Species selection for zoos

K

KatherineAlex

Member
Hi, I was wondering exactly what the general requirements are on an ethical/legal level for selecting and approving animals to be put in a zoo? This question is coming from an internationally avid zoo go-er. I have been to so many zoos where animals are subjected to life in a climate completely outside their natural habitat's climate.

One big example, that always hurts for me to see is the Snow Leopard. This is a truly magnificent animal that lives at extremely high altitudes in the snow. Obviously, replicating that environment in a zoo is impossible and thus, the poor animals on display are living in hot, humid areas at low sea level (nevermind the lack of natural mobility).

Does anyone know why this is not considered a form of cruelty or the effects it has on the animal? What factors for the animals well being are taken into consideration for zoo placements?

Any opinions or info would be great. Thanks!
 
In general, zoo professionals (Curators, keepers, etc.) determine that they can provide suitable conditions for the health of the animals. (We're talking about reputable zoos and professionals here.)

I think you may not appreciate how adaptable many (not all) species are, given proper husbandry. It seems to me a very limited perspective to assume that an animal living outside its home range is by definition being cruelly treated. If we accept the premise of exhibiting animals in zoos, and the animals are provided with conditions in which they thrive (the Bronx Zoo's snow leopard breeding record is exemplary and neither the altitude nor the summers duplicate the Himalayas - although it does get to the low 80sF in Tibet) then where is there evidence of any problem? There are animals being kept in environments quite similar to that of their wild relatives, yet are so badly cared for that their lives are short, they breed poorly or not at all, and they are subject to terrible treatment by the visiting zoo public. But at least the weather report is what you'd want for them.
Odd that you would so freely refer to "cruelty."

Back to your question: different countries have different legal and ethical rules about zoos.
 
Thanks for your reply. I know nothing about the way zoos are run or how the animals inside are selected which is why I asked. I was just stating that to the untrained person, it seemed cruel to put an animal, for example, a polar bear, in a habitat that reaches over 95 degrees F. I was just wondering if anyone knew why the bear was ok, if they were, etc. Growing up we were always told that animals are in specific environments for a reason and I was just openly pondering the zoo system. I ask myself some questions each time I visit the zoo and I wanted to know from a professional what steps are taken in the selection, etc and also from other zoo patrons and animal lovers their opinions.

I think its great that the Bronx Zoo's breeding program for snow leopards is working!


Thanks for your information!
 
To pick up on your comments re Polar Bears -- it can get very hot in the Arctic summer.
As a general rule of animal husbandry, if an animal breeds and shows natural self-care [bathing, grooming], and appears relaxed [as opposed to mindlessly bored] one can assume it is contented or even happy.
 
I would add that the question isn't a bad one and is hotly debated (elephants in Cananda? Elephants ANYwhere?). But the assumption of cruelty seems like excessive heat to me.
I still say that having humans work in cubicles in huge office spaces is cruelty to this species. But no one is willing to challenge the corporations on that! :D

In the wild we never were found in cubicles (or with wires danging from our ears)
 
Internationally, of course, there is a huge variance. Obviously countries that are poor and whose people are living in poverty are not going to have the means to provide first rate animal care. Some zoos in third world countries are truly appalling and I think many of us would prefer to see them shut down. (I am basing this on photos, not on personal visits).

In wealthy, so-called first world countries, there is a large range. Most have professional zoo associations that demand very high standards in order to maintain accreditation. AZA here in the states, EAZA in the European Union, Australia I believe has a similar organization. Any institution with this logo is going to have the best care and overall very good exhibits.

HOWEVER, at least here in the United States, there is no requirement for a public zoo to be AZA accredited in order to operate. All that is required (with slight variance in certain states or counties) is a USDA license (United States Departement of Agriculture). All that they require is that an animal has access to clean water and shade and has enough room to stand up and turn around. (The reason they do not require any more space than that, I believe, is as a favor to the factory farming industry, which is a whole other topic). Therefore, even in a country like the U.S. with arguably the world's best zoo system, there are some truly awful roadside menageries.

Thankfully these are becoming less common, due to the public's increasing unwillingness to put up with places like that. If people don't go, they won't make money and will have to close.

As for animals in proper climates, I would like to see more attention to this, such as polar bears and snow leopards in more northern zoos and tropical animals in more southern zoos. I think we are finally starting to see this to a small extent here in the United States (for example, there are no snow leopards in my state of Arizona).
 
Arizona Docent said:
As for animals in proper climates, I would like to see more attention to this, such as polar bears and snow leopards in more northern zoos and tropical animals in more southern zoos. I think we are finally starting to see this to a small extent here in the United States (for example, there are no snow leopards in my state of Arizona).
Click to expand...

@Arizona Docent: How do you feel about the Tuscon Zoo having polar bears? I've heard the argument that the bears never develop the layer of fat that they would in the wild, and thus do not suffer from the heat in southern zoos. Do you know if this is true?
 
DavidBrown said:
@Arizona Docent: How do you feel about the Tuscon Zoo having polar bears? I've heard the argument that the bears never develop the layer of fat that they would in the wild, and thus do not suffer from the heat in southern zoos. Do you know if this is true?
Click to expand...

How do I feel about it? Not good. If I was magically made zoo director, my first order of business would be to ship the bear up north. Polar bears are in high enough demand right now that placement would be no problem. Although I am just a volunteer, I do know at least one staff member who feels the same way. He is not senior staff, however, so is in no position really to do anything about it.

Some southern latitude zoos, namely San Diego, do have good facilities for polar bears. (Being right on the coast, the San Diego Zoo also stays much cooler than the inland areas like the Wild Animal Park). But our enclosure is too small and barren and the bear spends most of her time indoors anyway (unless they lock her out on exhibit). Other than San Diego Zoo and perhaps Sea World (climate controlled ehxibit in Orlando), I cannot think of any southern latitude American zoos that should have polar bears. In fact, there are not many that do (Albuquerque and North Carolina are the only ones that come to mind).

As for the loss of fat layer, I have not heard that. Ironically, our zoo actually tells people that having the fat layer helps to insulate them from heat as well as cold. Personally, I don't buy it, but that is what they say. (I mean if that was really true then shouldn't our zookeepers wear down jackets in the summer for an extra layer of cooling insulation?).

If someone from my zoo sees this post (which I don't think they will), I suppose I could get a mild reprimand, but I can't help telling it as I see it.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on polar bears in Tuscon.

The "no fat layer" argument was what I was told to tell people at the Sacramento Zoo when I was a teen education volunteer there in the late 1980s. We had two polar bears and in the summer the temperatures are frequently 100 degrees plus - perhaps slightly less brutal than Tuscon, but similar.

Eventually the female polar bear died and the male went to live at a much better exhibit in Detroit. I've always wondered if they were more miserable in hot weather than the neighboring grizzly or sloth bears. Of course, the misery of being in small grottos might have outweighed the discomfort of the heat.
 
Although not a hard and fast rule, US zoos do try to do this with tigers ... Amur tigers are mostly found in northern zoos and Malayan and Sumatran tigers are mostly found in southern zoos.
 
polar bear said:
Although not a hard and fast rule, US zoos do try to do this with tigers ... Amur tigers are mostly found in northern zoos and Malayan and Sumatran tigers are mostly found in southern zoos.
Click to expand...

I thought that was the mandate from the SSP.

Either way, another thing that goes into play are state laws governing animal care. I know in Florida it can be a royal pain for zoos to obtain some animals because of all the red tape they have to go through. Jacksonville dropped piranha and several insect species from Range of the Jaguar for this reason.
 
Many years ago, I was told that a polar bear had once frozen to death in a New York zoo (I don't know which one) Does anyone know if it's true?
 
DavidBrown said:
The "no fat layer" argument was what I was told to tell people at the Sacramento Zoo when I was a teen education volunteer there in the late 1980s.
Click to expand...

and

Ironically, our zoo actually tells people that having the fat layer helps to insulate them from heat as well as cold.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that this is a wide practice to perhaps try to placate possible concerned patrons (alliteration!) of zoos by giving out iffy or unsure facts to hot topic questions that are asked?
 
I can assure you we would NEVER be told to give out iffy or suspect information. In fact, if we are unsure of something we are told to tell the patron we don't know the answer but we can get it to them if they want to leave contact information. So I am sure my zoo staff genuinely believes the fat insulation theory. I am personally not too keen on it, but I am not a scientist and it very well may be true. I generally avoid the topic by not staying near the polar bear exhibit.

I can say that the dry air of Tucson is good for polar bears - a lot of people forget that the Arctic actually is a desert. Our current bear came from a more humid zoo in the northeast and had a skin rash, which cleared up after a few months in the dry desert air.
 
Well its good to know that no one is trying to lead anyone astray. I've always wondered if there was a PC answer that zoos had to give out, thanks! At least I know the AZ zoo is on point :D

And super interesting fact about your Tuscan polar bear.
 
I've often heard people comment that it's surprising when chimps go out in the cold and snow but they often choose to go out and something they particularly seem to enjoy on really cold days is getting ice from the top of ponds and eating it (or taking it indoors - to eat later!?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top