Last weekend the San Francisco Zoo held an event called The Teddy Bear Festival.
I interpret this to be an event that celebrates the Bears that live at the Zoo.
A synonym for the word celebrate is the word honor. To honor, you must respect. To date, Wishbone the Andean Bear, still lives on concrete.
Above is a photo of a sign that hangs outside the Tropical Aviary, two exhibits over from Wishbone. This signs shows a new exhibit as "Coming Soon." A NEW exhibit, while old exhibits like Wishbone's need upgrading.
Wishbone has lived exclusively on concrete, baring a short time when he lived in the Grotto next to the one with the meadow, to which he had shared access. His living situation goes unrecognized as the Zoo Management hire (read pay) artists to render drawings like the one above to illustrate their future Master Plan.
Wishbone has needed grass landscaping brought into his home for years, why is this not part of the new Master Plan? Why is there no (grass) "Coming Soon" sign on his enclosure? Why, because there is obviously still NO plan to bring grass to Wishbone's home. I guess the Zoo's plan is to let him continue living on concrete for the rest of his life?
The "Coming Soon" exhibit is to provide a new, bigger home for the Squirrel Monkeys. My comments are in no way meant to take anything away from the Squirrel Monkeys, but to show the obvious and that is, whoever is making decisions, does not take the Animals into thought.
The Squirrel Monkeys have a home. Its also a home with greenery. This new home will also include a children's play area. Why is it more important to make a new and better home for a group of Animals who have an adequate home for now, while another Animal lives with a hard surface under his feet? Why is it more important to build a play area for a human, when an Animal lives on concrete? Is the San Francisco Zoo a human playground or an Animal Park?
I completely understand that some exhibits are funded by donor's for specific use. I do not know if that is the case with the money being used for the new Squirrel Monkey exhibit. My issue if this is the case, why aren't donor's approached to fund severely important things like getting grass for Wishbone? Why can't the Squirrel Monkey exhibit be done without the children's play area and that money go to get Wishbone grass? Then both Animals win. Do we really need to encourage more screaming children outside the exhibit (next to the coming soon play area) which houses two blind sea lions?
A further note on the Master Plan. I went to a Guardian Member Reception in November, where Director Tanya Peterson showed slides of this photo and more. I was appalled. I was appalled by two things. First, that there is a Master Plan for new exhibits while old ones need upgrading and second, that there were four! new children's play areas planned, again while existing Animal enclosures need help. I am sorry if those reading this have children and are pro there being more play areas, but honestly as stated above, this is an Animal Park. There is already a huge Playfield with more grass than any one Animal that lives at the Zoo has and Golden Gate Park is laden with playgrounds. When people bring children to the Zoo they should utilize the existing playground or spend their time there teaching their children about the Animals.
Also, note that the drawing for the new Squirrel Monkey exhibit shows white tree' structures?? Where in nature are there white trees? I think even the Director feels a need to sell this as she kept saying "Think modern. Think modern." Why should we think modern? This isn't a museum, this is an Animal Park and Animals don't live surrounded by white plastic looking tree's.
In summary. Creating new exhibits while this poor Bear feels nothing but concrete beneath his feet is a crime, is outrageous, is unacceptable and is disrespectful.
UPDATE 12.8.11
Please view the video on the last post projectgetwishbonegrass.blogspot.com
If you support this crusade, please email San Francisco Zoo Director Tanya Peterson - tanyap@sfzoo.org
