Quote:
Originally Posted by wild worlds
........ The big issue is the sheer numbers of people that now want to see wild places. Limiting the number of permit issued must be worth consideration. But as for zoos, I feel that they contribute little to conservation and research and are jut a throwback to Victorian times. How many of the species currently in zoos are critically endangered?
|
Yes, there are embarrassing numbers of non-endangered species in zoos
but there is also much work on seriously endangered things - these tend to be insects, molluscs &c which don't get much publicity or sympathy really!
I think that urban zoos have a very limited value although they do provide a means whereby the casually interested member of the public can get a first look at exotic animals. I think there's a much better justification, for large mammals
only, of wildlife parks. Several reasons for this: parks in Europe can be much better policed than ones in natural habitats (sadly); with climate change the historical home range of many species may (sadly, again) become desert or otherwise unsuitable; isolation of populations
might be useful in avoiding extinctions from disease.
So, I was intrigued when passing this valley in Galicia, northern Spain (south of Santander), to see:
Apparently this is a wildlife park: I didn't go in but could only see elephants and some deer. Hardly native Iberian fauna
but if the climate warms by a few more degrees, this environment might become more like that of East Africa?
Interesting to see that despite plenty of water availability they dig scrapes in the ground - I presume this is for dust bathing rather than a search for water?
