Deconstructing the Zoo Illusion

by Angela Grimes in Animals in Captivity, Blog on January 08, 2019

Last week, news reports and social media buzzed with the stories of two zoo incidents. In North Carolina, a young worker was killed by a lion that had escaped his enclosure and, at a zoo in Florida, a toddler suffered minor injuries after falling into the rhino enclosure during a close-encounter attraction. Many people are aware of the cruelty of circuses and roadside zoos, where captive wild animals are drugged, forced to perform, and confined to tiny cages to languish in abysmal conditions, and which are, to no surprise, frequent sites of wild animal escapes and attacks. But, both of last week’s incidents took place at facilities with good public reputations – after all, the North Carolina zoo, called Conservators’ Center, partners with North Carolina State University and the Florida facility, Brevard Zoo, is accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). So, what happened?

These incidents, and other, similar, instances of animal attacks, escapes, or members of the public entering animal enclosures at well-known facilities reveal the cracks in “the zoo illusion” – the notion that large zoo facilities exist purely and solely for educational and conservation purposes and that getting close to animals in these settings is always safe.

If you visit the websites of the two zoos involved in last week’s incidents, you will find them full of language about education and conservation. The Conservators’ Center’s stated mission is to strive “to provide a premiere educational experience” and boasts a 20 year history of supporting “wildlife education and conservation.” Even its name is all about conservation! Likewise, the Brevard Zoo’s mission is “Wildlife conservation through education and participation.” Read the mission statements of any major American  zoo and you will see a similar theme: the mission is to promote education and conservation. While some zoos may take in animals that would otherwise not have a place to go, and some may contribute to conservation, the notion that these facilities exist just for educational and conservation purposes, or even that there is a significant value to the conservation and education aspects, is an illusion; entertainment is the main, if unstated, part of a zoo’s mission.

Entertainment is the main, if unstated, part of a zoo’s mission.

Camel Ride at Tulsa Zoo
A camel ride at Tulsa Zoo, OK. Doug Wertman from Rogers, AR, USA [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons.
Indeed, entertainment considerations often come first. Take, for instance, the Brevard Zoo’s “Rhino Encounter Experience” – the attraction during which the toddler fell into the rhino enclosure. According to news reports, zoo visitors purchasing this option were given private access to feel and brush the rhinos. This attraction certainly does not benefit conservation in anyway, and nor is it educational, despite offering “up close” access to the animals. This and other, similar attractions at zoos across the country – such as animal rides and “touch tanks” – run contrary to educational aims. The animals are in an unnatural situation and will inherently not act as they would in the wild. Nor is it in wild animals’ natural behaviors to be felt, petted, or climbed on by humans. Instead, the main objective with this kind of attraction at zoos can only be to entertain the public and bring in additional funds. Indeed, the entire concept of a zoo – members of the public pay admission to view animals – is built on the notion of providing an entertaining day out; any education or conservation that happens at all is secondary to the visitor experience.

Wild animals are just that – wild – and will act instinctively if they are frightened or feel threatened.

Aquarium Touch Tank.
A “touch tank” at the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center. Photo by C. Watts (https://flic.kr/p/RhajU2) via: freeforcommercialuse.org.
The second aspect of the “zoo illusion” incidents like these call into question is the notion that getting close to wild animals in the setting of a large zoo facility is always safe, for both staff and visitors. Anytime humans and wild animals are in close contact with each other, there is an aspect of unpredictability and danger. Inadequate barriers, human mistakes, or accidents can lead to unintended contact, but even intentional contact in so-called educational experiences can lead to harm. Wild animals are just that – wild – and will act instinctively if they are frightened or feel threatened. Attacks and escapes can, and do, happen. And, when they happen, it is not just humans who are in danger; the animals – like the lion at Conservators’ Center – are frequently killed after an attack, merely for acting on their natural instincts and impulses.

Wildlife belongs in the wild, not captive in zoos or theme parks, and not forced to entertain or “educate” us humans. Please don’t fall prey to the illusion of educational value of zoos, and please do not support close contact experiences – for your safety and for the animals’ well-being.

Keep Wildlife in the Wild,
Angela

Read the next article

London Zoo is Falling Down, Falling Down, Falling Down...

Angela Grimes
Chief Executive Officer