|
Until recently the case for zoos was never questioned. They are accepted as useful and
entertaining amenities which were also educational. Children love seeing animals, and a visit to
the zoo has always been a treat.
Gradually however unrest has grown about the morality of keeping animals, reptiles and
birds in captivity, though not on grounds of ill-treatment, lack of hygiene or incorrect feeding.
The concept of confining them in cages became suspect. More than fifty years ago a wildlife park
was established at Whipsnade in Bedfordshire, UK, and since the Second World War in the
grounds of large houses such as Longleat. The major-attraction types of animals such as lions,
tigers and elephants thus have room to move freely and to set up their own social structures.
They are fenced off from the public except in safari parks where people can see them at close
quarters from rover type vehicles.
There are four points in favor of zoos, and arguments against them all. The first is
conservation. Due to over shooting and deforestation in Africa, India and elsewhere, many
species are endangered or becoming extinct. The koala bear, some types of deer and the Arabian
oryx are examples. Attempts to mate these in captivity have been successful, with the result that
their natural habitats have been re-stocked. This process is expensive and time-consuming,
however.
Sometimes it is unsuccessful. Sometimes animals bred in captivity cannot adapt to the wild,
and either die or fall prey to predators. The fact is that only 5% of endangered species are to be
found in zoos, so the whole concept may be wrong. These arguments do not of course apply
to bird sanctuaries, where the birds are encouraged to frequent natural but protected habitats,
and are never confined.
The main argument against is that available money should be put into the saving of natural
habitats. Realistically, this is totally impracticable overseas, and difficult enough in the country
concerned.
Point two is that zoos are educational. Seeing and touching animals means much more to
a child than any number of good books or pictures. Children have a chance to touch, groom and
ride on animals in a modern zoo. Some zoos specialize in activity centers which generate love of
animals, understanding and enjoyment. The counter to this argument is that animals dislike
being domesticated for any reason, and that in the strict sense the zoo does not further education.
Zoology is best learnt in the classroom, in the laboratory, and from the text-book. Another
counter-argument is that for close contact, visual or actual, cages must be small. This
inhibits
exercise, and worse, prevents the putting together of enough animals to allow for natural social
behavior, i.e. the setting up of families and clans. However it is conceded that given large
enough cages or confined areas with sufficient animals these defects can be largely overcome.
It has to be said that zoos are constantly improving their facilities and bringing them into line
with the animal's natural surroundings as far as possible. The polar bear house in London Zoo
is currently being remodeled in this way.
If the wishes of the public are to be considered, zoos as recreational amenities have a large
following, and should be kept. Children have been mentioned, but the informative booklets,
scripts and tapes available in a modern zoo attract the adult also. Entrance takings are high,
and money becomes available for research as well as improvement. Some agree; others ask why
animals should be made a peepshow.
The fourth argument for zoos is that they not only allow for research but also finance it.
This again is not considered a valid argument by the opponents. What kind of research ? people
ask. In the case of the London Zoo the answer is that they have an Institute of Zoology. This
produces comparative surveys, statistics for analysis, and data bases. The veterinary branch
learns how best to keep animals and treat them when sick. Animal nutrition is studied. Problems
of re-introduction into the wild are studied. Animal behavior is studied. Nothing was known
about the social habits of the rhinoceros until specimens were brought into captivity and
observed in suitable surroundings.
What of the future ? Despite all arguments to the contrary, the continued development of
zoos seems to be a valid policy. The old defects will be overcome. Surroundings will be made
larger and more natural. There is also a strong case for the specialized zoo or sanctuary, such
as the woolly monkey sanctuary at Looe, in Cornwall, UK. This provides conservation,
education about their kinship and social life in natural colonies, plus personal contact, with
opportunities to touch and groom; also lectures. The future may lie in this direction.
|
