Simple question. After the incident in San Francisco, the inevitable argument arises. Is it inhumane (not to mention unsafe) to display wild animals for public entertainment?
I think that we’re more likely to care about animals that we see in person. Sure, it’s cruel to cage and confine creatures that Og meant to be free. The fight to save habitate hasn’t been going too well, though…without zoos, we might as well just go ahead and kiss some of those charismatic megafauna good-bye.
There are some magnificent animals around of which more specimens are in zoos than in the wild. Why lose them?
Most modern zoos, from what I can see, keep their animals in comfortable accomodations, appropriate to the species. The days when they’d toss a lion into a ten-be-ten steel cage are long over.
As I’ve stated before in these sort of discussions, zoos in my mind are vital for exactly one reason - education of the young. I think it is important for young people to see actual, physical animals, marvel at them and perhaps learn a smidgeon in the process. I know they had a real impact on me as a child ( and I attended after school/weekend programs at the SF Zoo in the 1970’s ) and I’ve seen the positive impact they’ve had on my nieces/nephews. It’s really where a lot of young environmentalists get their start and that’s a good thing.
Captive breeing programs are also of limited, but admittedly for the most part probably very limited, utility.
But mostly it’s for the young. We should strive to improve zoos as much as possible, but I think they serve a genuine purpose that for urban kids in particular might be irreplaceable. MHO.
I went to summer school at the San Diego Zoo. Ever had an Echidna pee in your hands?
No, but a I had a ringtail lemur lick my face and an annoyed wolf cub growl menacingly at me as I stupidly insisted on petting him while he slurped down his milk and meat mush :p.
You guys got to PET the animals? Lucky!
I will echo what Tamerlane said, that it is important for kids to see animals, take interest in them, and learn about them.
Some people insist that zoos are prisons for animals, but I think of them more like retirement communities. If the animals are neglected or abused in any way, it will quickly get the public spotlight and be bad for business.
Zoos are vital for several reason. In my opinion the number one reason is teaching our kids to appreciate animals and about animals. Nature shows alone are not enough.
The protecting of severely endangered animals is another great reason, but IMHO second even to the educational mission that most Zoos appear to embrace these days.
Many Zoos do a lot of research with animals these days and add to our general knowledge of animal species.
I have been to so many Zoos and Aquariums around the nation and even in Scotland, that I cannot keep track of the number anymore. I went as a kid, a young adult, a married guy without kids and now even more often with kids. I might be closing in on 50 zoos and aquariums at this point.
The Bronx Zoo is still my favorite. The Bronx Zoo and the San Diego Zoo do a great job with animal habitats. Strangely the San Francisco Zoo is one I missed. Someday I will have to visit it.
Jim
Zoos are infinitely better than they were when I was growing up. They are still prisons where the animals are not responsible for their own livelihood. Obviously I am ambivalent on the subject. Perhaps when our so-called civilization collapses, the zoos will repopulate (reanimate?) the world.
FWIW, I heard on this morning’s news that the wall surrounding the lion exhibit in SF was lower than the standard recommendation.