Been to the Zoo lately?

4zn76tysfajdxp

TiGeR KiNgS wrote: »

Really? that is terrible news......'long dead' you say !
Torturing animals to death in this way is vile.

Thank you for informing me WRT the likely outcome of the Cheetahs I saw at the Zoo. After all these years I wondered how they were doing and now your post has given me some sense of relief that they are no longer suffering.

Many thanks,
TK

TiGeR KiNgS wrote: »

I truly hope the Northern Ireland Zoo in the UK, situated within Belfast which fly's the flag of her Majesty have not got the aforementioned creatures in such a terrible state.

The UK I imagine would not tolerate the level of cruelty to animals I saw when I was 6.

May the Loyal Orange Lodges bless and keep you safe in your Utopian country.

You're taking this news very hard. Perhaps you should consider calling a grief counselor?

TiGeR KiNgS

Brian Chilly Ale wrote: »

You're taking this news very hard. Perhaps you should consider calling a grief counselor?

Not at all.
Your original reply to my genuine post was very heartfelt and I thank you for putting me at ease with your informative reply.

I am at peace now, thanks to you.

jupiterjack

i have never been to the zoo..foto island is much better..

JupiterKid

jupiterjack wrote: »

i have never been to the zoo..foto island is much better..

How can you say that Fota Island is better than Dublin zoo when you've never been to the latter and therefore can't compare?

SweetCaliber

JupiterKid wrote: »

How can you say that Fota Island is better than Dublin zoo when you've never been to the latter and therefore can't compare?

Also Dublin Zoo own Fota

Aaaaaaand.... Dublin Zoo has far more animals :P

jupiterjack

JupiterKid wrote: »

How can you say that Fota Island is better than Dublin zoo when you've never been to the latter and therefore can't compare?

suppose ur right, will compare when i go but i do love foto..

g'em

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I think you are wrong that animals don't understand the concept of enclosure. I think a lot of animals are smart enough to know it is better not be in a cage or a small enclosure, especially the massive ones.

I worked closely with animals while growing up and I could see how distressed some where by being enclosed. And these were domesticated animals.

Well enclosure could mean anything from a box to a paddock. Would a horse feel constrained and uncomfortable in a tiny holding box? Sure. Would that same horse feel constricted in a paddock? Likewise I'm saying that I don't agree with bad zoos, I agree with zoos that - to 4their best ability - replicate the natural conditions of an animal in the wild.

Have you ever seen the African Savanna section of Dublin zoo? Giraffes, zebras, ostriches (I think) all housed together in one very large paddock. These are animals who would all have hectares at their disposal in the wild, but in the zoo they are free from predatory pressure and disease.

You mentioned predatory animals though, so take the big cats as a classic example. Well, this is where I agree that having an animal as large and roaming as a lion or tiger in a zoo is less than ideal, but I'm willing to offset my concerns with the benefits of knowing that the animals will live long and safe lives, and the educational value they will provide (not only in terms of local schools and even adult education) but in their value as genetic repositories available for studying the species at large.

Micky Dolenz wrote:

Animals definitely have a concept of being content.

And I would argue that such contentment is almost always met by responsible zoos who actively remove all common stressors from same animals' lives: food, disease and shelter.

Micky Dolenz wrote:

Having Camels or polar bears in Dublin is far from natural.

Dublin Zoo no longer has either

smash

You can't see the silver back any more, he's always hiding... just like the Lion!

Vicxas

I really liked the zoo when we were there, the only problem i has was that there was no clear path to follow so that you could see everything, the paths just splt into 2 and you had to check you map frequently to see where you were going.

Apart from that i loved it. Love seeing Tigers

Dravokivich

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

What about giraffes, zebras, kangaroos, emo's, etc etc. We could exchange Google found tit bits all night.

In my own personal opinion, zoos are horribly depressing places. Taking an animal out of it's natural environment is wrong. If they need to be conserved, do it on a nature reserve and make it as close as possible to the environment they are from. Having Camels or polar bears in Dublin is far from natural.

What would you suggest should be displayed in a zoo based in Dublin so, Sheep and Cows?

barbiegirl

smash wrote: »

You can't see the silver back any more, he's always hiding... just like the Lion!

Was there on Saturday with my nephews and the silverback was sitting in front of the glass looking at everyone, arms folded, as if to say, yep these are my gang, you can look but I'm guarding them. He seemed to be smirking and not at all stressed.
We hadn't been in years and the difference is massive. The animals looked clean, healthy and content. Big enclosures, lots of interaction between them, and the urangutans certainly played up for the public, loving the attention.
We brought a picnic as the food is very expensive, but the boys aged 12 to 4 really enjoyed themselves, as did we.

Bad Panda

antodeco wrote: »

Education programmes for the animals?

Q1 Mr Duck, can you tell me the chemical symbol for sodium?
- Quack Quack

Q2 Mr Duck, what happens when a base and an acid are mixed?
- Quack Quack

Q3 Mr Duck, what name is given to an elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter?
- Quark Quark

Since when are ducks an attraction at any zoo?

smash

barbiegirl wrote: »

Was there on Saturday with my nephews and the silverback was sitting in front of the glass looking at everyone, arms folded, as if to say, yep these are my gang, you can look but I'm guarding them. He seemed to be smirking and not at all stressed.

Have to say he's the one animal I always felt sorry for because of the small enclosure. I was delighted when they moved the gorillas and wanted to see if he looked any happier but when we went over, he was hiding away on the island somewhere. Good to hear he seems less stressed, last time I saw him he was banging a rock against the glass trying to smash it.

Wibbs

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Predators can't hunt and kill. I think you are wrong that animals don't understand the concept of enclosure. I think a lot of animals are smart enough to know it is better not be in a cage or a small enclosure, especially the massive ones.

If born in an environment like that they have nothing to compare it with. I'd agree with you re wild caught animals. Some animals of course, many animals have quite small home ranges. Many reptile species would happily remain in a couple of acres or less for life.

You can dull instinct but it never leaves.

Depends on the instinct. Dogs lost their fear of humans, lost the ability to become fully adult, even doubled the amount of breeding seasons in a year. Domestication makes huge changes to an animal's instinct.

As for camels, depending on the species our climate isn't that different, just milder. In any event camels in particular take well to domestication/living with people. Elephants too if properly stimulated. In many cases zoo animals get more stimuli from keepers and the environment than in the wild.

I'd personally be more dubious of the monkeys and great apes in particular in zoos. It's pretty clear at this stage that they have an inner life and great intelligence. That requires a lot more stimuli and interest than say a tiger. I seem to recall that the Gorilla who can use sign language wasn't pushed about the enclosure but made it clear she hated being bored. I think maybe this idea of trying to be as natural as possible in a zoo environment may not suit the great apes as much. Might be better to cobble together gorilla proof xboxes and the like to stimulate them more? With the Kinect do dah you could do that easy enough. Shít sign em up to Boards, though with some posts you wonder if they're already here.:D

g'em

Wibbs wrote: »

Many reptile species would happily remain in a couple of acres or less for life.

True that. Anyone with a pet snake who manages to escape can vouch for the high number of times the snake is found in close proximity to their original home. I spent two consecutive summers in Honduras - in summer 1 there was a female pink boa caught, weighed, tagged and released. When we returned in summer 2 we discovered her a huge 2.5 metres from where she'd been released!

Wibbs wrote:

I'd personally be more dubious of the monkeys and great apes in particular in zoos. It's pretty clear at this stage that they have an inner life and great intelligence. That requires a lot more stimuli and interest than say a tiger. I seem to recall that the Gorilla who can use sign language wasn't pushed about the enclosure but made it clear she hated being bored.

No more so than a human. We have the freedom of the planet at our disposal. How many of us actually indulge in our own 'instinct' for freedom. Freedom means danger and the fear unknown. It really ain't all it's cracked up to be for animals.

Wibbs wrote:

I think maybe this idea of trying to be as natural as possible in a zoo environment may not suit the great apes as much. Might be better to cobble together gorilla proof xboxes and the like to stimulate them more? With the Kinect do dah you could do that easy enough. Shít sign em up to Boards, though with some posts you wonder if they're already here.:D

I really shouldn't officially condone a remark like that....

smash

entertainment ideas wrote: »

Went to Dublin Zoo on Saturday for the first time... Great place but Badly sign posted

You can get a free map when you walk in. And it's pretty much a figure of 8. Very hard to get lost in my opinion!

Run_to_da_hills

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Zoos are prisons for animals, but unlike prisons, all the animals are innocent.

Will not support such places with my cash.

In so much is I dislike zoos they are also an necessary evil, without them many wild animals would be extinct through poaching and natural habitat destruction etc. I would agree with strict guidelines on captive animals and also a total ban on mobile zoos in circuses etc.

WolfgangWeisen

I like the zoo but I also hate the zoo.

On the one hand, it's a chance to see animals that you'd never otherwise see. On the other, they're in (relatively, for a lot of them anyway) small confinements and will never have lives akin to their non-confined counterparts.

The zoo is doing good work and is regarded very highly around the world, but even armed with that knowledge it's hard to not feel a bit sorry for the animals. I've left there feeling guilty for having paid (and thus, supported) the place more than a few times to be honest.

nacho libre

I was given a guilt trip by a street fundraiser about how cruel I was for visiting the zoo.

I pointed out that if it's okay to hunt certain species on the basis of conservation, then what is wrong with a zoo caring for an animal that is criticially endangered? Although i agreed with her that you can't justify keeping a lot of the well- populated animals that are found in zoos. Although it could be argued they will be preyed on in their natural environment, thus they feel less stress in a zoo. I think the essential question is do most of the animals feel frustrated, or are zoos good enough these days to replicate their natural enviornment to a satisfactory level for the animal? Do most animals kept in zoo live longer than those who live in the wild? I know when i was looking at an Eagle Owl. He/she seemed cross. I got the sense he/she was thinking oh no another pesky human gawking at me.

IvySlayer

Is that Siberian Tiger still there? He's massive!!!

I'm all for the AH zoo trip :pac:

podgemonster

I went 2 weeks ago and was well impressed with the place. Remarkably we were able to plan our walk around with the feeding of particular animals. The seals, then penguins, giraffes, Rhinos and finally Gorillas. At each feeding a member of staff was able to speak on facts/stories about the animals and took numerous questions from all the kids. It really was wonderful for them from an educational point of view.

Fota Island is well up there too in terms of enjoyment, although it doesnt have the variety of animals as Dublin and not a zoo, the gardens itself are lovely and you have to ocassionally step aside to let some wallabies skip past while trying to hide your snacks from the pesky monkeys.

Big Nasty

Haven't been in a long time but would like to go. Might have a 'toke' beforehand - I'll either laugh my ass off or be completely freaked! :eek:

I gather this gentleman from Athlone had just returned from a visit and apparently tried to mount a hippo!?! :eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oZTW30fAQY

paddyandy

I get depressed seeing animals caged .

OpenYourEyes

David Attenborough's thoughts on zoos

eviltwin

Dublin Zoo is a fantastic place not just as a day out but from a conservation point of view, many of the animals are in areas where they have huge amounts of space, they are very much away from the visitors so you get a sense of them as they would be in their natural habitat. I can remember the zoo of old being a horrible, depressing place and if you haven't been in a while you might still have that image of it but its improved so much and is really worth a visit.

Wompa1

I've been to the zoo in Sydney, Phoenix, Dublin, Cologne, San Diego and London. I also went to a place called Out of Africa which is more a nature preserve in Northern Arizona.

Best actual Zoo I've been to was in San Diego and I'd put Dublin Zoo second. They did a great job with it the last few years.

steddyeddy

g'em wrote: »

I'd see your view as pretty sensationalist tbh.

As humans we have an innate tendency towards anthropomorphising other animals' feeling, even those that are dubiously capable of emotional intelligence. Animals no not 'feel' the way we do, but they do have basic needs. A zoo meets - and often surpasses - those needs. They had unlimited food, medical care, they are free from the stress of predation or having to forage for sustenance. They have a ready made territory and there are numerous accounts of animals who have become freed or escaped from an enclosure only to return to the safety of their 'freakshow' home.

The chances of becoming prey in a zoo are non-existent, the chances of succumbing to disease or parasites is massively reduced. The chances of starvation or dehydration are nil. So what part is the animal missing out on?

Freedom? Meh, given the option of a potential niche the animal will rarely, if ever, occupy all of that territory, instead living in a much smaller realised niche. If you want to humanise it, think about one person living in a huge mansion - chances are they will live most of their time in the house in two or three primary rooms and will rarely if ever venture into others.

I don't know if you've ever seen big cats in the wild, but they are lazy baxstards. Wonderfully so. It's only the pressures of mating and feeding that force them to go anywhere. Likewise with most of the animals you have listed.

Social interaction? This I would agree with in some cases. Elephants thrive in a socially complex hierarchy, travelling in large groups headed up by a long standing matriarch. Socially interactive animals like to be told what to do, in the wild their 'leader' does this for them, in captivity their handlers and feeders can play a surrogate role. It's not a patch on the real thing though.

Breeding programs - this is one extremely important role that zoos play. Take our own Dublin zoo for example - the zoo is a member of the international tiger breeding program. Given that the wild tiger population is in such horrible decline, one of the only ways to keep the lineage going (and not only going but varied, a major issue facing dwindling populations in the wild is genetic bottlenecking. By 'blind-dating' tigers from zoos around the world we are keeping the lineage for the tigers varied and healthy.

Some of the breeding programs are also involved in reintroduction programs - afaik some of the birds bred in the zoo are reintroduced in their native rainforests. I've seen something similar in Zimbabwe where the lion cubs of captive lionness are reared for release at 1-2 years old.

And then there's the educational factor. Keeping animals in captivity helps us to understand how they tick, how they work, what they need. It will help us to understand what kind of conservation programs need to be implemented to make sure that healthy populations remain that way. Even for children (and adults) of the tropical animals that we associate with zoos need to be educated about their value in ecological society. In Kenya or Tanzania lions are seen as cattle killers; in India elephants are seen as crop destroyers. Zoos help us all to appreciate animals as more than just a local pain in the face.

I'm not saying all zoos are great, and I'm not saying zoos are all inherently great. But slating zoos as having no redeeming feature is - to me - quite misinformed. And I say that as a zoologist and someone who has worked in animal conservation on three different continents.

I’m not against zoos that have breeding programmes but I have to take you up on some of the things you said. The idea that animals having emotions and a higher intelligence is a result of human an anthropomorphising came about early in the last century. This happened as a result of backlash against the findings ethology or animal behaviour studies when parralels emerged between man and animal. People thought that humans had some sort of divine spark which separated us from the rest of the animals. Its easy for us to want to shut of our relationship to other animals and think were extraordinary.


There’s a lot of emerging evidence that shows that animals have strong emotions. Several animals such as the great apes (including us), whales, dolphins and elephants exhibit emotions similar to our own (if not the same). All these creatures being social animals it makes a lot of sense for them to have some sort of emotion.


On the subjective evidence anyone who has worked with any of the above mentioned animals will testify that they do display emotion. Following the murder of their parents by poachers or hunters orphaned gorillas, chimps or orang-utans are often traumatised for the rest of their lives. The same goes for elephants which have even been known to mourn a death in the herd.


Apart from subjective evidence there is also a lot of newly emerging objective evidence. Before recently it was thought that the great apes (by that I mean humans also) were the only animals to possess spindle neurons but recently it was found that elephants and also whales possess them too (Hof & Van Der Gucht 2007). Amongst other things spindle cells are responsible for regulation of emotion. Whales even have more spindle cells than us even when taking into account their brain size. The spindle cells are found in the same locations in the brain also which could indicate shared function.


As regard animals in captivity depending in the animal how the experience captivity seems to range from being content to extreme neurosis. The great apes that have learned to sign actually signed that they find being in a cage unpleasant and some of them developed neurotic symptoms. Bears that have been in captivity didn’t fare much better either. Unless the zoo has a breeding program it has no business keeping certain animals in my opinion.


That said zoos are a necessity if they have a breeding programme and they have come on leaps and bounds in the last few decades. Dublin in particular is now one of the best zoos I have even been too.

nacho libre

steddyeddy wrote: »

Apart from subjective evidence there is also a lot of newly emerging objective evidence. Before recently it was thought that the great apes (by that I mean humans also) were the only animals to possess spindle neurons but recently it was found that elephants and also whales possess them too (Hof & Van Der Gucht 2007). Amongst other things spindle cells are responsible for regulation of emotion. Whales even have more spindle cells than us even when taking into account their brain size. The spindle cells are found in the same locations in the brain also which could indicate shared function.

This would support the idea that the humpback whales in California, rather than being stupid, as one scientist put it, were showing empathy when they intervened to try and help a blue whale calf from being killed by Killer whales. To be honest it's not really a matter of debate anymore as to whether amimals possess emotional life and intelligence, still if you're involved in some professions it's convenient to insist otherwise.

I'd be interested in going to Dublin zoo again based on some of the comments in this thread. The last time I was there as a child, an elephant I saw looked absolutely miserable.