Have You Met People Who Disliked or Opposed Zoos?

[The Horse Boy]

Over two years I have talked about zoos with quite a few people and my passion in them, esp when getting to know them. Most of the time people are going to say positive things about them from their experiences, typically AZA type facilities, as they have now evolved to be places of protecting endangered species, educating the public about the natural world, and build spacious enclosures to simulate their animals natural enviornment with humane care, training approaches and animal welfare in mind. However, I have on occasion come across adults (even ones born in the 90s) that will have sentiments of dislike for zoos, very much because these animals are being held captive in an enclosed space with no freedom and an ability to roam in contrast with the wild, to them, when I broached the subject, no matter all the good zoos do today. "Zoos make me sad" would often be the stated mentality from that experience, and I generally find it pretty hard for me to deal with those. I grew up visiting and liking zoos and have a great understanding of how they work. For a year my mom had a boyfriend who found zoos depressing back in my mid teens. Frustratingly, these people can have that against even wonderful places such as San Diego, Smithsonian, Omaha and Disney's Animal Kingdom, but thank the lord none of them were animal activists. Have any of you experienced people who had these thoughts and statements, and how did y'all handle them if so?

 

[Zoofan15]

Many times. If it’s family or friends, I’ll will take the opportunity to talk to them about their viewpoint and share my opinion.

Sometimes their opinion can be founded on incorrect assumptions. One example is my friend’s mother who thought Auckland Zoo’s giraffe exhibit was sub-standard due to the barren terrain. She believed giraffes should have grass paddocks. I explained to her the benefits of that substrate to the giraffes hooves versus a grass field which retains water and can lead to hoof issues.

With other people, I’ve provided examples of the conservation work zoos do and even gone into greater detail of the Five Domains with regards to animal welfare (yes, I’m fun at parties ).

As a generalisation, I find older generations to be more against zoos than younger generations. It’s important to remember that they grew up in an era where zoos were largely concrete cages and while zoos have long moved on from this image, those people haven’t necessarily followed. It can be a good opportunity to share how zoos have progressed and compare/contrast.

At the end of the day, it’s about respecting each others opinions. I’m entitled to mine; they’re entitled to their’s. Neither is going to be completely converted to the other’s way of thinking, but that’s no reason we can’t hear each other out.

 

[Great Argus]

Not too many, surprisingly enough. Usually it's someone who's run across a few too many articles from PETA and/or IDA and doesn't have enough information to realize they aren't accurate.

Only one particular instance really sticks out to me; I was working down in the older exhibit area which was the first animal area in that part of the park. This consisted of a row of raptor mews set in a building, as far as was occupied. A couple of older ladies arrived and started looking at the animals there, and I could tell they didn't seem real happy. When they saw me they started asking various questions such as "do they get to come out?", "surely you can put more in the exhibits for them?", "they look bored, are you sure they're okay?" They didn't seem very pleased with any of the answers I gave them, even though several answers should have well satisfied anyone concerned about them. They continued insisting we should at least paint extensive murals on the walls for the birds, at which point I encouraged them to continue on and see the new, larger, more natural exhibits we had and were building more of farther out, where all the birds they were seeing here were moving to in a few months. They ended up turning around and marching back they way they came, grumbling about how terrible the facility was and we should be doing way more for those poor birds. They'd seen less than a quarter of the animal collection and couldn't be bothered to go see the improvements we were making so the old building could be shuttered. It irked me how unfairly they were judging, but I knew the opinion wasn't remotely true so I decided I really couldn't be bothered to dwell on the conversation.

 

[The Horse Boy]

Not too many, surprisingly enough. Usually it's someone who's run across a few too many articles from PETA and/or IDA and doesn't have enough information to realize they aren't accurate.

Only one particular instance really sticks out to me; I was working down in the older exhibit area which was the first animal area in that part of the park. This consisted of a row of raptor mews set in a building, as far as was occupied. A couple of older ladies arrived and started looking at the animals there, and I could tell they didn't seem real happy. When they saw me they started asking various questions such as "do they get to come out?", "surely you can put more in the exhibits for them?", "they look bored, are you sure they're okay?" They didn't seem very pleased with any of the answers I gave them, even though several answers should have well satisfied anyone concerned about them. They continued insisting we should at least paint extensive murals on the walls for the birds, at which point I encouraged them to continue on and see the new, larger, more natural exhibits we had and were building more of farther out, where all the birds they were seeing here were moving to in a few months. They ended up turning around and marching back they way they came, grumbling about how terrible the facility was and we should be doing way more for those poor birds. They'd seen less than a quarter of the animal collection and couldn't be bothered to go see the improvements we were making so the old building could be shuttered. It irked me how unfairly they were judging, but I knew the opinion wasn't remotely true so I decided I really couldn't be bothered to dwell on the conversation.

What zoo was that at?

 

[NNM.]

My sister.

 

[JigerofLemuria]

I live in Barcelona... it likely isn't a surprise to people that know me, but I swear, around 85% of people I meet either have misgivings about zoos, or are outright against them. I've managed to convince quite a lot of people of the good accredited institutions do for conservation, but some are downright adamant in their fervent disdain for them. Also, for some reason, I swear EVERY Argentinian I've met are in the latter camp! I mean, lovely people, but in my experience they ESPECIALLY hate zoos and want them all shut down.

 

[evilmonkey239]

A handful over the years, including a teacher who confusingly enough said she liked aquariums (including those with dolphins and such) but hated zoos. When I asked her how this wasn’t contradictory, she said it was because animals in zoos could tell that they were confined, but ones in aquariums somehow couldn’t. Part of her dislike came from the visitor side of things though, as she associated going to the zoo with hot, crowded summer days that could be kind of miserable to be there on.

 

[Trua]

My son! When he was younger he was fine with them. I did take him to the zoo a lot. Now he ostensibly claims he hates them. Apparently I take him too much and he never wants to step foot in one again lol. Maybe I overdid it a little... oh well

 

[Lafone]

Over two years I have talked about zoos with quite a few people and my passion in them, esp when getting to know them. Most of the time people are going to say positive things about them from their experiences, typically AZA type facilities, as they have now evolved to be places of protecting endangered species, educating the public about the natural world, and build spacious enclosures to simulate their animals natural enviornment with humane care, training approaches and animal welfare in mind. However, I have on occasion come across adults (even ones born in the 90s) that will have sentiments of dislike for zoos, very much because these animals are being held captive in an enclosed space with no freedom and an ability to roam in contrast with the wild, to them, when I broached the subject, no matter all the good zoos do today. "Zoos make me sad" would often be the stated mentality from that experience, and I generally find it pretty hard for me to deal with those. I grew up visiting and liking zoos and have a great understanding of how they work. For a year my mom had a boyfriend who found zoos depressing back in my mid teens. Frustratingly, these people can have that against even wonderful places such as San Diego, Smithsonian, Omaha and Disney's Animal Kingdom, but thank the lord none of them were animal activists. Have any of you experienced people who had these thoughts and statements, and how did

I’ve met people who don’t like zoos and indeed heard people expressing their dislike for them at the zoo and I’m can’t say I am greatly bothered either way.

We live in the most connected age mankind has ever known and yet appear to have the greatest concern about what other people think and then vehemently object to their right to think it. So what if someone thinks zoos are places of animal torture - someone saying something out loud doesn’t make it true it just makes it their opinion.

If people want to discuss zoos of course that can be good fun and even if disagreeing it’s often an interesting debate. There’s lots to discuss about how zoos approach captivity and conservation after all. And informed debate is fun.

But if someone at the zoos shouts about how much they hate zoos, or how sad the lions are and how they’d be better off in Africa (particularly when they are Asiatic) it’s not going to spoil a fun day for me - they can think what they like and chances are I’ll never see them again anyway. I’m not actually on a mission to convert people to love zoos while I am at the zoo - I’m just having a good day out.

 

[The Horse Boy]

I think a lot of times these mentalities come from care and concern for the animals and wanting them to be happy and healthy. Although I don't think i have done this myself yet, a good approach to dealing with their opinions is to tell them that zoo animals are indeed content safe and physically and mentally robust and the fact that they generally live longer lives than their wild populations (more than in the bad old days in fact). The enrichment programs would also a good way to reassure these people imho.

I'm unsure about the big naturalistic habitat reassurance. I did that with a couple people who found zoos saddening and they would insist that these animals are still in captivity regardless and should all live in the wild. I also talked to a couple girls who said zoos made them sad last year, and I told them that aza type facilities mostly get their animals from eachother, and the animals are born at zoos. We know zoos now do not go out to the wild and capture animals as much as they historically did, but they actually didn't know that, and weren't too convinced.

I think some people just have very idealistic views of nature and the wild for that matter. They would think it's animals roaming happily and doing whatever they wished without all the dangers and cons associated with it.

 

[Strathmorezoo]

During the 1970s/1980s, it seemed to me, that people who enjoyed zoo visits, were in the minority. Demonstrating outside zoos was also common. However, from the 1990s, zoos started to improve more and the trend of disliking zoos definitely started to slow down. Over the years I've tried to avoid confrontation with a person who is showing signs of being anti zoo .

 

[JigerofLemuria]

During the 1970s/1980s, it seemed to me, that people who enjoyed zoo visits, were in the minority. Demonstrating outside zoos was also common. However, from the 1990s, zoos started to improve more and the trend of disliking zoos definitely started to slow down. Over the years I've tried to avoid confrontation with a person who is showing signs of being anti zoo .

Interesting that the anti-zoo sentiment was stronger in the 70s and died down by the 90s. They were also times of rampant political activism so...
And yes, I have also learnt to avoid conflict with these people like the plague.

 

[The Horse Boy]

I generally think it's more liberals (in this America at least) that are likely to oppose zoos than conservatives as uch of the animal activists are liberal and much of the zoo activist movements have happened coastal US cities.

 

[Aardwolf]

I generally think it's more liberals (in this America at least) that are likely to oppose zoos than conservatives as uch of the animal activists are liberal and much of the zoo activist movements have happened coastal US cities.

To an extent, but not necessarily. I've clicked on some profiles that have left virulent anti-zoo comments on facebook out of curiosity, and plenty of them are full-on MAGA, whereas I know many zoo aficionados that are comfortably to the left of Bernie Sanders.

You could go down quite a rabbit hole trying to answer the question of the politics of zoos. On one hand, conservatives tend to like zoos (in theory) because of the association of good old fashioned family outings, weekends with the whole family going to the zoo. On the other hand, they tend to be much more opposed to the use of tax dollars to fund things like zoos, and there have been many backlashes against what they've perceived as liberal bias in zoos - talking about conservation, climate change, etc. A few years back, some conservative mommy-blogger in Chicago did an "audit" of Brookfield Zoo (and Field Museum) looking for perceived liberal bias, Tulsa Zoo had the whole to-do about teaching evolution (the city wanted them to teach creationism as well) and the Ganesha statue, and Smithsonian National Zoo is subject to the new EO about liberal teachings (so we'll see if the salamander exhibit in the reptile house, which discusses coal mining and it's impact on species, survives the next few years).

Liberals, as you've noted, tend to be sensitive to animal welfare/rights issues, which in some cases can lead to opposition to zoos - it's no coincidence that one of the most perpetually beleaguered and underfunded major city zoos in the US is San Francisco, while NY and LA are constantly dealing with critiques of their elephant programs, and California led the charge against their SeaWorld Park more vigorously than, say, Texas did. At the same time, the left is also typically more strongly associated with support for conservation and education programs, which has led to plenty of collaborations with zoos.

In the end, I think zoos defy easy political associations. Newt Gingrich had said that if he hadn't gone into politics, he'd have wanted to be a zookeeper (and even wrote a forward to a book on zoos). I've heard Chelsea Clinton speak at a book signing about how visits to the Little Rock Zoo as a kid with her parents (Bill and Hillary) inspired her love of animals, and she was the keynote speaker at an AZA conference back in 2019 (where she was signing a children's book about wildlife conservation that she wrote). Dan Ashe, current President of AZA, headed USFWS under the Obama Administration. There is a bipartisan Zoo and Aquarium caucus on Capitol Hill, and members of both parties turn out every year to come to AZA's Zoo Day in DC. In my experience, the vast majority of zookeepers are left of center. Private, non-AZA zoo owners, in contrast, tend to swing very hard to the right (mostly due to their severe dislike of regulation).

Overall, though, I would say most politicians of either party DON'T give zoos the least bit of thought, either way. If you were to ask Donald Trump, or Joe Biden, or JD Vance, or Kamala Harris, point blank what their position on zoos was, I think they'd probably stare blankly for a second while they wracked their brains, probably say something very generic and noncommittal, and then move on.

 

[The Horse Boy]

Liberals, as you've noted, tend to be sensitive to animal welfare/rights issues, which in some cases can lead to opposition to zoos - it's no coincidence that one of the most perpetually beleaguered and underfunded major city zoos in the US is San Francisco, while NY and LA are constantly dealing with critiques of their elephant programs, and California led the charge against their SeaWorld Park more vigorously than, say, Texas did. At the same time, the left is also typically more strongly associated with support for conservation and education programs, which has led to plenty of collaborations with zoos.

Tbf I have been around quite a lot of zoo loving liberal Americans indeed because they are more concerned with environmental awareness and conservation, and tend to have more awareness of the educational aspect of AZA zoos today. I've lived in Austin my entire life, and we all know it's a very liberal city in the midst of the very right wing state of Texas.

On the other hand, they tend to be much more opposed to the use of tax dollars to fund things like zoos, and there have been many backlashes against what they've perceived as liberal bias in zoos - talking about conservation, climate change, etc.

I think it's true that you can also get anti zoo Republicans as well. One enigmatic instance is Joe Rogan as he is a Trump supporter, but has videos on YouTube about him saying that he thinks all zoos are so-called "animal prisons", I posted a thread all about it earlier as y'all may remember. He mostly thinks of zoos as places of family outings with children rather than preservation education and welfare based facilities like they are now.

 

[filovirus]

I've met plenty. My specific location has greatly influenced my experience in this matter.

Around where I am in Minnesota we have 2 "big zoos". One is the Como Park Zoo, started in 1897 and owned/operated by the city of Saint Paul. The other is the Minnesota Zoo, opened in 1978 and owned by the state of Minnesota. Como is built in a very urban area; MN is much more suburban.

Both zoos, in my opinion, are wonderful facilities. They each have their strengths and weaknesses but I don't find either zoo to be unethical/have poor husbandry/etc. But it's no secret that Como does look and feel like a city zoo, with less space, less natural landscape to play with, and with a general... vibe?... that makes it clear that this was once an old, far-less-ethical zoo. Never anything unfitting of the standards of the time, mind you, but certainly once an old zoo.

MN zoo has a lot more land to play with and was constructed MUCH later than Como, so the entire thing is built with presentation much more in mind. Lots of forest, lots of plants, a much more spread-out footprint. In the last decade or so they've also moved away from housing species of tremendous public ethical concerns (there are no more dolphins, haven't had belugas in decades, no great apes...) while Como still has some species that the public tends to have very big feelings about (orangutans and gorillas, mostly, and also polar bears). There's perhaps also a bit of a classism angle... MN zoo services a fairly well-off suburb (and charges a hefty admission), while Como services a very urban area and is free to enter.

The opinion of many people I've met, then, is that Como is a very objectionable facility compared to the high-and-mighty Minnesota Zoo. That they take great issue with the QOL of animals at Como, while the animals at MN seem happy and natural and content.

Generally folks I know have been pretty easy to sway... I've become a Como Zoo advocate lol. I remind people that they're AZA-acrredited, that they do a lot of rescue work (hence why some of their animals look unwell- they're medically complex), that they play an important role in the breeding and studbooks of many threatened species, and that they display their collection fully free-of-charge!

tldr i guess is that yes i have met people opposed to zoos, and i think this topic has a lot to do with local zoo offerings

 

[Thomas]

Protesters for Billy the Elephant at the Los Angeles Zoo where I volunteer.

 

[Sphenisciologist]

I feel that I tend to meet people who fall somewhere in between. A lot of my friends and family, per se, will happily be more than willing to go to the zoo and point out how much they enjoy seeing and learning about animals, but will then point out how upset the idea of zoos makes them because they don't like seeing animals trapped or subconsciously believing crap like top zoos are treating animals poorly behind-the-scenes, etc. So not necessarily blatant opposition - but definitely skepticism, which I can understand.
One instance that sticks out to me was when I went to the zoo with a few of my friends when I was younger and we were walking past the bald eagle exhibit - one of them pointed out how sad it was that they were kept in such a flight restricted enclosure - even though bald eagles are not allowed to be kept in captivity if they are capable of surviving in the wild. I made sure to tell them after, but that was a situation that stuck out to me because I knew the incentive was deeper than just being about bald eagles.
I'll usually do my best to give the whole description of how zoos are fundamental in ensuring the survival of genetically-healthy species as the natural world continues to deplete, how it exposes the public to nature in a valuable and accessible way, etc., but at the end of the day I can only do so much. Honestly, the best thing I would say is not trying to change their mind with words, but rather attempt to give them the chance to experience a "zoo spark" that ignited the love for zoos in all of us enthusiasts.

 

[The Horse Boy]

I feel that I tend to meet people who fall somewhere in between. A lot of my friends and family, per se, will happily be more than willing to go to the zoo and point out how much they enjoy seeing and learning about animals, but will then point out how upset the idea of zoos makes them because they don't like seeing animals trapped or subconsciously believing crap like top zoos are treating animals poorly behind-the-scenes, etc. So not necessarily blatant opposition - but definitely skepticism, which I can understand.
One instance that sticks out to me was when I went to the zoo with a few of my friends when I was younger and we were walking past the bald eagle exhibit - one of them pointed out how sad it was that they were kept in such a flight restricted enclosure - even though bald eagles are not allowed to be kept in captivity if they are capable of surviving in the wild. I made sure to tell them after, but that was a situation that stuck out to me because I knew the incentive was deeper than just being about bald eagles.
I'll usually do my best to give the whole description of how zoos are fundamental in ensuring the survival of genetically-healthy species as the natural world continues to deplete, how it exposes the public to nature in a valuable and accessible way, etc., but at the end of the day I can only do so much. Honestly, the best thing I would say is not trying to change their mind with words, but rather attempt to give them the chance to experience a "zoo spark" that ignited the love for zoos in all of us enthusiasts.

On that similar note, I was volunteering at a local food bank and I worked and chatted w an outgoing younger girl while helping load potatoes onto crates and putting them into stations to place them on conveyor belts just yesterday. She told me she was from the OKC area, and their zoo looks to be one of the best by using very roomy habitats. I told her of my DFW trip I did last weekend to see their AZA zoos. She told me she lived in Fort Worth for a few years so she must have visited it. It's really strange to me, but she said she likes going to zoos, and loved my passion for them, but at the same time she expressed a mentality that animals should not be in captivity and that they'd still be happier in the wild. I could not help but get a little upset hearing this at first if it was particularly about reputable AZA facilities which are very good homes for wild fauna. But after a few minutes of so, I reassured her with points on how modern zoos function such as mostly taking zoo born animals from eachother rather then wild captures, making larger enclosures intended to mimic their native habitats, and their comitted conservation work. She seemed to not really be wary of these factors so the discussion ended just fine without any real argumentative debate, thank goodness. So I guess she was not actually anti zoo there. She luckily doesn't seems to think they mistreat animals or that zoo animals are generally unhappy and unhealthy. Believe me, it could get way way way from that.

 

[Batto]

I have met my fair share of people who are not fans of zoos. Including several WdG visitors who came to the somewhat contradictory conclusion that they don't like zoos, but love WdG. Well, thanks...?

As for the political orientation of anti-zoo lobbyists: I think it depends on the location and its political landscapes. The vast majority of people attention-grabbingly opposed to zoos in most of Europe would probably define themselves as liberal, left-leaning, leftist or even far-left, in particular as Greens or (neo-)communists, anarchists, Antifa members etc. It's kind of "chic" among those circles to be against zoos, out of merely ideological reasons. Which might change when they grow older and have kids...And don't get me started on artists.
Conservatives or even right-wingers usually have little to no interest in zoos unless it's about money.
And @Aardwolf is right: Most politicians seem to care little for zoos unless it serves their agenda. Given that their factual knowledge regarding animals, no matter which political party they belong to, is usually close to zero (which might explain why they can't get a decent job and had to become politicians...), I'm not surprised. My past experiences with politicians is similar to that with journalists: I'm always surprised, if not shocked, to witness how far you can get in these professions without a good educational background, common sense and professional factual skills & experience.