AALBORG, Denmark – A zoo in northern Denmark has stirred an international controversy after appealing to the public to donate their unwanted pets, such as rabbits and guinea pigs, to be euthanized and used as food for its carnivores. Aalborg Zoo officials defend the program as a sustainable and natural way to feed their predators, but the initiative has prompted a fierce debate about the ethics of animal welfare and the role of modern zoos.

The program, first reported by the BBC on Monday, encourages local pet owners who can no longer care for their animals to bring them to the zoo. Officials state this provides a more humane alternative to abandonment and a more natural diet for predators like tigers and lions than processed meats or farm-raised feed animals.

Trine Hammer Jensen, a veterinarian and inspector at Aalborg Zoo, explained the rationale behind the practice. "It's good for the animals to have a varied diet," she stated in media interviews. "It's enriching for them to eat a whole animal with fur and bones and guts. It's more natural."

A Matter of Welfare and Naturalism

Aalborg Zoo's leadership argues that the program prioritizes the welfare of its predators by mimicking their natural feeding patterns. This practice, known as providing "whole prey," is considered beneficial for carnivores' physical and psychological health, offering nutritional variety and stimulating natural behaviours.

The zoo has been transparent about its process, assuring the public that donated pets are humanely euthanized by a veterinarian before being fed to the animals. They will not accept common companion animals like cats or dogs due to the risk of disease transmission. The focus remains on smaller animals like rodents and rabbits, which closely resemble what the predators might hunt in the wild.

Furthermore, zoo officials contrast their method with the alternative of breeding thousands of mice or rats solely for the purpose of being feed animals. By using surplus, unwanted pets, they argue they are reducing waste and giving a purpose to an animal that might otherwise be euthanized and disposed of at a shelter.

Public Outcry and Ethical Questions

Despite the zoo's justifications, the program has been met with significant public backlash, particularly from animal rights organizations and pet owners outside of Denmark. The core of the criticism lies in the ethical distinction between a purpose-bred feed animal and a former companion animal.

Groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have long criticized such practices, arguing that they desensitize the public to the value of individual animals' lives. Critics contend that promoting the idea of pets as disposable predator food undermines efforts to encourage responsible pet ownership.

The controversy highlights a cultural divide in attitudes towards animals. In 2014, the Copenhagen Zoo faced global condemnation for euthanizing a healthy young giraffe named Marius, dissecting it publicly, and feeding it to its lions. At the time, zoo officials similarly defended their actions as scientifically sound genetic management, a standard practice in European zoos that shocked many in North America and the United Kingdom.

The Broader Context of Zoo Management

The debate over Aalborg Zoo's policy is part of a larger conversation about the purpose and ethics of zoos in the 21st century. While modern zoos increasingly focus on conservation, research, and education, their methods for managing animal populations and providing for their welfare remain under constant scrutiny.

For many European zoos operating under the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA), managing genetic diversity and providing environments that are as natural as possible are paramount. This sometimes leads to decisions—like the culling of surplus animals or feeding them to predators—that clash with the public's emotional connection to individual animals.

As the story continues to generate discussion worldwide, Aalborg Zoo maintains its position. For them, the choice is a practical and ethical one, aimed at providing the best possible care for the predators that live within their walls, even if it challenges deeply held societal norms about the animals that share our homes.