Should zoos be made illegal or do they more good than harm?

[pipelineaudio]

There is a species of desert lizard commonly kept. These lizards do not drink standing (still) water. For that matter, they drink precious little water in the first place- most of their water requirements are met by eating vegetation. However, the DoA insists that they are provided with water bowls.

Long story short, these water bowls are a horrible idea and are in many cases harmful to the lizards.

So, here is a case of being overseen by those who are barely better educated than the general public, and yet empowered to enforce their whims.

I'm not sure where you are at, but we had a similar situation in Arizona. The game and fish guys were hit or miss on knowledge about the animals they were supposed to oversee.

Some were AMAZING! Walking encyclopedias, who could give you spots to see whatever animal you wanted to. These guys were on good terms with the herp club I was in.

Others were, to put it mildly, pathetic. There was a case where a game and fish agent, responding to a complaint of a tortoise eating someone's garden, put the tortoise in a bucket of water to take him "back to the desert". Luckily, the poor guy didnt drown, but did get a fungal infection, which required long enough care that it was illegal to release the tortoise back into the wild

 

[rjh01]

Zoos have a place for education and for various other reasons. However I have serious issues with captive breeding of endangered species for later release in the wild.

First off the habitat must be restored. No good having animals you want to release into the wild when the natural habitat no longer exists. Then the hunting skills would have been lost over several generations of captive breeding. These need to be re learnt. Then there may be a very small genetic diversity. Any stress like a disease may wipe them out due to this reason. Worse if the zoo has a choice of which animals to attempt to breed especially over many generations it may choose the tamer animals, rather than the harder to control animals. These would be less suitable for the wild.

So I think the money would be much better spent keeping whatever natural environments rare and endangered animals need. And keeping poachers out.

 

[Varanid]

Well, let's help your argument out. I don't doubt the passion and dedication in your line of work.

I appreciate the discussion.

But, how is original research done for animal care? Is it mostly front line work by people like yourself just doing your daily job (hey, we threw some balls in the enclosure, and they ignored them, but boy do they love these XXX)? Is there funding and grants? Research from universities that you read and implement? Do you or other people do field work? That sort of thing.

Scientific method.
Basically, educated trial and error. Providing a given species with a range of choices, noting the choices, making adjustments. Captive breeding is actually a good goal in and of itself with non-domesticated animals. It is at least suggestive of good husbandry practices.

What I'm getting at is that obviously zoos have improved since the 70s or so. Obviously, some of that was just due to having to comply to USDA regulations, but equally obviously zoos are learning how to care for animals better and doing things without being prodded by regulations. I'm just curious at how these advances are made, and how many advances might be yet to come (will a top notch zoo 100 years from now be very different, or very close to the best current zoos).

The leaders are the keepers, the lagers are the USDA, etc. The AZA is a different matter, but does not cover institutions such as the one I work at.

Essentially, I guess, some sort of peer run agency (such as the AZA) is the best method. But that just moves the goalposts, the AZA (or some such) is now the "authority". Just as soon as they implement something, a clever keeper somewhere will make an interesting observation or conclusion that turns the world on its ear.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

...the lagers are the USDA...

Who are the ales?

 

[Varanid]

Who are the ales?

Busted.

I was wondering if it was actually a word ("laggers"). Spell check didn't recognize it, and offered "lagers". I took a shot.

I am sure my point was intelligible. I don't make too many grammar/vocabulary mistakes- so you will have to forgive this one.

 

[roger]

I hate lagers.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Laggers.

 

[Varanid]

Zoos have a place for education and for various other reasons. However I have serious issues with captive breeding of endangered species for later release in the wild.

First off the habitat must be restored. No good having animals you want to release into the wild when the natural habitat no longer exists. Then the hunting skills would have been lost over several generations of captive breeding. These need to be re learnt. Then there may be a very small genetic diversity. Any stress like a disease may wipe them out due to this reason. Worse if the zoo has a choice of which animals to attempt to breed especially over many generations it may choose the tamer animals, rather than the harder to control animals. These would be less suitable for the wild.

So I think the money would be much better spent keeping whatever natural environments rare and endangered animals need. And keeping poachers out.

Totally valid. There is a line of thought (which I am inclined to believe in) that if you protect the habitats, the species will take care of themselves.

Evidence? What is the one thing all endangered species have in common?
Habitat destruction.

 

[Varanid]

I'm not sure where you are at, but we had a similar situation in Arizona. The game and fish guys were hit or miss on knowledge about the animals they were supposed to oversee.

Some were AMAZING! Walking encyclopedias, who could give you spots to see whatever animal you wanted to. These guys were on good terms with the herp club I was in.

Others were, to put it mildly, pathetic. There was a case where a game and fish agent, responding to a complaint of a tortoise eating someone's garden, put the tortoise in a bucket of water to take him "back to the desert". Luckily, the poor guy didnt drown, but did get a fungal infection, which required long enough care that it was illegal to release the tortoise back into the wild

The tortoise anecdote is just classic. Do you even have any aquatic turtles in AZ? Do you even have water?

 

[Amapola]

Zoos have a place for education and for various other reasons. However I have serious issues with captive breeding of endangered species for later release in the wild.

First off the habitat must be restored. No good having animals you want to release into the wild when the natural habitat no longer exists. Then the hunting skills would have been lost over several generations of captive breeding. These need to be re learnt. Then there may be a very small genetic diversity. Any stress like a disease may wipe them out due to this reason. Worse if the zoo has a choice of which animals to attempt to breed especially over many generations it may choose the tamer animals, rather than the harder to control animals. These would be less suitable for the wild.

So I think the money would be much better spent keeping whatever natural environments rare and endangered animals need. And keeping poachers out.

This is a great idea but it won't always work and as an example I'll use the Guam rail I've already mentioned.

The reason this bird was wiped out in its original habitat is because of the accidental introduction of a particular type of tree snake, the brown tree snake. No one is quite sure how it got to Guam, possibly on a ship or a plane, but once there it wiped out all the birds. There are NO birds on Guam because of this snake - and just try and get rid of it, the island is covered with some pretty thick jungle. The habitat has not been destroyed and there are no human poachers - yet if you reintroduced the Guam rail back to its native land it would simply be wiped out yet again.

What's being done instead is a captive breeding program to keep the numbers up and reintroduction to islands in the area of Guam that have not been infested with brown tree snakes.

Sometimes the habitat has not been destroyed in the regular sense of the word, but alien species have been introduced, either deliberately or accidentally. Sometimes captive breeding programs are an animal's best chance for survival.

 

[Severus Snape]

This! Seaworld is a tourist trap. Come visit us at the St. Louis Zoo. Or go to San Diego or Albuquerque even.

Don't forget the Columbus Zoo. Number 1 zoo in the USA.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Don't forget the Columbus Zoo. Number 1 zoo in the USA.

That would be the third #1 then. St. L. and Deigo would eat Ohio alive.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I hate lagers.

I hate stouts and porters.

 

[Emet]

I hate stouts and porters.

Are you prejudiced against bulky baggage carriers?

 

[rjh01]

Totally valid. There is a line of thought (which I am inclined to believe in) that if you protect the habitats, the species will take care of themselves.

Evidence? What is the one thing all endangered species have in common?
Habitat destruction.

Thank you for your comment.

This is a great idea but it won't always work and as an example I'll use the Guam rail I've already mentioned.

The reason this bird was wiped out in its original habitat is because of the accidental introduction of a particular type of tree snake, the brown tree snake. No one is quite sure how it got to Guam, possibly on a ship or a plane, but once there it wiped out all the birds. There are NO birds on Guam because of this snake - and just try and get rid of it, the island is covered with some pretty thick jungle. The habitat has not been destroyed and there are no human poachers - yet if you reintroduced the Guam rail back to its native land it would simply be wiped out yet again.

What's being done instead is a captive breeding program to keep the numbers up and reintroduction to islands in the area of Guam that have not been infested with brown tree snakes.

Sometimes the habitat has not been destroyed in the regular sense of the word, but alien species have been introduced, either deliberately or accidentally. Sometimes captive breeding programs are an animal's best chance for survival.

Problem. If the Brown tree snake is not removed from the island the animal cannot be put back in the wild. If the Guam rail are in zoos for many generations then that produces huge problems. For example there may be selective breeding to make the animal less wild and more able to be kept in captivity.

There may be valid reasons for keeping the Guam rail in captivity but unless the Brown tree snake can be removed from the Island keeping them to release later to the Island is not one of them.

 

[pipelineaudio]

The tortoise anecdote is just classic. Do you even have any aquatic turtles in AZ? Do you even have water?

We got a few aquatic ones, but not for much longer if the "environmentalists" keep putting up dams

http://www.reptilesofaz.org/herp-turtle.html

 

[pipelineaudio]

There may be valid reasons for keeping the Guam rail in captivity but unless the Brown tree snake can be removed from the Island keeping them to release later to the Island is not one of them.

One of th big issues keeping that snake around is that contrary to the post birds are NOT all gone. The introduced pigeons, dove's, sparrows, Kentucky Cardinals, and who knows what else are keeping those snakes fat and populous

 

[Finn McR]

An easy solution: show that the animals displayed at zoos show no extra stress when stared at by a number of potential predators. If the apes, bears, zebras, birds, bats, reptiles/ etc. do not have a negative response to being watched, then they are acceptable zoo animals. If it stresses them (e.g. typical prey animals), then don't subject them to 12-hour-a-day scrutiny by observers.

 

[Finn McR]

So I have seen a TV program with Sir Richard Attenborough (sp?) in which he demonstrated that a bird species will feign injury to draw off predators if the bird/nest is observed by a walking, observant, human; whereas a person walking about in the same habitat without looking at the ground did not trigger a response from the birds.

Did I fall for a, "just-so" story or is there something to this??

 

[aglassman]

Half the kids in the world don't even know where milk comes from. Take zoo's away? No way!

But I do think zoo's should include cows, horses, chickens and such so at least they learn where some of their food comes from.