The world of wildlife conservation was rocked late last week after a coalition of Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) zoos announced an end to conservation programs for animals they deemed “ugly,” “nasty,” “creepy” or otherwise “gross.”
“For too long,” said the press report, “we have wasted our resources on animals that are—let’s be honest—just not that nice to look at.” It elaborated that ongoing economic uncertainty, combined with a newfound boldness to “tell it like they see it,” had motivated the change. “The woke Left has had us in a stranglehold, wasting space on California condors, naked mole rats and other animals that look like scrotes. No more!”
The appendix categorizes the various animals to be phased out and assigns each category a priority ranking. Animals classified as “Too Many Legs,” such as centipedes, spiders and octopuses, will be the first to go, while those with “Too Few,” from snakes to giraffes, are next in line. Other categories of note include “Smells Weird” (skunks, maned wolves, binturongs), “Weirdly Human” (baboons, lemurs) and “Kinda Gay Vibe” (a majority of rodents, chimps).
Animal scientists around the world have been horrified by the announcement. “Bugs are NOT icky,” said Vassar’s own Professor Timothy Lampasona, “and giraffes have enough legs as-is!” Others think that the bans haven’t gone far enough—one Ernest Horne, a zoologist, said that anything ectothermic is “new-age bullshit,” and “we should kill and eat snakes to gain their power.”
As of press time, Vassar College has endorsed this position, and PB promises that this new hardline stance on things that are icky will lead to proper pest control: From Raymond’s rats to Strong’s bicycle mechanics to Lathrop’s slavering wild coyotes, the various nasty critters that haunt our dorms will soon be dealt with. Moreover, the administration asks that faculty who promote “weird and nasty animals” change their fields of study to “fired.”