A common childhood core memory for many is a trip to the zoo. The ability to get a good look at the animals that we would never be able to see in real life becomes reality. After a couple of hours families and groups leave the establishment and many tend to ignore the long life that these animals endure. Once the zoo closes, the animals remain in their undersized enclosures just to wake up and repeat. The animals commonly found in zoos were designed by nature for the boundless expanses that they are native to. Through these practices, we are objectifying the animals in unnecessary ways for what these establishments claim to be educational and preservative. The main source of these unethical conditions falls on urban and suburban zoos where expanding enclosures is nearly impossible. Urban and suburban zoo organizations should not be supported by the public because the environments are unnatural and inappropriate for the animals that are forced to live there.
The origins of zoos date back thousands of years ago and some of the unethical practices have persisted throughout time. Historical records have shown that zoos in the past were created to show status without the animals' best interests at heart. The National Geographic Society has been one of the leaders in the exploration and education of the public on the environment and the majestic creatures that lie within. Through their findings it has been discovered that "The first zoos were created as private collections by the wealthy to show their power ... as early as 2500 BCE" ("Zoo"). There is evidence of these acts that have been discovered through cravings that were made by the ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia people. This preserved information reminds us that animals have been relocated from vast and distant locations to be a part of private collections for a long time ("Zoos"). Although animals are not collected for this reason today, it does not fix the fact that animals are still being corralled for entertainment purposes.
Ancient zoos were called menageries and had similar purposes to those found today which serve as entertainment. Today zoos justify their actions by deeming the main purpose of their establishment for educational purposes and to study these animals. In reality, the focus of modern urban and suburban zoos is to entertain the public. This behavior can be traced back hundreds of years to early Egyptian and Asian zoos. These zoos were created primarily for the entertainment of the public eye and to which the study of these animals was deemed a secondary function of their captivity ("Zoo"). Another ancient civilization has used animals for similar purposes is the Romans. For ancient Romans, animal collection had the purpose of entertainment within their arenas. One example of this would be, "the games held to celebrate the inauguration of the Colosseum in Rome, the Flavian emperor Titus (r. 79-81 A.D.) arranged to have 9,000 tame and wild animals of various kinds slaughtered in the arena" (Coley, Jacob). Throughout time, respect for animals has improved but there are still major underlying factors that do not justify the inhumane conditions that we inflict.
As of modern times, zoos have developed into a less primitive version of themselves. Today's zoos vary in size, purpose, and location but some have a more problematic structure than others. On the more ethical side of zoos are the Safari Parks and Game Reserves which are better at managing and supporting the wildlife within. Safari parks are designed with vast amounts of land that allow animals to roam freely. To observe these animals, the public can drive personal vehicles into the natural environment without restraining or containing them ("Zoo"). This style of zoo respects the space that animals deserve and creates restrictions around those who are choosing to enter their habitat. This type of enclosure allows the public to observe and study the animals within without putting them in uncomfortable environments. Another type of zoo that has similar qualities is the Game reserve. Game reserves assign large plots of land that protect the environment and the wild animals within to thrive. These locations are flocked to by tourists and allow the public to witness wild animals in their natural habitat ("Zoo"). Games reserves are beneficial alternatives to urban and suburban zoos because they isolate a specific region in which the animals are native too. Another benefit of game reserves is that it not only protects the animals, but also protects the entire ecosystem within. This scenario gives the animals the most natural and realistic life that they were destined to live.
On the more problematic and unethical side of zoos are the urban and suburban zoos most people indulge in. Urban and suburban zoos are created within or close to large cities which makes expansion extremely difficult and even impossible ("Zoo"). These types of enclosures result in environments that are undersized and inconsiderate to the environment these animals were designed for. It is common for activists to claim that urban and suburban zoos are unethical "due to cramped conditions, noise, and pollution" ("Zoo").
One of the reasons that Urban and suburban zoos are inappropriate is because they create an unrealistic image of how animals are perceived. Liz Tyson, the director of the Captive Animals' Protection Society, explains how these types of zoos are unbeneficial to not only the animals, but also to the public understanding of these animals. Zoos convince children from an early age that humankind can control and manipulate nature to its will. This information could develop future generations to believe that regardless of how disastrous humankind can treat nature, we can always "save" wildlife by extracting animals from their failing environment. (Tyson, Liz). Putting animals in these types of situations is only an "unethical Band-Aid" to which we permit this behavior.
Additionally, the consequence of observing animals in confined enclosures is that the public receives minimal information on what animals are really like. Tyson has had a well-rounded understanding of how animals act naturally due to her research. Her extensive time in wild habitats has given her insight into how animals naturally act, in which she relates how the same animals behave in urban and suburban zoos. Viewing a tiger in an enclosure only informs the public about its size, color, and shape and relays a filtered understanding of complex animal behavior (Tyson, Liz). If zoos credit their purpose with educating the public, then one could say we are being misinformed due to the artificial environments we observe them in. There is a plethora of alternatives to supplement the same information that zoos attempt to pass on, whether it be via online sources or more respectful means of observation like safari parks or game reserves.
Furthermore, Urban and suburban zoos create an unrealistic image of how animals behave in the wild. The observation of these animals in their enclosures can be one of the leading causes of misinformation when observed by the public. To understand the complexity of animal behavior, it is most beneficial to observe them in their natural habitat. Since the animals within urban and suburban zoos are restricted from this type of environment, animals have been recorded exhibiting odd and unsettling behaviors. It has been recorded that due to the lack of natural space in their enclosures "Captive polar bears, for instance, spend much of their day pacing back and forth, and clouded leopards pluck their fur out" (Francisco, Edna). A disturbing fact given by Georgia Mason, a Behavioral biologist at the University of Oxford, U.K, states that "Among the worst off were polar bears, which have a home range of 1000 square kilometers or more--about 1 million times bigger than their average enclosure." To put that into perspective, their natural environment is nearly the area of San Antonio, Texas. This type of situation is quite common among urban and suburban zoos. Consequently, the public is misinformed about how these animals behave in their natural environments. Another example of misinformation is found in how African and Asian elephants behave in their artificial environments. In African and Asian elephants, early deaths can be caused by obesity, not because they have an improper diet, but because they are not allowed enough space to exercise. It has been recorded that they "spent 83% of their time indoors, contributing to early death" (Sample, Ian). When the public observes these obese mammals in this type of situation the truth behind their physique and behavior is abstracted. Overall, this mounting information contributes to the point that urban and suburban zoos are unnatural and inappropriate ways to exhibit animals.
Equally important, those who attend Urban and Suburban zoos are utilizing them for the wrong reasons. One of the greatest, if not only, potential benefits of going to zoos is to get educated on the animals that are held inside. Studies have shown that people do not go to zoos to learn about the animals but instead, they go as a form of entertainment. In a 2008 study it was found that more than half of all surveyed zoo attendees described the "main purpose", of their visit was to "have an outing with friends and family" (Marris, Emma). This selfish behavior has led to an unhealthy cycle of utilizing these animals for the wrong reasons. Although there are signs of some people taking away a better understanding of these animals, the change is minuscule. A study conducted by the University of Warwick that included over 6,000 visitors over 30 zoos around the world found "there was an increase from pre-visit (69.8%) to post-visit (75.1%) in respondents demonstrating some positive evidence of biodiversity understanding" (University of Warwick). That is just over a five percent change in understanding. There is an abundance of available information within these establishments that people tend to shy away from. Just utilizing these establishments for entertainment is not justifiable enough to keep these animals locked in their confined enclosures.
There is an even more depressing truth behind urban and suburban zoos. The artificial environments that animals are subject to have a degrading effect on the physical well-being of these animals. A shocking fact about gorillas may shed some light on the harm that zoos cause these animals to go through. An unnatural cause of keeping gorillas in zoo enclosures is that "About 70% of adult male gorillas in North America have heart disease, the leading cause of death among gorillas in captivity, although the condition is almost completely absent in the wild" ("ProCon.org"). This identifies a near-direct link between how urban and suburban zoos create an unhealthy environment for these animals. Before they are at risk of this type of danger, there are equally threatening circumstances that these animals go through. Animals are also at risk of losing their life even before making it to zoos. It is predicted that the process of capturing one animal often leads to the deaths of others in failed attempts to secure them ("Zoo"). The process is broken, and the consequences are the unnecessary deaths of these amazing animals.
Physical damage is only half of the suffering that these animals go through. Animals in enclosures also endure psychological damage from their environments. Due to stress and other psychological damage, animals are being restrained from the life they deserve. In zoos, a variety of animals like clouded leopards, brown bears, and giraffes can suffer from psychological issues including clinical depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and anxiety ("ProCon.org"). These behaviors are not normally exhibited in the wild, adding to the false perception put into visitors' minds about their behavior. Some animals have more severe consequences from their enclosures than others. Some common psychological side effects found in captive chimpanzees are "Eating feces, twitching, rocking back and forth, plucking hair, pacing, vomiting, and self-mutilation, among others" ("ProCon.org"). This dark side of urban and suburban zoos are aspects that most people never see or know about. It is sad to know that this is the only life that a lot of these animals will live. With this information given, attending and being a part of this process should be considered when visiting these types of zoos.
Consequently, there are laws set in place with the intention of protecting animals within zoos. Even though these laws are set in place, they do a poor job of giving specific requirements and boundaries for zoos to follow for the most adequate care. The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is the only federal law designed to protect the well-being of animals whereas other laws at this level are only concerned about financial and procedural matters concerning zoos (Grech, Kali S.). This makes the AWA an incredibly special law even though the guidelines around this law will lack the special attention that most exotic animals require in zoos. The terms of the AWA are vague and only offer animals the bare minimum regarding "handling, housing, feeding, watering, sanitation, shelter from extremes of weather and temperatures, and adequate veterinary care" leaving animals at risk (Grech, Kali S.). Higher standards are needed if these animals will ever receive a life above the bare minimum.
Also, there are laws at the state level that impact the lives these animals endure. Laws that protect animals in zoos at a state level are non-existent and only abide by bare minimum standards set in place at a federal level. State laws are still subject to the AWA but can make their own laws if they are stricter than what the AWA states (Grech, Kali S.). This does not push state legislation in a progressive direction to protect the animals that they have within. A small group of states have progressive state legislation regarding the handling and care of animals but there are no incentives or external motivation to create quality and fair protection for every single animal in zoos. (Grech, Kali S.). The process of updating these laws around the specific needs of animals could lead to healthier lives that animals are forced to live.
Without strict laws, limited information is brought to light regarding poor conditions. With so many zoos it is difficult to hold them to the same standards. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) carries the responsibility of inspecting zoos so that they meet certain standards. Citations from the USDA in 2018 fell from 4,000 citations of which 331 were critical, to 1,800 citations of which 128 were deemed critical in 2017 (Brulliard, Karin). This is a significant drop in which many zoos were not given the proper inspections that they deserve. A spokesperson for the Animal and Plant health inspection service of the USDA said the drop in inspections could be due to the shortage of inspectors (Brulliard, Karin). This leaves zoos increasingly vulnerable to improper care from those who create these establishments.
Therefore, there have been zoo investigations that have led to findings of improper care and treatment. Without proper oversight, zoo officials are free to make independent decisions that can put animals in danger. During an investigation, it was found that a zoo owner avoided professional veterinary care and independently removed a growth of the face of an animal with a pocketknife, all done without any anesthetic (Tyson, Liz). This behavior is ignorant because it neglects the proper needs of animals. Unfortunately, in another investigation, it was found that big cats were forced into cages for extended periods of time in enclosures that were described as in a state of disrepair (Tyson, Liz). These inhumane standards of living that fall under the AWA's requirements of bare minimum amenities have shown to be anything but protective of these animals. If zoos continue to be under-inspected, then these poor conditions will continue to lead to unethical and inappropriate lives for animals.
In brief, urban and suburban zoos are where animals are being neglected the most. As a conscious, moral, and dominating species of the world, it is vital that we consider the damaging effects that we are forcing these animals to go through. As a society, we need to take responsibility for the lives of those we impact. If we do not, domestic and exotic animals will continue to endure unethical standards of living that will lead to damaging effects on their health.
WORKS CITED
The origins of zoos date back thousands of years ago and some of the unethical practices have persisted throughout time. Historical records have shown that zoos in the past were created to show status without the animals' best interests at heart. The National Geographic Society has been one of the leaders in the exploration and education of the public on the environment and the majestic creatures that lie within. Through their findings it has been discovered that "The first zoos were created as private collections by the wealthy to show their power ... as early as 2500 BCE" ("Zoo"). There is evidence of these acts that have been discovered through cravings that were made by the ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia people. This preserved information reminds us that animals have been relocated from vast and distant locations to be a part of private collections for a long time ("Zoos"). Although animals are not collected for this reason today, it does not fix the fact that animals are still being corralled for entertainment purposes.
Ancient zoos were called menageries and had similar purposes to those found today which serve as entertainment. Today zoos justify their actions by deeming the main purpose of their establishment for educational purposes and to study these animals. In reality, the focus of modern urban and suburban zoos is to entertain the public. This behavior can be traced back hundreds of years to early Egyptian and Asian zoos. These zoos were created primarily for the entertainment of the public eye and to which the study of these animals was deemed a secondary function of their captivity ("Zoo"). Another ancient civilization has used animals for similar purposes is the Romans. For ancient Romans, animal collection had the purpose of entertainment within their arenas. One example of this would be, "the games held to celebrate the inauguration of the Colosseum in Rome, the Flavian emperor Titus (r. 79-81 A.D.) arranged to have 9,000 tame and wild animals of various kinds slaughtered in the arena" (Coley, Jacob). Throughout time, respect for animals has improved but there are still major underlying factors that do not justify the inhumane conditions that we inflict.
As of modern times, zoos have developed into a less primitive version of themselves. Today's zoos vary in size, purpose, and location but some have a more problematic structure than others. On the more ethical side of zoos are the Safari Parks and Game Reserves which are better at managing and supporting the wildlife within. Safari parks are designed with vast amounts of land that allow animals to roam freely. To observe these animals, the public can drive personal vehicles into the natural environment without restraining or containing them ("Zoo"). This style of zoo respects the space that animals deserve and creates restrictions around those who are choosing to enter their habitat. This type of enclosure allows the public to observe and study the animals within without putting them in uncomfortable environments. Another type of zoo that has similar qualities is the Game reserve. Game reserves assign large plots of land that protect the environment and the wild animals within to thrive. These locations are flocked to by tourists and allow the public to witness wild animals in their natural habitat ("Zoo"). Games reserves are beneficial alternatives to urban and suburban zoos because they isolate a specific region in which the animals are native too. Another benefit of game reserves is that it not only protects the animals, but also protects the entire ecosystem within. This scenario gives the animals the most natural and realistic life that they were destined to live.
On the more problematic and unethical side of zoos are the urban and suburban zoos most people indulge in. Urban and suburban zoos are created within or close to large cities which makes expansion extremely difficult and even impossible ("Zoo"). These types of enclosures result in environments that are undersized and inconsiderate to the environment these animals were designed for. It is common for activists to claim that urban and suburban zoos are unethical "due to cramped conditions, noise, and pollution" ("Zoo").
One of the reasons that Urban and suburban zoos are inappropriate is because they create an unrealistic image of how animals are perceived. Liz Tyson, the director of the Captive Animals' Protection Society, explains how these types of zoos are unbeneficial to not only the animals, but also to the public understanding of these animals. Zoos convince children from an early age that humankind can control and manipulate nature to its will. This information could develop future generations to believe that regardless of how disastrous humankind can treat nature, we can always "save" wildlife by extracting animals from their failing environment. (Tyson, Liz). Putting animals in these types of situations is only an "unethical Band-Aid" to which we permit this behavior.
Additionally, the consequence of observing animals in confined enclosures is that the public receives minimal information on what animals are really like. Tyson has had a well-rounded understanding of how animals act naturally due to her research. Her extensive time in wild habitats has given her insight into how animals naturally act, in which she relates how the same animals behave in urban and suburban zoos. Viewing a tiger in an enclosure only informs the public about its size, color, and shape and relays a filtered understanding of complex animal behavior (Tyson, Liz). If zoos credit their purpose with educating the public, then one could say we are being misinformed due to the artificial environments we observe them in. There is a plethora of alternatives to supplement the same information that zoos attempt to pass on, whether it be via online sources or more respectful means of observation like safari parks or game reserves.
Furthermore, Urban and suburban zoos create an unrealistic image of how animals behave in the wild. The observation of these animals in their enclosures can be one of the leading causes of misinformation when observed by the public. To understand the complexity of animal behavior, it is most beneficial to observe them in their natural habitat. Since the animals within urban and suburban zoos are restricted from this type of environment, animals have been recorded exhibiting odd and unsettling behaviors. It has been recorded that due to the lack of natural space in their enclosures "Captive polar bears, for instance, spend much of their day pacing back and forth, and clouded leopards pluck their fur out" (Francisco, Edna). A disturbing fact given by Georgia Mason, a Behavioral biologist at the University of Oxford, U.K, states that "Among the worst off were polar bears, which have a home range of 1000 square kilometers or more--about 1 million times bigger than their average enclosure." To put that into perspective, their natural environment is nearly the area of San Antonio, Texas. This type of situation is quite common among urban and suburban zoos. Consequently, the public is misinformed about how these animals behave in their natural environments. Another example of misinformation is found in how African and Asian elephants behave in their artificial environments. In African and Asian elephants, early deaths can be caused by obesity, not because they have an improper diet, but because they are not allowed enough space to exercise. It has been recorded that they "spent 83% of their time indoors, contributing to early death" (Sample, Ian). When the public observes these obese mammals in this type of situation the truth behind their physique and behavior is abstracted. Overall, this mounting information contributes to the point that urban and suburban zoos are unnatural and inappropriate ways to exhibit animals.
Equally important, those who attend Urban and Suburban zoos are utilizing them for the wrong reasons. One of the greatest, if not only, potential benefits of going to zoos is to get educated on the animals that are held inside. Studies have shown that people do not go to zoos to learn about the animals but instead, they go as a form of entertainment. In a 2008 study it was found that more than half of all surveyed zoo attendees described the "main purpose", of their visit was to "have an outing with friends and family" (Marris, Emma). This selfish behavior has led to an unhealthy cycle of utilizing these animals for the wrong reasons. Although there are signs of some people taking away a better understanding of these animals, the change is minuscule. A study conducted by the University of Warwick that included over 6,000 visitors over 30 zoos around the world found "there was an increase from pre-visit (69.8%) to post-visit (75.1%) in respondents demonstrating some positive evidence of biodiversity understanding" (University of Warwick). That is just over a five percent change in understanding. There is an abundance of available information within these establishments that people tend to shy away from. Just utilizing these establishments for entertainment is not justifiable enough to keep these animals locked in their confined enclosures.
There is an even more depressing truth behind urban and suburban zoos. The artificial environments that animals are subject to have a degrading effect on the physical well-being of these animals. A shocking fact about gorillas may shed some light on the harm that zoos cause these animals to go through. An unnatural cause of keeping gorillas in zoo enclosures is that "About 70% of adult male gorillas in North America have heart disease, the leading cause of death among gorillas in captivity, although the condition is almost completely absent in the wild" ("ProCon.org"). This identifies a near-direct link between how urban and suburban zoos create an unhealthy environment for these animals. Before they are at risk of this type of danger, there are equally threatening circumstances that these animals go through. Animals are also at risk of losing their life even before making it to zoos. It is predicted that the process of capturing one animal often leads to the deaths of others in failed attempts to secure them ("Zoo"). The process is broken, and the consequences are the unnecessary deaths of these amazing animals.
Physical damage is only half of the suffering that these animals go through. Animals in enclosures also endure psychological damage from their environments. Due to stress and other psychological damage, animals are being restrained from the life they deserve. In zoos, a variety of animals like clouded leopards, brown bears, and giraffes can suffer from psychological issues including clinical depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and anxiety ("ProCon.org"). These behaviors are not normally exhibited in the wild, adding to the false perception put into visitors' minds about their behavior. Some animals have more severe consequences from their enclosures than others. Some common psychological side effects found in captive chimpanzees are "Eating feces, twitching, rocking back and forth, plucking hair, pacing, vomiting, and self-mutilation, among others" ("ProCon.org"). This dark side of urban and suburban zoos are aspects that most people never see or know about. It is sad to know that this is the only life that a lot of these animals will live. With this information given, attending and being a part of this process should be considered when visiting these types of zoos.
Consequently, there are laws set in place with the intention of protecting animals within zoos. Even though these laws are set in place, they do a poor job of giving specific requirements and boundaries for zoos to follow for the most adequate care. The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is the only federal law designed to protect the well-being of animals whereas other laws at this level are only concerned about financial and procedural matters concerning zoos (Grech, Kali S.). This makes the AWA an incredibly special law even though the guidelines around this law will lack the special attention that most exotic animals require in zoos. The terms of the AWA are vague and only offer animals the bare minimum regarding "handling, housing, feeding, watering, sanitation, shelter from extremes of weather and temperatures, and adequate veterinary care" leaving animals at risk (Grech, Kali S.). Higher standards are needed if these animals will ever receive a life above the bare minimum.
Also, there are laws at the state level that impact the lives these animals endure. Laws that protect animals in zoos at a state level are non-existent and only abide by bare minimum standards set in place at a federal level. State laws are still subject to the AWA but can make their own laws if they are stricter than what the AWA states (Grech, Kali S.). This does not push state legislation in a progressive direction to protect the animals that they have within. A small group of states have progressive state legislation regarding the handling and care of animals but there are no incentives or external motivation to create quality and fair protection for every single animal in zoos. (Grech, Kali S.). The process of updating these laws around the specific needs of animals could lead to healthier lives that animals are forced to live.
Without strict laws, limited information is brought to light regarding poor conditions. With so many zoos it is difficult to hold them to the same standards. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) carries the responsibility of inspecting zoos so that they meet certain standards. Citations from the USDA in 2018 fell from 4,000 citations of which 331 were critical, to 1,800 citations of which 128 were deemed critical in 2017 (Brulliard, Karin). This is a significant drop in which many zoos were not given the proper inspections that they deserve. A spokesperson for the Animal and Plant health inspection service of the USDA said the drop in inspections could be due to the shortage of inspectors (Brulliard, Karin). This leaves zoos increasingly vulnerable to improper care from those who create these establishments.
Therefore, there have been zoo investigations that have led to findings of improper care and treatment. Without proper oversight, zoo officials are free to make independent decisions that can put animals in danger. During an investigation, it was found that a zoo owner avoided professional veterinary care and independently removed a growth of the face of an animal with a pocketknife, all done without any anesthetic (Tyson, Liz). This behavior is ignorant because it neglects the proper needs of animals. Unfortunately, in another investigation, it was found that big cats were forced into cages for extended periods of time in enclosures that were described as in a state of disrepair (Tyson, Liz). These inhumane standards of living that fall under the AWA's requirements of bare minimum amenities have shown to be anything but protective of these animals. If zoos continue to be under-inspected, then these poor conditions will continue to lead to unethical and inappropriate lives for animals.
In brief, urban and suburban zoos are where animals are being neglected the most. As a conscious, moral, and dominating species of the world, it is vital that we consider the damaging effects that we are forcing these animals to go through. As a society, we need to take responsibility for the lives of those we impact. If we do not, domestic and exotic animals will continue to endure unethical standards of living that will lead to damaging effects on their health.
WORKS CITED