Andrew, I understand that you take this in a very personal way -- of course. (So much so that you selectively quote me and take my words out of context. What I wrote was "as zoos and restaurants reopen.") I was speaking from a wider context than you have realized. In the great sea of behaviors that will increase coronavirus infection, zoos are small players. But as the public returns to all of those public activities -- zoo going, restaurants, public garden visiting, outdoor events, retail shopping, etc. -- the infection rate will pick right back up. As it has in many places (although some of Europe hasn't seen this yet). There is nothing stopping it. Any zoo that thinks the worst for them is past is putting its head in the sand
I hope majority of zoos won't close... But if some of zoos will close, "venom greens" will happy, because 'some of evil, bad zoos were close, so animals can enjoy FREEEEEDOM now!'
Don't even get me started on this, as an 'essential worker' who apparently doesn't qualify for hazard pay despite 50+ cases within my workplace..... ~Thylo
Could you please give us(me) the data then, where opening zoos led to an increase or 'ramp up' in infections - which is what you claimed. I have asked for this four times, and still you refuse. If it is true, then there must be evidence from some of the countries earlier on in 'the curve'. Some of us are dealing with the reality of this, and need real information rather than just personal opinion...
I dont know if I'm grasping what's been said perfectly, but I can make an inference. In America, with states opening up, there's been surges in cases, and whilst I dont think zoos are as big of a risk as people are more spread apart with limited capacity and hoping they follow social distancing rules and guidelines, it'd definitely contribute to a raise in cases. That's my inference on the situation, I'm not sure if it matches the context perfectly but I tried my best .
Yes , totally agree with this. I think zoos as a whole will survive (though like everything else post-pandemic they will have have to adapt) but sadly I think it inevitable that some institutions may not make it.
Sadly, with big losses like Living Coasts, and hopefully we dont lose the Minnesota Zoo. It's good and I'm glad to know that zoos are trying and are hanging in there.
That is because in the US most states don't even fulfil the federal guidelines that stipulate when it is safe to re-open, making it likely the many will be shooting themselves in the feet by opening before they are ready, which will likely result in a worse situation than sitting it out a bit longer...
Yes that is true, so I am speaking on behalf of the US, not any other nation, because I dont know what it is like there. I personally do think that it is much too early to reopen this fast, and we're bringing on another waves because of the economy or something. As I've heard people say, "The pandemic isn't over in America, but America is over the pandemic." But they aren't ready for the conversation that this is not how it works. This is life or death for many people, and we're worried about our money making economy. Just goes to show where the mind of our government is at.
I don't think that's what @Zooplantman means. If there were to be a ramp up in infections (and it in all likelihood will happen - there is no way opening things up will cause any decrease), it would be sometime around the Autumn. Nobody, not even China, are ahead of the curve enough to see a spike yet, although there have been occasional moments in Beijing for example when they closed the airport because of a spike. Taking the example of this spike, Beijing zoo is now open and has been for a while now. One could say that Beijing zoo was open and so caused that spike. That would of course be completely wrong (about as wrong as some of my earlier posts on Beauval's development relating to pandas in fact ), because the truth is there are millions of other factors at play (and no, I am not exaggerating.). Restaurants, shops and pubs reopening will all have at least 100 times more bearing on the R number (and therefore the number of cases) than zoos. In fact, even if zoos were the main factor at play, it would be impossible to formulate a sound scientific argument for zoos causing a ramp up in infections, because of this plethora of other factors. However, even this isn't the case as people are many times more likely to catch Covid in a shop or pub than at a zoo, and then many times more likely to be in a shop or pub anyway on top of that. So essentially, it is impossible to find evidence for zoos causing a ramp up in infections for two reasons: firstly, zoos won't cause an anywhere near significant ramp up in infections, and secondly, it would be impossible to soundly attribute said spike to zoos anyway. I believe Zooplantman also said 'Zoos and Restaurants' and not just zoos though, so perhaps what I have just said is not of any use. I'm sorry if I have wasted your time reading this, but I hope it is useful either way
Andrew what you appear to want is a study or report that shows a zoo opened and 46 people caught COVID19 there. I know of no such clear events. I asserted what seems obvious to me from all reports and epidemiologists' predictions. I refused you nothing: I just can't produce data to suit your demands. (Although judging from the post on Chester Zoo and Social Distancing those reports can't be far off) Just as, in another thread, I asserted that some zoos would close due to this situation and you similarly jumped on me to prove it., insisting that zoos cannot close. Period. I stated what seemed clear to me. (Since then London, Chester, Minnesota, Vancouver Aquarium and others have claimed they will close if not helped and now Living Coasts is gone.) I understood where you were coming from emotionally but I can't have the conversation with you that you want. I cannot give you comfort. I believe that for institutions to survive this and thrive their leaders must be open creative thinkers ready to look beyond this afternoon. I wish you luck.
Sigh. it is pretty clear to nearly everybody here that Zooplantman was using zoos (and restaurants, but that got dropped off the conversation) as rhetorical stand-ins for gathering places as a whole. It was a general statement that as “places” open up in an environment where the virus remains uncontained, greater opportunities for people to come into contact with each other increases the likelihood of virus transmission in any one place that opens up. This seems a straightforward statement of statistical fact to me and, I wager, most people who read Zooplantman’s post. Given the poverty of contact tracing in some ‘reopened’ jurisdictions it can be simultaneously true that zoos reopening has near-certainly been directly associated with transmission of the virus, and for that fact to not be specifically shown in case studies. But, once again, Zooplantman’s “zoos and restaurants” was shorthand for “zoos, restaurants, offices, shopping centres, galleries, parks, gymnasia and literally anywhere else that unrelated humans come into contact with each other”. You have seized upon a metaphor and demanded that it be literally and specifically verifiable. That’s not how metaphors work. Your argument is with grammar and rhetoric, not Zooplantman.
Thank you, I'm not happy but I'm hanging in there. I'm lucky I've still been working this whole time I suppose. A handful of states have seen huge spikes in COVID-19 cases since reopening. Most states seem to be stable at the moment but that can change at any moment. There are some states reopening already--albeit very, very slowly and cautiously which are still seeing a reduction in cases. Thankfully, CT is one such state, though we have had some of the most strict lockdown and reopening regulations in the entire country. Our zoo has been opened for a few weeks now and I keep my fingers crossed that things continue on this trend here. ~Thylo
I never 'insisted that zoos cannot close' - that is another miss-quote. It is obvious that zoos close. If you had chosen to be consistent with my contributions to other threads, you would know that I have personally visited over 50 which have closed. All I have asked, is if you assert that opening zoos would cause a 'ramp up' in infections, that you either admit that this is simply personal opinion/assumption or give us some sort of clue, as to where this might have happened. Similarly, I never asked for details of a zoo opening and 46 people catching Covid. It remains, regardless of whether you ignore it or not, that those countries which asserted that zoos were ideal destinations to open early and did so,sometimes with very large footfall quotas, must surely be experiencing the effect of your 'ramp-up', be it 46 or any another figure... all I asked for was some figures, some link, some evidence, some clue, something... I never asked for proof. I have never demanded data, but it does seem as though you have nothing to back up your personal opinion.
As an aside, it is inevitable that reopening places where the public will congregate in some form or another (and I do understand that some (many) zoos do not fulfil these criteria), will cause a rise in cases, because the number of individuals that people will come into contact with will increase, inevitably. There is not data, or proof, or figures, or evidence, or link needed to know that for certain. There are only two things that can stop numbers from rising once people start coming into contact increasingly, and those things are a vaccine and mass testing. A vaccine is not a possible option as of yet, and both the UK and US government seem to be finding it hard to get their heads around the concept of testing, so the only conclusion that can possibly be derived from this is that numbers of cases will rise. Mathematically, there is a chance, an infinitesimally small chance though, that it will not cause an increase, and that that increase in contact between people will result in no, or very few, cases. However, the probability of this occurring is in the magnitude of one in tens of billions. Furthermore, as people come into contact more an more, they will return to normal habits more and more, washing hands less, doing away with uncomfortable/inconvenient masks etc. It is impossible that the situation will ameliorate as places open up. Of course, if it were just zoos to open up, the numbers would hardly rise, but the truth is, the government would never do that and zoos rely on other services to bring in visitors and to function. You would know that better than anyone on this forum.
I think that is some of the good things of the federalist systems that there can be multiple pathways in place in the same country simultaneously and then hopefully states can learn from eachother as they go (at least in theory). It also helps in making sure the ridiculous ideas from the top aren't implemented nationwide and that there is healthy pushback
Being state-owned has always caused issues for the Minnesota Zoo, but I never thought it would be closure! It's one of my favorite zoos I have been too and it would be missed. But where would all the animals go? Minnesota has a very unique collection and I'm not sure many of their animals could find a home. Minnesota has also had great success breeding native endangered invertebrates, the zoos loss could doom species such as the Dakota Skipper.
Right now closure somewhat seems inevitable sadly.....the state having to worry about COVID and looting damages...
