We’re not all going to the zoo
Zoos have been around for centuries. Helen Harvey asks if they still have a place in the modern world.
Zoos were first called menageries. They were owned by rich people to show off their power. And, just like in the movies, you can still buy your own. In New Plymouth Pouakai Zoo is up for sale. It’s small, but has white tigers and two lions – Aslan and Asha.
Zoos, or menageries, have been in existence for millennia.
Over the last 50 years they have had a major change in outlook, with increased focus on conservation, research and education. They’ve come a long way from the days of the chimps’ tea parties or tigers caged in concrete rooms that look no different to a prison lock up.
But, while zoo advocates believe modern, or progressive, zoos are important for conservation, research and education, others think zoos should be consigned to history.
And actually Auckland Zoo director Kevin Buley partly agrees with that sentiment. He reckons 95 per cent of the world’s zoos should be shut down tomorrow.
‘‘Good zoos are being dragged down by thousands of these zoos around the world.
‘‘It’s fair to say there is still a lagging perception about zoos, that it’s cruel to have animals in a zoo setting. These perceptions of zoos persist and exist because of these bad zoos. If we could shut 95 per cent of them it would be fantastic.’’
The ‘‘good’’ zoos Buley talks of are different from the ones people older than 40 might remember from their childhood. ‘‘Hand on heart: modern zoos get it right.’’
At Auckland Zoo animals have a better life than their counterparts would in the wild, he says.
‘‘It’s a powerful thing to say. And it’s not something we say lightly. You have to have the science... the financial support... everything correct. Very few zoos on the planet do that.’’
And zoos are playing a crucial role in conservation.
‘‘There are species alive in New Zealand that would not be if not for the work we are doing with DOC.’’
He gives the we¯ ta¯ punga as an example. The giant we¯ ta¯ was on the brink of extinction, found on just one island in New Zealand. Now, as a result of the zoo breeding thousands of them, their future is secure. But it is fair to say people don’t go to zoos to see we¯ ta¯ and Buley agrees.
‘‘I love we¯ ta¯ and birds, but to see the look on a child’s face when see their first lion or get up close with elephant... they provide the types of memories that last a lifetime.’’
And while lions aren’t part of its conservation programme the zoos look after the lions giving them a less stressful life than their wild living counterparts, he says.
‘‘They provide good welfare and protect them from the crap experienced in the wild.’’
But not everyone agrees with the good life argument.
A young elephant gifted to John Key in 2016 when he was Prime Minister has still not left Sri Lanka.
Activists in Sri Lanka went to court to stop the move saying the elephant was better off at home with its mother.
Animal advocacy organisation SAFE (Save Animals From Exploitation) head of campaigns Marianne Macdonald agrees.
She says the elephant, indeed all elephants, should stay in their natural environment.
And if another Sri Lankan elephant, Anjalee, which arrived at Auckland Zoo in 2015, has any calves they are never going to be reintroduced into the wild, she says. ‘‘They’re just more animals to stare at.’’
No matter how well intentioned a zoo is, it is impossible for it to provide all that’s required for an animal to be able to express natural behaviour, she says.
That’s why SAFE encourages people to boycott zoos.
‘‘I think people need to seriously question whether that’s what they want to do with their money.
‘‘If they want to support conservation and help animals, put that support into projects that preserve habitats for animals in the wild or tree planting or beach clean ups that can affect animals,’’ Macdonald says.
‘‘Zoos are definitely something that needs to be consigned to the history books. The treatment of animals in zoos is not outright abuse, but in a lot of cases, particularly for the larger animals, they cause extreme deprivation because they are in such a restricted environment.’’
As one example, research has shown tigers enjoy roaming around in an area 18,000 times larger than the average zoo enclosure, she says.
The lack of mental stimulation can cause boredom and severe stress. Zoochosis is the name for extreme physical and mental frustration and abnormal behaviour such as pacing or rocking backwards and forwards and self-mutilation.
Neither does Macdonald buy into the conservation argument. Most species in a zoo are not endangered, she says.
‘‘It’s like they are living museum exhibits that bring in visitors to keep the business going. There are some small schemes in some zoos, for instance Auckland Zoo, that support in New Zealand conservation projects.’’
But life in modern zoos, involved in conservation work, can be brutal for animals as the world discovered when Copenhagen Zoo euthanised a baby giraffe called Marius, in 2014.
Marius was a healthy giraffe whose only mistake was to have been born with common genes. The zoo decided to use it as an opportunity to educate the public, so they shot it and then publicly dissected it and fed it to the lions.
It was four years ago now, but created a world wide scandal at the time as the public reacted emotionally to the ‘‘murder’’ of Marius.
Jeraldine Teng, an expert in captive wildlife conservation, says the way the media described the incident ‘‘wasn’t ideal.’’
If an animal is genetically unviable and the zoo doesn’t have the resources to look after it and it can’t be rehomed, then the zoo may have to euthanise it, she says.
‘‘The way Copenhagen Zoo did it was educational. It’s a bit gory, but if you watch wild animals get hunted it’s not a fun sight. It is heartbreaking. It’s sad for the animal, but that’s the way it is.’’
All good zoos participate in conservation, she says, and to breed an animal for conservation the genetic make up is taken into consideration.
‘‘So, progressive, or modern, zoos have associations they are part of and these associations have a stud book keeper and that person, or team, keeps track of the individual animal’s genetics.
‘‘They work in partnership or collaboration with zoos or in their association, so the correct individual breeds with the other one – like a dating service. This is to make sure the genetics are healthy and the animals are viable for release in the future if ever a situation allows.’’
But some species can’t be released in the wild because their natural habitat is no longer big enough or safe enough, she says.
‘‘Other organisations actually are buying up land to provide habitat for the animals, which would be the ideal way of doing things. But as you can imagine a lot of the habitats for the charismatic animals are in developing countries and they usually have limited funds.’’
That’s one of the reasons Teng believes zoos still have a role – if they are managed well and responsibly and transparently.
‘‘It is unfortunate that some animals have to be in captivity because their habitat has been destroyed and the rehabilitation is not fast enough that we can reintroduce that.
‘‘Because of the way we have urbanised our cities and landscapes the opportunity for people to actually encounter wildlife is becoming less and less.
‘‘It’s not about the ‘‘poor animals’’. One of the positive things about animals in captivity is they are taken care of properly.
‘‘They don’t face predation. They get given food two or three times a day. They are kept clean and warm and they are being looked after.’’
In New Zealand the modern zoos look after the animals quite responsibly, she says. ‘‘The same cannot be said of some developing countries. But that has to do with the cultural perceptions of what animals’ role in society is and their resources are limited.’’
"Hand on heart: modern zoos get it right.’’
Kevin Buley
Auckland Zoo director
‘‘Zoos are definitely something that needs to be consigned to the history books."
Marianne Macdonald
Save Animals From Exploitation