Zoocheck Commentary on Calgary Zoo Email

The email below was sent by Laurie Heron, Corporate Affairs Coordinator, Calgary Zoo, on April 13, 2006, to a private citizen who wrote to Calgary Zoo director Alex Graham opposing the zoo's proposed Arctic Shores exhibit and expressing concern about the management of the zoo's elephants.

The entire text of the zoo's email and Zoocheck's commentary, inserted into the body of the email (in red text), follows.

Calgary Zoo: Thank you for your letter of April 10th. Your letter to Mr. Graham has been referred to me for response. We appreciate the time you have taken to write to us and assure you that your opinion is important to us.

As a Passport member, you will know that the Calgary Zoo has undergone many changes over the past twenty years. The exhibit space for our collection is constantly expanding and improving and it is our goal to provide only the best care for all of the animals for which we have stewardship. With the knowledge, expertise and work of a growing number of professional animal keepers, scientists and researchers, and improvements in exhibit design and construction, animals are now successfully exhibited in many of the best accredited facilities around the world, including the Calgary Zoo.

Perhaps you have followed recent news reports and are aware that climate change and global warming are creating conditions where many species in the north could be at risk of extinction. Your particular concern about bringing back polar bears to the Calgary Zoo is noted, but it should be kept in mind that polar bears are facing a loss of their sea ice habitat - essential for them to access their chief source of food. As the sea ice recedes and diminishes, researchers have documented that bears in the wild have become thinner, birth rates have declined and death rates have increased among young bears. According to the World Conservation Union, polar bears are listed as a near threatened species that is likely to be classified as threatened in the near future. It is believed polar bears could be extinct within 25 to 40 years if we do not do something now. In recognition of the serious threat to the north, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (all professional accredited institutions) is moving as quickly as possible to establish and maintain Species Survival Programs (SSPs) for many animal species of the north.

Zoocheck: The threat that global warming poses to polar bears and other arctic species is substantial and worsening. However, the dilemma that animals of the north face will not be solved by captive breeding. In fact, captive breeding of polar bears has little, if any, conservation value whatsoever, and it does nothing to address the root cause of polar bear problems.

There are currently about 1,000 polar bears held captive in zoos around the world. Most of them are held in hard, biologically deficient exhibits that are a key factor in their physical and mental deterioration. A wide range of problems, including aberrant behaviours like repetitive pacing and swimming, poor cardiovascular health and lack of muscle mass, are more or less ubiquitous in captive polar bears. A significant number of captive polar bears are held in temperate and tropical zoos where they experience chronic heat stress, climate induced hair loss and other conditions. The world population of captive polar bears is unhealthy and compromised.

If zoos somehow manage to maintain a genetically viable captive population of polar bears until suitable wild environments become available for repopulation, possibly decades or centuries from now, there is little reason to believe that surplus animals would ever be physically or behaviourally capable of surviving upon release, assuming that there is even a wild for them to be released to at that time.

The Calgary Zoo puts forward their participation in Species Survival Plans (SSPs) as indicative of their strong pro-conservation bias, but what most people don't realize is that SSPs weren't originally created to put animals back into the wild. In fact, most SSPs don't actually have any way of returning surplus animals to the wild or any plan to do so. SSPs were developed to create self-sustaining captive populations of particular animals for zoos. The polar bear SSP has no way of ever releasing polar bears back into the wild.

The melting of arctic ice sheets will continue and accelerate in the years to come. At present, there is little hope that current trends will stabilize or be reversed in this century, unless drastic measures are taken to reduce and eliminate carbon dioxide emissions. The possibility of that happening seems remote at best. Even if current climate trends can be reversed, it could be hundreds or thousands of years before ice has reformed to the extent that it is again useful to polar bears.

Keeping and breeding polar bears in captivity may actually make things worse by creating a sense of complacency in the public that as long as we have polar bears in zoos, then the species is safe and we don't need to worry.

If the Calgary Zoo were truly interested in saving polar bears and the arctic, they wouldn't be planning to spend tens of millions of dollars to keep a few physically and psychologically diminished animals in Calgary, an effort that does nothing to solve the problems faced by arctic wildlife. The Calgary Zoo should be exploring alternative, humane, modern strategies of education and conservation that focus attention on real problems and workable solutions, such as an environmental information center with satellite link-ups to animals in the wild and linkages to field conservation initiatives that visitors can support.

Calgary Zoo: Although advanced when built over thirty years ago, we are very aware of the inadequacy of the former polar bear exhibit and that is one of the reasons it was torn down. Many specialists and researchers now understand what is required to provide polar bears with a healthy captive environment and we have consulted with and included their recommendations in the design for Arctic Shores. The natural and complex environment planned for the polar bears that will inhabit Arctic Shores, more than ten times larger than the old polar bear exhibit, will provide them with mental and physical stimulation, areas to climb, dig, swim and wander. There are, in fact, plans for a large cold den with viewing access and two pool areas for the bears.

Zoocheck: Most new polar bear exhibits are variations of old design styles and incorporate their many flaws. Even the most expensive, modern polar bear exhibits are only marginally better than their 19th century predecessors. Most of them are still remarkably small, especially when compared to what wild polar bears would experience, and they fail completely to prevent the development of abnormal stereotypic behaviours, such as repetitive pacing and swimming. Mock-ups of the proposed Calgary Zoo exhibit show an environment not substantially different from other unsuccessful polar bear exhibits in other zoos.

If you think about the natural lifestyles of wild polar bears, it isn't difficult to see why zoo environments, such as the one proposed by the Calgary Zoo, are so inadequate. Polar bears are the widest ranging terrestrial mammals on earth, with home ranges from 20,000 - 300,000 square km. They can walk or swim 90 km in a single day, a distance far greater than the distance from one end of the City of Calgary to the other. It's hard to imagine such a wide-ranging animal, compressed into such a tiny space in the Calgary Zoo, doing well, even if the zoo claims they now know how to keep polar bears, will keep them engaged and will provide them with an opportunity to "wander." I'm sure this is probably what they said when they opened their old exhibit years ago, the one that proved to be so inadequate and to cause so much suffering.

Calgary Zoo: The ten-million litre saltwater aquarium, approaching the size of the playing field at McMahon Stadium, will be among the largest and most complex of its kind in the world. It has been designed to accommodate marine mammals, including cetaceans, although plans to add these species will be dependent on many factors.

Zoocheck: Ten million litres sounds like a big number, but compared to the almost limitless expanse of the ocean, comprised of hundreds of trillions of litres, it isn't even a drop in the bucket. Beluga whales can swim thousands of kilometers in just a few weeks time and they can dive thousands of feet below the ocean surface. Belugas in Canadian waters regularly swim into Russian territory and back again. They travel vast distances and sometimes congregate in the thousands. While there are some animals that can be housed and cared for in captivity in a way that satisfies most of their biological and behavioural needs, beluga whales are not one of them.

The Calgary Zoo claims that they haven't made any decisions about what will go into their proposed display, specifically designed for marine mammals. That doesn't make any sense. Who on earth plans to construct an enormously expensive aquarium, potentially costing tens of millions of dollars, to house a particular kind of animal if they weren't firmly committed to acquiring those animals?

Calgary Zoo: You have mentioned the pollution that has affected belugas in the St. Lawrence and so you may also be aware that three of seven populations of beluga whales in Canada alone, including those at Southeast Baffin Island-Cumberland Sound, Ungava Bay and the St. Lawrence River, are considered endangered. These magnificent animals, both polar bears and beluga, are integral to Arctic life and yet are under severe threat. They deserve our research and conservation efforts. We have no plans to remove marine mammals that are self-sufficient in the wild, but will look for opportunities to assist other institutions in providing homes for captive-born, rescued, stranded or orphaned animals, and others that may need our help to survive.

Zoocheck: While the zoo claims that they will not remove marine mammals that are "self-sufficient in the wild" this seems disingenuous when the zoo has already tried to acquire wild narwhals and musk ox from the Territory of Nunavut. Certainly the animals that they wanted to acquire from the wild were self-sufficient.

Zoos and aquariums around the world often characterize their animal acquisitions as rescues, presumably to make their actions more palatable to members of the public. These kinds of acquisitions may involve the purchase of animals from established hunts, like the Japanese dolphin drive fisheries, or extending an offer to government agences to take "orphaned" animals off their hands. But zoos never mention that their actions may be helping to keep the wild animal trade alive by creating an incentive for people to obtain more animals from the wild.

Many so-called rescues by zoos involve the acquisition of orphaned animals, such as polar bear and grizzly bear cubs. Here in Canada, zoos have taken in bears that were good candidates for rehabilitation and release, relegating them to a life in captivity, instead of providing them with a chance at a natural life in the wild. Such endeavors would certainly fit into zoos' educational and conservation mandates, and actually contribute to species survival and humane treatment of animals.

Some zoos and aquariums acquire animals from other institutions that have obtained them directly from the wild or from brokers who work with collectors who capture animals on their behalf. When animals are transferred from these institutions, spaces are opened up allowing additional animals to be captured from the wild to fill them.

The Calgary Zoo insists that their plans are not completely set. Considering that they are moving forward with their plans, that seems to be a ludicrous claim.

Calgary Zoo: We will join with the AZA Population Management and Taxon Advisory Group (TAG) for marine mammals and plan to work closely with the Alliance for Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums - organizations focused on conservation, best breeding practices and other efforts to save threatened species.

Zoocheck: The Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums (AMMPA) is made up of aquariums, zoos and other facilities that keep whales and dolphins for display, performances, interactive programs, such as swim-with-the-dolphin sessions, and research. Animal welfare and wildlife conservation groups around the world have campaigned against the keeping of whales and dolphins by many of these facilities because they are exploitive, cruel, and have little education or conservation value.

Calgary Zoo: You may not be aware that the Calgary Zoo already participates in 23 SSPs for endangered animals and that we have a Conservation Centre south of the City of Calgary where we breed endangered species such as Canada's most endangered animals - the Vancouver Island marmot, whooping cranes, wild Asian horses (the Przewalski horse) and have successfully participated in programs to introduce them back into the wild.

Zoocheck: Most Species Survival Plans (SSPs) have no mechanism for putting animals back into the wild. In fact, although zoos would like you to believe that that is what they are for, they are not. The purpose of most SSP programs is to maintain a genetically viable captive population of an animal species in captivity for a specific period of time. In theory, any surplus animals produced by that captive population in the future could potentially be released back into the wild, but that has rarely happened. In fact, zoos the world over highlight, ad naseum, the remarkably few releases the industry has been able to accomplish.

The reality is that many animals are physically and behaviourally altered by life in captivity, so they could not survive if released. The process of captive breeding is based on selection of pairs by humans in committee, not by the process that prevails in the wild - natural selection - which in turn allows the species to adapt to changing conditions. Even the best release programs in the world, few of them run by zoos, face enormous obstacles when releasing captive-bred animals into the wild. The idea that zoos will breed polar bears and other northern animals and then repopulate the wild is a misguided, impossible dream.

Calgary Zoo: Our family of Asian elephants, now fully mature, originally included three who came to Calgary from Sri Lanka as babies after their mothers had been killed and they were found stranded and alone in a pit - where they would have died. Bandara and Kamala successfully produced two babies and their male calf Chanda has matured and gone on to sire additional young in other parts of the world. We continue to be hopeful that Maharani, their daughter, and Ganesha "Spike" will again produce offspring that will contribute to the genetic pool of this species in peril. This is just one example of the work in which we have been engaged as a major conservation, education and research facility for many years. Research and planning is still proceeding for Arctic Shores, but we want to assure you that it is our intention to set a new world standard with this exhibit and contribute to conservation, research, and education in relation to our amazing Arctic.

Zoocheck: The keeping and breeding of elephants in zoos has become increasingly controversial. While zoos claim they maintain elephants for conservation purposes, there have little to show for their efforts. In fact, elephant breeding in North American zoos has been an unmitigated failure, and the captive elephant population drops annually. Not surprisingly, the majority of elephant conservation organizations dismiss captive breeding of elephants as a useful conservation tool.

While the threats facing wild elephants in Africa and Asia are numerous and serious, breeding captive elephants does nothing to address those threats. Better support for field conservation initiatives involving habitat protection, prevention of poaching and resolving human-elephant conflicts will help far more than having a small population of elephants in foreign zoos, including the Calgary Zoo.

If you compare the cost of maintaining elephants in captivity versus protecting them in the wild, the choice about what to do becomes clear. The new Calgary Zoo exhibit is reportedly going to cost $7 million or more. The exhibit will be small, relatively barren and house a very small number of animals. And once it's built, it will require hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to keep it running.

Contrast that with the $1 million annual budget of the entire Kenya Wildlife Service, an agency that protects huge areas of Kenya that are home to thousands of individual elephants (and their numbers are increasing), as well as rhinos, ungulates, big cats and hundreds of other species.

Many zoos, including the Calgary Zoo, claim that it is important to educate the public about elephants in order to save them. But they don't explain how seeing a few bored, behaviourally abnormal elephants in captivity will actually help any elephants at all.

Calgary Zoo: We are sorry that your experience with our wonderful elephant family was not entirely pleasant. You may not be aware of how potentially dangerous elephants are, particularly if uncontrolled. Sometimes the discipline used may appear harsh to those who are unfamiliar with training an animal that weighs approximately 3000 kilograms (males weigh almost twice as much). I want to assure you that our elephant keepers are extremely well-trained, experienced and dedicated men, in fact our senior elephant keeper has been with Kamala and Swarna since they arrived at the Calgary Zoo thirty years ago. Our keepers communicate with other elephant keepers and various world-wide organizations in regard to best practices for training and enrichment with elephants to ensure the well-being of our elephant family. Keepers do not use "billy clubs, "but do use training hooks or ankhs. Their understanding of the subtleties of elephant behaviour and the potential danger both to themselves and others if these intelligent animals are not in control is the reason for the reinforced training. What might seem to be a harmless action on the part of the elephant to the inexperienced observer can in fact indicate subtle aggression and "testing of limits." For example, an elephant lifting its trunk can be a sign of aggression in certain situations. Just as with children, there must be consistency when dealing with elephants. Whether the public is in direct contact or on the other side of the barriers, the keepers cannot handle it differently. I assure you that these same keepers also reward and show great affection to the elephants, giving them hugs, pats and kisses also when appropriate.

We value your membership and would welcome the opportunity to have you come to the Zoo and view the model and conceptual plans for Arctic Shores. If you are willing, we could also try to arrange a time for you to have another opportunity to speak to one of the elephant keepers who may be able to help you understand the family dynamics and complexities that exist in the elephant world. Please call me to arrange a visit.

Again, we thank you for taking the time to write to us and ask for your patience and trust that we will do everything we can to make all the elements of Project Discovery a source of pride for Calgarians.

Laurie Heron
Corporate Affairs Coordinator
The Calgary Zoo