Variation in nature: its implications for zoo elephant management
Publication Type: |
Journal Article |
Year of Publication: |
2006 |
Authors: |
Michael Hutchins |
Publication/Journal: |
Zoo Biology |
Publisher: |
A Wiley Company, Inc., Wiley Subscription Services |
Keywords: |
animal care, animal welfare, captive management, elephants, flexibility, metrics, variation in nature, zoos |
ISBN: |
1098-2361 |
Abstract:
Abstract 10.1002/zoo.20087.abs Despite many advances in animal care and welfare over the past few decades, zoos have been criticized recently for the quality of their elephant management programs. More specifically, critics have argued that elephants live miserable lives in captivity and thus should not be kept in zoos. Poor health and reproductive success, they say, are the result of the combined impact of: a lack of exercise; exposure to cold temperatures and disease; and stress due to the use of “brutal” training techniques, chaining and inappropriate social environments. Everyone, including zoo professionals, seems to agree that improvements in zoo elephant management are necessary and appropriate. However, there is considerable disagreement on how to proceed and little information on which to base such decisions. One tactic that the critics have adopted in their efforts to promote change is their frequent reference to “nature” as a yardstick for gauging the adequacy of zoo animal management and care. An argument is made that direct zoo–wild comparisons are of questionable utility and may be invalid from a scientific perspective. Some critics talk about “nature” as if it represented a fixed set of rules by which captive managers must either abide by or risk diminishing the health and welfare of their charges. However, many aspects of elephant natural history vary greatly depending on prevailing environmental conditions and elephants may be much more flexible than many critics are giving them credit for. Thus, although zoo animal managers should look to nature for clues about how to best care for captive elephants, they should not feel constrained by them. This revelation is not intended as an excuse for poor elephant management or to support the status quo. On the contrary, a better approach is to develop realistic and biologically meaningful metrics that reflect the quality of elephant care and welfare and to use them to measure the success of evolving zoo elephant programs. Zoo Biol 25:161–171, 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.