hunt animals to extinction, pollute the environment... and animals die out, never to be seen again. it seems fair. but that's a spiteful answer.

i just don't like the idea of forcing animals to breed against their wishes. which probably doesn't happen all of the time, but i have no good way of knowing...

i'm certainly against nonconsensual artificial insemination of animals (and i don't think we communicate well enough with animals of other species to get their consent on such matters). imagine if someone inseminated me... i'd be fuckin' miffed! the nerve of them scientists! getting me pregnant and making me give birth...!

and even with "natural" breeding, i have reservations. after all, most animals in zoos don't have much of a choice in their partners - they don't get to choose their cell-mates, nor pack up and leave if their roommate drives them nuts. given a safari-type place with wide open spaces and many mates to choose, that i could bear. but otherwise, i don't approve.

and that's even without considering the "bad" zoos, where animals are kept in small cages or solitary confinement, without space to roam and without much in the way of entertainment.

one might even consider the plight of predators kept in zoos, being fed meat, but never able to go on the hunt for themselves, never being able to have the excitement of a real chase. by confining them in zoos, we deny them these natural instincts and activities... nor is it right to put small live prey in their cages, where such prey have no real chance of getting away like they do in the wild.
i'm somewhat ambivalent about this last argument, it's just something that came to mind which ought to be considered.

i remember being at a zoo in germany and seeing the camels. their humps were falling / sagging all the way down. they looked pitiful. perhaps it is normal for humps to sag; i don't know. but it certainly didn't seem right to keep camels in a cold climate like germany.

[darkoshi]

ah, well, you want to live forever. not everyone does, and not everyone thinks in the same way you do.

even if you were immortal, or especially so, if you were arrested and kept in a cell with no chance of ever getting out, and no ability to do the things you enjoy doing, nor to be with people you enjoy being with, (or perhaps if you were confined in a room with your parents for eternity?), would you really enjoy such a life and think it was better than death? Perhaps death and the chance of a different afterlife would be better than such a life.

and indeed, this is probably quite a far fetch from whatever the reality is of this captive breeding program of condors you speak of (i am not familiar with it). but it is merely something to consider, if you are interested in understanding how some other people think.

and i've stated my own thoughts on captive breeding in a separate reply to this thread.