Go Monkey Go.....Where?

This morning's St. Pete Times featured a fascinating story about a rhesus macaque monkey that has been on the run in the Tampa Bay area for over a year. Eluding several attempts at capture, his neighborhood wanderings have made him somewhat of a local hero, spawning the battle cry "Go monkey go!"

While it is refreshing to see so many people on the side of the monkey's freedom, the article provides an excellent overview of why the animal may very well be suffering from a great loneliness. Experts on the species point out that what is keeping him on the lam is a futile search for members of his own kind. The article is extremely thoughtful and well-written, but there is one aspect of it that greatly disturbs me: it seems to suggest that once captured, the monkey should be placed in the hands of a private owner, and yet in the same breath points out the distinct possibility that the monkey is an escaped pet. Can't we see the connection here? The trade in exotic pets is exactly why he is so desperately looking for something he will never find. The only way to keep a trade like this going is to separate the animals from one another in the first place, particularly by separating the young from their mothers.

The only solution that really benefits the monkey is to place him in an accredited sanctuary. Accredited sanctuaries are the only places truly committed to giving disenfranchised animals a permanent home.

Below is the letter that I wrote both to the reporter and to the editor:

Dear Michael,

I wish to thank everyone involved in the story about the rhesus macaque monkey that has been on the run in Tampa Bay. By honestly outlining the animal's needs, you have helped to dispel some of the myths that humans have believed and even perpetuated about wild animals and especially about wild animals living in captivity. Recognizing their need for autonomy and social interaction with their own helps us to also recognize the ethical implications of separating family units, keeping them in isolation, and using them for our own purposes.

The only thing that disappointed me was that the article seemed to insinuate that the only solution for this monkey is to capture him and give him to one of the private owners who maintain licenses to keep such animals. Such a solution ignores the fact that the fallacy of private ownership may be the reason that the monkey is in this predicament to begin with. The article adeptly outlines the lack of foresight that caused someone to bring in a troop of macaques to entertain tourists without considering the needs and abilities of the animals, and as well points out that the monkey may be on the run precisely because it got loose from a license-bearing pet owner. Why do we assume that the solution is to put the animal right back into the hands of people who are contributing to a multi-billion dollar industry that willfully separates social animals from one another for the sole purpose of keeping them as pets?

I am surprised that the possibility of placing the animal in an accredited primate sanctuary, like Jungle Friends, was not even mentioned. Accredited sanctuaries are held to the standards of the accrediting body, The Association of Sanctuaries, and dedicate every resource they have to providing the animals with what they actually need, including the social interaction so important to primates. Additionally, the homes they give them are permanent. Private ownership is nothing more or less than buying, selling, and trading individual animals, which means that such individuals get moved from place to place with little regard for the toll it takes on them psychologically, no matter how much people involved in this trade shout that they trade them for the purposes of conservation.

If we really cared about conserving wild animals, we never would have taken them from their rightful homes to begin with. But we can make up for our past wrongs by focusing our considerable energy on placing unreleasable captive animals in accredited sanctuaries that operate according to the highest standards, and by talking to one another and our lawmakers about how we can preserve wild places and let the wild animals that we have left in this world live peacefully within them. It is time for the public to recognize squarely that private ownership is a business and not a part of any organized conservation effort, and is inherently unsustainable becaue it essentially treats living creatures like a commodity.

Thank you again for covering this story and for your attention to detail. I would love to see more
articles about this topic in the future, especially anything that outlines the very best things we can do for the welfare of the animals.

Sincerely,
Sharyn Beach
Tampa, FL