The original purpose of zoos was to showcase exotic animals for the entertainment and amusement of humans. This has been a consistent factor throughout time; even now it is a big aspect amidst the huge topic of conservation. The treatment of animals held in captivity has changed over history, as the understanding and views of their well-being has increased. One big contributor to this is the Endangered Species Act of 1973. This act requires that zoos provide endangered or threatened species conservation to the extent of their ability. I found a very informational website regarding the controversy of zoos, Common Sense For Animals. They quoted the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), "Zoos serve a demonstrable purpose in the long term benefit of animals." (HSUS).
There has been a lot of evidence of zoos making efforts to support endangered and threatened species.
Breeding programs have been used to help make a comeback and according to the Smithsonian National Zoological Park, many species have been saved from extinction, including black-footed ferrets, California condors, Partula snails, and Spix’s Macaws. Not only are there successful attempts in conservation by breeding animals, the consideration for proper habitats have been improved in some zoos. One zoo located in Valencia Spain, Bioparc Valencia, has a very different approach to the living arrangements for their animals, which includes a large collection of African animals. It is called “an immersive zoo”, which is a concept of immersing visitors into the animals’ habitat. Instead of using cages and fences as barriers, they use rivers, ponds, streams and rocks.
This gives a very natural illusion to the zoo, and many of them have felt fear, because they are so close to the animals. Another very interesting factor of this zoo is that rather than keeping animals in separate sections, they are allowed to live in the same area, as if they weren’t in a zoo and in their true habitats. “Species that naturally and peacefully reside together in the wild are placed together, while other gentle species, like lemurs, for instance, are free to meet humans face to face, without any barrier.” (Valencia Tourist Guide) I think that besides being a natural approach to captivity, this is a very important aspect of the educational purpose of zoos. Seeing animals interacting with each other, living in a synthetic natural habitat is a hands-on approach to understanding different species. After reading about Bioparc Valencia, I think that this is the proper way to keep animals in captivity, for the purpose of education as well as protecting endangered species.
While zoos are consistently making efforts in promoting and showcasing their conservation impacts, there are many organizations that oppose them. This includes PETA, Born Free Foundation, and Animal Liberation League. It is very understandable where they are coming from, and I have to agree with certain aspects of their dislike for keeping animals in captivity. I know the newfound purpose for zoos is to keep animals healthy and thriving in population, but at what cost? There have been incidents in the past that have supported the fight against keeping animals behind bars and in unnatural habitats. Unfortunately recently, a 7-month-old giraffe was euthanized at a Miami Zoo.
Curiously he had stuck his head through a chain link fence, panicked and jerked back, hurting his neck. He was cared for and medicated, but he couldn’t walk, and according to the Miami Herald, “…a giraffe that cannot stand cannot survive.” Another giraffe incident was mentioned in the article where a baby giraffe injured his neck after running into a single metal wire barrier at Fresno Chaffee Zoo in Fresno, California. Giraffes can be skittish and can easily hurt themselves if they are trapped in tight spots. It is not natural for giraffes to be locked in these small enclosures with hazardous surroundings.
A huge controversial topic involving keeping animals in small spaces is the issue with SeaWorld. Killer whales are large animals. In my opinion, it should be common sense to not keep them in tanks when they naturally and normally need the wide-open ocean to live in. There has been evidence that these enclosed spaces cause stress. The average age of death of killer whales that have died at SeaWorld is 13 years old, while in the wild they have an average life expectancy of 30-50 years.
According to the website, seaworldofhurt.com, all of the captive adult male killer whales have collapsed dorsal fins. This is likely because they have no space to swim freely, and they are fed an unnatural diet of thawed dead fish. In the wild, this is a rare case and a sign of an injured or unhealthy killer whale. Not only are they dying off at a strangely increased rate, and suffering injuries, there have also been many cases where they have acted out against trainers, causing harm, death and danger to many people. Killer whales are used in SeaWorld for entertaining shows, as well as to educate the public. If the killer whales and other animals are as sick as sources claim, then these shows are almost pointless and fail to conserve the species.
Breeding has been proved positive in many zoos in bringing back endangered species. In some cases, however, there have been negative results. Last year at a Copenhagen zoo, a vet killed a perfectly healthy giraffe because his genes were too common. This is a completely unnecessary and disturbing route for a zoo to take when an animal is normal and healthy.
The zoo has claimed to euthanize smaller animals in the past due to the same circumstances, and wildlife conservation centers have offered to provide a home for them. However, the zoo has declined because they explained, “When breeding success increases, it is sometimes necessary to euthanize.” If a species is being bred to either support the zoo or to support it’s endangered status, an animal should not be killed unless it is injured badly and is suffering. As I read the explanation of why a healthy giraffe was killed, I realized that this wasn’t in efforts of conservation. It was in the best interest for the zoo, because they want a unique giraffe for their economical standpoint.
I think that we should only be breeding highly endangered species that cannot currently be released back into the wild. These animals need to be preserved and cared for until they are at a population stable enough to eventually be released into the wild where they will hopefully flourish
I believe that we should maintain captive animals for the purpose of education, but only in the way Bioparc Valencia portrayed it. Cages are not natural, and while people are seeing and learning about animals in the usual generic zoo, I don’t think they are fully able to understand how different species interact with each other, and use nature to support them. There are many zoos that have natural appearing habitats, with animals roaming around. Not all zoos are tiny cages, but there is still a very synthetic feeling and appearance to them in comparison to Bioparc Valencia.
When I was younger, I rarely visited zoos. I haven’t been to one since a school trip in third grade, almost eleven years ago. Before I even went to the zoo, and even in the years following my trip, my love for animals grew. I am so fascinated by every type of animal out there, and I care for them, I learned so much, using books, television and school. I understand that seeing an animal in your presence is a much different experience than seeing one on TV, but I think many people can learn just as much, or even more by researching on their own. I know that people would much rather go to a zoo and learn right then and there instead of finding information on their own time.
Education is promoted heavily at zoos, whether if it’s through shows or information stands in front of exhibits. Zoos have improved a lot over time and although I personally don’t support them for unnecessarily keeping many animals in captivity, they are a very good source of information for education and conserving many species.
