This article was downloaded by: [Syracuse University Library]On: 04 June 2014, At: 13:51Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Applied AnimalWelfare SciencePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/haaw20

Is There a Future for Zoos?Lisa B. WeisbergPublished online: 04 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Lisa B. Weisberg (1999) Is There a Future for Zoos?, Journal ofApplied Animal Welfare Science, 2:3, 251-253, DOI: 10.1207/s15327604jaws0203_9

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327604jaws0203_9

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is

expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Syra

cuse

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

3:51

04

June

201

4

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE, 2(3). 251-253 Copyright Q 1999, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

CONFERENCE REPORTS

Is There a Future for Zoos?

Lisa B. Weisberg American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Sponsored by the New York City Bar Association Committee on Legal Issues Per- taining to Animals, a full-day program on September 26, 1998 explored the com- plexities of and justifications for raising and displaying captive wildlife. Topics ex- amined included the changing role of zoos, the legal obligations of society toward animals in zoos, the laws that govern the conduct of zoos over these animals, and how well those laws are worlung. A distinguished panel of speakers from the United States, England, and Australia debated the ethical obligations of zoos toward indi- vidual animals. Speakers included Dr. William Conway, president and general di- rector ofthe WildlifeConservation Society (i.e., theBronxZoo); Will Travers, exec- utive director of Born Free Foundation; and Dr. Dale Jamieson of the University of Colorado. Among the other organizations represented were Zoo Atlanta; Museum of Victoria, Australia; American Zoo and Aquarium Association (AZAA); U.S. De- partment of Agriculture (USDA)-Animal and Plant HealthInspection Service; Per- forming Animals Welfare Society; Animal Legal Defense Fund; and the Humane Society of the United States.

Conway, who provided the opening remarks, looked at the changing role of zoos from recreational and entertainment facilities to conservation societies, edu- cational centers, and sanctuaries that provide the last hope of survival for some species of wildlife. Historically, and still in large part today, zoos have exhibited nonindigenous species for the public. Today, because of our separation from na- ture, zoos may represent our only contact with these animals.

Requests for reprints should be sent to Lisa B. Weisberg, American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 424 East 92nd Street, New York, NY 10128. E-mail: lisaw@aspca.org

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Syra

cuse

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

3:51

04

June

201

4

252 WEISBERG

ROLE OF THE ZOO

What lund of relationship with nature do zoos really provide? True, many zoos have evolved in the last few years from housing animals in sterile enclosures that did not even meet the AZAA accreditation standards to using more natural environments. Today, however, only 183 of 2,000 licensed zoos are AZAA ac- credited. Do zoos then symbolize a symbiosis with and respect for nature, or are they a paradox, representing both a confinement of nature and a subordination of animals? Do they serve as conduits for our learning how natural systems work, or do they romanticize animals by creating an ecological balance that we can no longer find in the wild? Are not zoos, as evidenced by their very nature and de- sign to suit public convenience and pleasure, really temples of human consump- tion and oppression rather than sanctuaries serving the best interest of the indi- vidual animal?

The panel of speakers discussed these important philosophical questions, andev- eryone agreed that a critical need exists to save many of the animals quickly facing extinction in the wild. How do we do this? Zoos themselves, although captively breeding a desired species to maintain and enhance their populations, may raise funds torebuild nature preserves and parks. What hasdevelopedinmany instances is the changing role of zoos as conservation societies and sanctuaries.

Yet pitted against this optimistic backdrop are the realities against which we are working to save wildlife. Conway estimated that our global human population to- day is approximately 6 billion, and increases by 85 million each year. Falling to de- velopers, nature parks and preserves are being destroyed, greatly diminishing available wildlife habitats.

All said, a fixed amount of space remains for animals, both in zoos and in the wild. The need for wildlife management, that is, the breeding of animals to sustain the desired populations, inevitably becomes very scientific and complicated. Without question, working with local people to manage and preserve existing wildlife parks and habitats is crucial to the success of any species population plan (SSP). Yet even if we were to achieve our goal, SSPs require us to decide which animals we want to live and which animals we are willing to sacrifice. Moreover, any breeding program usually entails a controversial culling of certain species that interfere with the desired ecological balance.

ZOOS, HABITATS, AND THE FUTURE

As Conway appropriately stated, the question of whether there is a future for zoos in achieving the objectives of wildlife management is tantamount to the question of whether there is a future for wildlife. In the future, will there be any natural habitat left to which the animals can return? Is it, indeed, feasible to re-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Syra

cuse

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

3:51

04

June

201

4

CONFERENCE REPORT 253

turn captively bred animals to the wild? Jamieson did not believe it possible to return the captively bred; Conway essentially concurred. If such is the case, we must then determine the underlying purpose of captive breeding programs, the hope, if any, of preserving certain species, and the role of zoos in the new mil- lennium. Even as we struggle with these questions, the panel agreed that we are obligated to assume responsibility for the lifetime care and well-being of ani- mals who remain in zoos. Currently, the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) of 1966, under the jurisdiction of the USDA, governs the care provided to animals in cap- tivity. The panel identified many ongoing problems with the AWA that call for prompt redress. These include the need to (a) hire more USDA inspectors and implement a comprehensive training program; (b) establish higher standards of care, including behavioral enrichment programs as the threshold minimum stan- dard of care by which to measure compliance; and (c) create a "private right of action" on behalf of animals. Additional needs include (a) the elimination of the stipulated agreement provision, in which an apparent violator is subject to a civil penalty in lieu of an adjudication of the charges; (b) the imposition of penalties for violating the AWA; and (c) the complete shutdown of zoos not accredited by the AZAA.

ROLE OF ETHICS

Regarding the ethical responsibility of AZAA toward individual animals in zoos, many panelists felt the problems of surplus animals, primarily from cap- tive breeding programs that supply the lucrative and growing pet trade and pri- vate shooting preserves, were of utmost concern. Problems pertaining to these animals, they felt, must be eliminated. Ultimately, the panel considered the rec- ognition of the rights of the individual animal apart from the collective species.

Travers stated that, whether or not our efforts to preserve species succeed, as long as we have animals in zoos we have the responsibility to ensure their being re- garded as "sentient beings, and, with this, the responsibility to safeguard individ- ual animals from physical, social and psychological suffering." Travers concluded that, ultimately, the United States should adopt thefive freedoms of the United Kingdom, to which every animal is entitled: the freedom (a) from thirst, hunger, and malnutrition; (b) from thermal and physical discomfort; (c) from fear; (d) from injury and disease; and (e) to display normal behavior.

REFERENCE

Animal WelfareAct.7U. S . C . 52131-2159(1966).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Syra

cuse

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 1

3:51

04

June

201

4