Private Menageries: Luxury for Humans, Cruelty for Animals

The practice of keeping private menageries traces back to ancient civilisations, where royalty and the elite collected exotic animals to display wealth, power and knowledge. These collections, which included everything from lions and elephants to peacocks and small monkeys, were not just for display but also played a role in cultural and religious practices across various societies. The Romans, for instance, showcased their menageries in lavish games in the Colosseum, where animals often fought gladiators or each other for entertainment.

By the 19th century, menageries had evolved from royal symbols to public spectacles, contributing to the burgeoning field of natural sciences while entertaining the masses. These collections were instrumental in the establishment of the first modern zoos, such as the London Zoo, founded in 1828, which was initially intended for scientific study before opening to the public to serve educational purposes.

However, despite their transformation into more scientifically-driven institutions, private menageries have continued to exist, often blurring the lines between personal luxury and public interest. Notoriously poor conditions in some private collections reveal the cruelty often hidden behind the gates of opulent estates. Examples include the infamous private zoo in Ohio, where in 2011 dozens of exotic animals were released into the public by their owner before he committed suicide, prompting a tragic large-scale slaughter of escaped wildlife.

Here’s a link to an article on the Zanesville, Ohio case from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/19/ohio-dangerous-animals-breakout

Unlike their zoo counterparts, which are regulated to varying extents around the world, private menageries often operate under the radar, with minimal oversight. Zoos are generally subject to public, scientific and governmental scrutiny and are increasingly designed around conservation, research and education principles. They strive to provide environments that mimic natural habitats, offering animals better welfare standards and contributing to global biodiversity conservation efforts.

Governance and regulation of private menageries vary significantly across countries, influenced heavily by cultural attitudes towards animals. In parts of Asia, for instance, lax regulations allow for the keeping of species that would be illegal or highly regulated in the United States or Europe. The disparity in laws leads to significant challenges in international wildlife conservation, complicating efforts to set universal standards for animal welfare.

It's often the cuter and rarer animals that end up in private collections - Lemurs, Golden Macaques, Capuchins and Marmosets are just a few of the most frequently trafficked animals.

In countries like the UK and Germany, where laws regarding captive wildlife are among the most stringent, regulations are specifically designed to ensure high standards of animal welfare and strict enforcement mechanisms. In the UK, the Animal Welfare Act 2006 is the primary legislation, which was further strengthened by the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021. This Act significantly increased penalties for animal welfare offences, with the maximum imprisonment for the most serious crimes raised to five years, alongside unlimited fines. This includes offences like causing unnecessary suffering, such as involvement in dog fighting, for example.

In Germany, the German Animal Welfare Act mandates humane treatment and specifies conditions under which animals can be kept and used. The Act includes detailed provisions for the humane operation on animals, requiring anaesthetics in most cases and sets strict guidelines for how animals should be treated during these operations. Penalties for non-compliance can be severe, reflecting the seriousness with which animal welfare is regarded.

Conversely, in countries like Thailand, China and Vietnam, the regulation of private menageries and exotic pet ownership is not as stringent. These countries have seen a significant prevalence of private collections where exotic animals are kept as status symbols. Popular animals in these collections often include big cats, primates and exotic birds, reflecting a continued demand for exotic pets that confer status rather than companionship or conservation goals. This disparity in animal welfare standards highlights the need for global cooperation and standardisation in animal welfare laws to ensure that all animals, regardless of where they are kept, receive appropriate care and comfortable living conditions when kept behind bars. It is the least we can do, after all.

Addressing the challenges posed by private menageries requires a multifaceted approach, spearheaded by global institutions that have the authority and reach to enforce and harmonise animal welfare standards across borders. Leading the charge could be a combination of wildlife conservation groups, international policy makers and regulatory bodies, each playing a critical role in shaping a future where animal welfare is paramount.

Organisations like the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) are pivotal in this regard due to their extensive expertise in wildlife conservation and their ability to influence policy through research and advocacy. These organisations can provide the scientific backbone needed to draft international regulations that reflect the latest in conservation science and animal welfare.

Furthermore, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), with its global reach and mandate to promote environmental sustainability, could facilitate the necessary international dialogue and cooperation. UNEP's involvement would ensure that animal welfare and conservation are integrated into broader environmental policies and sustainable development goals.

Fennec Foxes are in increasing demand for private collections around the world, with many private owners actively trying to breed, domesticate and resell the foxes.

Another vital player in this collective effort is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which could be tasked with tightening controls on the international trade of exotic animals, a key factor in the proliferation of private menageries. By making it harder to legally acquire exotic pets, CITES can reduce the demand that drives the growth of such menageries.

Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) like the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the World Animal Protection could also play significant roles. They can help raise public awareness about the plight of animals in private collections and lobby governments to adopt and enforce stricter regulations. Their advocacy efforts could drive public demand for policy changes, creating a more conducive environment for legislative reform.

Collectively, these bodies could work together to establish a unified set of international standards and practices that prioritise the welfare of animals over ownership rights. This global governance framework should not only focus on the regulation of private menageries but also foster a cultural shift towards recognising animals as sentient beings deserving of ethical treatment and care.

As we continue to debate the morality of captivity, whether in zoos or private collections, it becomes clear that the luxury of owning exotic animals often comes at the expense of their well-being, undermining efforts to respect and conserve the natural world.

So please, let’s all try to do better - avoid and boycott places that don’t treat their animals well, and wherever possible, leave scathing reviews of these places so that others can avoid them too.

If you know of any private collections that should be investigated, please let us know in the comments - we’d love to hear about your experience!