Zach & Kaycee's Project Proposal

This is a Kaycee Conaway and Zachary Hutchinson Project

Our Topic
Animal Birthdays - Celebrating the animals individuality

Integration
We will be integrating methods of technology and tactile information (ie a map) to show our celebrations with the animals.

Goal
To promote personal connections with the animals and celebrate their individuality in order to promote conservation efforts in the future.

Media Format
We will have a map of the Zoo containing QR codes that can be scanned with smart phones. When the codes are scanned they will send you to a video (a la YouTube) of us celebrating and informing you of the personal birthdays of and exciting facts about certain animals.

Access
We will hand out maps near entrances of the zoo.

References
Hopefully Zoo Keepers, Lincoln Park Zoo Website and news article pertaining to animals at LPZ

Title for Project
PARTY 4 LPZ

Ariella, Chris, and Stephanie Updated Project Proposal

Hey guys!  So Chris, Stephanie, and I chatted about the direction of our project today and here is an update.

We still want to stick with a PSA video about the privatization of ownership of exotic pets.  Realistically, the video will be around 3-5 minutes long which is about the length of most of the PSA videos we have been watching online for our research.  Instead of using Sand Cats as the central figure for the video completely, we have shifted to be using tigers as that.  This is because we took all of your suggestions into consideration and also did an extensive amount of research on the lifestyle of Sand Cats and their upkeep, and it seems as though they are not as high maintenance and violent as our imaginations wanted to believe.  We found out that there is a huge market for people who want to purchase tigers from India and that this would be a really good catalyst to discuss the issue that we really want to communicate our viewers to, which is the privatization of ownership of exotic pets.

We are going to have humor in the video, but of course, our main goal is to be informative and helpful to our viewers.  What we like about our topic is how it extends into an issue that many people are not nearly as aware of in conjunction with how vast this issue actually is.

Something that we have been battling with is how we are going to publicize the video to the Lincoln Park Zoo's audience.  What we have decided on is that we are going to go onto the LPZ's various social networking site profiles (ie. youtube, flickr, yelp, facebook, twitter exc.) and post links to the URL of our video on youtube as comments.  We are also going to make fake tags with our URL on them and attach them to stuffed animals in the LPZ's gift shop.  These may not be the best methods but they are what we could think of, so if you guys have any other suggestions, let us know!

Make-up Observation 2 -sm

Sand Cat

The sand cat or "felis margarita” (I knew there was a greater meaning to my connection with the sand cat – tequila! Cat party time!! Just kidding, just kidding, but not really kidding at all) can be found in the small mammal exhibit at the LPZ in a small dark cornered space. Weighing in at an average 7 lbs it is very close in size to a domestic house cat. Like a domestic house cat, and even like humans, the sand cat has many hairs on the inside of their ear holes that protect their hearing from the sand or debris of their native desert surroundings. You will find the sand cat in nature in Africa and Asia. They can withstand EXTREME hot and cold temperatures making the sand cats FIRECE. So fierce that we don’t really know much about how they live in the wild because we can’t withstand the conditions they live in for long enough to find out. If you are smaller than a sand cat I would advise not messing with a sand cat because they will probably eat you. Carnivorous like the domestic house cat – except for the whole eating snakes part. When they aren’t hutting down things to stay nourished you can find them chilling in the sand where they dig holes to keep cool in the cool sand out of the sun.

Sand cats have something that I know I would like when the sand at the beach gets really hot – furry paw protectors! That’s right, the fur on their paws is longer and wirier than their other fur in order to protect their little paws from some seriously hot Sahara Dessert sand. Another fun fact, their mating call is supposed to sound like a barking dog.

Sand cats aren’t at much risk of extinction because of their isolated extreme habitats. Some are killed because they are seen as threats to livestock, while others are collected for pet trade. For the most part, they are left alone because they aren't easy to get to. I looked on google and yahoo answers "sand cats for sale" to see if I could "purchase" one, but it appears people are having trouble getting their hands on a sand cat and if they do they are very expensive. 1,300.00 was one price I saw for a young sand cat. 

http://www.earthsendangered.com/profile-64.html

http://www.lpzoo.org/animals/factsheet/sand-cat

http://bigcatrescue.org/2011/sand-cat-facts

Zoo Crossword -gr

My media assignment is going to be a crossword puzzle or series of them, that entice the zoo visitor to visit every exhibit of the Lincoln Park Zoo and read the information on each animal. By having the crossword puzzle provide information on the animals that the visitor needs to cross-reference with the plaques already in place at the zoo, and by leading them to the appropriate sections of the zoo where they can find specific answers I hope that this will provide the public with a supplementary form of entertainment at the zoo that also promotes interest in the foundation that the institution has already set.
I think I will make physical pamphlets for people to take at the zoo and also provide an online source for people to download these crosswords and print them out. I currently looking at which animals at the zoo and every exhibit I want to highlight in my puzzle that will bring zoo traffic, and how to construct these puzzles.

-guillermo

(((((Proposal MEN)))))

      Who me? That’s who! This will be a Solow project focusing on informing zoo goers of the material history and symbolic significance of animal products and applications relatable to the animals viewed at the Lincoln Park zoo and then some. The history of how or why animals have become endangered or extinct will be explained. Informing the public that the disappearance of animals is not solely linked to habitat loss and or pollution but through hunting for food and esthetics. This zine will illustrate trends in western culture focusing on the demands of certain animal products, such as fur, hide, bone, feathers, organs and other animal properties in different time periods. The zines themselves will be made of harvested traffic cone rubber; witch in turn simulates hide or some sort of flesh. Further addressing the concept of abundance, rarity, demand and conservation. The pages will be silk screened or stamped. The zines will be places at the site of the exhibit corresponding to the animal and maybe a few related examples. Hopefully leaving the zoo gores with a more realistic insight to animal extinction. The cover will be some sort of lament and have the zoos logo on it… or not? I will do some test to see how people respond to different materials.

REF:

Ancient Skins, Parchments and Leathers by R. Reed,

American Plastic: A Cultural History by Jeffrey l. Meikle

Fashion Resource Center-SAIC

Even though I still wish to do the project I first proposed, I am now realizing the extreme ambition. As a second idea that would evolve a much less labor intensive proses yet still following my overall concept. I would like to make charts of animal skin, fur and there history’s in the form of temporary tattoos. Both children and adults engage in putting on temporary tattoos. Using flesh as a vehicle for information the tattoo could inform people outside of the zoo context, promoting personal education and conservation.  I would out source the production of the tattoos to a small temp tattoo company and get 50-100 tattoos to distribute in the park. like a super secret zoo employee!!

I will know focus on making the tattoos primarily and a zine in a smaller scale.

Taxonomic order in art

So, I felt that this was some what unrelated, but then completely related to our course at the same time.
Taryn Simon is an American photographer, whose work I find extremely compelling!
Check her video out!
She also mentions rabbits in one part, and how Australia uses population control (3:23). It was pretty neat how this tied into her series for the Tate Museum.

Zoo proposal, MRF

Update:
I plan to do what was mentioned in class, perhaps 4 stuffed animals at most, of different endangered animals.
I liked the suggestion of the sound from different parts of the animals anatomy, I thought this was interesting, and may incorporate this into the idea. 

The proposal below is much different and political than what I said in class, so please disregard it. 

Thank you, 
m.
 

Proposal project-

Who is involved?  Michelle Ralph-Forton

Your topic?  

Zoo institutions are targeted towards the audience of a child, the ultimate goal being to retain their attention. Amongst the feelings of joy, entertainment, and awe, zoos provide a certain level of empathy for animals as well, as it becomes one of the few places where man can really feel immersed amongst the exotic species that are presented to them here. Amongst learning educational facts, I feel that one of the main goals of a zoological institution is to integrate this feeling of incredulous wonder. It is with this point of intrigue that really enhances proactive movements towards conservationism.

Citing Hancock’s opinion when he states that “we are conserving zoos, not their natural habitat”, is my center of focus. I would like to take this comment and exemplify it by creating a system of animal interaction, and show that it is disconnected when they try to communicate with us. Our relationship with animals, as much as we may adore and revere them, is not a harmonious one, such as  relationships animals have amongst each other. Although there is a privilege and power in the animal kingdom, as survival of the fittest heavily comes into play, there is a different psychology that human beings obtain in feeling superior above all.

I feel that there is an absence of integration with animals and the wild, whereas it is integral for animals to cooperate and have mutualistic relationships to sustain themselves.

It is this chain that I would like to point out and break, literally, as I plan to print images on felt of different animal species (preferably the most endangered in the zoo) and stuff them, such that they are handmade stuffed animals. Each “animal” will have a long red line sewn to its belly. The belly will also have a QR code, where the viewer has to scan it to hear the noise. There will be a pile of these animals, (location TBA, perhaps scattered throughout, or in front of the most endangered animals) all with red lines leading to one solitary cut out of a human shadow walking away.  This will also have a scan code on it, where it will be an accumulation of human noises, city life, laughing, etc. It is meant to be convoluted and loud, ignoring the sounds of the animals.

In the end, I will say “Break the chain. Conserve animals in their natural habitats now, or risk their absence.”

I am thinking of this more as an art piece/installation in the open public. My intention is not to have the sound be debilitating if a spectator does not have a smart phone to scan the code, rather to equally be as powerful with its silence and accumulation of animals. Ultimately, if they do have the opportunity to hear it, this is great, but if not, I think it could work without sound, and just text on the man’s shadow.

Why is the topic a good one for general visitors?

I feel that visitors who go to the zoo already have an appreciation for animals. But I do believe we get side tracked forgetting that different species are critically endangered, and how easily it can be to lose them if we don’t do something about it. I want this piece to serve as a reminder that we have to listen to the animals, and not just watch. Hopefully, perhaps by the display/illustrations/colors of the stuffed animals will entice the crowd to further investigate what type of animal it is and become eager to try and help conserve them.

AS- Response Questions

1- Sarah Long, a coordinator of breeding at Lincoln Park Zoo, argues in Date Night at the Zoo that “Noah got it all wrong.” What does she mean by this? What strategy are zoos taking to “get it right”? What are the pros and cons of this strategy on the part of zoos? Discuss them in the context of animals like cheetahs, black-and-white ruffed lemurs, and polar bears. Reference SSPs in your response. 

 The reason why Sarah Long says "Noah Got it all Wrong" in Date Night at the Zoo is because today, people have realized that it is better to preserve more of one species than few of many.  This is because many zoos would then not have enough genetic variation with the animals they have pertaining to each particular species.  The positives of exercising these measures are that the animals that do get bred in these facilities are generally healthier.  One example of a negative would be that certain species will be more prevalent than others.  Hence, some species that "need" to to preserved and populated could eventually go extinct.  An example the article discusses how the population of Andean bears is shrinking because of zoos withdrawing from breeding them so now the population is much too old to reproduce.

2- If conservation is a key goal, then what is the tension between funding resources and the how zoos go about conservation? Wht are the alternatives – what do some other people should be done with such funds if conservation is the primary motive? 

I suppose the issue with conservation and funding resources is that some zoos will capitalize more off of their funding than from taking actual proper care of their animals.  People go to the zoo for entertainment.  The popular animals are the ones who inherently make the most money for the zoos, so therefore they may get the most funding for themselves.  Other animals that may need more funding, however, get less attention from visitors can sometimes be disadvantaged.
 

3- Many zoos argue that the first hand experience with animals at zoos are crucial for helping people to form bonds, and thus develop a care and sense of conservation ethic, for endangered animals. The Wild Thing piece on the National Zoo especially makes this argument. What is your view? 

The philosophy at the Smithsonian National Zoo seems to be effective that if people witness the lives of the animals in the zoo that there will be a greater chance of conservation input from the public.  However, it seems as though the Smithsonian National Zoo provides such good facilities for the animals in their facility that people are more hyper-sensitive and aware about funding.  It would almost seem that people don't want to help the "bad" zoos and instead want to promote the conservation of animals at the best conditions.  When viewers see the animals enjoying their lives and their environment, it makes the effort for conservation all the more important.

4- What is a difference between American and European zoos in terms of ther philosophy of captive animals breeding if room does not exist for the adult population to grow given the size of the zoo habitats? Which approach makes more sense to you and why? How does the European approach relate to the logic of conservation and the issues of genetic diversity that underlie them? 

Both contraception and euthanasia seem very unnatural and immoral to me, when I think about the dichotomy between North American and European zoos and how they populate.  For me, I can sympathize with the North American zoos using artificial insemination to force the endangered species to breed.  However, it must also be taken into account that if these species were in the wild their breeding methods would probably be much more successful.  The only problem is the human forces that can obstruct life in the wild for these animals.  Euthanasia seems like an extremely inappropriate and heinous crime to commit on these creatures.  In general, I find it somewhat disgusting that these zoos take such great authority over the animals they house, but I also see that their intentions can be good.

what the animals have to say

what do the animals have to say????? watch this animation.

week 4 ##### MEN

1- Sarah Long, a coordinator of breeding at Lincoln Park Zoo, argues in Date Night at the Zoo “Noah got it all wrong.” What does she mean by this? What strategy are zoos taking to “get it right”? What are the pros and cons of this strategy on the part of zoos? Discuss them in the context of animals like cheetahs, black-and-white ruffed lemurs, and polar bears. Reference SSPs in your response.

At this point I t is clear to us that entail animals in zoological gardens were symbols of patriarchal power and wealth by the elite for the elite. By creating this scenario the animals became a direct symbol of power. Thus supporting the concept of the living collection and furthering global cultural power. It is Sarah Long who states “Noah got it all wrong,” that refers to this collection proses and more recently the concepts of animal reproduction. In referencing Noah and his ark Long is also inferring the phenomena in witch humans apply there own habits onto other living organisms, assuming that they behave in the world in the same way humans do. More directly, Noah took two of every animal, neglecting to acknowledge things such as life pairs, solitude, and genetic diversity! Come on Noah… didn’t you just stop to think maybe every animal is not like you…. Or did god tell you that? We are talking about the bible of Couse, tricky business. However modern zoos are going to grate lengths and grate expenses to have successful reproduction programs and move away from the power driven, exsabitionist zoo and are driven toward conservation and education. Many zoos are both contributing and following species survival plans. Created by zoo data and field sampling charts and mating pairs are formed to create the greatest genetic diversity among endangered species. Although zoo may seem to giving a valet effort the element of attraction and pleasing the public is still almost first priority. This creates high expenses directed at unthreatened or Un-endangered animals.

2- if conservation is a key goal, then what is the tension between funding resources and the how zoos go about conservation? Wht are the alternatives – what do some other people should be done with such funds if conservation is the primary motive?

Mostly driven by esthetic appeal and animal significance, especially when talking about American culture.  American zoos allocate more money to popular animals even if they do not need the attention of the public for support and funding to promote rehabilitation and reproduction programs. I believe that it is the product of old advertising that certain animals are still as popular as they are in zoo settings. Popular animals have been popular for a long time.  With am effort to push education I feel that any animal can become just as popular with adamant information fro the public’

3- Many zoos argue that the first hand experience with animals at zoos are crucial for helping people to form bonds, and thus develop a care and sense of conservation ethic, for endangered animals. The Wild Thing piece on the National Zoo especially makes this argument. What is your view?

It is true in my perspective that zoos do provide a sense of diversity that is unmatched. There is I feel a lot to be said of experiencing the physicality of an animal that is not visually common. Most recently I made a ceramic sculpture of a horse. With are thick neck, erect main and it china legs it looked like no horse I had ever seen. Subconsciously I put the “horse” into my own category of the fantastic. The following weekend I went back to the zoo to ease drop on peoples conversations about the zoo. Passing the ape house I found the two magnificent greys zebra. They two are astonishing! With huge necks, little legs and stiff mains I had realized that my sculpture was not at al out of proportion and make-believe but a type of horse I was not aware of. This experience shows that zoos can have a profound effect on all people, especially in the subject of diversity and how through animals can be applied metaphorically to the human experience.

4- what is a difference between American and European zoos in terms of there philosophy of captive animals breeding if room does not exist for the adult population to grow given the size of the zoo habitats? Which approach makes more sense to you and why? How does the European approach relate to the logic of conservation and the issues of genetic diversity that underlie them?

The main difference between European zoos and American zoos is the handling of excess animals. Some European zoos prefer to let animals have offspring  but in doing so the zoos usually practice euthanasia after a couple years of age. However American zoos are in the habit of birth control medications and hormone treatment to both withhold and promote reproduction. I believe that the European approach is better in general and for educational proposes. It is valid that the Europeans zoos wish for their animals to experience rearing young and even a dead animal can still be used for conservation and educational proposes. I feel this approach is more productive over all and is still abiding by keeping genetic diversity strong.

Response Questions 4 (ZH)

1. Noah thought that having a male and a female of each species would be enough to proactively flourish a new world with healthy happy animals but now with modern science we can understand that inbreeding turns out to be extremely unsuccessful. Zoo's nowadays are using breeding programs to create ways of making successful healthy offspring. They have gone as far to create large terrains to keep some species separate, as this at times encourages procreation.

2.Conservation is secondary is the secondary goal that most Zoo's have. The primary goal is to make people keep coming to the Zoo. So with with this atitude not all the animals who need the conservation are the "super stars" of the Zoo, so in turn they get pushed to the side.

3. Although a zoo may spark a young ones interest in animals i feel as if you really want to grow up to be a zoologist (or anything of the sort) you are going to regardless if you went to a zoo or not. Seeing the trapped monkey puts a stigma into children's heads that "all monkeys can be trapped and made into my pet". What i mean to say is that at first glance, with out any prior knowledge of zoos, most zoos still don't look as if they promote conservation. 

4. European ideology is to euthanize any unneeded offspring so that there is no chance of them having more offspring who would become unhealthy do to unsuccessful genealogy. While American ideology is to let them die naturally. I like the American way of natural death because it just seems less cruel.

week 4 response

1- Sarah Long, a coordinator of breeding at Lincoln Park Zoo, argues in Date Night at the Zoo that “Noah got it all wrong.” What does she mean by this?   What strategy are zoos taking to “get it right”?  What are the pros and cons of this strategy on the part of zoos?  Discuss them in the context of animals like cheetahs, black-and-white ruffed lemurs, and polar bears.  Reference SSPs in your response.

The statement that “Noah got it wrong” means that breeding an entire species from a single lineage of a male and a female is problematic and makes way for very little genetic variation. Zoos have attempted pairings of animals in isolates scenarios when they are in heat, which yields low success rates. Keeping the cheetah females apart helps maintain the hierarchical/ matriarchal structure to encourage fertile females. However these structures of purely genealogical pairings and controlled breeding does not account for natural selection, and thus genetically diverse, yet weaker/less dominant animals are building the next generation. Moreover, pairing isn’t simply a matter of pressing Ken to Barbie, males and females that prove themselves naturally superior in their environment decide the genetic power play. Animals raised in captivity also have few natural models for partnerships because of these failed pairings and thus do not learn about the birds and the bees.

2- If conservation is a key goal, then what is the tension between funding resources and the how zoos go about conservation? Wht are the alternatives – what do some other people should be done with such funds if conservation is the primary motive?

Often times, the animals that require the most intimate attention and funding are not the ones that people pay to see. There is a dilemma of recourses vs. sustenance of those resources. Animals that don’t exactly need the high funding usually take precedence because of their ability to self sustain their own funding, whereas the ones that need the most help, because of lack of “showmanship” usually get the shaft.  Nature doesn’t fit into a commodity/capital market because they are based on completely different factors. If a zoo makes the investment to house an endangered species, their motive should be for conservation, and come with an understanding of the immense financial responsibility involved. I think if zoos spent resources to market education as showmanship, increasing awareness would do the job of entertainment, and that’s what people would come to see. It may also help to put aside money from the showy animals like the Sea Lions to help create more natural habitats, thus creating room for more natural and more interesting behavioral diversity. It’s not always a good idea to create availability for things that are popular in ways of adding more seats, more space for people. If there is more intimate interaction with a smaller number of people at a time, then people would absolutely wait in line to see them and be more competitive about buying. i.e. the express lane for the Shedd Aquarium.

3- Many zoos argue that the first hand experience with animals at zoos are crucial for helping people to form bonds, and thus develop a care and sense of conservation ethic, for endangered animals.  The Wild Thing piece on the National Zoo especially makes this argument. What is your view?

Interaction is key to any natural system, to learn why animals are valuable, and to build a connection to them. This is an interaction that is often deprived of because of growing urbanization, and less nature to interact with. It also presents it in a way that is unthreatening, educational, and exciting. It also opens it up to people on a wealthier economic scale that can have a hand in impeding the capitalistic mode of natural destruction. On the other end, those that have animals in the wild, perhaps not on a largely well off economic scale, prone to the natural predatory world at large, can make their living based on money by poaching these animals with no education on their importance ecologically. It is a double-edged sword in lieu of the problems within zoos and their lack of nature. However because of the progressive nature of zoos and the inherent educational value they present, I feel that they are necessary to bridge that gap of understanding, to see nature in the flesh, and not as an image in a book or a skeleton in a museum.

4- What is a difference between American and European zoos in terms of ther philosophy of captive animals breeding if room does not exist for the adult population to grow given the size of the zoo habitats?  Which approach makes more sense to you and why?  How does the European approach relate to the logic of conservation and the issues of genetic diversity that underlie them?

The difference is in the ethics of European euthanasia vs. American natural death. The approach for natural death seems more rationally sane to me as euthanasia is a direct killing. Suffering and death occur anyways, especially in the wild. The only difference is the spectacle of the zoo. Just because of human “sensitivities” does not mean that suffering should be thwarted by some clinical control or god complex. Death is inevitable, and so what if little Jane grows up a bit when he goes to the zoo. In the scheme of conservation, yes it is understandable to want to preserve human resources and money, but the greater conservation would be that of the natural world. 

TB Reading week 4

1. She says that "Noah got it all wrong" because in order to keep a species alive, one would need far more than a pair of mates to make a healthy population. This is an issue that contemporary zoos are dealing with. To "Get it right", Zoos are teaming up with other zoos in order to broaden the mating pool. This is good because animals like the Cheetah, who only mate with unfamiliar Cheetahs now have the option to do so. A con would be that some animals do not get the same funding and have less options for mates to choose from. Some animals also choose a mate from a younger age.
2. The tension comes from the fact that the animals that need the most funding for conservation are not always the animals that bring in the crowd to the zoo. This crowd is needed in order to provide money for the zoo to do conservation at all, so the more popular animals win. More people could be encouraged to donate their money to conservation efforts while also attending the zoo.
3. I think that people unfortunately do become more inspired to give money to conservation efforts when they see the animal in person and develop a bond to a living-breathing creature in front of them. It would be nice if people would react to all endangered species like they do with the whale. Even though whales are not typically exhibited in aquariums, people feel very inclined to donate to funds for them. Possibly, if there is more effort and media produced about other endangered species, people will feel educated and inclined to save them.
4. American Zoos use contraceptives to control the population. I think that this method is better than the European Zoos who euthanize. It seems like a total waste to execute these animals.  

Zoo project-Tanner

Who is involved?

Tanner Bowman

Topic

Animal Yoga For Lincoln Park Adults and Their Children

Integrative?

I am interested in the Lincoln Park Zoo because of its location and Audience. Situated in a recreational park, the zoo's paths are often accessed by joggers and other people exercising that are passing through the park. It would make sense to engage this relationship.

Why is this topic good for general visitors? What are your goals for the project if a visitor engages with it?

Yoga can be used by adults and kids alike. It is healthy, relaxing, and can be fun. The instructor of the course will be educated about the zoo's animals and make connections between the poses and animals that speak to biology, natural history, and conservation (as well as fun random facts to keep the children  engaged). Possibly the poses will be done at each corresponding animals exhibit after a short walk to each cage. The visitor should walk away feeling excised while interacting with their children and the animals. The class could be free, or could cost money which would go straight to the lincoln park zoo.

Media format?

Live demonstration and possibly a pamphlet.

Research for this particular media format? Why is it appropriate (given your goal, skills, accessibility, etc.)

I am interested in the event as performance and in designing with and for existing landscapes.

Access Venue?

Once a week at a certain time meeting at the front of the zoo

References/Information sources?

Yoga for kids: http://www.yogajournal.com/lifestyle/210

Yoga by animals: http://www.buzzfeed.com/whitneyjefferson/the-animal-guide-to-yoga

Possible Title for the Project?

ZOOGA (Just kidding, ill think of something better) 

marianne week four reading response

question one-
when sarah long said that “noah got it all wrong” what she meants was that in order to save a species you need a lot more than just one male and one female,  you need a large pool of genetics to maintain healthy genetic variation in a species.  
zoos in north america are now creating complex breeding programs where they keep track of the demographics and genetic makeups of the populations of animals in captivity that are a part of breeding programs to ensure that there is a good amount of genetic variety in a population to sustain the species.  
there are, as with all things, upsides and downsides to this, as are there different reasons for which animals are being bred.  these programs have let us learn numerous things about breeding behaviors (for example, familiarity being a turn off in cheetahs). these programs have been successful in repopulating certain groups of animals, but its possible that because of a need to be selective and limited success in these programs certain animals are being bred while others aren’t (black and white lemurs being bred,  lion tail macaques not being bred).  

question two -
there is a lot of tension between zoo funding and conservation funding because the two are extremely different.  if people were really 100% about conservation they would be giving their money to conservation efforts and not zoos, in my opinion.  zoos have a lot of money to work with but because they are a zoo and not a conservation only facility not all money can reasonably go to the zoos.  zoos are interested in conservation but also in pulling in customers. hence things like lots of money going to a new sea lion home when sea lions aren’t of concern on the endangerment scale.  

question three -
i think that it can be argued that first had experience with animals increases an interest in saving animals but i think that is a flawed reason to keep zoos as they are.  if zoos really generated the amount of desire to help animals that the people in the ‘wild things’ documentary seemed to think i feel that there would be more money towards conservation efforts, etc, than we see currently.  i think it is good to be optimistic about things like this but it is also important to look at them realistically.  

question four -
there are significant differences in views between what should be done when there is not enough room in the zoos for babies, or there are babies born without the desired genetic differences.
zoos in north america depend on contraception to avoid unwanted animal babies in the zoo, while european zoos use euthanasia of unwanted animals as soon as they are born.  the philosophy behind the european method is that in keeping animals in zoos we take away so much normalcy from the animals lives that the least we can do is allow them to exist with animals of the opposite sex and breed in the most natural way possible.  the philosophy behind the north american method is that the public would not respond well to euthanasia of animals.  i think both plans are troubling, just like all of zoos.  i’m totally unable to pick which one is better, although i do remember in one of the readings it being mentioned that european zoos take the animal’s day-to-day life into more consideration than the north american zoos do and i think that is good.  

Kaycee Conaway Week 4

1.She says that Noah had it all wrong, because Noah’s Ark only brought along 2 of each animal. According to recent scientific breakthroughs, it is necessary to have around 20 of the same species in order to have a potentially successful mating/pregnancy. They’ve also learned that with Cheetahs, for example, cannot even be around each other before they mate. Being separate up until the time for breeding is crucial, or else they’ll hurt one another. It is also expensive to breed them, and only 4 places in the entire country are usually successful. The birth rate per year is only half of what they need to keep a healthy balance of captive cheetahs. Some argue that they would not need to go through long processes to breed them if they were just in the wild. Some would prefer this funding for breeding just go right to habitat conservation efforts. 2.Some think that the funding for breeding should go into conservation efforts, and put more of the animals back in the habitats. 3.I think that zoo’s are important for education, but in most zoo’s are too focused on entertainment. They should provide ample amount of space for the animals, and people should have to approach the space differently. The space should be geared toward research on how to help the species in general. Breeding should not be as big of a priority, rather more of that funding should go into habitat conservation. 4.European zoos use euthanasia in order to cleanse the gene pool, whereas American zoos use birth control in their feed for the animals. They both mean well, but seem unhealthy and cruel for the animals. Spending large amounts of money on obscure breeding experiments seems less effective than just having enough room where they feel comfortable enough over all to do these things with minimal interference. Using unnatural substances to get a desired effect for breeding seems too unnatural and cannot be without side effects.

Response Questions 4 WEEK-4

Samuel Kim #2270768

Science: Lecture Course

Assignment #4

            Within the reading “date night at the zoo” Sarah Long states that Noah’s got it all wrong. By this what she was implying the present situation that many Zoos are experiencing today. For instance in the past Zoos would have the option to choose which animal to keep, usually whatever animal most visitors would be eager to see and experience. But these days Sarah is informing the about the current dilemma regarding many zoos being “forced” to receive certain types of animals, because of their endangered status. The Strategic method that zoos are taking to “get it right” is by gathering as many of the endangered species within their zoos and by isolating the males and females of each endangered species and then attempting to breed them within the zoo. The pros of this approach on zoos is the fact that they are given the opportunity to “save the world” by repopulating an endangered species before it becomes extinct like the dinosaurs. The cons of this attempt according to Jack Grisham is the fact that within the past twenty years the association’s cheetah breeding plans which he coordinated has failed to achieve their main objectives of breeding the cheetahs. He states that it has been a very costly and pointless attempt, and that they would have been better off if they had used that money instead on preserving the natural environment, which these cheetahs roamed and lived in.

            The tensions between funding resources and how zoos go about conservation is that some zoos are using the funding to create more “revenue” and ignoring the actual “conservation” where as some zoos are using the funding and ignoring the “revenue”. By “revenue” it is referring back to the reading where they stated that some zoos are using the funding they receive to reproduce more “sea lions”, because they were a main attraction for the zoo, which lead the zoo to purchase more parking spaces, seating, and many other amenities for the public for their zoos. By doing this according to the article they had to ignore the walruses’ which were one of the endangered species that the zoo were expected ensure as well. The article referred these zoo’s as “zoo’s bitter choice: to save some animals and letting others die. According to the articles some people believe that there should be some sort of liability that zoos must be accounted for. For instance Zoos are by law responsible to take care of some of the endangered animals that they have in possession within their zoos and that “revenue” for zoos should be the last priority whether or not a certain animal attracts more visitors to their zoos they must strictly use every dollar that is funded to the zoo to protect the interests of the people of sustaining these endangered species and not going to the zoos to bring in more revenue. According to the articles the primary motive for conservation is for zoos to be responsible for their actions and if they fail to ensure the funding towards the endangered species by law being punished for taking advantage of the people’s taxes that the zoos took for their own personal interests. Zoos that take the public’s taxes should be held responsible by law, and those zoos that use the public’s taxes for what they were originally intended for should not be punished.

            I strongly disagree with this approach. We as humans should not interact with the animals for when we do we disrupt the nature’s equilibrium. Once you start to research different wild species within our natural world, you realize the mother nature has already a system that keeps the world I in check, for instance like the natural “food chain”. Where there are animals, which rely upon another species to survive, and if humans were to disrupt this cycle it can have a catastrophe ripple effect on our world. For instance if we were to fish out all the fish that are out in the sea the animals that relied on the fish would loose their main source of food and become extinct and the animals that relied on those animals that recently became extinct would also become extinct because their main source of food has become extinct. For instance if fish were to become extinct, then for this example lets say that bears only ate fish, then the bears would become extinct, and for this example lets say that jaguars’            main source of food were the bears and if the bears would become extinct than the jaguars would become extinct, and for this example/analogy lets say that humans main source of food were the jaguars then we as humans would become extinct too. This is what I meant by the “ripple effect” and “disrupting nature’s equilibrium”. What the Zoo’s are claiming are completely false, by creating bonds between animals will only “domesticate” wild animals and only strip these wild animals from their natural instinct, robbing these animals of their lives by forcing them to become reliant to humans. These wild animals that are “domesticated” or “being saved through the zoos” are actually just creating a burden on the human population. We as a society are more intelligent and should let mother nature take care of these animals and we as a society should stop trying to “play god” and create “bonds” with wild animals that deserve a chance to live out their lives in the wild, rather than humans interfering and ultimately directing the animals in their own demise.  

            The difference between American and European zoos in terms of their philosophy of captive animals breeding if room does not exist for the adult population to grow given the size of the zoo habitats are that the European zoos allows more of an invasive and lethal approach where as the united state’s approach is more towards less invasive and letting the animal naturally die. Both approaches do not make any sense to me, because it doesn’t really matter. One way or another the end result is ultimately the same. Europeans can play “god” and choose to kill animals, which they believe should die, or American can allow animals to live, and let them naturally die. But based on my observation it seems that most people believe that forcing animals to die and letting the humans play “god” seems to be frowned upon. It seems that most people favor the natural approach. But in conclusion personally I do not think the American zoos are better than the European zoos or the European zoos are better than the American zoos. They both seem to have their own valid and unique and justifiable reasoning.

Observation 2 WEEK-3

While at the zoo today what caught my attention was how small and limited the space was for many of the animals within the zoo. Especially the Tigers and Lion Exhibit. The Tigers and Lions seemed tired, and wild Tigers and Lions live in a more dangerous and larger environment were they can travel, chase down their preys and consume after hunting them down. They are more viscous and are full of energy. The Tigers that were shown at the Lincoln Park Zoo seemed almost unreal, even though the Zoo had incorporated some natural native environmental elements such as trees, grass, rocks, it did not seem to fool the Tiger. All the tiger was doing when I was there was just lying on the ground staring at the visitor that past by or took pictures of the Tiger. The Tiger reminded me of domesticated animals, when I researched the topic online on the keywords domesticated tigers, the results that I found were circus animals. Tigers which were wild animals, which relied on their hunting skills to survive and their natural instincts to stay alive within their natural habitat were removed. They were kept in a cage for several years fed by humans and there were no need for the Tigers to hunt or use their natural instinct of survival. I strongly believe that the Lincoln Park Zoo, because of their lack of funding, they are unable to provide the Tigers with an adequate amount of space to roam, also I believe that the Lincoln Park Zoo are literally placing these innocent Tigers to their own death bed by “training” the tigers to rely on humans. If these Tigers at the Lincoln Park Zoo were to release these Tigers out into the wild today, back to their own natural environment they will die. All that these Tigers do, at least when I was observing them at the Lincoln Park Zoo were just lying down doing nothing. They were just staring at the visitors or just sleeping. If the Lincoln Park Zoo were to capture a “real wild Tiger” and place them into the Tiger’s cage today, I truly believe that the “Wild Tiger” will truly be the “realistic” depiction of the true “natural” behavior. They would not be domesticated, so once the Zoo throws in a prey that the Tiger consumes within the cage, I truly believe that the Tiger that was just imported from the wild today would consume and devour the animal in a different way versus feeding the Tiger that I observed at the Lincoln Park Zoo today. Isn’t the point of a Zoo for the visitors to actually truly experience the animal as if the animal was within its wild environment? “Like a simulation of the wild Tiger within its own environment”. I’ve been to the Bronx Zoo several years ago and the Tigers there actually have a larger space to roam within their artificial environment, and the Tigers in the Bronx Zoo are not lying on the ground but actually walking around and “actually moving” where as the Lincoln Park Zoo has failed to achieve this ultimately, but I believe that it isn’t the Lincoln Park Zoo’s fault, for the Lincoln Park Zoo has to work off a “budget” which they are offered. Also considering that the Lincoln Park Zoo is “free” to the public, it is hard to expect the Lincoln Park Zoo to accommodate all the public’s demands and expectations. If the Lincoln Park Zoo was charged each visitor, and was well funded by the city, state, and federal government I believe that the Tigers would have not been in these devastating conditions, where they are kept in a “prison”, and forced to become domesticated which would inevitably lead them to their ultimate demise once they are released back into their natural environment by the zoos once they don’t need Tigers within the Lincoln Park Zoo anymore.  

Response Questions 3 WEEK-3

In the zoo’s public mission Hornaday, Blair, and Osborn as leaders of the Bronx Zoo pushed for Wildlife Protection, Educational. Scientific Fields, Conservation (of natural resources such as, forests, grass, soil . . .etc.). In terms of design Osborn instituted changes by luring the public back to conservation, along with how our use of our limited natural resources will affect the future of wildlife that living within those natural environments. The pros of the African Plains was that in the 1940s they received anonymous funding from a benefactor who was the department store owner of Marshall Field, the zoo was more realistic having native plants for the animals, consisted of a more detailed and informative descriptions for the visitors to read before or while watching the animals at the zoo. The cons were that the human visitors continued to be placed outside the scene. They were still separated from the naturalistic landscape looking out and into a stage set. Hancocks praised the Bronx Zoo because of the fact that the zoo precipitated a revolution on its home ground, setting the stage for a remarkable run during the past thirty years of new exhibits and the consistency in setting the highest standards for all their exhibits.

The major innovations that were introduced at the Seattle’s Woodland Park Zoo was the fact that they were the first to ever take priority on animals over visitors, clients, or workers at the park. What made Seattle’s Woodland Park Zoo different from other was the fact that they classified each animal based on the environment that they lived such as by the temperature, precipitation, and habitats . . . etc.  The radical departure that zoo’s committed to the “landscape immersion approach” was the departure from conventional zoo design because it reflected a pronounced shift in philosophy from the homocentric to the biocentric view, and noted what Joe Coe, one of the planning team members, explains as the basic conservation approach that says we just live here, we don’t own the earth, the owns us. The new approach allowed the viewer to become physically and psychologically immersed in the stimulated created habitat.

Wilson implies that visitors at the zoos prefer watching an animal that is living naturally like it would in the wild, rather than staring at an animal in a cage doing nothing. Wilson states that a zoo incorporates natural elements such as trees, plants, temperature, soil, and many other wildlife elements where the animal originates. This then initially then gives the visitors at the zoos an opportunity to actually experience, embrace, and learn by observing how the animal lives in the wild. 

Response Questions 2 WEEK-2

Through Linnaeus’s taxonomic method of classifying organisms, the British zoos then began to collect all different types of animals located from different parts of the world and then had them shipped to the zoo so that the public can experience and learn about animals from different parts of the world all in one location. The notion of “stamp collecting” was perceived by the public as the government wasting taxpayer dollars on these zoos that took care of these animals according to the Ark in the Park, but later was evident that the public was wrong because some of these animals were endangered which meant that they were worth a lot of money, and since they were many people came to see these animals which brought the community a lot of revenue. As well as by sustaining these endangered species and for the zoo to breed more of these animals that were endangered their zoos became more profitable. And their assets of their zoo doubled and tripled. For example, the zoos would have two endangered species that were worth $1,500, and then they would breed the two animals that were endangered, then they would give four offspring’s, which made their park an additional $6,000. And there were times when zoo’s would sell some of these animals after taking care of them within the zoo and would charge them more than what they were really worth. The reason why stamp collecting in context of zoos is that there were problematic because there were cases where some of these animals were uninhabitable within their environment, so the zoos (such as the early British Zoos) had to create an artificial environment such as an indoor environment with heating which was expensive and costly.

The wealthy during this time was trying to collect as many animals as they could for their zoos, because during this time you were perceived wealthier based on the amount of animals that you collected throughout the world; especially the animals that were not “fit geographically” within that environment. Which once they shipped these animals for collection they had to build artificial indoor environments for these exotic animals that were from other parts of the world. They believed that by collecting some of these exotic endangered animals they were helping some of these animals by collecting them, but in actuality they were domesticating them and having them “trained” to rely on humans when these endangered wild animals should have never been taken away from their natural environment in the first place. For example when animal collectors would capture a jaguar from Africa, they would then place that jaguar within their zoo, but after a decade or two, the jaguar would then rely on the humans to feed the animal with food, rather than the jaguar hunting a live animal for its survival. Then once the zoo decides to free the jaguar back into the wild it will die, if not the offspring’s that were born within the zoo from the jaguar will die once they are released back into the wild. The reason is jaguars are meant to be in the wild, hunting for food, but once they are taken away from their natural habitat regardless of whether they are endangered from poachers or pollution form industrialization, they will ultimately lose their natural instinct and will become reliant on humanity. Ultimately the result is that “stamp collecting” and these greedy wealthy people did not think about the bigger picture on how catastrophic their actions would soon cause within nature. They thought that by installing these zoological gardens they were collecting and saving endangered animals but in reality they were the ones who were actually contributing towards the extinction of the endangered animals by extracting the exotic animals from their natural environment, and placing them in a “zoological garden within their zoo and domesticating them by feeding them, and training them to become reliant upon humans to providing them with food. When really the animals themselves were already are self-sustainable, until these greedy wealthy people wanted to collect these innocent animals and destroy the very fabric of our world. The wealthy wanted to be known as wealthy by collecting the most amounts of animals, exotic animals, endangered animals, and animals from different parts of the world not thinking about how it would affect every individual in this world in the long run. Because once these animals are later released back into the wild such as the jaguars into Africa they will not know how to hunt for food and later would become extinct and based on their extinction then the animals that relied on consuming the jaguars will become extinct as well. And the animals that the jaguars relied upon hunting will then become overpopulated and then there would be a chaotic trickle affect within the food chain of the natural world, which then will later on somehow affect us the human society eventually in negative or positive way.

According to John Berger we looked at animals because in the past they have served as a necessity such as horses were used has a way of travel since cars were not invented, cattle were raised to provide us with food, dogs were used for hunting animals in the wild because of their strong natural ability for scent, as well as many other animals served as a necessity in the past. But now in the present many of these things animals are useless now because we have technology that replaces them, and with our industrialization, such as cities, manufacturing plants, urbanization, recreational parks (such as golf courses, bars, clubs, fitness centers, stadiums, museums, universities, national parks, homes, condos, office buildings…etc.) We had to cut down a lot of trees, pave through nature and flush out these “pests” animals that serves us no use out of the way, because many of the things we built after destroying the natural forests were necessary and essential things that we needed as a society. We as a society needed more space so we had to get rid of the other space that the animals were using. Based on John Berger’s definition of “anthropomorphism” we as a human culture are more superior. As a society have history, knowledge, power, judgments, culture, intelligence (such as being able to travel into space… etc.), have an understanding of our world (such as recycling, reducing pollution, conserving natural resources (food, energy, products [“such as trees for example which produces paper, buildings, furniture, office supplies…”] preserving endangered species, evangelisms to third-world countries and providing them with food, shelter, education, medicine or medical treatments “for those people living in those countries that don’t have the resources in the third-world countries”, and helping them become self-sufficient, giving freedom to communistic countries with dictators…etc. ), many other things as well. This is what John Berger was meant in the reading when describing the word “Anthromorphism”. 

marianne zoo project proposal

who is involved: just me!

topic: elephants in zoos, and why there aren't any in the lincoln park zoo, and why it isn't a bad thing at all

integrative: i think so,  i'm sure it's not uncommon for people to be curious as to why there aren't any elephants that the zoo, as they are such a classic zoo animal, and this could really give people an interesting insight into the history of elephants in captivity and why they aren't at the zoo anymore

why is this topic good for general visitors?  what are your goals for the project if a visitor engages with it?: i think it's a good project because with high profile animals like elephants i think people often lose track of the posible downsides to captivity because they are so caught up in the magic of the animal, but it's important to remember that the zoo setting may not be beneficial for the elephant.  i would hope that if someone were to engage with my project they would come away with some new info and thoughts about animals, specifically elephants, in zoos.

media format: zine!

research for this particular media formant? why is it appropriate (given your skills, accessibility, etc.)  i would need to look at some more zines, i used to keep up with them quite regularly but i haven't looked at any as of late.  i enjoy illustration so i think a zine would be a good way for me to work on this project.

access venue: maybe around info stations where there are normally brochures.

references/info sources:  histories on elephants in captivity and news articles about the specific elephants at LPZ

possible title:  "where are the elephants hiding?
    why there are no elephants at the lincoln park zoo and why that's not necessarily a bad thing"

post class discussion project edits 

i'm still having a really hard time deciding exactly how i want to focus my zine. i'm thinking of possibly leaning towards either doing a zine that is only really focused towards an older group,  or a children's book focused towards ages 5-8 ish.  

i guess i'm leaning towards doing a zine geared towards the 20+ age group. but still not having it be over serious or preachy, just kind of putting facts out there about why its not so great to have elephants in the zoo.  the zine just seems like the more realistic option for me right now.