The wildlife tourism industry is built on a false sense of trust for captive wildlife. There are endless examples of people letting their guards down around captive animals and paying the price. A well-known example being Roy, of Siegfried and Roy, who was attacked on stage by one of their white tigers. Roy suffered a severed spine and extreme blood loss, which resulted in a stroke.

This tragic incident, unfortunately, is not unique in the captive wildlife industry. We instill trust into animals that have different instincts than us, and as time goes on, this causes us to become less diligent around these individuals. For this reason, unnecessary close contact with captive wildlife should be avoided to maximize human safety. Knowing this, why do we still insist on close encounters with wildlife?

comfort brings carelessness

The majority of people don’t trust captive animals right away. However, more continuous positive exposure to the individual animal makes people more comfortable. This can cause them to stop analyzing potential warning signs. Let’s use dogs as an example. When you first meet a new dog, you’re careful in introducing yourself and making them feel comfortable. You don’t know if this dog will bite you or get scared.

Now say you go to an elephant sanctuary, and an elephant walks up to you; you’re likely to be a bit weary about the encounter because you don’t know what the elephant may do. However, after a few positive interactions, you form a false sense of safety.

Now let’s take it to an even larger scale. If you work at an animal rescue and continuously have positive interactions with the animal you work with, you consider yourself to have a good relationship with the animal. They would never hurt you, right? Regardless of if you’re a consumer, conservationist, or animal care expert, this principle applies.

This thinking comes from anthropomorphizing animals and placing human rationale onto a non-human species. Although non-human animals have different instincts and social behaviors than we do, we often default to this way of thinking because our minds can only think within the confines of our species.

Understanding the animal Psyche

Without being able to communicate in a common language with a wild animal, it’s impossible to define a mutually positive relationship. We can only be sure of our perspective and make an educated guess about how the animal feels in the interaction based on behavior. With this, it can be hard to determine if a captive animal is allowing you to stroke them because they enjoy the contact or because they feel that they have no choice in the interaction. This is especially pertinent with species that are often exploited and made to undergo aggressive training methods.

Even with a rescue, it can be challenging to know when the animal is genuinely comfortable versus when they feel they are being controlled because many species and individuals freeze when presented with adversity. Suppose an animal is used to being punished when not compliant with human demands. In that case, even after they’re rescued, they’re likely to put up with interactions that they aren’t entirely comfortable with simply out of fear of punishment.

This does not justify continuing to interact closely with captive wildlife; in fact, it’s another reason why we must give captive wildlife the space to heal from the traumas they’ve endured. The alternative is pushing an animal too far to a point where the animal or human’s life is at risk.

What can cause captive animal attacks?

One of the biggest errors we can make is developing an unconditional trust for captive wildlife. Once we let our guard down, alter the animal’s routine, or get a bit too close, accidents and attacks can happen. There are several reasons why this can occur, including causing the animal to feel disoriented, unsafe, or simply being nearby when a natural wild instinct is acted upon.

Disorientation

Many captive animals rely on routine and training to understand how they should interact with their environment and caregivers. In ethical facilities, training is built on a foundation of reward for action. The training must be entirely voluntary to be considered positive reinforcement training, meaning the animal is not chained or punished for not participating.

These training sessions offer rewards, usually food, for following commands. During each session, the same commands and sequences are utilized to avoid confusing or disorienting the animal. However, if an animal is receiving mixed or unclear signals, they can get frustrated and unsure of what will happen next, leading to dangerous behaviors. An example of this principle in action is the Siegfried and Roy tiger attack mentioned above.

In facilities where the animals are being dealt with in protected contact, this usually is not a problem because there is a safety barrier between humans and animals. When humans and animals are in the same space without any safety barriers, this can lead to potentially fatal attacks.

Fight or Flight

Every animal has boundaries that, when crossed, make them feel unsafe in their environment. This is common in captive wildlife tourism because the animal is being touched in places that are not comfortable or being moved into unnatural positions. While these control tactics can cause frustration, they can also create a feeling of danger that causes the animal’s stress levels to spike. When hit with a rush of cortisol, many species will go into fight or flight mode.

In the case of a large or dangerous animal, both of these responses can be extremely dangerous for any nearby humans. Elephants, for example, could go into flight mode and trample somebody; or they could go into fight mode and attack their caregiver or nearby tourist.

It’s important to remember that this is not exclusive to facilities exploiting their captive wildlife. Many sanctuaries and rescue facilities interact exceptionally closely with their wildlife in a way that is unnatural and dangerous. Sometimes, this is out of necessity— such as during a medical procedure. While other times this is out of the human desire for interaction, focusing on entertainment rather than welfare.

Wild Instincts

One of the biggest myths is that wild animals living in captivity are domesticated. Wild species, like elephants and tigers, cannot be domesticated; if they could, there would be very few incidents of humans being killed by captive animals. No matter how much an animal is trained and exposed to human contact, they still carry wild instincts that can present themselves when humans are in a vulnerable moment.

There are endless examples of captive large cats that have attacked people whose backs were turned and elephants that have killed caregivers who weren’t diligent and attentive to warning signs. This is not because the animal is exceptionally aggressive; it’s because they are a wild animal. All wild animals have the instinct to avoid close interaction with humans and, when in close contact or cornered, to escape by any means. With larger or carnivorous species, this usually results in humans being attacked.

The Importance of Hands-Off Wildlife Tourism

The value hands-off tourism brings to captive wildlife welfare is often stressed and utilized as the main selling point of the concept. However, the dangers of forced interaction with captive wildlife must be duly noted. Not only for tourists but wildlife workers in dangerous situations every day while managing captive wildlife.

Minimizing close contact allows the animals to live as they should be, socialize with their own species, and heal from past traumas, all while optimizing safety for humans and animals. For help finding ethical facilities that are actively working to minimize human contact with their elephants, reference our ethical elephant facilities list! This is a constantly updated page that reflects the best facilities around Asia to support while traveling.