All weekend, media across the globe were abuzz after a four-year-old boy managed to get into the gorilla enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo, fall 15 feet to the ground below, and come in repeated close contact with a massive silverback gorilla named Harambe. The gorilla stood next to the boy while he cowered in the corner; the gorilla stood over him; the gorilla dragged him through the water. Harambe was shot and killed. The boy was rescued.
Let the questions flow; let the debate begin.
How did this "accident" happen? How did the boy get through the fence line? Was the gorilla protecting him? Was the gorilla poised to attack at any moment? Why wasn't the gorilla tranquilized? Was the gorilla exhibit secure? Is the public safe? And, importantly, how can we keep this from ever happening again?
While these questions are considered, we can be clear of one thing: the only fool-proof way to keep people safe from wild animals and prevent wild animals from being slaughtered after close contact with people is to stop putting them in close contact in the first place.
Gorillas belong in Uganda, Rwanda, and across the Congo Basin up to Nigeria. (And, for the record, lions belong in Kenya and across Africa, tigers belong in India down to Sumatra, and polar bears belong in the Arctic). If we keep wildlife in the wild and not in American urban jungles, there is a much better chance of kids and gorillas alike remaining safe.
Oh, what a joy killer I am. Taking away people's fun. A good day out for the family. Contributing to conservation. Educating children about imperiled animals.
Zoo apologists like Jack Hanna keep saying the same things. They say that zoos are safe; that accidents happen; that the decision to shoot the gorilla was the right one (just as Hanna said about a deadly incident at the San Francisco Zoo involving a tiger a decade ago). But, the point is that these situations should never arise in the first place. We should be guided by a sense of precaution, not risk.
Since the time when I graduated college, the Cincinnati Zoo has reportedly had a polar bear escape from her enclosure, a Bengal tiger maul a seven-year-old girl, and a zookeeper have her right arm chewed up to the elbow by a polar bear. This doesn't take into account the giraffes, lions, and other animals who will have died prematurely and unnaturally under the zoo's "care."
And, what of the prized gorilla in the American zoo? According to recent news reports, an employee of the Los Angeles Zoo fell into a gorilla enclosure, a baby gorilla was crushed to death by a hydraulic door at the San Francisco Zoo, an adult gorilla at the Buffalo Zoo escaped his cage and bit a female zookeeper before being tranquilized, a male silverback at the Lincoln Park Zoo bit a zoo worker, a western lowland gorilla escaped his enclosure at the Dallas Zoo... and on and on.
So, what does history show us? Quite simply, that 1) dangerous wild animals in zoos can escape or attack humans, and 2) that gorillas have historically been implicated in these unfortunate, frightening, and completely preventable events.
Worth it? Conservation? Education? Or, Russian roulette?
Gorillas should be protected in Africa, where they belong. Children can learn about gorillas (and tigers, lions, elephants, and polar bears) without ever seeing one up close--just as they learn and care about blue whales without ever experiencing one up close in captivity.
The lesson of Harambe is that having dangerous wild animals in American zoos is not worth the risk: the risk to humans and the risk to the animals themselves. The lesson of Harambe is that zoos, whether only licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture or also accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, cannot predict or prevent the possibility that animals will escape their compounds or that humans will enter them.
In a world where accidents happen, we should always minimize or eliminate risk. Here, the only way to really do so is to not have certain animals in cities in the first place.
It's time to press "pause" and re-evaluate. Should dangerous animals not be on display? Should exhibits be closed while a complete review of safety protocols is put in place? Should all emergency protocols at every zoo in the country be assessed?
If you play Russian roulette with wild animals in captivity, it's best to reduce the number of bullets in the chamber. I dare say, however, that the lesson of Harambe is that it's best not to play at all.
Keep Wildlife in the Wild,
Adam