Zoos' involvement in wildlife conservation

Definition: Parks where live animals are displayed for public viewing

For many years zoos were operated primarily as entertainment venues, but in the mid-twentieth century, most zoos began to shift their focus to education and active conservation of endangered and threatened species.

Each year, millions of people visit zoos around the world. Many modern zoos, often called wildlife conservation parks or natural wildlife parks, have replaced cages of concrete and steel with simulated natural environments. Typically modern zoos obtain new animals through selective breeding programs instead of capturing them from the wild.

History

Early zoos were the sole province of the wealthy; the first recorded zoo in history belonged to a Chinese emperor in 1100 BCE. It was not until the nineteenth century that zoos became open to the public. The word “zoo” derives from the term “zoological park” or “zoological garden,” which reflects what the first zoos were designed to be: afternoon diversions along the same lines as amusement parks or circuses. The companies that ran zoos captured exotic beasts from newly charted regions of the world and displayed them with little regard for the animals’ physical health or emotional well-being. Mortality was high, and display animals were constantly replaced with others captured from the wild, where there seemed to be an inexhaustible supply.

The first zoo to use moats to separate animals from visitors was established in Germany by Carl Hagenbeck in 1907. With moats replacing the bars of cages, visitors had unobstructed views of the animals, and, depending on the placement of the moats, visitors could have the impression that the animals were free. The habitats in which the animals lived, however, were nothing like what they were accustomed to in the wild. In their strange surroundings, many animals spent their days sleeping; others often displayed near-psychotic behavior patterns, such as pacing, head butting, and even self-mutilation.

Two developments are credited with influencing the changes that took place in zoo management during the twentieth century. First, with the advent of motion pictures and then television, potential zoo visitors were able to see many animals in their natural habitats, and suddenly giraffes, lions, and zebras no longer seemed quite so exotic. Second, wild animals were becoming increasingly scarce, and words such as “conservation” and “endangered” entered the collective vocabulary. Acquiring specimens from the wilderness became more costly, and zoos began to look at internal breeding programs to replenish their stocks. However, they found that animals kept in unnatural and, in some cases, inhumane conditions would not breed.

New zoo enclosures were designed to encourage natural behavior in animals by replicating their natural environment as much as possible while still ensuring the safety of both the animals and zoo visitors. Founded in 1916, the San Diego Zoo in California was one of the first zoos in the United States to introduce animal enclosures that attempted to duplicate animals’ natural habitats. The animals held in zoos began receiving healthier diets; when possible, they were allowed to feed in much the same way they would in the wild—by digging, foraging, or grazing. Zoos began to keep human contact with orphaned and injured animals to an absolute minimum, and some zoos took the additional step of instituting the policy of not naming their animals in an effort to discourage anthropomorphism. By the end of the twentieth century, 80 percent of the mammals on display in zoos were born in captivity. Since 1985, 90 percent of mammals and 74 percent of birds that have been added to zoos in the United States were born in captivity.

Debates and Criticisms

Zoo managers continue to struggle to balance science, conservation biology, scarce resource allocation, and ethics. Among the decisions that must be made are whether predators should be offered the chance to exercise natural hunting behaviors by being offered live prey and whether zoos should maintain potentially deadly animals that are necessary for breeding programs but are dangerous and difficult to control, such as macaques, many of which harbor the deadly hepatitis B virus, and adult male elephants. Another dilemma is the question of what zoos should do with “surplus” animals that are inbred, unable to reproduce, or otherwise genetically inferior.

Municipal bureaucracies can sometimes hamper zoos’ conservation efforts. Zoo managers must often combat local governments and public opinion when dealing with unpopular issues, such as the selling or other disposal of surplus animals and the allocation of monetary resources. In addition, budget cuts have forced zoo managers to turn to the private sector for financial assistance. Among the fund-raising activities pursued by some zoos are “adopt an animal” programs and commercial ventures that involve selling “exotic compost.”

Some people question whether zoos should exist at all—whether it is cruel to take animals from their natural habitats and place them on display, even if the purpose is education rather than entertainment. The People’s Republic of China “rents” giant pandas to zoos around the world; some people assert that these pandas would better serve their species by remaining in the wild or by being part of a captive-breeding program aimed at replenishing the species’ numbers. The San Diego Zoo has one of these breeding programs, and in 2023, it remained one of the most successful and ethical breeding programs for rare giant pandas in the world. Critics argue that the money devoted to zoos and captive-breeding programs would be better spent on preserving animals’ natural habitats. To combat this type of criticism, some zoos have changed their focus from “collecting” wildlife to “protecting” wildlife, also known as field conservation. In these zoos, visitors view exhibits linked with protection and conservation programs in natural habitats; this allows the visitors to connect what they are seeing in captivity to what is worth saving in the wilderness. Some zoos have taken the additional step of “adopting” wildlife refuges.

Despite the criticisms that zoos face, the fact remains that many animal species simply could not survive without the existence of zoos and captive-breeding programs. Ironically, where historical zoos replenished their stock from the wilderness, some zoos are now replenishing the wilderness with captive-bred animals.

Bibliography

"Captive Breeding and Species Reintroductions. " umich,edu, www-personal.umich.edu/~dallan/nre220/outline23.htm. Accessed 9 Feb. 2023.

Graceling-Moore, Rose. “10 US Zoos Everyone Should Visit (10 We Wouldn't Spend A Dime On).” TheTravel, 3 Sept. 2018, www.thetravel.com/10-us-zoos-everyone-should-visit-10-we-wouldnt-spend-a-dime-on/#visit-san-diego-zoo. Accessed 9 Feb. 2023.

Hancocks, David. A Different Nature: The Paradoxical World of Zoos and Their Uncertain Future. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.

Hanson, Elizabeth. Animal Attractions: Nature on Display in American Zoos. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2002.

Kisling, Vernon N., Jr., ed. Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Animal Collections to Zoological Gardens. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press, 2001.

Norton, Bryan G., et al., eds. Ethics on the Ark: Zoos, Animal Welfare, and Wildlife Conservation. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995.