WP,pg1: 5 Animal Deaths Renew Criticism of Care at (D.C. National) Zoo

[DeepModem Mom]

5 Animal Deaths Renew Criticism of Care at Zoo
Staff Disputes Outside Experts' Opinions

By Karlyn Barker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 29, 2005; A01


Staff members at the National Zoo fretted early last year over Kisangali, a female lion who was sick for weeks. She was lethargic and had bouts of vomiting and frequent thirst. Having ruled out digestive and kidney problems, a zoo veterinarian wrote in case notes that the troubles might be psychological.

Three weeks later, in February 2004, a raging infection in Kisangali's reproductive tract ruptured and spilled gallons of pus into her abdomen. Despite surgery, she died.

Veterinarians not affiliated with the zoo, who reviewed records at the request of The Washington Post, say the lion was showing classic symptoms of pyometra, a uterine infection. They maintained that the zoo, which is part of the Smithsonian Institution, missed an obvious diagnosis and failed to take surgical action early enough to save the 13-year-old animal....

***

The case is one of five deaths between December 2003 and December 2004 that raise new concerns about animal care at the National Zoo, according to three veterinarians and two other animal experts. A fourth veterinarian called the deaths "regrettable" but said he did not believe they reflected the overall care of animals at the zoo. The outside experts reviewed records, including medical notes and pathology reports, that the zoo provided to The Post....

***

Zoo veterinarians said they failed to diagnose the lion's uterine infection but gave good care to the four other animals. They questioned the ability of outsiders to second-guess them....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/28/AR2005062801674_pf.html

[shraby]

1. The Chicago zoo is also under fire for

animals dying. Don't have a link.

[DeepModem Mom]

3. I've posted two stories re. the Chicago Zoo...

but don't have links either.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

2. The zoo is underfunded

just like the rest of the Smithsonian. Thank the rethugs for that, too. :(

[the other one]

4. Zoos are immoral and should be banned.

Live-animal museums.

[blindpig]

5. much more than that

Once upon a time you would have been correct and sadly some places are still like that but don't paint with such a broad brush. Zoos have a definite place in the struggle to preserve biodiversity:

Education. Zoos allow people to experience animals up close and personal. Nothing like the real thing, sight and smell, to focus the attention of the public and encourage the public empathy needed to continue the struggle for conservation. Consider the zoo animals as ambassadors. Moving pictures on the idiot box are certainly nice but lack the visceral presence.

Captive breeding. That this option must be resorted to is an indictment of how badly we've managed this planet. Failures have exceeded successes but those successes, like the California Condor, have been gratifying. Needless to say, it's hard work, and grossly underfunded. Unfortunately in some cases in situ management is no longer possible. The hope that one day we'll wise up and be able to reintroduce species to their native range may be tenuous but it's all we got.

It is so much a matter of funding. Zoo staffs are much more professional and educated than when I was an animal keeper. They just need the tools to do the job. Zoos are a public good that require increased support.

I strongly suggest that if you ever get a chance to visit the Sonoran Desert Museum near Tucson, it is what a zoo should be IMHO.

[The Stranger]

6. The point is to preserve species that are being systematically eliminated.

You get the point. If some zoos are not typical "zoos," then come up with a different name.