Death and Dying at the Zoo

Benbow, Mary

doi:10.1111/j.0022-3840.2004.00074.x

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, if a zoo is taken to encompass the collecting and displaying of live wild animals, as noted by Benbow (2004), then the earliest forms can be traced back over 4500 years to historic civilisations such as the ancient Egyptians, Chinese, and Romans. This broad definition of a zoo incorporates entities such as menageries, wildlife parks, safaris, and zoological gardens, amongst others.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, zoos have faced a barrage of criticism about animal welfare and animal rights in the last 30 years that have questioned their ability to act as productive agents of conservation (Mason 2000;Spedding 2000;Davey 2007) and had a negative impact on their public image (Holtorf 2008). This situation may not be helped when it is recognized that the majority of animals in most zoos are not endangered and therefore arguably not in need of conservation at the present time (Benbow 2004). A common call from the animal rights lobby who question the value of zoos has been that "both humans and animals will be better off when they [zoos] are abolished" (Jamieson 1985, p. 117).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather, it is arguably still the case today that the predominant image of zoos in the eyes of the public is one of a place of entertainment (Benbow 2004). This view is reinforced by Puan and Zakaria"s (2007) study of zoos in Malaysia which found that people are primarily motivated to visit zoos for recreation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Public Face of Zoos: Images of Entertainment, Education and Conservation

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The contemporary justification for zoos is based on their ability to act as sites of wildlife conservation. Alongside this is the reality that zoos have historically been defined as sites for the entertainment of the general public and continue to be dependent on the revenue raised through visitor receipts. Consequently, zoos are, today, identified as sites of conservation, research, education, and entertainment. In recognition of this the aim of this paper is to assess the image that zoos are currently portraying to the general public to see how the different roles are advertised and how they sit alongside one another. The data for the research on which this paper is based was gathered via a content and semiotic analysis of the websites of 54 zoos spread throughout the world.The results indicate that the image zoos present to the public whilst incorporating a strong conservation message lacks depth. In addition, the image zoos present via their websites has a strong emphasis on entertainment. Based on the results of this paper it is suggested that zoos need to present their conservation credentials in more detail and ensure the entertainment message does not adversely affect transmission of the conservation or education one whilst at the same time continuing to attract sufficient visitors to ensure the economic viability of zoos.In addition, it is recognized that changing public perceptions of zoos requires these institutions to act together rather than independently when determining the overarching theme of the "zoo".

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Public Face of Zoos: Images of Entertainment, Education and Conservation

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the field, a death may rightly be looked upon as providing a source of materials for anatomical, pathological, or biochemical studies, etc., and indeed there exist recommended procedures for burial, excavation, and preparation of nonhuman primate skeletal remains (Garrod et al 2015). Swift removal and disposal of corpses may also be justified in terms of prevention of the spread of disease (in both the field and captivity) (e.g., Porter et al 2019), or in safari parks or zoos, to shield visitors from seeing dead animals, as the latter can give rise to negative reactions (e.g., Benbow 2004), and simply due to concerns about appropriate and ethical treatment of the dead. Such concerns are of course valid, but we call for greater consideration to be given to leaving corpses in situ whenever possible, in order to maximize information return about the responses of the living to the corpse, ideally until the group moves away and finally abandons it.…”

Section: The Wider Ethological and Anthropological Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primate thanatology and hominoid mortuary archeology

Pettitt

Anderson

2019

Primates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, a thanatology of primates has become a respectable research topic, and although still sparse, observations among several taxa have shown how complex responses to the dead can be. In human evolutionary archeology, re-analysis of old 'burial' sites is slowly revising our view on the development of specifically human responses to the dead. We propose here the means of integrating information from the two disciplines of primatology and archeology, in support of the field of primate thanatology. We propose a terminology and a shared set of research questions, from which we generate a number of observations that can be utilized in the field, in order to establish a working dialogue and foster greater collaboration across the two disciplines.

show abstract

“…Similarly, the polar bear cub Knut, born in 2006 at the Berlin Zoo, received massive media attention and became famous after being ‘adopted’ by a human caretaker and named. In this way he may have escaped the label of ‘surplus animal’ applied to many other animal cubs born in zoos and later killed when there is no room, or need, for them [ 30 ]. In both cases the name is instrumental to people recognizing the animal as an individual and regarding him or her with special fondness and this can influence the fate of an animal significantly.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a Name?—Consequences of Naming Non-Human Animals

Borkfelt

2011

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple summaryHistory teaches us that the act of naming can have various consequences for that which is named. Thus, applying labels as well as both specific and generic names to non-human animals can have consequences for our relationships to them, as various examples show. The issues of whether and how we should name other animals should therefore be given careful consideration.AbstractThe act of naming is among the most basic actions of language. Indeed, it is naming something that enables us to communicate about it in specific terms, whether the object named is human or non-human, animate or inanimate. However, naming is not as uncomplicated as we may usually think and names have consequences for the way we think about animals (human and non-human), peoples, species, places, things etc. Through a blend of history, philosophy and representational theory—and using examples from, among other things, the Bible, Martin Luther, colonialism/imperialism and contemporary ways of keeping and regarding non-human animals—this paper attempts to trace the importance of (both specific and generic) naming to our relationships with the non-human. It explores this topic from the naming of the animals in Genesis to the names given and used by scientists, keepers of companion animals, media etc. in our societies today, and asks the question of what the consequences of naming non-human animals are for us, for the beings named and for the power relations between our species and the non-human species and individuals we name.

show abstract

Death and Dying at the Zoo

Cited by 12 publications

References 13 publications

The Public Face of Zoos: Images of Entertainment, Education and Conservation

The Public Face of Zoos: Images of Entertainment, Education and Conservation

Primate thanatology and hominoid mortuary archeology

What’s in a Name?—Consequences of Naming Non-Human Animals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About