Harambe, a 17-year old lowland gorilla, was shot after a 4-year old boy fell into the gorilla enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden at the end of May. Zoo officials determined the boy's life was in danger when he was grabbed by the gorilla after falling through the railing. Thane Maynard, the zoo director, told the Washington Post, "It seemed very much by our professional team, our dangerous-animal response team, to be a life-threatening situation. And so the choice was made to put down, or shoot, Harambe. And so he's gone." You can see a video of the incident taken by an onlooker here.
Officials at the zoo claim they were unable to sedate Harambe because of his agitated state. The tranquilizers would cause a "dramatic response" in the gorilla before rendering him unconscious, potentially leading to more harm against the child. With respect to these developments, zoo officials made the decision to shoot and kill the gorilla.
The shooting of Harambe provides an important narrative on our relation with animals. While Harambe's death is uncommon among zoos, and was cited as the first to occur in Cincinnati Zoo history, it helps spotlight some of the problems captive animals experience.
One of these problems is mental instability, resulting in highly aggressive and unnatural behavior. Roger Panaman, an animal and environmental activist with a doctorate in animal behavioral ecology, published a free online book on how to discuss animal rights issues. One of the problems Panaman highlights is the deteriorating mentality enclosures have on their nonhuman residents. According to Panaman, "In their restricted zoo-world many animals succumb to ailing mental health and go mad. It is easy to see animals with unnatural behavior in zoos. You can see self-mutilation, such as tail chewing or excessive plucking out of fur or feathers, see listless difference, and see abnormal repetitive behaviors like pacing up and down or rocking back and forth for ages... These behaviors indicate neurosis or insanity brought on by boredom, deprivation, frustration, and stress.
"The animals are telling us they are suffering from inadequate lives - even though they may look physically healthy, well fed, clean, and otherwise cared for. Humans in mental homes express the same kind of behavior, but mental health problems in zoo animals usually go unnoticed by the passing public." Panaman's findings can help explain some of the erratic behaviors attributed to animals in captivity, like Harambe and his "agitation." Another example of this behavior is the rake marks on the orcas at SeaWorld, a result of stress and frustration.
Another problem Harambe's death raises is the integrity of captivity. The morality of zoos and parks gradually entered the public sphere after a Danish zoo killed a healthy giraffe to limit breeding in 2014, and again this year when SeaWorld announced it would end its captive orca breeding programs. Critics and anti-captivity activists have questioned the necessity of zoos and aquatic parks, claiming they do more harm for the animals (and people) than good.
Keeping animals captive in zoos and parks breeds catastrophe, and allows for deadly encounters like the one between Harambe and the child to occur. According to the organization Born Free, 63 people have been killed and 432 have been been injured as a result of zoo, circus, and exotic pet attacks since 2000. Animals forced to live in captivity, often in conditions significantly worse than their natural environment, are more likely to act erratically and aggressively.
A third problem Harambe's death raises is the necessity of zoos. While some argue zoos are important for protecting biodiversity and endangered species, Stephen Meyer, a former Political Science professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, disagrees. Meyer's 2006 book "The End of the Wild" discusses how humanity needs to, "move away from the current haphazard strategy of protecting species in isolation and create trans-regional 'meta-reserves,' designed to protect ecosystem functions rather than species-specific habitats." Meyer's book claims that zoos and the captive conservation of endangered species is ineffective. As many as 3,000 species go extinct every year, and zoos have no effect on increasing biodiversity or saving these endangered species. It would be more effective to adapt to a global conservation approach; protecting species and their habitats from poachers, pollution, and environmental degradation. Zoos contribute very little to helping save species.
While zoos may provide us with the opportunity to see exotic and endangered animals from across the globe, they offer no benefits to the animals living in captivity. Is the convenience of zoos worth the suffering of the animals we are trying to protect?
