Wildlife conservation is an important issue within our society, through new legislations and more reports from the media people have become more aware and have a greater understanding of the problems caused by hunting, climate change, deforestation and pollution. The definition of wildlife conservation has been described as “the practice of protecting endangered wild animal species, along with their habitats.” (Day, 2014.) It is now recognised globally through media outlets that some of the world’s animals are at danger of extinction and programmes such as Blue Planet highlight the need for more to be done regarding this issue. WWF reported that vertebrate populations are down by around 50% since the 1970’s (Sohl, 2017) which is an indication that something needs to be done to help with conservation of endangered species. Shockingly other figures suggest that the world is losing in just one minute six species of animal to extinction, being described as the largest extinction since the dinosaurs (Praded, 2002).Nationally, there are various ways of supporting the efforts of those who are dedicated to conservation including recycling, supporting conservation projects and being more aware of products used in order to become involved as well. Conservation projects include zoos offering captive breeding projects as an effort towards conservation. However the question that keeps being raised asks whether this is working or is it cruel to keep wild animals in captivity for the purpose of conservation and ultimately public entertainment? This essay will discuss the contributing factors that affect wildlife population numbers and the involvement that Zoos have towards conservation and how ethically this is perceived.
The decreasing population of the world’s wildlife is caused by several different factors and can affect wild animals directly and indirectly. Data analysis explores the reasons for depleted wildlife populations, the main 6 being: destruction of habitat, hunting and poaching and illegal trading, introduction of new species, control of pests and predators, pollution and collections for research, private collections and zoos (Bhati, 2017). Destruction of habitats is a contributing factor to the depletion of wild animal populations; this can come in the form of deforestation, logging, urban settlement, pollution, overgrazing, and an increase in agriculture. In this case the wildlife population have to either learn to adapt to the changing surroundings or move elsewhere which may not always be possible. If it is not possible to move elsewhere the wildlife becomes more at risk of disease, predation and starvation which can lead to death (Bhati, 2017). Hunting for meat also puts animals at risk of extinction and research has proved that about a third of the world’s birds and mammals are at risk over being over hunted, they are typically larger breeds of animals who are slow to move and reproduce (Society for Conservation Biology, 2002). Poaching, which is the illegal act of hunting plays a major part in animals becoming at risk of extinction along with illegal trading, the WWF have reported that more African elephants are being killed by poachers than are being born and around 20,000 are killed per year (Sohl, 2017). Introducing foreign species intentionally or unintentionally can have detrimental consequences to the original wildlife inhabiting the area, it has been described as being and ecological disaster (Bhati, 2017), the new species can disrupt the way the original species live, sometimes resulting in extinction. People find it may be necessary to control pests or predators without realising the effects it has on wildlife populations, whilst sometimes it may be necessary it must be controlled to avoid killing off a species altogether (Smith, 2014). Population numbers are decreasing due to pollution which is widespread throughout the world. Animals are mainly affected by noise, water and air pollution (Haluzan, 2011) the likes of acid rain, toxic algae and ship traffic all contribute to wildlife finding it increasingly difficult to survive. The final issue that shall be explored in more detail is the effects of keeping wild animals for private collections or in zoos for research and entertainment. Zoos and private collectors take animals from the wild and mostly those of endangered species. It has been found that Zoos do not take every animal they own from the wild and the majority of the time there will be discussions with other Zoos about transferring animals for a set period of time, mainly for the purpose of breeding (Scott, 2014). It is clear that there are many issues affecting animal populations in the wild and whilst zoos can have a negative effect on this there are things that they do to help towards conservation of endangered species but is this one of the best ways to help conserve the most endangered species considering the ethical issues behind them?
Zoos have been a part of the world’s culture from the 1700’s,the first zoo to open was in 1752 in Vienna for members of royalty and opened 13 years later to the general public, this then started a trend across Europe for countries to showcase their array of species for public entertainment (Hill, 2015). This spanned over many years but Zoos in the 20st century turned their purpose to not only entertainment but education and conservation in a world where it is now prevalent that a vast majority of species are becoming endangered, this was also in response to declining numbers of visitor numbers in the late 1960’s due to the world’s population becoming more aware of the issues with falling species numbers and anti-zoo groups becoming more popular (Zimmermann et al, 2007). Zoos roles of conservation and education has developed over time in response to the increased need of these elements, it is important to seek out evidence to show if the role zoos would like to be their main function in order to prove that their efforts are successful. Zimmerman reports that in a survey carried out to visitors at Denver Zoo, 55.1% of visitors felt that zoos were educational (Zimmerman et al, 2007) however it was also reported that only 18.4% of participants had attended the zoo to learn about the animals (Zimmerman et al, 2007), whilst it is clear that this group of people acknowledge the Zoos efforts to educate it also shows that over half see a day out at the zoo as a form of entertainment, 56.5% of participants expressed they attended the zoo for a family outing (Zimmerman et al, 2007). Comparing this with data from 1980, it was found most people attended zoos to see animals or go out with friends rather than to learn, around 51% (Kellert & Berry, 1980). This data shows that over a period of around 20 years the motive for a visit to the zoo remains the same; nevertheless it shows that people’s perception of zoos is encouraging as they recognise the efforts of educationin a world where education is the key to change. Chester zoo is one zoo in the UK who recognises the need for education and carries out regular surveys much like the ones carried out by Zimmerman to keep an up to date awareness on how effective their education programmes are, their aim to is to educate the public on how they can contribute towards conservation (Chester Zoo, 2017). On the contrary it can also be felt that zoos do not educate the public on conservation but instead advocate the idea that keeping wild animals in captivity for their entertainment is acceptable (Lin, 2017).
In order for zoos to conserve endangered species, they first have to obtain them, Chester zoo claim that in order for endangered species to survive it relies heavily on the sustainability of the population within a zoo. (Chester Zoo, 2017) The main way of zoos getting their animals are from in situ programmes, this involves loaning an animal from another zoo sometimes between countries. However it may be necessary to capture animals from the wild also know as ex situ, with ZSL London Zoo publishing this acknowledgment on their website. Lin claims that to capture animals from the wild can have an adverse effect on conservation of endangered species (Lin, 2017) as the animals left have a less diverse group to breed with and may not achieve finding a mate, consequently leading to depleting populations and furthermore contradicting the zoos original plan. In 2010, data shows that in European Zoos, 70% of elephants were taken from the wild (CAPS, 2010).
In order to help save a species at risk of becoming extinct the predominant element of achieving this comes in the form of breeding. Captive breeding is a topic that has been widely debated that still has no conclusion. Animals in captivity are easier to study than they are in their natural habitat and Twycross Zoo explain that researching animals breeding and behavioural traits helps to identify problems that can help understand problems a species might face in the wild (Twycross Zoo, 2017). The consequence of this is breeding animals can have a surge in numbers for Zoos and most establishments do not have the space to house an unlimited amount of animals (Temple, 2015). It has been reported that in this situation surplus animals are destroyed, in 2007, The European Association of Zoos and Aquariums (EAZA) reported that zoos were being advised to kill unwanted animals if other zoos would not accept them as too much time and expense would be needed by keepers to care for them, this would include endangered species such as tigers (CAPS, 2010), as of yet nothing has been done to solve the problem of creating surplus animals from captive breeding programmes and Sunquist explains that it is an unavoidable part of captive breeding (Sunquist, 1995).
A different argument for the positive ways zoos help conservation is breeding and keeping endangered animals in captivity allows species that have no hope surviving in the wild alive for a prolonged amount of time, the argument; it is better to keep a species alive in captivity than let it die out altogether is a popular argument, extensively argued. Warren reports that the Javan rhino species only has a population of around 20-30 in the wild and this species will be doubtful to ever recover wild population numbers (Warren, 2013), for this reason zoos provide a place where studies of behaviour can take place, whilst allowing the public to see a species they will most likely not see in the wild. In contrast, CAPS data reveals that some animals die prematurely in captivity, African elephants that live in the wild are more likely to live around 3 times longer than those kept in captivity (CAPS, 2010), likewise, it was found that in captivity 40% of lion cubs die before the age of 1 month old, compared with only 30% passing away before reaching the age of 6 months in the wild and it must be remembered that a percentage of deaths in the wild are due to predation (CAPS, 2010).
The main aim of captive breeding is ultimately to return the new offspring in to the wild, however as mentioned before this is not always the case. Zoos that do manage to return animals in to wild are helping increase depleting numbers and also prevent inbreeding within circles of animals (Temple, 2015). There are cases in which reintroduction has worked to a degree for example the Arabian Oryx species which will be discussed in more detail further on. Chester Zoo are involved in an ongoing programme to reintroduce pine martens back into the UK and Wales, the 20th century saw pine marten numbers decrease where once they were in abundance (Chester Zoo, 2017). The programmes aim to move populations of the species from Scotland and the use of captive breeding to reintroduce them into Wales, carefully acclimatising the species to their new surrounding and monitoring the success of the project through thorough surveillance. However the ethics of this type of conservation is highly debated with organisations like PETA and Born Free feeling the positive outcomes of captive breeding is overruled by the negative ethics of keeping animals in zoos (Netivist, 2017). There is evidence to suggest keeping animals captive lessens the chance of them being able to be released back into their natural habitats are the natural instincts and behaviours are lost (Temple, 2015). Behaviours such as predator evading can become obsolete in captive animals as there is never a need to hide from predators, the animals soon learn there is no danger within their enclosures and these traits are lost, reintroducing an animal’s into the wild without these qualities would be detrimental to their survival. Furthermore animals kept in captivity demonstrate behaviours related to stress and boredom which results in a decreased activity levels which consequently affects their reproduction rates therefore hindering zoos aim to breed endangered species. (Lin, 2017). An issue with releasing animals back into the wild is the problem with disease, animals released back into the wild could completely wipe out the species there already by bringing in foreign bodies (Lindenmayer, 1993) which could prove damaging to saving the species. Organisations such as Born Free concentrate a lot of their research into the welfare of animals living in zoos and have described it as a challenging problem (Born Free, 2017) reporting that spaces available to the wildlife are insufficient and nowhere near as plentiful as they would have in the wild with other organisations validating this claiming that zoos big cats such as lions and tigers having 18,000 times less space in a zoo enclosure than in the wild (CAPS, 2010). Zoos however insist that they adhere to the legislations put in place by WAZA, (World Association of Zoos and Aquariums) and WAZA pride themselves on making sure zoos practice excellent animal welfare. They recognise that overtime zoos have evolved; now not only being a place of entertainment but one that must think of animal welfare whilst providing conservation (WAZA, 2017)
The Arabian Oryx is an example of how captive breeding was used to reintroduce a species back into the wild and whilst its first few years were successful, eventually the efforts were reversed through human actions (Spalton et al. 1999). The Phoenix Zoo began the captive breeding project from the only 9 Arabian Oryx left, in the wild they had become completely extinct (PBS, 2009). The young produced here were transferred between more zoos to create more captive herds. Between 1982 and 1990 populations of the Arabian Oryx increased from just 10 to 100. This happened through captive breeding of the only 10 wild Arabian Oryx left in order to produce more animals. By 1995 the numbers were at 280 and the population covered 16,000 sq km, this surge in numbers continued reaching at least 400 animals by 1996. (Spalton et al, 1999) This shows that captive breeding can be successful and shows evidence to continue this in today’s zoos. However, due to human interference by the means of poaching a year later poaching had recommenced and numbers began to fall. By 1998 the numbers were at 138, with only 28 of those being female Arabian Oryx, more up to date figures estimate that in 2008 this number is barley at 50 (PBS, 2009). At this point it was decided there was no coming back from this and a selected few animals were obtained to structure a captive herd. (Spalton et al, 1999). Whilst captive breeding can have successful outcomes it is thought that some Zoos need to think more carefully about the preservation of the natural habitat first and foremost before directing the conservation efforts of increasing animal populations through captive breeding (PBS, 2009).
The argument of zoos being a good way to help with conservation is one that will be discussed for an infinite amount of time, the differing opinions of those who work on these conservation projects to those who see it as oppressing the animal’s welfare rights will be difficult to overcome. There is no simple answer to the questions posed as there are so many variables. Zoos can be seen as an extremely important part to helping boost wildlife populations both in captivity and in the wild and are responsible for education the public on how to help. However, the feelings of some are that zoos do not have any solutions to the problems that endangered species face and instead promote holding animals captive for entertainment with the facade of conservation being at the heart of their existence (Prideaux, 2016). Bekoff explains that the future of conservation is to focus efforts on the preservation of wild habitats rather than captive breeding and to move forward, the abolishment of locking animals in zoos for entertainment and allegedly their own good (Bekoff, 2016). Looking back at the original definition of conservation zoos are focusing their efforts on protecting endangered species but does more need to be done by zoo organisations to help protect the natural habitats of these vulnerable species and should this where the next step of conservation be concentrated?