Animals on the move?
(Beijing Review)
Updated: 2004-06-10 11:10

Thoughts of moving the Beijing Zoo to the city outskirts has ruffled a few feathers.

Covering an area of 90 hectares, the Beijing Zoo is the third largest zoo in the world in terms of space, and receives 7 million visitors every year. Recently, a plan by the municipal government to move the 100 year-old zoo from downtown Beijing to its outskirts aroused wide concern from the public. At several of the forums held to discuss the issue, debate focused on the following aspects:

According to the municipal government, relocating the zoo aims to better protect public health and security, relax traffic pressure and improve the living conditions of animals.

Some people argue that the aforementioned reasons are groundless, believing that, with its halls and pavilions, the zoo itself serves as a cultural site and is a good leisure resort for people. In addition, the proper distribution of ancient structures and animal cages is conducive to their protection and in keeping with the natural scenery. Hence, relocation of the zoo will cause both emotional and cultural losses.

Some citizens complain of a lack of opportunity to voice their opinions on a plan that is closely related to their life.

According to the Chinese Association of Zoological Gardens, no less than 16 cities throughout the country are planning to move their zoos out of city centers for urban construction.

The arguments on the relocation of the Beijing Zoo are as follows:

It Should Be Moved

Guo Baodong (Deputy to the People’s Congress of Beijing Municipality): The outbreak of the SARS epidemic in Beijing and bird flu in other parts of the country forced us to review the relations between people and animals. The Beijing Zoo, located in a densely populated area, poses a threat to public health because animal waste and wastewater are likely to be the cause of disease.

Mang Ping (scholar): Many cities are moving their zoos to locations with better natural conditions. By doing so, the living environment of animals will be improved and cross-infection of disease between people and animals avoided. For instance, monkeys are likely to pass diseases to people. Besides, they require a larger place for living. Elephants are another example. They should live in wildlife parks.

Wang Song (research fellow of the Animal Institute of the Chinese Academy of Science): The method of permanently keeping animals in cages impedes their growth, weakens their reproduction ability and changes their native characteristics.

Relocation Is Unreasonable.

Fang Zhenning(critic): The view that a zoo should not be in a city’s downtown area is groundless. The zoo in Tokyo is located in the city’s center, which is surrounded by a science museum, an art university, a cultural hall and a painting hall. Locals regard it as one of the most important cultural facilities.

With ancient structures and exquisite brick carvings by its front gates, the Beijing Zoo is on the city’s list of well-preserved cultural relics and provides precious materials for the study of China’s architecture.

The ancient buildings and animal enclosures that are properly distributed are conducive to their protection. The buildings, together with an imperial garden in the zoo, provide locals a good place to spend their leisure time. It is said the relocation of the zoo is for the construction of a commercial center. In that case, the cultural value of the zoo will vanish.

Liu Nonglin (senior engineer of the Chinese Association of Zoological Garden): In many countries, zoos are located at the center of metropolises, like Washington, London, Sydney, Berlin, New York and Tokyo. None of these zoos is being moved to a larger place.

The size of a zoo cannot decide its quality and the living environment of animals. Without proper animal enclosures and ecological environment, as well as the knowledge about animals’ living conditions, a larger size is useless.

Input is another big problem. The relocation of the Shenyang Zoo in Laoning Province is a lesson. Its crane-breeding center that used to be the pride of locals was closed down after it was taken over by an individual who is reluctant to invest in the study of crane breeding.

Because of vested interests, real estate developers and the district where the zoo will be relocated are firm supporters of the relocation project.

Jia Yuanhua (professor at Beijing Jiaotong University): The relocation of the zoo, which will divert only a small number of automobiles, cannot effectively relax traffic tension of the roads nearby.

Zhang Shuyi (expert with the Animal Protection Institution of the Chinese Academy of Sciences): Animals may indeed pass on epidemics to humans. But it is far-fetched to use this as the reason for the zoo’s relocation. As wild animals must receive numerous medical exams and injections to make them immune to diseases before entering the zoo, they can hardly pass on contagious diseases to people.

The Public Should Be Involved

Deng Yuwen (Beijing Youth Daily): It is the responsibility of experts to study whether the zoo should move or not. But what we are concerned about is the reason behind the relocation and a channel to air opinions.

If the zoo is moved to the outskirts, people may be reluctant to go there, because they have to spend more time and money. The current wildlife parks in Daxing and Badaling serve as examples. They seldom receive visitors due to their remote locations.

Children and youth favor the zoo most, where they can have access to foreign creatures and learn. If the zoo is relocated to a far place that is hard to reach, the aforementioned function of the zoo will disappear.

Besides, it is important to make clear the real purpose of the zoo’s relocation. If it is for real estate development, for building a park without animals, or even for building a square or a shopping center under the pretext of improving animals’ living environment, I’m afraid it will be hard for the decision-makers to justify the project to the public.

People know little about the plan and, up to now, no official has elaborated on this project to the public and no public hearing has been held. Even the manager of the zoo is unable to give out details. That’s the reason why most people are disgruntled with the plan, which has much to do with the government’s work style.

According to a recent decision of the State Council, any decision making that is closely related to people’s lives should be made public. Forums, hearings and feasibility discussions should be made to solicit public opinions.

The plan for the zoo’s relocation reveals that some officials are still dictatorial in making decisions, though they always pay lip service to guaranteeing citizens’ rights to know facts and to participate in state affairs.

In modern times, making administrative decisions is not only the duty of the government, but also of citizens. Hong Kong is a good example in this field. For instance, a real estate developer wanted to requisition a patch of wetland and offered a high price for it. But he failed due to the disagreement of locals.

In a democratic society, citizens have the freedom to voice their opinions, which is also the norm to measure whether the government respects public opinions. Seen from this angle, the relocation of the zoo is not a simple matter.-

Close

Today's Top News     Top Life News
State bank splits up in pilot reform         11 Chinese killed in Afghan terror attack         Beijingers rally around Olympic relay         Hu signs communique in Warsaw         Officials sacked over fake milk fiasco         Half of China's rich aren't spending	Animals on the move?       Animals on the move?       Reagan's face for $10 bill       Research: Brain genes start to slow at 40       Olympic flame lights up city       Eating McDonald's, making millions