Is It Ethical To Keep Animals in Zoos?

by Alex Lemieux

As an aspiring vet, a strong interest of mine is the health and wellbeing of animals, no matter how big or small. Currently I am particularly interested in wild animals and during my research into zoo veterinary the question as to whether zoos are ethical pondered in my mind. If I want to go into the field, surely I should agree with the idea of a zoo, right? But unfortunately I found rather large elements of zoos, such as keeping the wild animals in a confined space, hard to justify. Counteracting this were many reasons as to why zoos are ethical such as how they increase the population of many endangered species through internal breeding so my internal debate carried on.

One obvious reason against zoos would be the cages most animals are forced to live in. From the animal’s point of view, removing them from their habitat and locking them up in a cage is against their rights and completely unjust and we, as humans, would never want that for ourselves; so why do we do it to animals? Animals have rights too, and we shouldn’t violate them by using them for our own entertainment. Domestic animals such as dogs are a common household pet and no dog owner would condone keeping a dog in a cage 24/7 so therefore we shouldn’t do it to any other animal, especially animals that belong in the wild. These animals are meant for the wild not cages and so we should let them live where they are most comfortable rather than force them to live where it is most convenient for us as there is no rule saying we are superior to all animals and have control over them.

However we should be caring for animals and if they are severely injured, it would make sense to give them the help they need that wouldn’t be available to them in the wild. There are many vets that specialise in zoo animals and it would be right to use their knowledge to aid the animals but this would need to be done in a place like a zoo where the animal is away from any further harm. If the animal was given the help in their natural habitat it would be harder for the animal to recover due to factors such as being preyed on or disease affecting them more due to their now weak immune system. Zoos are very good at rehabilitating unwell or injured animals that would otherwise not have made it in the wild and therefore keeping a species from becoming extinct. This demonstrates a positive aspect of the zoo and shows how ethical they can be in particular cases.

In cages many animals will become stressed as they are born to live in the wild and therefore in open spaces so the enclosed space will negatively impact them. In the case of humans, help is provided by the NHS to overcome anxiety in the form of mental health workers but there is little done to provide any such service in animals. Of course zoo keepers will attempt to help an animal that is clearly very distressed but any help is limited since they can’t let the animal out of their cage due to the risk it poses to the public and themselves. This means that there is no feasible way to minimize the stress to an acceptable level. If we believe so strongly in the importance of mental health zoos should not be allowed as I’d like to think animals are included as they have the right to being mentally healthy. I understand that at some zoos certain animals such as giraffes and zebras are in an open area where visitors go on a safari tour to see them, so anxiety would be reduced, but this certainly not the case for all animals or all zoos.

In many cases, zoos are an amazing educator to both children and adults as they provide an opportunity to learn about animals that they would otherwise never meet in their life. Those who live in built up areas will especially benefit since rural areas that house horse, sheep or even cows are a rare sight yet alone wild animals. At zoos, we see, hear and smell a range of animals from across the world and gain an insight into how each species differs from the other just by simply watching the animal go about its daily business. If there were no zoos, we would be educated purely on books and websites rather than actually seeing it for ourselves, which I think everyone can agree is a more valuable experience. By seeing it for ourselves we would notice the small details that no textbook could teach us about and would see the information illustrated in real life. Although some may argue that life in a zoo is nothing like how life would be out in the wild, zoos try their hardest to adapt enclosures to be as similar to their natural habitat as possible in order to help the animals stay calm and enjoy their new life at the zoo. In enclosures you will still see the same behavioural aspects in animals as you would in the wild such as mothers protecting their newborns and males competing to be the alpha male so zoos certainly educate on that front. In most zoos there are also talks and demonstrations by zoo keepers that give a further insight into the lives of a variety of animals that cannot be gained otherwise. These demonstrations can be things such as feeding times or simply just Q and A sessions where the keepers will be happy to answer any questions you have about a particular species. This will expand visitor’s knowledge and exhibit how much zoos teach the public without them even realising.

When looking at zoos from a conservation point of view, it could be said that removing them from the wild will make them more endangered in the long run. Firstly, you’re removing them from the wild which will automatically make the wild population more endangered as the population will become less genetically diverse and therefore will add difficulty in finding mating partners in the wild. This will therefore reduce the number of the certain species in the long run as there will be more dying than there are being born. If this carries on eventually the species will become extinct in the wild and the only animals of that species will be found in a zoo which surely is not right. One may argue that zoos have breeding programmes so the number of animals will therefore increase worldwide (if the programme is successful) but zoos will use their breeding programmes as a way to advertise the zoo and make a large sum of money. If this is the zoos incentive, they are not breeding for the right reason and it could easily lead to overpopulation and therefore the need for animals to be transferred to other zoos or even to circuses and roadside zoos where the animal will not be treated well. The transferring of animals to different zoos will obviously cause stress and trauma to some animals as they’re being forced to live in a new, unfamiliar place. I recently saw on ‘The secret life of the zoo’ an example of how the transfer to a new zoo can lead to bullying if the animal is very anxious and is not accepted into the group. A zeal of female zebras relentlessly picked on a stallion by kicking him and preventing him from eating or drinking, which lead to Mac, the stallion, being transferred to another Safari Park not long after his arrival. This also stopped the zoos breeding programme for Grevy’s Zebras.

In contrast to this, in some cases where the population is so scarce in the wild, breeding in zoos is actually the most beneficial thing. Breeding programmes will increase the population and prevent the species from being classed extinct and in the case of certain species; zoos are being relied on to keep the species from becoming extinct. In the case of the Javan Green Magpie, Chester zoo has worked hard on a breeding programme to try and increase the worldwide population which is currently estimated to be as low as 50, classing it as critically endangered. At the zoo, they have welcomed a number of chicks since 2015 that have helped to conserve the population and hopefully they will keep breeding to further increase the population, and prevent extinction. The Javan Green Magpie is only one example of the many species that zoos help through breeding programmes and some species such as the Arabian Oryx even owe their existence to zoos. If it weren’t for zoos, certain species would only be known to the world through pictures and memories instead of having the ability to physically observe how the species looks and behaves first hand. By having the opportunity to do so, we are allowing ourselves to notice the minute details that others may not pick up and deepening our knowledge beyond what we read online and in books. It has been shown that experiencing things for ourselves improves our knowledge and especially our understanding so from an educational view, breeding programmes widen the variety of animals that this is possible for.  Also, it must be added that when a breeding programme is successful and the population of a species is increasing at a constant rate, reintroduction to the wild does occur with some species. Although it is not always possible, zoos do understand that an animal will be more comfortable in its natural habitat rather than spending their life in a cage in a different climate so when possible, reintroduction programmes are used. An example of where this has been made possible is the Californian condor. In 1982 there were a mere 22 California condors existing in the wild and so zoos and similar institutions spent 20 years increasing the population to nearly 200 and by 2014 there were 425 birds in total including 219 in the wild. This is a clear demonstration of how breeding programmes can be seen as a lifeline to many species and that once they are used successfully, zoos see no reason as to why they should keep the entire species captive.

After much research I have come to the conclusion that zoos overall are ethical however, there are aspects of zoos that I would very gladly change, in particular the use of small cages for the main reason that it can cause major anxiety for some animals. I don’t believe that this is fair on the animals but when considering how this can be resolved, I feared that the only feasible way would be to build on green land which causes the dilemma of having to remove valuable habitat for animals that do live in the wild and taking away from the small amount of land hat isn’t built on that the developed countries have.