If it's budget is cut by the state. The governor of Massachusetts assures the state he will not let that happen and will find homes for the displaced animals.
The current problems of Zoo New England, which runs Franklin Park Zoo in Dorchester and Stone Zoo in Stoneham, stem from Patrick's decision June 29 to veto $4 million in funding from the nonprofit's annual budget. That reduces the state appropriation by 61 percent, to $2.5 million.On Friday zoo officials released a statement saying the funding reduction might require them to shutter both zoos. Then on Saturday, they issued a statement that said state bureaucrats - and not animal-care professionals - would be responsible for deciding whether some animals would have to be killed if the zoos closed.
In the 90's when their budget was cut they threatened to kill the animals then but didn't (I see a pattern here). They closed the same zoo (the Stone Zoo) that they are going to have to close now which begs the question: why the heck do they keep opening zoos when they don't seem to run them without the help of the state? Evidently, there isn't a need for the zoos or they would be able to support them with their admission fees.
BTW, if you believe that Massachusetts residents deserve all the zoos they can get, then feel free to contribute so they don't have to close them. Here's the Twitter feed for the zoos so you can keep updated on their dilemma.
The Bronx Zoo was also faced with a budget cut but they were smart, they didn't threaten the animals:
(via)
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
You need to make time to watch the very funny - and now, timely - "Fierce Creatures", from the folks who brought you "A Fish Called Wanda".
Only a complete idiot would actually threaten to kill zoo animals to balance a budget. It would not only be political suicide, it would be perceived as worse than killing Bambi's mother. So I tend not to believe news (or FOX pseudo-gnus) releases that say things like this.
No, they won't kill 'em. They'll find a home. They ought to lift restrictions on private citizens keeping exotic pets. Except for that dang Tiger Lady in Jackson who kept losing track of her beasts.
Anyway, I'd readily accept all the butterflies from the Bronx! :-)
Makes you wonder, if there is a pattern here, what they'll threaten when school budgets are on the block ... wouldn't you know, my kids are going to public school this fall.
No, Moonshadow, the way I see this happening is that the zoo animals will be killed, but after they are sold to a purveyor of exotic meats. There is a huge market in China for the horns of rhinos and privates of male tigers and fins of sharks, etc. Eating the animals as food, which is permitted in your religion and in mine, will give their deaths purpose and maybe swell the state coffers enough to keep some exhibits of inedible animals.
Got you, Karen. And people are next? Now I see what animal rights activists are on about.
Clearly Massachusetts Governor Patrick handled this very badly, but there was never any real danger of the animals being euthanized. Thankfully, the residents of the Boston area have responded -- pushing their elected officials to restore the Zoo's funding.
I've been to this zoo a few times and enjoyed it every time. It's definitely worth saving! Their Tropical Forest building is one of the nation's best indoor rain forest exhibits.
Allen Nyhuis, Coauthor: America's Best Zoos
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.