Published on montreal.ctvnews.ca the 30.03.2022.
Under the illustrious name Jane Goodall Act, nature and species conservation work for many species will be made impossible in Canada.
Note: The bill is creating a deep split within the Canadian Zoo Association, which the video shows very well: zoological institutions like Granby Zoo want to phase out their elephant husbandry anyway, so the bill does not bother them. They support it without thinking about other zoos, like Parc Safari, that still wants to use its animals for conservation. The bill provides selfish zoos, where the husbandry of apes, elephants, and other animals has no future anyway, with a welcome excuse to end their husbandries. They do not think of their duty towards conservation or anything other than their own plans.
This foolishness already became apparent in regard to whales. Many zoological institutions in Canada think of themselves above all. If it does not concern them, they will ignore such bills and then be surprised if they find themselves alone when it does affect them. Granby Zoo’s statement confirms this and shows how the zoo is looking out for itself above all: once it is done caring for the old animal, it will get rid of the other two. In line with the motto: after me, the deluge. This has nothing to do with responsible animal management seeing that a constant breeding stop for elephants results in animal cruelty, and it is up to Granby Zoo to ensure that the animals are spared this, even if the zoo does decide to end its husbandry.
It would appear that some of the zoo managers in Canada have sacrificed their mission on the shrine of opportunism and selfishness. Of all those interviewed in this unfortunately not very objective post, with a strong bias towards an uncritical treatment of the animal rights industry, only Jean-Pierre Ranger from Parc Safari seems to take his job seriously, as he criticises that the bill goes too far in the last of the videos. He explains the basics of ex situ management, which many Canadian zoo owners do not seem to understand or else they would not support this bill. The shameful acts in Canada, where zoo managers are supporting this bill, are likely the largest dagger planted by Canadian zoos in the back of conservation. However, there is a positive side to this too: it causes many masks to fall and makes it easier to differentiate between Canadian zoos: between those that take their conservation mission seriously and those that do not.
It also shows what the bill’s name-giver stands for, who supports rendering comprehensive conservation – for the great apes she supposedly loves so much, amongst others – impossible in Canada. It seems there is not much left of the icon of primate conservation. But we will discuss this separately.