|
Select a chapter:
|
Progress Report
The first three months of the Watson have been a challenge mainly because it takes some practice to hone interview skills and to focus the wide project of zoo architecture (many of you probably thought that it was a narrow topic and a field not yet explored- but it is not so!). In addition, it takes certain pluck for a freshly graduated undergrad to march into the national zoo in South Africa and interview the director about a subject that he has worked on for the past 40 years. All in all, I do not think that my first three zoos could have been better chosen for the introduction of this year (can it really be that one-fourth of the year is over?). Skånes Djurpark in Sweden allowed me to get familiar with the world of zoos on a small scale. The zoo has ~18 employees, and I met with the director every day about the woes and future plans of the zoo. After working overtime to do visitor questionnaires, sketches of model exhibits, caretaker interviews, research on history and master plans of the zoo (all in one week), Jonas and I were exhausted and reformulated the approach to the question of zoo architecture in the context of culture and conservation.
After the safe and successful start in Sweden, we ventured to Johannesburg Zoo in South Africa- one of the larger zoos in South Africa. My task there was refined from my visit to Skånes Djurpark, but even so- accruing the amount information I wanted at a big zoo in a big city was daunting. There is still so much more that I would like to know about Johannesburg Zoo even though I learned quite a bit. Thus, at Johannesburg Zoo, I again refined my project, tailoring it so that I could glean the information that I required from a big zoo within such a short amount of time (two weeks). From Johannesburg, I went to Pretoria Zoo, the National Zoo of South Africa and the archrival of Johannesburg Zoo. In Pretoria, my project became more solidified. The more zoo directors, caretakers, keepers, volunteers and custodians I interviewed, the more I learned about the basics of the zoo world- without having to re-ask the same broad questions about zoo management, direction and philosophy- thereby allowing me to hone in on what made each zoo unique from the last. I am deeply indebted to each of the directors, keepers and zoo personnel that assisted me and taught me about their zoo, country and culture.
Also while in South Africa, we visited Pilanesburg National Park and Kruger National Park, two of the most well-visited parks in South Africa. There, I learned about the other side of South African conservation: the game parks which breed, sell, and allow hunting of native animals. The game reserves in South Africa cover an astounding amount of territory and bring in 1 billion USD a year. They play enormous roles in conservation- roles that zoos cannot seem to play because of the inability to conduct in situ protection because of lack of space (a trade-off that means zoos reach an inner-city audience that would never see the animals in the wild). I am continuing to learn about the field of conservation in South Africa as well as the particular aspects of South African zoos.
From South Africa, we ventured to the wilds of Madagascar. In Madagascar, the zoos are struggling, and there was not much thought put into the architecture- even outside of the zoo- due to lack of funding and expertise. Visiting the four zoos and six reserves in Madagascar put the whole of the Malagasy conservation problem into perspective and I saw how conservation solutions in Madagascar differs dramatically from that in South Africa. The fauna is different in Madagascar- reserves cannot charge wealthy patrons to go on safari and shoot and kill adorable lemurs or chameleons as reserves can charge patrons to kill lions and elephants. Reserves in Madagascar must operate differently than game parks- and must therefore make money in a different manner than game parks- namely ecotourism and research. In addition, zoos in Madagascar are not nearly as widespread they are in South Africa. The message of the zoos is different, because the fauna, economics, and culture are different from South Africa. Most people live below the poverty line in the capital. Most people do not have refrigerators or hot water in Madagascar. The message of the zoo, therefore, is not to donate money to wildlife projects or conserve energy- the message is to get training to be a guide, learn eco-tourism, grow rice more efficiently,
ect.
All in all, my zoo architecture project has been all-consuming, exciting and fulfilling. In each of the countries, I feel like I have a purpose and am in some way giving back to the communities through the reports that I make at the end of each zoo visit (and in my final report that I have promised to send at the end of the year). I feel that overall, these first 3 months have made me more persistent, direct and attentive to detail. My project is becoming less about how to physically build a zoo and more about the ideological architecture made of national agenda, culture and time period. I am beginning to remove the idealistic veneer of the zoo as a conservation/research/education instigator and view it more as a business that does not make any money- a charity focused on gently reminding its clientele of the riches of the world and providing the truly concerned with options in how to help (donations, WWF projects, volunteering, ect
). Unlike the reserve parks that do actual conservation through land protection and also manage to reap profits, the zoo plays more of a role in society as a barometer for social responsibility and attitude towards animals and nature. At the base of the zoos inefficiency in prompting conservation/research/education is societys reluctance to feel guilt or accountability for its actions- namely the destruction of resources and non-sustainable development. The zoo can only urge society as much as society wants to be urged; if a visit to the zoo leaves the visitors feeling guilty, ashamed and inactive, it is not likely to be a visit that they will want to repeat- and the business side of the zoo needs visitors. The architecture as well as the zoo-based programs, species composition and educational information, represent a sly and subtle commercial aimed at changing opinions- a passive campaign- to win over the less radical constituents in global conservation without producing feelings of culpability. In short, the zoo is not for the animals sake directly- but is a social service aimed at people, with the long-term goal of inspiring protection. One can only hope that the zoo visitors recognize this purpose and the final goal of conservation.
My zoo project aside, the first three months have been a wonderful opportunity to see Africa. South Africa was not nearly as terrifying as I thought it would be. Madagascar is gorgeous (stomach troubles aside)- and we will miss it.
|
|