Zoos serve a purpose

By Jac Wilder Versteeg

Sun Sentinel

A tiger killed a zookeeper at the Palm Beach Zoo in Florida. To protect a child, zoo workers killed a gorilla at the Cincinnati Zoo. One response from some animal rights activists was the same in both cases: These tragic incidents show that animals should not be on display in zoos.

I think that is the wrong response, but there has been sufficient recent change in attitudes toward animals that I have to keep an open mind.

I have been to both the Palm Beach Zoo and the Cincinnati Zoo. I’ve been to the Bronx Zoo, the North Carolina Zoo, the Columbus Zoo, Disney’s Animal Kingdom and Zoo Miami.

I am glad that most zoos have greatly improved their animal enclosures. Not only is that better for the animals, it makes viewing them more enjoyable for humans. And that gets us to one of the core questions: Is the enjoyment that humans derive from looking at animals sufficient to justify keeping them in captivity?

Yes. It’s common to cite other justifications as well. Displaying the animals builds support for conservation. Zoos provide genetic diversity. Zoos make advances in animal health.

All good, but we all know the real reason for zoos is that humans like to gawk at the strange and wonderful animals. Isn’t that exploitation? You bet, and that’s OK. Humans have exploited animals throughout history (and prehistory) and will continue to do so.

By what right do we do this? That’s a complicated ethical question. Humans are smarter.

Might makes right

In part, because of that intelligence, we have become dominant. That boils down to a claim that might makes right, which makes many people uncomfortable but is the essential justification.

But we don’t need animals any more for transportation or farming. Synthetics replace leather, wool and fur. The attitude that we have a right to exploit animals isn’t gone, but it is shrinking as the need to exploit animals dwindles.

That history of exploiting animals includes exploiting them for entertainment. Modern humans have dropped most of the savagery. We don’t condone bear-baiting, cockfighting or fighting pit bulls to the death.

The bottom line is that we don’t want to make animals suffer for our entertainment... .

I think a lot of the animal rights angst comes from anthropomorphizing the creatures.

As a kid I loved going to the circus to see the elephants. But now I think it is a good thing that the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus has stopped using trained elephants in its shows and sent the animals into retirement in Florida.

More recently, I used to get a huge kick out of the Shamu show at SeaWorld. But now I think it’s a good thing that SeaWorld has ended its orca breeding program and is discontinuing its theatrical shows in favor of what it calls “natural orca encounters.”

I am, frankly, sad to see those forms of entertainment retired. But I have seen too much proof that elephants and killer whales were suffering too much to bring me that “entertainment.”

I don’t think gorillas, tigers and the other animals on display at zoos suffer anywhere near to that extent. True, in recent days a gorilla and a zookeeper both have suffered death.

To me, that’s rare and demands better safety rather than an end to putting animals on display. Still, I’m paying much closer attention to the arguments against zoos.

Jac Wilder VerSteeg is a columnist for the Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel.