Zoos

Animal welfare is a complex matter that includes scientific, ethical, economic and other dimensions. Despite the existence of more comprehensive approaches to animal welfare and the obvious shortcomings of the 'Five Freedoms', for zoological gardens the freedoms still constitute the general guidelines to be followed. These guidelines reflect both, an ethical view and a science based approach. Analysis reveals that the potential ineptitude of the 'Five Freedoms' lies in the manifold perceptions that people have of other animals. These perceptions are biased by our own (mammalian) umwelt, which is intertwined with different cultural attitudes towards other species (e.g. humanistic, moralistic, ecologistic). Perceptions of animals may be held simultaneously by different interest groups and may often be incompatible, thus often making it difficult to follow the 'Five Freedoms' in practice. We aim to recognise and consider the multiplicity of factors that, besides animal subjectivity, are relevant in understanding this hybrid environment. The moral value and practical applicability of the 'Five Freedoms' are sometimes undermined by prioritising some freedoms over others and by species bias. Both are characteristic phenomena of the zoo as a hybrid environment where other species are managed by humans. Given deficiencies are further amplified by humanistic and moralistic attitudes that people hold.

Contemporary zoos publicize their role as centers for the conservation of endangered species and include so-called “naturalistic displays.” These and other aspects of the new zoos can be fruitfully analyzed from the perspective of what some analysts describe as the predominance of “visual culture” in modern societies. The following essay nonetheless makes the case for an interpretation of zoos that highlights their multisensual character. On the basis of the semeiotic theory of Charles Sanders Peirce and the results of visitor research at two British zoos, the essay develops an account that articulates four different modalities of observation and their corresponding economies of multisensuality.

This study examines zoo discourses on media as a convenient site for probing into human-animal power relations. A form of critical discourse analysis is carried out in national daily news discourse focusing on how zoo discourses portray animals through lexical choices, grammatical structures, and discursive strategies of capitalism, hospitality, and conservation. These strategies overall operate to conceal the domination, oppression, and suffering of captive wild animals behind the benevolent image of the zoo institution promoting conservation, education, and recreation. Through language, animals are constructed, on a superficial level, as subjects who enjoy their lives on natural habitats with their families. Yet further analysis reveals a power abuse in which animals are objectified and commodified for an exclusively human agenda. The study concludes that through the naturalizing effect of discourses human dominance over wild animals are never questioned and the zoos grant animals an instrumental value rather than inherent value.

The majority of zoos and aquariums recognize that to remain relevant in the eyes of today's society they must be agents of conservation and directly linked to the survival of species in nature. They cannot be viewed only as places of recreation and/or edcuation, or worse, deemed to be threats to wildlife. Many zoos have adopted field conservation strategies that include research, habitat protection and restoration, local community capacity building and support, advocacy campaigns, and resource and onetary contributions to organizations engaged in like-minded efforts. In 2017 alone, Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) zoos contributed over 200 million dollars to field conservation efforts. As part of this push to engage more directly in species conservation, a number of zoos have begun working with conservation partners on headstarting programs for threatened and endangered species. Headstarting is a strategy that uses zoo-raised animals to augment existing wild populations that are at risk or to establish new populations in areas that the species once inhabited. The basic premise of headstarting involves the rearing and caring for young animals in a zoo or other captive facility from birth or hatching through to the time period when they would be most susceptible to predation, starvation or other causes of mortality that young animals experience in nature.

This paper attempts to show several problems with an education in zoos. It begins with an analysis of current definitions of zoos and a short description of the social reception of zoological gardens. Then, the scope of education in these places is analyzed. The main part of the paper deals with ethical problems of a contemporary education in zoos. One of many such problems is that the zoos are – as Ralph Acampora puts it – institutions of „visive violence” and power whose specific functions are to display fragments of animal life organized in such a way as to become resources for human pleasure and entertainment. The paper ends with a description of Lisa Kemmerer’s concept of nooz – the new, non-speciesist formula of zoos.

Kuzevanov V.Y., Ponomarev A.V., Kalyuzhny S.S., Kim Yong-Shik. Ethnobotanic gardens and zoobotanical collections as global world trends. The report provides a graphical analysis of the growth trends of the world botanic gardens number, their historical development as multipurpose and interdisciplinary ecological resources linking botanical, general biological and sociocultural aspects of their ongoing transformation. The authors, based on their own experience and examples of best practices, demonstrate the features of changing the dominant thematic areas of the mission of various botanical gardens of the world for the development of human resources-through education and research, nature conservation, management of natural resources and the amusement industry of "entertainment and free time" in the transition to the next technological order and to "knowledge economy" (R&D, education, biotechnology, healthcare, information and communication technologies) and the involvement of more countries and regions in the "race" to build modern multifunctional botanic gardens.
В докладе представлен графический анализ тенденций роста числа ботанических садов в мире, их исторического развития как многоцелевых и междисциплинарных экологических ресурсов, связывающих ботанические, общие биологические и социокультурные аспекты их продолжающейся трансформации. Авторы, основываясь на собственном опыте и примерах передового опыта, демонстрируют особенности изменения доминирующих тематических областей миссии различных ботанических садов мира для развития человеческих ресурсов - посредством образования и научных исследований, охраны природы, управления природными ресурсами и индустрию «развлечения и свободного времени» при переходе к следующему технологическому укладу и к «экономике знаний» (НИОКР, образование, биотехнология, здравоохранение, информационные и коммуникационные технологии) с вовлечением всё большего числа стран и регионов к «гонка» по созданию современных многофункциональных ботанических садов.

This chapter highlights several criticisms of zoos, then provides a vision for new zoos: “nooz.” Offering a new name to these institutions makes a clear break from the old model, which is fundamentally exploitative. The common denominator between zoos and nooz is that both foster nonhumans who are neither domestic pets nor farmed animals—they keep “wild” animals. Nooz are nonexploitative, benevolent, and are designed for nonhumans, to provide safe-haven for those individuals who have been misused by zoos or science, or injured by humans. This essay also explores “benevolent” reasons for keeping nonhuman animals in zoos, such as captive breeding programs and injured wildlife, and acceptable parameters for nooz, including such topics as retribution for previous exploitation and the problem of carnivory.

III International Conference (Animals, Zoos and Consevation) was held in Poznan (Poland), 8-9 June 2006. All talks concerned not only main problems of conservation, but also described researches which took place in different Zoos. Presentations about studying, saving, keeping and breeding the animals were made. A lot of posters have been done on various topics: behavior, anatomy, morphology, etc. This paper could be an interest for all kinds of specialists working with animals; it is a short review of all talks and posters which were presented at the Conference.

On 17 June 2015, an unprecedented series of rain events caused a wall of water to tear through an affluent urban neighborhood in the Georgian capital Tbilisi. The flood damaged 700 homes, displaced 67 families, killed 19 people, left 3 more unaccounted for – while also leaving nearly 300 animals either drowned or killed as the flood destroyed the Soviet-era Tbilisi Zoo. Deadly and headline grabbing interactions among humans and non-humans continued surprising those in Tbilisi as diverse actors tried to control the precarious situation unfolding in this post-Soviet urban landscape, and survivors of all sorts roamed the streets. I illustrate these relationships by analyzing news coverage, government statements, technical reports, archival resources, and my own experiences as a participant observer within the events surrounding the flood. In doing so I extend arguments by Foucault and his interlocuters to present a case of more-than-human government, requiring the arrangement of non-human elements to maintain the life of a political population such as the Tbilisi citizenry. As I demonstrate, such governmental practices require not only calculations of what life to protect and what to destroy via sovereignty, discipline, and biopolitics, but also a constellation of other powers, including historically embedded regimes of truth and authority. From this perspective, the security of a human population may at times rely on its imbrication with the government of animals and infrastructure alike, and vice versa – by securing, disciplining, knowing, and at times destroying our material environments and companion species, however we may be related.

On 14 June 2007, the Hon. Ame Pandu Ame, MP for Nungwi constituency in Zanzibar, asked the following question in the Tanzanian parliament: "Given that Zanzibar is part of Tanzania, and that some animals have now disappeared from the islands, such as Ader's Duiker (Paa-Nunga), Impala (Swala), Zebra (Pundamilia), and Ostrich (Mbuni):- Does the government not see that there is a need to take these animals (which aren't dangerous to man) over to the islands so that people can see them there?" The Hon. Member's knowledge of his own islands' fauna was evidently on par with that of the brains behind the "Rare Animals of Zanzibar" series of stamps that was issued in the mid-1980s.

Since the 1950s zoos have taken up the mission to make their audience aware of conservational issues. The ideological shift towards conservational goals as well as public concerns about living conditions of captive wild animals influenced the concepts of zoo design. Zoos had to integrate popular imaginations about naturalness and scientific research on ecological issues, an ambivalent mixture between science and aesthetics. During the 1950s and the beginning 1960s planners have worked on a new master plan for the Zoological Garden of Basel in Switzerland. The old buildings of the nineteenth-century’s city zoo were demolished and replaced with animal houses styled according to post-war modernism. Veterinary and behavioural research as well as new materials like concrete, glass and tiles supported the conditions for conservational tasks like health and fertility. Nevertheless, the zoo’s environment should appear as a surrogate of Nature to enhance the public’s awareness of conservational concerns and ecological relations. The artist Kurt Brägger modelled illusionistic natural habitats with the help of a semiotic program, which transferred geomorphological structures of the regional landscape of Basel into the zoo. A dramaturgy of sight-lines and lightning effects led the visitors through the park to immerse the recipients into a coherent landscape experience. The new landscape design and the souterrain buildings of the 1960s relied on contemporary theoretical studies about walking experiences and phenomenological space. Conservational claims and ecological rhetorics were closely related to behavioural research on the relational space of territory and social behaviour. All these ideas influenced the design of Nature for both kind of users, for visitors and animals. The represention of zoological research contrasted the immersive effects of the popular themed exhibition space. Hence, the built environment of the zoo condensed and combined contradictory ideas of progress, conservation and reassurance.

Animals are among the most sought after tourist attractions and the impact on them is a matter of concern to an increasing number of people. The first book of its kind, Tourism and Animal Welfare addresses the issue of animal welfare within the tourism experience. It explores important foundations such as the meaning of 'animal welfare' and its relation to ethics, animal rights and human obligations to animals. It also explores the nature and diversity of the position and role of animals within tourism.

‘Tales from the front line’ is the section of the book that provides the reader with the views and experiences of animal welfare organisations, individual leaders, tourism industry organisations and operators, and academic experts. These case studies and opinion pieces will encourage the reader to consider their own position regarding animals in tourism and their welfare.

Regarding other species than our own in the modern world, there are only 3 possibilities: private ownership, zoological and similar institutions, and preserves. They all have certain advantages and disadvantages. Some are termed, " exotic " , and some, " domestic " , although the distinction is not always very clear. In layman's terms, exotic often means species taken from the wild whereas domesticated basically means species raised by people that no longer occur in the wild. In reality, exotics are first generation wild species either in captivity or relocated but living freely outside of their natural range. Domestics are species raised and bred in captivity by use of animal husbandry as opposed to maintaining them in the natural ecosystem from which they arose. Technically, then, " pets " raised in captivity, whether dogs or pythons, are both " domestic species ". Advantages of private ownership: Private ownership of exotic or domestic species allows the individual to focus on some species of personal interest. Doesn't have to be the flashiest or best known. Private ownership can also entail breeding the species. Captive bred animals are always healthier than their wild counterparts, and therefore better to acquire, which takes pressure off wild populations given enough captive bred individuals to supply the pet trade. Examples of successful dispersal of exotic species in captivity include bearded dragons, leopard geckos, corn snakes, and ball pythons. There are many others. Disadvantages of private ownership: Most exotic animals (e.g.taken from the wild) will die due to poor husbandry (the owners don't take proper care of them, either from ignorance, unwilling to make the investment in time or money, or they simply get tired of them). Private owners of exotic species are not organized, and frequently seem to be in competition for attention or sales, as opposed to working together to benefit the species. The most successful private owners are typically one-off. In other words, they invest tremendous time and money to achieve husbandry needs (learn how to keep them in captivity) and breed multiple generations, but their attainments are lost with their passing. They don't pass the torch. It was something they did just for their own satisfaction. Obviously this is in contrast to better known pets, like dogs, cats, horses, etc., that have breeding registries, specialty groups, sporting or show competitions, etc. Zoos and Sanctuaries: Zoos have many pro's and con's. Sanctuaries not so much necessarily. Zoos are typically actively engaged in conservation of their species. Sanctuaries are more commonly a place for refugees to live comfortably, but may not have any type of breeding or long-range plan in place and the species probably are kept in the natural habitat where they arose. Advantages of Zoos: Zoos are one of the few places where the average person can personally see exotic animals from distant places in vivo. Establishes a direct connection to exotic animals and people. Offer lots of information for visitors about their resident animals that most people will never see in their local paper or any other popular media source. Zoos often coordinate the breeding of target species with other zoos in order to maintain a more diverse, e.g. not inbred, strain of individuals. Many zoos are also now working with preserves in areas where they assist local communities in maintaining target species in situ through eco-tourism, direct donations, and with husbandry expertise. Disadvantages of Zoos: Zoos tend to target the larger, flashier, and sometimes, easier to display species of animals, as opposed to worrying about smaller, more difficult species that are just as endangered in the wild. Zoos don't have the money to ensure the preservation and perpetuation of any given species very far into the future as most are dependent upon donations and gate receipts in order to fund their operations. These sources, of course, vary with the economy. In spite of zoo breeding programs, they tend to breed animals simply to keep the genome of the species as diverse as possible, which is not the way it actually works in nature, where a dominant individual of a species, often male, makes the effective breedings for the whole group, sometimes for many years. Of

In dit essay wordt de veranderende gedaante die biophilia in de Amsterdamse dierentuin Natura Artis Magistra door de eeuwen heen heeft aangenomen, geobserveerd. Op basis daarvan worden zowel de mogelijkheden als de dilemma’s van de dierentuin in het Antropoceen overdacht.