Zoos Drive Animals Crazy. Literally.

i know this is an unpopular topic, but we can appreciate and preserve the world's wildlife, in the wild.

I think the subject is interesting but I don't think closing all the zoos in the World would be a good solution.    Actually there are some good alternative ideas in this article, certainly would be nice if these were considered.

Topic like this is probably not popular indeed, first because none of us (I think) have enough influence/powers to really change something about it. Also, for me for example, the possibility to see some fascinating species from so close is really a precious thing, but yes, the price the animals pay for that (for our pleasure to watch them from close) is certainly too high, especially in zoos with small enclosures (the article doesn't mention for example "safari parks" where animals, especially hoofed animals, can spend time on relatively big space). Also I think the subject is more complex, and has more aspects then these written in article.

I remember my first zoo visit, I was 17 y.o. then. I remember seeing real elephant from close distance it was absolutely unique, so different than seeing them in TV or in a book. I remember how magic look for me had the group of takins.  But I was very sad to see tiger that was totally bored and walking circles and apes that behaved really strange and unnatural. So zoo visiting was always very "mixed feelings" experience. I do think the zoos should be different, especially situation for big cats and other predators is almost always very bad in all zoos, they must change it  :/ But closing all of zoos, I don't know   

well said Anna. in my experience, ive never had positive experience in any of my zoo visits and the last time i went to a zoo at the age of 14, i went home in a state of daze, and just cried all night long. (remembering the lone elephant walking back and forth, the tiger pacing from one end of the enclosure to the other, and birds of prey who were just perched miserably instead of flying around, the lone chimp who was spitting at people due to her extreme annoyance and frustration). from then on, i hoped for the day when wild animals in captivity would be a thing of the past.

You can't say that all zoos and aquariums are bad. Yes, I have also not like all of my zoo and aquarium visits and I do think there are certain species who don't do well in captivity; but I feel if you are going to keep them captive you have to meet their needs (both mentally and physically). Think about it also if no one visited the zoo and everyone saw animals in the wild, what the sight of so many boats, safari jeeps and what not would do to them. They would probably get just as frustrated as if they were in a captive setting even though there are rules you have to following when seeing them in the wild.Either way you look at it, there are pros and cons. In the future, we may only see certain endangered species in zoos.

orcagirl26 wrote:

You can't say that all zoos and aquariums are bad. Yes, I have also not like all of my zoo and aquarium visits and I do think there are certain species who don't do well in captivity; but I feel if you are going to keep them captive you have to meet their needs (both mentally and physically). Think about it also if no one visited the zoo and everyone saw animals in the wild, what the sight of so many boats, safari jeeps and what not would do to them. They would probably get just as frustrated as if they were in a captive setting even though there are rules you have to following when seeing them in the wild.Either way you look at it, there are pros and cons. In the future, we may only see certain endangered species in zoos.

I agree with what you said Orcagirl. I think the subject is not so black and white. Some species probably shouldn't be shown in the zoos at all, I'v never seen happy tiger in the zoo for example. But I would say that llamas, turtles, camels, some waterbirds and probably many more animals can adjust quite well to zoo life if the enclosures are big enough. Peacocks often just walk and fly around, at least in the zoos I visited.

I think the situation is almost always most difficult to big predators, also to birds of prey and often for apes, zoos cannot give them life with enough space, challenges and experiences so probably these species shouldn't be there at all.   

But the thing about conservation mission of zoos, I think the article doesn't do justice to this aspects. People give much more money to safe animals they know. For example how much money is investigated to safe giant panda and how much goes for silky sifakas. Both species are endangered but sifakas have very small chance to survive, because they are not protected good enough
Further, for example about wisents, they would be extinct if not population from the zoo gardens.

As for the education side, well, yes probably majority of visitors don't really educate themselves in the zoos. But all who study subjects anyhow connected to animals do have a lot see and learn in the zoo, for example zoologists, veterinarians etc. Well, also some zoos have really interesting educational materials in the form that is attractive also for kids.

It's really sad to see many animals suffering in the zoos, that should be changed, but again I don't think it means that all zoos should be closed.

i agree with both of you. there are certain animals that can adapt to captive life as long as the facility is more than adequate/ideal. but there are certain species that just dont thrive around humans and limited space (cetaceans, birds of prey, apes, tigers, elephants and a host of others).

Thanks for sharing this article, it was very enlightening. I agree with all that has been said. It would be incredibly hard to close all zoos, let alone release all the animals etc. I have met zoos that had fairly suitable exhibits etc. as well as zoos that were a disappointment and almost unbearable to witness. It would be great if zoos could just modify to having animals that do well and thrive around human presence (such animals stated above) and the rest sent to (or even some zoos converted to) rehabilitation/conservation institutions or released into the wild if possible. Anyways, its just not good to own animals that have to be drugged all the time, it affects their bodies similar to what humans experience under "the influence" of behavior and mentally changing drugs.
The one thing I do appreciate about zoos is conservation efforts. Breeding programs can have their issues (like mentioned in the article) or event he small genetic pool zoos have to offer each other. However, they do help other organizations with conservation.
Anyways, thanks again for sharing this, it was very interesting.   

Ana wrote:

orcagirl26 wrote:

You can't say that all zoos and aquariums are bad. Yes, I have also not like all of my zoo and aquarium visits and I do think there are certain species who don't do well in captivity; but I feel if you are going to keep them captive you have to meet their needs (both mentally and physically). Think about it also if no one visited the zoo and everyone saw animals in the wild, what the sight of so many boats, safari jeeps and what not would do to them. They would probably get just as frustrated as if they were in a captive setting even though there are rules you have to following when seeing them in the wild.Either way you look at it, there are pros and cons. In the future, we may only see certain endangered species in zoos.

I agree with what you said Orcagirl. I think the subject is not so black and white. Some species probably shouldn't be shown in the zoos at all, I'v never seen happy tiger in the zoo for example. But I would say that llamas, turtles, camels, some waterbirds and probably many more animals can adjust quite well to zoo life if the enclosures are big enough. Peacocks often just walk and fly around, at least in the zoos I visited.

I think the situation is almost always most difficult to big predators, also to birds of prey and often for apes, zoos cannot give them life with enough space, challenges and experiences so probably these species shouldn't be there at all.   

But the thing about conservation mission of zoos, I think the article doesn't do justice to this aspects. People give much more money to safe animals they know. For example how much money is investigated to safe giant panda and how much goes for silky sifakas. Both species  are endangered but sifakas have very small chance to survive, because they are not protected good enough
Further, for example about wisents, they would be extinct if not population from the zoo gardens.  

As for the education side, well, yes probably majority of visitors don't really educate themselves in the zoos. But all who study subjects anyhow connected to animals do have a lot see and learn in the zoo, for example zoologists, veterinarians etc. Well, also some zoos have really interesting educational materials in the form that is attractive also for kids.

It's really sad to see many animals suffering in the zoos, that should be changed, but again I don't think it means that all zoos should be closed.

sauroid wrote:

i agree with both of you. there are certain animals that can adapt to captive life as long as the facility is more than adequate/ideal. but there are certain species that just dont thrive around humans and limited space (cetaceans, birds of prey, apes, tigers, elephants and a host of others).

I completely agree with both of you, especially sauroid on the species that shouldn't be held in captivity. But yet, I don't think that zoos should be something of the past as there are zoos/aquariums that do care for their animals. Even though I agree on the species that shouldn't be held captive, I don't think we can just simply release them all, especially the ones that have been in captivity for a long time and any who may have health problems.