| Re: "Zoo plan meets with opposition," by Amy Steele, News, April 13 - 19, 2006.
Alex Graham, president and CEO of the Calgary Zoo, has yet to offer up studies that prove his claims that the zoo has learned from past mistakes regarding the care and handling of the animals within its fences, specifically as this pertains to the plan of re-introducing polar bears. Further, he is making plans to introduce beluga whales, when virtually all non-zoo funded studies show that captive whales and large marine mammals suffer greatly in captivity and are prone to a series of ailments, including mental.
Mr. Graham made a ridiculous claim, first saying that of the people who go to the zoo, 95 per cent of them support the plan to bring whales and polar bears to Calgary. Then from that statistic, drew the bizarre conclusion that only five per cent of the general population opposes this plan, implying that everyone goes to the zoo. Last time I read a stat on the zoo's aim to bring polar bears back, roughly 80 per cent of those asked whether they supported the plan responded with a definite "no."
The facts are thus:
1. Studies conducted at Oxford University have shown – again – that bears (in particular, polar bears) suffer greatly from captivity. They do not and seemingly cannot acclimatize to a life that creates, in the vast majority of cases, stereotypic behaviour that, in the case of Calgary's last attempt at housing them, necessitated that they be placed on Prozac.
2. Likewise with a study done by Dr. Naomi Rose, "Captive Cetaceans: The Science Behind The Ethics," as presented at a conference in Sweden on March 29, 2004, where the conclusions seem to indicate that captive cetaceans may suffer from persistent low-level stress due to inter alia, confinement, artificial social groupings, susceptibility to infection, disease and immunosuppression as a result of the stress. Her final summation is: "...the research benefits are limited and the education benefits have not been systematically evaluated. In short, the preponderance of hard evidence should lead us to the conclusion that captivity and its related practices are ethically and scientifically unjustified."
Clearly, there is no science that defends the idea of bringing these animals to the Calgary Zoo. This is not misinformation – it is scientific research conducted outside the influence of zoological parks.
That Peter Karsten, the previous director of Calgary Zoo, opposes this plan also speaks to the fact that it has no merit, outside of being simply a means to bring more tourists to the zoo. That would certainly explain the close relationship that has been established between San Diego's Sea World, an amusement park not unlike DisneyWorld, and the zoo people here.
It may interest people to know that, in 50 years, at least 25 cetaceans have died at the Vancouver Aquarium, including dolphins, narwhals, belugas and orcas.
Finally, it doesn't matter that these animals may come from other sites of captivity – the reality is this still contributes to wild whales and polar bears being captured in places where there is no uproar over such an ethically unconscionable decision.
People need to tell their aldermen to not allow this morally repugnant decision/plan to stand. There are many ways the money earmarked for the zoo can be better utilized, including promoting legitimate conservation expeditions into the north, better facilities for the current zoo population, virtual reality exhibits and more.
A zoo of tomorrow will be one that promotes the idea of respecting nature's denizens, the earth's environments and conservation – not being an entertainment venue to the easily amused.
Michael Alvarez-Toye, Calgary Animal Rights Coalition
|
Copyright ©2006 FFWD. All rights reserved.