She was only a few months old when she was ripped from her mother, never to see her again. They cried out for each other for hours on end to no prevail. The child’s captors threw her into a small confinement with other children where they would spend majority of the rest of their lives, only to be let out when it was time for them to be put on display before countless strangers. Never would this be normalized if the aforementioned child was a human, but for years this scenario has been a reality for different species of animals from all around the globe. These animals are ripped from their families and shipped around the world to be put on display in enclosures which are a fraction of the size of the habitats they have been used to for generations. The impact on the animals’ psychological and physical health is downplayed and excused by the educational and entertainment needs fulfilled by wild animals being locked away. According to an article published by The New York Times: The typical zoo enclosure for a polar bear is one-millionth the size of its’ home range in the wild, which can reach 31,000 square miles… Some captive polar bears spend 25 percent of their day in what scientists call stereotypic pacing, and infant mortality for captive animals is around 65 percent.” (Derr). However, there are organizations in place to help ensure the proper treatment of animals within zoos. As Maisy Samuelson writes: The current leader of quality of animal care in the United States is the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). Starting in 1971, the AZA worked to develop guidelines and standards for zoos and aquariums in the United States. The first zoo accredited by the AZA achieved these standards in 1974, just three years after the AZA began to develop a set of standards for animal husbandry and welfare. (Samuelson). But this begs the question, how did places, such as SeaWorld, get away with mistreating animals for so long. How are these regulations enforced and what is the degree of punishments if the requirements are not met? The requirements set by the AZA, as listed on their website are as follows, “The Accreditation Commission evaluates every zoo or aquarium to make sure it meets AZA's standards for animal management and care, including living environments, social groupings, health, and nutrition. We also make sure that animals are provided with enrichment, which stimulates each animal's natural behavior and provides variety in their daily routine,” (AZA.org). Each zoo or aquarium must go through a process to remain accredited every five years, but AZA accreditation is something more of a status symbol than a requirement. It is actually protected by law to import animals for zoos, so long as said importation is approved. As explained by Kali Grech of Michigan State, the Lacey Act of 1900 made it illegal to: [I]mport species of wild animals, wild birds, fish (including mollusks and crustaceans), amphibians, reptiles, or the offspring or eggs or any of the foregoing which the Secretary of the Interior prescribes by regulation to be injurious to human beings or to the interests of agriculture, horticulture, forestry, or wildlife, except that the Secretary may permit importation for zoological, education, medical, or scientific purposes. (Grech). This gave leniency to people who intended to import animals to be put on display in inadequate enclosures for the rest of their lives in zoos. This act was changed in 2008 to include trees in order to prevent illegal logging practices, but still allows the importation of exotic animals. There are a few instances where captivity is acceptable, such as rehabilitation or conservation. Injured animals that would otherwise not survive in the wild can be cared for in captivity as well as conservation efforts for species on the brink of extinction. However, wild animals still do not belong in cages and enclosures and should be given enough space to still have a sense of freedom in these environments. Wild animals lose all senses of freedom when captured and this goes against the rights of all living beings. Animals never get a full sense of freedom in captivity. As Stephen Bostock explains inZoos and Animal Rights: The Ethics of Keeping Animals,“In bad captive conditions, animals are in an obvious sense not free to live their natural lives— and therefore, simply, not free,” (Bostock). Big cats are often the most prominent example of the psychological effects that captivity can have on these wild animals. From pacing to over-grooming and self-mutilation, these big cats often show signs of mental health issues. The site One Green Planet wrote: Locomotion stereotypes like pacing are thought to be a result of an inadequate living environment (restricted space or lack of environmental complexity), while self-directed behaviors are often a result of stress and anxiety caused by a lack (or excess) of animals of the same species. (One Green Planet). Recently, a lioness killed her mate of eight years in their enclosure at an Indianapolis zoo. She suffocated her male counterpart by locking her jaws around his throat until he stopped moving. The pair had three cubs together and had seemingly no aggression towards each other in the past. This brings forward the question of what caused the lioness to snap. It very well could have been a mental break caused by the close quarters that do not mirror the habitats that animals are accustomed to in the wild. I am reminded of an enclosure I saw recently at the phoenix zoo for their mountain lion. The beautiful big cat was in a small stucco enclosure; painted to look like the red rocks of their natural habitat; I’m sure to create a sense of comfort. It really disturbed me at the time as I know mountain lions like to roam, and they usually go farther than the area of the tiny enclosure it had been reduced to. This enclosure was far too small and limiting for these powerful creatures to be confined in. If similar dimensions and conditions cannot be duplicated for the animals, they’re not free. In contrast, I once took a trip to Africa and during my time there I visited a safari park in Zambia. In my opinion, these reservation areas are the ideal form of animal captivity. They are in their usual habitats and able to perform their natural behaviors all while being protected from poachers and other external threats. People can ride through these parks and see the animals act as they naturally would, and I personally believe it is a much more powerful and emotionally moving experience to see these animals how they are meant to be; free. Above are photos I took at the (a) Phoenix Zoo and (b) in a safari park in Zambia, Africa Rob Laidlaw writes in his book Wild Animals in Captivity, “The confinement and treatment of animals in public, private, and roadside zoos all too rarely show respect for the creatures' lives,” (Laidlaw). These animals are born with the freedom to roam and hunt or be hunted. With this freedom comes instincts and behavioral patterns that are difficult to suppress, as it is in the animals’ nature. When animals are placed in captivity, they no longer have the freedom or ability to practice these natural instincts. These animals should not have to endure the tortures of being separated from their own kind, stripped of all freedoms they knew before, and placed into an enclosure that is less than accommodating to the needs of a wild animal. It would make headlines if something of this degree was happening at such a high rate to humans; it is not acceptable for this to be happening to any living being, human or not. These babies should no longer be ripped from the loving, desperate grips of their mothers and imprisoned to be gawked at and taunted by humans for the rest of their days. They should be happily running, jumping, swimming or flying freely about as the wild creatures they are. Because they are more than just creatures, they are living beings just like anyone reading this essay. Living beings with freedoms that should not be limited for any reason. ReferencesAccreditation Basics(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.aza.org/becoming-accredited
Beyond the Zoo: How Captivity Affects the Mental Well-Being of All Animals. (2015, November 13). Retrieved from https://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/how-captivity-effects-the-mental-well-being-of-all-animals/ Bostock, S., & Ebrary, Inc. (1993). Zoos and animal rights the ethics of keeping animals. London ; New York: Routledge. Derr, M. (2003, October 01). Zoos Are Too Small for Some Species, Biologists Report. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/01/science/zoos-are-too-small-for-some-species-biologists-report.html Kline, E.S. (Photographer). (2018). Mountain Lion[photograph] Kline, E.S. (Photographer). (2016). Giraffe[photograph] Laidlaw, R. (2015). Wild animals in captivity. Markham, Ontario: Fitzhenry & Whiteside. Samuelson, Maisy Louise, Meloy, Elizabeth, Caron, Martha, College of Integrative Sciences Arts, & Barrett, The Honors College. (2017). Modern Zoos and Animal Welfare.
0 Comments
|
AuthorEmma Kline |