The Guardian view on zoos: respect our animal relatives
|
Version 0 of 1. Gorillas are not just animals, Sir David Attenborough said this week, explaining: “They are related to us; they get stressed. A gorilla is not a fish.” Leaving aside the fact that fish can also get stressed and are probably also related to us, albeit more distantly, he surely has a point. Humans, at this advanced stage in their evolution, may like nothing better than to parade themselves on Strictly Come Dancing and The X Factor, but gorillas still value a bit of privacy and do not necessarily enjoy performing for visitors. That, some think, may have been a factor in the escape of a dominant male gorilla called Kumbuka from his enclosure at ZSL London Zoo. The attraction went into lockdown while the gorilla was located – he was in a secure keepers’ area – and tranquillised, although not before he had downed five litres of undiluted blackcurrant cordial. It does not appear to have done him any lasting harm, and the zoo was able to give assurances that the public were never in any danger from his adventure. But the incident has been a public relations disaster, particularly because the management initially failed to explain how the animal was able to escape; the answer, it emerges, was two unlocked doors. Some commenters on social media enjoyed the spectacle of human visitors, who had been advised to seek sanctuary in secure buildings at the site, being locked up while an incarcerated animal had its hour of relative freedom, a reaction that should surely worry the zoo authorities. Critics of zoos have been given a prime opportunity to rehearse their view that such institutions – a throwback to the 19th century, which had a taste for both scientific classification and freak shows – are outmoded. Pressure groups have had a field day, proving a lot nimbler with their PR than London Zoo itself. The president of the Born Free Foundation has argued that multiple incidents have shown that zoos simply cannot guarantee the safety of their visitors and their animals. The foundation, which wants to see zoos phased out, argues that the £5.3m spent on London Zoo’s Gorilla Kingdom would have been better devoted to conservation in the wild. That is a legitimate argument and one the zoo needs to address, not least as the gorilla expert Ian Redmond had previously argued that the enclosure was too exposed and afforded insufficient cover for animals that dislike close attention. Sir David suggested spyholes to allow the public to watch the gorillas without the creatures realising they were being observed, but he didn’t seem entirely convinced by his own idea. The onus is now on London Zoo to make the case for keeping alive its 170-year tradition of showing animals – especially large animals such as gorillas – to the public. There’s no doubt many younger children enjoy their outings. The zoo says the Gorilla Kingdom ensures unforgettable encounters with the apes. It will cite its educational work and argue that it is putting money into conservation of gorillas in the wild: protecting endangered species in zoos and in the wild are not mutually exclusive. Kumbuka has also fathered two offspring in his three years at the zoo. But in an age when virtual reality can replicate the African rainforest, and with sprawling conservation parks such as Whipsnade offering less inhibited environments than urban zoos, it may be time to rethink our Victorian heritage. |