You make another statistic mistake: "to date". Elephant lifespan is long and growing, so when you count only animals which already died, you underestimate it. In this case, annual survival is better choice.
Bored / depressed animals
- Thread starter CZJimmy
- Start date
You make another statistic mistake: "to date". Elephant lifespan is long and growing, so when you count only animals which already died, you underestimate it. In this case, annual survival is better choice.
I'm not sure everybody knows that most animals in zoos when given a choice prefer their enclosure to the wild. This includes older and worse exhibits. This especially includes great apes.
Proofs are many. Chimpanzees and orangs reintroduced to the wild usualy need to be forced to go and forage on their own. For example, orangutans in Kalimantan are fed only plain bananas to force them to look for food. Circus chimps in Tanzania were scared on the wild and wanted to stay with men.
In zoos you see lots of wild birds trying to enter into zoo birds cages and ponds. So, what kind of captivity it is if captives queue to be imprisoned?
See yourself that zoo exhibits for non-dangerous animals are often not escape-proof. Barrier serves to limit animal familiar territory. So you see antelope and deer behind narrow moats. Bison who jump 2 meters in the wild behind cattle fences. Camels behind 0,5m shallow trenches. Free-flying birds and free-ranging primates. Etc.
Most animals who "escaped" return to their cages or keepers. Naturally, unless they are public danger and are brought by force as soon as possible. You can read numerous accounts of e.g. birds which would be impossible to catch but come back. If they escape, if is usually because their social group is imbalanced and they must leave the herd.
You can also read accounts of older naturalists, like Konrad Lorentz and Gerald Durrell, who kept their pet animals free and they always wanted to stay where their food bowl were. Durrell account of releasing animals in Paraguay when he was forced to flee the revolution is even funny.
Proofs are many. Chimpanzees and orangs reintroduced to the wild usualy need to be forced to go and forage on their own. For example, orangutans in Kalimantan are fed only plain bananas to force them to look for food. Circus chimps in Tanzania were scared on the wild and wanted to stay with men.
In zoos you see lots of wild birds trying to enter into zoo birds cages and ponds. So, what kind of captivity it is if captives queue to be imprisoned?
See yourself that zoo exhibits for non-dangerous animals are often not escape-proof. Barrier serves to limit animal familiar territory. So you see antelope and deer behind narrow moats. Bison who jump 2 meters in the wild behind cattle fences. Camels behind 0,5m shallow trenches. Free-flying birds and free-ranging primates. Etc.
Most animals who "escaped" return to their cages or keepers. Naturally, unless they are public danger and are brought by force as soon as possible. You can read numerous accounts of e.g. birds which would be impossible to catch but come back. If they escape, if is usually because their social group is imbalanced and they must leave the herd.
You can also read accounts of older naturalists, like Konrad Lorentz and Gerald Durrell, who kept their pet animals free and they always wanted to stay where their food bowl were. Durrell account of releasing animals in Paraguay when he was forced to flee the revolution is even funny.
I don't want to know how many comments I've seen or heard in this direction over the years. I could spend the night writing what I think, but will leave it where I say that I have long since stopped letting it bothering me, as I know only simple minds would write comment like this. But it starts being a problem when many of those simple souls start writing to their local zoo, demanding it to enrich their polar bears' lives more, give them more 'toys' etc ... and worst is that its only because the poor animals happened to be asleep, in the high noon, during the two minutes that the simple minds and their short attention spans lasted in front of the exhibit!
johnstoni
Well-Known Member
I think there is an important distinction between the most complex animals (great apes, elephants, cetaceans) and most other species regarding their requirements in captivity. I think this is the start of a shift that will continue, eventually it will not seem appropriate to house monkeys without trees, or to keep pinioned birds in open enclosures etc, but for now, we seem to be a the start of a very worthwhile re-evaluation of the needs of the captive species we manage.
I think an elephant or an ape can become very instituionalised and kept healthy on one level, but psychologically they don't resemble their species very closely. Paignton zoo's orang-utans were discussed on another thread, in that they rarely ever use the trees on their islands, which is possibly indicative of their past conditioning in zoo cage environments. I see an ideal situation as a stimulating environment where the animal can make plenty of choices and encounter new smells/sounds/sights etc, but can also choose to avoid situations it finds stressful.
I think an elephant or an ape can become very instituionalised and kept healthy on one level, but psychologically they don't resemble their species very closely. Paignton zoo's orang-utans were discussed on another thread, in that they rarely ever use the trees on their islands, which is possibly indicative of their past conditioning in zoo cage environments. I see an ideal situation as a stimulating environment where the animal can make plenty of choices and encounter new smells/sounds/sights etc, but can also choose to avoid situations it finds stressful.
Those simple souls as you seem to patronizingly write are doing allot more in writing to a zoo, than most.
Hopefully we look back one day soon and say that. "Thank god we no longer condemn animals such as polar bears to a life not worth living" by keeping them in zoos.
I believe that there are some animals such as polar bears that are just not suited to captivity! One day soon hopefully those simple souls will start the change in thinking of zoos.
Hi Baldur, l have just taken the time to read your other posts. I get the impression that you may not have been saying "Simple souls" in a patronising manner. So if you did not l apolagise for saying that you did put it this way.
I do howvere stand by the rest of my comments.
I do howvere stand by the rest of my comments.
Do you have a link to a resume of some of the studies,please? It would help a lot to have such a link to avoid sensless discussions with simple souls.I'm not sure everybody knows that most animals in zoos when given a choice prefer their enclosure to the wild. This includes older and worse exhibits. This especially includes great apes.
Proofs are many. Chimpanzees and orangs reintroduced to the wild usualy need to be forced to go and forage on their own. For example, orangutans in Kalimantan are fed only plain bananas to force them to look for food. Circus chimps in Tanzania were scared on the wild and wanted to stay with men.
In zoos you see lots of wild birds trying to enter into zoo birds cages and ponds. So, what kind of captivity it is if captives queue to be imprisoned?
See yourself that zoo exhibits for non-dangerous animals are often not escape-proof. Barrier serves to limit animal familiar territory. So you see antelope and deer behind narrow moats. Bison who jump 2 meters in the wild behind cattle fences. Camels behind 0,5m shallow trenches. Free-flying birds and free-ranging primates. Etc.
Most animals who "escaped" return to their cages or keepers. Naturally, unless they are public danger and are brought by force as soon as possible. You can read numerous accounts of e.g. birds which would be impossible to catch but come back. If they escape, if is usually because their social group is imbalanced and they must leave the herd.
You can also read accounts of older naturalists, like Konrad Lorentz and Gerald Durrell, who kept their pet animals free and they always wanted to stay where their food bowl were. Durrell account of releasing animals in Paraguay when he was forced to flee the revolution is even funny.
johnstoni
Well-Known Member
Of course many animals become institutionalised or socialised in such a way that open spaces create fear, but that is not an argument for captivity! It certainly does not mean they 'like' being captive, if that is all they have known. True, many herbivores that could escape stay within barriers they could actually jump, but try putting wild-caught bison in the same enclosure that a captive herd are in. They wouldn't suddenly choose to remain. Wild animals come to the enclosures of similar captive individuals because they are seeking to defend territories, find a mate or access an easy meal.....they have no concept of captivity having not experienced it.
All of this does not mean you should euthanase captive polar bears. But there is an argument for either providing exceptional habitats for the more complex species we know to suffer greatly in captivity, or prevent them breeding so as to phase them out.
All of this does not mean you should euthanase captive polar bears. But there is an argument for either providing exceptional habitats for the more complex species we know to suffer greatly in captivity, or prevent them breeding so as to phase them out.
Simple souls feel too lazy to google?
Here you have recent news about colobus, snowy owl and orangutan:
BBC NEWS | UK | Northern Ireland | Zoo escapee heads to exile in sun
BBC NEWS | UK | England | Hereford/Worcs | Wind scare owl returns to centre
Bruno, the Orangutan, Wanted a Change of Scenery
Very good chapter of mammals in zoos is here, you might get it in library . Anybody interested in zoos would do well read this one!
[ame=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Grzimeks-Encyclopedia-Mammals-Bernhard-Grzimek/dp/0079095089]Amazon.co.uk: Grzimek's Encyclopedia of Mammals: Bernhard Grzimek: Books[/ame]
Konrad Lorenz "King Solomon's Ring":
Amazon.co.uk: king solomon's ring: Books
Gerald Durrell's "Drunken Forest" - you will certainly not be bored/depressed after reading that:
Amazon.co.uk: drunken forest durrell: Books
What you mean is some species have aversion to open spaces. That's different.
If somebody would be stupid and catch a bison and put it immediately in a zoo exhibit, bison would try to escape (more likely die from stress).
But catch a bison, let it accustom for a few months to food and safety, put it in a compatible herd - and it will be happy to stay inside any more.
Animals have no concept of "freedom". They want simple things - food, drink, companions, mate, safety, warmth or cold. Zoo provides it - animal is happy. Wild animals don't like the wild any more than domestic dog or cat which always returns home, or human who will not trade noisy city flat for living as homeless or live as hunter-gatherer in Kalahari.
sooty mangabey
Well-Known Member
A lot of very interesting comment on this thread, and a lot of nonsense too. What Jurek7 says is spot on, of course. There's no reason at all why captivity cannot satisfy the needs of any species - although to do it for some is very difficult.
But look at this from the other side. If zoos are so awful, what are we to make of the wild. The discussion started with talk of gorillas, orangs and elephants. None of these is doing brilliantly in situ. African elephants may have a shortened life, with arthritis and boredom in zoos (but I'd dispute this). But how does this compare to being culled in South Africa, poached, struggling for water etc? The rose-tinted spectacle view of the wild is just daft. And it's not just people-made things which go to make the wild not-so-wonderful. It's just a fairly difficult place to exist, even for an elephant.
Of course there are some pretty awful zoo enclosures out there, but there are some pretty awful hospitals and schools too. Doesn't mean that the concepts of health care and education are inherently flawed.
And to those who say we shoudn't keep gorillas, elephants etc - why stop there? Capuchin monkeys are pretty bright, as are wolves. Rats have sharp brains. Crows are good problem solvers. Are we going to be left with zoos containing nothing but goldfish and stick insects?
But look at this from the other side. If zoos are so awful, what are we to make of the wild. The discussion started with talk of gorillas, orangs and elephants. None of these is doing brilliantly in situ. African elephants may have a shortened life, with arthritis and boredom in zoos (but I'd dispute this). But how does this compare to being culled in South Africa, poached, struggling for water etc? The rose-tinted spectacle view of the wild is just daft. And it's not just people-made things which go to make the wild not-so-wonderful. It's just a fairly difficult place to exist, even for an elephant.
Of course there are some pretty awful zoo enclosures out there, but there are some pretty awful hospitals and schools too. Doesn't mean that the concepts of health care and education are inherently flawed.
And to those who say we shoudn't keep gorillas, elephants etc - why stop there? Capuchin monkeys are pretty bright, as are wolves. Rats have sharp brains. Crows are good problem solvers. Are we going to be left with zoos containing nothing but goldfish and stick insects?
NZ Jeremy
Well-Known Member
Zing..! Sooty FTW..!
Hi matey, can you decode that for us ozzies?
dragon(ele)nerd
Well-Known Member
On the topic of african elephants, I agree with Sooty,
Over population of African elephants has drove many African countries to kill some number of elephants, which is very sad.
In zoos the only African elephants in Australia are at Western Plains zoo, two are left one died about one year ago at age 33. I am trying to figure out why it seems that a few number African elephant die from diesease at yonug ages, that Asians don't. Both have the ageing process.
AS for boredom, many Asian elephants kept in facilities with as much as up to 5 other animals still have the head-swaying posture that is posed as boredom. This is commonly mistaken for "dancing"
Many Africans though don't display this behaviour as many of the zoos that keep Africans provide plenty of Enrichment,
Over population of African elephants has drove many African countries to kill some number of elephants, which is very sad.
In zoos the only African elephants in Australia are at Western Plains zoo, two are left one died about one year ago at age 33. I am trying to figure out why it seems that a few number African elephant die from diesease at yonug ages, that Asians don't. Both have the ageing process.
AS for boredom, many Asian elephants kept in facilities with as much as up to 5 other animals still have the head-swaying posture that is posed as boredom. This is commonly mistaken for "dancing"
Many Africans though don't display this behaviour as many of the zoos that keep Africans provide plenty of Enrichment,
johnstoni
Well-Known Member
No, I mean open spaces as in beyond the captive environment they have become accustomed to.
When large herbivores were caught from the wild, death and injury were common due to the stress of forcing them to become accustomed to confinement. The fact that the surviving animals would eventually become acclimatised to being in captivity is not a justification for captivity itself.
I don't think you can correctly make the assertion that an animal would be 'happy' to be in captivity having 'let it accustom for a few months to food and safety'.
johnstoni
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone is suggesting zoos are inherently bad, or that certain species should never be kept in captivity without exception, and I think it is right that our understanding of the complex needs of all taxa is a linear process and develops all the time......sure, capuchin monkeys and wolves deserve the same level of care as rarer species, but I think you do have to look at mortality/ breeding success/ abnormal behaviour levels overall and identify where there are health problems in each species. And I think therefore people are right to conclude that there is a very real problem with polar bears, elephants and cetaceans in the majority of captive environments. This doesn't mean there are no examples of really good husbandry and habitat design for the species mentioned, but acknowledging the issues pushes towards improvements, such as the ones we are seeing in captive elephant husbandry.
I also don't believe anyone is really romanticising the wild, but the issues facing, say, African elephants being culled in the wild doesn't automatically mean that any captivity is better. Some captivity certainly is, and that is why this argument is good, as the more people are debating this, the more focus there is on captive conditions for these species.
dragon(ele)nerd
Well-Known Member
Not many Africans live to very old in captivity, can anyone track down a very old African?
NZ Jeremy
Well-Known Member
Zing = Great point...
Sooty FTW = Sooty for the win, i.e. Sooty wins this argument...
On elephants I've made this argument before, you need to look at the history of gorillas (or other intelligent species) in captivity...
When gorillas were first brought to American zoos in the first half of the 20th century it was thought amazing to keep them alive for over two years but as attitudes, enrichment, exhibits and diet have been improved, experimented and perfected the standards of living, life expectancy and mental and physical health have risen to a point now where in the best gorilla enclosures they have a better life than in the wild...
That process has begun a lot later with elephants and two phenomena are occuring, especially in America:
1). Zoos do not want to commit financially to such large improvements and are phasing out their elephants...
2). They are building enclosures which take into account current best practice care, i.e. larger enclosures (5+ acres), little or no concrete in the enclosures and sand and rubber floors in barns, pools for complete submerging, regular and varied daily enrichment...
This round of improvements will not solve all captivity problems but hopefully the next in 25 - 50 years will go a long way to higher standards of living in captivity than the wild (definitively) and a greater focus on breeding and herd life if the goal of preserving genes is be attained properly...
For arguments against elephants in captivity go and have a look at the member Patrick's old posts in elephants threads...
johnstoni
Well-Known Member
Longevity is only part of the answer. I don't think the schools and hospitals analogy is particularly fitting, for if there was a particular policy that was failing, it would be changed across the board. In zoos, the vast majority of collections with elephants are failing them. Here in the UK, even some of the more progressive zoos with elephants have had their breeding programmes riddled with stillbirths, neonatal deaths, rejection of calves, and the deaths of mothers during or as a result of giving birth. Of course these situations occur in the wild, but in captivity there is vetinary care, no food or water shortages, excellent diet, and no risk of predation, so the statistic really should be better than in the wild. I think the current policy of keeping elephants in yards just a few hectares or less is failing, even though it is a huge improvement from just a decade or two ago, and the policy of breeding from badly socialised, orphaned cows is, statistically, a disaster. But of course it will continue as that is the only realistic way that zoos will be able to continue to exhibit elephants, and as the captive born calves mature and breed without the problems their mothers experienced, it will seem as if elephants are now completely suited to captivity.
As for gorillas, I can think of a few long-lived individuals here in the UK in fairly dire exhibits. I would expect them to live longer than their wild counterparts with all the care afforded them, but I wouldn't say most captive environments I have seen for gorillas are suitable. You can always hold up a couple of good examples, but if they are well above the general standard then their breeding success will be marred slightly by the fact there are few collections of similar calibre to which any surplus offspring can be sent.
As for gorillas, I can think of a few long-lived individuals here in the UK in fairly dire exhibits. I would expect them to live longer than their wild counterparts with all the care afforded them, but I wouldn't say most captive environments I have seen for gorillas are suitable. You can always hold up a couple of good examples, but if they are well above the general standard then their breeding success will be marred slightly by the fact there are few collections of similar calibre to which any surplus offspring can be sent.