• wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      87
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Generating awareness and sympathy is probably the biggest factor in keeping many endangered species alive

      • RadicalCandour@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        55
        ·
        5 months ago

        To add to this, A lot of gorillas that are saved from unsafe/illegal conditions cannot go back into the wild. Places like The Rotterdam zoo provides a lot of enrichment for these animals that you won’t see at say, Joe’s roadside animal park.

        • rah@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Why not save animals from unsafe/illegal conditions and provide enrichment, without turning the animals into an attraction?

          • Liz@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            5 months ago

            Because the attraction rallies support for preserving and protecting their natural habitat. Zoos act as promotional centers for conservation.

            • rah@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              5 months ago

              Zoos act as promotional centers for conservation.

              But they aren’t necessary for conservation. Conservation can occur without zoos.

              • Liz@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                5 months ago

                Yes, but conservation is not a binary condition. Zoos are responsible for more conservation than we would otherwise have without them.

                • rah@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  So you acknowledge that zoos are not necessary for conservation?

              • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I love when people like you suddenly come up with a hot take that absolutely no one has ever thought through ever in the past hundreds of years.

          • wahming@monyet.cc
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Because people wouldn’t support spending their taxes on it without making them aware of the value. Which is done by educating them.

      • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        5 months ago

        Another lie of capitalism. Species don’t have inherent value, individuals of a species do. Which is why bad treatment of those individuals can’t be justified by appealing to the species’ survival. It’s about money, like everywhere else.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          … What. I don’t even know where to start with that. Ecological conservation is about money?

            • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Well how else would you suggest people come in contact with the wildlife of this world? Which is obviously critical in making people care about protecting it.

              Crappy “documentaries” ain’t it by the way. Not to mention that zoos also serve a secondary function in providing for rescue animals, and animals otherwise unable to live in the wild. Zoos are not perfect, but are very clearly the best compromise for fostering interest in our wonderful nature in future generations, who probably won’t even encounter a horse or cow in real life otherwise.

              • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                5 months ago

                Well how else would you suggest people come in contact with the wildlife of this world?

                They shouldn’t.

                Which is obviously critical in making people care about protecting it.

                Where is the evidence for that?

                Not to mention that zoos also serve a secondary function in providing for rescue animals, and animals otherwise unable to live in the wild.

                This doesn’t require the animals to be put on display.

                Zoos are not perfect, but are very clearly the best compromise for fostering interest in our wonderful nature in future generations, who probably won’t even encounter a horse or cow in real life otherwise.

                Or we could stop destroying the natural habitats of those animals instead of making a profit with the remaining individuals.

                • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Do you need evidence that most people have a hard time being invested in something entirely abstract which they will never interact with for their whole life? Something they only ever saw in school books? Which is what animals would be for a massive part of the population.

                  Kids nowadays at best interact with pets, they know the horses are what people rode in those old western movies and cows are what makes the milk in the carton from the grocery store. Chicken grows in nugget form.

                  And these are all domesticated animals, not at all exotic in most places around the world. How would they ever come into contact with all the other fascinating creatures we share our planet with? Develop a passion for their protection?

              • rah@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                5 months ago

                Well how else would you suggest people come in contact with the wildlife of this world?

                By going to their habitats?

                obviously critical in making people care about protecting it

                No. Zoos are not critical in making people care about protecting wildlife.

                • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Taking tourists into natural habitats is way more destructive than having a few specimens on display in artificial habitats.

            • wahming@monyet.cc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Zoos are about money, yes. That’s not the point under discussion. I’m taking issue with the line ‘species don’t have inherent value’. You’re basically saying it’s ok to drive species extinct as long as its done humanely.

              • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                ou’re basically saying it’s ok to drive species extinct

                You should read my comment again. This is not what I am saying.

                • wahming@monyet.cc
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  That’s certainly how it comes across when you claim species don’t have inherent value. Why would we bother to preserve and protect something that’s valueless? You may have meant something else, but judging by the downvotes nobody else is getting your intended meaning either.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Whey do you mean? We entirely dominate them, and transparently acknowledge all species on this planet are either our commercial resources, or our entertainment

  • sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    5 months ago

    Wait, a person came to a zoo every day and stared at a Gorilla?

    How many days? Did this person just go to the zoo every single day and mean mug a gorilla?

    Is this an anime plotline, a zoo employee, or is OP’s headline a bit misleading?

    • MummifiedClient5000@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      5 months ago

      Zoo employees had previously warned her against doing this, but she continued, claiming a special bond with him: in an interview with De Telegraaf she said, “When I smile at him, he smiles back”.

      If only I could have been that one employee who got to visit her in the hospital and whisper “told ya”.

    • bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 months ago

      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dutch-gorilla-idUSL3042888320070530/

      The 180 kg (397 lb) Bokito seriously injured a woman, who it later emerged has visited the ape almost every day since his arrival at the zoo a year and a half ago

      Dutch citizens lost sympathy for the woman after it emerged that she has visited the gorilla about four times a week and said that Bokito “remains her darling” despite suffering a broken arm and wrist and around 100 bites.

      Dutch Media widely reported that the woman misunderstood what she perceived as a smile from the gorilla. Experts suggest he was more likely to have been baring his teeth as a threat.

  • sushibowl@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    5 months ago

    Fun fact: This incident was huge news in The Netherlands and inspired the new term “bokito-proof,” meaning strong enough to withstand or contain a gorilla.

  • Gestrid@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 months ago

    Found a Reddit thread about this. Some of the users further down in the comments did some digging and found this old news article. Other Redditors mentioned that they don’t give out the glasses anymore, and that the glasses were mainly a marketing plot by an ad agency.

    • EddoWagt@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      They definitely don’t give those glasses anymore and in fact, the particular gorilla has passed away as well. I believe last year

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    ‘Everyday’ - an adjective meaning ‘normal’ and 'mundane.

    ‘Every day’ - daily.

    A trusted news source should know its own language.

  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    All of these people look like they’re staring at me…? Wouldn’t sunglasses have worked better?

  • jonasw@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    5 months ago

    From Wikipedia

    The week after Bokito’s escape, a local health insurance company sponsored the production of 2,000 BokitoKijkers (“Bokito viewers”), paper visors which disguised the direction of the wearer’s gaze. The visors were designed by advertising agency DDB Amsterdam, and won a Bronze Lion for promotional material at the 2008 Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival, and a Eurobest Silver at the 2007 Eurobest European Advertising Festival.

    The word “bokitoproof”, meaning “durable enough to resist the actions of an enraged gorilla” and by extension “durable enough to resist the actions of a non-specific extreme situation” was voted the Word of the Year for 2007 in the Netherlands.

  • Lumisal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    For those who didn’t read how obsessed the woman was, let’s just say there’s a good chance she might have been attracted to the gorilla 🦍