bermannor

4 minutes ago, Thian said:

No i didn't read that.

 

He has plenty land to give, is there not a better plot for the zoo? I would like it if he ordered the best zoo of the world on that plot, so the rest of the world will speak about it...

 

Pathum thani always has flooding isn't it? Not a good place for a zoo.

You move on dangerous ground. Don't criticise the King!

43 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

The "Rest of the Story" is the property is too valuable for animals, Bangkok needs another Condominium complex, or another Mega-Mall.  Wanna bet it doesn't turn into a 

Green Space for Bangkokonians to enjoy???

Seems to be Trump thinking!

Could you imagine, that there might be another reason? The zoo was founded 75 years ago and it might not be up to the standard of modern zoos anymore. Expansion is not possible, if you have visited it. The only way would have been to reduce the number of animals drastically.

5 minutes ago, Thian said:

I think it should stay in BKK somewhere close to the bts or subway...

 

How can the BKK kids visit it so far away? Or the tourists?

 

It would be great if Thailand builds the best zoo of the world, i know it will never happen but it would be great. There's enough money in the country to do it.

Did you read that the King donated 9 plots of land for public use last year? One was selected for the zoo.

What do you think would have happened to choose another location? Guess!

20 hours ago, crazykopite said:

No mention about the girlie bars where the Thai prositutes wear very little so that they can bare all their assets , think there is more important things to do than the police to roam a secluded beach where a few tourists have stripped off to get a sun tan . I for one would rather see the police spend time on rounding up all the drug dealers on the island and put a stop to all night parties which go on until 6 in the morning .

Can you imagine, I mean in your wildest dreams, that there might be a difference between urban and rural locations?

20 hours ago, Chassa said:

No nudity in Thailand since the American missionaries made Thai ladies cover their breasts in the 1800's.

Yes, that's why so many Thais are Christians.

Another typical fake expat news. Read Thai history!

3 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

The "Rest of the Story" is the property is too valuable for animals, Bangkok needs another Condominium complex, or another Mega-Mall.  Wanna bet it doesn't turn into a 

Green Space for Bangkokonians to enjoy???

Isn't that the case in any mega city around the world?

20 hours ago, mike1967 said:

I think it's common knowledge Thai people don't want foreigners in Thailand but they still want the money. There's a committee, as we speak, trying to work out how this can be done !!!

Yes common knowledge of some brain dead expats.

44 minutes ago, observer90210 said:

Looking forward for the new zoo to open and of course to pay the double farang entrance price !!

Do you want to revive the many old dead threads?

58 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Take look at UK zoos that are now really study centres for means on conversation and trying to breed endangered species in an attempt to re-stock nature. Yes people come to gawk but the money for admission is used to finance the zoo.

Some other countries it's used to ensure the lifestyle of a few.

Hope you don't mean Michael Jackson. As long as they treat the animals well, up to them as your Thai girlfriend would say. Better than running in front of an American wildlife trophy hunter.

19 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Well apart from the mistake I made writing conversation instead of conservation, ?private zoos in UK have to adhere to well enforced laws and are actively involved with the larger zoos in breeding programmes, to ensure a good introduction of genes etc so they don't end up with banjo playing members of the species.

That is UK not Thailand. They have still a long way to go.

2 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Take look at UK zoos that are now really study centres for means on conversation and trying to breed endangered species in an attempt to re-stock nature. Yes people come to gawk but the money for admission is used to finance the zoo.

Some other countries it's used to ensure the lifestyle of a few.

Why do you all throw private zoos (entertainment) and public zoos in one pot? 

14 minutes ago, Happy Grumpy said:

So what happens to the animals in the mean time?

 

 

Served to the Chinese?

3 minutes ago, greeneking said:

No. I can not. It would be very unwise. Watch and see.

You mean wait and see? Why would it be unwise to give such an iformation?

But may be it gets back to Crown property which doesn't mean ut will not be used commercially.

2 hours ago, secondfusilier said:

Yes, I can agree on all of that.

However, Thailand zoos, crocodile farms, safari parks, etc are well below the acceptable par and still treat their animals like a Victorian sideshow would.

There seems to be no governing body to control what happens in these places.

I still believe that zoos and reserves should exist,  but until Thailand learns that the animals are not a commodity, then not here please.

I am not an animal activist but boxing orangutans are not my cup of tea.

Which public zoo you did see that?

8 hours ago, balo said:

I don't think 

That will never happen , even if many agree with you ,  as long as the animals are taken good care of I have no problems with it. 

 

Unfortunately in Thailand we know that's not the case.  Chained up elephants is a good example. 

 

 

 

Is this a chained elephant? You spread fake news!

8 hours ago, balo said:

I don't think 

That will never happen , even if many agree with you ,  as long as the animals are taken good care of I have no problems with it. 

 

Unfortunately in Thailand we know that's not the case.  Chained up elephants is a good example. 

 

 

 

We ??? You mean "you"! Elephants are chained in most zoos during the night, even best zoos. Do a research about it. Elephants are used as working animals for centuries (Laos, India etc) and they are always chained when not on duty!

6 hours ago, greeneking said:

I am happy if animals can be treated well.

This change is happening because someone wishes to reclaim land for themselves that had been made available for public benefit.

Can you proof that? Please quote.

7 hours ago, Forethat said:

Unless the idea of animals on display can be terminated permanently

Not everybody can afford a trip to Tansania or South Africa (Serengeti, Kruger NP), Borneo or China (pandas).

1 hour ago, secondfusilier said:

Yes, I can agree on all of that.

However, Thailand zoos, crocodile farms, safari parks, etc are well below the acceptable par and still treat their animals like a Victorian sideshow would.

There seems to be no governing body to control what happens in these places.

I still believe that zoos and reserves should exist,  but until Thailand learns that the animals are not a commodity, then not here please.

I am not an animal activist but boxing orangutans are not my cup of tea.

Some rare animals are commodities! Look at China and the panda bears.

9 hours ago, secondfusilier said:

Good and about time, all zoos, animal farms and safari parks in Thailand should be closed down.

Most zoos worldwide have had incidents and accusations of not treating their animals correctly but Thai zoos money making tourist attractions bring this to a new level and they bring no educational value to their visitors.

 

The only exemption should animal farms that are not open to the public, for example a snake farm for milking snakes to produce antivenom.

 

It's quite shocking to see how badly wild and often endangered animals are treated in captivity in a country were you could be sent down for kicking a soi dog.

 

And who will breed endangered animals? If not open to the public, who will finance?

How does it come that captive animals live significantly longer?

I only agree with you on places where animals are used for entertainment (elephants carrying logs from left to right, tigers posing with visitors). Or look at Orang Utan rehab centers in Borneo or Sumatra.

10 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Why would you base a relationship on anything other than sex and reproduction?

Only pimps do that!

8 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

There's a lot more than that too.

Yes, a couple of ice cold Chang for breakfast!

But joke by side, there are quite a few very successful expat farmers in Isaan and where the mia luang is very proud of her husband.

The only problem might be envy in the village.

4 hours ago, whaleboneman said:

I had a wonderful relationship for four years with this lady. And I really enjoyed building the house and furnishing it. I even painted it myself. It was an incredible adventure and we also traveled all over SEA together. But in the end I realized that our relationship wasn't going anywhere and left.

Now I've met a Pinay lady so I guess I'm going to learn about house building in the Philippines next. Life can always be an adventure if you want.

I hope, it's your pocket money!

On ‎8‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 4:46 PM, swissie said:

OP is not married. That's the crucial point.
If OP can prove that HE paid for the house, legally the house belongs to the OP, 100%.
If necessary, the house can be sold by court-order. The court proceedings are not overly complicated, but it will still take 2 to 3 years.
Ahhhhh......if only those houses were on wheels!
Cheers.

2 -3 years hell on earth! Good luck!