I like to think of myself as an optimist – one who
sees the glass half full. I am happy with where I am and what I have (although
I wish I could do more for my children and grandchildren). But as a
conservationist, I can’t help but feel a little gloomy.
Human populations in sub-Saharan Africa are expected
to double in the next forty years while the killing of African wildlife for
ivory, horns, bush meat, and as a result of warfare continues to escalate in
spite of worldwide outrage. A fifth of the vast Amazon rainforest has been
destroyed in the last thirty years despite government crackdowns and in 2013
deforestation actually increased by almost one-third.
In Indonesia, nearly nine million acres of forest
have been lost to oil palm plantations in the last twenty years. The Orangutan
Land Trust's scientific advisory board estimates that some three thousand
orangutans are lost each year to habitat conversion and hunting. And if all
that is not bad enough, there is global climate change to worry about. Polar
bear habitat is literally melting before our eyes.
People who lobby for “animal rights” are also
lobbying for the repatriation of captive animals back to the wild. Repatriation
is a term that was bandied about in the first half of 2014 with regard to children
who were illegally pouring across the U. S. – Mexican border. The term
literally means to return someone to his or her own country. But repatriation,
in this case, was not a straightforward issue because these children were not
from our neighboring Mexico. They were from hundreds of miles away in Central
America, fleeing crime, gang violence, and grinding poverty in Guatemala,
Honduras, and El Salvador. They had no homes to which they could be humanely
returned.
If we are going to repatriate wild animals and move
them out of zoos, aquariums, and marine parks, to what wild will they be humanely
returned? Does anybody really think we can stem the tide of human population
growth and the resulting destruction of animal habitats in wild areas? We may
need to accept the fact that the people of Africa, Asia, and South America have
a right to expand just as we did in North America and Europe, and that global
climate change is going to continue into the foreseeable future. Tying the fate
of wild animals to the future of their natural habitat might be ensuring their extinction rather than
preventing it.
So here is a glass-half-full thought. Perhaps it is
time we recognized that zoos, marine parks, and yes even circuses may hold the
answer. It is these institutions that have developed the ability to live with
animals and it is to these environments that most wild animals have been able
to adapt. Facilities are getting better and more humane while enlightened and
loving caretakers learn new techniques to ensure that animal welfare is a top
priority. A large, diverse zoo habitat might be a perfectly good, permanent home
for some wild animals.
Instead of trying to repatriate all wild animals, we
need to find ways to allow some of them to live in our
midst – a kind of Amnesty for Animals Program. If we really want to stir up an
interesting partisan debate, maybe we could expand our already controversial
immigration reform policies to include wild animals from around the world. It
puts a whole new spin on the concept of illegal
aliens!
No comments:
Post a Comment