Zoos: the light and the dark

When I told people that I had worked at a zoo, they didn’t know how to react. The entire time, I didn’t know how to feel. As someone who loves animals and cares about the survival of other species on our planet, I saw the darker side of the industry that we call Animal Management. It made me hesitant to say that I worked at a zoo. It made me question the reality of human involvement in animal care and I grew sceptical of the purpose of cages. As months turned into a year, my view became more nuanced. My hesitations and concerns were solidified even more. 

Let’s back up a little. My name is Rashmi Ryan-Brundin. I am a third-year political science student at UofT. Last year, I took the year off school to travel and gain some work experience. I ended up working in conservation wildlife education for the Denver Zoo, an AZA-accredited facility, which is an animal zoological foundation in Denver, Colorado. My job included a variety of things: educating the public on species biology, wildlife and conservation methodology, the care of exotic animals, and zoo functions and practices.  

I loved my job! I woke up every morning, fed the zebras, talked about the amazing river hippo, snuggled for selfies with our black rhino, waded my way through stingray pools, practised flight training with some of the world’s most exotic birds, and sat next to our silverback gorillas and Sumatran orangutans during lunch. It was a childhood dream to be around some of the world’s most endangered yet smartest and most beautiful animals. I will forever be grateful for my job and the time I spent at the Denver Zoo.   

Before I launch into why zoos are more complex than you might think, there are a couple of terms we use in the industry that you should be aware of. The first was mentioned earlier: the AZA, also known as the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The AZA is an organisation setting the highest standard of care for zoological and aquarium facilities within the United States, Canada, and around the world. Zoos and aquariums get tested once every five years for their accreditation. Tests are days long where experts in animal care, conservation education, and zoo functions are invited out to observe the function of the facility. The AZA also sets standards for animal habitat requirements, food nutrition, enrichment, etc., for exotic animals and animal care.  

The Species Survival Plan (SSP) is a data configuration program that considers all the animals in AZA-accredited facilities to manage animal space within facilities and specialises in breeding and the survival of endangered animals to grow captive populations. Think of the SSP like a dating app for all the animals in AZA-accredited facilities to match and breed so that they can grow populations to avoid inbreeding. That’s also a lot of species! The Denver Zoo has over 3,000 animals and there are over 230 AZA-accredited facilities!  

Okay, now that we understand those terms, let’s try and understand why zoos are problematic in our society. I am sure you are familiar with the moral argument: animals are incredibly intelligent, keeping them behind bars is wrong because they don’t have access to their natural space, which can lead to high levels of depression and fighting amongst species in zoos. We will call the moral argument the ‘Blackfish’ argument, after the controversial SeaWorld documentary about orcas. I believe all of that is completely fair game. From what I have learned, some animals at the Denver Zoo are depressed. I have seen the lions in the Denver Zoo fight so aggressively in a confined space that one of them was hospitalised. This argument brings in the idea that animals are just like us—you wouldn’t like to be in a cage and neither do they. A current AZA-accredited facility in Colorado is being sued by an animal rights activist group for this very reason—questioning the care and management of their elephants.  

Not only is that true, but the SSP and AZA work together for breeding. Animals and their offspring are worth a lot of money and the trading and breeding of them generates revenue, despite hesitations for moving species. Zookeepers have little say in the moving of their own animals, which is cause for concern, especially when breaking up offspring from mothers. The key here is that the offspring stay in zoological facilities; in captivity, they are not offered the time to be in the wild. It takes generations and numbers for animals to be reintroduced into the wild (which is the end goal of the SSP). However, these animals are valuable to keep in zoo facilities (everyone wants to see the new baby orangutan, rhino, or jaguar), they won’t release them to rebuild wild populations. 

Don’t worry, zoos are great at making sure the words and phrasing they use make it all seem like a smooth and “animal-based choice.” Let me clarify: zoos are meticulously purposeful about the wording and phrasing used when it comes to the general public to boost their image. They are not “captive animals,” they are in “human care.” These exhibits are not “cages,” but “homes.” This is not a “zoo industry,” it is an “accredited zoo community.” An animal has not escaped (a natural behaviour when in captivity), it has “accessed an area it is not supposed to be in.” There is a clear lack of acknowledgment and truth behind these animals being in captivity and being wild animals. As staff, we are given a list of around 30 terms we are told not to use to describe zoos. This is concerning for a lot of reasons and it’s hard to use the tagline phrasing, which sometimes feels like propaganda and not the reality of what the animals face.  

It is also important to remember that just because AZA is the highest standard of care does not mean it’s the best standard of care. AZA has a lot of work to do when it comes to the space management of animals and requiring them to be in pairs and groups versus solitary. At the Denver Zoo, we have two Grévy’s zebras living together, when in reality, herds of these species range from 20 to 30 (a fact the Denver Zoo writes on its own website); it is AZA accredited, even without meeting the basic standards needed for animal care.  

There’s a lot more I could say here about the day-to-day functions of zoos that are problematic, but that sums up the general ideology behind zoos and builds on the moral argument for not having animals in cages. However, there is a side to zoos I saw since working there that I had no idea about.  

It is required for AZA-accredited facilities to use some percentage of their budget for conservation work with wild species locally and internationally. Two million of the Denver Zoo’s budget works with local communities in Colorado around the American bison population and internationally, with frogs in Peru and Przewalski’s horses in Mongolia.  

Zoos connect people to wildlife in a new way. A lot of the species in zoo facilities span around the world and you can go to your local zoo to see them in your backyard. This is an amazing opportunity, especially for kids to gain an understanding of the world around them and of how small we are in comparison. Zoos promote animal and wildlife education, giving the population steps and ways to reduce risk to animal populations and work with local communities to help save animal species. Zoos also give fun facts and anecdotes to connect people to animals. 

Not to mention, the SSP works to manage zoo populations and breeding programs. This allows for the management of species that have gone extinct in the wild and also helps the care of these animals and their populations. We would be facing a more severe extinction crisis now without specified human intervention breeding programs. It is a huge win for conservation and a way for the next generation to see a rhino, because zoos and scientists have not only figured out the best way for them to breed but have also put a tremendous amount of resources into finding the best approaches to care for young animals.  

Keepers genuinely care about their animals and respect them. They care about animal welfare and dedicate their life to the animals they work with. I have seen and heard stories of keepers sleeping in back areas with animals who are sick, got out of an operation, or just moved to a new facility. I have heard stories of keepers staying up all night to make sure that a baby zoo animal is breathing and healthy. Especially if an animal has passed, what the mourning and grieving keepers go through is intense and they view each and every animal like an individual they have lost.  

So, where do we go from here about the implementation and survival of zoos? One may disagree with the idea of holding the world’s smartest and most well-adapted animals in captivity for human enjoyment, but I believe we have hit a point in the development of climate change, the utilisation of the earth’s natural resources, along with the exponential rise of the human population—animals have never been more threatened now than they have before. Without human intervention and active work in the rehabilitation of populations, wildlife, and conservation education, many animal species would go extinct. That being said, zoo and aquarium facilities (even AZA-accredited ones) have a lot of growth and development work to be done surrounding animal care standards and future projects with animal management in correlation with wild populations.