Bloque t_15_SB6

As the least involved in pro-environmental behaviours, Megan and Elizabeth were more seemingly the most susceptible to influence from the Penguin Encounter zookeepers. Both had visited zoos previously, but had not had a direct encounter with a non-domestic animal. Leading their encounter was Nancy, previously discussed in Section 4.3.1, who’s discourse during the encounter embodied an extreme of risk potential. Nevertheless, Nancy was the penguin expert in Megan and Elizabeth’s encounter. Having not participated in a similar experience previously, they had to place themselves in the care of Nancy, trusting Nancy’s judgement of behaviour that would be considered too risky. Thus

zookeepers, as experts framing animals’ behaviour, hold enormous power in participants’ construction of risk.

Nancy’s influence in Megan and Elizabeth’s conceptualisation of needing to care for penguins is apparent in the excerpts below. Prior to visiting Megan and Elizabeth give typical responses to the question. Neither considers pro- environmental actions a necessity. In actuality, both girls believe wild penguins are self-sufficient – existing separately from human action.

Extract 61

Megan: I put two, because they are more than capable of living on their own out in the wild, but like say like if they are in a zoo then they are going to need like help with being fed.

Megan: Um, if they lived anywhere like in the wild, where do they live? The north pole or the south? One of those. Then they are more than capable of living on their own. Unless they are going extinct, but i don't really think they are endangered.

Elizabeth: I put 4 because if they are in a zoo then they need caring for because they've got nothing, it's their natural instinct to find food and stuff. So, they could probably do it themselves if they were in the wild and they had never been helped out before.

(Megan and Elizabeth, 03 Sept. 2013, London Zoo, Before the Visit)

From pre-visit to post-visit, Elizabeth expressed one of the most dramatic changes in ‘caring for penguins’. Indeed, Elizabeth and Megan’s compassion for the penguins and the environment seems diminished following the encounter:

Extract 62

Megan: Two. They don’t need people to help care for them in nature. They can get on by themselves.

Elizabeth: I put 2 because the wild ones don’t have help, but the ones at the zoo need looked after. So, yeah.

The extract above shows that before taking part in the Penguin Encounter as part of this research, Megan and Elizabeth were reluctant to consider eating a penguin. Following their encounter, each participant felt they would only eat a penguin if their own welfare were at stake:

Extract 63

Researcher: If you were hungry would it be okay to eat a penguin? Megan: I put 4, you shouldn't eat it just if your hungry, but say for

example you are like starving and there is no food source, then like its fine then.

Researcher: So, you would eat them if you were starving and didn't have any other food?

Megan: Yeah, if it was a matter of life or death then i would eat a penguin. under any other circumstance then no i wouldn't Elizabeth: I put 5 because if you are hungry then no you don't, but if

you were starving then probably because they are not really different to like pigs and sheep and stuff. They’re just like really the same. They are just an animal as well. So, if you were starving then...yeah

(Megan and Elizabeth, 03 Sept. 2013, London Zoo, Before the Visit)

Despite her positive propensity for conserving animals, following Elizabeth and Megan’s visit they seemed less concerned about conserving species:

Extract 64

Megan: I put 7. Well, like before. If I was starving then i would eat a penguin. If you’re going to die then you might as well eat it. Elizabeth: Six, yeah well yeah like the same. If I needed to I would. (Megan and Elizabeth, 03 Sept. 2013, London Zoo, After the Visit)

The above extract demonstrates that the positive valuing of the penguins was not absolute; Elizabeth showed a clear shift in her thinking about the value of

penguins as a result of a single Penguin Encounter session. Herzog (2011), anthro- zoologist, describes several aspects of human-animal relationships, which demonstrate humans’ values, attitudes and practices concerning animals are strongly embedded in cultural norms and experiences. The de-valuing of penguins is important for understanding attitude changes and perceptions of risk. As the bond between participants and penguins is broken, or fails to develop, participants are more likely to distance themselves, ultimately de-valuing penguins as worthy of human attention. Penguin-participant bonds shifted from beginning to end of the encounter, as captured both by video evidence and through the penguin drawings. Drawings evidence participants undergo a shift to their comfort with penguins:

Figure 19: Megan’s Pre-Visit Drawing

In the above drawing, the participant and penguin are in close proximity to each other, sharing a physical space, with no barriers between the two. Following

the encounter Elizabeth distances herself and the penguin, separating her and the penguin by space and physical barriers:

Figure 20: Megan’s Post-Visit Drawing

While the drawings do show scientific and environmental knowledge gain2_, the post-visit drawing above gives clues about Megan’s bond with the penguins.

2In the comparison of these two drawings Ricky’s features are accurately detailed

and his nest is added in with appropriate detail.

The dramatic shift in Megan’s proximity to the penguins, as well as the introduction of a barrier, indicate Megan visualises the penguins as a potential source of danger. This finding is in line with Franklin’s (2012, p. 43) argument that zoos have historically acted as a cultural institution to house dangerous species behind bars.

From a human-animal interaction perspective, physical dissociation between the participant and the penguins is important for understanding how attitude change takes place. Therefore, a substantial shift in participants’ depiction of cohesion and distancing could be argued as a distinctive and important aspect of building pro- environmental attitudes and behaviours. Megan’s drawings are a primary example of the potential influence of risk discourse arising from Penguin Encounters.