Conservation vs Education vs Entertainment

{Note from mods - some posts were moved from here: Hogle Zoo News [Hogle Zoo] ... and from here: COVID-19 effects on zoos and animal conservation}

'Shows' along with keeper experiences and handling sessions will be some of the last zoo experiences to come back on stream, if they ever do in the same format. In addition, UK law forces us to offer educational services and local conservation work, both of which lose money, have to be funded from other zoo activity, cost us viability and compromise our financial resilience. It will be interesting to see if these requirements survive Covid, when the Government might need to fund them instead.

 

The ethos of American zoo culture is that zoos are foremost education and conservation organizations. This is quite different from your for-profit zoo perspective that seems to see education and conservation as nuisances instead of core mission values.

 

But more US zoos are receiving local government funding as public resources to support those aims. Almost all UK zoos are not, so their first concern is survival! I'm not sure how many UK zoos are being run for-profit - most are either run by charities or just running to cover their own costs. Outside of SeaLife and the theme parks I think profits are few and far between..!

 

@DAVID, it is driven not so much by a zoo for profit ethos as a disregard from municipalities and Government to view zoos and private ex situ breeding facilities as commercial ventures and not education conservation oriented NGO's. If the latter is your thing, I agree the UK situation is a total no-brainer.

I am afraid that across Europe in general it is a rather mixed picture with most German and Dutch zoos being somehow publicly funded - although even here the cost cutting and despicable privatise - monetise ethics on the part of our MP's and Govt's is showing ... Quite a few Eastern European zoos are traditionally government funded. Not sure about Scandinavia, but I think that is a similar concept. Southern Europe though it is not publicly funded in quite a few cases and there is - goodness knows why an unjustifiable antipathy towards zoos and captive breeding facilities in some countries (Italy and Spain are notorious ..., even though animal welfare wise by being in the public domain zoo standards are and will improve). Perhaps other European continent forumsters can chip in too on this.

 

This thread is for disscussion over which is the more important purpose for zoos.

 

Unless, you have recreation first you don't get either of these...

 

I dont actually think this is true. Given the visitation level, the often public funding support for the zoos as facilities for public recreation, and the personal philanthropic donations given to them rather than non-public access organisations - These would indicate that whatever your personal 'perspective' is, it is the public appreciation of the venue and the generosity of the donors, which comes pretty high up too.

 

It is objectively true that zoos are run as educational and conservation organizations in America. Recreation is an essential function, but combined with an educational and conservation mission. This is recognized by the zoo-going public, the governments that fund the zoos, philanthropic donors, and accrediting agencies.

Your dismissal of the importance of education and conservation in zoos seems rooted in your animus towards the laws of your country, and your perspective is definitely not universal as you seem to assume.

 

For me, it’s a mix of these both. Conservation is probably the most important purpose for zoos’ contributions to the world. Education is generally a must, as some people just don’t understand what’s really going in the animal world, as it’s a subject not normally covered in schools. If you fuse them together, you get a powerful thing, the ability to conserve animals while educating people about the reality of the animal world.

@Andrew Swales what did you mean by recreation?

 

Recreation is what pays the bills - the public spending a few hours of their leisure time at the zoo instead of the supermarket, or the cinema, or the play-barn - without their money there is nothing to pay for the conservation or education, so recreation must always come first.
It is not a chicken-and-egg scenario - it a recreation (then chose from the rest) scenario...

 

Are you kidding me?! People often want to take their kids to the zoo, it’s a great learning experience for them. If you are talking about private collections then I understand. For a zoo like San Diego, then you make no sense.m

 

No, the vast majority of people are going to a zoo to have fun for a couple hours, not for its educational value. If zoos weren't seen as a fun day out for families, they wouldn't exist. Even San Diego.

 

I can assure you most people do not visit zoos to be educated, they visit for a fun day out. That is where the money comes in and without money you can't do anything.

 

Is that the way you were raised? While growing up, I often went to zoos to have a learning experience. If you think people just don’t care about animals then you are awfully wrong. It’s the education module of zoos that attract people. It’s not quite obvious but look at interactive columns and many fun facts such as Edinburgh’s sun bear tongue sculpture which asked kids to compare their tongues to sun bears’

 

You're getting the wrong impression, people do care about animals however the primary reason people go to zoos is to enjoy themselves on their time off with friends and family. People appreciate conservation and education of course but for the regular person it is usually not the reason they decide to visit the zoo.

 

I'm not saying people don't care about the animals (although having seen some visitor behavior this is possible), but it's pretty obvious that the primary reason people go to zoos is for a fun day out with their family. People don't visit zoos for education, recreation pays the bills.

 

Think about it, why parents often book educational programs for their child’s party. It’s because they manage to combine education and fun in one single program. That’s exactly what zoos do

 

Recreation can be done with education as part of its purpose. That is why millions of school kids take field trips to zoos. They are not necessarily separate things as is being portrayed here.

 

??What??
Do you actually believe that the millions of people who visit San Diego (your choice) do so to be educated.
Some of them might be educated whilst they are there - but that is NOT why they go, and pay the entry fee.

 

I agree, I'm not saying they're entirely separate. I'm just disputing the fact that education is the primary reason people visit zoos. Visitors come into zoos for a fun day out and in the process can learn about the wonders of the animal kingdom. But without that recreation, visitors won't come in and with no visitors it's hard to educate anyone.