Hello everyone! Hope your week has been great thus far 🙂 I recently went to River Safari during recess week and I saw this sign:
That got me thinking about my blog theme. In my last post, I discussed the possibility of having a synthesis between animal welfare and conservation issues. Today, we will be looking at how zoos, in particular, incorporate the two.
Zoos have conservation programmes where they aim to breed endangered species such that they can be released back into the wild once their numbers have increased. This is to ensure the continuity of their species. According to Wild Welfare, in the past, the conservation of a species has taken precedence over the welfare of single animals and the captive population. It was soon discovered that this method has proven to be unsuccessful for most populations.
Animal welfare in zoos include measures to enhance the living conditions in enclosures and meeting the behavioural and physical requirements of the animal. These include optimising condition for reproduction, health and reducing stress levels of the animal. To ensure that animals that have been bred survives in the wild, zoos will have to combine both animal welfare and reduce the effects of captivity. Therefore, these approaches must go hand in hand in order to increase the breeding potential and sustainability of these species.
We will study one conservation programme that has had successful results from improving animal welfare.
The Hawaii Endangered Bird Conservation Program under San Diego Zoo seeks to increase the population of birds. They mostly work with birds that are with the vulnerable and critically endangered conservation statuses like the Maui Parrotbill.
At the breeding facilities, they “aim to increase captive animal welfare through husbandry, nutrition, behavior-based enrichment, and integrated veterinary practices.” By doing so, they are able to evaluate the animal welfare practices by keeping track of the animals’ behaviour and thus, improve on conservation efforts.
I hope you have learned more about the conflict and synthesis between animal welfare and conservation issues from my blog posts. Join me next time as I analyse the environmental impacts of the illegal wildlife trade!
-Amanda 🙂
Reference list:
Image: “Maui Parrotbill” by am_smith2 is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
Greggor, A. L., et al. (2018). “Animal Welfare in Conservation Breeding: Applications and Challenges.” Frontiers in Veterinary Science 5: 323.
Hi Amanda!
What a coincidence! I went to the River Safari during recess week as well! Considering that my blog is on zoos and how zoos have played an important role in cultivating my love for animals, it is no surprise that I am a supporter of zoos, and the good work that they do. In your post, you have discussed how animal welfare can be achieved in conjunction with conservation goals, that they are not mutually exclusive (I enjoyed the read, and do agree with it too!).
That said, I do think that is not always the case, and there are times where to achieve conservation goals, the welfare of animals in zoos might have to be compromised. This article by the Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/02/zoos-time-shut-down-conservation-education-wild-animals) is quite an interesting read, but there are 2 points of interest. 1) Some animals like lions, polar bears are unsuitable for captivity, and even if they are becoming threatened (which they are), zoos can never truly emulate their natural habitat which leads to some compromise of welfare. 2) It is estimated that only 15% of animals in England zoos are threatened, meaning the rest of the species kept may be kept for entertainment purposes only, and are not involved in conservation. I am curious to know your thoughts on this.
Cheers!
Jeng Wei
Hi Jeng Wei! Thanks for your question 🙂 I agree with you that sometimes, animal welfare in zoos is not always optimal. However, it is challenging to adequately assess whether zoos are beneficial or detrimental to animals as proponents from both sides have convincing arguments and it is difficult to arrive at an answer. Regarding your first point about polar bears in captivity, I feel that it is also unnecessary unless their population numbers have dwindled to numbers that are extremely low because large animals are not really made for zoos. That being said, polar bears in the wild now may have lower survival rates due to habitat loss, starvation and drowning which is all caused by climate change. Survival rates of animals in captivity are greater than in the wild but are, admittedly, more suitable for smaller animals. There must be some guidelines for us to know where to strike a balance. For your second point, although the article mentions education as not being a considerable factor for having zoos, it is, in my opinion, much more impactful for children to experience firsthand the joy of having to see animals. It may leave a greater impression on them as perceptions are shaped when young. This may encourage them to make a difference in the future, such as making sustainable decisions that will indirectly support conservation. I hope that my responses made sense and helped to shed some light on the arguments from the opposing side!
– Amanda 🙂