New Animal Kingdom logo?

MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Been posted before, but, applicable here...

TWaGkib.png


vxyrmz0.png
 
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
zengoth said:
With all the bad press zoos have been getting lately, i am expecting a name change soon to Disney's Animal Kingdom*
*now with 40% less real animals!
Click to expand...

You are not wrong.

That said, except for the fringe who don't think any type of zoo should exist (who would rather see all zoo animals be euthanized tomorrow and the industry shut down), they really would find very little to complain about in terms of AK and it's animal care. Trust me - if there were, we would be hearing about it, loudly. Just like when someone stubs a toe somewhere on property, it would be huge news because...Disney.

In the Zoo industry, AK is the gold standard. Not in terms of their collection, of course, ROFL - I mean, there isn't a regional zoo in the country that doesn't have more animals and better viewing (just not as pretty - and studies show that in a lot of species, "pretty" is mostly for our benefit, not the animals, but it certainly helps public perception). But in animal care and enrichment.

Like most zoos, they also are active in "species survival plans" - basically, the genetic management of all the collected animals in captivity. And the reason a lot of zoos justify still existing, and holding exotic animals in particular. In addition to issuing best-care manuals for species, etc., these SSP's by the zoo associations primary purpose is to manage the genetic lines between zoos, so species keep as much genetic diversity as possible. Obviously, if you have a long-term collection of animals in one space, inbreeding is a huge problem (especially ones that can live nearly as long as humans). That's why you hear about animals changing zoos sometimes, and over long distances - either infants who need surrogates or males/females to be added to groups that need them but are unrelated.

AK in it's rather short time has become quite influential in both care protocols and even scientific studies. Particularly the with Gorilla's - there is actually something called the "Animal Kingdom Protocol" that has been widely adopted by other zoos to assist Gorilla mothers in raising their own infants. Gorilla's are the most difficult of the Great Apes to breed in captivity, their babies are rejected so much in fact that up until a few decades ago, it was standard practice just to take them at birth for hand-rearing by humans, and introduce them back (often to another zoo) when they were weaned. AK successfully developed positive reinforcement training methods to teach the pregnant mothers how to take care of the infant before they gave birth so they don't have to be taken away (and they initially taught it to a mother who had already rejected three previous babies). It's pretty much the industry standard now with any Gorilla-mom-to-be, no matter what her history.

Anyway, that's a bit off topic...sorry. I am sure I seem to crap on AK a lot for it's shortcomings - but when it comes to animal care, they really do an amazing job. It's one place they don't seem to cut corners (which is another reason why I'm sure we don't see more diverse species added to AK - see, I got a dig in there!).
 
Last edited:
larryz

larryz

I'm Just A Tourist!
Premium Member
AEfx said:
You are not wrong.

That said, except for the fringe who don't think any type of zoo should exist (who would rather see all zoo animals be euthanized tomorrow and the industry shut down), they really would find very little to complain about in terms of AK and it's animal care. Trust me - if there were, we would be hearing about it, loudly. Just like when someone stubs a toe somewhere on property, it would be huge news because...Disney.

In the Zoo industry, AK is the gold standard. Not in terms of their collection, of course, ROFL - I mean, there isn't a regional zoo in the country that doesn't have more animals and better viewing (just not as pretty - and studies show that in a lot of species, "pretty" is mostly for our benefit, not the animals, but it certainly helps public perception). But in animal care and enrichment.

Like most zoos, they also are active in "species survival plans" - basically, the genetic management of all the collected animals in captivity. And the reason a lot of zoos justify still existing, and holding exotic animals in particular. In addition to issuing best-care manuals for species, etc., these SSP's by the zoo associations primary purpose is to manage the genetic lines between zoos, so species keep as much genetic diversity as possible. Obviously, if you have a long-term collection of animals in one space, inbreeding is a huge problem (especially ones that can live nearly as long as humans). That's why you hear about animals changing zoos sometimes, and over long distances - either infants who need surrogates or males/females to be added to groups that need them but are unrelated.

AK in it's rather short time has become quite influential in both care protocols and even scientific studies. Particularly the with Gorilla's - there is actually something called the "Animal Kingdom Protocol" that has been widely adopted by other zoos to assist Gorilla mothers in raising their own infants. Gorilla's are the most difficult of the Great Apes to breed in captivity, their babies are rejected so much in fact that up until a few decades ago, it was standard practice just to take them at birth for hand-rearing by humans, and introduce them back (often to another zoo) when they were weaned. AK successfully developed positive reinforcement training methods to teach the pregnant mothers how to take care of the infant before they gave birth so they don't have to be taken away (and they initially taught it to a mother who had already rejected three previous babies). It's pretty much the industry standard now with any Gorilla-mom-to-be, no matter what her history.

Anyway, that's a bit off topic...sorry. I am sure I seem to crap on AK a lot for it's shortcomings - but when it comes to animal care, they really do an amazing job. It's one place they don't seem to cut corners (which is another reason why I'm sure we don't see more diverse species added to AK - see, I got a dig in there!).
Click to expand...
They're good until some activist slaps together a "documentary" called "Greytrunk" or some such title to moan about the plight of captive elephants...
 
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
larryz said:
They're good until some activist slaps together a "documentary" called "Greytrunk" or some such title to moan about the plight of captive elephants...
Click to expand...

Oh, I know what you mean - my long winded point was that - yeah, all zoos are under attack in one way or another - but that's the real fringe of the activists who think all zoo's should go - the larger general public outcry over the Sea World thing was also because, in spite of the hacky documentary, when you really think about it having animals that large in captivity (and letting them breed) is kind of nutty to begin with.

In any case - of all the zoo's to go after, even though they would surely go after Disney first if they had reason, DAK's nose is pretty clean. In terms of husbandry and animal care, they far exceed all recommendations. Plus, they have much better security in the off-exhibit areas (even with the behind the scenes tours). ;)

It's possible - but a lot less likely.
 
Pixieish

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
I'm just going to put in my two cents, RE: a logo redesign.

I've been working in the arts and graphics worlds since I was a teenager, and guess who the most difficult to please clients are...

Yup. The company you actually work for - especially if there's more than one big-wig who gets a say in the matter. So, I'm sure there have been TONS of ideas tossed around over the years, but getting those in charge to agree on anything is likely pretty much impossible.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom