Why The World Needs Zoos - Dr Dave Hone

The ongoing extinction crises shows that zoos are needed - even for common species.

I have written before about the importance of zoos and the role they have to play in the world for conservation
and education. They are in particularly important for endangered species – many animals are critically
endangered in the wild and may go extinct there soon but are going strong in zoos. Many others are already
extinct in the wild and only survive because of populations kept going in captivity. Even those critical of zoos
often recognize this role and that it is better to have species preserved somewhere than be lost for all time.
However, even species that are common can come under severe threat very quickly or without people
realizing.

Take the ring-tailed lemur of Madagascar for example. This animal is almost ubiquitous in zoos and few do not
keep groups of these pretty primates as they breed well in captivity and the public are fond of them. However,
despite their high numbers in collections around the world, they are under severe threat in the wild. A recent
survey suggested that a huge 95% of the wild populations have been lost since 2000. This is clearly
catastrophic and means that the remaining individuals are greatly at risk. One bad year or a new disease could
wipe out those that are left, and small and fragmented populations will be vulnerable to inbreeding so even a
single loss can be keenly felt.

Such trends are not isolated. Giraffe are another species that are very common in zoos and unlike the lemurs
are very widespread being found in numerous countries across much of sub-Saharan Africa. Anyone who has
been on safari in Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa or plenty of other countries will have had no trouble in seeing
plenty of them in the wild and yet giraffe populations have gone down by a third in the last thirty years. While
less dramatic than the lemurs, this is obviously a major loss and again, whole populations (which some
scientists think are in fact unique species) are on the verge of extinction.

Cheetahs too, despite protection and efforts to support populations, are showing a major decline in their wild
populations, primates as a whole are doing badly (it is suggested some 60% of species are at risk) and that’s
on top of the major crisis facing huge numbers of amphibian species. Many other species are probably facing
sudden drops in numbers and some estimates are particularly worrying with suggestions that 50% of species
could be gone at the end of this century. Conservationists struggle to monitor even species known to be
vulnerable, so it is easy to see why common species might be overlooked especially if the perception is that
they are not at risk because there are large numbers. Even a dramatic local loss might be overlooked on the
assumption they are populous elsewhere but clearly that’s not always the case.

Ongoing and future issues from climate change (more extreme weather events, as well as things like overall
warming and sea level changes) can have dramatic and unexpected effects on wildlife and we will likely
struggle to predict which might be at risk. The numbers of species showing major losses, and the number that
we overlook until things are already critical is only likely to rise. A new study suggests that climate change has
already harmed over half of all mammal species on the endangered species list for example, and that is only
likely to increase as more species are put under pressure from climate change and other environmental
pressures.

In short, while zoos do provide a critical reservoir for endangered species, many other animals may yet
become endangered very soon, or already are and we don’t know about it. Those species that are held in zoos
are already protected from any such events and trends. In may not be long until ring tailed lemurs and many
other species are only held in zoos and their loss from the world would be otherwise both tragic and
irreversible.

There will, I suspect, always be resistance to the arguments for keeping animals in captivity and I will not
defend those bad zoos desperately in need of improvement or closure. But if we wish to keep any real
measure of biodiversity on the planet, we may lean on zoos and aquaria far more than many realise. If even
common and popular species can lose a huge percentage of their populations in a few years, it may be too late
to save them with even the best breeding programs or conservation efforts in the wild. As seen here, too often
we do not even know a species is under threat until their numbers have crashed to dangerously low levels and
this is a trend that is only likely to continue.

THE GUARDIAN- Wed 8 Mar 2017 08.00 GMT Last modified on Thu 1 Jun 2017 15.47 BST

Zoos May Actually Hurt Conservation Efforts, Not Help Them

Even under the “best” circumstances, zoos cannot begin to replicate natural habitats. Animals are often
prevented from doing many of the things that are natural and important to them, such as running, roaming,
flying, climbing, foraging, choosing a mate, and being with others of their own kind.
Zoos teach humans that it’s acceptable to interfere with animals and keep them locked in tiny enclosures—
often far from their natural homes—where they’re denied all control over their lives and often become
depressed and frustrated. Many animals in captivity exhibit self-destructive, repetitive behavior because of the
inherent stress—symptoms of a condition known as “zoochosis.”
When the damaging effects that confinement has on animals are this apparent, it’s hard for zoos to explain the
“need” to keep them trapped in unnatural conditions. That’s where the industry’s most powerful marketing tool
comes into play: “conservation.”
Zoos and the Great ‘Conservation’ Con: Zoos claim that they protect species from extinction—a seemingly
noble goal. However, most animals in zoos are not members of endangered species. A study published in the
journal PLOS ONE (which is dedicated to original research from all disciplines within science) found that only
18 percent of land animals in zoo collections are threatened or endangered. Of the nearly 4,000 species in
captivity, only 691 have this status.
The majority of animals held in zoos are not being prepared for release into the wild. In fact, it’s nearly
impossible to release captive-bred animals, including those from threatened species, such as elephants, polar
bears, gorillas, tigers, and chimpanzees.

Those who are reared in zoos are denied the opportunity to learn survival skills, can transmit diseases to their
wild counterparts, and often have no natural habitat left to return to because of human encroachment.
Breeding programs produce cute baby animals to attract zoo patrons and generate revenue but can
sometimes result in a surplus of adult animals, who may be “warehoused” behind the scenes or shuffled off to
shabby roadside zoos.

Touting zoo exhibits as “conservation” efforts may undermine support for and divert resources from existing
programs all over the world.

A 2015 study published in the Journal of Applied Ecology concluded that unless animals in the wild are
protected, captive breeding won’t make a difference: “Our research challenges the assumption that when a
species is perilously close to extinction in the wild, it is always a good idea to set up a captive breeding
population… Without conservation in the wild there is no point in captive breeding” -Dr. Paul Dolman, lead
researcher.

A 2011 study found that North American zoos invested less than 5 percent of their income in conservation, but
even that estimate may be too high. Today, among zoos accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums,
almost half of all reporting organizations spend less than 1 percent of their revenues on conservation. Some
zoos keep this information private, making it difficult to find out how much, if anything, they dedicate to these
efforts.

“We as a society have to decide if it is going to be ethically and morally appropriate to simply display animals
for entertainment purposes… In my opinion, that model is broken. There needs to be an explicit role for zoos to
champion species.” Dr. Steven L. Monfort, director of the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, part of
the National Zoo in Washington, D.C.
What You Can Do? People who want to make a difference can support groups such as the International
Primate Protection League, Born Free USA, and other organizations that work to preserve animals’ natural
habitats. You can also check out these nonprofit sanctuaries that rescue and care for exotic animals but don’t
sell or breed them: The Elephant Sanctuary, the Performing Animal Welfare Society, and Save the Chimps.
You can learn about animals by observing them quietly from a distance or watching any of these great
documentaries available to stream online. You can also help animals by taking action today. PETA – Animals
Are Not Ours Website

Arguments In Favor Of Zoos

 By bringing people and animals together, zoos educate the public and foster an appreciation of the animals. This
exposure and education motivate people to protect the animals.
 Zoos save endangered species by bringing them into a safe environment, where they are protected from poachers,
habitat loss, starvation, and predators.
 Many zoos also have breeding programs for endangered species. In the wild, these individuals might have trouble
finding mates and breeding.
 Reputable zoos are accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums and are held to high standards for the
treatment of the animals. According to the AZA, accreditation means, "official recognition and approval of a zoo or
aquarium by a group of experts."
 A good zoo provides an enriched habitat in which the animals are never bored, are well cared for, and have plenty of
space.
 Zoos are a tradition, and a visit to a zoo is a wholesome, family activity.
 Seeing an animal in person is a much more personal and more memorable experience than seeing that animal in a
nature documentary.
 Some would argue that humans have little, if any duty to non-human animals because humans are more important,
and if keeping animals in zoos serves any educational or entertainment purposes, it serves a purpose to the humans,
even if that purpose is not beneficial for the animals.
 Some zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want or are no longer able to care
for.
 Both accredited and unaccredited animal exhibitors are regulated by the federal Animal Welfare Act, which
establishes standards for care.

Arguments Against Zoos

 From an animal rights standpoint, we do not have a right to breed, capture and confine other animals, even if they are
endangered. Being a member of an endangered species doesn't mean the individual animals have fewer rights.
 Animals in captivity suffer from stress, boredom, and confinement. Intergenerational bonds are broken when
individuals get sold or traded to other zoos, and no pen or even drive-through safari can compare to the freedom of
the wild.
 Baby animals bring in visitors and money, but this incentive to breed new baby animals leads to overpopulation.
Surplus animals are sold not only to other zoos, but also to circuses, canned hunting facilities, and even for slaughter.
 Some zoos just kill their surplus animal outright.
 The vast majority of captive breeding programs do not release animals back into the wild. The offspring are forever
part of the chain of zoos, circuses, petting zoos, and exotic pet trade that buy, sell and barter animals among
themselves and exploit animals. Ned the Asian elephant was born at an accredited zoo, but later confiscated from
an abusive circus trainer and finally sent to a sanctuary.
 Removing individuals from the wild will further endanger the wild population because the remaining individuals will be
less genetically diverse and will have more difficulty finding mates.
 If people want to see wild animals in real life, they can observe wildlife in the wild or visit a sanctuary. A true sanctuary
does not buy, sell, or breed animals, but takes in unwanted exotic pets, surplus animals from zoos or injured wildlife
that can no longer survive in the wild.
 If zoos are teaching children anything, it's that imprisoning animals for our own entertainment is acceptable.
 The argument that children will have more compassion animals they can see life does not hold water.
 Not one of today's children has ever seen a dinosaur, yet kids are crazy about them.
 At least one study has shown that elephants kept in zoos do not live as long as elephants in the wild.
 The federal Animal Welfare Act establishes only the most minimal standards for cage size, shelter, health care,
ventilation, fencing, food, and water. For example, enclosures must provide "sufficient space to allow each animal to
make normal postural and social adjustments with adequate freedom of movement. Inadequate space may be
indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition, debility, stress, or abnormal behavior patterns." Violations often
 result in a slap on the wrist and the exhibitor is given a deadline to correct the violation. Even a long history of
inadequate care and AWA violations, such as the history of Tony the Truck Stop Tiger, will not free the animals.
 Sanctuaries also rehabilitate wildlife and take in unwanted exotic pets, without breeding, buying and selling animals
like zoos do.
 Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as people. There have even been
incidents of zoo animals eating other zoo animals.

In the case of zoos, both sides will argue that their side saves animals. Whether or not zoos benefit the animal community,
they certainly do make money. As long as there is demand for zoos, they will continue to exist.
We can start by making sure that zoo conditions are the best possible for the animals who are confined to them.