Hurte 1

Taylor Hurte

Professor Riley

English 1201

March 17, 2022

How Beneficial are Zoos in the Conservation of Wildlife?

For as long as humans and non-human animals have lived side-by-side, there has always

been a relationship between the two. Historically, this relationship has been morally lacking.

Animals have been kept and traded for human entertainment, education, and worse, but today the

question of whether modern zoos and aquariums are a benefit to the animals and wildlife

conservation remains.

The first zoos were private collections as a sign of wealth and power. These menageries

were shown throughout history with evidence of ancient people housing their own exotic

animals. One of the earliest collections of animals in the Western Hemisphere was housed by the

Aztec people in ancient Mexico. It was destroyed in 1520. These personal menageries remained

popular until the 18th and 19th centuries when private collections became public, tax funded

institutions (Vandersommers). Zoos enriched the lives of the citizens with education,

entertainment, and an escape from the city.

Although public zoos and their popularity were growing, the enclosures for the animals

were not. Many suffered due to lack of proper housing, space, and general preparedness of the

early zoos themselves. An example of this is the Philadelphia Zoo. In the first eight years it was

open, a bison trampled the fence to its enclosure, a seal climbed the railing of its enclosure to
 Hurte 2

enter another, a kangaroo suffered injuries as it attempted to jump from its enclosure due to the

proximity of a nearby train, a Bengal tiger killed a neighboring Bengal tiger, a macaque

viciously attacked and killed another macaque, and many other incidents (Vandersommers).

These were all preventable and due to improper preparedness of the zoo itself. As zoos continued

to grow, they were able to employ more people and more research was taking place. Less

animals were being taken from the wild to fill the enclosures, they were captive bred or rescued

(Vandersommers).

Until this point in history, the cages for the animals remained small, polished displays,

arranged neatly for viewing. The animals were cramped, and their lives were monotonous, full of

pacing, inactivity, and illness. In the late 1900s, zoos shifted to a new type of enclosure, proving

to benefit both the animal residents and the experience of the visitor (Vandersommers). These

more naturalistic enclosures have no visible “bars.” The animals are surrounded by plants,

painted backgrounds, and other pieces of wildlife to mimic the wild. Zoogoers for the first time

could look at an animal in its “natural” habitat, free of metal and cages (Vandersommers). Not

only do people prefer the aesthetic of the naturalistic enclosures, but they also consider them to

benefit the welfare of the animals.

While zoo visitors perceive these more natural enclosures as best satisfying the needs of

the animal residents, that is not always the case. In 2012, 1381 enclosures across 63 parks were

evaluated for their suitability and ability to meet the welfare needs of the animals they housed

(Fàbregas et al.). The benefits of naturalistic enclosures have been associated with the animals’

ability to express normal behavior patterns, and therefore have a positive effect on the welfare of

the animals. This study, conducted using a criteria of seven aspects, proved that nearly 80% of

naturalistic environments in zoos are suitable in satisfying the needs of their resident and the
 Hurte 3

remaining 20% were lacking in only one area. Conversely, nearly 40% of non-naturalistic

enclosures were suitable leaving approximately 60% of non-naturalistic enclosures not suitable

in meeting the needs of their animal residents (Fàbregas et al.). Naturalistic enclosures, while

overall were able to supply the animals with the environmental resources to satisfy their

biological requirements, not all were able to do so (Fàbregas et al.).

Around the same time the culture surrounding zoos began to change in America, a

nonprofit organization named American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums was

formed in the United States. This organization placed increased scrutiny to the areas of

conservation, education, science, and recreation. They would employ a group of people who

were experienced in animal welfare and husbandry, operations, and veterinary medicine to

evaluate whether their high standards had been met in an accreditation process (“AZA and

Animal Program Conservation Initiatives.”). Later, the association would become a professional

branch affiliate of the National Recreational and Parks Association. In 1985, the association

made the decision to make accreditation a mandatory requirement for their membership. This

would result in a substantial drop in members, but the animals would thrive under the new

standards. A shorter name, Association of Zoos and Aquariums, was adopted in 1994 and

abbreviated to AZA. The AZA is considered the national standard for zoos and animal care to

this day. To be a certified zoo, the AZA identifies five “opportunities to thrive.” They are

nutrition, environment, physical health, behavior, and psychological wellbeing. Another

requirement is a portion of the institution’s profits must go to conservation (“AZA and Animal

Program Conservation Initiatives.”).

When looking at the cost of wildlife conservation, many special interest groups are

involved in funding. In a 2015 study, it was found that approximately $18.7 billion of United
 Hurte 4

States federal funding was spent on habitat and wildlife conservation on average annually (Smith

et al.). In 2020, the AZA spent $231.5 million on field conservation with money from its

members (“AZA and Animal Program Conservation Initiatives.”). The AZA and many other

non-profits contribute approximately $2.5 billion annually (Smith et al.), making zoos alone

responsible for approximately 10% of all non-profit funding for United States wildlife

conservation annually. Outside of only the United States, another nonprofit organization

dedicated to the animals housed in zoos and aquariums is WAZA, or World Association of Zoos

and Aquariums. Worldwide, WAZA zoos and aquariums pledge more than $350 million in

conservation funding annually on average (Amodeo).

Not all zoos and animal exhibitors in America are accredited by the AZA, however. Of

the approximately 2800 exhibitors licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture, less

than 10% are AZA accredited (“AZA and Animal Program Conservation Initiatives.”). These

non-accredited zoos are not required to adhere to any special animal welfare criteria, only the

federal and state laws. Often, these establishments are known as “roadside zoos.” A large selling

point for these animal exhibitors is the ability to interact directly with the animals, through

photographs, pay-to-play programs, and other direct, hands-on events. Often, these animals are

speed-bred to have a steady supply of small, baby animals for these activities (Nasser). This

practice is enabled through a loophole in the Endangered Species Act known as the Generic

Tiger Loophole. “Generic tigers are tigers of inter-subspecific crossed pedigree” (Nasser 200).

These are tigers that do not follow a pure-bred lineage and are therefore excluded from the

Species Survival Plans administered through the AZA. The AZA has announced that a “breeding

moratorium for generic tigers is in place” (Nasser 200) for all AZA-accredited institutions. Since

all privately owned tigers are considered by the AZA to be generic, they are of no genetic
 Hurte 5

benefit. With less than 300 tigers in the United States included in conservation breeding

programs, it is assumed that 95% of all captive tigers in the United States are generic tigers with

no conservation value (Nasser 201). White tigers are also considered to be generic tigers because

the recessive gene that creates the white fur has been shown to lead to a loss of gene diversity as

there are no populations of white tigers in the wild. Private owners frequently claim that they are

contributing to the conservation of the species, but this is simply untrue (Nasser 204). Often,

these roadside zoos may obtain an exhibitor license from the United States Department of

Agriculture to further attempt to legitimize themselves. The license has a low application fee and

an annual fee not exceeding $310 (Nasser 225). This licensure allows the holder special

privileges and exemptions from some state and local laws. This allows for the keeping of tigers

and other exotic animals with little to no oversight. A popular example of this are the roadside

zoos featured in the Netflix series “Tiger King.” The popular series shined a light onto the lives

of some of those who run these types of facilities. Mainly featured was one man, Joe Maldonado-

Passage and his property, the Greater Wynnewood Exotic Animal Park (Nuwer). Maldonado-

Passage was a major player in the breeding and selling of big cats, most notably tigers. The cubs

would be bred for photo or interactive opportunities and then when they would inevitably

become too large and dangerous, they would be disposed of. Some would go to private buyers to

be pets, some went to other roadside “zoos,” and others were simply killed. This overbreeding is

only adding to the tiger crisis in America and around the world. In an interview, former

employees of the Greater Wynnewood Exotic Park spoke about the tigers and stated, “I never

thought that [tigers] should be kept in captivity. But I knew the reality of it and the reality of it is,

they cannot be returned to the wild. And there’s not much of a wild for them to return to (Goode

et al., Ep. 8, 18:16).” It is important to keep these establishments in mind when deciding which
 Hurte 6

zoos to visit. These non-accredited “roadside zoos” are not beneficial to wildlife conservation or

the welfare of the animals in their care.

The general public rates conservation and education as the most important role for zoos.

This is echoed by many accredited institutions, using the same keywords in their mission

statements (“The Conservation Mission of Zoos | Wild Welfare.”). While funding is an important

part of conservation, the research and work which zoos can accomplish is invaluable as well.

Research done within zoos often benefits the animals directly, with an opportunity from the zoo

to learn and adapt. The most comprehensive database on zoos and aquariums in the world,

known as Species360, revealed that nearly 16% of the International Union for Conservation of

Nature’s threatened species have representation that are housed in zoos (Amodeo). There are

many programs to assist these animals. An example of this is the California Condor. The condor

had been on a steady decline since Europeans had arrived in western North America. They were

prone to being shot, having their eggs hunted, being accidentally poisoned, and having their

habitat destroyed. By 1982, only 22 California Condors remained (“California Condor

Reintroduction & Recovery”). In 1983, a captive breeding program began at the Los Angeles

Zoo and the San Diego Wild Animal Park. Additional locations for breeding would be added

later at The Peregrine Fund’s World Center for Birds of Prey in Boise, Idaho, and the Oregon

Zoo in Portland, Oregon. In the wild, process was not being made and the number of condors fell

again to only nine in 1985 (“California Condor Reintroduction & Recovery”). All remaining

wild birds were then brought into captivity. The fate of the California Condor was now solely

placed on the zoos. Captive breeding techniques were introduced to “trick” the birds into laying

multiple eggs in one season. They were incubated and raised by caretakers. As a result of these

efforts, the population increased to 177. Captive bred condors began to be released into the wild
 Hurte 7

beginning in 1992. The world total number of California Condors today is around 400, with

more than half of them in the wild (“California Condor Reintroduction & Recovery”). Some

programs are not as successful, however. Of 145 reintroduction programs carried out by zoos,

only 16 were truly successful in restoring wild animal populations to the wild (“The

Conservation Mission of Zoos | Wild Welfare.”).

Zoos and aquariums are producing scientific papers at a higher increased rate on average

than other specialties in general science, highlighting institutional efforts to increase knowledge

about the species in their care (Escribano et al. 1). The focus of 48.5% of zoo led research is on

vertebrates, with 33.7% of that research being on mammals. The top ten keywords highlighting

areas of focus are breeding, conservation, captivity, genetic diversity, endangered species, sexual

hormones, mitochondrial DNA, behavior, microsatellites, and nutrition/animal welfare. While

breeding has remained steady as a focus, conservation has recently come up quickly and

remained prominent (Escribano et al. 3-4). Over time, the zoo community has realized the

limitations of zoo-based conservation and realized that field-based conservation is the way

forward.

Zoos and aquariums fill a niche role as a center of public education, wildlife

rehabilitation, scientific research, and entertainment. When people visit and spend money in a

zoo or aquarium, these institutions use that funding to drive research and conservation

(Amodeo). Understanding attendance and what drives people to visit the zoo is the key to

funding more wildlife conservation, but what the visitors want and what is best for the animals is

not always in line. Species360 curated information from 458 zoos to draw connections in zoo

attendance, animal collections, and conservation funding (Amodeo). The model shows that the

types and variations of animals housed in a particular zoo directly influenced visitor attendance
 Hurte 8

and therefore, conservation funding. Zoos that can house large animals, such as elephants,

giraffes, hippopotamuses, bears, tigers, etc. can expect a higher number of visitors. This can

prove difficult for some zoos due to the space and resources required to ensure the well-being of

these animals (Amodeo). Beyond the larger animals, zoos with a large variation of species and

the inclusion of unusual animals can increase attendance and improve funding as well (Amodeo).

There are over 30 million species of animals on Earth today. The average American zoo houses 1

in 31 different species of mammals, 1 in 98 different species of birds, and 1 in 104 different

species of reptiles (Keulartz). Amphibians are represented even less. It is feared that by turning

the attention to the smaller species, the attraction of the zoo will be weakened. Mammals are

typically used to draw visitors and help raise awareness for conservation.

Over time, with the focus shifting from entertainment to conservation and education,

modern zoos have become an essential resource in the field of wildlife conservation because of

their ability to be multi-faceted in their approach. Partnered with the increase in the call for

conservation is the population’s rapid growth and its demand for resources and land once left to

the animal kingdom. As humans utilize more and more of the land for living space or agriculture,

the more the other species on this planet will also be affected. By focusing on education and

conservation, the modern zoo’s reach is two-fold: in the conservation of the animal kingdom and

inspiring a new generation to preserve the wildlife that remains (Iwuchukwu et al. 9).

In addition to humans requiring more resources, climate conditions are changing across

the globe and wildlife is being affected more rapidly and extensively as time passes (Wilkening

et al. 11). Many species of plants and animals are shifting their geographical ranges due to the

changing climates. This could lead to ecological alteration in the future as some habitats may

grow and others may cease to exist altogether. Aside from the rising temperature, the current
 Hurte 9

ecosystems may face other disturbances such as flooding, drought, and other natural disasters

associated with climate change. Many threatened and endangered species exist in very small

areas known as microclimates. It is feared that these types of areas will be affected by climate

change in a disproportional way and therefore the long-term survival of these species is

threatened (Wilkening et al. 12). Preserving ecosystems in their current locations may become

increasingly difficult as these areas shift and change over time (Wilkening et al. 12). This could

mean the only option for the survival of some of these species would be through the intervention

of our zoos.

One area of conflict in the conservation world is invasive species invading other areas.

Non-native species entering a new area can be detrimental to the local ecosystem.

Conservationists’ solutions to these aliens include eradication programs that involve hunting,

trapping, and pesticides (Keulartz). Animal welfare enthusiasts oppose these programs due to the

harm they cause to the invasive species. One example of this clash is over feral pigs in Hawaii.

The conservation biologists at the Nature Conservancy believe the pigs should be dealt with by

removing and killing them because of the threat they pose to Hawaii’s natural biodiversity. Some

animal activists, including groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA,

argued it was wrong to kill the pigs because they are sentient animals (Keulartz). Another area of

conflict between these two groups is managed relocation. Managed relocation, also known as

assisted colonization or assisted migration, is the human-aided relocation of a species that is

threatened or endangered when their historical location has become inhabitable due to climate

change or habitat fragmentation. Relocated animals would experience chronic stress throughout

the process and would increase the vulnerability of the animals and therefore decrease the

probability of success in the efforts (Keulartz). These areas of conflict are very nuanced and
 Hurte 10

difficult to manage. It will require all sides coming together, along with funding and research

from the zoos and aquariums to ensure what is truly best for the wildlife.

As the global extinction crisis continues, conservation will require engagement from all

potential partners. This will include many different organizations as these problems are multi-

faceted. Animals are being driven from their native wildlife due to human interruption and

habitats are moving and disappearing completely due to climate change. Zoos will continue to be

an important factor as they are able to contribute to a diverse array of efforts. Financially,

accredited institutions are responsible for a portion of all money used in species survival plans,

conservation efforts, and rehabilitation. Scientifically, zoos are contributing to a record number

of research papers about the animals in their care and conservation. Educationally, zoos will

continue to be a place to influence the greater public, young and old. While better coordination

among institutions could benefit species survival and wildlife conservation programs even more,

progress is being made. Many zoos focus on animals that are not threatened and many

conservation programs overlap one another without being of benefit to each other (Che-Castaldo

et al.) and while that is true, other zoos have successfully repopulated some species. While,

ethically, there will always be room for improvement, accredited zoos are incredibly important in

the conservation of wildlife.

 Hurte 11

Works Cited

Amodeo, Mary Ellen. “Visiting a Zoo This Week? Research Sheds Light on Why You Go, and

the Impact on Conservation in the Wild.” WAZA, 2 July 2020,

https://www.waza.org/news/visiting-a-zoo-this-week-research-sheds-light-on-why-you-

go-and-the-impact-on-conservation-in-the-wild/.

“AZA and Animal Program Conservation Initiatives.” Association of Zoos & Aquariums |

AZA.Org, https://www.aza.org/aza-and-animal-program-conservation-initiatives.

Accessed 2 Mar. 2022.

“California Condor Reintroduction & Recovery (U.S. National Park Service).” National Parks

Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, https://www.nps.gov/articles/california-condor-

recovery.htm.

Che-Castaldo, Judy P., et al. “Evaluating the Contribution of North American Zoos and

Aquariums to Endangered Species Recovery | Scientific Reports.” Nature, Springer

Nature, 28 June 2018, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-27806-2.

Escribano, Nora, et al. “Global Trends in Research Output by Zoos and Aquariums.”

Conservation Biology, no. 6, Wiley, June 2021, pp. 1894–902. Crossref,

doi:10.1111/cobi.13757.
 Hurte 12

Fàbregas, María & Guillén-Salazar, Federico & Garcés-Narro, Carlos. (2012). “Do naturalistic

enclosures provide suitable environments for zoo animals?”. Zoo biology. 31. 362-73.

10.1002/zoo.20404.

Goode, Eric, and Rebecca Chaiklin. 2020. Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem, and Madness. TV

Documentary Series—Season 1; Los Gatos: Netflix.

Iwuchukwu, Chinaedu Samrose, et al. “Confinement for Conservation: An Ethical Overview of

Zoos.” Bulletin of Pure & Applied Sciences- Zoology, no. 2, Diva Enterprises Private

Limited, 2020, pp. 327–37. Crossref, doi:10.5958/2320-3188.2020.00036.4.

Keulartz, Jozef. "Captivity for conservation? Zoos at a crossroads." Journal of Agricultural and

Environmental Ethics 28.2 (2015): 335-351.

Kleespies, Matthias Winfried, et al. “Identifying Factors Influencing Attitudes towards Species

Conservation – a Transnational Study in the Context of Zoos.” Environmental Education

Research, no. 10, Informa UK Limited, June 2021, pp. 1421–39. Crossref,

doi:10.1080/13504622.2021.1927993.

Nasser, Carney Anne. "Welcome To The Jungle: How Loopholes In The Federal Endangered

Species Act And Animal Welfare Act Are Feeding A Tiger Crisis In

America." Government Law Review 9.1 (2016): 23971.

 Hurte 13

Nuwer, Rachel. “Why 'Tiger King' Is Not 'Blackfish' for Big Cats.” The New York Times, The

New York Times, 9 Apr. 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/science/tiger-king-

joe-exotic-conservation.html.

Smith, Mark E., and Donald A. Molde. “Wildlife Conservation and Management Funding in the

U.S.” Mountain Lion Foundation, 8 July 2021,

https://mountainlion.org/2015/05/21/wildlife-conservation-and-management-funding-in-

the-u-s/.

“The Conservation Mission of Zoos | Wild Welfare.” Wild Welfare, 6 May 2014,

https://wildwelfare.org/the-conservation-mission-of-zoos-nabila-aziz/.

Vandersommers, Daniel. “What's All Happening at the Zoo?” Origins, Jan. 2017,

https://origins.osu.edu/article/whats-all-happening-zoo?language_content_entity=en.

Wilkening, Jennifer, et al. “Endangered Species Management and Climate Change: When

Habitat Conservation Becomes a Moving Target.” Wildlife Society Bulletin, vol. 43, no.

1, Mar. 2019, pp. 11–20. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.944.