How would we feel if we were imprisoned in small enclosures and put on display? . Even if animals aren’t “intelligent” to the extent humans are, should that give us license to degrade by penning them up in cramped cages so we can gawk at them?
Well, it certainly isn’t moral to put a polar bear on display at the L.A. Zoo (where animals do hard time!).
An animal suited for sub-zero temps in a city zoo, in an outdoor display where temps can reach 120 degrees.
:eek: :eek:
Probably yes.
Zoo encourage people to take an interest in animals. Without zoos, a zebra would be something we saw on TV. We have zoos, and it is right to debate their morality, but without them we might have an even worse view of our companions on the planet.
When you put it that way, probably not. But zoos do more than just put animals on display; they feed them and keep them healthy and safe from predators and hunters. Without zoos, species that are currently endangered would probably be extinct instead. Animals in zoos live longer and healthier lives than their brethren in the wild. Most are probably not aware that their freedom has been restricted, though of course we can’t know their minds.
This is a really good question, one I have wrestled with more as I have gotten older.
I think on balance the fact that most modern zoos make education a big part of their mission outweighs the any negative effects of captivity on a few individual animals. For example the Giant Pandas at the National Zoo in Washington no doubt helped educate millions of people who wouldn’t have otherwise known about the plight of the species in the wild.
Zoos from 50-100 years or more ago had less of an instructional role, and the conditions some individual animals lived in was deplorable, so I would say that probably wasn’t morally defensible.
The question posed in the OP has in fact made it much harder for me to enjoy such entertainments as circuses where otherwise wild animals perform tricks merely for our amusement.
I agree with Laughing Lagamorph . Today’s zoos are much more about conservation and less about entertainment.
For those who are interested, there is a show on the Discovery channel called “Zoo Diaries”. It’s filmed at the Toronto zoo, and you get to see a lot of deatils about life in a zoo that the average visitor there wouldn’t - behind-the-scenes things like surgery, training, birthing, etc. The animals there have very good living conditions and appear quite happy and comfortable, and the zoo staff are very good in their interactions with them. There was one episode where a fruit bat had to have surgery and died on the table, and one of the zookeepers was crying. You can tell they really care about these animals.
That’s just the Toronto zoo, though - I hope all zoos keep these same standards.
In particular they are much more about education. I think zoos are a necessary evil as a forum for exposing children to conservation issues and the diversity of living things ( they certainly turned me into a budding conservationist at a young age ). The captive breeding programs are nice, but I suspect only a few will have any real impact. But the real importance of zoos is their impact on the younger generation.
- Tamerlane
The animals in the Calgary Zoo are given enclosures appropriate for their nature wherever possible.
Animals are taken off display whenever it would harm the animal to be on display, or benefit the animal to be taken off display. We get to see the animals when it is best for the animal.
How do you know it degrades them? Have animals sent you letters in code telling you that they are humiliated and need to be released?
I am a supporter of our local zoo which, as others have said, is much more about education and conservation than it is about “gawk[ing]” at penned animals.
I am also a supporter of animal rights, but unfortunately, humans are in the process of taking over the entire world and marginalizing and exterminating every living species that gets in the way of that, and zoos are one of our last lines of defence against species after species disappearing forever. If our zoo wanted to take all the animals off display and concentrate solely on conservation, I would still support them, but, like others have also said, seeing the animals is part of what makes their conservation efforts possible.
(ps - There are more Siberian Tigers in captivity than there are in the wild due to habitat loss.)
When I see a tiger or leopard pacing back and forth in some 20 or 30 foot wide cage, and know that is the extent of it’s life expectations, I do think it degrades the animal in some fashion, no matter what self serving, feelgood excuses we make up for ourselves as to why it doesn’t “matter” to the animal.
I love going to the zoo. So much so, that I have a pass so that I can take my daughter every week. The Fort Worth Zoo is really nice and not too far from me.
There are times when I feel badly for the animals (the higher thinking ones especially, like primates) but then I think that it can’t be any worse than living in a place where they would probably die out due to poaching or encroaching human habitats.
Then I stop to think this:
Man, doesn’t that Chimp have it made?
Then I think how in the case of some people I know, the lifestyle isn’t that different: go to work, come home, eat, stay on the computer all night. Repeat til death.
I mean, in some case of the people, if they were in a habitat I don’t think they’d mind it so much.
All (somewhat) kidding aside, I don’t know that in some cases if the wild would be much diffferent. The gorilla at the zoo is almost always in the same spot. I have been told that he’d be doing the same thing (just sitting there) if he were in the wild.
That said, I think cages are not good. The animals should be in natural habitats.
Depends on the zoo. The “Exhibits” at the Toronto Zoo look very comfortable; they’re designed specifically to suit the needs of each animal, with ample spaces landscaped specifically to mimic the animal’s usual habitat. Having been there dozens of times I can tell you it really is as nice and spacious as it looks in “Zoo Diaries.” They’re amazingly well cared for. I don’t know what zoo you’ve been to where tigers are kept in 30-foot cages, but I have never seen such a thing.
Some zoos are apparently pretty crusty, but they’re going by the wayside. I am spoiled by the Toronto Zoo, which is one of the finest zoos ever constructed. I do know this though; zoos are becoming the natural habitat of some creatures, and without them they would vanish. As featherlou points out but understates, there are more tigers - Siberian OR Bengal - in captivity than there are tigers not in captivity. In effect, the tiger’s natural habitat is zoos.
As for primates, I would suggest they may actually LIKE living in a nice zoo. Last year Mrs. RickJay and I visited the zoo and found to our disappointment that all the big ape displays were hidden under camouflage nets. It was part of an experiment run by some British university to see how they would behave if cut off from the regular exposure to humans. We asked one of the research assistants how the apes were doing. According to her, they had found that the apes hated it; they were becoming irritable and temperamental and were obviously depressed. They enjoyed seeing people go by.
Reminds me of a cartoon set in a safari park. One lion to the other:
“Isn’t it cruel the way they keep them cooped up in those little boxes”.
As other posters have noted, it depends on the zoo. Keeping an animal in a small cage is pretty cruel, but not a lot of American zoos do that any more. Even the D.C. zoo, which is a pretty small zoo, gives the animals room to roam.
Also, I think anti-zoo people are making a lot of assumptions as to what animals really want. While I can’t get inside my cats’ heads, I really think they prefer the comforts of home, heat, and easily obtained food to the struggle for survival in the “natural” world. A lot of animals are territorial, and can adapt to small territories, provided they are reasonable and designed with the animal in mind, not just a small jail cell.
What zoos have you visited? I have never seen this-the Pittsburgh Zoo has the animals in huge areas that are designed just as their own natural habitats would be. The tigers have this enormous area to run around in, to play and explore. I don’t remember any of the animals being in cages, unless you count some of the wire enclosures over the top of some areas.
In fact, sometimes, we would go and it would be near impossible to see the animals, because they were hidden back in their dens or among the plants.
A good zoo loves, cares for, and protects the animals while educating the public.
Yes, there are still some exploitive ‘lock up the critters for the amusement of toursists’ places left. I cannot think of one that uses the word zoo.
Unless the National Zoo in DC has really changed since last time I visited, it placed a great deal of emphasis on education, conservation (A seal exhibit had a large sign displaying a color photograph of a seal stomach filled with pocket change. This made it very clear that you should not throw your change into the seal pond, and helped drive home the message that we must consider the consequences of our actions) and keeping the animals comfortable.
The alternative is wildlife preserves that are not adequately funded or staffed, where poachers can kill anything that produces ivory or an interesting hide.
Always go to the zoo on a cool, overcast day. Big animals hide and sleep when it’s hot. On overcast days you see the big ticket animals more, plus there’s smaller crowds.
Astro, I’ve also wondered where you have seen animals in cramped cages lately.
I live about two blocks from the Nashville Zoo. It was a Wildlife Park until about four or five years ago. Then the city began moving the zoo here from another area. So far I’ve been generally pleased with what I’ve seen.
There are a few exceptions. For example, I don’t like to see elephants trained to do any “tricks” and I don’t like to see animals used to give children rides. (I don’t know if they are still giving rides or not. They may have stopped.)
Most of the volunteers and workers at the zoo are animal rights supporters and certainly animal lovers.
Many zoos have excellent breeding programmes.
Kiwis are endangered because of introduced predators. The dept of conservation takes eggs from the bush and they are hatched and raised at Auckland zoo. When the chicks are old enough to look after themselves they are released. During their time at the zoo they are not on display to the public at all.
Zoos do good work on many levels.
Astro, I’d highly recommend reading “The Life of Pi” by Yann Martel, in which the author explores this very question. Apart from being an excellent story in its own right, it explains how the animals can be perfectly happy in zoos because all of their territorial needs are being met.