NATURE versus NURTURE
For so long, this question has been pondered by man. In several spheres of life, we often wonder:
What brings out the best in a creature? Is it its natural genotype, phenotype and its natural environment? Or is it the social construct around it, to which it is gradually and perpetually subjected, with or without its consent? Of all the situations across which this enigma cuts, let us consider the Animals in Captivity.
The Debate between WILD FREEDOM and CAPTIVITY
For as long as we can remember, this heated debate has sparked off many contentious controversies between the protagonists and antagonists of animal captivity. Personally, the most intriguing part of this dispute is this: Both parties profess a great love for animals. Below are a few of the many reasons that both sides vehemently assert, as they defend their respective perspective in this highly sensitive matter of the Animal Kingdom.
The Protagonists
Many believe that wild animals should be ‘rescued from the wild’ and be given ‘a safe haven’ in steel cages and concrete walls. Part of their rational is below:
Wild animals are safer from each other, from man, and from predators when caged under captivity, than when left to roam by themselves in the jungle.
Scientists carrying out research on animals have easy access to wild animals in cages than those in the wild. Part of this intensive and extensive research on animals is used to study the genotypes and phenotypes of caged wild animals, their resilience and response to disease and intense medication, as well as to mimic the masterpieces of engineering that are evident in their bodies, especially when designing machines, such as the: Robotic arms designed by mimicking an Elephant’s trunk, Bio-inspired computers mimicking a Cat’s brain, and Bat-Sonar Navigation for the blind, designed by mimicking Bats.
Wild animals entertain people in circus shows by performing tricks under the supervision and instruction of their circus masters.
Wild animals that are caged in zoos can easily be visited, since zoos are in close proximity to many cities, without spending exorbitant amounts of money on travelling to far-away safaris.
In zoos, wild animals are well-fed, monitored and regularly treated by veterinary doctors, as opposed to when in the wild, where they have to survive in the complex eco-system.
In captivity, endangered species are kept under strict supervision and intensive care in order to breed more of their kinds and thus perpetuate their lineages.
The Antagonists
The antagonists aren’t making it any easier for their counterparts, unleashing an avalanche of criticism. These are a few of their reasons against animal captivity:
Animal Rights activists extrapolate man’s fear of being caged onto the animals. These caged animals have, on many occasions, expressed aggression when caged, by banging and scratching their cages. Upon release, they’ve been observed to run freely into the wild, with reduced aggression, and a general sense of relaxation and freedom, peculiar to that of humans who have been freed from captivity.
Animals, like humans, cherish and enjoy spending time with their families, bonding with parents and siblings, hunting for food, and for mates. It is inhumane to deprive anyone of that, even the animals. Consider, as an example, the love and affection enjoyed by certain birds that mate for life. These include the Scarlet Macaw, Mute Swan, Bald Eagles, Black Vultures, Laysan Albatross and the Whooping Crane. Protagonists shudder at the thought of separating the love birds by caging one of the spouses.
Animals in the wild learn to survive and thrive by working their way through the intricate eco-system, thus accentuating their hunting skills, strengthening their muscles, bones, teeth, and improving their agility, speed and awareness of their environment. For instance, the gorillas strengthen their muscles as they carry their weights up the trees in defiance of gravity, swinging from tree to tree, which is in stark contrast to caged ones. They also have a stronger immunity and a harder set of teeth, owing to the wild food that they eat, such as the hard bamboo, as opposed to those that are spoon-fed in cages.
Many, if not all caged animals, are exploited for money-making circus tricks, which they perform under duress, and an utter sense of monotony, and sometimes, after a spanking or whipping from their circus masters as they force them to pull off some amazing feat on stage. This is in sharp contrast to the freedom wild animals enjoy while roaming freely in the jungle.
Caged animals are weaker and more susceptible to diseases as compared to their wild counterparts. For example, some captive orcas have collapsed dorsal fins, which are extremely rare amongst wild orcas.
To a considerable extent, caged animals have been observed to have a shorter lifespan than those in the wild. For example, elephants in zoos have a much shorter lifespan than those in the wild.
Captive animals usually experience pain as they tread on hard concrete of tarmac, unlike the jungle-dwelling wild animals. As an example, bears, whose paws are meant for soft jungle ground, fell pain when walking on concrete floors for long.
Experts have observed that caged animals experience stress levels high enough to cause repetitive behavior, such as route-tracing and pacing and self-injury. Some have been noted to poke their eyes, or to scratch, bite and injure their arms and wrists.
Well, given the aforementioned rationales from both sides of this contentious coin, we arrive at the same enigma: Nature or Nature? Both? In my innocuous opinion, I believe that wild animals should be allowed to roam freely. In case of disease outbreaks, animal trafficking, and extremely endangered species, we should intervene, and as soon as their dire situations have been remedied, release them back into the wild, to enjoy the adventures of our beloved Mother Earth.
