If there’s anything that the Missouri Students Association learned from the absurd debate over purchasing a live tiger for the university in spring 2010, it’s that there’s no chance of an actual tiger running around the football field on game day. Sorry, Mr. Noce.
However, a more recent proposal that would be safer and less terrifying for fans and tigers alike has caught our attention, and we’re not necessarily opposed to it: sponsoring tiger habitats at Missouri zoos.
Sponsorship of a tiger or tiger habitat at the Saint Louis Zoo would pan out to a cost of $20,000 per year for five years, though student government would ideally only pay a fraction of this after collecting donations and other funds specifically for the initiative. Although MSA executives say the sponsorship would work as a recruiting tool for MU and a way to increase MSA’s visibility, the more realistic payoff would be more like a plaque on the tiger habitat and the moral gratification of improving the home of an imprisoned animal.
Although we’re open to the idea, it seems irresponsible for MSA to make such a financial commitment to something that has a minimal impact on the student body without getting a real measure of student opinion. MSA should test the waters of student support of this initiative before they commit to it. Holding a fundraising event to not only raise funds for the project, but also determine student feedback and raise the much-desired visibility of MSA. If response isn’t as stellar as MSA would hope, perhaps it’s time to shoot lower than a plaque at the Saint Louis Zoo (we doubt the Kansas City Zoo’s asking price is as high as $20,000 per year). Everybody wins, including the tigers.
We will say that the reasons behind MSA’s push for the tiger sponsorship seem somewhat stretched, especially as far as recruitment goes. Little children going to the zoo aren’t going to read the plaque that says where the money behind the rock in the pretty tiger’s cage comes from and think, “I want to go to Mizzou in 10 years!” The same will go for older children – and once they’re even old enough to consider college, a plaque in a zoo isn’t going to influence the college choice of any rational prospective student.
On another note, yes, sponsoring tiger habitats in zoos is a nice thing to do. But, tens of thousands of dollars for it? At a public university of that size, thousands of dollars can become just a drop in the bucket, but, at the same time, without evident student support for this initiative, is it really worth forking over $20,000 or even $10,000 per year?
If MSA’s goal with the sponsorship idea is to enhance recruitment efforts, could they not use this money to start up public relations campaign? The last time we checked, 2008 MSA President Jim Kelley’s photo was still hanging in Plaza 900 in an effort to help students “get to know” their student government.
Are we opposed to sponsoring a live tiger in a zoo? No, not necessarily. We would just urge MSA to not commit to such extensive spending without taking student input into consideration. MSA should test the waters for support for this project from students and across the student organizations they hope will join them in fundraising efforts, and act accordingly.
