The parties involved with the transportation of giraffes reaches further than just the direct hands on deck. Reserves and park managers, zoos, and the public all share a voice as to why these animals should be transported, and their views on the transportation process itself.

Reserves & Park Managers:

Giraffes and other megafuana, such as elephants, have shown to impact other native species in the area. The acacia tree is often a favorite amoung these animals, whom will strip down the bark of the tree, often damaging it to such an extant that the tree cannot recover and dies (Birkett, 2002; Pellew, 1983). A key goal for reserves and park rangers is maintaining the community biodiversity. They have a more utilitarian approach, meaning that they the ends out weight the costs of the means, resulting reserves and park rangers to accept relocating such megafauna elsewhere if they were decreasing biodiversity (as in the case of the acacia). If these species are under threat however, the tables can turn, whereby relocation would not be the best option for the species nor the ecosystem. It is a fine balance, one in which does not come easy for rangers and reserves, but under specific circumstances, where the conservation of biodiversity of the community outweighs the transportation detriments of moving a group of megafuana, transportation will be favored.

 

Zoos:

The transportation of giraffes coming into zoo care is often viewed as beneficial for the zoo. The housing of such large megafauna often attracts the public, and can engage them in conservation efforts or building connections with animals and our natural world (Orban et al., 2016). To do this, zoos have created feeding programs, in which the public can feed giraffes and get up close and personal. Even while in captive care, giraffe breeding has often been another beneficial attribute, contributing to maintaining populations even for endangered species such as the Rothschild’s giraffe (Glonekové et al., 2016). However, a possible negative view of transportation is the complications that can arise, and the loss of the individuals upon travel to a new or arriving destination. This can have large backlash towards the zoos responsible for the decision, and is thus heavily considered before any action is taken place.

 

The Public:

The views of the public can stir up controversy, as they often lack the background knowledge or consideration of how a giraffe may have wound up on public display for them to see. If giraffes were in poor conditions prior to transport, then they would want them out of the area as soon as possible. If the giraffes however were being transported to conditions the public viewed as having poor welfare (such as a small enclosure), they would vouch against transportation. With the actual transportation process itself, it is often successful with minimized harms to the animal. Therefore I believe the public would be in support of transportation if it was justified. Studies have shown that increasing the public’s knowledge on endangered species through a public display can improve conservation efforts, zoo credibility, and increase public support (Cornelisse and Duane, 2013; Le et al., 2015). Thus our enjoyment and the beneficial impact we can have on conservation and zoos, would view giraffe transport as a beneficial stepping stone in achieving conservation and zoo goals.