# data[].attributes.headline
Debate Over Whether Zoos Should Still be Running or Not (Credible Source #1)

# data[].attributes.subject
Debate Over Whether Zoos Should Still be Running or Not (Credible Source #1)

# data[].attributes.body
While some say that zoos should still be running because they are fun to visit, the animals themselves are sad and miserable. In the article, the sentence, "Zoos are imprisoning animals who want to be free," is true because it is not ethical to keep them cramped up in cages when they would much rather be free.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Texts, photographs, links and any other content appearing on Nature & Cultures should not be construed as endorsement by The American University of Paris of organizations, entities, views or any other feature. Individuals are solely responsible for the content they view or post."
Costa Rica's trrecent ban on zoos coinciding with the centennial of the death of Karl Haggenbeck, one of the greatest entrepreneurs in the history of museology and zoology (and show business in the tradition of Barnum and Bailey?...), would be an excellent occasion to raise an important question relevant to animal rights, science and education, and to the issue of the representation of nature:
"When I was a kid", writes Michelle Carr of The National Museum of Animals & Society, "I went to the zoo all the time with my family. I loved pandas as a kid (still do!), and I thought being able to see them in person would be neat. But once I saw them 'up close and personal', I realized that the animals were miserable. It instantly became very clear to me that the animals imprisoned in zoos are sad and don't want to be kept in artificial environments, have people gawk at them, listen to children who bang on the windows of their enclosures, or have cameras flashing in their faces. To put it simply, zoos are imprisoning animals who want to be free.".
Michelle Carr's article ,"The Reality of Zoos", published on the website of PETA, the vocal animal-rights organization, reflects a growing hostility towards zoological collections. Could it be one of the causes of disaffection with some famous zoos? In 1968, the Zoological Park in Vincennes, a suburb of Paris, once a popular landmark for the French, counted 1.5 million visitors. In 2005, they were only 300,000 (see Jean-Charles Battenbaum, "Rénovation du Parc Zoologique de Paris"). Other signs of disaffection are visible in many other zoos worldwide. Is this the end of the era of zoological parks and should we applaud it? Or should we support those zoos, like Vienna's Schönbrunn Tiergarten, one of the first zoos in history, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, which defends on its website that "modern zoos", have become educational centers", showcases for teaching and research, "and valuable partners for many nature and species conservation projects"?

Collections of wild animals have served many different purposes throughout the centuries since they first came into existence. While most modern zoos claim that their vocation today is above all to serve science, education, conservation and animal welfare, others, mainly animal rights activists, would prefer to ban the entire institution. In fact, the Ministry of Environment of Costa Rica, considered by many specialists as a model of environment-friendly policies and sustainable development, has just announced, as a first measure of a campaign to shut down all zoos in the country, that its famous Simon Bolivar Zoo will no longer hold captive animals. In addition, it has only recently come to the attention of a handful of scholars-not zoologists, but rather specialists in the social sciences-that zoos carry an ideological tradition that raises serious ethical questions as to how they represent not only nature but the human condition itself.

From private menagerie to museum: the growing educational, scientific and environmentalist ambition of zookeepers
Tiergarten Schönbrunn (above) in the imperial palace gardens of Vienna, is considered as the first public zoo in history. Visited by privileged guests since 1752, opened its menagerie to the general public in 1779 in the context of the Enlightenment which was concerned with science, knowledge and the democratization of education.
"What is the role of a zoo?" once asked the author on one now defunct pages of Bioparco Roma, the old zoo of Rome founded in 1911. "In recent years," he or she answers, "the concept of zoos has changed. Zoos today are not 'museums of exotic animals' but structures that focus on:
- conservation of endangered species by joining international reproduction in captivity programs
- environmental education by planning environment-related activities, conventions, exhibitions, educational routes for schools and so on."
But how true are such assertions? Have zoo owners truly become environmentalists, as they seem when we read most of their websites, or is this "greenwashing"-a façade of words for the sake of political correctness?

From Menagerie to Educational Centers

achievement comparable, in our own times, to creating a large museum of minerals from the Moon or Mars. So animals or human prisoners brought from far away to die in Rome's Coliseum or the parrots and African servants entertaining guests in a 17th century palace symbolized exceptional power as much as a palace or a collection of unpublished maps. But there was more.
In China, the famous "Garden of Intelligence" was conceived as a representation of the divine by the Chinese monarch Wen-Wang as early as the 9th century B.C.E. Throughout Chinese Western and Islamic history, maps and geographic knowledge (which included information on zoology and botany) were highly strategic. In a profoundly religious culture the one who demonstrates knowledge of creatures unheard of (white bears in the Far North, tigers in the Orient, etc.) has a world view that few humans can even dream of. Only the
Creator of the Universe or an exceptionally wise human being with special powers could have a bird's eye view of the full immensity and richness of the Cosmos. Hence the success of geographic scholarly books or simply travel literature for centuries before and during the age of printing. Furthermore, actually owning a population of live animals gives a potentate a symbolic power as a reenactment of Noah thering the animals in his Ark, for example.

This mystical elitist attitude changed during the Enlightenment. This is when begins the real history of modern zoos. Still located on the grounds of the Schönbrunn Palace, home of the emperors of Austria, "Tiergarten Schönbrunn", is considered by historians and museologists as the oldest zoo still in operation.
The first animals were collected and kept there as early as the 1500s. An imperial menagerie existed as early as 1540 serving all the purposes mentioned above. But in 1752, the Schönbrunn Palace's menagerie became a genuine animal museum, first, for a limited number of privileged visitors, then, in 1779, for the general public. Later, animal rides, sporting events and even ballroom dancing were held on zoo grounds in an era when visiting a zoo often meant a day-long journey outside of the city limits. The name of the Schönbrunn menagerie, "Tiergarten", -animal garden-coined the word that remains to this day the German word for "zoo".

The"Hagenbeck Revolution"

Large-scale dioramas first adopted by Karl Hagenbeck for his private zoo in Stellingen , a peripheral area of Hamburg (above) would influence menageries' architecture for decades. The lion's den where Haggenbeck is photographed (below, bottom photo) is typical. Such changes created a sensation still remembered as "the Hagenbeck Revolution".

"The green oasis in the middle of Hamburg is a popular destination for visitors of all ages, whatever the weather" proudly announces
the home page of Hamburg's famous zoo, created by entrepreneur Carl Hagenbeck. Another page of the same website is an excellent summary of the Hagenbeck experience... or ideology: "Its landscapes and enclosures are world famous. More than 1,850 animals from all continents live here (...) Carl Hagenbeck's panoramas, listed as landmarks, characterize zoo architecture of the 20th Century to the present. In 1907 he fulfilled his dream: he opened his Stellingen zoo, just outside Hamburg. For the first time, a flow of visitors were able to
go through the famous Art Nouveau entrance into other worlds and marvel at predators in gridless leisure facilities and panoramic views."
The Helsinki zoo's artificial mountain, (below and center) a typical example of the "Haggenbeck Revolution" in zoo architecture is home to Northwest American mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus) An artificial rock formation (above) and another typical example of the "Haggenbeck revolution" at the Jardin d'Acclimatation, second oldest zoo in Paris
But can reality be represented accurately and still convey objectivity; and, therefore, how can the educational effort be true to reality?
Acclaimed animal and nature photographer Fritz Pölking (1916-2007) warned that he could not guarantee absolute reality when presenting his images. Because it is acknowledged that photographic images often hide or transform the reality that they portray, the animals can only be objectively perceived in their own environment, and only with your own eyes. On the other hand, one may ask where would you see or even know how an extremely rare wild animal, such as a snow leopard, looks like, if not from a photograph or a zoo. On the other hand, the
kind of stages or giant dioramas that Hagenbeck invented to expose animals are no more than an illusion of "wilderness", simulacra. Isn't then the ethical discourse an alibi? An early example of "greenwashing" as we call it today ?

"She was born free and she has the right to live free"!

The zoo in Saint Petersburg, Russia, (above and below) presents some of the worse examples of conditions of captivity of wild animals. Several factors could explain such conditions. First of all treatment of animals may reflect the political culture of a regime where humans themselves were treated brutally. After the liberalization of Russian society, reconstructing communities ravaged by conflict, economic failure, corruption and mismanagement has only recently started to improve the habitat of humans in Russian cities. Animals must still wait. Yet, there are important signs of progress even in a shabby looking environment such as this one. (See more photos from the St Petersburg zoo below)

Notable exceptions to the Hagenbeck principles can still be found. The Leipzig zoo detains animals in an unentertaining abstract environment, all in the same cubic cages and without much trees, stones, or any other natural decorations. While the Jardin des Plantes of Paris has made efforts for animal comfort, large cats, apes and a few other residents remain locked in the same kind of small cells in
which their predecessors were held in the early-mid 19th century. And there is worse: from a purely humanistic perspective, the history of zoos is tainted by a history of colonialism and even racism.

Alan Aftonfalker, co-author of this article, remembers his first visit in the 1990s to the zoo built in the Villa Borghese in Rome, which is
considered as one of Haggenbeck's masterpieces. "The impression was appalling. Many infrastructures, supposed to imitate a natural landscape, were crumbling. Other animals seemed miserable in their pens. Across a high cement wall, in an enclosure without the slightest element of vegetation, a lonely Indian elephant, obviously seeking some company, was caressing the back of another solitary
elephant of the African species. The most pathetic scene was an adult gorilla sitting in a minuscule cage near the entrance. 'Do not feed' ordered the sign on the cage. But the minute we approached, the gorilla stuck out its large hand in an obvious gesture. When it became clear that we had no food to give out, it opened and closed its fingers insistingly. Begging from visitors seemed to be one of its only distractions...."

Some zoos consistently fail to achieve the criteria necessary to succeed at their task of maintaining viable groups of animals in order to repopulate their natural habitat. Instead they keep solitary, or unnaturally small groups of misplaced animals in substandard artificial habitats, permanently on show, thousands of miles from where these animals belong. Also, in the wild, species build immunity to naturally occurring diseases, but in a zoo, animals might not develop resistance to the most commonplace of ailments. On the other hand, they
may be challenged by viruses from a species that they would never otherwise meet. Surplus animals could create a problem for zoos as well. In some cases, zoo animals are bred simply to attract visitors, and pressure on space and resources means that some animals are then disposed of or killed at the end of the season. For example, some zoos and safari parks have supplied animals for experiments. Certain species are 'recycled', in other words, fed to other animals. A few zoos have supplied animals like bison and ostrich to exotic meat
farms. While zoos might argue that raising animals for their carnivores is logical, supplying the exotic meat trade for humans is clearly questionable.
It has been observed and well-documented that animals behave drastically different once taken away from their natural environment. "There is about as much educational benefit to be gained in studying dolphins in captivity as there would be studying mankind by only observing prisoners held in solitary confinement" once declared Jacques-Yves Cousteau. Indeed, animals become noticeably sad and
depressed and experience lack of sexuality, which in turn complicates the reproduction.

rock, as the animal may be trying to wait out the environment in which it is trapped, but the wait usually never ends. Birds are virtually stripped of their most precious gift, flight, often able to do little more than flutter their wings. Birds of prey do not fly, but sit around, waiting for the keepers to bring them food. Consequently, captive birds like vultures and pelicans are prone to bone diseases. In the wild, animals react to their surroundings, avoiding predators, seeking food and interacting with others of their species, in other words, doing what they have evolved for. Consequently, even what might seem larger or better areas may be impoverished in terms of the animal's real needs. Some zoo enclosures prevent the animals from being able to enjoy their most basic range of behavioral patterns including social interaction, exercise, and bathing. The disappointment in the environmentalist standard-setting initiatives so often proclaimed in the official discourse of zoo administrators was recently expressed during a conference by Daniel Turner, spokesperson for ENDCAP, a coalition of NGOs lobbying European institutions where data has been gathered from over 20 countries: "ENDCAP's evidence, clearly demonstrates that despite the European Zoos Directive, the welfare of hundreds of thousands - possibly millions of wild animals remains at risk. Quite frankly, the conditions in some European zoos are appalling."

Virginia McKenna is the actress who played Joy Adamson in the movie version of her best-selling autobiographical account Born Free-the story of Elsa the lioness, one of the icons of the conservation movement as perceived by the public in the mid-1960s. The story was about how Joy and her husband George, who operated a private game reserve in Kenya, adopt an orphaned baby lioness, Elsa, and then refuse to give her to a zoo. Instead, they train her successfully to return to the wild. "She was born free and she has the right to live free!" shouted by Virginia McKenna in one of the most dramatic scenes of the screen version viewed by millions. A few years later, the actress and her late husband Bill Travers, who played George Adamson in the film, abandonned a great part of their acting careers and took over George
Adamsons' private lion sanctuary after he and Joy were killed by poachers. In 1991, with their son Will, they founded the Born Free foundation, now one of the world's highly reputable conservation societies. One of its main targets are zoos and Mrs. McKenna is very outspoken about their hypothetical usefulness for science and conservation : "We can learn as much about lions by studying them in
their captivity as we can about men by studying them in their prison cells".

Watch evidence of animal suffering in zoos from the Born Free Foundation's channel (below, left), then listen to Virginia McKenna, co-founder of the Born Free Foundation (below, right)

Regardless of Hagenbeck's sincere sympathy for his animals, the new enclosures that appeared after the reform he inspired became a bit larger, but remained small and the animals continued to be locked up between four walls at night (a practice still current today in hundreds of zoos worldwide). The giant dioramas, vaguely symbolizing what "wilderness" means to visitors rather than reconstituting a real ecosystem, thus belongs more to the history of show business than to the history of conservation.
So what does an institution tell about itself when its policies favor the fake versus the real? Could it be that spectacle is more important than science, or that entertainment is more important than education? This leads to the next disturbing question: is nature what we even think it is? What do we mean by "wilderness" and "civilization".

entertainment chambers has become the Natural History museum of the city of St. Petersburg.

The case of the famous "Elephant Man" is only one of the most notorious examples of such show business cruelty. Curious crowds came to view "freak shows": the suffering of living beings behind cages, including humans-physically handicapped or mentally ill people such as "geeks" (yes, that it is where the word originated) and "wild men", i.e., alcoholics having fits of delirium tremens, or other manifestations of hysteria and dementia. The morbid nature of the public's curiosity is revealed here: observing captive living beings considered as inferior, indulges a person's or a group's sense of superiority. It is a form of sadism. The vision of the beast or of the wild man conquered and put behind bars constructs the viewers' own identity of conquerors, which is gratifying for the ruling classes-the great industrialists and merchants who invested in the colonial economy-but particularly for the middle classes and the uprooted popular masses, the main clients of zoos- i.e. the mediocre or the disenfranchised, observing creatures less fortunate than oneself and enjoying the illusion of belonging to the elite. The feeling provided an "opiate of the people", a compensation for their own miseries or frustrations. The participants in such violent orgies as public executions or racist rallies, deny their cruelty through philosophical rationalizations ("the criminal is evil and deserved it"). In the case of zoos, the alibi is scientific and educational. Can it even take on the disguise of conservation?
The Emperor Wilhelm II visits a "human zoo" in 1909 (below) accompanied by Haggenbeck (on his left in top hat).
(Federal archives of Germany, with permission)
One of the most powerful arguments in the defense of animal rights is that a society tolerating cruelty to non-human living beings is at
risk to sooner or later tolerate cruelty towards humans as well. There is probably no stronger evidence to support this accusation than the historic experience of zoological exhibits in one of its ugliest aspects: the phenomenon of the human zoo. The expression is neither a sarcasm nor a label recently coined by historians. From the mid 1800s, entire groups of individuals were seduced into leaving their tribal villages and coming to large European cities to be exhibited. These exhibits were often held in zoos. They were presented next to the animals and "human zoo" are the exact words used in some of the official advertisements. Groups of inhabitants from colonies were shown to the public in their national clothes, often, on a stage with reconstructed houses and artifacts of their native land. The case of the "Hottentot Venus", a slave exhibited as monster for her anthropomorphic features so different from the European representation of the human body (particularly her very large buttocks) is another sinister example of how exhibitions of the "wilderness" and its "natural inhabitants"" were far from innocent. Once again, Alan Aftonfalker remembers. "Children visiting the Paris Museum of Anthropology at the Trocadero Square (a division of the Museum of Natural History mentioned earlier) would laugh at this mummified naked body (not always realizing that this was an actual cadaver, not a wax statue) exhibited in a glass display case. I have seen this as late as 1971!" Thus not only zoos or circuses participated in this unsavory form of spectacle. A respected educational institution, no less than New York's American Museum of Natural History, has committed even far worse in the way it represented animals and people "from the wild". The story of the six indigenous Greenlandic companions of Polar explorer Peary is the sad evidence. The future great discoverer of the North Pole had convinced to come with him to New York. Neglected by Peary who abandoned the group in poor quarters, weakened by a long trip, cultural shock and consequent disorientation, suffering from the unusual climatic conditions and the polluted air of an early 20th century industrial
urban environment, the travellers from the Arctic withered and died, except for one little boy, Minik. The body of Minik's father was then stripped of its flesh and his skeleton was put on display in the Museum (see the PBS documentary "Minik, the Lost Eskimo ").
Here, the line between an ethnographic educational project and a circus freak show becomes extremely blurry, especially in the mind of an uneducated public for whom making fun of a geek expressing alcoholic rage in his cage in a carnival was socially acceptable. The stage
upon which the Natives of the colonies were displayed were either actual zoos or special events like Paris colonial world fair of 1931. Among the entrepreneurs of such spectacles was no other than Hagenbeck himself.

In the conclusion to their history of zoos, Eric Baratay and Elisabeth Hardouin-Fugier (see our bibliography at the end) summarize what was, according to their research, the fundamental social role in Western societies of keeping and exhibiting captive animals. It was "to treat
them as proof of the existence of the Other, as hostages from a conquered world, as survivors of the universe on the road to extinction. Until the 20th century, zoos clearly reflected the will of a triumphant Europe to classify and dominate." This does not mean that there was no real educational and scientific value. But as noted by the authors, the animals offered for observation "were more often virtual than natural". Later, "torn between the persistent drive to exploit and the genuine desire to preserve and respect", Western societies
transformed views "into an ersatz of natural, open space." The illusion of nature, disguised the reality: that Western societies were not liberal and benevolent as they viewed themselves. They preferred to "transplant, then limit, cultivate and arrange nature however and wherever it liked, rather than leave places truly free of human influence. Here again a parallel is to be drawn with the processes of the colonization and neo-colonialism which expressed, and continues to express the same dialectic between sentiment and reality."
Education or cheap exotism? Asian elephant trainers on display (above) in a turn-of-the-century Parisian zoo: where the lines separating zoological and ethnographic education, from exotism, circus performance and white supremacist ideology become extremely blurry. The pavillion at the entrance the 1931 Colonial World's fair (above) which was the occasion for the inauguration of the zoo of Vincennes. Exhibiting animals served the purpose of demonstrating political and military power. The representation of the wilderness, with its wild
inhabitants-animals as well as people-was part of an exotism that, in this fourth decade of the 20th century, communicated more positive values than the morbid freak shows and exhibitions of "wild men" and "missing links" of earlier generations: although trophies they were, the exotic animals and human beings were nevertheless seen as treasures, a national treasure to be valued. But this kind of paternalism may have been more harmful to the advance of true humanistic values than the vulgar racism of the 19th century. No less than Three million Frenchmen visited the "Expo Coloniale". Today, all historians who studied this festival agree with the numbers that were circulated eighty years ago to measure its success as a public relations operation to win public support for colonialism: before the exhibit, the majority of Frenchmen were either opposed or indifferent to exploiting a French colonial empire, after the exhibit closed, the majority of the French supported colonial expansion. The exhibition of beautiful animals was part of this great campaign machine.
Why we may need zoos after all
Protecting an American symbol, Lowry Park zoo provides safe haven to an injured female bald eagle (above) incapable of returning to the wild in its large habitat areas near Tampa, Florida.
"Basically, we don't like zoos". The affirmation shouldn't be surprising if it had been pronounced by anyone else than Michel Bondu,
Director of communications of the Zoo of Doué founded in 1961 in France's Loire Valley. In an interview by N&C, Mister Bondu expresses such strong words without hesitation. He hopes that they will be understood as a sign of a profoundly changing attitude by zoo keepers. Millions have been invested by the Doué zoo (which its executives prefer to call "biopark") for animal welfare inside its gates but also in the wild.

zoo in London's Regent Park in the 1820s. How did he explain his presence at Virginia McKenna's talk and his applauding her while obviously knowing her frequent attacks against menageries? "Oh, Ginny and I get along very well", he confided to our reporter, "she has to make these kind of statements publicly because a lot of abuse has been inflicted upon animals and it's her job to put an end to it..."
If we started dismantling zoos, wouldn't we be throwing away the baby with the bathwater? What would we do with hundreds of thousands of animals born in zoos and incapable of surviving in the wild? Where could zoologists conduct research essential to our knowledge and to the animals' welfare and that can only be observed in captivity? What would happen to almost extinct species for which the zoo is a last haven from poachers?
Few know even about the existence of a creature such as the Sichuan Takin also known as the Tibetan Takin (Budorcas taxicolor tibetana - above). Collecting rare and almost unknown species is seen as valuable not only for zoological research and for the education of the public. It also provides protection for specimens living in extremely limited areas and suffering from habitat reduction.
More and more simulation of reality: can zoo animals becoming "happy" in captivity?
Animals roam in a quasi-free range territory in the Thoiry animal reserve, a near Paris
After World War II, yet a new revolution transformed the mentalities of zoo administrators and the architecture of zoological parks.
Monkey Jungle in Florida is a good example. In 1933, animal behaviorist Joseph DuMond released a troop of Java monkeys into his
private reserve to study them in an environment resembling their natural habitat. Soon afterward, to finance his research, DuMond let the first visitors enter his reserve. More species were added to the collection and the place became a new kind of zoo: a menagerie where the visitors are enclosed in long corridors of meshed wire while monkeys roam free in a floridian jungle. Monkey Jungle has thrived ever since. There is an enclosure around the compound of each species, but Monkey Jungle personel explained to us that the monkeys "enjoy two
to three times more space than they would usually occupy in the wild"".

"Just as we don't often hear much about owl monkeys, we don't always hear enough about the less-famous organizations," says Barbara J. King about Dumond Conservancy and Monkey Jungle. is the author of Being with Animals, Why We Are Obsessed With the Furry, Scaly, Feathered Creatures Who Populate Our World (Doubleday: N.Y., 2010) and is Chancellor Professor of Anthropology at the College of William & Mary. These are places, she insists, "where fiercely dedicated people work (with strained resources) to make animals' lives better in captivity and in the wild. The DuMond Conservancy is a small place that packs a big punch."

dramatically changed-and improved-from what viewers saw a generation ago. Gone are the sour cages full of frantic cats and the concrete tubs of thawing penguins. Instead the terrain is uncannily authentic, and animals are free to behave like, well, animals, not inmates." These changes have affected numerous zoos in the world.

An international régime of animal welfare in zoos and aquariums.
Strongly refusing to be qualified as a "zoo", Big Cat Rescue, in the Tampa Bay (above): not only a sanctuary where felines receive treatment and enjoy a safe haven from abusive detention and cruelty the association greets visitors for purposes of education and fund-raising.
Many zoos also follow a code of animal welfare now being enforced by over thirty national zoo associations and internationally by nearly
a dozen regional organizations and by global federations, the most important of which is the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
(WAZA). WAZA enforces a strict code of ethics for its members. Today, being excluded from WAZA or not being admitted into one of the regional or national associations for not respecting the modern standards of animal welfare could be a death sentence to a zoo in terms of
credibility and public image.

between the IUCN - the International Union for Conservation of Nature - and zoos throughout the world.
The S.E.C.A.S. - Société d'Encouragement pour la Conservation des Animaux Sauvages (Society for the Encouragement of Wild Animals
Conservation), is the NGOs supporting the zoo work of France's Museum d'Histoire Naturelle. It provides more interesting details about the history of international networking for conservation.
In 1973 was created a network called ISIS -International Species Information System. It is a computer database identifying, on a voluntary basis, zoo animals with their origin and genealogy. The goal is to collect information necessary for the creation of herd books
(studbooks) by species, allowing the initiation of coordinated breeding programs. Based in the Minnesota Zoo, ISIS maintains a list of approximately 550 participating zoos, over 1,3 million animals, including more than 350,000 6,000 species and subspecies.
In 1980, the Association of Zoos North American (AZA) organized the first breeding programs involving captive animals called SSP ( Species Survival Plan). In 1982, the UK implemented its own programs: JMSP (Joint Management Species Program). In 1985, the European Community created the European Endangered Species Programme.

White Army and nationalist Polish opponents, the species had become completely extinct. Less than 60 individuals survivied in zoos. It is
thanks to them that the species is now back in Białowieża. A good recent example was the reintroduction into the steppes of Asia of the Przewalski horse. By the 1980s, this living fossil of prehistoric times had been reduced to quasi-extinction in the wild. Without the zoos where individuals had been preserved, the 300 horses living today in national parks in China and Mongolia would not have existed.

In a May 27, 2010 interview for 30 Millions d'Amis ("30 Million Friends") , one of France's longest running TV shows entirely devoted to
the subject of pets, Gilles de Turckheim, director of the "Montagne des Singes" (Monkey Mountain), a zoological park hosting one of largest populations of Barbary macaques outside of their natural habitat in Northern Africa, defended the usefulness of his institution: "the monkeys have maintained the exact behaviour they display in the wild, except that they no longer fear humans. Here in Kintsheim", he continued "more than one thousand of these individuals belonging to the Macaca sylvanus species roam freely amidst the lush pine forest of the French Vosges mountains, near the German border." This new hyper-realism is one of the standards that oganizations such as WAZA are attempting to enforce.
Apparently, even artificial environments in zoos can keep animals "happy" (or at least no less miserable than in the wild). One of the results of research on animal behavior in zoos is that interaction seems to be the main key to that goal. For most animals to "rest" is a severe punishment; in their natural habitat they would hunt, or run wild and play. So not only the surroundings must be carefully planned, but also, the accessories that will be included in these surroundings. For example, a penguin or a walrus in the zoo will potentially be happier if supplied live fish in their pool, so that they could hunt it. The same goes for other animals; even the ones that do not hunt need some toys and objects that would replace the ones involved in their natural activities.

See the big cats play on these videos from Big Cat Rescue and find out more about what a menagerie can accomplish for animal welfare

True, not everything is perfect. "Scientists wanted to acquaint their rare golden lion tamarins with a facsimile of their natural habitat, a lowland Brazilian forest. But the coddled, zoo-happy monkeys lacked some basic skills-how, for instance, to peel a banana. Instead, they fell out of the trees and got lost in the woods," reports the Time Magazine article mentioned above. It also laughs at the famous San Diego zoo and its attempt, for the benefit of five adolescent Malayan sun bears, to recreate a natural habitat which included a moat, a cover of sod, a waterfall, real trees, and a fiber-glass version with an electric honey dispenser. "Zoogoers loved it. So did the bears. They shredded the trees, rolled up the sod, plugged the moat-and then one attempted a fast break over the wall. Spectators went scrambling for a zookeeper, who propped up a plywood barrier while another clanged some pots and pans to intimidate the beasts and herd them into a locked closure."
Yet, "like almost everything else that goes wrong these days," firmly declares Time's Nancy Gibbs, it "is a signal that America's zoos
are doing something very right".

The zoo as "a modern ark"

Yann Arthus Bertrand is one of today's most notorious wildlife photographers and spokesmen for environmental causes. Little is it known that he began his career as a director of an animal park. In his first ever televised interview in 1969, he explained how one of the main goals of his zoo was to provide a safe house and veterinary facilities for injured animals. This is one of the main rationales of the new institutions after the second zoo revolution.

Big Cat Rescue in the suburbs of Tampa in Florida, does not even see itself as a zoo at all. The volunteers of this non-profit organization insist on being called a "sanctuary" and frankly explain to visitors that their presence is only needed to bring in funds. It grew out of spontaneous responses to emergency situations by people who just happened to be in the right place at the right time to respond to the immediate needs of injured wild animals found by the road (cats indigenous to Florida, like panthers) or pets, circus animals, or zoo animals abandoned by irresponsible owners or confiscated by the authorities from animal traffickers or criminals. It was either that or letting the cats just be euthanized. One rescue operation leading to another... and Big Cat Rescue was born. Dozens of lions, tigers, panthers and smaller felines live in rather large enclosures in a secluded patch of woods not far from Tampa. The place does looks like a zoo, but the managers see it only as a lesser evil, the only place where wild felines, those that can no longer be returned to the wild, can end their lives in a relatively comfortable although somewhat unnatural habitat. The volunteers are very militant in their efforts to educate their visitors about animal rights.

like that and they are getting smaller all the time. The choice is between living in wonderful facilities like these where they are probably better off or living in the wild in an area like Budongo, where one in six gets caught in a wire snare, and countries like Congo, where chimpanzees, monkeys and gorillas are shot for food commercially. If I were a chimpanzee, I know what I would choose," added Dr. Goodall (see Mark Wade's article in our bibliography).

The zoo keeper as conservation champion

First among these were the Austrian ethologist Konrad Lorenz, famous for his studies on human and animal aggression and on geese (proven to accept as their mother the first living creature they see as they hatch) and Swiss zoologist Heini Hediger, director of the zoos of Berne, Basel, and then Zürich. They were among the pioneers of the new zoo with wider living space for the animals and with reproduction, rather than museology, as a priority.

screens in 1959 and won the 1960 Oscar for best documentary. For Germany, where more than elsewhere, environmentalism was to rise as a major global political force, this powerful documentary, one of the first to denounce modernity's fatal threat to wildlife, became a landmark in the long love story between the media, the public and conservation activists. Serengeti Darf Nicht Sterben, (its original title), was the creation of the Bernhard and Michael Grzimek, a father-and-son team. Young Michael, the cinematographer lost his life during filming when his bush plane crashed. Bernhard, the writer, producer and director was no other than the head of the Frankfurt zoo. In 1945, he had assumed responsibility for the Tiergarten, immediately after the bombings of the last weeks of the war had reduced its infrastructures to rubble and killed almost all of its animals. But courageously, the new director (a former Wermacht veterinarian who had helped Jews during the war) restored the park within weeks, brought back several animals and created festive events that attracted an important public as early as July 1945. The need to rebuild a major zoo from scratch allowed Bernhard Grzimek to apply the new philosophy of zoo management: large, comfortable quarters for the animals with the best possible rendition of their natural habitat, protection of endangered species, breeding programs and exchange of specimens with other zoo. Also, the exhibition of animals was now seen only as a pretext-a means for raising funds (by charging entrance) and a platform for conservation propaganda. But in that domain-public relations-Bernhard Grzimek demonstrated no less talent than a Barnum or a Hagenbeck. His philosophy on animal-human relations was going to profit from his showmanship and growing celebrity.

In 1956, Bernhard Grzimek had already written scores of books and made a documentary when he began hosting a talk show on animals-Ein Platz für Tieren (A place for animals)- which became one of German television's most popular productions. It was on the air until 1980. It featured popular science, appeals to the public's environmental conscience, and news from the zoo in Frankfurt with live animals as special guests of the studio.

A recognizable host, animal stars, news reels from the field and environmentalist comments-it would be very interesting for students specializing in environmental studies or communications to investigate (for a term paper or a presentation) just how much Grzimek's show became a model for comparable broadcasts in other parts of the world such as those of other stars like François and Marylise de la Grange or Christian Zuber in France, Cousteau (the most famous worldwide), Marlin Perkins in the United States (yet another zoo director), and in the UK, David Attenborough and Gerald Durrell.

A terrifying roar sounding like a powerful motor attracts N&C staff members to the scene of a fight about to take place between large male aligators. They warn Silver Springs theme park personnel who arrive just in time to break up the extremely violent confrontation just when the largest of the two males is trying to rip off his opponent's limb (both photos above). A few days earlier, a baby macaque could not be saved on time (below) when a fierce battle between factions became extremely violent in "Monkey Jungle" nature reserve. Our N&C staff member turned his camera towards the terrible shrieks, he could only witness a mother trying to revive her baby killed by a rival. This may be the price to pay when animals are left to themselves in a habitat resembling the wild.

In or out? A great egret (Ardea alba) living in the wild is attracted to Lowry Park zoo near Tampa, Florida (below), whether by the presence of captive birds of the same species or food left over imprudently by visitors. Whatever brings this beautiful ainged animal to such an unnatural place as a zoo, it poses the problem of our human behavior reshaping animal behavior for better or for worse. REFERENCES

Zoo de St Félicien (Québec). Definetely the best educational and scientific website.

Second best (in our opinion) but famous worldwide for its success stories in nature conservation the
about Gerald Durrell himself see: " Gerald Durrell" in Wikipedia
The Association of Zoos and Aquariums
, the monthly magazine of AZA, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums

ZOOS and MUSEUMS:
The American Museum of Natural History
The Frankfurt Zoo one of the historic landmarks in the history of zoological museology
The Moscow Zoo
www.zoo.ru: a small portal for finding zoos in the former USSR

" Un zoo engagé pour préserver la biodiversité ", documenary

Les Zoos humains, Pascal Blanchard & Eric Deroo, dir., Cités Télévision, Les Fims du Village & Les bâtisseurs de mémoire, prod.

BOOKS and ARTICLES

Birnbaum, Jesse. " Just Too Beastly for Words ", Time, June 13, 2006. (Sept. 5, 2008)

" Fact Sheet on Zoos.", Naturewatch (NGO aginst animal cruelty in UK). June 2004. (Sept. 8, 2008)

Fisher,James, Zoos of the World: The Story of Animals in Captivity, The Natural History Press, Garden City, N.Y., 1967

Fravel, Laura. "Critics Question Zoos' Commitment to Conservation", National Geographic News. Nov. 13, 2003. (Sept. 3, 2008)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/11/1113_031113_zoorole.html

Nancy Gibbs, " The New Zoo: A Modern Ark", Time, Sunday June 24, 2001, online

Hancocks, David. A Different Nature: The Paradoxical World of Zoos and Their Uncertain Future. University of California Press. 2002

Andrea Hauenschild, "Claims and Reality of New Museology: Case Studies in Canada, the United States and Mexico ", Smithsonian Center for Education and Museum Studies

Lemonick, Michael D., "Who Belongs in the Zoo?", Time, June 11, 2006. (Sept. 3, 2008)

Majkowski, Nancie, "Snow Leopards Thrive in Zoos Around the World", National Geographic, May 20, 2008. (Sept. 5, 2008)

Pickrell, John. "Zoo Life Shortens Elephant Lives in Europe, Study Says", National Geographic News, Oct. 25, 2002. (Sept. 5, 2008)

Vernon N. Kisling (ed.), Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Animal Collections to Zoological Gardens. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2001, available at http://www.crcnetbase.com/isbn/9780849321009

Shashank Nakate, "Pros and Cons of Zoos", Buzzle.com: Intelligent Life on the Web

Strehlow, Harro "Zoological Gardens of Western Europe", in Vernon N. Kisling (ed.), Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Animal Collections to Zoological Gardens, CRC Press: Boca Raton, 2001.

Trivedi, Bijal P. "Zoos Use New Tricks to Stimulate Animals.", National Geographic Today, Aug. 27, 2002. (Sept. 5, 2008)

Wade, Mike, " Zoos are best hope, says Jane Goodall", The Times, May 20 2008, online (available to subscribers only; important excerpts are available online at the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums Newsletter 04/08, June 2008, p.8)

"Zoos and aquariums join forces with IUCN", News Page, 17 December 2008, accessed April 16 2011 at IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) website,

" Zoo check" web page of the Born Free Foundation,

"Zoos: Pitiful Prisons.", PETA, Big Cat Rescue (Sept. 3, 2008)

_________________________________________________________________

Watch six half-hour episodes from "Zoo Quest", the classic BBC TV series that brought images of exotic places and rare wildlife into the homes of 1950s Britain, in partnership with London Zoo. First go to the link here and view a "making of" interview of David Attenborough, then view the episodes by clicking on the links on the right hand side of the page.

On the art of the Landscape consult:

A great series of short articles created by Kathleen M. Hogan for the Tocqueville's America Website American Studies at the University of Virginia on the Hudson River School and the argument between Tocqueville and Thomas Cole about whether American identity is centered on the representation of the landscape or not.

On the ethical issues concerning the landscape, consult:
the California Academy of Sciences Naturalist Center on "responsible collecting" (search for relevant links from that page) and "Why we collect"

Also in this Issue 1, N&C's reporters take you to sea to face the extreme dangers of modern piracy, to the far North to understand Arctic geopolitics, and to the home of the Ladins (not Latins) - a lost culture in a hidden valley of Europe. Don't miss the visual poem on Africa, the debate about overpopulation, our book review and the N&C e-library - a portal to numerous resources on nature and human geography.

In Issue 2 (Fall 2014): the Ukraine, Russian geography, conflicts over water and many, many more features. To receive notification of its release, go to N&C's Facebook page and sign up (Issue 1 will remain available on a special archives section).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
zoos; hagenbeck; "animal rights"; "zoological garden"; peta; "born free"; "jane goodall"; "virginia mckenna"; "zoo check"; grzimek; durrell; cousteau; monaco; aquariums; "monkey jungle"; "zoo quest"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Costa Rica's ban on zoos coinciding with the centennial of the death of Karl Haggenbeck, one of the greatest entrepreneurs in the history of museology and zoology (and show business in the tradition of Barnum and Bailey?...), would be an excellent occasi

# data[].attributes.headline
Zoos are Not Fair to Animals (Credible Source #2)

# data[].attributes.subject
Zoos are Not Fair to Animals (Credible Source #2)

# data[].attributes.body
Although zoos have been around for centuries, people now are becoming more aware of the negative effects they have on animals' lives - like being bred when they don't need to be and being abused without any defense. This highlights that zoos need to care better for animals because they are being poisoned and starved, and many visitors aren't even very interested in the majority of enclosures, showing that zoos are not needed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Animals in Entertainment: Circuses, SeaWorld, and Beyond | PETA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Animals in entertainment suffer immensely. Find out how PETA is putting an end to elephant rides, horseraces, roadside zoos, and safari parks.

# data[].attributes.headline
Aquariums and Marine Parks are Cruel to Ocean Animals (Credible Source #3)

# data[].attributes.subject
Aquariums and Marine Parks are Cruel to Ocean Animals (Credible Source #3)

# data[].attributes.body
Putting whales, dolphins, and other highly intelligent aquatic animals in marine parks is cruel to them because they are separated from their families and get psychological problems and mental illnesses. This shows that putting these marine animals in marine parks is harmful to them and causes them to be distressed and even to behave violently, which would not happen if marine parks took better care of them and/or released them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Aquariums and marine mammal theme parks like SeaWorld, the Miami Seaquarium, and Canada's Marineland are part of a billion-dollar industry built on the suffering of intelligent social beings who are denied everything that's natural and important to them.

Wild orcas and other dolphins live in large, complex social groups and swim vast distances every day in the open ocean. In captivity, they can only swim in endless circles inside tanks that, to them, are the equivalent of bathtubs and they're denied the opportunity to engage in almost any natural behavior. They are forced to perform meaningless tricks and are often torn away from family members when they're shuffled between parks. Many die far short of their species' natural life expectancy.

Families Torn Apart

Countless marine animals (even the original Shamu) were taken from their rightful ocean homes and placed in tanks. Tilikum, the orca who lashed out and killed SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau and two other people, died in a concrete prison 33 years after he was taken away from his Icelandic family. Lolita, torn away from her family when she was just a baby, has spent half a century in the same tank at the Miami Seaquarium. Some countries continue to capture wild dolphins and whales.

Captivity's Tragic Consequences

Frequently housed with incompatible tankmates, dolphins, whales, and other marine mammals are often drugged in order to manage stress-induced aggressive behavior and relieve the endless monotony of swimming in circles. They break their teeth chewing on the metal bars and concrete sides of their tanks and are forced to perform tricks for tourists in exchange for food-all in the name of entertainment.

While wild female orcas can live to be more than 100 years old, orcas at SeaWorld often die by the time they reach their teens and rarely approach even the average life expectancy of wild orcas. More than 40 orcas have died at SeaWorld from causes such as bacterial infections and fractured skulls. More than 300 other dolphins and whales along with approximately 400 pinnipeds have also died at the parks.

While Marineland can no longer breed whales and dolphins or confine new ones-thanks to Canada's recent ban on their captivity-it's still imprisoning the animals currently languishing there. Dozens of dolphins, whales, and walruses have died there-including a walrus named Apollo who recently suffered a heart attack. An orca named Kiska-who was abducted from her family in the ocean as a baby 40 years ago-is confined in isolation and can do nothing but swim in endless circles inside her cramped tank.

The Trouble With 'Interactive' Programs

Touch tanks as well as "swim with dolphins" and "paint with dolphins" programs allow the public to pet, kiss, paint with, or even ride these animals. Such programs invade their already diminished worlds and are intrusive, stressful, and even dangerous for them, as well as being risky for human participants.

Animals in "petting pools" are frequently exposed to foreign bacteria and other pathogens, and they can become anxious, frustrated, aggressive, and even neurotic as a result of being confined to shallow tanks and exposed to constant interaction with humans. Members of the public have been injured at SeaWorld's dolphin-petting pools.

Even programs that enable people to swim with dolphins in nature can be invasive. Boats and swimmers may chase, harass, and scare them, interfering with their natural feeding, resting, migrating, and playing behavior.

Poor Government Regulations

Captive marine mammals have some federal protections in the U.S., but enforcement is lax. There are simply too many animal exhibitors for the limited number of U.S. Department of Agriculture inspectors-as of February 2020, there were 104 inspectors for 12,851 facilities. Even when exhibitors are cited for violating the federal Animal Welfare Act, they're rarely assessed fines or meaningful penalties.

Keeping Dolphins Free

In nature, orcas work cooperatively in search of food. They share complex relationships in a matrilineal society and-in some populations-rarely leave their mother's pod. They have group-specific food preferences and behavior. These attributes, along with their pods' unique dialects, are considered a form of culture that is unrivaled by any species other than humans.

Other dolphins, too, maintain dynamic relationships within a large social network. They live with up to a few dozen others in a pod and can swim as many as 60 miles each day and dive to depths of nearly 1,500 feet in nature.

The world is moving away from keeping intelligent, sensitive cetaceans in captivity. In the U.S., the National Aquarium is building the dolphins in its care a seaside sanctuary-a safe ocean cove in which captive marine mammals can be released into a protected area of the sea to dive deep, feel the ocean currents, and finally live like they should, all while still receiving care, food, and veterinary support. Two whales have been moved from a marine park in China to a seaside sanctuary in Iceland, and The Whale Sanctuary Project just announced plans for a seaside sanctuary for rescued orcas and belugas in Nova Scotia, Canada.

Governments around the world are also recognizing that dolphins (including orcas) and other cetaceans do not belong in tanks. Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, and Croatia have all banned the practice of keeping cetaceans in captivity. In 2013, India's Ministry of Environment & Forests banned the practice of keeping dolphins captive for public entertainment. Other countries, including Brazil, Luxembourg, Nicaragua, and Norway, have highly restrictive standards that make it nearly impossible to keep cetaceans in captivity. The last dolphinarium in the U.K. closed more than 20 years ago.

What You Can Do

Please don't visit marine parks, and never buy tickets to roadside zoos or aquariums that keep ocean animals in captivity. Encourage your local aquarium to create more space for rehabilitating (and releasing) injured wildlife by refusing to breed more animals.

You can also leaflet at local roadside aquariums or marine parks, pressure officials to avoid subsidizing these facilities with taxpayer money, write letters to the editor of local publications, and support legislation that prohibits the capture or restricts the display of marine mammals.
Please join PETA in urging SeaWorld and other marine parks to stop using animals and to relocate the orcas, bottlenose dolphins, and other animals to seaside sanctuaries, where they can thrive in the enrichment and diversity of the sea while still receiving the care that they require.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Aquariums and Marine Parks are no safe havens for marine mammals like dolphins and whales. Learn more on how you can help animals and not support these facilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Sources like PETA have argued that putting animals in captivity limits their natural behavior, causing physical and mental problems. This highlights that zoos must take action and give the animals they're responsible for better lives because they develop health issues, which can limit their life spans and make them lash out on zookeepers and visitors, being a danger to everyone.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opposing Viewpoints in Context - Results -

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
My Library: Pleasant Valley Middle School Library

# data[].attributes.headline
Viewpoint Article - Support (Database Article #2)

# data[].attributes.subject
Viewpoint Article - Support (Database Article #2)

# data[].attributes.body
Even though the conditions of animals in marine parks have slightly improved, they still do not come close to what creatures such as belugas and orcas are used to in the wild, like having a vast ocean to swim in, their ability to hunt for food, and being with their families. This shows that public attraction places like marine parks need to rethink how they treat their animals because while they might mean well, it really is not entirely fair to the mammals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Keeping Marine Mammals in Captivity Is Cruel Exploitation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Endangered Oceans, edited by Louise I. Gerdes, Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http%3A%2F%2Flink.galegroup.com%2Fapps%2Fdoc%2FEJ3010130288%2FOVIC%3Fu%3Dpl2683%26sid%3DOVIC%26xid%3Daccc4cb3. Accessed 27 Feb. 2019. Originally published as "Do Marine Mammals Belong in Captivity in the 21st Century?" HSUS.org, 2008.

# data[].attributes.headline
Viewpoint Article - Oppose (Database Article #3)

# data[].attributes.subject
Viewpoint Article - Oppose (Database Article #3)

# data[].attributes.body
This article argues that one advantage of zoos is that it protects endangered species and helps restore their numbers and make sure they stay out of extinction. Although this is true, the reality is that most species of animals in zoos are not endangered and actually have completely healthy numbers in the wild. This highlights that zoos should not keep animals in captivity because while it might help some, far more animals are hurt by the practice instead.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zoos of the Future May Be Animals’ Last, Best Hope

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2019. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http%3A%2F%2Flink.galegroup.com%2Fapps%2Fdoc%2FJLEEAI829551748%2FOVIC%3Fu%3Dpl2683%26sid%3DOVIC%26xid%3D208bc2f7. Accessed 27 Feb. 2019. Originally published as "Zoos of the future may be animals' last, best hope," Washington Times, 4 Sept. 2016.

# data[].attributes.body
In zoos, lions and other animals of prey cannot hunt and instead are fed by zookeepers. This shows that zoos are unfair to animals and should create better environments for them because lions are used to hunting for food since it is their natural instinct - when they are unable to do that they lose what makes them threatening, dangerous, and unique.

# data[].attributes.headline
Orca Whales Being Shown at a Marine Park (Image #1)

# data[].attributes.subject
Orca Whales Being Shown at a Marine Park (Image #1)

# data[].attributes.body
Orca whales are being taken out of their natural habitat and forced to do tricks and entertain people at marine parks. This highlights that they are mistreated and that putting them in aquariums is unfair because they don't have adequate space to move and it wrongly portrays them as creatures that do tricks and flips, when in reality they just like to swim and be free in the wild.

# data[].attributes.body
Many animals in zoos like this tiger are found pacing their cages out of boredom, because their enclosures are too small for them and they have nothing to do. This highlights that zoos need to treat their animals much better because they cannot roam and hunt like their instinct tells them to - they can feel useless and tired with nothing to do all day, sometimes causing their health to plummet and experiencing distress.

# data[].attributes.body
Animals in zoos like tigers often do not have enough space to move and roam like they would in the wild. This highlights that zoos need to give their animals more room and provide them with better living conditions because they are used to the vast amount of territory they have in the wild, making even a larger cage at a zoo much too small to keep an animal that is used to roaming freely all day.

# data[].attributes.headline
Orca Whale in a Very Small Tank (Image #3)

# data[].attributes.subject
Orca Whale in a Very Small Tank (Image #3)

# data[].attributes.body
Even though the tank this whale is in is most likely temporary and it probably has a larger one where it spends the majority of its time, it is still much too small for an orca. This shows that aquariums and marine parks need to take into account the full needs of their aquatic life because even a larger tank is too small for a whale of any kind - they need the ocean, and putting a highly intelligent and socially complex animal in a small tank is imprisoning it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Elephant Swaying and Having Foot Injuries (Video #2)

# data[].attributes.subject
Elephant Swaying and Having Foot Injuries (Video #2)

# data[].attributes.body
The elephant in the video experiences boredom and psychological distress because it does not have enough space to move and roam like it's supposed to in the wild. This highlights that animals in zoos are mistreated and abused because animals like elephants obtain injuries from their enclosures and can get mental illnesses, which would not occur if they were left to be free in the wild.

# data[].attributes.headline
Zoos Mistreat Animals on a Regular Basis (Video #1)

# data[].attributes.subject
Zoos Mistreat Animals on a Regular Basis (Video #1)

# data[].attributes.body
It is far too common to mistreat animals in zoos due to carelessness and lack of regulations. This shows that zoos need to start treating their animals better because not treating them properly puts them at a faster rate of endangerment and extinction, and it gives animals in captivity much shorter of a lifetime than average.