Life at the Zoo

by Phillip T. Robinson

  An innovative program of the Wildlife Conservation Society’s Field Veterinary Program, based from their New York Wildlife Health Center, is providing veterinary insights into ecosystem health in locations around the globe. The proximity of people and their livestock to wild populations has created numerous disease problems throughout the world. For example, an outbreak of canine distemper virus, communicated from domestic dogs to Serengeti lions, resulted in a 30 percent loss of the lion population in a single incident. Tuberculosis introduced by domestic cattle is a serious problem in South African wildlife in the vicinity of Kruger National Park. For years, the disease brucellosis has been a serious problem shared by bison and grazing cattle around Yellowstone National Park. Gorillas in Africa are being monitored by Wildlife Conservation Society staff for diseases that could readily decimate these small populations. These and other examples of interchanges of infectious organisms between people’s livestock and wildlife give rise to a whole vista of new and undiscovered problems that could affect the welfare and survival of animals and people alike. The science and politics of rural land use will have serious disease consequences for shrinking populations of wildlife. Studies that educate decision makers on these matters will be valuable in determining future actions that will regulate livestock and influence nature conservation strategies.

  The motivation of average citizens toward environmental consciousness and stewardship should be paramount among zoos’ objectives. Zoos should foster the application of global lessons of conservation biology in their own back yards. The greatest difficulty in all this is political. It is safe and comfortable to lament and criticize the cutting of African rainforests—the offended entrepreneurs and government officials have no practical capabilities for recourse or retribution. It may be quite another story, however, if a zoo goes up against entrenched corporate interests in its home region or takes critical positions against pollution and resource utilization where fault lies with local government and businesses. Indeed, it would be a courageous zoo that finds diplomatic ways to help identify or rectify local environmental transgressions.

  In a recent address to the assembly of the World Conservation Union in Pretoria, South Africa, New York’s Wildlife Conservation Society’s former director, William Conway, observed:

  It is past time for zoos to stop arguing that enlightening children in New York or Tokyo about the plight of gorillas in Cameroon or Congo is responsive conservation. That’s a lesson that I think we all know, but what I would like to ask each one of us to think about is “What are we doing about it?” If we really want to change the world and put in place the kind of new thinking that will really make the world a better and better place as the years go by, we will have to work a lot harder and to speak and act in such a way as to affect legislators, adult voters and the general public, in every way that we can.

  When I was growing up in Grand Rapids, in western Michigan, and making forays to the Grand River, which runs through the center of the city, there was nothing at all grand about the river that I saw. The prevailing attitude was “that’s just the way it is.” This river bisects the former “Furniture Capital of the World” and had become a degraded body of moving fluid, oozing its way past industrial operations—the city’s version of ancient Rome’s Cloaca Maxima, or great sewer. Finally, the would-be Grand River dumped into Lake Michigan, which had become a toxic depository for mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and agricultural chemicals from western Michigan watersheds. It was a pathetic sight to see drainpipes poking out along the river’s banks, dribbling all manner of manufacturing waste. But why wasn’t I compelled to action at the time? Where was the common sense of the average citizen or corporate responsibility while the degradation took place over many decades? Although much of this has now been significantly abated, thanks to enhanced environmental concerns and regulations, old bottom sediments in the Grand River and in Lake Michigan continue to contribute to aquatic ecosystem problems, including limits placed on the safe consumption of fish by people. It is remarkable and frightening how deadened our senses were that allowed our rivers to be polluted and our forests decimated in the first place. It took Rachel Carson’s 1962 book Silent Spring to alert politicians and academics to the seriousness of our environmental problems, resulting in the establishment of the federal Environmental Protection Agency eleven years later.

  The Grand River today, though never destined to be pristine, has been improved enough that salmon can make their way from Lake Michigan into the heart of the city, and fishermen stand elbow-to-elbow in spawning season in attempts to land a prized catch. Zoos have the potential to be catalysts for the conservation of their own community’s streams, marshes, and woodlands. Some zoos have taken on the task of educating the public by creating hands-on laboratories that local schools can use to teach conservation biology. Kentucky’s Louisville Zoo built such a teaching facility, the MetaZoo Education Center, years ago, and many other zoos have since followed its lead. In essence, the entire zoological garden should be an extension of school classrooms to complement their teaching resources. The Bramble Park Zoo in Watertown, South Dakota, for example, has embraced regional conservation issues by collaborating with the state Game, Fish and Parks Department and focusing on mixed grass prairie ecosystems. They have developed special projects for breeding the endangered black-footed ferret and swift fox, as well as conservation outreach programs that provide environmental instruction in public school classrooms.

  As more resources become available through communications technology via satellite and the Internet, one can also envision zoo education programs establishing sophisticated multimedia centers that provide live connections to real-time, remote environmental imaging and video feeds from other zoos, sensitive habitats, and research projects around the world. An “electronic zoo” now under development in the United Kingdom proposes to use no live animals at all.

  Larger zoological institutions can take on activities that are more global in scope, including in-house research programs and in-situ conservation programs in field locations far from the zoo itself. In some instances already, the traditional distinctions and barriers between academia, research, and zoos have diminished significantly. Although not every zoo can fund and administer programs of the scope carried out by the New York’s Wildlife Conservation Society, the Zoological Society of San Diego, and a few others, every niche in between is available for projects and collaborative relationships in activities around the globe. The first zoo director to dedicate an institution to being primarily a conservation center was the Jersey Wildlife Trust’s Gerald Durrell. Despite the small size of the Jersey Zoo, its departure from the zoo norm was revolutionary for its time. The staff likes to describe their organization as “the zoo that’s not a zoo.”

  A growing number of zoos are creating small grant programs to assist in wildlife and habitat research. Though often modest in financial scope, such efforts have the potential to catalyze projects that kindle nature conservation activities in diverse locales. And catalyze is the correct operating term, since mere expatriate project initiatives, uncoupled to local capacity building (training in agriculture, ecology, and administration), are unlikely to foster enduring conservation programs. The Annual Report on Conservation and Science is published by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association (AZA), which lists the conservation activities of member institutions, is accessible on its web site (www.aza.org). International projects involving veterinarians and curators will challenge zoos to understand truly the limits and prospects of effecting conservation initiatives in foreign lands.

  In some of my own work in West African wildlife conservation, I have had lengthy discussions with government officials about the risks of ignoring obvious signs of tropical forest degradation. To my surprise, one such official responded defensively, “You Americans used your country’s natural resources to build up your country and to develop your economy. Now that you have your prosperity, you’re telling us that we can’t have ou
rs.” In other words, he had pretty much the same attitude about the exploitation of the environment as many of our ancestors did. Both perceived themselves as living on the edge. The surprise, for naive me, was that they, those few making the decisions, often choose to ignore lessons already learned in exchange for the short-term gains that they see in front of them. Outsiders offering advice are sometimes dismissed as “ecologic imperialists.” His sentiments are not rare, and perhaps this reflects growing frustration toward expatriate “experts” whose suggested solutions may be incompatible with, or irrelevant to, needs on the community level, and whose projects may do little to build local capacity for environmental management.

  Few officials of any stripe seem consistently disposed to implementing community capacity building for sustainable agriculture and environmental conservation. Such initiatives often conflict with political, ethnic, and private agendas. Frequently, there is a broad disconnect between ruling governments and their rural citizens. In developing countries, where more conservation opportunities exist, problems are rampant in the areas of benevolent governance, economic transparency, human rights, and even personal safety. Zoos will be wise to support programs that favor building local capacity, rather than simply supplying “experts” to study and recommend measures for foreign governments to implement and then leaving for home.

  Thirty years ago, for example, a series of survey projects in Liberia was funded by an international conservation organization, recommending the protection of sensitive areas of forest and wetlands as nature reserves and national parks. Entirely lacking from these initiatives were significant plans to assist in the implementation of the recommendations. At the time that was that best that could be done, but, in the interim, significant conservation opportunities have been lost as the forest estate there has been subdivided. As conservation-grant programs proliferate (they are the simplest, most economic way for a zoo to be engaged in international field conservation), it may be wise for zoos to pool administrative resources or at least develop evaluative protocols to assure that the objectives of their conservation projects are clear, measurable, and are being met.

  My fellow zoo veterinarians’ numbers continue to grow, though their faces are changing rapidly. They contribute and depart, each passing on his or her experiences and observations in the manner of an endless relay race. The vision of their roles in collaborating in the conservation of captive and free-ranging wildlife is coming into clearer focus.

  The Canada goose is an excellent example of the value and efficiency of collaboration. It is reported that a flock of geese traveling in a classic vee shape can fly much longer and faster because of the aerodynamic effects of formation flying. Like a sports cars drafting a leading vehicle, the energy required for the one following diminishes because of the vacuum created, which literally pulls the following object along. When the lead goose tires, the other geese take turns at the head of the column, which thereby is able to travel distances that a lone goose could not. Flying in formation, so to speak, zoos and zoo people can go much farther together than their individual efforts ever could in contributing to wildlife conservation.

  Zoos have evolved from menageries to zoological gardens to conservation centers. Thirty years ago, most zoos were not involved in conservation work outside of their own gates, but it is not unusual now, even for modest-sized zoos, to have projects in South America, Africa, or Asia. South Africa’s Johannesburg Zoo is now partnering with a Nebraska zoo and a Michigan college in its research and education programs. Johannesburg’s promotional statement articulates what most people expect their hometown zoo to be: “It’s a growl, a splash, a chatter of excitement, green trees, gardens, laughter and learning, a living classroom, a place for the family to relax—and much more.”

  Through the support and input of society, zoo veterinarians, curators, directors, and scientists will be expected to define and implement the “and much more” details. In that process, they will shape the character and course of the world’s zoo community. Animals will be the ultimate judges of the performance of zoos by their ability to thrive in captivity and in the wild. History will judge zoos by their tangible contributions to understanding and conserving animals at home in their natural environments.

  ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SELECTED WORKS ON ZOOS

  Eric Baratay and Elisabeth Hardouin-Fugier. Zoo: A History of Zoological Gardens in the West. London: Reaktion Books, 2002.

  A detailed review of the history of keeping wild animals in captivity, abundantly illustrated with reproductions of hundreds of old drawings, paintings, and photographs depicting the relationships between captive wildlife and people and the changing architecture of menageries and zoos. Overall, an intriguing but somewhat dark account of humankind’s exploitation of animals for status, amusement, and profit. Originally published in French.

  A. D. Bartlett. Wild Animals in Captivity. London: Chapman and Hall, 1899.

  Compiled from his father’s records by his son Edward Bartlett, this account provides interesting details about efforts to adapt many animals—from elephants to birds and serpents—to captivity. Though a taxidermist, not a veterinarian, Bartlett tended to the birds of the Queen of England and to many other ill animals at the London Zoo during his tenure as manager. He provides interesting anecdotes about animal keeping, including problems in trimming claws on lions, lancing abscesses on elephants, and generally nursing a wide range of creatures to help them survive their stays in captivity.

  W. Reid Blair. In the Zoo. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1929.

  The author served for long periods as both veterinarian and director of the Bronx Zoo. A small section is devoted to some of the challenging medical cases in the first part of his career, and the rest of the book describes the manner in which many of the major species in the Bronx Zoo were acquired, acclimatized, and managed in their new homes in captivity. The text contains several interesting illustrations of veterinary care scenarios at the zoo.

  Stephen St C. Bostock. Zoos and Animal Rights: The Ethics of Keeping Animals. London: Routledge, 1993.

  Written by a Glasgow Zoo education officer, this work treats the ethics and value of keeping animals in zoos. Ranging from ancient times through modern-day transitions from barred cages to naturalistic exhibits, Bostock discusses the constraints of captivity and how they affect animal health, behavior, and public perceptions, with an emphasis on striving to improve these areas through evaluation and change. He provides arguments to justify the keeping of animals in captivity by illustrating the successes that zoos have had in education, breeding, and the reintroduction of endangered species.

  William Bridges. Gathering of Animals: An Unconventional History of the New York Zoological Society. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.

  William Bridges provides detailed insights into the history of the Bronx Zoo and its leaders as they struggled to fund, develop, and sustain one of America’s largest zoological parks. There are interesting profiles of the strong personalities that founded the New York Zoological Society and the competing interests of exhibition, field research, and medicine that typified the subculture of this evolving zoo. The author, the zoo’s curator emeritus of publications, explores these conflicts in an open and unapologetic style that provides candid insights into the political, scientific, and cultural factors that shaped the Bronx Zoo from inside and out.

  Lee S. Crandall. The Management of Wild Mammals in Captivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.

  This publication was once a standard on the keeping of wild mammals in zoos, dealing with husbandry and management issues group by group. Derived largely from his experiences at the Bronx Zoo, where Crandall held curatorial positions over a forty-five-year career, it was one of the few reference publications available for many years. Crandall wrote several hundred scientific publications and a companion book with William Bridges entitled A Zoo Man’s Notebook (University of Chicago Press, 1964).

  Vicki Croke. The Modern Ark. New York: Av
on, 1997.

  This book covers a range of issues, from the history of animals in captivity to the transformation of many old zoo exhibits into naturalistic ones. The author has covered zoo subjects for several media organizations and draws extensively on the experiences of directors, curators, and keepers to develop her discussions about conservation, ethics, behavioral aberrations of zoo animals, and the role of zoos in wildlife conservation.

  Murray E. Fowler and R. Eric Miller. Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine, 3d ed. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders, 2003.

  The most widely used reference on zoo animal medicine and the first comprehensive text on zoo animal medicine, this is a taxonomic-oriented, multiauthor work created through the efforts of dozens of veterinarians who have made zoo medicine their life careers.

  Alan Green and the Center for Public Integrity. Animal Underworld: Inside America’s Black Market for Rare and Exotic Species. New York: Public Affairs, 1999.

  A journalist attempts to describe the complexities of the trade in exotic animals involving zoos, dealers, private parties, and the animal-products industry. He concludes that in many ways, “animal laundering” resembles the manner in which drug money is laundered in our economy. Relating example after example of blurred chains of custody and ownership, he implicates many prominent zoos and a vast network of smaller players in his thesis. The recurring theme of the book is his contention that zoos irresponsibly reproduce animals and then dispose of many of them in ways that make it difficult to determine their ultimate fate in auctions, back yards, roadside animal brothels, and even restaurants and medicine shops. Depressing, tedious, and disorganized, the book offers as examples health certificates and other transport documents that illustrate shipments to nonexistent facilities and nebulous middle persons. Surely, many zoo staffers have checked the index in the back to see if they or any business associates made cameo appearances in the text.