Ethical dilemma

[Horseguards]

The last time I visited a zoo was over ten years ago. I would never go again - I was a stressed as some of the poor animals in cages. I even find it very difficult to watch zoos on tv.

Similarly, perhaps someone with more knowledge could help with the following. There is a bird of prey sanctuary pretty close and I would like to take some pictures.

But doesn't sanctuary ultimately mean captive, here? Unless the birds were injured - and I'm pretty sure most would be able-bodied - wouldn't they prefer to be free? If that's the case, I won't bother. A visit would equate to condoning this. And if it was a choice between seeing captive birds, or seeing none at all, I'd settle for the latter.

Grant.

[digi]

In some cases sanctuary means a place of recovery for rescued animals so that would not be a problem for me. As for Zoo's I never visit them because like you I don't agree with them.

[Oy]

Places like this can also, if managed well, provide a great educational resource in raising public awareness about Birds of Prey which in turn can lead to benefits for the wild population.

[matt_xyz]

As digi says, a bird of prey centre may be some sort of recovery centre so may have some justification. Beware, though, even if primarily a zoo (with wild caught animals) they will claim they are a rescue centre even if only one of their birds was rescued. There's a lot of smoke and mirrors with these sort of centres, much like zoos. The latter will always exaggerate the scale (and the worth) of their breeding programmes since they know the public is increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of wild animals in cages.

Of course, there are many wildlife rescue/rehabilitation centres that do an excellent job so it might be worth checking out what sort of place it is (and reading between the lines of what they tell you).

Matt

[Alan]

Remember if an animal is born in captivity, the chances are that it may never be returned to the wild. They'd just die if they did because they've never had to look after themselves. Of course this applies more to carnivors. So if it is a true rehabilitation centre, they should have a release program for the animals that can be returned - so ask them if they have! As for the animals that can't be released, they have to be homed somewhere - either that or be put down. But at least they can be used to educate the public.

The one thing that really gets on my nerves is that some animals such as barn owls can still be bought and bred leagally without the need for a license. I've often been walking down the street and seen them in peoples living room windows!

[Walwyn]

I have no problems with zoos. I did have some reservations twenty or thirty years ago, but no longer. Put simply I have no problems with Slimbridge, Twycross, or other such institutions.

[Imaginos]

I think there is a place for zoos in modern conservation efforts-look at Jersey Zoo with its successful rearing & reintroduction programmes (Pink Pigeons and Marmosets spring to mind) and London Zoo also has some good programmes in place. The balancing act is to have enough popular exhibits to keep the money coming in without compromising the conservation effort.

[digi]

Originally Posted by Imaginos

I think there is a place for zoos in modern conservation efforts-look at Jersey Zoo with its successful rearing & reintroduction programmes (Pink Pigeons and Marmosets spring to mind) and London Zoo also has some good programmes in place. The balancing act is to have enough popular exhibits to keep the money coming in without compromising the conservation effort.

You have a point but I hate to see captive animals.

[Imaginos]

I recall Gerald Durell saying (or writing) that with many species 'freedom' is not a concept, as long as there is all the necessary requirements are fulfilled then they are content. He used a species of (I think) squirrel to demonstrate this concept. In the wild these squirrels will not leave their home tree-ever, if put in an enclosure with more than one tree then they will pick one and remain in it thus giving you a large, generally unused enclosure.
The trick is to find out what are the necessary requirements, obviously for some animals these requirements includes space to roam (e.g. bears, big cats), for others the requirement may be the opposite and all they need is food & a place to sleep that is safe.

With species recovery programmes you need to get the subject to breed. With many animals if they are stressed then breeding is impossible, thus the need to give an animal as good conditions as possible.

Another thing to take into consideration is the fact that in captivity an animal tends to be well fed and safe from predators and hunters.
Of course there are some bad, and some very bad zoos out there & many irresponsible private owners/collectors. This is a problem & should be addressed.

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by Imaginos

I think there is a place for zoos in modern conservation efforts-look at Jersey Zoo with its successful rearing & reintroduction programmes (Pink Pigeons and Marmosets spring to mind) and London Zoo also has some good programmes in place. The balancing act is to have enough popular exhibits to keep the money coming in without compromising the conservation effort.

I think some zoos make a worthy contribution to conservation efforts but the majority do not. Furthermore, although there is a place for the re-introduction of some species, for many other species a lack of habitat is the problem so no amount of captive breeding can help that. Plus, the reintroduction of many species is simply not a realistic proposition.

I still struggle greatly with the concept of caged animals and wild animals being caught for zoos. I'm amazed that the latter still goes on (and not just for captive breeding/reintroduction programmes).

So, I fully acknowledge that some reintroduction programmes are valuable but many zoos give the illusion of operating such schemes. Have a look at many zoos' websites and try to work out exactly what conservation work they are involved in. There are lots of vague phrases like 'zoos can help the conservation of threatened species' rather than 'this zoo is helping to conserve species in the following ways...'.

I think, for many, their sole contribution is that they are maintaining a captive gene pool should it ever need to be called upon. This may be worthwhile but they certainly like to give the impression that they are doing far more than that.

Matt