REPORT ON SINGAPORE ZOO

by Shubhobroto Ghosh

As a participant as the Project Coordinator Of The Indian Zoo Inquiry Project Of Zoocheck Canada and Compassionate Crusaders Trust at the Asia For Animals Conference in Singapore organized by ACRES (Animal Concerns and Research Society, I had the opportunity to pay two visits to the Singapore Zoo on 21st June and 25th June, 2005. The following is a summary of my observations made  whilst walking through the zoo. It was not possible to take detailed notes in the format of the Indian Zoo Inquiry due to time constraints so the report follows an anecdotal format.

The entrance of Singapore Zoo announces its very brazen commercial intent.  The numerous stalls and the dancers in their African costumes merrymaking with ethnic music with their exotic appeal welcome visitors.  Strangely however, as I noted, guidebooks are not for sale to the general public. They are apparently only sold to members or Friends Of Singapore Zoo. Television sets eulogise the 'conservation' and maintenance of the zoo.

The entrance greets people with zoo guides handling snakes for ostensibly educational purposes. Visitors can have their photographs taken with snakes wrapped around their hands. The conservation and educational benefit of this exercise is open to question. Snakes are not toys. As well, the stress experienced by the reptiles due to frequent handling may be excessive and the risk of human visitors contracting zoonotic diseases from the reptiles could be high.

There are Scarlet Macaws and Sulphur Crested Cockatoos perched on branches in the open for photo opportunities.  I was unable to determine if their wings were pinioned or clipped but it did not appear as though they could escape . It is possible that the constant public viewing could cause them some duress. These issues of animal handling need to be addressed by the zoo as a matter of priority.

The Siamang enclosure is one of the best gibbon enclosures I have observed. It gives the animals space, ample branching, swinging opportunities and excellent cover. Indeed, the Siamangs on display seemed robust and in good health. However, it does seem that the proximity of the vegetation to the perimeter offers a chance for the animals to escape if they wish. This is a potential danger that merits prompt attention.

Singapore Zoo seems very lush with varied species of rainforest plants. However, the vegetation falsely creates the impression that the surroundings are 'natural' when they are not.  This illusion is brought to book in the white tiger enclosure where three animals are exhibited in a moated enclosure. The illusion of space and naturalness is created by the lush vegetation. Also, for apparent decorative effect, there is a waterfall inside the enclosure that reduces the amount of ground space available to the animals. The tigers were observed slipping in their efforts to cross the waterfall by pouncing on a log above. Stereotypic pacing behaviours were extremely pronounced.
 
The Pygmy Hippopotamus enclosure offers an excellent opportunity to view the animals underwater through glass panels. However, due to the lack of barriers visitors, including children, were observed banging on the glass to solicit movement in the animals. Indeed, the lack and inadequacy of barriers is a central feature of Singapore Zoo. A good educational experience is thus effectively distorted.
 
There seems to be an overpopulation of Antelopine Wallabies. A couple of these animals were observed huddling in the same place during the two visits at the side of an alleyway. There was no barrier between these animals and pathway.  The other animals were in a paddock with a very low fencing. It is unknown why two animals were outside this paddock.

The Warthog enclosure seemed particularly filthy with excreta strewn with mud causing a stench.  Warthogs are known to enjoy a good wallow  but not in their own excrement.

Singapore Zoo boasts of having the 'largest primate collection in any zoo in the world'. The very concept of having 'a collection' is questionable since animals are not collectors' items like stamps or vintage cars. Zoos deny this aspect of their existence but the lavish hoardings splashed on the walkway in Singapore Zoo bear testimony to a different reality. 


Baboons and Nubian Ibexes are exhibited in a mixed species exhibit. It seemed that the space for the Ibexes , while moderately hilly,  was  insufficient  to  meet  their physiological and behavioural needs  which are  geared for a mountainous existence.

The hyrax enclosure seems reasonably spacious but has no barriers.

There are a number of primate species in Singapore Zoo , some highly threatened in the wild and it would be interesting to note the origin of rare animals such as the Douc Langurs. Some enclosures for the primates were spacious but no dens or shelters were observed. Indeed this also seems to be a regular feature of Singapore Zoo, with most animals being forced out in the open for public viewing. This is a practice that goes against the tenets of some modern zoo directors. The late John Aspinall, owner of Howletts and Port Lympne zoos in the United Kingdom was totally against this principle.

There seemed an overpopulation of Celebes Black Macaques.

Singapore Zoo makes Asian Elephants perform for the public. Needless to say, the 'educational'  benefit of this kind of show is questionable . The majestic animals are made to carry logs to demonstrate their utility in timber camps. At a time when the very keeping of elephants in captivity is being challenged around the world, such a practice seems  anachronistic .

The Orangutan enclosure also seemed overcrowded, contrary to the animals natural biology and behaviour. The 'environmental enrichment' tools seemed patently artificial and of little real value to the animals. 

Singapore Zoo exhibits Orangutans for animal shows where the animals are made to stand on two legs and perform tricks, such as peeling coconuts. A young animal with its mother in an open area was observed being punched by the keeper when it tried to move away from him. Striking animals at any time is unacceptable.

The manatees and sea lions are exhibited together in a glass fronted pool. For creatures like manatees, that inhabit lagoons reaching out to the open ocean, any captive situation is bound to be restrictive. The animals have bred and the breeding duly advertised, but breeding is not necessarily a sign of good welfare because many  animals (including humans) can reproduce in the most appalling circumstances. For example, domesticated animals in factory farms reproduce very well but often live in the most inadequate conditions. One sea lion seemed extremely emaciated and appeared to be blind. This animal was also observed swimming in circles in the pool and performing repetitive roundabouts. This behaviour seems abnormal and has been observed by me in fur seals at Bristol Zoo. The enclosure has no barrier and children were observed banging on the glass. The glass-fronted Jackass penguin cage was also subject to similar treatment.

Perhaps the most visible failure of the Singapore Zoo is the unnecessary and thoroughly inadequate display of polar bears. Studies on polar bears in captivity by Paul Horsman and Georgia Mason have shown that the average zoo enclosure is one million times smaller than the species home range. The animals in Singapore Zoo have very little space to move about and there is no provision for cooling in the enclosure (There is a cooling facility in the den apparently). One animal seems to have lost a great deal of hair and appeared mangy. To counter this problem, the zoo has taken the ingenious step of having announcements done by keepers extolling that 'polar bears are actually black and get their white colour by reflection from the sun in the Arctic environment'.  It is a ludicrous claim at best and a harmfully insidious one at worst. Also, the advertisement saying that Inuka is 'the first polar bear born in the tropics' is inherently contradictory and meaningless. Indeed, the zoo has attempted to glorify the display by claiming that polar bears are the largest species of bears. This claim can be contested since Kodiak bears have attained bigger sizes.

A first step toward improving the living conditions of the polar bears would be the acknowledgement of the unsuitability of polar bears as captive animals ANYWHERE, followed by proper arrangements at cooling and 'environmental enrichment', although no amount of environmental enrichment could be deemed satisfactory for an animal like the polar bear. 

The Singapore Zoo polar bears have reportedly had other problems, such as becoming green  in colour because of algae growth in the fur due to the excessively hot environment. If Singapore Zoo does not take steps to provide these animals with a more tolerable life and ideally to move them out to another more acceptable location, it will be a very unfortunate and regressive step for them and for zoos in general.
 
A Malayan Sun Bear was observed eating its own vomit, a stereotypy  known as coprophagia (regurgitation and reingestion). The paddock also seemed too small for the bears' physical needs since all species of bears are inquisitive by nature and need a wide range of stimulation in their daily lives.
 
A mixed species enclosure that seemed particularly odd was one housing a Nilgai, a Thamin deer and a Dromedary. These animals inhabit radically different habitats in the wild state and would never come into contact. Such mixed species exhibits send very mixed messages to the visitors.
 
A Maned wolf was observed circling its enclosure. The enclosure seemed very small for the animal's physical  needs. Also, during the second visit, there was a wild party going on in the proximity with very loud music, apparently a Singapore National Day celebration. It could be that sensitive and shy animals like Maned Wolves feel distressed due to the prevalence of such loud noise. Indeed, during the second visit, the zoo atmosphere seemed more of a do than that of conservation. The alloy of conservation and entertainment in zoos is always unsatisfactory for the cause of animal welfare since they cater to contradictory objectives.

Some of the reptile enclosures seem adequate for the privacy of their inmates. However, zoo visitors were observed banging the glass beside two resting Gila Monsters, as well as a number of snakes.

The Komodo Dragon enclosure seemed spacious and the animals were observed moving about. It would be interesting if the zoo were to mention what steps are being taken to breed these animals in captivity or how their captivity is helping their wild cousins. Just saying that their presence in a zoo situation is 'for conservation' is not enough. These animals could form a valuable educational  exhibit provided the zoo cares to portray their captivity in the appropriate context.

The walk-in reptile exhibit was interesting although the iguanas could come into direct contact with humans. Contact with reptiles can be hazardous for both the animals and for the human visitors who come into contact with them, with a particular hazard being zoonoses.
 
Frog species like the White's tree frog seem to be exhibited more for ornamental purposes rather than for conservation.
 
Binturongs were exhibited with Asian Small Clawed Otters. There was not enough vegetation cover for a rainforest animal like the Binturong.
 
The Cheetahs are exhibited in a paddock that seems way too small for their physical prowess. They have no opportunity to indulge in their primary behavioural activity of chasing prey at high speeds. It seems obvious that the enclosure precludes efforts at behavioural enrichment by providing toys or dummy animals for the cats to chase. Also, the single King Cheetah was observed pacing repetitively. Reportedly, the Cheetahs of Singapore Zoo have been obtained from Namibia but such a step is irrelevant for conservation. If the motive of the African establishment was to get rid of surplus animals, then the zoo needs to upgrade its enclosure.  A much larger paddock, very possibly extending to acres in area, would be needed to satisfactorily cater for the needs of these animals.
 
There were nine White rhinos observed in a small paddock. Breeding has been successful but space is evidently limited. Some animals were observed fighting and this may be due to their close proximity to each other. If alternative space cannot be provided, the zoo should stop breeding the animals.
 
The small mammal enclosures were disappointing with glass fronts and the animals displaying stereotypic behaviour. Two ocelots were seen continuously pacing. The cage also stank.

Free-living Brown (or Mongoose) lemurs were observed and it was a very interesting sight to see them gamboling around. However, a lemur was observed pinching food from a Giant Tortoise and this should be avoided.
 
Eleven chimpanzees were observed in a family group. The enclosure had electric fencing that was sparking in the rain. This could be potentially lethal if the animals could access the fence and be electrocuted in the process. Also, continuous breeding might create a surplus whereby animals may have to be sent to substandard zoos in other countries.

The Mandrill enclosure had turtles in the moat. This could be dangerous for the turtles since reportedly Mandrills have killed turtles in the precincts of their paddock in Toronto Zoo.

The domestic animal section exhibits goats, cows, horses, donkeys and pigs and dogs. Adults and children are encouraged to feed and make physical contact with the animals. However, a signboard urges people not to feed the goats since they might be incited to jump out of their enclosure in their eagerness to accept food. There was no one to supervise the feeding of the goats.

This section also had a walk through aviary. The birds have vegetation and space but a couple of Victoria Crowned pigeons were seen sitting on the railing. A visitor keen on mischief could actually physically harm the birds.

The Caracals were exhibited in a small cage and were observed pacing. So were the pumas which seemed overcrowded. Singapore Zoo has sent surplus pumas to Kolkata Zoo where they died very quickly. Breeding has to be controlled and the animals given more space and privacy. The leopards and the jaguars were also observed constantly pacing.

Perhaps the most novel exhibit was the rainforest enclosure housing a variety of species ranging from invertebrates to mammals. Victoria Crowned Pigeons, Ring Tailed lemurs, a sloth  two Black and White Ruffed lemurs and  a couple of Matschie's Tree Kangaroos were observed. There were different species of butterflies as well. It is well acknowledged that this exhibit gives a valuable educational experience for visitors. However, the animals exhibited together come from very different parts of the world ( e.g., lemurs from Madagascar, Tree Kangaroos from Papua New Guinea,  sloths from South and Central America), so the message is a muddled one tying all biomes together. The Black and White Ruffed Lemurs were also observed in a small cage.
Singapore Zoo has Proboscis Monkeys on exhibit. The enclosure seems reasonably spacious for the animals to perch and move about. The glass front however remains prone to curious inspection and banging queries from the public. The animals have bred and babies were observed. However, the source of these animals seems quite suspect since a few years ago there was a scandal in Indonesia involving the export of wild caught Proboscis Monkeys to zoos. Singapore Zoo was involved in that case. It remains to be seen what conservation benefit has emerged from the captive breeding of these primates at Singapore Zoo.
It is also not known if Singapore Zoo supports the preservation of the wild habitat of these creatures. Simply exhibiting the animals as showpieces to draw in visitors will not help them in anyway. But, as the former London Zoo director, Jo Gipps has commented, "Conservation can sell tickets" and Proboscis Monkeys can be crowd pullers by the same token.

The Naked Mole Rats are exhibited in a small plastic box with wood chips that do not allow them to bury and disappear from human view. This is possibly extremely uncomfortable for these very essentially subterranean creatures. People are actually encouraged to view them closely. They however, deserve as much attention as the polar bears since they are in captivity through no fault of their own.
 
Singapore Zoo is spread over quite a large area and two water bodies surrounding it provide a beautiful ambience. But the beauty of the grounds does not necessarily mean that the animals are comfortable. In fact, many aspects of Singapore are problematic from an animal welfare perspective. 

The priority for Singapore Zoo should always be the welfare of their animals, and welfare should take precedence over public relations and profit generation. This is evidently an enormous challenge in a place like Singapore that seems to be focused on getting as many visitors through the gates as possible..

Singapore Zoo does provide a limited opportunity for public education, but the message is often contradicted by the methods being used.  On the grounds there are many free-living animals that provide unalloyed pleasure, such as butterflies in the exotic fruit farm, wild skinks and wild monitor lizards, but a short distance away other animals are caged in inappropriate conditions.

I observed a wild, baby water monitor lizard on the zoo grounds.  That lizard moved freely about, in sharp contrast to the other animals nearby that could only move a few feet in any direction.  Visitors see both and must come away from their zoo experience in a state of confusion..

Conservation is more than forcing nature in a box.  Singapore Zoo will have to develop very different standards, practices and philosophies in future. A first step might be to acknowledge their existing problems and to start cooperating with outside agencies, including animal welfare organizations, to resolve them.


Back to  Zoo Pages.