Writer
@benwallacewells
steals a bit of my thunder in his recent article The Case for the End of the
Modern Zoo ( http://t.co/XzoTpN42pR ). One of the central
questions of my next book and of the project I have proposed to the folks at
National Geographic for their Expedition Granted program (http://bit.ly/1jITOd1 ) asks some fundamental questions about the future
of zoos, aquariums, and marine parks.
Now, I don’t for one moment believe we need to do
away with them. But I do suspect that zoos, aquariums, and marine parks may be
at a cross-roads and may need to make some fundamental changes in the way they
do business. Perhaps they will need to reconsider how (and whether) they keep
certain animals – like killer whales, elephants, polar bears, and apes. Perhaps
it is time for a rational discussion that explores what is truly
best for the animals, asking who is right – the zoos and marine parks who want
to keep doing business as usual, or the people who are lining up to shut them
down altogether? The
answer, I suspect, lies somewhere in between as Wells suggests: “In 25 years, there will likely still be some
way for Americans to see exotic animals. But I will be pretty surprised if
those places have cages, mirrors, smoke machines, and conference-room tanks for
12,000-pound whales. There may be nature preserves. But it seems to me that
we're pretty rapidly reaching the end of the era of the modern urban zoo.” I
wonder if he will be proven correct?
No comments:
Post a Comment