Should zoos be banned?

Alison Benjamin: Where’s the enjoyment in seeing magnificent creatures behind bars?

Whether the parents of the four-year-old or inadequate safety standards were to blame, the real problem is that this gorilla, like all zoo animals, was living in captivity, incarcerated in a small enclosure supposedly for our entertainment and education.

I know most children find days out at the zoo an amazing experience, where they can get up close to animals large and small from far-flung places that they may have only seen in picture books or on TV.

But they are a relic of the Victorian age, before David Attenboroughdocumentaries and nature programmes such as Springwatch brought animals into our front room in all their glory, in real time and living in the wild. The reality is not always pretty or cute, but these shows are educational – unlike gawking at animals that are often pacing up and down in their cages in boredom or frustration or sitting in a corner, lonely and depressed. I was shocked to learn a few years ago that zoos were prescribing Prozac to some of the animals. Zoos are sad places for animals. As an animal lover, I don’t understand why anyone finds enjoyment in seeing magnificent creatures such as tigers or lions behind bars.

Even with those that look as though they might be having fun – the monkeys and penguins – just think how much more exciting it would be to see them swinging in the jungle, rather than in a cage, or hunting on the ice caps instead of being thrown fish at feeding time.

And it’s not as if you can touch the animals – that’s deemed too dangerous. You can’t get that close to most of them, not even by squashing your face against the glass of an enclosure, certainly not as close as those television cameras.

As for the conservation argument, surely the human race should be working harder to preserve animals’ natural environments rather than shipping them off to zoos to breed (often unsuccessfully) while continuing to destroy their habitat in the name of progress.

So if it’s about a fun day out for the kids, where they can learn about animals and eat ice-cream, why not take them to a natural history museum followed by a trip to the movies to see an amazing 3D film about the bugs in the Borneo forest or the underwater world of the Great Barrier Reef?

When I was a child, watching animals doing tricks at a circus was acceptable. Now, in response to growing popular concern about the cruelty of using animals in entertainment, many countries ban using animals in circus acts, and animal-free circuses are becoming more common. I hope it’s only a matter of time before, in the same spirit, we reimagine zoos.

Toby Moses: For those who can’t afford a safari, a reputable zoo is the best alternative

It’s important to start by acknowledging that zoos are far from an ideal home for most animals. If it were as simple as a choice between an animal living wild or living in captivity, then the zoo would be as much of an anachronism as lions jumping through flaming hoops in a circus tent. But that is not the choice we face. No reputable zoo would now snatch an animal from the wild to display for public amusement – and certainly no zoo I would wish to defend.

The modern zoo should act as a place for the preservation of endangered species, a safe house for rescued animals snatched from their habitat by those with malicious intent, and a breeding ground for those that can safely be kept in captivity to help spread a sense of wonder about the natural world to those who would otherwise not have the chance to see anything more interesting than a local labrador.

And this latter point is key. Where else would someone brought up in an inner city get to see a gorilla, a tiger or even a meerkat? While a safari in the plains of the Serengeti may be preferable, the vast majority will never be able to afford such an exotic holiday.

Animal experts may bemoan our anthropomorphising the natural world, but it is important to acknowledge the importance of this in helping to protect species that may otherwise be lost to us. One need only look at the relative difficulties of building a campaign to protect the rights of battery hens – still providing most of our eggs – and the polar bear. One is a bloodthirsty killer, the other a harmless hen – yet the public relate far more to the cuddly, white oversized teddy bear. Public opinion matters, and letting children get up close with a real-life Baloo or King Louie will do as much to foster a sense of conservationism as any Rudyard Kipling story.

Then there is the part zoos play in preserving endangered species – I for one would rather the northern white rhino lived in a San Diego Zoo than ceased to exist entirely.

To ignore the part zoos have to play here would be dishonest, and to pretend that there is any practical source of funds to support this vital work other than paying guests is disingenuous. When government and taxation won’t even pay up to support the poorest in society, it seems unlikely they’ll fork out for the protection of the black-footed ferret. If not you, through your taxes – then the zoo?

sourced: the guardian international