Nepple 1

Rylee Nepple

Tatum

AP Lang 4

27 March 2020

Why Zoos Need Government Regulation

Introduction

Popular tourist attractions known as zoological gardens, or zoos, have existed longer than

one may think. While zoos were not popular or made widely available to the public until the

early 1800s, the first zoo opened in the 1660s at the Palace of Versailles during the reign King

Louis XIV (Sahlins 1). Established primarily to demonstrate the wealth of Louis XIV, this zoo,

then called the Royal Menagerie, led to eventual research of the animals held captive, leading the

way to the modern zoo.

Originally opened to the public primarily for education, zoos have played a major role in

helping people to observe and understand the habits of wild animals we normally would not get

the chance to see up close or in person. However, as zoos have transitioned into a fun family

outing, their educational value has decreased. With new technology and resources, we can better

observe animals and their natural behavior in the wild instead of in captivity. Animals no longer

need to live in such dire situations, but greed keeps them there.

Most zoos now strive to attract tourists and make money, and many do not have the

proper space, habitats, or resources to properly care for the animals they house. Often times,

animals reside in small, dirty habitats, eating foods not suitable to the proper diet. In these

situations, animals begin to exhibit behavior indicating psychological distress (PETA 7). These

unethical conditions hurt the animals and our hearts (Zeugma). The government needs to step in
 Nepple 2

to implement policies to ensure the safety and proper treatment and habitat regulations of

animals held in zoos.

Literature Review

Zoos hold animals in captivity in improper conditions. Romesh Ranganathan, a standup

comedian and actor who supports and advocates for wildlife conservation, argues “there is less

reason to see animals in captivity than ever before” (Ranganathan par. 3). He goes on to speak

about the harsh treatment of animals in zoos and how the ever-increasing technology we have

will soon eliminate the educational purposes of zoos altogether. Programs on television allow

viewers to learn about the true lifestyle of animals in the wild, which zoos cannot provide due to

the captivity of the animals. Another animal rights activist and editor for the New Statesman

magazine, Sophie McBain, agrees with Ranganathan’s assessment on the ethics of zoos. She

writes of an elephant named Happy who lived in total isolation after her life-long companion

died due to fatal injuries inflicted by other elephants living in the zoo (McBain par. 1). In the

wild, elephants socialize with each other and live in large herds, so Happy lived a very unhappy

life that differed greatly from her natural instincts while in isolation. The unethical treatment of

Happy and other zoo animals like her fuels McBain for further research and advocation for

animal rights. The organization PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), the largest

animal rights organization in the world, makes multiple claims regarding the ethics of zoos: they

put little effort into animal care, breed animals just for the cute babies, and capture wild animals

for entertainment (PETA par. 3-4; 11; 13-16). These perspectives, while truthful to an extent, all

offer radical solutions such as never endorsing zoos by visiting or buying their merchandise

(PETA par. 18). However, less radical solutions exist.

Many people see the potential dangers associated with zoos, but also see the educational

benefits they possess. A wide portion of zoos only use animals that were born in captivity and

could never survive in the wild. Others home in on the conservation aspect rather than focusing

purely on the entertainment value (Carpenter par. 2; 5). Tzachi Zamir, a lecturer in the English

department of The Hebrew University, also sees these educational benefits. He explains that

some animals thrive living in zoos because they receive proper treatment and living space, so

they continue to exhibit natural behavior, such as birds, while other animals should not live in

captivity because their routine does not mimic that of a wild animal of the same species, like

most large mammals and reptiles. In captivity, if most birds received the opportunity to fly away,

a large percentage of them would return to the enclosure. However, if given the same option,

most large animals would not look back (Zamir par. 3). These elements associated with zoos

benefit humans because they allow us to study animals up close and help to conserve the

populations of endangered species. However, as Zamir states, not all animals should live in

captivity and need a much larger space and many more resources to thrive.

Zoos play an instrumental role in protecting and preserving (alliteration) endangered

species. Dr. Robin Ganzert, the president and CEO of American Humane Society claims,

“responsible zoos exist to facilitate and promote the conservation of animals” (Ganzert par. 3).

Ganzert continues on to explain how we are in the process of the sixth mass extinction and how

the endangered species list is continuing to expand. Zoos exist to help “preserve genetic

biodiversity” and “reintroduce critically endangered species to the wild” (Ganzert par. 4). By

providing a safe place for these endangered animals to thrive, zoos help keep species from total

extinction. Ben Minteer, an associate professor of environmental ethics and conservation at

Arizona State University, agrees with Ganzert: “Zoos promote the protection of biodiversity”
 Nepple 4

(Minteer par. 1). Zoos continue to work towards preserving endangered species and helping

scientists research what they do not yet know about them. Many zoos provide adequate shelter

and resources to keep the animals healthy while in captivity, which enables species previously

labeled endangered to thrive.

Argument

Zoos once provided people with rich learning opportunities to discover exotic animals up

close and in person. However, they have shifted from the purposes of education to an

entertainment business focused on revenue, resulting in animals living in unsanitary and

improper conditions, such as small enclosures with little to do for entertainment or exercise,

often fed the wrong diet as well. By comparison, animals held in captivity demonstrate a

significantly shorter lifespan than those in the wild. I do not believe that zoos need to shut down

completely; however, the government must implement regulations in regard to habitat size and

conditions, as well as companionship and dietary rules. Such regulations would ensure the safety

of our animals and better provide an adequate learning opportunity for people who truly want to

enrich themselves with the knowledge of these animals that could possibly go extinct.

Many instances of animals living in unsanitary and therefore unsafe conditions occur

every year. For example, after the baby chimpanzee Edith grew up, she moved from zoo to zoo,

eventually landing in the Amarillo Wildlife Refuge in Texas, where she lived in an empty

concrete pit covered in filth. When Edith got rescued, she had no hair on her body and had a frail

frame due to her limited and unhealthy diet of rotten produce and dog food (PETA par. 13).

These conditions are not suitable for any animal, especially one as intelligent as a chimpanzee.

Edith lived in very extreme conditions, but so do many more animals just like her. Often times,

enclosures have dimensions too minimal for the animals that live in them, especially large
 Nepple 5

mammals such as bears or large cats. In the wild, these animals live in large groups, but remain

alone or in pairs when in captivity. These conditions can result in “zoochosis,” a condition where

the animals exhibit abnormal and self-destructive behavior that includes high stress levels and

psychological dysfunction. With even small regulation put into place, we could eliminate these

circumstances and improve the lives of these animals tenfold.

Lifespan of African elephants in the wild v. in

56
50

40
Years

30

20

16.9
10

0
Lifespan

Wild Captivity
Not only do the habitats in zoos exhibit qualities of a prison

for the animals, animals also have shorter lifespans when held in

captivity. Over a two-year period, a zoo in Cambria had nearly 500

animals die; this singular example should easily

convince anybody that zoos do not exhibit ethical

treatment of animals (Ranganathan par. 1). If those 500

zoo animals had been a species more relevant to the general population, such as puppies, or

kittens, would that make a difference? Should that make a difference? (Rhetorical question)

Regardless, all
(Fig. 1) Bar graph comparing the median lifespan of African elephants held in captivity to
animals deserve a the median lifespan of those in the wild.

fair shot at life and living in captivity does not give them that chance. Beautiful animals such as

elephants, who can recognize themselves in the mirror, which demonstrates a sign of increased
 Nepple 7

intelligence, live in the captivity of zoos as well, where they express a lifespan about a fourth as

long as their counterparts in the wild (McBain par. 4-6). A collection of data from 4500

elephants shows that in the wild, the lifespan of an African elephant averages 56 years, while

African elephants held in captivity live for an average of 16.9 years (PETA 7) (Fig. 1). These

animals all deserve a better chance at life than zoos provide them with. If the government, even

just at the state level, stepped in and implemented zoo regulations such as minimal size

requirements for enclosures or requiring certain animals to kept with companions, the lives and

well-being of thousands of animals would drastically improve, allowing zoos to revert to a truly

educational experience again.

Conclusion

Zoos, although not inherently bad, need regulation in some shape or form if we continue

to support their practice. Governments should regulate the size of all enclosures and ensure that

certain animals live with companions in order to emulate their lifestyle in the wild. A large

portion of the animals living in captivity undergo unethical treatment and deserve a better life

than they receive. These animals live in harsh conditions that result in zoochosis and shortened

life expectancy. The small enclosures dream of expansion (personification of the enclosures) for

the sake of the animals. By mandating that the government regulate treatment of animals in zoos,

animals will likely live a longer and healthier life. Increasing the lifespan of these animals not

only serves as beneficial to the animals, but people too. Zoos opened originally for educational

purposes, and although they have strayed from that initial goal, with the right regulation, zoos

can once again provide visitors with proper learning opportunities. With today’s increasing

technology, we can learn more from these animals than ever before. Not only can we study their

natural behavior in the wild, we can study the animals’ behavior within zoos to bring education
 Nepple 8

through technology to those around the world. As each small level of government implements

these proposed regulations, the quality of life in zoos will increase as well. Eventually, the

government should regulate zoos on a national scale to ensure the safety and well-being of all

animals in captivity. If the animals remain happy and gain our respect, humans will gain an

increased opportunity to engage with these magnificent creatures and learn from what they have

to provide.
 Nepple 9

Works Cited

Carpenter, Betsy. “Upsetting the Ark.” U.S. News & World Report, vol. 113, no. 8, Aug. 1992,

p. 57. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9208241023&site=ehost-live.

Ganzert, R. "Zoos Are Not Prisons. They Improve the Lives of Animals." Time, 13 June 2016,

time.com/4364671/zoos-improve-lives-of-animals/. Accessed 5 Feb. 2020.

McBain, Sophie. “A Case of Beast versus Man.” New Statesman, vol. 148, no. 5467, Apr. 2019,

pp. 42–47. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=a9h&AN=135952526&site=ehost-live.

Minteer, Ben. "How Zoos Can Save Our Animals." World Economic Forum, 31 Oct. 2014,

www.weforum.org/agenda/2014/10/zoos-save-animal-species/. Accessed 5 Feb. 2020.

PETA. "Zoos: Pitiful Prisons." Cache:////www.peta.org/issues/animals-in-entertainment/animals-

used-entertainment-factsheets/zoos-pitiful-prisons/ - Google Search, 2019,

//www.peta.org/issues/animals-in-entertainment/animals-used-entertainment-

factsheets/zoos-pitiful-prisons/. Accessed 5 Feb. 2020.

Ranganathan, Romesh. "Zoos Are Prisons for Animals – No One Needs to See a Depressed

Penguin in the Flesh." The Guardian, 24 Nov. 2017,

www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2017/mar/13/zoos-are-prisons-for-animals-

no-one-needs-to-see-a-depressed-penguin-in-the-flesh. Accessed 5 Feb. 2020.

Sahlins, Peter. “The Royal Menageries of Louis XIV and the Civilizing Process Revisited.”

French Historical Studies, vol. 35, no. 2, Spring 2012, pp. 237–267. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1215/00161071-1498463
 Nepple 10

Zamir, Tzachi. “Reply to Bostock.” Society & Animals, vol. 16, no. 2, June 2008, pp. 188–190.

EBSCOhost, doi:10.1163/156853008X291462.
 Nepple 11

Works Consulted

"Best Cute Elephant Clipart Black and White #28169." Clipartion.com, clipartion.com/free-

clipart-28169/.

Johannsen, Kyle. “Animal Rights and the Problem of R-Strategists.” Ethical Theory & Moral

Practice, vol. 20, no. 2, Apr. 2017, pp. 333–345. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s10677-016-

9774-x.

Norris, Mark. “World War Zoo Gardens -- Wartime Zoos, the Challenging Future and the Use of

Zoo History in Visitor Engagement.” IZE Journal, no. 50, Jan. 2014, pp. 42–47.

EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=a9h&AN=108522881&site=ehost-live.