Captivity versus extinction: Is wildlife served by zoos?

By: PAUL EAKINS - Staff Writer | Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:06 PM PDT ∞

Wild Animal Park keeper Curtis Lehman checks the eye of Mabhlane, the male African elephant, at the park on Thursday.
DON BOOMER Staff Photographer
Order a copy of this photo
View A Video
Visit our Photo Gallery

SAN PASQUAL VALLEY ---- The euthanization last month of Carol, a beloved 39-year-old Asian elephant at the San Diego Zoo's Wild Animal Park, has reignited the debate over whether zoos provide the care they should for wild animals whose captivity zoo officials say ultimately may protect the species from extinction.
View A Video

Park officials said the injured and diseased elephant, which gained fame when she appeared on "The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson" and had lived most of her life at the park, had to be killed to end her suffering, but animal advocates lambasted the park's decision.

Advocates said in recent interviews that the pachyderm's death was only the latest of many incidents of animal mistreatment at the animal park through the years.

Zoos are built for human entertainment and don't seriously consider the animals' quality of life, animal advocates said. They said the elephant euthanized June 19 should have been sent to an animal sanctuary instead and that the park's mistreatment of the animal was what caused her foot problems and degenerative joint disease.

"The zoo is not a sanctuary," said Florence Lambert, founder of the La Jolla-based Elephant Alliance. "On the contrary, it's a prison."

Officials at the animal park said last week, however, that the park plays an important role in educating the public about wild animals and in learning skills that will help preservationists manage animals in the wild, and in running breeding programs to reintroduce animals to their natural habitats. The animals that are in captivity are given the best care, officials said.

The typical zoos of previous decades that had small, cramped cages with bars separating the inactive animals from human visitors are disappearing, said Robert Wiese, director of collections for the animal park.

"Now, we view ourselves as true conservation organizations and education organizations that really have a role to play in the survival of species," Wiese said.

Successes and failures

When visitors take the animal park's motorized Heart of Africa tour ---- an almost 2 1/2-mile route around an enormous open space designed to emulate the African wilderness where dozens of hoofed species roam ---- the guides usually mention some of what park officials consider to be breeding program success stories.

Officials say the park has had many, with hundreds of offspring from dozens of often endangered species being born at the park since even before it officially opened to the public in 1972. Animals from a handful of these species, most notably the California condor, have been released into the wild.

Among the developments that park officials count as successes:

- 125 cheetahs have been born since 1970;

- 91 southern white rhinos, 10 black rhinos and 50 Indian rhinos have been born at the park;

- 128 Przewalski's horses, the only truly wild species of horse in the world, have been born at the park to be reintroduced to its natural habitat in Mongolia and China. The species is extinct in the wild;

- about 300 Arabian oryx, a species of antelope that was near extinction in the 1960s, have been bred at the park, some of which have been released to the wild in Saudi Arabia and Tunisia;

- the animal park has helped breed and reintroduce California condors to the wild. The species has grown from 27 birds in 1987 to 305 as of June 1, 140 of which are in the wild.

The park also helps establish captive breeding or management programs of animals to be reintroduced to the wild in other parts of the world, most recently working with Russia to preserve the Saiga, an antelopelike mammal, officials said.

But the park also has had its failures, tragedies and publicity messes.

In addition to Carol the elephant, other park animals have died in tragic situations.

In April, a lion cub named Koza was mauled by an older female lion when a park staff member allowed the two to interact in a tragedy park officials attributed to "human error." The badly injured cub had to be euthanized.

After the animal park sent three old African female elephants to the Chicago Zoo in 2002 to make room for a herd of incoming wild African elephants, all three died within three years from a bacterial disease. Critics blamed the deaths on the animals' relocation to a much colder environment.

The incoming herd of seven elephants also created controversy because the pachyderms were taken from the wild in Swaziland. The Swaziland government had planned to kill the elephants in an attempt to control the country's growing elephant population.

But critics say taking any creature out of the wild does little to help the individual or the species. Most of those born in captivity are sent to other zoos, not released back to the wild, they say.

"If you're bringing wild elephants from Africa to put into a zoo or the Wild Animal Park, that's not conservation to me," said Jane Cartmill of Encinitas, vice president of San Diego Animal Advocates.

Caring for animals

The conditions in which captive animals live, particularly elephants, is one reason many animal activists such as Lambert and Cartmill say they oppose zoos.

Animals should be kept in a natural environment where they have enough open space to live and behave naturally, Cartmill said.

"The future isn't bright for wild animals," she said. "But if we're going to try to preserve some, the conditions have to really be adequate to their needs."

The argument that zoos preserve species that may face danger in the wild just doesn't hold water, she said. Each animal has a right to a natural quality of life, despite its species' survival status, Cartmill said.

"Would you rather go extinct or have your children kept in jails all of their lives?" Cartmill said. "You don't want to try to save the species at the expense of the individuals."

Wiese, of the animal park, said zoos play a role not only in preserving the species, but also in educating the public about perils facing the animals.

"I think one of the underestimated positive aspects that zoos have is to really inspire people to care about animals," Wiese said.

At the park, staff members care for an animal's physical and mental well-being, he said.

For example, plants for the African elephants are scattered throughout their grassy 3-acre space to allow them to forage for food as they would in the wild. The elephants have pools where they can bathe and toylike "enrichment" items for the animals to play with. They also receive regular care and attention from park staff members.

On Thursday, the elephants took turns visiting their caretakers at a large metal gate through which the park staff members inspected the elephants' eyes, feet, teeth and overall health. The elephants in return got some attention and a good scratching with a brush.

"We give animals the best care available," Wiese said.

A massive task

But when Carol the elephant was euthanized, critics said the zoo was to blame for her foot and joint problems after at least 20 years of being kept chained at night on a hard concrete surface. In the 1990s, the animal park stopped the practice of chaining its elephants, including Carol, at night, zoo officials said.

The park also received worldwide attention and criticism in 1988 when an elephant that had been transported from the San Diego Zoo in Balboa Park to the Wild Animal Park was chained and beaten by park staff members with axe handles to control the animal.

Jeff Andrews, the park's animal care manager, said Thursday that zoos are continually learning what is best for animals and that newcomers such as the African elephants act more naturally and are healthier than some animals in the past.

"These animals will fare much better due to the change in management strategies that we have," Andrews said. "Our general premise is to let elephants be elephants. We're promoting the most natural behavior possible."

Elliot Katz, a veterinarian and founder of the San Rafael-based In Defense of Animals that had protested the decision to euthanize Carol, said elephants need more space than the animal park and most zoos provide.

"They're the largest mammal, and their feet and their legs are designed to be moving, to be on different kinds of surfaces," Katz said.

But he admitted that if more zoos provided a somewhat natural environment for all of its animals like that offered in the park's Journey into Africa exhibit, the animals would be better off.

"If other zoos had that, there would be some quality of life to that," Katz said.

Extinction versus captivity

Much of the natural world is becoming human-managed natural areas much like the animal park, Wiese said.

"The line between zoos and the wild is really blurring," he said. "It's just a matter of size."

Zoos' work with animals and their research has helped biologists manage wildlife preserves throughout the world, Wiese said.

Zoo researchers, such as at the park's Conservation and Research for Endangered Species center, learn helpful information such as the chemical composition of giant pandas' milk, which has helped biologists in China care for young pandas to reintroduce them to the wild, and how to capture animals without harming them.

"If we did not have animals in zoos, (biologists) would not know how to get out and immobilize these animals safely in the wild," Wiese said.

Animal advocates say individual animals still suffer as a result of their captivity.

Cartmill said that wild animals kept in captivity aren't truly wild anymore, which may be just as bad as humans causing their extinction.

"The question is, do we just let the species die out, or do we try to save some as museum pieces?" Cartmill said. "I think it's a very difficult question. As much as I would not like to see any of the endangered species on our planet become extinct ... I don't want to see any individuals of those species live lives of confinement and frustration."

Contact staff writer Paul Eakins at (760) 740-5420 or peakins@nctimes.com.

22 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

CSUSM student wrote on Jul 1, 2007 8:04 AM:I agree that zoos are more for human entertainment than for the animal's well-being. Even the "Heart of Africa" area is like a pin head in comparison with the vastness of the African wilderness. I say, let the poor animals go back to their homes in their natural habitat.

Jeremy wrote on Jul 1, 2007 9:31 AM:Two words Wild Animal. We capture "wild animals" and cage them for monetary gain. It's a very disheartening thing to see whether it's at Seaworld or the Wild Animal Park. Many captive male killer whales (orcas) experience collapse of the dorsal fin, possibly because lack of exercise through turning leads to diminished muscle tone, other possible factors include change in diet, sex drive and pressure in the pool due to counter-clockwise swimming. And while they're performing their tricks we're being exposed to budweiser, popcorn, and coca-cola products. I highly encourage people to open their eyes and go hiking, camping, or scuba diving if they want to see wild animals.

Jeremy wrote on Jul 1, 2007 9:34 AM:Two words Wild Animal. We capture "wild animals" and cage them for monetary gain. It's a very disheartening thing to see whether it's at Seaworld or the Wild Animal Park. Don't you notice the dorsal fin on the killer whales at seaworld collapses. Many captive male killer whales (orcas) experience collapse of the dorsal fin, possibly because lack of exercise through turning leads to diminished muscle tone and pressure in the pool due to counter-clockwise swimming. And while they're performing their tricks we're being exposed to budweiser, popcorn, and coca-cola products. I highly encourage people to open their eyes and go hiking, camping, or scuba diving if they want to see wild animals. Not spend 50 dollars to see contrived living enviornments for these WILD ANIMALS.

Paul wrote on Jul 1, 2007 12:01 PM:Jeeze, they brought many species back from the brink of extintion. You guys should move to Lake Tahoe to protect those trees so the lake doesn't get muddy. This is a balance between man and nature. Man does has a very large influence on his enviorment. And man hunted most of these animals to the brink of extinction. Returning them to the wild so they can be hunted is not a good solution at this time.

Joey wrote on Jul 1, 2007 2:14 PM:No doubt about it, zoo's do protect species from extinction. Do some research and find out how many species would be now extinct if it were not for intervention of man.

What? wrote on Jul 1, 2007 2:57 PM:Like the wild is some happy safe place. No preditors, disease, starvation. Puleeze. Reminds me of the shows Jane Goodall did on Chimps. Made them look like sweet nice and harmless when in fact they are pretty nasty critters. Not as bad as man but definitely related to man. I think the education, science and financial support that the San Diego Zoological Society provides more then makes up for the supposed suffering of the animals in the zoo and wild animal park.

Jeff wrote on Jul 1, 2007 3:46 PM:There is always two sides to every story. Yes, many zoos may do more harm than good. There are, however, numerous zoos that do make a difference. Look at the California Condors and what quality programs have been able to do. They have been able to breed them and raise them in a way that made it possible to return them to the wild. Expanding the giant panda population is another example, although not to the same caliber as the Condor program (as many of the pandas will never be able to return to the wild). Even those zoos that do little to better the survival of species do help to provide a close-up experience and put a face to these animals that we here about in news stories (such as the reports of more pouchers killing animals).

Someone wrote on Jul 1, 2007 3:59 PM:Some of you get it and some don't... THERE IS NO WILD ANYMORE!!! Humans have ruined all of the wild that there was in the world. The only "wild" we have left is the reserves we set aside for some animals but those are few and not even close to the wild they once had. If you want to go after someone go after the people who are developing land, pushing animals from their homes, and leaving them to get run over on the freeways and highways we build so we can get somewhere faster and polute the air more. I am really getting sick and tired of people attacking the Wild Animal Park when it is the best facility for animals out of all of the zoos I have ever heard of. They do more to protect animals than you do, you just make it harder for them to do it. GET IT?!?!?!

Pieter wrote on Jul 1, 2007 4:04 PM:I suggest that those that have too much time on their hands to go after the Wild Animal Park, spent their energy petitioning the Chinese government before the appetite of that country's need for natural resources wipes out every living thing in Africa. The WAP may then be the only place where you see zebra's, elephants, when the Chinese are done with that continent. Do I also assume wrongly that Florence Lambert is willing to give up het cozy LaJolla house to defend elephants in the wild?

Jeremy wrote on Jul 1, 2007 5:12 PM:Hey "Someone" listen to yourself...incorporating facility and animals in a sentence. You're glowing with humility and ignorance for species on this planet. Unfortunately our society has detached us from the natural environment and embedded in our brains the philosophy of zoos and animal parks. Wake up people. Someone, you obviously don't travel much. Perhaps a trip to Africa or India would do you more justice versus a trip to Seaworld or the San Diego Zoo.

Joey- wrote on Jul 1, 2007 5:36 PM:What is it in Africa or India that would do us justice? I recently read that the Chinese have a thousand bears kept in tiny cages and they extract bile which is very painful to the animal. That would be worst than a zoo in my opinion.

What? wrote on Jul 1, 2007 5:55 PM:Jeremy, your righteous indignation is annoying. You know what's best for the planet and anyone who disagrees with you is obviously ignorant. We sit here fat and happy pondering the best thing to do with the elephants while the african farmer has to worry about feeding his family while a herd of elephants destroy his crops. I have a simple test for animal rights activists. Give them a choice between shooting an animal or shooting a loved one. I am not a hunter and consider myself an animal lover. But for me this quandry wouldn't require any thought. The animal gets it.

Jeremy wrote on Jul 1, 2007 7:14 PM:...and don't get me started on the seal exhibit at Seaworld. I was repulsed seeing seals in a frenzy gathering around a tourist dropping dead fish in their mouths. And to make matters worse SEAWORLD CHARGES 5 BUCKS to feed the seals. Can anyone of you numbskulls see the hypocrisy? righteous indignation? Actually I like to call self discovery and awareness.

Gregh wrote on Jul 1, 2007 8:29 PM:Animals serve humans. Start from that point of view and the answers are easy .

Kevin wrote on Jul 2, 2007 1:09 PM:I have been a wildlife biologist for over 22 years spending my career trying to recover endangered species and I do not enjoy visiting zoos – they are too depressing. The salvation for endangered species is habitat protection, restoration and conservation efforts. Captive breeding is a desperate effort to save species when it usually too late and are rarely successful because they do not address the issue of habitat loss. So what do you do with the captive bred animals? Trade them to other zoos.

What? wrote on Jul 2, 2007 2:00 PM:Jeremy, you don't like captive critters but you drop the money and time to go to Seaworld? Who do they call when a seal pup is abandoned on the beach? That's right, Seaworld. What does Seaworld do? They rehab them and release them. That is so evil, how dare they care for an animal. Every good cause has wack jobs like you that do more harm than good. I sugest you move to Alaska and hug a grizzly.

Thembi wrote on Jul 3, 2007 5:11 AM:It is really sad that somehow because someone cares about animals in captivity that some how this means we are not concerned about China's imminent threat for African wildlife or trees in tahoe, or climate change - most animal advocates care deeply about the planet and all things living on it. What are YOU doing about the trees in Tahoe? What are YOU doing about species extinction in the wild? What are YOU doing about the bottomless pit of cruelty, death and destruction of the natural world. It is easy to have an opinion. It might be better for you and the rest of us too if those that deride the caring amongst us put your money and time where your mouth is and do something constructive and compassionate for a change - you might be suprised at how good you feel about yourself. Thembi (Australia)

Paul wrote on Jul 3, 2007 12:22 PM:Thembi, look up the historic photos, (say of Yosemite, CA from the early 1800's -- there were many less trees before man intruded). They were depleted by natural causes. Now man protects them, they grow too thick and become a wild fire hazard. That my friend down under is how good I feel about some of the environmentalists and their righteous attitude.

maybe i'm crazy wrote on Jul 6, 2007 5:51 AM:What?--To be perfectly honest, if I could be 100% guaranteed that by killing myself I would save an endangered species from going extinct, there would be no second thought in my mind, I would gladly take the bullet. Gregh--Animals weren't put on earth to serve humans. We are one of the most recently evolved creatures in existence. The majority of animal species were here millenia before we were and look how suddenly many of them have become endangered/extinct in recent decades all b/c of man's intervention. 95% of extinctions are of animals from specific islands they had evolved to. The reason: European exploring brought invasive species that out-competed the native animals and brought about their demise. Why isn't our responsibility to try to fix our ancestor's mistakes from the past??

Reardon wrote on Jul 6, 2007 7:45 AM:To Maybe I'm Crazy: Yes. Your suspicion is confirmed. You are crazy.

Scarlett wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:17 PM:many people approve of zoos because they help "care" for injured and endangered animals. Sorry to tell you, but those are wild life rescue centers. Zoos just provide entertainment at the cost of an animnals happiness and welfare. Did you know that many animals that are in zoos for periods of time begin to show signs that would in humans be considered signs of mental illness or insanity. tell me, how do zoos help animals?

Poalo W. wrote on Oct 14, 2007 11:48 AM:Zoos are badddddddd

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, email addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

Submit Comment[-]

(optional)
   

Advertisement

Videos