March for Elephants may be primarily about the elephant, but we do not discriminate. We are dedicated to the lives and welfare of all animals and were particularly moved by the story of Marius, beautifully told by blogger, Lori Sirianni.
It's not every day that a giraffe makes international news. But Marius did. He was a young, healthy, captive-born reticulated giraffe at Denmark's Copenhagen Zoo, deemed "surplus" and scheduled for death on Sunday, February 9, because his genes were already well-represented in European zoo populations, and the zoo claimed his continued existence could cause inbreeding.
When news of his impending execution was learned at the 11th hour, animal rights advocates rallied to save him. Nearly 30,000 people signed a petition to the zoo, and swamped the zoo with emails begging for mercy to spare Marius' life. They pleaded for Marius to be transferred to one of the other zoos that had offered to take Marius, including Yorkshire Wildlife Park in the U.K., the Froso Zoo in Sweden, and a private buyer. Their pleas fell on deaf ears.
Sunday morning, the Copenhagen Zoo fed Marius a last meal of rye bread, then gave him a fatal shot to the head with a bolt gun. They didn't use a humane lethal injection so as not to contaminate his "meat." A large turnout of visitors showed up at the zoo with their young children to watch Marius being chopped into pieces and his limbs dragged away by zoo staffers. The lions had a good meal for Sunday dinner.
The killing of young, healthy Marius has ignited an international furor. The Copenhagen Zoo and its accrediting body, the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA), have endorsed Marius's killing and are both now fending off worldwide criticism. Thousands of people have commented on their social media pages with no forgiveness, calling out these institutions for an apparently brutal, callous act.
They reply that Marius's death was necessary to preserve the gene pool in European zoos. They conveniently omit any mention that Marius was an individual, not a "specimen", who was a living, breathing sentient creature with his own inherent interests independent of the zoo's, and independent of any human want or need. Marius's life surely mattered to Marius. Did that ever factor into their decision?
Marius lived only two short years on this earth. Had he been born in the wild, his lifespan could have been 25 years, living naturally in the glory of Africa instead of the cold confines of a concrete bin in Denmark. Zoo supporters correctly state that Marius could have been eaten by lions in the wild. But Marius wasn't born in the wild; he was intentionally bred as part of zoo breeding programs. Shouldn't birth and captivity in a zoo ensure that a young giraffe will not be eaten by lions?
Baby animals are big draws at zoos. The public responds to news of a baby giraffe, elephant, polar bear, or other charismatic animal and flocks to open their wallets for a gawk at the new baby. Make no mistake about it, babies are big business. When those babies start growing up, their usefulness runs out; they take up too much space, or they're inconvenient because they could potentially mate with one of their own family members. What's a zoo to do? Did the zoo think about that before the animals bred?
This begs for a serious, thoughtful examination of the role of zoos in today's world. Zoos' dual claims of "education" and "conservation" ring hollow when they deliberately kill an animal like Marius. Especially one who is young and healthy. Reticulated giraffes are not endangered - yet, they are on the short list as their natural habitats are destroyed and trophy hunters take more and more prizes home to the taxidermist to be stuffed and shown off. Grotesque, glassy-eyed remnants of the magnificent living animals they once were.
One could argue that Marius's execution - and death by a bolt gun to the head IS execution - was necessary to prevent inbreeding at the Copenhagen Zoo. But considering that other options such as castration, separation from females with fencing or stalls, or a transfer to another facility were all rejected, can the zoo be excused for killing Marius?
Are EAZA's allowances for the disposition of "surplus" or unwanted animals humane? Some zoo animals around the world were once commonly pawned off on unaccredited roadside zoos, circuses, and canned hunts. Today, the world is stunned at the death by bolt gun of a healthy young giraffe. Should zoo associations tighten their guidelines to restrict zoos from unethically ridding themselves of animals they don't want, like Marius? Are zoos prepared for the kind of public backlash and PR nightmare that the Copenhagen Zoo is facing?
The public is now wondering why zoos are indiscriminately, perhaps irresponsibly, breeding animals that they know will reflect a gene pool already "represented" in other zoos. From the outcry in the press and social media, people are appalled at the Copenhagen Zoo's actions. Perhaps the public should reflect on their own patronization of zoos, and choose to learn and teach their children about wild animals through books, documentaries, videos, photos, and if possible, by wildlife watching or photo safaris in these animals' natural ranges.
Yes, giraffes die in the wild. All animals do; it's nature at work. But while they live, it's a free and beautiful life as nature intended. When they die, it's by nature's design, not by the hand of a familiar, trusted man wielding a bolt gun because a zoo labels them "surplus". The Copenhagen Zoo decided that Marius's life didn't matter. Marius would beg to differ.
Written by Lori Sirianni
