The Monroe County Parks Department is developing a new
master plan — a guide for development and growth — for the Seneca Park Zoo. And
this time, there will be no attempt to encroach into Seneca Park.
“We don’t need that headache,” says county parks director
Larry Staub. “We don’t want it.”
The county’s 2001 plan initially called for the zoo to
expand into the Frederick Law Olmsted-designed portion of the park. But public
outcry made the county change its mind.
The emphasis this time will be on replacing the zoo’s main
building, which houses endangered snow leopards, Bornean orangutans, and other
animals, Staub says.
The structure was built in the 1930’s, Staub
says, and its enclosures are outdated and inconsistent with modern zoo
practices. Modern exhibits resemble animals’ habitats, Staub
says.
The Association of Zoos and Aquariums told zoo officials
that the building needs to be gone by 2018 or the facility’s accreditation would
be in jeopardy. The zoo has to apply for accreditation every five years.
An accredited zoo can acquire and exhibit endangered animals
that are part of the association’s Species Survival Plans. The zoos do
breeding, public education, and field conservation work. Seneca Park Zoo’s
polar bears and Bornean orangutans are on exhibit through the Species Survival
Plan program.
The Monroe County Parks Department will hold a public input
session on its zoo master plan from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on March 19, at the Roger Robach Community Center, 180 Beach Avenue.
Staub says that officials want to
hear which exhibits and animals would bring people to the zoo. They’re also
looking for ideas on what should replace the main building.
This article appears in Mar 11-17, 2015.
I remember our efforts to stop that loony idea back in the day: “The county’s 2001 plan initially called for the zoo to expand into the Frederick Law Olmsted-designed portion of the park.” Rochester needed a world-class zoo like a fish needs a bicycle.
This new zoo idea seems less ambitious, but still why do we need zoos in the first place? They are a medieval entertainment frivolity that constantly needs to justify themselves in the modern world. When you take wildlife, those creatures who helped define their/our environment, and stick them in a zoo, they become mere living artifacts.
What is a polar bear without the Arctic? Why are we trying to save species that will never be able to return to their environment because Climate Change is changing that environment, maybe forever? Why isn’t a nature program as educational as caging animals in prisons, where these creatures are totally out of their element? At least a nature program can connect the dots between wildlife and their environment in situ.
Why don’t we put our efforts into saving the Arctic (which is disappearing very quickly) and many other environments around the world that are in extreme danger—which is to say ecologies that are integral parts of our life support system?
Why can’t field conservation work be done via the DEC supported by tax dollars instead of the DEC getting funding by folks paying for licenses to kill and fish our wildlife? We are at a crucial point in saving wildlife, as Climate Change is changing our wildlife’s environment many times faster than they can adapt and the answer is not bigger and better zoos.
Should tax dollars go to medieval torture chambers or for actually helping those creatures who defined our environment so they can continue to do so?
More on Wildlife in our area: http://rochesterenvironment.com/animals.ht…
Totally agree with Frank. We need to stop preserving specimens and start saving habitats. The specimens found in zoos are very poor representations of the species. In order to survive in captivity, they need to possess behavioral attributes (lack of aggression, adaptable to non-native climates and diets ) usually at odds with the attributes that would make them best suited for survival in their natural habitat. A generation or two on captivity and you don’t even really have a specimen of that species any more. In nature, these organisms are creating and maintaining our life support system. In captivity, they are feeding a foolish worldview for humans who’d rather have someplace to take the kids on Sunday than actually securing their kids’ future.
I went on a field trip to the Seneca Park Zoo when I was in elementary school. I don’t remember anything about the animals. But I do recall how great it felt not being cooped up in a classroom.
What is the long term plan for the zoo? If they can’t expand at Seneca Park, maybe a long term plan to move the zoo back to Durand Eastman Park where there’s tons of room.
I think we should close the Zoo and set a example to the world, That animals need to be free. The education for children should be one of animal sentience.
“The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality.” Arthur Schopenhauer
“We must fight against the spirit of unconscious cruelty with which we treat the animals. Animals suffer as much as we do. True humanity does not allow us to impose such sufferings on them. It is our duty to make the whole world recognize it. Until we extend our circle of compassion to all living things, humanity will not find peace.” Albert Schweitzer
Close this Animal Prison. Children are not going to learn much from an animal in an artificial habit other than putting profit and entertainment over an animals right to be free just like us.
The zoo should not be prison to animals that should otherwise be free. The should also not serve animals as food. The irony with the only reason a ‘zoo’ might need to exist is to help animals who might otherwise go extinct. The irony? The eating of animals is one of the prime reasons animals go extinct. If the zoo would not serve animals on a plate and if people would not put animals on their plate, there would be no reason for a zoo at all.
Rain forests are cut down or burned at rate of 80,000 to 200,000 acres per day and much of the reason is for animal agriculture, a place to graze animals or to grow food to feed the animals that people eat. Millions upon millions of acres in the United States are used to graze cows or to grow food for cows. These lands were once home to an abundance of biodiversity. Now they are home to monocrops of genetically modified corn and soy, a diet not even suitable for a cow which is why they are fed antibiotics (another problem). Millions of tons of animal waste lay ruin to waterways and areas that once were biodiverse. Overfishing where 7.3 million tons of dolphin and other animals that people do not eat are thrown away, dead as by-catch. All of this mass destruction for a hot dog or a hamburger that is not even healthy to eat anyway.
If we did not eat animals we would reduce the amount of land needed to grow food by a staggering amount.
The whole problem with a zoo is the problem in general: Valuing the life of one animal over another. By serving one animal on a plate but valuing the animal in the cage because it might go extinct is the problem. That animal might have its habitat intact if we valued all life. By valuing only some life, we devalue it. We are the threat. The only way to solve the problem is not by building a zoo. It is by actually valuing animals, not just some animals, but all of them.
Peace.
Not really sure why City censored my post as I wasn’t trying to sell anything. I was merely trying to recommend a book (“Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn) that folks can borrow from their local library if they so choose. It was an eye-opening book for me personally and I think it’s entirely relevant to this conversation about animal captivity and human global dominance (but thanks for censoring me without even knowing what you censored). Perhaps I should’ve used this link instead: http://www.ishmael.org/Origins/Ishmael/
I love the zoo and think it’s past time that the zoo update its main building. Zoos have a key role in getting people interested in wildlife which will, in the long run, help create the political pressure to save wildlife habitats.
Zoos have been around for several hundred years. Have they saved their non-human inmates from the humans yet? Wake me up when they do.
Does the county spend more on the zoo than it does to help the homeless?
If we must have a zoo, why not move it to Genesee Valley Park where there is MUCH more room? Do we really need TWO 18-hole golf courses there?
I don’t like zoos anymore. If I feel that way, imagine how the jailed animal feels. I would rather they get land and make a big sanctuary. I’m completely on board for that.
I live behind the Zoo. They have created a nightmare for us. They are install all the mechanical cooling systems directly behind our homes. We live with a 60 ton water chiller running from 8am to 10pm. The noise is worse then living near an expressway. We need to close our windows to avoid the noise.
Financially, the zoo is in the RED. It needs taxpayer money to exist.
2 years ago the County bought the CSX right of way to provide access to a new parking lot. This parcel is 50 ft wide and runs adjacent to park. This parcel is about 14 acres but only 50ft wide. They spent $523K . This works out to be $37K per acre. To compound matters, CSX still owns the Fibre Optic Revenue Rights. CSX loved the deal. No need to pay taxes on the parcel but keeps there revenue stream options open, This DID NOT include the parcel for the parking lot. That was close to $300K. They bonded $1.8M for the project to drive us tax payers deeper in debt. The state
This is all for a Zoo that is losing money year after year. Will you spend $13 to go to this Zoo?
The County leaders will retire with the massive pensions and move out of the area and lead the tax payers paying the mess they created.