Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The cubs were obtained from the G.W. Exotic Animal Park in Wynnewood, OK. In 2006, the USDA fined the GW "sanctuary" $25,000, suspended their license for a 2-week period, and placed them on probation for 18 months. These actions were taken because of serious violations of many provisions of the Animal Welfare Act. There is a PDF available of the USDA order at the following link:
After you get to the link, search for "GW Exotics" and then click on "fined 25,000 and suspended 2006" to download the PDF.
Also, you can go to the GW Park's own site, at www.gwpark.org
and see the banner running across the top of the page that says that if you pay $25 ($15 for senior citiziens and kids) you can play with a baby lion, tiger, or bear for 15 minutes. Great. Playing with humans (esp. humans they don't know) is stressful for the baby animals--they should be with their moms, not the paying guests. It's also dangerous for the people who are playing with the animals. Some "conservancy."
There are a lot of questionable "sanctuaries" which claim to be breeding lion & tiger cubs for conservation purposes. But unless the animals are part of a carefully monitored breeding program like the SSP (Species Survival Plan), then they will never, ever be fit for re-introduction to the wild. Further, if they are raised in cages and frequently handled by humans, they will never be representative of what true wild tigers are like-- and that will limit their use in any sort of quality education program.
In a recent Times-Trib article, Ms. Miller says that the cubs were obtained to "replace what was lost." She also says that Reba's death cast a "pall" over the GWC, and that the cubs provided an infusion of "energy and excitement." Once again, there is a terrible message coming from the GWC: if you're depressed and want to feel better, you should run out and get yourself a kitten or a puppy (or two kittens or two puppies) and not worry at all about how you will house the animals as they grow up or how you will pay for their food, vet care, etc. This is precisely the sort of irresponsible attitude which keeps the streets and shelters full of unwanted strays, many of which will end up having very short, sad lives. In getting these cubs, the center has set a truly horrible example.
Thanks for posting the quote. As is so often the case, a defender of the GWC blames everything on the city and nothing on the center. Personally, I think both the GWC and the city have made a lot of mistakes in this whole mess.
The city is only providing a venue. You could say that they should hold GWC to some sort of standard, but they might as well just operate their own zoo if they are expected to have the experience to manage someone else's. It seems to me that GWC is acting as their own worst enemy right now. Giving attitude to the public, especially tax payers, is not the way to secure more funding or spread an appropriate message.
There are two more letters in today's Times, both negative as to the situation at GWC.
Most disturbing is this highlight:
Quote:
However, when I called with my questions, I was immediately hung up on by a zoo employee.�When I called back, I was told by another employee that she did not know what the new habitat would be like for the baby tigers or how “you people” had the time to “harass” people who are trying to care for animals.
The city is only providing a venue. You could say that they should hold GWC to some sort of standard, but they might as well just operate their own zoo if they are expected to have the experience to manage someone else's. It seems to me that GWC is acting as their own worst enemy right now. Giving attitude to the public, especially tax payers, is not the way to secure more funding or spread an appropriate message.
There are two more letters in today's Times, both negative as to the situation at GWC.
Most disturbing is this highlight:
I think you're right that the GWC is its own worst enemy at the moment. Thank you for posting the quote from the paper. Here is another quote--this one from the online comments section of the Times-Tribune's July 24 article on the tiger cubs:
"Renee wrote on Jul 29, 2008 11:41 AM: I have been saying that the sanctuary was too small since the first time I saw it. They did have some alligators in the smallest enclosure I have ever seen but they are gone now...I wonder where they went...also some of their monkeys are so overweight that they don't even move around.The cat area is in no way large enough to house four large cats...also when we went there for the weekend to see the tigeers they have an area partitioned off that is only a few feet wide and maybe 6 feet long...the staff was playing with the babies yet had the door open and their backs to the large cougar who was pacing behind them...even I, not ever working with a big cat know that no matter how tame you NEVER turn your back on a big cat. I think that something should be done about the size of the enclosures...these animals never even get to feel grass under their feet...maybe a large scale fundraiser or something. "
I can't tell from the above exactly what is meant by "having the door open." I'm assuming the poster was referring to the door between the baby tigers and the cougars, not the door between the public and all of the cats. In any case, I'm hoping that if anyone visiting the zoo sees a potentially dangerous situation, they will **immediately** contact the USDA and report what they've seen.
While the city may well have little direct control over the day-to-day operations at the center, the city does have control over the money going to the center. The city should make it clear that if the center does not clean up its act, it will not continue to receive taxpayer support. Taxpayers concerned about what's going on at the GWC should contact the mayor's office.
I would be interested to see just how much cash it would take to provide adequate housing for some of these animals, not just what is considered 'enough' by the USDA. What would be an acceptable amount to spend on improvements? How would you pay for these improvements? An amusement tax? Hard to justify, when the city does not own the center, only the building...
On a side note, I suppose it's possible the city may even decide to bring in a different sanctuary or rescue if problems continue with Genesis?
I would be interested to see just how much cash it would take to provide adequate housing for some of these animals, not just what is considered 'enough' by the USDA. What would be an acceptable amount to spend on improvements? How would you pay for these improvements? An amusement tax? Hard to justify, when the city does not own the center, only the building...
On a side note, I suppose it's possible the city may even decide to bring in a different sanctuary or rescue if problems continue with Genesis?
I don't care if the tooth fairy dropped $5,000,000 in the GWC at night, they NEED TO GO. The city of Scranton CANNOT MANAGE ITS OWN FINANCES and does not need to be involved in the animal rescue business.
I honestly don't know what your attraction or obbession with Nay Aug and the zoo is but come on man, why would you encourage the city to even think about finding another rescue or sanctuary for the Nay Aug location.
Its not like the GWC is going to leave and poooooof we have a new zoo for someone else.
The zoo or pen was closed because the city COULDN'T FINANCIALLY HANDLE IT PROPERLY why do you think that trying to keep this place open is a good idea?
I would be interested to see just how much cash it would take to provide adequate housing for some of these animals, not just what is considered 'enough' by the USDA. What would be an acceptable amount to spend on improvements? How would you pay for these improvements? An amusement tax? Hard to justify, when the city does not own the center, only the building...
On a side note, I suppose it's possible the city may even decide to bring in a different sanctuary or rescue if problems continue with Genesis?
Fast answer: it would take a lot of money. Really a lot. More than is probably realistic for the # of animals at the GWC, considering Scranton's current economic situation. (I will try to get you some actual numbers on this--I have some somewhere here among the research I've done on this issue.)
Best way to go if Scranton wants a zoo: Start very small and build. Be patient. Go slowly. Go for quality, not quantity. Building up a good zoo takes a lot of time and money and a lot of that money should probably come from sources other than the taxpayers.
Fast answer: it would take a lot of money. Really a lot. More than is probably realistic for the # of animals at the GWC, considering Scranton's current economic situation. (I will try to get you some actual numbers on this--I have some somewhere here among the research I've done on this issue.)
Best way to go if Scranton wants a zoo: Start very small and build. Be patient. Go slowly. Go for quality, not quantity. Building up a good zoo takes a lot of time and money and a lot of that money should probably come from sources other than the taxpayers.
I found a report at the Albright library, from maybe 1989 or 1990, that outlined expanding and updating the zoo. Of course, we know this was never implemented, but it could provide a few ideas on how to update the facility in an economical manner. I think the best thing to do would be to find new homes for a number of the existing animals, not replace deceased ones, and work on creating adequate environments for the animals that remain. As I have said before, I think holding GWC to AZA standards is a smart move, and if they could receive guidance from the AZA in making changes to the center, good for all involved. I do not see what good it would be for the city to step in and mandate changes on their own, as I assume that there is most likely nobody on staff with formal training in operating a zoo.
The staff has always been wonderful to my children, offering them educational guided trips and even once letting my kids see and hold a newborn baby primate
Quote:
I will do everything in my power to make sure these animals find the home they deserve. I hope there will be many to help me. I guess I can start by sitting on a bench at the park getting petitions signed.
Quote:
More help, less grief
Editor: About Genesis Wildlife Center, which is a rescue, and not a zoo, we are lucky to have access to these animals.
We take our kids to the “zoo” and gawk at the animals. Many of the visitors don’t donate; there is no fee like at a regular zoo. They rely on donations, and many times volunteers put their own money out.
No, it’s not an ideal situation. But what about the pets we keep at home? Some are in cages. Is it really so different?
Maybe if more of the complainers shut their mouths and volunteered or donated, the shelter that this woman runs could function a little more to their liking. Volunteer, give money or shut up!
PATRICE VACCA
SPRING BROOK TOWNSHIP
Quote:
While we enjoyed the park as a whole, the zoo was terrible and very disappointing.
What are Scranton’s leaders waiting for? A sign from God? Make Scranton proud!
"But what about the pets we keep at home? Some are in cages. Is it really so different?
Maybe if more of the complainers shut their mouths and volunteered or donated, the shelter that this woman runs could function a little more to their liking. Volunteer, give money or shut up!".....
Pets at home in comparison to the conditions at the GWC.....Last I checked if we were to keep our pets in those conditions they would be removed from our homes and by the way I have 3 awesome and loving dogs that have never seen the inside of a cage. The dogs in my house live as well as the rest of us and even better in some respects. Personally I do not have the the desire to donate($4.89 a gallon) my money or time to a facility that I do not believe needs to be in the city of Scranton, especially in a city owned park and building.
If Scranton really wants a zoo then start a small one the right way and grow but at a financial pace that will not drain on the taxpayers unnessarily.
Why does it have to be with a poorly run group like the GWC, regardless of how many people donate $$$$ to the GWC it will not be properly used and accounted for as has been shown already.
The GWC needs to go and the city should step back and do a feasability study of a new building and a smaller zoo that could be run by the city.
I don't have a problem with Scranton having a zoo I guess but we cannot afford to have one now. Fire about 100 incompetent crony hires in city hall and put part of the $$$ towards the salary of a QUALIFIED ZOO DIRECTOR to work with the city and a public oversight committe to raise donations and practice quality stewardship with donors to build somekind of an endowment fund to facilite the expansion and day to day needs and maintenance of the facility.
IN ANOTHER WORDS DO IT RIGHT, BUT THATS NOT IN THE CARDS AND PROFITABLE FOR ANY CRONIES IS IT, SO WE KNOW THAT IT WILL NEVER BE DONE RIGHT AS LONG AS WE HAVE THE CURRENT MAYOR.
GET RIDE OF THE GWC AND MAYOR DOHERTY AND WE MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE BUT UNTIL THEN THE CURRENT CONDITIONS WILL NOT CHANGE DRASTICIALLY IF AT ALL.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
