Are Zoos Ethical?

[Lightworker]

Hi!! I was just wondering what your thoughts are on zoos. I have visited a few and some of the ones that tend to be deemed as the "better" ones and was talking to a friend who said they didn't particularly like zoos because its not really a natural habitat for the animals.

I know that the zoo keepers make as much effort to make everything seem as natural as possible, from creating devices to drag food around so the carnivores can chase it sort of simulating life in the wild to the way they build the housing etc.

I'm used to driving around and seeing wildlife walking along the roads like baboons and giraffes, anyone thats been to Kenya/Tanzania will know what I mean. So I can totally see their point. The freedom that the animals experience is a million times greater than those in the zoos could hope for.

I know some argue that zoos also act as sanctuaries for endangered species, but there are sanctuaries in Africa that have successfully kept species in existence such as the black rhino.

What are your thoughts? Do you think it is ethical for animals to be kept in zoos? And do you visit them? I am not judging at all. Just nice debate

 

[Nibblenic]

I think from a educational stand point Zoos are very effective and it isnt possible to travel as widely in the main to see all the animals that you would in a zoo.

I do think that some Zoos are cruel, Im talking world wide not paticularly in the UK

Obviously the animals dont have the skills or stimulation as the ones int he wild so, but neither do domesticated, cats/dogs/horses anything really

I am personally very happy to visit Zoos and enjoy learning about and seeing these animals

I would however say I have little to no interest in animals rights dont believe in vegitarianism and condone fox hunting. So perhaps I dont mind as I dont really feel strongly about animal welfare

 

[Blah11]

in some ways yes, I do. They are great for education and they do take part in lots of endangered species breeding programs. and I know you say that there are places in Africa BUT poaching still is rife

Its tricky because some enclosures ARE too small (the big cats are usually always too small) I've been to amsterdam zoo and the enclosures are WAY smaller than edinburgh zoo ones.


Edinburgh is getting pandas apparently

 

[marley2580]

I think zoos are probably a necessary evil as their role in education etc probably outweighs the harm they may cause to individual animals iykwim

 

[summer rain]

I'm not sure. I wasn't allowed to visit zoos as a child because my mum was very adamant that they were unethical and cruel. I have been to London zoo as an adult and yes many of the enclosures aren't as big as they could be. To me the welfare of the animals and the long term survival of species is far more important than me being able to show the kids what a giraffe looks like in real life...

 

[Sarahkka]

Zoos have an ugly history, but their modern existence in accredited institutions (accredited by organizations like the American Zoos and Aquariums Association (AZAA) and its other counterparts) has done and continues to do tremendous things for conservation.
I have been to Kenya and Tanzania and was impressed by the wealth of wildlife there (and I come from the mountain parks in Canada, so I'm a wilderness snob! ), but the fragmentation of habitat and human encroachment is as bad there as anywhere else I've seen.
I think the accredited zoos are in a unique position to act as a sort of genetic Noah's Ark. If we don't maintain genetic diversity in endangered species populations, we will lose them for good. Many of the critically endangered species will be gone in 50 years in the wild unless some massive changes happen. Having a captive population as a gene bank is our best insurance policy against that. And the accredited places all fund and support local and global wildlife research, veterinary science research, human/wildlife projects, you name it.

These zoos are very different from some nasty roadside menagerie, and are very different from zoos of even 30 years ago. I think they strive for very high ethics, actually, and in most cases are achieving more for animal welfare and conservation than any PETA-like organization ever has.

 

[marley2580]

To me the welfare of the animals and the long term survival of species is far more important than me being able to show the kids what a giraffe looks like in real life...

See, I think that kids need to see animals in real life in order to really understand and care about them. They can be told about the wildlife in africa and how endangered it is, but I think seeing the animals in person can really hit home and make people care more.

 

[KaceysMummy]

The zoo is keeping animals in order to preserve a species that is under threat in the wild, a lot of animals would already be extinct with out captivity - it would be unforgivable to allow tigers, pandas and so on to become extinct because they were wiped out in the wild due to hunting, habitat loss, etc., and people did not want to see them in captivity. Would you like to have explain to your children or grandchildren that they will never see a tiger except in pictures, because you disagreed with zoos? I certainly wouldn't.
They treat the animals in an appropriate way, so I see nothing wrong with that when it comes to the welfare of the animal.
Most animals in the zoo where captive bred anyway so they know no different and its not like they are unhappy...
Animals have no knowledge of abstract concepts or things outside their own experience. They have no idea what freedom is, or that there is any other life than the one they lead.
Animals in captivity live much longer than their wild counterparts - twice or even three times as long in some cases. They don't have to worry about hunting and catching prey for food, mating, fighting for territory or have struggle to survive each day.

The only thing that I disagree about the zoo is there prices

 

[special_kala]

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of taking River to a zoo. If we were going to take her to one then it would need to be a conservation one like london zooe

 

[SKATERBUN]

I think today the majority if not all in the UK are concerned with breeding and conservation of species which would have died out in some parts of the world if it had not been from public interest. I remember zoos from the 80's and beyond and no they were not nice places to be in, but the times have changed and high welfare standards and knowledge has increased dramatically from times goen by.
I think in some parts of the world this education is still lacking and behind, and animals are still seen as a source of fun or entertainment as they were a century ago over here. the WWF and WSPA are still the way forwards in protecting and educating those animals whilst still in their own habitat, but zoos/animal parks as they are more wildely know now, as I said are also important for breeding programmes and educating the public, adults and children.

 

[cleckner04]

I love zoos. We have a membership to our zoo. But it's the world famous san diego zoo and they make so many efforts to help endangered animals. They have a breeding program for pandas with a huge panda research facility with classes to teach people about pandas, etc. And the less known california condor which had only a few birds left in the wild until the zoo came and started breeding them and releasing them to bring back up the population in California. I think it's really important for Emma to learn about these kinds of things. And 'hands on' learning is usually the most effective way imo. I've never been to a zoo that wasn't involved in breeding programs and helping the environment.

 

[marley2580]

On a different note, I'm in agreement with Chris Pakham when he says that pandas should be allowed to die out. I think they always were going to die out due to their reliance on only one food.

 

[Sarahkka]

I disagree, marley.
I think we have a moral obligation to go to extraordinary measures to conserve every species on this planet because WE are the cause of their endangerment.
Pandas rely on bamboo forests. There is no shortage of bamboo. There is a shortage of intact habitat. And we caused that.

 

[Midnight_Fairy]

The only zoos I have gone to are mainly conservation ones! They rescue animals in need, therefore their life is better anyway. I agree with conservation of species, also teaching children about the world too.

I refused to go in the zoo in spain though. It looked awful.

 

[Midnight_Fairy]

On a different note, I'm in agreement with Chris Pakham when he says that pandas should be allowed to die out. I think they always were going to die out due to their reliance on only one food.

OT- but he lives near me and I always see him in Tescos haha .

 

[XfairyhopesX]

As a huge animal lover i actually love the idea of being able to access animals that close... however i do not agree with them caged, i much prefer the thought of them in the wild / natural habitats etc, at a push safari parks are preferable for breeding animals extremely close to extinction like the rhinos / panda etc and have a large large large valley to play in.

x

 

[Lightworker]

I still struggle to accept the educational value of zoos TBH. I remember learning about volcanos and to this day have never seen one but still got As in geography. It doesn't seem a fair trade to me to exchange life in the wild for the sake of educationg children mostly.

 

[Sarahkka]

Well, here's my take on it.

"In the end, we will conserve only what we love, we will love only what we understand, and we will understand only what we are taught."
— Baba Dioum, Senegalese conservationist

I really believe that quote.
I live in a smallish Canadian city (~1 million people). We are right next to incredible wilderness areas, but many of the kids I have worked with in our school systems have never been there. Many of them don't even visit our city green spaces. Nature and animals are something strange and uncomfortable for them.
I have seen firsthand the bridging effect that the Zoo in our city has had for those school kids. The connections they forge to the animals they meet and the ecosystems they learn about are real and meaningful. These encounters often lead to bigger conservation projects as the Zoo works to connect the kids with how their everyday choices affect the habitats of the animals they meet.
Example: a cell phone recycling program to benefit gorillas (reduces cell phone demand for coltan - a mineral found only in prime gorilla habitat). After a visit and class session studying gorillas, we get whole schools participating in a cell phone drive to add to the Zoo's eco-cell program. Those kids were inspired to care, to do something, because of their visit.

Also, this idea that the animals in Zoos would otherwise be free is a common misconception. Accredited zoos do not go out and grab animals from the wild. That was a bad practise and is a thing of the past. The animals in these zoos are captive -bred. And those that aren't, are rescue animals (ie orphaned, injured, etc - not going to survive, otherwise).

Did you know that the AZAA states that in an ideal world zoos would not be necessary? In the meantime, I think accredited zoos and aquariums are making tremendous efforts to raise awareness and promote conservation.

 

[Lightworker]

That is an interesting take and I think when you have a good reservation whose main aim is conservation then it makes perfect sense. I have however been to a zoo where by they had 4ish lions in an enclosure that had perhaps a 500m circumference. I do not in any way believe they are a conservation project. Also TBH some of the animals could not be further from exctinction.

 

[Sarahkka]

BIG difference between accredited and non-accredited zoos.