Are zoos cruel to animals, or are they important ...



Running Head: Zoos: Cruel or Educational?

Zoos: Cruel or Educational?

Customer Inserts His/Her Name

Customer Inserts Grade Course

Customer Inserts Tutor’s Name

06 April 2009

Introduction

There are mixed opinions on whether zoos are cruel to animals (due to the kind of treatment accorded to animals in these facilities) or they are important educational and conservational facilities.

The most widespread accusation against zoos is that they subject cruelty to animals. In fact, many visitors to zoos have been made to buy this argument, thus a question of whether future generations will continue perpetuating this kind ‘unfair treatment’ to animals. Arguing on the issue, Bostock (1993) notes that there are many instances where animals are kept cruelly: in houses in factories and many other places. Along this line, Bostock posed the all-important question: Are zoos also used to perpetuate cruelty against animals? Perhaps the answer to this question would be forthcoming after considering other factors such as the kind of harsh environment that animals are subjected to in the wild. In this context, to say that zoos provide refuge to animals from harassment in the wild would not be an overstatement.

After along evaluation of ideas Bostock (1993) noted in chapter five to seven of the book Zoos and animal rights: the ethics of keeping animals that zoos can and indeed provide favorable conditions for the animals they keep. This brings a notion that the reference to zoos as a source of cruelty to animals or as important facilities that enable conservation of animals and education of people about the animals are based on individual judgment.

This paper will argue the above point with consideration of all opinions about zoos. It is worth noting that even though critics of zoos are of the standpoint that zoos deny animals their freedom in the jungle, without the zoos some animals would by now be extinct or greatly diminished due to threats from other animals and poaching. Given this aspect, the paper’s argument will evaluate points both for and against the keeping of animals in zoos.

Aspects of cruelty to animals in zoos

Zoos are subject to criticism due to the conditions in which animals are kept. Robin Flynn, an animal rights expert argues out clearly why keeping animal in zoos is against their rights to freedom in the jungle. To start, Flynn believes that human beings have no right to use animals for entertainment purposes. He argues that animals do not like to be snatched from their natural environment and be kept in strange enclosures that no human being would be comfortable staying in (Flynn 2007). Perhaps the reason for snatching animals from the wild to zoos is for man’s interest in entertainment rather than conservation because people usually pay to view the animals.

The need for entertainment seems to surpass the importance of zoos as educational facilities since if were animals meant for educational purposes, they would be left in their natural environments. It cannot be gainsaid that the best place to study animals is in their natural environment since those in zoos do not really portray the characteristics of animals in the wild. In order to be tamable, animals are subjected to many changes in their physiological and chemicals characteristics, which suppress their aggressiveness and normal character (Flynn 2007).

Specific cases of cruelty to animal include the way they are handled before being placed in zoos and how they are treated when they are already in the zoos. Cruelty is not just about beating the animals, it also includes poor forms of handling such as hooking of fish, branding of mammals, catching some animals using snares and steel jaw-straps, cutting tails of some animals, debeaking birds to stop them from pecking visitors, and so forth (Flynn 2007). Some instances of cruelty are shown in plate 1. All these cause excruciating pain to animals but since the animals cannot complain, human beings justify their actions as being meant to tame the animals. Regrettably, many cases of cruelty are not reported due to lack of investigators.

[pic] [pic]

Plate 1: Cruelty to animals in zoos

Source: Animal Cruelty Pics (undated).

But the statistics provided by the Humane Society of Utah show that indeed there are many cases of cruelty in zoos (Table 1).

Table 1: Cruelty statistics in zoos in the United States

|Year |Cruelty/abuse investigations |Animal facility inspections |

|1999 |390 |422 |

|2000 |394 |334 |

|2001 |372 |392 |

|2002 |361 |411 |

|2003 |382 |480 |

|2004 |351 |596 |

|2005 |305 |550 |

|2006 |282 |696 |

|2007 |299 |619 |

|2008 |285 |779 |

Source: Humane Society of Utah

It is not an overstatement to say that animals in zoos are subjected to a lot of frustration due to the manner in which they are handled. They are kept in tiny cages that deny them the freedom to roam in large spaces, and sometimes they are kept on food rations, which may not be their normal way of life (Norton, 1995). It is also worth noting even when the animals in zoos are fed, they may not be given they exact food they would have wished to have on their own in the wild. The following section of the paper highlights and discusses particular instances in which animals in zoos have been subjected to spiteful treatment.

Particular cases of cruelty to animals in zoos

There are many instances where individuals or organizations take animals to zoos with a pledge of caring for them but later end up mistreating them. Some animals are subjected to horrible breeding experiments while in zoos in order to create offspring that attract more visitors hence more profits (Norton, 1995). Surprisingly, some zoo managers resort to killing some animals in case the animals proliferate at a high rate; or worse, some zoo owners sell their unwanted animals to hunting ranches (Norton, 1995).

A case in 1990 in which animals were used for experimental purposes is a stark indicator of cruelty meted on animals. The case involved zoo research institute that was experimenting on primates and wallabies. In one of the experiments, the sense of smell of marmoset monkeys was destroyed by chemical and surgical burning techniques. The pretext for the action was that the researchers wanted to know if the breeding rate of the monkeys improved with the removal of the senses organs. Additionally, the same research institution in Australia decapitated wallabies as part of their research work. Apart from research work, some zoo owners take the advantage of zoos to sell game meat as is the case in many ostrich farms the world over.

In the United Kingdom, many zoos have been criticized for using zoo animals in circuses. For instance, a young sea lion identified as Orry from one wildlife park in the Isle of Man was found being transported illegally to circus in France and was later taken to the United Kingdom (Norton, 1995). This transit of animals to different places for entertainment is surely in violation of their rights and freedom. Constant transfer of animals just because they are in zoos exposes them to a lot of disturbance. There are also many zoos that use animals such as elephants for entertainment purposes in which the animals are forced to behave in a queer manner in order to make the circuses hilarious. Worthy noting is the fact that in some instances animals are transported under very inhumane conditions that affect their physical and behavioral characteristics.

How zoos show more cruelty and are less educational

While arguing against the use of zoos to keep animals, Sather (1999) notes that animals have rights just as human beings do. Along this line, the author points out that animals have evolved from nature and each species belongs to its own natural habitat where it should live, breed and seek food. Therefore, to remove animals from their habitats is against the will of nature.

What is the value of animals to human beings if they have rights? To say that animals should not be used by human beings would be a poor argument because human beings have to co-exist with animals Sather (1999) notes that even if animals may be perceived not to have rights, human beings still have a duty to treat them humanely in their role as the ’Stewards of the Earth’. But it is so unfortunate that many cases of handling animals subject the animals to unfair treatment.

Perhaps the cruelty subjected to animals in zoos arises from the misunderstanding of human beings in regard to animal behavior. For instance, one San Francisco zookeeper defended a case in which an African elephant was hit with axe handles for two consecutive days by saying that the beating was meant to motivate the elephant (Sather, 1999. How such a conclusion was arrived is debatable since there was no evidence that elephants hit each other as a way of motivating themselves. This adds to the many instances where bird feathers are clipped, aquatic animals are kept in very little water, herd animals are kept in individual seclusion or in pairs, and many others are exposed to self-destructive behavior due to living in confined environments. The fact that many people visit zoos however seems to justify the use of zoos in ‘conserving’ animals.

There is a common perception that zoos are set up for educational purposes. However, there are a number of issues about this point that cast doubt on the truth about it. To begin with, most zoos are set up by roadsides and entertainment facilities such posh restaurants usually surround them (Williamson, 2004). The point is that these entertainment facilities usually seem to overshadow the importance of the zoos since visitors may spend only a couple of minutes viewing animals in the zoos then move to relax in the restaurants for hours. Additionally, not many visitors usually have keen interest to study the animals; the trips to zoos are usually used as leisure trips rather than educational trips (Williamson, 2004). This makes it difficult for the visitors to ask questions pertinent to the animals in the zoos since most of them look at the entertainment aspects of the trip. In fact, Sather (1999) argues that most zoos have no educational value as they are purported to be.

Still on the claim that zoos are educational, large municipal zoos usually lay emphasis on the theme but in reality, they are just kidding. The zoos hold exhibitions to ‘educate’ the public about animals kept (Williamson, 2004). However, the targeted people rarely spend minutes learning about a certain animal. Instead, they get engrossed in entertainment- teasing the animals and so forth. This only adds to the cruelty to which the animals are subjected. Large zoos also encourage animal breeding in captivity for research purposes (Williamson, 2004). If no zoos existed, there would be no need for such research works.

Educational and conservational aspects of zoos

In spite of the seemingly much criticism of zoos on their cruelty against animals and lack of educational value, their importance in conservation and dissemination of knowledge cannot be gainsaid. Zoo managers in the United States describe changes in the American zoos with enthusiasm: they have been transformed within a very short time from animal prisons to bioparks, and have become pivotal in enhancing the wellbeing of both animals and human beings (Hanson, 2002). This point introduces an idea that if well managed, zoos are indeed safe havens for animals and recreational and educational facilities for human beings.

Whereas it is easy to pick cases of animal cruelty in zoos, the common perspective is that today animals are accorded very nice treatment in zoos (Hanson, 2002). Animals in some zoos are given food, water and very comfortable environments that suit their way of life. Most importantly, they are given medical treatment that would that would never be the case in the wild (Hanson, 2002). As the animal attendants provide these services, they get opportunities to interact with animals thereby learning more about them. Although animals in captivity may not display the characteristics congruent to those of animals in the wild, they provide an ample opportunity to learn about what happens in the wild.

In areas where the public are interested in knowledge about animals, zoos provide important educational services that help the people to interact with animals in other areas such as national parks, marine parks and game reserves. As such, the public can get an overview of how to interact with animals in the wild and particularly how to conserve and protect them. Along this line, there is need to streamline zoos by putting much emphasis on the conservational an educational aspects rather than entertainment as emphasis on entertainment creates a mindset that animals in zoos are just tools to be watched, teased and then left alone.

The importance of zoos as educational facilities cannot be gainsaid. In Nigeria, studies on visits to the University of Ibadan Zoological Garden between 2002 and 2005 and showed that animals in zoos were attracting a large number of people (Olukole & Gbadebo, 2008).Of the 95,107 people visiting the zoo annually, 74% were children (Olukole & Gbadebo, 2008). The animals were reported to have educational benefits to the visitors in that they gave them knowledge and experience and related with them emotionally (Olukole & Gbadebo, 2008).This emotional attachment between people and animals is important in emphasizing the need for conserving animals as well as other natural resources and encourages a peaceful co-existence of different populations (Olukole & Gbadebo, 2008).

Davey (2007) points out that zoos are important educational facilities that help the public and in particular children to observe closely animals that they would never have would never have seen, especially those from other countries. Students also get a chance to learn about nearly all species of animals, which they would only be able to read about in books such as the rare orangutan (plate 2). While it was argued earlier that transportation of animals limits their freedom, it worthwhile noting that careful and organized transportation will not harm the animals. In addition, the fact rare animals attract more revenue due to the high number of visitors means that zoos can act as charitable organizations to fund more conservational projects that would encourage more learning.

[pic]

Plate 2: Orangutan in a zoo in New Orleans

Source: New Orleans Zoo (undated)

The other aspect of education with respect to zoos regards scientists and researchers. Zoos provide many opportunities to scientists to research on various species of animals and therefore provide generalizations about the animal kingdom. According to Hanson (2002), zoos provide precious opportunities to study animals in strange environments and draw inferences about how human beings can affect the various habitats of different animals. In fact, much published work about different animals particularly those that are not docile such as tigers is based on research among tamed individuals (Hanson, 2002).

Perhaps the most important aspect of zoos with respect to conservation and education is that zoos protect endangered species from extinction (Mallapur, Waran, & Sinha, 2008). The green turtle is one example of the endangered species, yet it is still a target by marine fishermen due to its value. The bald eagle (plate 3) is another example of endangered animal kept in zoos. It is evident that without zoos to protect members of such a species, it would be exterminated in a matter of years. Nevertheless, the presence of zoos with endangered species provides an assurance that endangered species still have a chance to survive, the harsh environment notwithstanding.

[pic]

Plate 3: Bald eagle in a zoo enclosure

Source: Rolf Hicker (undated)

Argument collision

It is obvious that the arguments for and against zoos seem to match. Zoos protect animals and provide educational opportunities, but they also lead to some violation of animals rights. The argument that zoos are a source of cruelty to animals is based on an evaluation of the freedom of animals in the wild. In their natural environment, animals are free to choose what to eat and where to go unlike in zoos where they have to rely on the food they are given and remain confined in little spaces (Mallapur, Waran & Sinha, 2008). But on the other hand, zoos are important educational facilities, without which people would never have an opportunity to learn about some animals. In addition, the conditions provided in some zoos are far better than those in the wild.

The educational aspect of zoos can also be evaluated in terms of how knowledge is disseminated from these facilities. Individuals and institutions have different perceptions of zoos. Some people visit zoos strictly for entertainment purposes and it may be difficult convincing them to view zoos as being educational. For instance, 69% of the people visiting Shri Chamarajendra Zoological Garden in India said they did not know the function of zoos (Mallapur, Waran & Sinha, 2008). Yet most institutions keep the animals for education purposes and their ideas are aimed at ensuring that animals live in the best conditions.

Anti-zoo loyalists’ arguments versus why the importance of zoos cannot be gainsaid

Anti-zoo loyalists argue that animals should be left in their natural ecosystems so that they enjoy their freedom. They argue that this would save the animals the agony of being confined in tiny zoos. Along this line, it is noteworthy that removal of animals from their natural habitats affects the ecosystem. With the removal there occurs a major shift in the nature of food chains and food webs in different ecosystems and this may lead to an ecosystem collapse (Vickery & Mason, 2005).

Even though anti-zoo loyalists argue that zoos deny animals their freedom, it is still worthwhile noting that the importance of zoos cannot be gainsaid. This is because zoos provide an opportunity to restore animal species at would otherwise be at risk of extinction due to the dangers in the wild (Vickery & Mason, 2005). As earlier mentioned, animals such as the green turtle which is endangered have a chance to procreate in zoos and the offspring can be used to restore numbers in the wild. In addition, animals confined in zoos provide people with a real opportunity to interact with them, and in doing so, the people learn about the animals’ ecosystems and how to protect them when they go back home. As such, the opportunities for conservation provided by zoos are twofold- in their own protection and through dissemination of conservational knowledge to the public.

The arguments posed by anti-zoo loyalists are based on the point that when various structures in zoos become old, they become uninhabitable and may affect animal existence. Along this line, it is common to find zoo managers investing in new structures while neglecting the old ones, and the old facilities are usually hidden from public viewing (Williamson, 2004). This results in torture of animals particularly as they age. For instance, what happens to an old crocodile in an old shallow pond?

Perhaps the point by anti-zoo loyalists that animals should be left in their natural habitats is true considering the fact that it is always difficult to provide a semblance of some environments in zoos. Using the crocodile as an example, it may not be possible to provide a real aquatic environment such as a big river or lake that is characteristic of the crocodile’s habitat. Thus even though the crocodile may be provided food and protection in a zoo, it may not enjoy life as it would in its natural ecosystem.

But it would also be prudent to argue that conditions in zoos are not as seasonal as they are in the wild. A crocodile in a zoo pond may not enjoy lots of water, but it will enjoy food all year round-unlike the conditions in seasonal rivers where it has to disappear into nearby caves during droughts- and sometimes die as the dry season bites.

Given the above discussions, it is apparent that the educational and conservational importance of zoos overwhelms the perceived cruelty against animals depicted in some zoos. An important point therefore is that if zoos are well managed as is the case in many zoos in the Unites States, they provide important educational material to many generations while also being a source of recreation. Therefore, the isolated cases of cruelty to animals in some zoos in the world should not be used as the benchmark to evaluate the functionality of zoos. Rather, there is need to emphasize on the educational aspects, particularly given that zoos protect endangered animal species.

Conclusion

Zoos have been criticized for subjecting animals to cruelty in terms of how animals are handled and treated while in these facilities. The spiteful treatment of animals is evident in beatings, poor feeding and confinement to which the animals are subjected. In spite of this, some zoos provide very conducive conditions to animals, even better than those in the wild - such as medical treatment. Most importantly, zoos provide people with opportunities to closely study rare animals and protect endangered species from extermination. This outweighs the occurrence of isolated cases of cruelty in some zoos.

References

Animal Cruelty Pics (undated). Retrieved 24 April 2009 from

Bostock, S.S.C. (1993). Zoos and animal rights: the ethics of keeping animals. New York: Routledge

Curnutt, J. (2001).Animals and the law: a sourcebook. New York: ABC-CLIO

Davey, G. (2007).Public Perceptions in Urban China toward Zoos and Their Animal Welfare. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 12 (5): 367 – 374

Flynn R. (2007). Animal cruelty in zoos (3/26/2007). Retrieved, 7 April 2009 from

Hanson, E. (2002). Animal attractions: nature on display in American zoos. NJ, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Humane Society of Utah. Animal Cruelty in Utah - 1999 through 2008. Retrieved on 8 April 2009, from

Mallapur, A., Waran, N., & Sinha, A. (2008). The captive audience: the educative influence of zoos on their visitors in India. International Zoo Yearbook, 42(1), 214-224.

New Orleans Zoo (undated). Retrieved 24 April 2009 from

Norton B. G. (1995). Ethics on the Ark: Zoos, Animal Welfare, and Wildlife Conservation. New York: Smithsonian Institution Press

Olukole, I. O. & Gbadebo, O.S. (2008). Patterns of Visits and Impacts of Zoo Animals on Visitors. Anatolia: an international of tourism and hospitality research, 19(2): 205-22

Rolf Hicker (undated). Retrieved 24 April 2009 from

Sather, T. (1999). Pros and cons: a debater's handbook. New York: Routledge,

Vickery, S. & Mason, G. (2005). Stereotypy and perseverative responding in caged bears: further data and analyses. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 91(3/4), 247-260

Williamson, G. (2004). Zoo Cruelty. Ecologist, 34(2): 6-7

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download