Boos for Zoos: Why Zoos Aren’t Ethical

Caroline Watts, 27

Throughout history, and especially now in the 21st century, there has been growing understanding and progress toward issues such as mental health, racial equality, women's rights, and LGBTQ+ rights, including animal rights. With the rise in concerns about things like animals in the food industry bringing a wave of veganism, and the uncovered inhumanity of animal testing now promoting cruelty-free brands, society as a whole has become more aware and active in fighting for the rights of animals around the world. That said, why do these same people who preach “adopt don’t shop” or go out of their way to look for the PETA logo on their favorite product visit the zoo? The ethical issues surrounding the zoo industry have long been ignored by the almost 700 million people who visit zoos worldwide every year (Ganzert). With the exception of organizations dedicated to caring for animals that cannot be released into the wild due to mental or physical health issues, zoos are not ethical and should not be supported by the public.

Animals in zoos have never benefited from being in captivity, especially the ones that could survive in the wild. An animal in captivity is automatically never going to be able to have the same freedoms or independence it would have being in the wild (Animal Safari India). Because animals are usually provided just with the basic survival needs of food, water, and shelter, and sometimes not even that in captivity, animals don’t face the same key challenges that shape their survival skills and instincts. This lack of challenge also brings with it a lack of stimulation that can lead to mental and physical distress, which can manifest itself as a condition known as zoochosis (Abnormal Behavior). Zoochosis can be identified in animals through “highly repetitive, invariant, functionless behavior, such as repetitive pacing, swaying, head-bobbing, bar-biting, over-grooming or excessive licking” (Abnormal Behavior). This can not only have a significant mental impact on animals, but it can also take the form of a physical health issue, which is often wrongly attributed to other separate issues. The immoral practices and values behind the zoo industry are evident through the many animals suffering in captivity.

Some may recognize that while there is the mistreatment of animals in such enclosed spaces, many zoos do dedicate themselves to rehabilitating injured animals and increasing endangered species numbers through captive breeding, both with the intent of eventually releasing those animals back into the wild. The reality is that very few of these facilities actually release animals (Wiliamson). Zoos are businesses with the main goal of making a profit; because of this, the first choice is often to sell unwanted animals to smaller zoos rather than freeing them. But even if a zoo finds an animal able to be released into the wild and chooses to release them, what says that their natural environment is even safe for them to live in? Overhunting, poaching, the destruction of habitats, and pollution are just some of the issues that prevent animals from living where they belong in the wild and stop zoos from releasing animals. The same issues that cause endangered species and a need for these types of rehabilitation centers are still very present in our environment today, and until “animals in the wild are protected, captive breeding won’t make a difference” in the preservation of animals across the world (Don’t Zoos Help).

The lack of efforts toward true conservation unveils a deeper systematic issue in the way these institutions operate. The way zoos source, trade, and sell animals is corrupt and usually only intended to benefit the institution doing the selling. Most either breed their animals or acquire them from other zoos, but one of the main points of profit is baby animals (Where do Zoos). Because baby animals bring such attention, visitors, and profit, zoos are always trying to make and keep space for them, even if it means getting rid of older unwanted animals. Different ways these surplus animals are disposed of include selling to smaller zoos, petting zoos, circuses, and “game farmers” who make a business out of killing animals. In extreme cases, animals are just outright killed or sold to laboratories for testing, which is arguably worse than being killed (Lin). These smaller zoos that animals are often sold to are called roadside zoos. In addition to losing their freedom, animals in roadside zoos are often not even met with their basic needs (Roadside Zoos). Cages are often not adequately cleaned, animals are fed unsuitable meals, and access to proper medical help is rarely provided. On top of this physical abuse, animals are usually kept in solidarity, which is especially harmful to animals who naturally live in groups. Although these issues can present themselves in other larger zoos, they tend to be even more common in roadside zoos, due to the increased lack of enforcement of the few rules and regulations around the care of animals in captivity. This lack of supervision also contributes to these places often allowing animals and visitors to engage in dangerous activities, “such as bottle-feeding bear cubs” that put both the visitor and the animal in danger (Roadside Zoos).

The lack of administration over zoos only heightens the issues behind the selling of animals in the industry. Because of this, state and federal governments should pass more laws and regulations protecting captive animals' rights and make more efforts to enforce these laws. Given the many issues present in the care and treatment of animals in the industry, some may assume that the national, state, and local governments are more involved in the protection of animals' rights. Despite this, there is still a lack of laws and regulations. One of the very few acts passed by the federal government is the Animals Welfare Act. The AWA is currently the only federal law that protects “animals in research, teaching, testing, exhibition, [and] transport” (Animal Welfare). Although the passing of this act was a step in the right direction, the act was passed in 1966, making what it covers extremely outdated, especially due to new information and values regarding the treatment of animals in captivity. Because of the government's lack of involvement in animal rights issues, an organization known as the American Zoo and Aquarium Association was formed (DiBenedetto). The AZA is a voluntary organization that sets rules and standards for people in the zoo and aquarium industry. Although membership in this organization is highly respected, the sense of need for the formation of this organization further highlights how the federal government doesn’t adequately protect animals’ rights and instead, this responsibility turned to the people. Not only is the U.S. federal government not sufficiently involved in the protection of animals in captivity, but state governments also fail to secure animal rights. Most state laws only apply to a specific scope of animals or regulate the exhibition of animals, leaving enforcement of these laws up to local law enforcement (Grech). 

Zoos, with the exception of facilities caring for animals that could in no way be released into the wild, are not ethical and should not be supported by the public. But although this may be true, and whether it is from a genuine lack of knowledge on the reality of the care and health of animals in captivity, the majority of US adults either strongly or somewhat support the existence of zoos (Support for the Existence). This shows a huge disconnect between modern morals and the treatment and public outlook on captive animals, proving that there is still so much work to be done to raise public awareness around these issues. Animals walked the earth free long before humans ever existed, and until these unjust, immoral facilities no longer exist, these animals held prisoner in captivity will continue to be mistreated and abused.