Of Tigers and Tyrannosaurs

"The culmination of tyrannosaur evolution, T. rex was one of the very last North American dinosaurs.  Nothing else combined its size, speed, and power.  Since its demise, we ave had to make do with lions and tigers and bears, and other 'little' mammalian carnivores."

- Gregory S. Paul, Predatory Dinosaurs of the World

"As many have pointed out, Tyrannosaurus rex has now ascended from the limits of pure scientific research and imposed itself as a postmodern, geomythological icon.  This renders it immune to standard scientific criticism, thus making it unassailable, almost sacred."

- Andrea Cau, Theropoda, Volume I: Tyrannosauroidea

This summer, visitors to the Smithsonian National Zoo are being treated to a visit from some very species creatures - it's just too bad they aren't alive.  DinoRoars is an outdoor exhibit filled with animatronic dinosaurs, such as Triceratops and, of course, Tyrannosaurus rex.  The attraction is accompanied by a theater experience, meant to immerse visitors in the prehistoric world of dinosaurs.  This coincides neatly with the long-awaited return of dinosaurs to the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, located downtown on the National Mall.

Photo from Smithsonian National Zoological Park website

Personally, exhibitions like this at zoos have always made me leery, since I've had a disturbing number of visitors complain that the dinosaurs are not, in fact, alive, which is what they had expected since they were at the zoo, not the natural history museum.  I would awkwardly try pointing out the kori bustards or Chinese alligators, but when those failed to appease them, I would usually just resort to running and hiding.

Dinosaurs have also been brought up in an argument questioning the educational value of zoos.  The argument goes, kids (and many adults) love dinosaurs, even though they've never seen a (non-avian) one in real life.  With that understanding, why do we think visitors need to see real, live animals in zoos in order to learn about animals, or to learn to love them?

I thought about this one for a long time.  In the end, I came up with this answer.

It's easy to love dinosaurs.  It's downright convenient.  It doesn't cost us anything.  Other animals are harder.  Consider the difference between two apex predators, the Tyrannosaurus and the tiger.

People are fascinated by Tyrannosaurus.  We go to museums to see their remains, we watch Hollywood blockbusters about them, and we buy our kids toys and books about them.  But they don't require anything of us other than that we think that they are cool.  (And really, they don't even require that - what, are they going to go more extinct, otherwise?)

Tyrannosaurs don't require us to set aside large tracts of suitable habitat for them to survive in the wild.  Tigers do.

Tyrannosaurs don't eat rancher's cattle or sheep when they leave those protected areas, to say nothing of occasionally the rancher's themselves.  Tigers do.

Tyrannosaurs aren't subject to studies from climatologists who repeatedly warn us that if we don't reduce our carbon footprints and change our lifestyles dramatically, that we will lose this species from the face of the earth.  Tigers do (see the threat of global climate change to the Sundurbans home of Bengal tigers).

Yes, people love Tyrannosaurs, but that's because there are no drawbacks to them.  If you don't like them, then the good news is that there aren't any around, and you don't have to worry about them.  The fact is, if we did have live, wild populations of Tyrannosaurus rex, we'd have the same issues that we have with any other large carnivore. 

Some people would love them - there would be ecotourism focused around seeing them in the wild, they'd have their pictures all over the web and on magazines, and yes, we'd probably have some in zoos.  They'd be on Animal Planet and National Geographic, and Discovery Channel would probably have "Tyrannosaur Week" right after "Shark Week" each year.

At the same time, a lot of people would hate them.  Every facebook post or news article about them would be filled with people calling them monsters who hurt farmers' livelihoods and pose a risk to public safety.  We'd hear testimonials from people who were hurt or had loved ones killed by the dinosaurs.  We'd have debates on whether it was justifiable or economically feasible to set aside how much habitat for them (and imagine if oil or some other valuable resource were found in that habitat).  There would be debates about trophy hunting, captivity (not only in zoos, but also private ownership, because you know someone would want a pet T-rex), and population management.

Right now, the prevailing view of the species is as a slavering, ravenous, kind of brainless monster.  That's not necessarily great PR - it sells movie tickets, at least - but it doesn't hurt the dinosaurs, because they aren't here to be hurt.  If they were around, that would not create a public dialogue conducive to their long-term survival.  In other words, if there were real, live Tyrannosaurs walking the earth today, they would need all of the advocates that they could get.  They would need people to be able to see them as something more - not as a monster, but as another species of animal, deserving of protection and conservation.  Another species that I can think of used to have a similar reputation.  That was the orca, or killer whale, and they were pretty high on everybody's hate list... until a marine park called SeaWorld came along and reintroduced the species to the public as an intelligent, charismatic, wonderful creature.

Really, if Tyrannosaurus rex was with us today, I don't think it would be wrong to say that they might need zoos.  Otherwise, I suspect that pretty soon, we'd be back to just bones.