The_Leopard_Seal
Well-Known Member
Many (if not most) animals can thrive in a zoo. And many species would benefit from a greater presence in zoos. But what are some species that should never be kept in zoos? Other than humans of course.
What are some species that should never be kept in zoos?
- Thread starter The_Leopard_Seal
- Start date
Very few species thrive in zoos unfortunately and we are still narrowing down to the handful of species that can actually thrive and away from the practice of managing species that struggle in captivity.
Indri are one of the more interesting examples, they do not appear to survive in captivity.
Indri are one of the more interesting examples, they do not appear to survive in captivity.
Zoo adventures
Well-Known Member
I think the following animal cannot be kept in captivity: Narwhals have been kept 2 times and failed, Great white shark, Greenland shark, blobfish and all the high-pressure fish.
Nile Hippo Expert
Well-Known Member
Flying Spaghetti Monsters
When I visited Madagascar in 1987, I saw a large enclosure where some indris were kept prior to being sent to a zoo. They all died. Some indris were kept in a lemur park in Madagascar a few years later, but didn't survive long. I have a Bronx Zoo guide that lists indris, which were due to be in the collection but never arrived.
ZooNews2024
Well-Known Member
There is actually a long history of humans being kept in 'zoo's and other exhibitions - from premature babies, to colonial 'savages' (as they would have been described) in both America and Europe.
You may be interested in this book: The Project Gutenberg eBook of A Man In The Zoo, by David Garnett.
The other groups include the true pelagic and aerial birds, such as albatrosses, petrels, shearwaters, frigate birds and swifts, and the species which need specialised diets and cannot adapt to substitutes such as the jellyfish-eating leatherback turtle. A few rescued individuals of a few species may be kept temporarily or even permanently (like the Laysan albatrosses at Monterey Bay Aquarium) but there is no real prospect of establishing a captive population.
ZooNews2024
Well-Known Member
Thank you - but fiction is not really my thing...
The facts behind these exhibits are compelling enough:
Coney Island’s Incubator Babies - JSTOR Daily
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/03/opinions/newkirk-bronx-zoo-man-cage/index.html
Human zoo - Wikipedia
and plenty of others on-line...
Last edited:
Tapirus Lar
Well-Known Member
I think the question was ; 'which animals shouldn't be kept', not 'which animals can't be kept'.
For example, imho, indris and hoatzins cant be kept currently, but large whales, or large birds like albatrosses, or even sometimes domestic animals preferably shouldn't be kept.
Indris and hoatzins can be kept in captivity, but don't tend to live long. I have a book saying that the maximum length of life of a captive gorilla is 1 year.
Utahraptor
Active Member
Deep sea animals such as anglerfish, blobfish, abyssal squids and Greenland shark, don't tend to survive for much time on the surface, and overall lack of informations we have about those guys and the amount of resources to bring them to the surface and keep them alive, seems so abysmal that keeping a captive population seems really difficult and pointless for me.
And also to keep faithful to the spirit of the thread: Domestic cats. I can't think of a single reason to keep cats in a zoo. I can understand why to keep dogs mainly if they are there to help with stressful animals such as cheetahs, or other domestic animals such as goats and pigs, but I simply cannot understand why someone would keep a cat in a zoo.
And also to keep faithful to the spirit of the thread: Domestic cats. I can't think of a single reason to keep cats in a zoo. I can understand why to keep dogs mainly if they are there to help with stressful animals such as cheetahs, or other domestic animals such as goats and pigs, but I simply cannot understand why someone would keep a cat in a zoo.
cornu aspersum
Well-Known Member
Pest control maybe? They can also be used for educational purposes as other domestic animals
cerperal
Well-Known Member
Both Leipzig and Vienna off the top of my head keep cats, as I believe they are strays that the zoos take on - living in the Giraffe and Elephant houses respectively. Obviously not traditional housing given they can come and go inside the exhibit, but I think that's no different to having free-roaming guinea fowl or peacocks. In both zoos they serve as pest control and enrichment. I guess as there's no end to strays, both zoos won't have trouble replacing them - personally, I think it's a very novel way of both rehousing strays and adding to exhibits.
I don't know what makes you think this.
I am firmly of the belief that all animal species can thrive in captivity. A small minority are impractically difficult to keep (ex. baleen whales) but most animals can thrive in captivity if kept in the right conditions.
Many animals that we don't currently *think* can are perfectly capable of doing so, we just haven't yet discovered the methods they require. Sure, right now it looks like animals like Indri and Hoatzin do not survive well in captivity, but a century ago we thought gorillas were impossible to keep, and today we know that ay zoo with enough space and know how can keep and breed a troop. With some more experimentation, I am sure we could figure out how to comfortably keep Indri, Hoatzin, or nearly any other species we don't currently think "thrives" in captivity.
Wisp O' Mist
Well-Known Member
Theater of the Sea, while not a "traditional" zoo, has dozens of cats living on its grounds. Initially part of a feral colony that just happened to live there, new strays periodically turn up, and very occasionally, needy cats are adopted.
The cats are a big draw IMHO. While not all are friendly, many are social enough to enjoy a good scratch or two behind the ears. The mostly outdoor setting helps prevent odor build up and seeing them lounge around here, there, and everywhere adds to relaxed atmosphere.