New Photo Tour---Nay Aug Park, Scranton (Lincoln: fit in, tenant, college) - Northeastern Pennsylvania - Pennsylvania (PA) -Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Pocono area - Page 12 - City-Data Forum

weluvpa · 01-22-2008, 08:03 AM

That would probably Chris Kelly who writes for the times. I'm sorry but I would rather see it closed again and the animals moved to a facility that would better suit them. I do not believe that it is the best interest of the animals to have the city of Scranton and its distressed financial situation involved at all. We cannot afford it and to be honest I think that it should have been left alone. It was a pure and simple PR move to gain interest in Doherty and the Nay Aug half ass restoration and he benefited while the animals suffered. The times and Mr. Kelly are setting the mayor up for another PR move right before another election year. The mayor will swoop in and save the day or zoo or whatever it is from certain destruction. He will try to ride to the polls on the backs of the animals like he did with the park.

scrantonluna · 01-22-2008, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weluvpa

That would probably Chris Kelly who writes for the times. I'm sorry but I would rather see it closed again and the animals moved to a facility that would better suit them. I do not believe that it is the best interest of the animals to have the city of Scranton and its distressed financial situation involved at all. We cannot afford it and to be honest I think that it should have been left alone. It was a pure and simple PR move to gain interest in Doherty and the Nay Aug half ass restoration and he benefited while the animals suffered. The times and Mr. Kelly are setting the mayor up for another PR move right before another election year. The mayor will swoop in and save the day or zoo or whatever it is from certain destruction. He will try to ride to the polls on the backs of the animals like he did with the park.

Haha, so helping the zoo, in your opinion, would be... bad? I know who wrote it, I'm asking who contacted the times. Or am I to believe that we have reporters trolling city-data? And who says letter writing does nothing? They might have well as signed my name to it. Read my samples if you don't believe.

scrantonluna · 01-22-2008, 08:39 AM

Here's the article:

Quote:

City zoo an idea whose time . . .?

01/22/2008

Scranton formally and correctly gave up operation of a zoo at Nay Aug Park more than 20 years ago because the city government simply could not afford to do it well. Closing the zoo was the only humane option for its residents and for the city’s image, which had suffered along with the caged animals.

A hallmark of the Doherty administration has been its restoration of Nay Aug Park. But the presence of the Genesis Wildlife Center as a component of the park should be the subject of deeper examination by the administration and City Council.

The center, which is housed on the grounds of the former zoo, is not technically a zoo. Rather, it is an animal-rescue operation. But like its predecessor at the park, it is housed in facilities inadequate to its task and is perpetually underfunded.

That is not to question the dedication, ability and compassion of Genesis director Margaret Miller, her staff and community volunteers, and donors of money, food and other materials that keep the center afloat amid trying circumstances.

It is to suggest that the city needs to conduct an examination of the center’s long-term future within the park, in terms of its own welfare and the park’s welfare. Given the vast improvements that have been made to the park, the standard should be that any facility at Nay Aug should enhance the overall quality of the park to the highest possible degree.

While the center is not by definition a zoo, it clearly is perceived as such by visitors to the park. In many cases, visitors are not impressed by what they see.

The city government should re-establish a commission it empaneled in the late 1980s and early 1990s, which assessed prospects for a zoo at the park and came up with a workable redevelopment plan that included private and government investment. That plan, unfortunately, never was enacted, largely because of political tension between the city and county governments.

Rather than making minimal contributions to Genesis’ operation and watching it live hand-to-mouth, the administration should comprehensively assess prospects for development of a zoo that lives up to the new standard for quality at the park, rather than the underfunded half measure that now exists.

weluvpa · 01-22-2008, 09:26 AM

If helping the zoo means that city is going to have to fund the construction of a new facility the yes i think its bad to get involved. We cannot afford to do it, period. Parks and Rec doesn't have the budget to run it. It was closed for a reason and I think that it should of stayed closed. I have no doubt that the editorial was one of your letters picked apart by the editor, thats the only way they could get it right. They have no qualified reporters at the Times and I wouldn't be surprised if they are surfing the CD site. Again it would be in the best interst of the animals and the city for this facility to close and the animals be moved to GWC's other facility. It would also finacially be easier on the GWC if they were not in Nay Aug. Its a PR campaign trust me on this one. I have seen it before. The Times and Doherty pushed the GWC and the new zoo up the voters arses for every bit of poistive PR they could and now thats its bad they will come in and save the day right before the next primary election in 09' when Doherty has no choice but to run for mayor again. He can't run for anything else, whats his platform going to be fiscal management? He will shove the parks, zoo and the half ass downtown right up their arses again and try to get relected. Watch the machine work and learn from it, if you would sit back and take the time to watch you would see.

scrantonluna · 01-22-2008, 01:27 PM

Well whatever, I hope I had a small part in getting this going, a BIG PUBLIC THANK YOU to whoever took my ball and ran with it, let's get something accomplished. I'll be behind the scenes for a bit, keep watching the headlines...

mbs7 · 01-22-2008, 04:58 PM

I honestly have no idea why the Scranton Times-Tribune ran the editorial about the zoo at this time. The important thing, I think, is that they did run the editorial. The editorial is only a small step, but it's definitely a step in the right direction! Here's a big thank you to everyone who has been writing letters and trying to raise awareness about this issue by discussing it with their friends, co-workers, relatives, etc. Let's keep working together on this and maybe we can see some positive changes at the old zoo!!!!

mbs7 · 01-22-2008, 05:06 PM

Weluvpa--I understand your concerns about the funding of the zoo, given the state of Scranton's economy. And, if the conditions at the old zoo cannot be substantially improved, then I would have to agree that the animals should all be moved elsewhere and the zoo should be shut down. But I don't think we should be too hasty in deciding that it is impossible for Scranton to have some sort of high-quality animal facility. I would agree that the city should not be the only (or even the major) contributor to that facility. I live quite close to another economically distressed city--Binghamton, NY. Binghamton has had an operating zoo for many, many years. According to their website (rossparkzoo.com), this is how their funding works:

"Today, the City of Binghamton provides non-cash services (water, sewer, gasoline, etc.), Broome County provides additional funding as a contract agency. The Zoo Society provides approximately 73% of the operating support, and 100% of the capital improvement support."

If Scranton decides to have a zoo, then they too will probably have to seek a funding mix similar to the above. I don't think that anyone can realistically expect the city to come up with the lion's share of the money. (sorry about the pun--couldn't resist--I'm in a good mood today!)

mbs7 · 01-22-2008, 06:20 PM

Just wanted to say that I took a look at the photos at the beginning of this thread--they look great! And I think they show what a beautiful park Nay Aug really is. With the exception of the old zoo, I am really impressed with how great the park looks these days. The people of Scranton are lucky to have Nay Aug!

SteelCityRising · 01-22-2008, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbs7

Just wanted to say that I took a look at the photos at the beginning of this thread--they look great! And I think they show what a beautiful park Nay Aug really is. With the exception of the old zoo, I am really impressed with how great the park looks these days. The people of Scranton are lucky to have Nay Aug!

A lot of people enjoy Nay Aug, including myself and most others on this forum. There are always going to be some who feel investing in it was a "waste of tax dollars," but I think it would be pretty neat to be able to live in the Hill Section and walk to either Nay Aug Gorge or a busy downtown area a mile or so in either direction.

weluvpa · 01-22-2008, 08:55 PM

There is nothing wrong with investing in Nay Aug, but we did not need to invest close to $7,000,000 in ONE PARK. The city spent $1,500,000 on a one time landscaping project for Nay Aug. Are we going to have to spend that agian this year? Probably and it will most likely goto the same company. What they should have done was stretched that out a few years. The initial project construction and plantings then so much per year to maintain the landscaping and plantings. I like Nay Aug but not at that price tag, sorry.