Confinement for Conservation: An Ethical Overview of Zoos

Authors

  • Chinaedu Samrose Iwuchukwu Department of Linguistics and Communication Studies, University of Calabar, Cross River, 540242, Nigeria
  • Aboh James Ajang Department of History and International Studies, University of Calabar, Cross River, 540242, Nigeria
  • Samuel A Bassey Department of Philosophy, University of Calabar, Calabar, Cross River, 540242, Nigeria

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/

Keywords:

Zoos, Animals, Animal Protection, Ethics

Abstract

This work describes the workings of modern zoos and  considers the core ethical challenges which face those  who choose to hold and display animals in zoos,  aquariums or sanctuaries. Using a number of  normative ethical frameworks this thesis explores  impacts of modern zoos. The impact of zoos include  the costs to animals in terms of animal welfare, the  loss of liberty and even impact on the value of animal  life. On the positive side of the argument are the  welfare and health outcomes for many of the animals  held in zoos, increased attention and protection for  their species in the wild and the enjoyment and  education for the people who visit zoos. This paper  concludes that zoos and aquariums are ethically  defensible when they align conservation outcomes  with the interests of individual animals and the  interests of zoo operations. The impending extinction  crisis requires large scale interventions which address  human values and facilitate consideration of wildlife  in decision making. Considering the long term  relationship zoos have with animals, their extensive  reach within communities and their reliance on  animals to deliver positive experiences for people, it is  appropriate that zoos pay back some of humanity’s  debt to wildlife by making a meaningful contribution  to wildlife conservation. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, K. (1995). Culture and nature at the Adelaide Zoo: at the frontiers of ‘human’ geography. Royal Geographical Society 20:275-294.

Anderson, K. 1995. Culture and nature at the Adelaide Zoo: at the frontiers of ‘human’ geography. Royal Geographical Society 20:275-294.

Bassey, S. A., (2020), Technology, Environmental Sustainability and the Ethics of Anthropoholism. Przestrzeń Społeczna, 1(19).

Berger, M., & Corbett, S. (2018). Zoo animals: Husbandry, welfare and public interactions. In Zoo Animals: Husbandry, Welfare and Public Interactions.

Bermond, B. (1997). The myth of animal suffering. In M. Dol, S. Kasanmoentalib, S. Lijmbach, E. Rivas and R. van den Bos (Eds.), Animal consciousness and animal ethics (pp.125- 143). Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum Publishers.

Blandford, D., Bureau, J.C., Fulponi, L. and Henson, S. (2002). Potential implications of animal welfare concerns and public policies in industrialized countries for international trade. In B. Krissoff, M. Bohman& J.A. Caswell (Eds.), Global Food Trade and Consumer Demand for Quality (pp. 77-100). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Press.

Bowd, A.D. (1984). Development and validation of a scale of attitudes toward the treatment of animals. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44, 513-515

Bradley, M., C. Lambert, V. Power, H. Mills, G. Gaikhorst, and C. Lawrence. 1999. Reproduction and captive breeding as a tool for mammal conservation: the role of modern zoos. Australian Mammalogy 21:47-54.

Broadie, A., &Pybus, E.M. (1974). Kant’s treatment of animals. Philosophy, 49, 375-383 10. Burns, G. (2015). Animals as Tourism Objects: Ethically Refocusing Relationships Between Tourists and Wildlife. In Markwell K. (Ed.), Animals and tourism: Understanding diverse relationships (pp. 44–59). Bristol: Channel View Publications.

Cavalieri, P. and Singer, P. (1993). The great ape project: Equality beyond humanity. London: Fourth Estate.

Coşgel, M.M., &Minkler, L. (2004). Rationality, integrity and religious behavior. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 329-341.

Coward, H. (2007). Approaches of world religions to animal cloning. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from http://www.sl.kvl.dk/cloninginpublic/indexfiler/Coward_ Approaches_ of_World %20Religions_to_Animal_Cloning.pdf

Dawkins, M.S. (2006). The scientific basis for assessing suffering in animals. In P. Singer (Ed.), In defense of animals: the second wave (pp.26-39). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing 15. DeGrazia, D. (1999). Animal ethics around the turn of the twenty-first century. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 11(2), 111-129.

DeGrazia, D. (1999). Animal ethics around the turn of the twenty-first century. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 11(2), 111-129

Doherty, J.G., and E. F. Gibbons. 1993. Managing naturalistic environments in captivity. In: Naturalistic Environments in Captivity for Animal Behavior Research. Pp. 125-141. E. F. Gibbons, E. Wyers, E. Waters, and E. Menzel (Eds.). State University of New York Press, Albany.

Fennell, D. A. (2014). Exploring the boundaries of a new moral order for tourism's global code of ethics: An opinion piece on the position of animals in the tourism industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22, 983–996. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.918137

Finlay, T., L. James, and T. Maple. 1988. People’s perceptions of animals: the influence of zoo environment. Environment and Behavior 20(4):508-528.

Fox, M. (1978). “Animal liberation”: A critique. Ethics, 88(2), 106-118.

Fuchs, S. (2003). Enhancing the divine image. In S.J. Armstrong and R.G. Botzler (Eds.), The animal ethics reader (pp. 224-226). New York: Routledge.

Gannon, F. (2002). Animals on the menu. EMBO reports, 3(7), 589–589. 23. Hancocks, D. (2008). Most zoos do not deserve elephants. In Elephants and ethics: Toward a morality of coexistence. (pp. 259–283). http://libezp.lib.lsu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&d b=psyh&AN=2008-00889-012&site=eds-live&scope=site&profile=eds-main

Herzog, H.A. (1990). Discussing animal rights and animal research in the classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 17(2), 90-94.

Kawata, K. (2012). Exorcising of a Cage: A Review of American Zoo Exhibits, Part III. Zoologische, 81(2-3), 132–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zoolgart.2012.05.001

Kawata, K. (2014). Journey from wilderness: Facing dilemmas of wild animal exhibits. Zoologische Garten, 83(1-3), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zoolgart.2014.06.001 27. Kleiman, D.G. 1992. Behavior research in zoos: past, present, and future. Zoo Biology 11:301- 312.

Law, G., A. MacDonald, and A. Reid. 1997. Dispelling some common misconceptions about the keeping of felids in captivity. International Zoo Yearbook 35:197-207.

Lindburg, D. G. (1999). Zoos and the rights of animals. Zoo Biology, 18(5), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2361(1999)18:5<433::aid-zoo9>3.0.co;2-u

Machan, T.R. (2002). Why human beings may use animals. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 36(1), 9-14.

Martin, J., and J. O’Reilly. 1988. Contemporary environment-behavior research in zoological parks. Environment and Behavior 20(4):387-395.

Matheny, G. (2006) Utilitarianism and animals. In P. Singer (Ed.), In defense of animals: the second wave (pp.13-25). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Matheny, G. (2006) Utilitarianism and animals. In P. Singer (Ed.), In defense of animals: the second wave (pp.13-25). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Mench, J.A., and M.D. Kreger. (1996). Ethical and welfare issues associated with keeping wild mammals in captivity. In: Wild Mammals In Captivity: Principles and Techniques. Pp. 5- 15. D. Kleiman, M.E. Allen, K. V. Thompson, and S. Lumpkin (Eds.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Milman, A., &Pizam, A. (1988). Social impacts of tourism on Central Florida. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(2), 191-204.

Orams. M.B. (2002). Feeding wildlife as a tourism attraction: a review of issues and impacts. Tourism Management, 23(3), 281-293.

Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. California: The University of California Press. 38. Robinson, M. H. (1998). Enriching the lives of zoo animals, and their welfare: Where research can be fundamental. Animal Welfare, 7(2), 151–175.

Sabaté, J. (2004). Religion, diet and research. British Journal of Nutrition, 92, 199-201. 40. Shettel-Neuber, J. 1988. Second and third generation zoo exhibits: a comparison of visitor, staff, and animal responses. Environment and Behavior 20(4):452-473.

Shettel-Neuber, J. 1988. Second and third generation zoo exhibits: a comparison of visitor, staff, and animal responses. Environment and Behavior 20(4):452-473.

Singer, P. (2002) Animal Liberation (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Avon.

Singer, P. (2006). Introduction. In P. Singer (Ed.) In defense of animals: the second wave (pp. 1- 10). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Templeton, L. 2002. The Geography of Zoo Attendance in the United States: Factors that Influence Visitation. Master’s Thesis, University of North Carolina at Greensboro. 45. uddin, D. M. F. (2017). History of Zoo, Comparison of Different Zoo and Success of Captive Breeding in Bangladesh. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 10(2), 13–16. https://doi.org/10.9790/2380-1002021316

Van Reybrouck, D. (2005). Archaeology and urbanism: railway stations and zoological gardens in the 19th-century cityscape. Public Archaeology, 4(4), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1179/pua.2005.4.4.225

Waldau, P. (2006). Religion and Animals. In P. Singer (Ed.), In defense of animals: the second wave (pp. 69-83). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Wolf, R.L., and B.L. Tymitz. 1980. Studying visitor perceptions of zoo environments: a naturalistic view. Zoo Display and Information Techniques 49-53.

Downloads

Published

2020-09-15

Issue

Vol. 39 No. 2 (2020): Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences Zoology (Jul-Dec) 2020

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Confinement for Conservation: An Ethical Overview of Zoos . (2020). Bulletin of Pure & Applied Sciences- Zoology , 39(2), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.48165/