Zoos have always had a big influence on me. Up until today, if we visit a city and there is a zoo, we go. I really believe zoos can have a crucial educational and scientific role: they can for sure change the ways we act towards our environment and have a big influence on kids of all ages. I was one of those kids... who then pursued studies in Biology and Veterinary medicine and who still yearns to do work that matters in that field, because I very very strongly feel we are all connected. I have volunteered at Zoo Education department activities and I have been involved in biodiversity conservation projects.
However, lately I am becoming more and more uncomfortable with the idea of keeping wild animals in captivity. Of course there are zoos and zoos. And if it is done properly, if the animals are stimulated, well kept, taken care of, I do think the role they can have in changing minds is worth taking the animals away from nature. This task of zoos seems particularly needed for us humans who seem not to respect anything around us. I guess it also depends of the species: some smaller species are easier to keep in an environment that closely resembles their own. But for highly social and highly intelligent animals that also depend on culture, that learn from growing up in groups with older peers, it just seems that it's almost impossible to stimulate them properly, to have them live a dignified life in captivity, to recreate their natural lives.
Perhaps we should start thinking of other ways to educate and instill this curiosity from early ages? Nature walks, visits to national parks, documentaries, interactive classes? (I am not convinced on ecotourism either, I basically distrust anything that's done for profit, and regardless of good intentions, going over and over and over to a protected place can alter the ecosystems it is supposed to protect. But I guess it depends on how it's done). How do you feel about this?
I think I feel similarly uncomfortable and ok with zoos. There is a "wild animal park" near my parents' home that I used to love going to. But when we visited San Diego Zoo a couple of years ago, I remember feeling so sad at the small amount of space the bears and big cats had. They just didn't seem so happy... I think it's a difficult balance between ethics and education.
ReplyDeleteThat's funny, I only went to San Diego Zoo as a very small child (maybe 5?) and I remember it being huge. And from what I have read in many ways it is a reference, a dream job for many vets. So I am surprised to hear about the small enclosures but of course proportions have nothing to do with real life when you are a kid.
DeleteI'm fascinated by the animals but uncomfortable with the state of how they are kept. Even with decent zoos, they pass animals around. A big story in Canada earlier this year is about two giant pandas who are on loan from China and are going to be paraded about at two of our zoos. There just doesn't seem like there's anything good in that for the pandas.
ReplyDeleteZoos aren't the worst place for animals, always. But when you consider how many animals react to it (certain big cats won't breed in captivity, for example) you realize that these animals are not living the life we want to live. I'm all for sanctuaries and trying to protect endangered populations, but I don't feel like zoos are often part of that picture.
On the other hand, I loved zoos as a child and I'm sure that I'd take my imaginary future children to a zoo to let them see the animals. I'd just feel a little squicky inside.
Yes, exactly, it's those animals presenting stereotypical (or other) pathological behaviour that break my heart. I think in Canada you have a lot of wild fauna rehabilitation centers, which is a good way to go.
DeleteI think zoos have their place in the world. For many reasons...education, exposure, increasing sensitivity to the plight of wild animals, and sometimes, breeding of animals that need extra support. But you're right. It IS sad and it's I imagine there are some pretty poorly managed zoos out there with some pretty poorly cared for animals. I doubt there is a perfect answer here. Probably more regulation is a good start.
ReplyDeleteYes, I also kind of still think there is a place for zoos in the world. The regulations are there, and there are organizations that devote themselves to making protocols better, to increase welfare. I think ONLY those zoos (and who are also participating in conservation / breeding projects) should be there.
DeleteI have lots of issues with zoos, more and more lately.I don't think education is a justification for keeping animals in captivity- that just sounds too anthropocentric to me. If Martians existed, I would want to be kept in captivity by them so that they can learn about earthlings.
ReplyDeleteWe do take Luka and Zoe to Zoos, and for now we let them see the animals and enjoy it as is, but the more they talk the more we explain to them the issues we have with them.I believe they should only exist as a temporary care facility for sick/endangered animals and be returned to their original environment as soon as possible...then again you have idiots like the King of Spain that enjoy hunting them, so maybe reserves are the best option.
I understand your point, it is what makes me really really queasy lately. However aside from Education, the zoos are *supposed to* also be involved in Awareness, Research and Conservation (which also means taking part in breeding programs or acting as a genetic pool / bank for endangered species) .
DeleteFauna rehabilitation is very important, though in some cases it is very difficult to return the animal to the wild (I am thinking mostly of animals that live within a social structure), without taking account risks of disease, or the fact that they have been accustomed to receiving food instead of looking for it or have perhaps lost their fear for humans. (Though in rehabilitation centers they take care of all of those things, so that the animals stay as wild as possible).
There is no excuse for poaching, and coming from someone as the King of Spain was just unacceptable.
And I agree, protected areas / natural reserves seem to me a good way to go... because of people like that. (And that's without even thinking that after drugs and weapons, trafficking animals is one of the most lucrative illegal businesses that exist).
Like you, I'm on the fence.
ReplyDeleteI've been to a fair amount of zoos and have seen big differences in the quality of habitats. At least in The Netherlands (which is really the only place I can speak for) there is a current trend where zoos work to re-balance their population. Keep fewer species, but keep them in better habitats, so as to improve their quality of life. Artis, in Amsterdam, is doing a good job of it, especially if you consider they're an innercity zoo with limited space. Over the years they've phased out almost all of their big cats and bears have started building bigger and better habitats for the few they've kept. They also have a plan to restructure the habitat for the elephants, so as to be able to give them more space (they already have a multi-generational family group, which I think is good).
Blijdorp has an excellent, newly-built habitat for their polar bears, allowing large units that can be combined or separated depending on the preference of the bears. I also really like their wolf-habitat - it's not spectacular in design, but it's dense enough that the wolves can hide and have dens and sleep in the pack without disturbance from humans. It's no comparison to the size of territory wolves would have in the wild, but I've never seen them show any of the neurotic behaviour that you see in improperly housed territorial animals.
Another great initiative is the 'Berenbos' in the zoo in Rhenen. That's where bears are kept who were previously kept in circuses and as street performers. They get dedicated care if they need it (because they have no teeth, for instance) but are otherwise allowed to just roam, hibernate and 'be bears'. I believe they keep wolves there too.
In general, I think that zoos have the right of existence if they can meet certain criteria:
- house whatever animals they choose to keep appropriately (which likely means specialization and habitat design based on the animals' needs more than human viewing pleasure);
- play a role in one or more successful breeding programs for endangered species and / or important research pertaining animal behavior / housing / enrichment / general welfare that would be impossible otherwise;
- foster a positive attitude for nature conservation, natural habitat restoration, biodiversity and humane treatment of animals in both children and adults .
Amen to everything you said. The points you mention are actually the aims for zoos as described by the World Associaation of Zoos and Aquaria... though not everyone seems to put those into action. I love Artis and Blijdorp.
DeleteAntwerp zoo is also a favorite, there is a lot of space: it feels more like a big park from the beginning of the century, with animals here and there, and most importantly the animals seem happy. They actually play around and seem to enjoy themselves (instead of displaying problems associated with boredom, psychosis, depression, sterotypic behaviour, etc).