Cincinnati Zoo Incident - What do you think of zoos? Do you go to zoos?

[Guest]

I still think it's an elitist attitude to tell people to just go visit Disney's Animal Kingdom and the various safari parks if they want to see animals. There's a safari park a little over an hour's drive from where we live but we've never been because they charge $115 per adult or teen and $50 per child. The three zoos in our area charge $20 A, $14 T & C; $17.75 A, $13.75 T & C; and $14.25 per person.

 

You want to get rid of zoos and replace them with safari parks? Make the safari parks as affordable to middle-class families, not just the rich.

 

zoos are partly funded through government subsidization. So?

 

Money could just be moved around.

 

It's bizarre to state as you have ere that, on one hand, we need zoos to induce wealthy people to write checks, but on the other hand, it's elitist for families to only visit zoos that don't give them the creeps. I don't understand how you've squared those two thoughts in your mind?

[Dmmetler]

It's a catch-22.

 

I can say, flat out, that the single thing that seems to do the most to protect native snakes is letting people meet "ambassador snakes" up close and personal, and learn that the animals aren't to be feared, and that their behavior can be understood. The Lake Erie Water Snake project, which has led to the water snake actually being delisted from the endangered species list, is a prime example. And the big tool there came down to outreach-that the researcher in charge had to convince the people that these snakes weren't a threat to them, to their children, or their fishing lifestyle.

 

Zoos serve a similar purpose. A lot of people are down on Sea World, but the fact is, commercial killing of whales and dolphins has gone way down, and is banned in many countries. That has everything to do with PR. Orcas are commonly called killer whales in part because they were such feared predators and could honestly be deadly to fishermen. Due largely to Sea World, they're now seen as gentle giants, to be preserved and freed. Sea world did such a great job of PR for these animals that killings by whales seen not as a sign that these animals are, ultimately, a large predator of mid-sized mammals, but that Sea World is evil. 

 

The same has happened with zoos. We know so, so much more about these animals due to keeping them in captivity, and zoo keepers have done such a good job of educating people about these animals that zoos are now seen as being evil.

 

Ecotourism isn't the answer. Not only due to expense, but due to the fact that so many natural ranges have been destroyed already, and Ecotourism brings humans into already fragile systems.

 

And there's another side, too. Zoos make most of their money based on visitors. Visitors want to see those charismatic megafauna. The lions, tigers, bears, orcas, dolphins, giraffes, elephants, and yes, Gorillas. On the herpetology side, the king cobras and reticulated pythons. But a lot of the animals that are being preserved and protected and researched are much less charismatic. They're the bats threatened by white nose disease, the rattlesnakes threatened by snake fungal disease and rattlesnake roundups, the little brown frogs and little slimy salamanders threatened by chytrid. You don't have to crowdfund research to study and preserve the Florida Panther. You do to study and preserve the gopher tortoise.

 

I don't know what the answer is. I do know that most zoo visitors don't see even a 10th of what is actually going on there. I didn't, until a couple of years ago.

 

 

[Guest]

Learn.  Learn about the animals.  Learn about the environment.  Going to the zoo can very much be an learning experience and learning about something often inspires people to learn even more.  And even if it doesn't inspire some kid to turn into Jack Hanna or Chris or Martin Kratt, the new interest may inspire the kid to go read more than he otherwise would, which leads to even more learning.

 

That's ridiculous. My kids learned more from one zoobook magazine than they learned in over 100 trips to the Seattle zoo.

 

Do you "inspire interest" in disease by taking your kids to look at dead bodies, or sick people? Do you inspire compassion for the poor by heading out to the ghetto? Geology by spelunking down a caldera?

 

I categorically do not believe children are more inspired to learn by things they see, than things they learn about through other means.

 

Case in point: the INTENSE AND UNDYING LOVE of every kid I have ever met for dinosaurs.

[Amy in NH]

I haven't watched the video, and I won't...but I clearly read the little boy fell. It sounds like it was an unfortunate accident? I doubt any parent will easily allow their kid to go hang out with gorillas. Sounds to me like this was an unfortunate and frightening accident, not a "let's break the rules and allow my child to go hang out with gorillas" type of thing.

If the kid fell then he was climbing somewhere he should not have been. This is not the fault of the gorilla, who IMO should not have had to pay with his life for doing what gorillas do.

[Guest]

And, again....

 

what does all this learning-that-otherwise-never-would-have-happened actually do for animals and their habitats?

[6packofun]

That's ridiculous. My kids learned more from one zoobook magazine than they learned in over 100 trips to the Seattle zoo.

 

Do you "inspire interest" in disease by taking your kids to look at dead bodies, or sick people? Do you inspire compassion for the poor by heading out to the ghetto? Geology by spelunking down a caldera?

 

I categorically do not believe children are more inspired to learn by things they see, than things they learn about through other means.

 

Case in point: the INTENSE AND UNDYING LOVE of every kid I have ever met for dinosaurs.

 

I don't think anyone is necessarily MORE inspired, compassionate, whatever simply by seeing things, but I do think it's useful.  I think it's useful for people to get over their fear or disgust of certain creatures so that when they see that snake or bug (or any other living thing they might come across in their own area) their first impulse isn't to kill it.  This isn't the purpose of zoos and zoos shouldn't be the only option for seeing and coming into contact with animals.  They need improvements, of course, and probably scaled down...but I'm not ready to say get rid of zoos altogether.

 

Your analogies are overly dramatic, impractical, and unconvincing.  (Not the ghetto, but YES, I do take my children to places where they will meet and serve people in need, btw.  The equivalent in this conversation would not be a zoo, however, it would be taking them out in the wild where the animals naturally live.  And now I'm going to move on because any likening of the poor to animals is sort of making me ill.)

[gypsymama]

I fall in between. I don't think every city or county needs its own zoo. I'm in favor of fewer but larger centers that are more geared towards conservation and sanctuary, knowing that a good portion of awareness and support for those missions come from the public's support and interest. These places would have an eye toward natural habitat and education and research, rather than cages and entertainment. They'd serve a larger region, rather than be individual to cities - even big cities.

 

I actually think it's more elitist to put our desires (as opposed to our needs) ahead of our responsibility towards the species entrusted to our care.

 

This. I think that this pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

 

 

We do happen to live near some decent conservation efforts and zoos. I like to support these. We have a membership to our local zoo so that we can go any time and we do fairly often. I think it's been great for my kids and I feel they are a good zoo that really cares about the animals. If they didn't then things would be different.

[Guest]

any likening of the poor to animals is sort of making me ill.)

Oh man that us NOT AT ALL what i meant. I should have taken more time and used a way less cringe-y analogy, and worded it better, to boot. Im sorry.

[Guest]

I didn't say "otherwise never would happen." I said it can inspire learning.

 

It might make a kid decide to be a marine biologist. Or a vet. Or an environmentalist. Or learn to build better zoos.

But my question was what do ppl do that they otherwise would not,as a result of zoos. And you said learning. You see?

[alisoncooks]

I like our (NC) zoo. It's the largest walk-thru zoo in the world. Most animals have very large enclosures to roam. Yes, sometimes that means visitors don't get to see them. It's a small issue IMO. Our zoo is/has been involved in the species survival plan for many endangered animals, including red wolves gorillas and numerous bird species.

This is "our" zoo, as well. It's our only zoo experience, but we love it, have a membership, and go frequently when the weather is nice. My children have a deep passion for animals, which the zoo has fostered; my oldest is interested in conservation and a possible career in it.

 

I think the gorilla event is tragic, and it's easy to assign fault. The parents should've been more attentive or the zoo should've made the enclosure safer/further from human reach. However, the child was not at fault and the zoo workers (who spend their lives caring for these animals) made the best decision they could at the time. I feel for them; that's a horrible decision to have to make.

[Seeking Squirrels]

If the kid fell then he was climbing somewhere he should not have been. This is not the fault of the gorilla, who IMO should not have had to pay with his life for doing what gorillas do.

The setup from inside out is a moat with a tall wall, then on top about three feet of bushes, then a short wood rail fence. So very difficult to *accidntally* fall into. Even if you climbed up on the fence and fell, you'd fall into the bushes. However very easy for a child to quickly give a caregiver the slip by climbing through the fence and through the bushes. So yes he was were he shouldn't have been. But he was 4, they're not exactly known for always following the rules or for good judgement. It's also a setup that wouldn't require a caregiver to be negligent to miss it happening. It could happen in just a few seconds.

[Pawz4me]

I still think it's an elitist attitude to tell people to just go visit Disney's Animal Kingdom and the various safari parks if they want to see animals. There's a safari park a little over an hour's drive from where we live but we've never been because they charge $115 per adult or teen and $50 per child. The three zoos in our area charge $20 A, $14 T & C; $17.75 A, $13.75 T & C; and $14.25 per person.

 

You want to get rid of zoos and replace them with safari parks? Make the safari parks as affordable to middle-class families, not just the rich.

 

I'm more skeptical of the humane and ethical treatment of animals in safari parks than I am in zoos.

[Supertechmom]

If the kid fell then he was climbing somewhere he should not have been. This is not the fault of the gorilla, who IMO should not have had to pay with his life for doing what gorillas do.

 

 Sure, the kid did something he wasn't supposed to.   But dying at the age of 4 as the natural consequence  is  pretty damn hardcore.

 

Fall into the gorilla exhibit and you will die. Because we adults are going to let the gorilla do his thing.  

 

Dang, even baby gorillas have moms who fight of silverbacks for them even when their baby antagonizes the beast.

 

 

No other option involved saving the child as quickly as needed.  Every second he was withing reach of that gorilla was another second of a miracle he was still alive. One more jerk, one more pull and that kid could have been dead. and obviously the zookeepers knew the gorilla well enough to know attempting a rescue was not going to work.   Otherwise, they would have tried it first.

[TravelingChris]

 I love good zoos.  I am not in favor of traveling zoos or other marginal zoos.  I think the mother was probably negligent.  I speak from experience with a fearless, super hyperactive kid who we took to many places with dangers like Grand Canyon and zoos.  Since we knew our kid was prone to rule breaking, we monitored and had her on a leash when she was little and then with us when she was older, like 4.  By the age of four, parents should know what kids are likely to do something like climb into animal enclosures or scamper up perilous rocks or do other daredevil type things.  That personality is evident.  IF the mom had more kids than she could properly supervise, she shouldn't have gone to the zoo.  Zoos are safe for people who obey the rules.  They aren't safe for those who don't.

[Laurie]

People might be interested in the IDA 2014 worst zoos for elephants list. http://www.idausa.org/campaigns/wild-free2/elephant-protection/hall-of-shame/2014-ten-worst-zoos-elephants/

 

 

 

 

 

I looked at the link you provided.  Our zoo received "dishonorable mention".  

 

I feel horrible about what happened to "our" elephants.  Under pressure to close the exhibit, the zoo decided to send the two elephants to the Oklahoma City Zoo.  The protest group wanted the elephants sent to a sanctuary in California.  In my opinion , the elephants should have been allowed to live out their lives at our zoo, their home, then close the exhibit after they had both passed if closing the exhibit had to happen.  It was cruel to move them around like furniture, whether to a zoo in Oklahoma City or to a sanctuary in California.  At the time, I told my husband that I was very worried that the elephants would die because of the move.  Then when they were on the road, they had to make a detour to the San Diego Zoo.  It must have been a very stressful trip for the elephants.  Even my own cats don't like to be put in their carriers for a trip to the vet which is not even a mile from our house, but you can't explain to animals that it's for their own good.  

 

Poor Chai the elephant died several months after being moved.  She had managed to survive about 30 years at our supposedly crappy zoo, but oh well.  

[Slojo]

If the kid fell then he was climbing somewhere he should not have been. This is not the fault of the gorilla, who IMO should not have had to pay with his life for doing what gorillas do.

Yep, the kid was climbing somewhere he should not have been. I am not in the camp of "zero fault" of the parent, but I am in the general neighborhood of empathy. Still think it could happen to more people than would like to believe themselves incapable of ever having a kid do that (and I say that as a mom of kids who actually are not impulsive; will stop on a dime at the command "Danger"; often get the "your kids are so easy" "hardly any work" compliments from friends and teachers who have cared for them; and who generally can be trusted to stay out of obviously dangerous situations (not going into the street..).. BUT are still kids, and occasionally, what is obviously dangerous to me does not occur to them as dangerous -- and cr** happens with kids. Never lost sight of your kid once? Not once?  I have (and so have you ;-). Not at the zoo, but I have lost sight of my kids. Panicked for 30 seconds, aged a year. Could also happen in the "I thought grandma had him and she thought I had him" scenario.  

 

And I have "easy kids." Now that I only have one kid who is in the "panic if I don't see them for 30 seconds" it is different. The others are at least old enough to calm themselves down, find a mom, and ask her to call my cell or take them to security. And they can read signs.

 

I'm not sure what to do with the implied consequences of your post. Of course it wasn't the gorilla's fault. But once the kid was in there, the "faultless gorilla" is a moot point. They were into a "no choice is going to be optimal" at that point. At some point, it was the kid or the gorilla. Armchair quarterbacking from folks who weren't there doesn't help -- tranquilizers were ruled out as they would have agitated the gorilla and could have taken up to 30 minutes to take effect. Gorilla totally didn't mean harm and seemed protective at first, but 400 lbs and "natural instincts" are what they are. The dragging the kid through the moat part of the video was terrifying to watch indeed. It was definitely a "just how many of those dragging episodes could a 4 year old survive" set of moments to witness. 

 

 Sure, the kid did something he wasn't supposed to.   But dying at the age of 4 as the natural consequence  is  pretty damn hardcore.

 

Fall into the gorilla exhibit and you will die. Because we adults are going to let the gorilla do his thing.  

 

Dang, even baby gorillas have moms who fight of silverbacks for them even when their baby antagonizes the beast.

 

 

No other option involved saving the child as quickly as needed.  Every second he was withing reach of that gorilla was another second of a miracle he was still alive. One more jerk, one more pull and that kid could have been dead. and obviously the zookeepers knew the gorilla well enough to know attempting a rescue was not going to work.   Otherwise, they would have tried it first.

Yes, this! Really sad for the gorilla, but don't get it twisted. 

Edited May 30, 2016 by Slojo

[Jenny in Florida]

I do think a compromise is important because the world needs to SEE God's creation, IMO, in order to be more compassionate towards it.  And zoos educate us about these creatures, as well.  

 

 

I disagree that you need to see exotic animals to have compassion for them.  I went to my first zoo at age 21 or 22 (also my last zoo) and have not lacked compassion either before or since.

 

Yeah, I don't buy the "ambassador" theory at all. This is the idea that it's acceptable to make some individual animals live diminished or difficult lives in order to allow humans to "appreciate" them so we care enough to save the rest. Frankly, as a human being, I find that concept downright insulting and depressing.

 

No, as a rule, I do not go to zoos. I've been to one zoo in the last several decades: I took my daughter to see the pandas at the National Zoo in Washington D.C. I have no desire to ever go again.

 

Meanwhile, my kids, who grew up not going to zoos or "animal parks" like Sea World, somehow managed to develop all kinds of compassion for all of their fellow living beings, maybe in part because we talked often about why our family chooses not to support organizations that exploit animals for human's entertainment or "education."

[Jenny in Florida]

Learn.  Learn about the animals.  Learn about the environment.  Going to the zoo can very much be a learning experience and learning about something often inspires people to learn even more.  And even if it doesn't inspire some kid to turn into Jack Hanna or Chris or Martin Kratt, the new interest may inspire the kid to go read more than he otherwise would, which leads to even more learning.

 

Which doesn't benefit the animals, themselves, in any way. I find it unacceptable to suggest that it's okay to exploit other living beings because it might encourage a kid to read a book.

[hornblower]

 

 

I also recognize my opinion here doesn't matter at all and they aren't going any where any time soon, and I don't boycott them.

 

Well, I was with you until the last sentence. I think your opinion matters. I think they are changing & slowly going away.

 

The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step, great social change begins with one person. Be the change you want to see in the world.

 

You might say I'm a dreamer, etc etc etc, do-gooders unite :) 

[hornblower]

 

Poor Chai the elephant died several months after being moved.  She had managed to survive about 30 years at our supposedly crappy zoo, but oh well.  

Chai should have gone to a proper sanctuary. 

Edited May 30, 2016 by hornblower

[Jenny in Florida]

Your analogies are overly dramatic, impractical, and unconvincing.  (Not the ghetto, but YES, I do take my children to places where they will meet and serve people in need, btw.  The equivalent in this conversation would not be a zoo, however, it would be taking them out in the wild where the animals naturally live. 

 

But the analogy for your taking the children to places in which they will meet people in need would be to round up those people without their consent and stow them in "habitats" that others have deemed appropriate, not allowing them to leave or to live normal lives, but to put them on display so that "guests" are able to view them for their own edificiation and entertainment.

 

I assume we can all agree that would sickening and unnacceptable?

[hornblower]

I still think it's an elitist attitude to tell people to just go visit Disney's Animal Kingdom and the various safari parks if they want to see animals. There's a safari park a little over an hour's drive from where we live but we've never been because they charge $115 per adult or teen and $50 per child. The three zoos in our area charge $20 A, $14 T & C; $17.75 A, $13.75 T & C; and $14.25 per person.

 

You want to get rid of zoos and replace them with safari parks? Make the safari parks as affordable to middle-class families, not just the rich.

 

I think it's a attitude of entitlement to suggest that everyone NEEDS to see these magnificent beings first hand. You can become passionate about conservation, preservation, animal biology, ecology, and all sorts of other fields without seeing them. Especially when you're 4 and really what you want is the hot dog and to go to the gift shop. 

 

The animals are not there for us to exploit for a day's outing in the park.  

[Guest]

I think the pp was right in pointing out that I should not have used an analogy involving people. Because human people definitely WERE put in actual zoos, pretty recently. ::shudder::

 

However, I also think it's really quite extreme to bring animals out of their habitats anywhere in the world, to be kept in comfortable cages for our edification or entertainment, or even, yes, education. My kid's education is not the alter at which I sacrifice all other personal values!

[creekland]

That's ridiculous. My kids learned more from one zoobook magazine than they learned in over 100 trips to the Seattle zoo.

 

Do you "inspire interest" in disease by taking your kids to look at dead bodies, or sick people? Do you inspire compassion for the poor by heading out to the ghetto? Geology by spelunking down a caldera?

 

I categorically do not believe children are more inspired to learn by things they see, than things they learn about through other means.

 

Case in point: the INTENSE AND UNDYING LOVE of every kid I have ever met for dinosaurs.

 

Your kids are the exception rather than the rule.  

 

I've been with literally thousands of kids in my years of teaching.  Those who have traveled more & experienced more know far more than those who just have access to books and videos.  A video about the Grand Canyon can only teach so much.  Facts tend to be meaningless and soon forgotten without the real experience.

 

And yes... my kids have been inspired by sick people, ghettos, and calderas.  Again, what we teach means so much more to them when they've seen it.  Back in 4th grade my youngest's class was studying volcanoes.  At the time we happened to be at Volcanoes NP in HI.  Guess who remembers more about volcanoes now?  But it isn't just volcanoes... our travels have inspired a thirst for knowledge of our planet that few "local-bound" kids share.

 

My middle son has a friend who hasn't gone anywhere outside of her local area.  We've taken her on her first ferry ride and some other firsts - leading up to more in the future (assuming they remain friends).  She loves it.

 

Middle son also has a heart for medical missions having gone on a trip and seeing it first-hand.  He volunteers in hospice - solidifying his desire for medical research.

 

Youngest is intent on helping both people and our planet after seeing the needs of both.

 

Most who learn solely from books might be able to talk, but rarely get inspired to "do."  (emphasis on might too)

 

As for animals... like humans, animals know only what they are exposed to.  Those who are born into captivity know that as "life."  Take them from the life they know and one induces stress.  Most kittens/cats dumped off on farms after being brought up in houses die.  Most wild animals raised in captivity see captivity as "life" and are quite content.  Being "kind" and releasing them gives them stress - usually leading to death.

 

Even domestic animals are like that.  We purposely condition show horses/ponies for their life traveling and competing.  Therapy dogs are also conditioned as needed.

 

Within just the horse/dog world you get some that are adventurous and love new things and others that prefer keeping to themselves - just like people.

 

There's so much variety.  It's a big fallacy to assume that animals in zoos can't stand it there and would be happier in the wild.  Those caught and penned up won't like it without a bit of conditioning (like taming wild horses), but those raised in it see it as "life" and won't like the reverse.

[Guest]

Obviously kids LIKE zoos.

 

My question to that is, so what?

 

It is not fallacious to work with the assumption that wild animals are better off in their natural habitats than they are in pens. Happiness has very little to do with animal preference, afaik. 

[Guest]

Also, I am pretty sure no one in this thread has suggested we take all currently-zoo'd animals and just release them into the wilds wholesale and say good luck chuck!

[creekland]

I think it's a attitude of entitlement to suggest that everyone NEEDS to see these magnificent beings first hand. You can become passionate about conservation, preservation, animal biology, ecology, and all sorts of other fields without seeing them. Especially when you're 4 and really what you want is the hot dog and to go to the gift shop. 

 

The animals are not there for us to exploit for a day's outing in the park.  

 

I think it's a sense of entitlement to think you know what the animals would prefer.  IF they could see their options (as we do) - life in the wild vs life in the zoo - I suspect many would choose a good zoo.  No predators, no poachers, no worrying about where your next meal comes from, no parasites, etc.

 

How many humans choose to live in civilization vs living out in the wild getting all their own food and shelter (no grocery stores, etc)?

[Guest]

AND (sorry for serial posting!!) if you want to say some dogs like to roam, some are couch puppies...

 

OK.

 

Sure.

 

Cause humans made them that way.

 

So do they do a personality assessment when new animals are born to zoos, to ascertain whether they'd be happier in zoos?

 

No. Because animal happiness has nothing to do with it, one way or the other

[creekland]

ps  My own ponies and cats often choose creature comforts over their "wild" options.  (They'll head for the barn and/or house plus prefer being fed to getting their own if it's an option.)

[Guest]

I think it's a sense of entitlement to think you know what the animals would prefer.  IF they could see their options (as we do) - life in the wild vs life in the zoo - I suspect many would choose a good zoo.  No predators, no poachers, no worrying about where your next meal comes from, no parasites, etc.

 

How many humans choose to live in civilization vs living out in the wild getting all their own food and shelter (no grocery stores, etc)?

 

lol Come one man. That's the argument from the first half of Life Of Pi.

 

Civilization literally == humans. Not other animals.

 

And we're not necessarily awesome at it with JUST humans. Anthropomorphisizing animals does not help animals.

[creekland]

lol Come one man. That's the argument from the first half of Life Of Pi.

 

Civilization literally == humans. Not other animals.

 

And we're not necessarily awesome at it with JUST humans. Anthropomorphisizing animals does not help animals.

 

I suspect we need to agree to disagree.  I spend/spent a fair bit of my life with animals and trust far more of what I see and experience than what I read from someone else on the internet.  I certainly don't see ME as the one anthropomorphisizing!

[MrsWeasley]

I don't know much about and have never been to the Cincinnati Zoo. We were members of the other zoo where a small child famously fell into the exhibit with the gorillas but with a very different outcome, but I chose not to renew our membership after 54 of their stingrays died due to equipment failure. This wasn't the first time they had problems with large losses of sting rays due to malfunctioning equipment, and as a result, I didn't feel good about our membership. It is famous, though, for being one of the first zoos to use moats and ditches instead of cages to contain animals.

[JoJosMom]

ps  My own ponies and cats often choose creature comforts over their "wild" options.  (They'll head for the barn and/or house plus prefer being fed to getting their own if it's an option.)

 

Okay, this is off the point, but this cracked me up, Creekland.  We have 3 horses who have nice barn stalls with large paddocks attached.  They also have a very large, well-shaded turn-out area where they get to go out in the day and be a herd and nibble grass and roll on the ground...for about 3 hours max.  Then my daughter's old Arab gelding (the brains of the operation) starts bellowing for me to come get them.  When I finally show up, after making them wait for, like, minutes, all three head right for the gates back into their stalls.  There's no place like home!

[SKL]

I categorically do not believe children are more inspired to learn by things they see, than things they learn about through other means.

 

Case in point: the INTENSE AND UNDYING LOVE of every kid I have ever met for dinosaurs.

 

It depends on the child.  My kids definitely get more out of experience than books/pictures.  Maybe that's why they've never actually cared for dinosaurs.  :P

 

[Liz CA]

Maybe off topic but I cannot help wondering how the 4 year old could fall over into an enclosure - suppose I could google. Someone here mentioned that parents seem to forget they are in the company of essentially wild animals and need to keep a close eye on their kiddos.

 

It is very sad to me that the gorilla had to be sacrificed but as Lanny said, they probably evaluated the situation and a tranquilizer would not have given them an immediate result. Of course, I am in favor of saving the child rather than waiting to see if the gorilla feels protective and parental or annoyed and aggressive, however, it's sad that the boy had the opportunity to fall in. The zoo will likely be spending resources now to make the barrier more child (people) safe and thus also protect their animals.

[Laurie]

Obviously kids LIKE zoos.

 

My question to that is, so what?

 

 

 

I've been visiting the same zoo since the 1960's and I've seen all the improvements made over the years.  I'm glad that I had the opportunity to make frequent visits as a child, and I'm glad that my children have had the same opportunity.

That's good enough for me.  

 

If the zoo closed and became a botanical garden, kids like mine would have little interest in going there.  And if it became just another city park, "green space", then I probably wouldn't want to go there because it would end up being taken over by bums to use as a free campground and garbage dump for their used syringes, etc.  

[Chelli]

Maybe off topic but I cannot help wondering how the 4 year old could fall over into an enclosure - suppose I could google. Someone here mentioned that parents seem to forget they are in the company of essentially wild animals and need to keep a close eye on their kiddos.

 

It is very sad to me that the gorilla had to be sacrificed but as Lanny said, they probably evaluated the situation and a tranquilizer would not have given them an immediate result. Of course, I am in favor of saving the child rather than waiting to see if the gorilla feels protective and parental or annoyed and aggressive, however, it's sad that the boy had the opportunity to fall in. The zoo will likely be spending resources now to make the barrier more child (people) safe and thus also protect their animals.

 

Here's what happened according to an eyewitness: http://www.foreverymom.com/witness-to-cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-death-it-wasnt-the-parents-fault/

 

In a nutshell, the mom had taken a picture and apparently had the boy put his hand on her back pocket while she was dealing with another child. He removed his hand and by the time she noticed, he'd already crawled under the fence. She went over the fence as did the husband of the eyewitness in the story above to get him, but he quickly crawled away from them, through the bushes, and fell. The mom and the eyewitness' husband both wanted to jump down to get him, but the eyewitness talked them out of it and instead called 911.

[mamiof5]

If the kid fell then he was climbing somewhere he should not have been. This is not the fault of the gorilla, who IMO should not have had to pay with his life for doing what gorillas do.

I know, and I feel bad for the gorilla. However, would not call the mom a bunch of bad words because of this situation. I read she had more kids, and a baby...some Facebook posts were just really demeaning to her, saying how she should have stayed home if she couldn't handle her kids etc etc. I have had babies, toddlers, 4 yr olds etc. I have planned family outings, or just the kids and myself. And yes, to the zoo. It's unfortunate that the gorilla died, but it's more unfortunate to read some of these posts (not here, on Facebook), just tearing the mom up. Maybe, just maybe, this was an accident.

[mamiof5]

Here's what happened according to an eyewitness: http://www.foreverymom.com/witness-to-cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-death-it-wasnt-the-parents-fault/

 

In a nutshell, the mom had taken a picture and apparently had the boy put his hand on her back pocket while she was dealing with another child. He removed his hand and by the time she noticed, he'd already crawled under the fence. She went over the fence as did the husband of the eyewitness in the story above to get him, but he quickly crawled away from them, through the bushes, and fell. The mom and the eyewitness' husband both wanted to jump down to get him, but the eyewitness talked them out of it and instead called 911.

Thank you for sharing this. Some of the Facebook posts against this mom just make me sick :(

[Julie Smith]

I'm okay with zoos. But I think there should be many regulations for them. My province (Ontario) has very few zoo regulations, and I don't think that is good. 

 

We do visit a very mini-zoo very often. Well visit and zoo might be pushing it. Our local park has what is called a zoo. They have rabbits, chickens, pigs, peacocks, llamas, and goats. They occasionally have a deer and or fawn. Basically picture a small petting zoo, but without the petting. 

[Ausmumof3]

So, what does this WHOLE other experience persuade people to actually do for wildlife that they otherwise do not do?

 

Incidentally, since you used them as your example, my husband's ship regularly travels somewhere where bald eagles are treated like rats of the sky. Because they are everywhere, and go through dumpsters and make giant messes and terrorize cats and dogs. Everyone he has spoken to there said they would gladly shoot them on sight if they were permitted to do so because they are behaving as urban vermin.

Well our zoos seem to pick one simple message at a time and heavily promote it. One is pushing "wipe for wildlife" - buy recycled toilet paper. Another is pushing a mobile phone recycling program to prevent habitat destruction. They even have post bags available so you can go home and drop that old buddy in your bottom drawer in the post and send it back. They push these campaigns through displays throughout the zoo and in every keeper talk you listen to.

 

Yes they could do it through tv advertising but I doubt it would be as effective. Nothing like seeing the power and majesty of the animals then getting the message that if you don't change your habits now by the time our kids are our age they won't exist.

 

Secondly the zoos have significant breeding programmes.

[MomtoCandJ]

I'm thinking the Zoo is as much at fault as anyone else, I mean by having such a large gap under the fence.

[Ausmumof3]

Maybe off topic but I cannot help wondering how the 4 year old could fall over into an enclosure - suppose I could google. Someone here mentioned that parents seem to forget they are in the company of essentially wild animals and need to keep a close eye on their kiddos.

 

It is very sad to me that the gorilla had to be sacrificed but as Lanny said, they probably evaluated the situation and a tranquilizer would not have given them an immediate result. Of course, I am in favor of saving the child rather than waiting to see if the gorilla feels protective and parental or annoyed and aggressive, however, it's sad that the boy had the opportunity to fall in. The zoo will likely be spending resources now to make the barrier more child (people) safe and thus also protect their animals.

The kid climbed under the wire and through some bushes before falling into the moat around the enclosure. He didn't fall in but deliberately went in because he wanted to hang out with the gorillas.

[marbel]

If the kid fell then he was climbing somewhere he should not have been. This is not the fault of the gorilla, who IMO should not have had to pay with his life for doing what gorillas do.

 

This is true, but what was the alternative?    

 

From what I've read, it sounds like there is shared fault:  the parent(s) of the child, and the zoo for making the enclosure easy for a child to breach.   I'm expecting to read about a lawsuit soon.

 

I like zoos that have good as-close-to-natural habitats as possible.  My kids have enjoyed many zoo trips. They combine education and fun.  If the animals are well-cared-for, I think zoos are great.   But I have seen apparent psychotic behavior in zoos (polar bears pacing back and forth) though other than that, I can't say that I've been able to tell if a zoo animal is sad or depressed.  

 

[Ausmumof3]

Thank you for sharing this. Some of the Facebook posts against this mom just make me sick :(

I feel the same. People seriously should just shut up. I feel so bad for the mum.

[MistyMountain]

Domesticated animals and house pets all have certain characteristics that allowed them to become domesticated animals or house pets that evolved over a long period of time. It is not ideal for a lot of animals to live in zoos. There are some sanctuaries that are done really well that are better then zoos. Zoos have been getting better over time and some are actually well done in that they take in rescued animals or have good breeding programs and big habitats. There is more awareness on how small enclosures and cages are not good and on the training programs for shows. Some animals are miserable in zoos and not given enough. Some animals are in good situations and lead happy lives.

 

It was a tragic accident. I know kids are all different and any kid can do stupid things that put them in danger. They do not always listen. My kids have done stupid things. Luckily nothing bad ever happen because of it. If if it was my kid that did it I would be very horrified and upset. It would be hard to live with the knowledge and I do not think I would ever be over the fact that an endangered species died because of what happen. My kids have always been good at zoos. An explanation that you can never go past a fence and why it is very dangerous has been all they needed but they do have there things that they do not listen over or need much more working with. I certainly do not put the blame on the enclosure. You cannot prevent everything just like with getting hit by cars and drowning.

[Ausmumof3]

I have to say the animals that always look really unhappy in zoos are the elephants and the Tigers. The elephants really don't need to be kept at all. The Tigers probably need to be part of a conservation breeding programme though. 😕 Our local zoo doesn't have elephants now.

[lailasmum]

I don't really love zoos from a quality of educational experience point of view as well as welfare. I don't really feel like we learn a lot from visiting them, and definitely learn more from good documentaries.

 

We have a few regional zoos from big ones to teensy ones and I'm varying levels of uncomfortable with them. The bigger two seem to have got rid of a lot of the very large animals over time and have added more smaller things like insects. There is one small local zoo that has a history of problems and I feel like they are just trying to make money from a private collection but it doesn't really add much educationally, I tend to forget the place exists most of the time even though it's our closest. I hated the large drive through safari park we went to last year. It was kind of pointless grabbing a glimpse of a non native animal transplanted into a small fenced area of English countryside before the traffic jam of cars moves on. I see the point of having places to breed and research animals but I'm not sure that zoos open to the public are it. Maybe specialised places with a more restricted ability to visit and more clear educational opportunities would work better.

Edited May 30, 2016 by lailasmum

[hornblower]

"Gorillas are some of our closest relatives, edged out only by chimpanzees and bonobos. This latest genome sequence confirms that just 1.6 percent of their genes diverge from our own. For reference, chimps and bonobos tie for 1.2 percent divergence, and after gorillas there's a sharp drop-off to 3.1 percent in orangutans — great apes with Asian instead of African origins. The genomes of individual humans differ from one another by around 0.1 percent."

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/04/01/a-second-look-at-the-gorilla-genome-shows-just-how-similar-we-are/

[Kassia]

Thank you for sharing this. Some of the Facebook posts against this mom just make me sick :(

 

It's appalling how this mother has been attacked.  I don't understand it.  

 

A friend of a friend of mine lost a child in a swimming pool accident.  This is what he posted on this matter:

 

"There was a time when I myself was one of those "I could never let that happen to my child" 

It was a lack of remembering 

Like the time my first born fell out of his crib 

I never even thought he could do that at 1 years old 

Or the time my 4 year old daughter got bit in the face by our dalmatian 

I never in a million years would want that to happen to her but it did 

Those things i didn't remember about being a parent that happened on my watch 

When I read stories about kids getting hurt or that are put in danger I used to say "what is wrong with that parent?" 

I know a mother who was trying to get home after she picked her kids up from daycare 

They were hungry 

She was tired from working 

She went to go around a school bus that was broke down on a two Lane highway 

A truck pulling a horse trailer came from the other direction 

She steered to the left ditch trying to avoid being hit 

She didn't make it 

All three of her small children died 

She somehow carries the incredible guilt 

People said of her that she was careless and in too big of a hurry 

But 

Since we lost our son 

My empathy level may be higher than most 

I'm really glad that woman at the zoo didn't lose her baby 

I hope in my heart the publicity of the negative comments she sees does not settle in her"