We went to Washington Zoo last month, and I’d like to point out a few observations/thoughts.
Extinction: Who Cares?
Recently a “lost world” was discovered containing creatures we either never though existed, or believed had become extinct. But why isn’t the delight that this has created, on a similar level to the sadness attached to threatened species that become extinct? Why is loosing something we knew about, more important that gaining something we didn’t know about? There must be many species that have become extinct despite us never knowing they existed, so why become so obsessed by extinction? The underlying emotion seems to be a fear of knowing that something existed once, but can never exist again. Despite scientific progress that might make it possible, this emotion is merely nostalgia. Much of our past can’t be repeated, so get over it…
For example, we learnt that the Cheetahs are threatened by extinction and one of the chief reasons is that their DNA isn’t conducive to their natural habitat. I watched them stroll around their enclosure as if they were striking miners – more mobile and exquisite, yet equally ill equipped for market conditions. As long as the reasons aren’t man made, I see no ethical point in interfering.
The Zoo: “You Should Care! They can help you”
We saw a species of frog that contained a type of saliva that possessed a rare antibiotic. The message was clear – if we allow animals to become extinct, who knows what future medicinal discoveries we’ll lose? This seems a flawed take on uncertainty on two counts. Firstly, if future “accidental” discoveries are uncertain, then surely so are future discoveries that are based on known methods. But the known methods also produce some medicinal gains for definite. Whilst it’s true that we may find a cure for cancer by hoarding VHS recorders, there’s no reason that it’s more a more likely strategy then focusing on where gains have already been made. Don’t play on the unknown. But secondly, even if there’s vast possible gains from keeping threatened species alive, surely profit-seeking firms would find it worthwhile to invest in them, using that greatest uncertainty-reducing institution of them all: the stock exchange. I’m sorry, but I just don’t believe a zoo that claims pharmaceutical firms would ignore potential profits – at least, it seems more likely that they’re just trying to justify their jobs.
The Zoo: “You Should Care! Otherwise you’re inhumane”
I don’t know about you, but I do not like snakes, lizards, and other reptiles. Maybe it’s from when an adder bit my friend, or maybe it was being forced to read DH Lawrence, but I just don’t like them – they scare me. According to the National Zoo, I should be ashamed of such an irrational phobia, and they tried two methods to convince me into liking snakes.
Method 1: The illogical nonsense
On the entrance to the reptile house you’re faced with an ingenious rotating cylinder, split into three segments. The purpose was to show how if you swap any section of a snake’s body with a corresponding section of any other type of animal, it’d be less scary. Zoo: If a snake had the head of a mouse, you wouldn’t be scared of it Zoo: If it had fur, you wouldn’t be so scared of it Zoo: If it purred… Etc….
AJE: Yes, but then IT WOULDN’T BE A BLOODY SNAKE WOULD IT!!
It’s like the defence lawyer for a violent, murdering, rapist saying: “if he hadn’t committed the murder, and if he didn’t have the IQ of a child, and if he didn’t eat his own faeces… then you wouldn’t convict him would you? It’s true – if a snake looked like a cute bunny, I wouldn’t be scared. If it weren’t “a snake” then I wouldn’t find it ugly. But it is, and that’s why I do.
Method 2: Offend all Christians
In case the tactic of trying to question whether it’s you who has the problem and not the snake doesn’t work, the zoo try a second strategy by asking the question Maybe you don’t like snakes because of stories you’ve been told? There follows two large pictures: one a typical scene from the Garden of Eden, the second an exact replica save for the absence of the snake, and in it’s place… a squirrel. The Zoo is basically saying, “Look, the only reason you’re scared of snakes is because the Bible says so, but the Bible could just as easily have picked a squirrel so why not lay off the snake?”
I’m not a Christian, but if I were I’d be mightily offended – the serpent is the Devil! The zoo is belittling the religious beliefs of the Christian church by saying that The Bible is not a good enough reason to dislike serpents, and you should just forget that it represents the Devil.
The Zoo: “But we can play the cute card too”
So after making us all feel guilty about judging animals on appearance, guess where all the donation boxes have been placed? Oh yes, the zoo may be disgusted at those rational and/or Christian visitors who don’t like ugly creatures, but they’re more than happy to play up to that by rattling the collection tin by every cute animal they possess. The baby Panda is born so flood the gift shops, and start selling tickets.
Maybe my feelings on animals stems back to Beatrix Potter, and a (what I believe is a very English) tradition of associating animals with children. Give them human names, dress them up, and make them talk! It’s quant and fun but it’s wrong. Sometimes you have to take out a spade, and perform a deed you’d never do on your own child. They are, after all, just animals.
The Zoo: “What am I???”
I enjoy learning, and I like animals, and so on the surface you’d expect I enjoy trips to the zoo. But zoos aren’t just education centres - they are also conservation lobbyists. Their profession is to fundraise and to rent-seek, and convince us (rightly or wrongly) that they deserve our attention and charity. Unfortunately I’m too suspicious to trust someone that wants my mind and my money, especially when their incentives are aligned to my information, rather than my understanding.
I’m not going to trust someone who works for a Tarmac firm to educate me on “the need for more roads”, and so I’m suspicious of the capacity of zoos to act as genuine education centres. Hopefully, I can express this suspicion in a way such that other zoos – those that genuinely want to educate – can prosper.
The Washington National Zoo, whilst pleasing to visit and a nice day out, is a rather pathetic plea based on soft emotion and illogical nonsense. I’m sorry, but they haven’t made me care anymore than I already did.
Recent Comments