This week, a keeper was killed at Hamerton Zoo Park in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire in a "freak accident" after a tiger entered the enclosure she was in.
South Lakes Safari Zoo in Dalton-in-Furness , Cumbria, was recently refused a new licence after nearly 500 of its animals died over a four-year period. And just under a year ago, Harambe, a gorilla, was shot at Cincinnati Zoo after it picked up a three-year-old
child who had climbed into its enclosure. Responsible Travel has responded to these incidents, and general animal welfare concerns, by breaking all ties with zoos. It is the first British travel company to take such a strong stand, arguing that there is no justification for keeping animals in captivity. The operator explained its decision by citing welfare fears, low investment from zoos in conservation (they claim most zoos spend only three per cent of their budgets on this), and the fact that 90 per cent of animals in zoos are not endangered.
“It is fabulous to see a travel company being brave, sticking their heads above the parapet and saying that in 2017 keeping animals in captivity purely for our entertainment is just not acceptable,” said Joanna Lumley, the animal welfare campaigner and actress.
In 2017 keeping animals in captivity purely for our entertainment is just not acceptable Joanna Lumley “There are so many superb ways to learn about and appreciate animals in the wild; we should be encouraging people to get out into nature, not watching wildlife behind bars. I hope that more companies will
follow this excellent example.”
Has the public lost its appetite for zoos?
Some of my fondest childhood memories involve trips to the zoo. My parents held my fourth birthday party at the Bronx Zoo, and there are photos of me and my friends riding an elephant.
Over the past three decades, zoos have evolved, but there remains this fundamental problem: these are
institutions that display animals in ways that prevent them from engaging in their natural behaviour - in
particular, breeding, hunting and moving across large areas.
“Zoos cannot meet the unique environmental, nutritional, climate and social needs of the species they hold captive,” says Elisa Allen, director of Peta UK .
“Consequently, an informed populace is now turning away from what are essentially animal prisons that cannot even guarantee their inmates' safety.”
But are zoos actually so bad?
My friend, who regularly brings her children to British zoos, dismissed my unease: “I think the animals [in zoos] live like royalty: they get the best food, they are isolated from all danger and that’s why they live so
much longer,” she says.
Other fans of zoos say they remain relevant because they educate and contribute to conservation and research. And, if we’re allowed to prioritise one type of
animal over another, they perform the often difficult task of getting human beings - particularly young ones - off the sofa, away from gadgets, and into a live experience.
Professor David Field, zoological director at ZSL London and Whipsnade Zoos , highlights the significant contribution his institutions have made to the
conservation of endangered species and their habitats around the world.
“We carry out research on animal ecology, physiology and behaviour, we develop groundbreaking veterinary techniques that are applied in the wild by our field veterinary teams, and we engage huge audiences with wildlife, and inspire the conservationists of tomorrow.”
He cites two particular recent triumphs of ZSL: the release of scimitar-horned oryx (once declared extinct in their native habitat), including some bred at Whipsnade, back to the wild, where they are already rearing young. Inside Gir Lion Lodge at London Zoo, where guests are guaranteed a really wild time. He argues also that money raised and research done through Land of the Lions , ZSL London Zoo’s flagship
exhibit, has offered game-changing support to Sasan Gir in India, the Asiatic lion’s last stronghold, protecting
their habitat and increasing the lion population there from 2015 to 2016 by approximately 100 individuals - taking the population to 500.
“We know not all zoos are the same. We’re members of BIAZA (British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums) whose high standards we uphold,” says
Professor Field, who advises parents to seek out members of this group. “Our conservation focus is very much about protecting both species and their habitats – it’s a key part of what we do.”
The 'Disneyfication' of animals
Three years ago, staff members at Copenhagen Zoo sparked international outrage when they shot a healthy young giraffe , called Marius, and dissected it in public,
in front of children, before feeding its remains to the zoo’s lions. Danish zoos routinely cull animals they deem surplus to their requirements, and use the remains as teaching tools for veterinary students and members of the public (with videos of the dissections posted on YouTube).
This practice plays better in a country whose abattoirs have public viewing platforms than in squeamish Britain or America.
Euthanising animals for population control is not an exclusively Danish practice (read Ian Parker’s excellent article, “Killing animals at the zoo” , to learn more) - but culling (an estimated 3,000-5,000 animals each year in European zoos) tends to be hidden elsewhere.
But there is hypocrisy in our squeamishness. Fewer than five per cent of Britons are vegetarians. In a country that raises animals for slaughter, is it so illogical to raise animals for education and as food for other animals? Does a giraffe deserve a better quality of life than a pig? Is this not, as the Danes claim, just the Disneyfication of animals?
What can a responsible parent do?
First, be honest - as a family - about how we treat animals. The zoo debate is an emotive one, but our meat-eating habits have a bigger impact on animal welfare. I’m with the Danes when it comes to the issue of 'Disneyfication'. It’s hypocritical to prioritise the rights of an elephant over a chicken. So either become a vegetarian - discuss this with your children: do they
want to? - or bring them to farms and proper butchers and really consider the body your steak and chicken nuggets come from. Make sure you’re buying free range
meat and make sure your children know which animals “beef” and “pork” come from. We need to clarify the mission of zoos in 2017 Are they really raising money for conservation? How much? And what is that “ But there is hypocrisy in our squeamishness. Fewer
than five per cent of Britons are vegetarians. In a
country that raises animals for slaughter, is it so
illogical to raise animals for education and as food for
other animals? Does a giraffe deserve a better quality of
life than a pig? Is this not, as the Danes claim, just the
Disneyfication of animals?
What can a responsible parent do?
First, be honest - as a family - about how we treat
animals.
The zoo debate is an emotive one, but our meat-eating
habits have a bigger impact on animal welfare. I’m with
the Danes when it comes to the issue of
'Disneyfication'. It’s hypocritical to prioritise the rights
of an elephant over a chicken. So either become a
vegetarian - discuss this with your children: do they
want to? - or bring them to farms and proper butchers
and really consider the body your steak and chicken
nuggets come from. Make sure you’re buying free range
meat and make sure your children know which animals
“beef” and “pork” come from.
We need to clarify the mission of zoos in 2017
Are they really raising money for conservation? How
much? And what is that “conservation” money doing to?
It will have to include habitats as much as individual
animals.
As animals rightly get more space to roam around in
parks, they become more difficult for children to see -
making exhibitions like Monkey Business , which
features a few dozen taxidermied primates in typical
poses, incredibly useful. Don’t dismiss the static poses
of taxidermied animals; a close-up look with
accompanying videos, like you get at the Natural
History Museum, has greater educational value than
craning to see a distressed animal hiding in the corner
of an enclosure.
Virtual reality offers a whole new area of experience for
kids. Elisa Allen, director of PETA UK, highlights the
success of Sea Life London Aquarium’s recent
collaboration with the BBC – Frozen Planet: Face to
Face, which sees visitors interact with virtual reality
animals, including polar bears and an orca. “It’s
popularity demonstrates that aquaria and zoos no
longer need to imprison animals for human
entertainment,” Ms Allen says.
Zoos had their height in the pre-television age. With the
wealth of technology available to us today, it’s
increasingly difficult to justify the case for keeping
animals in captivity purely for the spectacle of it. ” money doing to? It will have to include habitats as much as individual animals.
As animals rightly get more space to roam around in parks, they become more difficult for children to see - making exhibitions like Monkey Business , which features a few dozen taxidermied primates in typical poses, incredibly useful. Don’t dismiss the static poses of taxidermied animals; a close-up look with accompanying videos, like you get at the Natural History Museum, has greater educational value than craning to see a distressed animal hiding in the corner
of an enclosure.
Virtual reality offers a whole new area of experience for kids. Elisa Allen, director of PETA UK, highlights the success of Sea Life London Aquarium’s recent collaboration with the BBC – Frozen Planet: Face to Face, which sees visitors interact with virtual reality animals, including polar bears and an orca. “It’s popularity demonstrates that aquaria and zoos no longer need to imprison animals for human entertainment,” Ms Allen says.
Zoos had their height in the pre-television age. With the wealth of technology available to us today, it’s increasingly difficult to justify the case for keeping animals in captivity purely for the spectacle of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment