Death of Knut the Polar bear re-opens zoo debate
25/03/2011 08:57:17
Zoos or not?
That depends on the zoo. There are many good zoos that do excellent conservation work, and there is a long list of species that would now be extinct were it not for their work. They also act as a fantastic educational resource, teaching generations about the fauna they protect.
However there are also disgraceful zoos and some animals that just should not be kept in captivity, especially whales and dolphins.
A well run responsible zoo is an invaluable resource for wildlife and education, but they must be run on sound conservation principles.
 |
Polar bears can be seen in the
in Canada and on
Spitzbergen. |
Wildlife in the wild?March 2011. The tragic and premature death of Knut, the polar bear cub born in Berlin Zoo, has reignited the vociferous debate over keeping animals in captivity. In the wild polar bears live to the age of thirty or more despite the hostile environment, whereas Knut was just over four years old - although the cause of his death has not yet been established.
Chris Breen, founder of Wildlife Worldwide, said: "This is a very sad story but it raises legitimate questions about the future of zoos. They have improved beyond all recognition from a few decades ago but Knut would almost certainly have lived a lot longer in the wild. The same can be said about whales being used to entertain crowds in US theme parks; their lives are cut desperately short and the only place for them is in the ocean.
"Zoos can play useful roles - breeding programmes for endangered animals for example - and not everyone is afforded the luxury of being able to travel vast distances to see them. But nothing matches the thrill of witnessing these beautiful creatures is in their natural habitat."
Where to see Polar bears in the wild
The small town of Churchill, Manitoba on Hudson's Bay in Canada is the polar bear capital of the world. Here, between mid-October and mid November, bears congregate along the shore, waiting for the temperature to drop. Once the sea freezes, they take to the ice floes to hunt seals. If it doesn't freeze, the bears are deprived of the opportunity to hunt - and go hungry.
More spectacularly, the Polar bears of the Svalbard Archipelago, some 500 miles north of Norway, are a magnificent place to see these majestic bears amongst the glaciers and fjords of the Arctic Circle.
Polar Bear watching in canada - discount Specialist tour operator Wildlife Worldwide offers opportunities to see polar bears from close to in a comfortable Tundra Buggy on its Classic Polar Bears small group trip. These purpose-built, heated vehicles with an elevated outdoor viewing platform allow you to spend an entire day out in the national park in complete safety with a knowledgeable naturalist guide. Prices start from £4235 per person for a seven day trip including flights, transfers, five nights' accommodation and most meals, with three days of bear viewing. Bookings made before 01 May 2011 on the following departures in 2011 qualify for a discount of £650 pp (subject to availability): 12-18 October, 19-25 October, 20-26 October. Trips can be purchased ‘land only' for those who would rather source their own flights. More details For further information call 0845 130 6982 or visit www.wildlifeworldwide.com | polar bear watching on spitzbergen The Svalbard archipelago is home to several hundred bears and the most effective way to unlock their accessibility is onboard a small ice rated vessel (usually Russian).
What really makes a difference for wildlife enthusiasts and photographers alike is the 24 hour daylight. Ice patterns vary enormously, the constant daylight does not. It is not uncommon to find oneself scouring the horizon for Ursus Maritimus at midnight. Mother's with cubs, bears feeding on sperm whale carcasses and digesting seals in front of sapphire blue glaciers amounted to a superb inventory of sightings. Wildlife Worldwide run several Spitsbergen cruises. Exodus run a series Polar bear watching cruises around the Svalbard Archipelago. |
Read the comments about this article and leave your own comment
Knut's mother would not have rejected him if they'd been in the wild, where they belong! Zoos are cruel, outmoded ways of just entertaining humans. It's about time we all realised that we can see animals in a better and more natural way either by observing them in their own habitat, or better still, in wildlife documentaries, the quality of which is so "real" now that it's almost like being alongside them. Isn't it better to know that we are not torturing animals by imprisoning them and forcing them to live unnatural lives just for our sakes?? As for the excuse of "conservation", if zoos really cared about conservation, they would only breed the animals which need it, not thousands of other animals which are just kept to make money and entertain the public - the money spent on the upkeep of the whole caboodle could be better spent where it is supposed to be spent - on real conservation!!
Posted by: alicia | 25 Mar 2011 19:56:14
"Knut would almost certainly have lived a lot longer in the wild" don't see how that could be possible since his mother rejected him
Posted by: Ryan | 25 Mar 2011 13:44:37