Where did the Baboon Come From
The whole “Baboon Incident” that sparked lively discussions in Taiwanese society started on March 22 2023 when a neighborhood chief of Taoyuan City, posted on Facebook, stating that he first witnessed a baboon on the road on March 10. After two unsuccessful attempts to capture it, they gave up as the baboon had left the jurisdiction. The chief referred to the baboon as an “East African baboon.”
There were also rumors that the baboon that escaped was from Leofoo Village Theme Park. Leofoo Village initially denied it but later discovered that there was an extra baboon in the park during the count, speculating that it could be a newborn baboon. However, this raised concerns about poor management. The only registered institutions in Taiwan allowed to keep baboons are the Taipei Zoo, Leofoo Village, and Shoushan Zoo. The Forestry Bureau did not rule out the possibility of private individuals keeping baboons.
A dramatic turn of events occurred late at night on the 29th when Leofoo Village admitted that the baboon had escaped from their facility. Subsequently, the park’s history of incidents was revealed, including six Egyptian Sacred Ibises escaping and causing ecological havoc and eight giraffes dying from captivity over a ten-year period. The Forestry Bureau recommended that the Taoyuan City government seek compensation from Leofoo Village for the costs of capturing the baboon.
Even a Leofoo Village employee revealed that three years ago, there were around 250 baboons in the park, not the approximately 150 claimed by the park. It was already known that many baboons were wandering outside the park in the Kansai area, but local residents mistook them for large macaques. Leofoo Village did not outright deny these claims but responded that a thorough investigation was needed to ascertain the truth. They also emphasized the effectiveness of protective measures such as high walls and electric fences and stated that inspections by supervisory authorities were comprehensive.
17 Days of Freedom for the Baboon
After news of the baboon’s escape broke, many concerned citizens voluntarily provided information about the baboon’s whereabouts. It was sighted on Xinglong Road in Pingzhen, then in Xinwu and at the Taoyuan-Fugang Airport. During this period, it was discovered allegedly stealing lettuce from a vegetable garden and photographed with what appeared to be a sweet potato in its mouth. Fortunately, no reports of attacks or injuries were made, leading netizens to praise it as a “good baboon.”
On the afternoon of the 27th, the baboon took refuge in a residential house in Fugang. Personnel from the Taoyuan City Government’s Department of Agriculture discovered its presence and apprehended the baboon with a tranquilizer gun, ending its escape of over 17 days.
The Baboon’s Controversial Death
Unexpectedly, the end was not the baboon’s path to freedom but rather its entire life. Shortly after news of its capture, reports surfaced that the baboon had been shot by a hunting rifle and succumbed to its injuries. The examination of the baboon’s body revealed clear wounds on its right back, left chest, and a graze on its right hip.
Taoyuan City Government’s Department of Agriculture personnel took photos with the “trophy” at the scene and mentioned wanting to show off the pictures to their daughters at school, which led to accusations that they were responsible for delaying the baboon’s medical treatment. However, the Department of Agriculture explained that they did not detect any gunshot wounds due to poor lighting at the scene. They only noticed the bloodstains when they were transporting the baboon, and they stated that they would review their standard operating procedures. The director of the Department of Agriculture, even bowed to the baboon’s body, in a somewhat showy manner.
The question remains: Why was there a hunting rifle at the scene? Who ordered the hunter to shoot? The various parties’ statements differ, creating a situation akin to the “Rashomon effect.” The Control Yuan (an investigative agency in Taiwan) has also intervened to conduct an investigation.
The Hunter Mr. Lin who fired the gun: He claimed that he acted in conjunction with the Taoyuan City Government’s Department of Agriculture, and they were fully aware of the situation. He received a call from Mr. Liao of the Agriculture Bureau of Hsinchu County, asking for assistance in capturing the baboon. He claimed that he was informed by someone who identified themselves as an employee of the Department of Agriculture to shoot, but later found out that the person was a veterinarian from Leofoo Village.
Taoyuan City Government’s Department of Agriculture: Since receiving the report on the 23rd, all the capture operations conducted by our team were carried out using tranquilizer guns and not firearms. The personnel involved in the capture have already explained this at the Yangmei Fugang Police Station.
Hsinchu County Government: They publicly released the conversation records between technician Mr. Liao from the Agriculture Bureau and hunter Mr. Lin. Mr. Liao indicated that “Mr. Lin is currently at the Yangmei Hukou border, waiting at the scene. He said if there is a tranquilizer gun, a veterinarian can accompany him to use it, but they need to see the baboon for sure before using it.” However, when the county government contacted Mr. Lin, he was already at the scene, and it was unexpected that he had a hunting rifle with him. They emphasized that Mr. Lin was not dispatched by the Hsinchu County Government, stating that the county government was not aware of his actions.
Leofoo Village: Adhering to principles of animal conservation, they carried professional tranquilizing equipment and a veterinarian throughout the entire operation. As the capture area fell under Taoyuan City’s jurisdiction, the park cooperated fully with the command arranged by the Taoyuan City Department of Agriculture. The park is unaware of which organization arranged for the hunter to cross jurisdictions and carry a hunting rifle. Regarding the hunter’s allegation that he was authorized and given consent by Leofoo Village staff to shoot, no staff members gave instructions to the hunter to shoot once they heard the gunshots in the baboon’s hiding area. Leofoo Village stated that they would take legal action against the hunter.
Gandhi once said, “The greatness and moral progress of a nation can be judged by how it treats its animals.” With the development of modern transportation and easy access to images and videos, it has become easier to catch a glimpse of the natural habitats of wildlife or visit them in person. In light of this, is there still a necessity for keeping wild animals in captivity? The future role and positioning of zoos are often debated. In the early days, animals in zoos were treated as profit-making tools, and their captive environments were created to cater to human needs. Some species were even captured from the wild, causing harm to their wild populations. These animals were forced to live in limited spaces far away from their homes, and when they were no longer profitable, they were often abandoned. As a result, many animals became displaced.
These wild animals, having been accustomed to captivity for many years, may have already lost their ability to survive in the wild. In today’s context, it is crucial for the public to consider whether zoos should continue to introduce new species and maintain their current operating methods. Since the existence of zoos is driven by human interest in observing exotic animals, any change must start with a shift in human mentality. Only when the profit motive is no longer present, will there be a real opportunity to break the vicious cycle.
In the future, zoos could potentially transform into sanctuaries for animals that have been harmed in human society, unable to find food on their own and requiring specialized care. This would allow zoos to become environments for life education. However, such a transformation relies heavily on societal consensus and support. It is hoped that the death of this East African baboon will not merely be a temporary hot topic, but a catalyst for the sincere and compassionate treatment of captive wildlife.
