Animal Sanctuaries and zoos may seem similar at a glance, but they can often be vastly different, especially for the animals who inhabit them.

Zoos provide audiences with exposure to wild animals that they might not otherwise have access to. Undeniably, these experiences are valuable for sparking interest in wildlife and for giving visitors a sense of their beauty. However, these experiences do not always encourage authentic understanding of what each animal’s natural behavior should be.

For example, zoos have a long history of not providing animals with the quality of life they deserve; due to their focus on tourism and accommodating human visitor expectations. Thankfully, there is a more ethical, species focused, and educational alternative: animal sanctuaries.

Firstly, it is important to understand what an animal sanctuary is and how it differs from a zoo. Animal sanctuaries exist to provide a safe home to animals who are in need of rehabilitation or to provide permanent habitats for those unable to be reintroduced to the wild. Unlike many zoos, animal sanctuaries do not buy, breed, sell, or trade animals, but rather exist solely to care for the species who inhabit them. This is in contrast to zoos, which primarily exist to generate revenue from visitors who come to see their animals.

Now, it is important to note that not all zoos are selfish facilities that operate without consideration for the animals. Many indeed use funds generated by tourism for greater conservation purposes and are aiding in the valuable research necessary to do so. When proper enrichment practices are a focus of zoos, there is an increased opportunity for impactful public exposure towards understanding animal behavior.

However, the very nature of zoos leaves room for a potential conflict of interest when balancing what is “exciting” for a visitor to see and what habitats and behaviors are most natural for the animals to exhibit. In addition, zoos cannot fully exist without the money they make from visitors. So, when it comes down to it, sometimes the unfortunate truth is that the wellness of the animals is compromised in an effort to ensure continued public engagement and entertainment.

Contrarily, animal sanctuaries exist for the sole purpose of caring for their injured, displaced, or rescued animals. The operations at animal sanctuaries are much more likely to revolve around the well-being, healing, or natural behaviors of the animals. If there is a decision to be made between the visiting experience of guests, or the quality of living for their wildlife, true GFAS accredited sanctuaries will prioritize the later.

Not only does this benefit the animals, but such decisions allow visitors an increased likelihood of experiencing the heart of each animal – not just the aesthetics. Now, as with zoos, this truly depends on the specific sanctuary being discussed. It is not entirely fair to generalize zoos or sanctuaries into either positive or negative lights, as a title is not always representative of what goes on behind the scenes.

Realizing this, next time you set out to visit a zoo or a sanctuary, check out their website first to see if either is AZA or GFAS accredited. At a minimum, these accreditations will encourage a higher standard of care and staff awareness for the needs of animals at both. Truly, it is up to you and I to consider that all animals in captivity will experience some degree of unnatural stress induced behavior. Similarly, we hold the purchasing power when visiting zoos and/or sanctuaries – to determine which setting we prefer to view animals within; a more natural and holistic habitat, or one of closer confinement focused solely on human viewing purposes.

Image Credit: Thinkstock