Japanese Wartime Zoo Policy: The Silent Victims of World War II

Previous Publications Globalization of Japan: Japanese Sakoku Mentality and U.S. Efforts to Open Japan (St. Martin’s, 1...

Author: Mayumi Itoh

243 downloads 1340 Views 8MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Previous Publications Globalization of Japan: Japanese Sakoku Mentality and U.S. Efforts to Open Japan (St. Martin’s, 1998). The Hatoyama Dynasty: Japanese Political Leadership through the Generations (Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd ii

10/8/2010 11:30:54 AM

Japanese Wartime Zoo Policy The Silent Victims of World War II

Mayumi Itoh

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd iii

10/8/2010 11:30:54 AM

JAPANESE WARTIME ZOO POLICY

Copyright © Mayumi Itoh, 2010. All rights reserved. First published in 2010 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN® in the United States—a division of St. Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Where this book is distributed in the UK, Europe and the rest of the world, this is by Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries. ISBN: 978–0–230–10894–3 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Itoh, Mayumi, 1954– Japanese wartime zoo policy : the silent victims of World War II / Mayumi Itoh. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978–0–230–10894–3 (alk. paper) 1. Zoo animals—Effect of human beings on—Japan—History— 20th century. 2. Animal welfare—Moral and ethical aspects—Japan— History—20th century. 3. World War, 1939–1945—Moral and ethical aspects—Japan. 4. Japan—Politics and government—1926–1945. 5. War victims—Japan—History—20th century. I. Title. QL76.5.J3I86 2010 940.53⬘1—dc22

2010017701

A catalogue record of the book is available from the British Library. Design by Newgen Imaging Systems (P) Ltd., Chennai, India. First edition: December 2010 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Printed in the United States of America.

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd iv

10/8/2010 11:30:55 AM

For the animals who perished in the march of human folly

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd v

10/8/2010 11:30:55 AM

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd vi

10/8/2010 11:30:55 AM

C on ten ts

List of Photographs and Tables

ix

Acknowledgments

xi

Notes on the Text

xiii

List of Abbreviations

xv

Map

xvi

Photographs

xvii

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Introduction: “Disposal of Dangerous Animals” as Japan’s National Policy Historical Background: Creation of Modern Zoos and Militarism in Japan Zoos in Eastern Japan and World War II Zoos in Western Japan and World War II Zoos in Central Japan and World War II Zoos in Southwestern Japan and Japan’s Exterior Territories and World War II Zoos in Europe and World War II Zoos in the United States and World War II Zoos in Japan in the Early Postwar Years Conclusion: Assessment of Japanese Wartime Zoo Policy

1 15 37 57 77 101 121 145 161 185

Appendix

205

Notes

207

Bibliography

229

Index

237

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd vii

10/8/2010 11:30:55 AM

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd viii

10/8/2010 11:30:55 AM

P ho t o gr a phs a n d Ta bl e s

Photographs 1 Hanako at memorial service for fallen military animals, 1940 2 John in death, denied food and water since August 13, 1943 at Ueno Zoo, August 29, 1943 3 Kyōko and Maru, denied food and water since March 19, 1945 (died on April 24 and April 1, respectively) at Ueno Zoo, March 1945 4 Rita in military uniform at Osaka City Zoo, 1938 5 Danchi wearing gas mask for air-raid drill at Kobe City Zoo, 1938 6 Kiiko, Adon, Eldo, and Makani (from left) perform in patriotic costume at Higashiyama Zoo, October 1938 7 Hunters club members practice shooting in front of lion enclosure at Higashiyama Zoo, October 1941

xvii xvii

xviii xviii xix xix xx

Tables 2.1 JAZGA Member Zoos (1940) 3.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Ueno Zoo (1943–1945) 4.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Osaka City Zoo (1943–1944) 4.2 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Kyoto City Zoo (1944) 5.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Higashiyama Zoo (1943–1944) 6.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed in Japan (1943–1945) 7.1 Animals Destroyed at London Zoo (1939–1944) 7.2 Animals Destroyed at Whipsnade Zoo (1939–1943) Chronology of Major Events, Policy, and Measures regarding “Disposal Order” (1931–1945) (in appendix)

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd ix

35 46 63 66 91 119 126 128 205

10/8/2010 11:30:55 AM

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd x

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

Ack now l ed gmen t s

Among the many people who encouraged me in writing this manuscript, I would like to thank Spartaco Gippoliti, Pam Keeling, Paul Murphy, Lex Noordermeer, Harman Reichenbach, Ann Sylph, A. C. van Bruggen in Europe; Hashikawa Hisashi, Ishikawa Osamu, Kobayashi Hiroshi, Mikami Ukon, Mochimaru Yoriko, Mori Tetsuo, Nawa Akiyoshi, Sotani Katsunori, and Miyashita Minoru in Japan; as well as Beth Bahner, Li Jin, Ken Kawata, Vernon N. Kisling Jr., Donna McGill, James B. Murphy, Richard J. Reynolds III, Christina Simmons, and Erik Trump in the United States, for valuable information. I thank Kent E. and Toshiko Calder, Gerald L. Curtis, Ronald J. Hrebenar, Chalmers Johnson, Ken Kawata, Vernon N. Kisling Jr., Barbara Mori, Stephen Roddy, Donald S. Zagoria for insightful comments on the manuscript and for continuous encouragement. I also thank Daniel Dalet, Ishikawa Osamu, Kobayashi Hiroshi, Miyashita Minoru, and Nakagawa Shigeo for the loan of rare map and photographs. I would like to extend my appreciation for their generous support to Farideh Koohi-Kamali and Robyn Curtis, as well as Gregory Rewoldt, Megumi A. Itoh, and Itō Shigeru, who kept sending newspaper clippings even after suffering from a stroke, and Itō Asako, who had helped her family and friends tirelessly but suddenly passed away in the spring of 2010. Kōrogi ya awaseru hane no chinkonka (The cricket solemnly swings its wings, singing a requiem) —August 17, 2010, the 67th anniversary of the first day of disposal at Ueno Zoo

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xi

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xii

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

No tes on the Te x t

This book uses the modern system of Romanization for Chinese words, with the exception of historical names, which are given in the Wade-Giles system—for example, Chang Tso-lin (Zhang Zuolin). This work uses the Hepburn system for Japanese, with macrons; however, macrons are not used for words known in English without macrons, as in Kobe, Kyoto, Osaka, and Tokyo. The Revised Romanization of Korean spellings is used for Korean words, with the exception of historical words, which are given in the McCuneReischauer system. Chinese, Japanese, and Korean names are given with the surname first, except for those who use the reversed order in English. Honorific prefixes, such as doctor, mister, and so forth, are not used in the text. Native speakers were consulted as to the English spellings of names of Asian elephants and their trainers. The ages of animals are estimates, except for those born in captivity in zoos. Such an expression as “lion(s)” is used in the text when it was unclear whether there was only one lion or more than one lion in the original Japanese source, because the Japanese language does not distinguish singular and plural forms. All translations were made by the author in the form of paraphrases, not as direct translations, unless put into direct quotation marks. Citation numbers for sources of information are normally given at the end of each paragraph, instead of at the end of each sentence, in order to enhance the smooth reading of the text and also to limit the number of citations. All the haiku poems at the end of each chapter were originally written by the author in dedication to the animals destroyed.

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xiii

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xiv

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

A bbr ev i at ions

AAZPA ARCH ASPCA AVMA CCP GHQ HC HR IFAW IJA IUCN JAZA JAZGA JCP JNR JSP KMT MITI PRC R AF ROC SCAP WSPA

American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums Animal Relief Coalition for Haiti American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals American Veterinary Medical Association Chinese Communist Party General Headquarters House of Councillors House of Representatives International Fund for Animal Welfare Imperial Japanese Army International Union for Conservation of Nature Japanese Association of Zoos and Aquariums Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums Japanese Communist Party Japan National Railways Japan Socialist Party Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) Ministry of International Trade and Industry People’s Republic of China Royal Air Force (British) Republic of China Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers World Society for the Protection of Animals

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xv

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

Map

JAZGA Member Zoos, 1943 Source: Constructed by author from blank map of East Asia, courtesy of Daniel Dalet, d-maps.com, http://d-maps.com/carte.php?lib=east_asia_map&num_car=77&lang=en

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xvi

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

P ho t o gr a phs

1. Hanako at memorial service for fallen military animals, 1940 Source: Courtesy of Tokyo Zoological Park Society

2. John in death, denied food and water since August 13, 1943 at Ueno Zoo, August 29, 1943 Source: Courtesy of Tokyo Zoological Park Society

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xvii

10/8/2010 11:30:56 AM

3. Kyōko and Maru, denied food and water since March 19, 1945 (died on April 24 and April 1, respectively) at Ueno Zoo, March 1945 Source: Courtesy of Tokyo Zoological Park Society

4. Rita in military uniform at Osaka City Zoo, 1938 Source: Courtesy of Osaka City Ten’noji Zoo

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xviii

10/8/2010 11:30:57 AM

5. Danchi wearing gas mask for air-raid drill at Kobe City Zoo, 1938 Source: Courtesy of Kobe City Ōji Zoo

6. Kiiko, Adon, Eldo, and Makani (from left) perform in patriotic costume at Higashiyama Zoo, October 1938 Source: Courtesy of Higashiyama Zoo

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xix

10/8/2010 11:30:57 AM

7. Hunters club members practice shooting in front of lion enclosure at Higashiyama Zoo, October 1941 Source: Courtesy of Higashiyama Zoo

9780230108943_01_prexx.indd xx

10/8/2010 11:30:58 AM

CH A P T ER

1

Introduction: “Disposal of Dangerous Animals” as Japan’s National Policy

The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. —Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) Men! The only animal in the world to fear. —D. H. Lawrence (1885–1930)

When a devastating 7.0-magnitude earthquake hit Haiti on January 12, 2010, followed by its strong aftershocks, various humanitarian rescue missions were promptly organized by groups such as the American Red Cross and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), but rescue work for captive animals and wildlife there lagged behind. The Discovery News reported on January 15, 2010 that the fate of the Haiti zoo, the endangered species, and other animals in the Caribbean country remained uncertain at that time. U.S. animal and veterinary organizations, including the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), attempted to collect information about the plight of the animals there while also standing by to let rescuers concentrate on human victims.1

H Z According to a visitor to Haiti in late December 2009, Fermathe, Haiti, is home to a little zoo that houses monkeys, snakes, alligators, and exotic birds, but at the time no tigers, bears, elephants, or giraffes.

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 1

10/8/2010 10:07:17 AM

2


Haiti is also home to several endangered animal species. According to Animal Info, which monitors the world’s endangered animals, four out of Haiti’s total of twenty species of mammals (20 percent) are threatened, as identified by the 2004 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red Data List of Threatened Animals. These include the Puerto Rican hutia (Isolobodon portoricensis), with critically endangered status; the Haitian solenodon (Solenodon paradoxus), with endangered status; and both the American manatee (Trichechus manatus) and the Hispaniolan hutia (Plagiodontia aedium), with vulnerable status.2 The Fermathe Hospital next to the zoo was still standing, where doctors and other staff were exhausted but trying to provide sufficient aid to countless patients. The AVMA issued a press release on January 14, 2010, stating, “As always with disasters like this, the humanitarian rescue efforts will be the focus in Haiti for the first week or so. However, veterinarians are on standby to assist with the tragedy.” It added, “Once the immediate human needs have been met, the AVMA is ready to address the animal issue in any way we can.” Bloggers Christine Frietchen and Linda Mohr wrote, “So far, animal relief organizations like the Humane Society and the ASPCA [American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals] are not making large appeals for Haiti’s animal population. As with Hurricane Katrina, it may be a few days before animals’ agencies can start rescue operations and get personnel and supplies into the area. The International Fund for Animal Welfare [IFAW] is on alert, noting that humanitarian efforts need to be well underway before animal rescue efforts can begin in earnest.”3 On January 17 the ASPCA joined the newly formed Animal Relief Coalition for Haiti (ARCH), which was organized by the IFAW and the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA). Thus, they earnestly embarked on the rescue work for Haiti’s animals, including companion animals, livestock animals, stray dogs, and native wildlife.4

R C  Z  W In addition to this kind of natural disaster, wars have had devastating effects on zoos and animals throughout the world. In fact, as recently as the turn of the twenty-first century, animals fell to the march of human folly in wars. Three such examples are described below.

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 2

10/8/2010 10:07:17 AM

INTRODUCTION

3

K Z When Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990, they took over the zoo in a suburb of the capital, Kuwait City. The zoo staff were forced to abandon the zoo soon after the invasion, and left behind 493 birds, 208 mammals, and 34 reptiles on their own. Iraqi soldiers indiscriminately shot birds and mammals, including a tiger, two leopards, three wolves, and an orangutan. Moreover, when they became hungry, they shot the zoo’s gazelles and ate them. They also shot the zebras and fed them to the hungry lions. The sole surviving elephant, Azizor, roamed forlornly around its enclosure with a gaping bullet wound on its right shoulder. A monkey hobbled on a battered leg after being shot by an Iraqi general. In the end, Iraqi troops ate three-quarters of the edible species in the zoo. The surviving animals, including five lions, two tigers, and three sickly Syrian bears, had been confined to smelly cages for seven months and were starving to death when the U.S. forces arrived. The hippopotami were in a pool of putrid water that had been left unchanged for seven months.5

B Z Then came the Iraq War in March 2003. As U.S. forces dropped missiles on the Iraqi capital, Baghdad Zoo became one of the battlegrounds. People plundered the zoo, looting all the goods (including toilet bowls) and eating its animals. Only the fierce animals they could not get their hands on remained in their cages, being dehydrated and starved to death. Recognizing that animals have been expendable throughout wartime history, a South African wildlife conservationist, Lawrence Anthony, undertook a rescue mission to save the surviving animals in the zoo and provide medicine and supplies. By the time he arrived at the zoo, the number of birds and mammals had been reduced from 650 to just 30. To a reporter’s question as to why he tried to save animals when people were dying, Anthony answered, “Since humans put wildlife in cages, humans are responsible for their well-being.” Animals were in shocking conditions. Lions were too weak to even drink, unable to lap up the water, while a bear was caked in dirt. The U.S. Army had no formal plans for the zoo, but they improvised ways to help repair it. Four months later, zoo officials invited children from a local orphanage to attend Baghdad Zoo’s public reopening.6

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 3

10/8/2010 10:07:18 AM

4


K Z Decades of civil war among warring factions in Afghanistan have also taken a heavy toll not only on the country’s people but also on its animals. The animals of Kabul Zoo in that nation’s capital have been among the most affected. Kabul Zoo was “trashed” by the fighting among the Mujahideen factions from 1992 to 1996, after the Soviet Army withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. The zoo’s main building and its aquarium were destroyed by shelling, and half of the cage bars in the zoo were twisted. The combatants also shot many animals, such as deer and rabbits, for food. The zoo’s aged, one-eyed lion, Marjan, was blinded by the explosion of a grenade thrown by soldiers after he mauled a soldier who went into his cage on a dare. “Marjan has been traumatized by his brush with death ever since.” Another Afghan guerrilla amused himself by firing a rocket-propelled grenade at an elephant. A bear also suffered a gunshot wound in the leg. What animals remained were freezing, as there was no fuel to heat their cages in the subzero temperatures. Then “a justice minister of the Taliban regime [1996–2001] visited the zoo and demanded to know which law of Islam sanctioned the keeping of animals.” The Taliban made the zoo director dismiss the zoo veterinarian.7 London Times correspondent Stephen Grey reported in 1998 that Kabul Zoo was located twelve and a half miles from the front lines of the civil war, which was too close for comfort, or safety, for the animals. It was a “zoo of horror.” In 2001 the number of specimens at the zoo declined to less than forty. To counter the predicament of the zoo, a team from the WSPA, led by Hayden Turner, a zookeeper at Taronga Zoo in Sidney, Australia, embarked on the Kabul Zoo Rescue in the winter of 2001–2002. Marjan, the one-eyed lion, was in poor condition when the team arrived at the zoo. He succumbed to the cold and died in 2002. Nevertheless, owing to the outpouring of international assistance, including that from the Chinese government and North Carolina Zoo, Kabul Zoo began to recover from the decades of civil war and the turmoil of the Taliban regime. However, in 2005 China withdrew its animal donations. The fate of Kabul Zoo is uncertain while the war in Afghanistan continues under the Obama Administration.8 These cases of a recent natural disaster and of regional wars indicate that animals have long been considered secondary victims of calamities, both manmade and natural. However, recently animal protection groups and volunteers have gathered their forces to initiate rescue work for animals. These initiatives also have helped to raise

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 4

10/8/2010 10:07:18 AM

INTRODUCTION

5

awareness and interest among the general public in the plight of captive animals during war and other disasters. *

*

*

O T E  J In the aftermath of World War II, a strange scene took place in May 1949 at Higashiyama Zoo in Nagoya, in the central region of Japan. Zoo director Kitaō Hideichi instructed zookeeper Asai Rikizō to separate two female Asian elephants, Eldo and Makani, as two schoolchildren from Tokyo observed. Makani was taken to the outdoor yard in the elephant house, whereas the younger Eldo was left in the indoor facility. An iron door separated the two. No sooner did Eldo start crying and banging her trunk against the door than Makani turned back and dashed toward the door. As Makani banged her head against the door repeatedly, in her desperate attempt to open it, her forehead began to bleed.9 Kitaō’s purpose in this exercise was to demonstrate to the schoolchildren how inseparable the two elephants were. Kitaō told the young students, who had just witnessed the strong bond between the elephants, “You see, they are inseparable.” The children concurred. The two schoolchildren were representatives of the Taitō-ward Children’s Congress in Tokyo, where Ueno Zoo was located. They were visiting Nagoya’s Higashiyama Zoo all the way from Tokyo because Eldo and Makani were the only two elephants in Japan in May 1949, and the children wanted to persuade Kitaō to send one of the two elephants to Ueno Zoo (see chapter 9).10 There had been about twenty elephants in Japanese zoos in the early 1940s (all elephants imported to Japan prior to March 1953 were Asian). Nevertheless, all the elephants in Japan, except for five, had been “disposed of” from August 1943 to May 1945 during World War II. Out of the five elephants that had escaped the disposal, three died as a result of feed and fuel shortages: Kiiko and Adon at Higashiyama Zoo died in January and February 1945. Tomoe (officially Tomoe-gō) at Kyoto City Zoo survived the war, but soon died in January 1946, making Eldo and Makani the sole surviving elephants in all of Japan (see chapter 5 and photograph 6). In this context, the two schoolchildren visited Higashiyama Zoo to request a loan of an elephant. Kitaō welcomed them with the utmost hospitality and gave them a ride on the elephants. Nevertheless, he was determined to protect the well-being of the two elephants.

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 5

10/8/2010 10:07:18 AM

6


Eldo and Makani were indeed inseparable. They were also too old to withstand a long-distance trip. Kitaō declined the children’s request. However, understanding their strong wish, Kitaō conceived an idea to have children from Tokyo and elsewhere visit Higashiyama Zoo instead of sending an elephant to Ueno Zoo. But arranging such transportation was a “mission impossible” when Japan was under occupation. The Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers General Headquarters (SCAP-GHQ), General Douglas MacArthur, did not allow the Japan National Railways (JNR) to run even a single ad hoc train. Weaving through the complex bureaucratic red tape between the Japanese government and the SCAP-GHQ, Kitaō succeeded in arranging transportation for children in June 1949, hence the initiation of the “Elephant Train.” In total, the Elephant Train carried fifteen thousand children to Nagoya, running through war-torn cities. Eldo and Makani were invaluable in brightening the people’s hearts in the dark years of the early postwar era. They were symbols of peace and hope (see chapter 9).

“D  D A” Elephants were not the only animals that were destroyed during the war. A little-known fact is that zoos throughout Japan disposed of almost two hundred “dangerous animals” between August 1943 and May 1945. These included not only carnivores (such as lions, tigers, leopards, and cheetahs), but also omnivores (bears, which are considered carnivores in the taxonomic classification of the zoo community), herbivores (elephants, hippopotami, and American bison), and reptiles (such as pythons and rattlesnakes) (see table 6.1). On the record, 170 specimens were destroyed in Japanese zoos during the war, to the extent that the disposal of each individual specimen could be confirmed through the official zoo and city records, zoo directors’ writings, newspaper articles, and other documents. Actually, considerably more specimens, nearly 200, were destroyed, although the exact number can not be determined (an accurate number is no longer available, as some zoos have destroyed or lost their records). In addition, circus companies in Japan destroyed a total of 133 specimens in 1943: 52 lions, 8 leopards, 2 tigers, 6 bears, 7 elephants, and 58 snakes. Furthermore, three zoos in Japan’s colonies— Korea, Taiwan, and Japan’s puppet state, Manchukuo (in Manchuria in northeast China)—also destroyed a number of their own dangerous animals, although again the exact number could not be confirmed (see chapter 6).

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 6

10/8/2010 10:07:18 AM

INTRODUCTION

7

Why did the Japanese zoos destroy their exotic showpiece animals? Why did they destroy these animals that they looked after, some of which had been successfully bred in captivity on their own premises? And why did the Japanese circuses destroy their precious “commodities” that they had bought with enormous amounts of money?

F T G-G, Ō S In July 1943 Tokyo-city and Tokyo-prefecture were integrated and reorganized as metropolitan Tokyo (Tokyo, hereafter) in order to streamline and strengthen the management of the nation’s capital for the purpose of fully executing the war objectives (see chronology in appendix for the background). This organizational change brought fatal consequences upon zoos throughout Japan. The Tokyo governor position was not popularly elected, then. The first Tokyo governorgeneral, Ōdachi Shigeo (1892–1955), was a career bureaucrat in the Home Ministry (Naimushō), which administered the entire internal affairs of Japan, including local governments and police. Upon graduating from the Tokyo Imperial University Faculty of Law, Ōdachi climbed up the bureaucratic ladder to become permanent vice home minister in the Abe and Yonai cabinets (August 1939–January 1940; and January–July 1940). Ōdachi was deeply entrenched in the Home Ministry. After serving as Tokyo governor-general, Ōdachi became home minister in the Koiso cabinet (July 1944–April 1945). The post of home minister was the second highest in the Japanese national government, second only to that of the prime minister. The home minister, as the supreme decision maker for internal affairs, exercised enormous power, presiding over local administrations as well as the central government.11 Having been number two at the Home Ministry (and soon to become number one), Governor-General Ōdachi’s power extended beyond Tokyo to all the other local governments of Japan. Backed by this omnipotent Home Ministry, Ōdachi conceived the idea to destroy dangerous animals, for political reasons rather than for strategic necessities of the war (see chapter 10) , and executed it. Unlike those in the United States, most of the major zoos in Japan were public, run by municipal governments. Japanese government was highly centralized (unitary system), and local governments had little autonomy, a far cry from the states in the U.S. federal system. Zoo directors reported to local administrations’ Park Section heads, who in turn reported to bureaucrats in the Home Ministry. In this rigidly

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 7

10/8/2010 10:07:19 AM

8


hierarchical system, zoo directors had no choice but to execute the Home Ministry’s decision in order to save their own positions or lives in the wartime regime. Consequently, immediately following the actions taken at Ueno Zoo, other zoos throughout Japan executed the disposal order.12 In summary, Governor-General Ōdachi, who reached the pinnacle of the bureaucratic pyramid at the Home Ministry, made the decision and issued the disposal order. Thus, Ōdachi is responsible for destroying more than 303 showpiece animals (substantially more, in fact) in Japanese territories proper and many more animals in Japan’s colonies of Korea, Taiwan, and Manchukuo. The unique and extraordinary nature of this measure was that it was conducted as a national policy rather than as decisions of individual zoos or local authorities, as in the cases of Europe and the United States. Zoos and circuses throughout Japan destroyed a total of more than 300 popular animals well before the U.S. B-29 air strikes on major cities in the nation were anticipated, with the pretext of public safety (see chapter 10). *

*

*

Despite the extraordinary nature of the disposal order, and its actual execution throughout Japan (as well as its colonies in East Asia), there is no book on this subject in English.

L R Histories of zoos in the world have been written by R. J. Hoage and William A. Deiss, eds., New Worlds, New Animals: From Menagerie to Zoological Park in the Nineteenth Century (1996); Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens (2001); and Nigel Rothfels, Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo (2002), just to mention three notable examples. However, few books in English examine the effects of World War II, the most destructive war in modern history, on zoos and animals, with the exception of Kisling’s book (and brief references in encyclopedias of world zoos). There are some records of the war damage to zoos and animals in the original languages, such as in German, Dutch, and Polish; however, they have not been translated into English.13 Zoo specialists have not written much about the war damage to zoos and animals in English primarily because this is not a glorious part of the zoo history. This is a part of the zoo history that they would like to avoid writing about. Those in the zoo community

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 8

10/8/2010 10:07:19 AM

INTRODUCTION

9

would like to forget what happened to zoos and animals during the war. Another reason for the paucity of study on this subject is the serious disjuncture between policy study (or political science) and zoo study (or zoology). Political scientists rarely study zoos or animals.14 On the other hand, zoo specialists do not usually write about politics or policy making. They write articles mainly on scientific aspects of zoos and animals in their professional journals, such as International Zoo News. A general notion that the war damage to animals is not as important as such damage to humans and is not worth accounting for in the records might also explain the lack of study of this subject. Meanwhile, recently there has been a rise in awareness and interest in the study of war and animals. For example, as noted earlier, South African wildlife conservationist Lawrence Anthony initiated the Baghdad Zoo Rescue operations to save the zoo’s animals during the Iraq war. He then chronicled his experiences there in Babylon’s Ark: The Incredible Wartime Rescue of the Baghdad Zoo (2007). In addition, National Geographic News documented the rescue mission at Kabul Zoo in Afghanistan, organized by the WSPA. Further, Diane Ackerman portrayed the plight of Warsaw Zoo during World War II in The Zookeeper’s Wife: A War Story (2007), although her book is primarily about rescuing human war victims, not animals.15 This new interest derives from the awareness that the damage to zoo animals is an integral part of war history and the war record, which should be taken seriously and fully accounted for. This notion was not widely recognized half a century ago. The new awareness sheds light on the damage to zoo animals in recent wars, which is in turn resurrecting the interest in the study of the damage to zoos in World War II. This is also in line with the recent increase in the literature by civilian victims of World War II in Europe (Holocaust victims) and in Asia (Chinese and Korean “comfort women,” forced laborers, and other victims) in their final efforts to leave a true record of their wartime experiences.16 Paucity of Studies of Japanese Zoo History Surprisingly, there is not a single English-language book solely devoted to Japanese zoos, let alone to Japanese zoo policy during World War II. Only a chapter exists on the history of Japanese zoos, covering 1716 to 2000, written by former Staten Island Zoo general curator Ken Kawata. This chapter in Kisling’s book (above) is the only solid study of Japanese zoos available in English to the knowledge of this author. Thus, a huge information vacuum exists in the published accounts in

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 9

10/8/2010 10:07:19 AM

10


English of Japanese zoo history during the war. Kawata himself states, “The wartime experience in Japanese zoos is one of the areas totally unknown in the West. The disasters in German zoos during World War II, specifically that of Berlin Zoo, is only what we read about.” In September 2009 German sinologist Frederick S. Litten wrote an article titled “Starving the Elephants: The Slaughter of Animals in Wartime Tokyo’s Ueno Zoo” in English. However, as the title suggests, the article studies only the case of Ueno Zoo. It does not examine the disposal of animals in more than a dozen other zoos in Japan, except for a brief reference to the case of Higashiyama Zoo in Nagoya.17 Other than that, Ian Miller wrote a chapter titled “Didactic Nature: Exhibiting Nation and Empire at the Ueno Zoological Gardens” in Gregory M. Pflugfelder and Brett L. Walker’s JAPANimals: History and Culture in Japan’s Animal Life (2005).18 However, the chapter only discusses the creation of Ueno Zoo, the first modern zoo in Japan, and it does not go beyond 1924. There is no chapter that examines the wartime zoo policy in this book, because it is a historical study of the effects of animals in Japanese culture, primarily the period from early Japan to early modern Japan. The rest of the accounts on Japanese zoos available in books in English are entries on Japanese zoos in encyclopedias of world zoos, or their equivalents, where short descriptions of major zoos in Japan are given. A fine example was written by Kobe City Ōji Zoo director Yamamoto Shizuo, in Rosl Kirchshofer’s The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer, but it was published in 1968 as a general introduction of Japanese zoos and does not detail the war years.19 In addition, International Zoo News publishes articles on zoos and animals, including those in Japan; however, they are written by professionals in the zoo community for the professionals in their community and are really not suitable for readership outside their community or the general public. Absence of Studies of Japanese Zoo Policy during World War II More surprisingly, to the knowledge of this author, there is only one solid book written in any language that exclusively studies Japanese zoo policy during World War II: Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos, 1995). However, even this is not a comprehensive work on the subject, because it lacks a study of zoos in one whole island (out of the four islands that make up Japan), the one called Kyūshū in southwestern Japan. His book thus missed four zoos out of a total of fourteen zoos in Japan in May 1943 that

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 10

10/8/2010 10:07:19 AM

INTRODUCTION

11

were members of the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums (JAZGA, hereafter; this acronym was not used until after the war, because English was considered an enemy language. It is currently called the Japanese Association of Zoos and Aquariums, or JAZA) founded in June 1940 (see chapter 2). Yet, Akiyama (1929– 2001) was devoted to telling stories of the war to Japanese youth.20 Part of the problem derives from the absence of reliable information. Several zoo directors buried or “sanitized” the records, because they were not proud of these records, even if they had been forced to carry out the disposal order. People who worked at the zoos and have hands-on knowledge of the disposal have almost died out. Therefore, the research of this subject requires rigorous and thorough investigation of existing material with the eye of a detective (examined below). Another reason might be that the majority of the Japanese people have made a conscious effort to forget about what happened during the war. Their “historical amnesia” was fostered by the Japanese government, which drove the people into the rebuilding of the nation after defeat. The bottom line is that there is no single book in English that entirely examines the Japanese zoo policy during World War II, despite the unique and extraordinary nature of the disposal order.

S  T B This book is the first comprehensive study of Japanese zoo policy during World War II. It primarily examines the eighteen zoos: fifteen zoos in Japanese territory proper that were members of the JAZGA in January 1943, including Hanshin Park Zoo, which withdrew from the JAZGA in April 1943 when the military took over the facility—as well as three zoos in Korea, Taiwan, and Manchukuo, all three of which were members of the JAZGA (see table 2.1 and map). There were also several smaller zoos or menageries in Japan in 1943. However, these were mostly privately owned (as a kind of animal farm) and were not members of the JAZGA. They did not have large animals or dangerous animals.21 Therefore, their cases are not included in this study. In addition, there were three aquariums that were members of the JAZGA in 1943; however, this book does not examine their cases because they were excluded from the disposal order. In order to provide international comparative perspectives, this book also examines the effects of war on zoos in other parts of the world. Due to the incessant history of war and the countless cases of war damage to zoos throughout the world, however, the book limits the time scope mostly to World War II and some recent wars, and

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 11

10/8/2010 10:07:20 AM

12


confines the geographical area outside Asia to Europe, the United States, and the Middle East. While this book is the product of exhaustive research on zoos in Japan, examination of the zoos in other parts of the world is only selective, primarily determined by the availability of information and because complete coverage outside Japan would be beyond the scope of this book. Therefore, only selected cases in the rest of the world are given here to provide an international comparative frame of reference (see chapters 7 and 8).

S  I The bibliography used for this research includes primary sources (official histories published by each zoo, official histories of each city concerned, and other related records), books written by zoo directors and other zoo officials, newspaper articles, and scholarly and commercially published books, as well as interviews with zoo officials and employees or with people who knew the zoo officials. It should be noted that the literature available, including most of the official zoo histories, is fraught with errors. Even such critical information as the dates of the disposals, as well as the numbers of specimens and species of animals destroyed, is absent, inconsistent, or contradictory. Some zoos do not have any wartime records, either intentionally or unintentionally. There are also many instances of “rewriting history” by the zoo directors and other officials concerned. For instance, in the case of Ueno Zoo, acting zoo director Fukuda Saburō deliberately gave an inaccurate “official report” of the disposal to Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi, because he could not execute the disposal the way Ōdachi had ordered him to. Only a quarter century later, in 1968, did Fukuda reveal the true record (see chapter 3). In another case, zoo director Anami Tetsurō of Itōzu Yūen in current Kita-Kyūshū-city told part of the truth in 1950 and then told a completely different story a quarter century later in 1975 (see chapter 6). Despite exhaustive investigation and thorough research within the ability of this author, the true records of many other zoos are still filled with mysteries and are buried in the vault of history. Sorting out conflicting information and data was confusing at best. Moreover, all the zoo directors during the war were already deceased, and it was not possible to confirm the accuracy of each critical piece of information in the literature and records. This research was in many respects detective work, tracing back the documents of the wartime history, scrutinizing the conflicting data available with rigor, and determining which documents were more accurate than others. It was

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 12

10/8/2010 10:07:20 AM

INTRODUCTION

13

nerve-racking investigative work. In the case of zoo records of World War II in the European continent, although many of the zoos lost their records during the war, limited literature is available in their original non-English languages, such as German and Dutch. However, according to zoo historian Herman Reichenbach of Hamburg, Germany, no serious and comprehensive study on this subject has been made to date. Reichenbach therefore stated that it would make an excellent subject for German PhD candidates in war history or zoo study.22 In addition, translating names of animals from Japanese to English was challenging. Japanese zoos from 1943 to 1944 used many names for animals that are not recognized by the current zoological world. For instance, there is no such species of animal called a “North Manchurian brown bear” (Hokuman higuma), which the Japanese zoos listed in their collections in 1943, in the present zoological taxonomy. It would be “Siberian brown bear” in the current English taxonomy. Further, the changes in official names of many species of animals by the international zoological community itself over the years complicate the matter. For example, a crane called tanchō, which is often erroneously assumed to be the Japanese national bird (it is the kigi, or the Japanese green pheasant), is now officially called a “red-crowned crane.” According to Kawata, “Germans still use the old term, ‘Manchurian crane,’ which is now politically incorrect.”23 Although this book is not a zoological study of zoo animals in Japan, it has tried to use the correct English names of animals as much as possible, through consulting Japanese zoo experts, such as Kawata. When it was difficult to determine the correct name in the current taxonomy in English, both the original Japanese name (in parentheses) and its translation into English (in quotation marks) are shown, as for example, “Mongolian cranes” (Mōko-zuru). Thus, this book tries to be true to the original sources as much as possible and gives the closest translations into English. This author was also advised to use the proper terms in zoo communities, as well as not to anthropomorphize animals. Therefore, definitions are added to unfamiliar terms to those outside the zoo community, such as “mounted” (taxidermy) and “necropsy.” In addition, this book uses anthropomorphizing expressions, such as “the bear was scared” and “the elephant was smart,” only when the original sources use them. *

*

*

The “official history” of Higashiyama Zoo mentions that a new discipline called “zoo sociology” is receiving increasing attention.

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 13

10/8/2010 10:07:20 AM

14


It states, “A zoo is a ‘drama’ between animals and humans, reflecting the social situation of a specific time, if in a subtle fashion. It is important to build a zoo for the future, based on the history and experiences of zoos in the past.”24 What this statement means is that the state of zoos is a reflection of human society in many ways. For instance, as the list of endangered species expands, the primary role of zoos has changed accordingly as facilities to preserve species instead of merely displaying exotic animals. As the quotation of Mahatma Gandhi, introduced at the beginning of this chapter, suggests, a zoo is a reflection of the level of humanity, good or bad. It is this author’s belief that a study of war damage to zoo animals is an essential part of war history and war study. Documenting an accurate account in English of what happened to captive animals in Japan during World War II and understanding the reasons why things happened the way they did are the first steps to atone nearly seven decades later for their deaths worldwide. Quoting Philadelphia Zoo director William V. Donaldson’s words, “[Z]oos are frail arks,” Kawata says that the prosperity of zoos hinges on world peace, on the delicate balance of the superpowers’ game-playing.25 This book examines what happens to zoos and animals when that balance is moved off the scale, for the case of Japan during World War II. Before examining the actual execution of the disposal order of dangerous animals in Japanese zoos, it is important to understand the political and social background in which modern zoos were created in Japan and how they were incorporated into the war effort during World War II. Suna-arashi yashi no kokage ni rakuda yoru (The camel takes refuge under the coconut tree during the Desert Storm) —January 16, 2010, the 19th anniversary of Operation Desert Storm

9780230108943_02_ch01.indd 14

10/8/2010 10:07:20 AM

CH A P T ER

2

Historical Background: Creation of Modern Zoos and Militarism in Japan

The creation of modern zoos in Japan began with the Meiji Restoration of 1868 when the power of the emperor was restored from that of feudal warlords. The last shoguns, of the Tokugawa clan, had ruled the country from 1603 to 1868 while maintaining the emperor as a figurehead. Then the Meiji government organized a highly centralized government, patterned after Prussia’s Bismarckian regime, with Emperor Mutsuhito as the nation’s ruler; hence, it is called the Meiji Restoration. Japan had been under the self-imposed sakoku (seclusionist) policy for over two and a half centuries during the Tokugawa era. Consequently, the Meiji government strove for the modernization of Japan under the nationalistic banner of “Fukoku-kyōhei” (“Rich Nation, Strong Army”).1 The creation of modern zoos in Japan was an integral part of such endeavors. Komori Atsushi (1928–2002), who worked at Ueno Zoo in Tokyo from 1947 until 1984, categorized the development of Japanese zoos in the following ten stages: 1. 2. 3. 4.

1872–1882 1882–1886 1886–1909 1897–1925

5. 1909–1925 6. 1925–1942 7. 1943–1946 8. 1947–1952

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 15

The embryonic stage The formative stage The growth stage The diversification stage (partly overlapping with stage 3) The stagnant stage (partly overlapping with stage 4) The developmental stage The chaotic stage The rehabilitation and reconstruction stage

10/8/2010 7:42:21 AM

16


9. 1953–1963 10. 1963–1973

The expansion and mushrooming stage The maturing stage2

Backed by the almost absolute power of the Meiji government, the national and local governments created zoos in major cities in Japan. It is beyond the scope of this book to examine the detailed history of each zoo in Japan. This chapter therefore reviews the creation of Ueno Zoo, the first modern zoo in Japan, opened in the nation’s capital. This zoo became the model for other zoos in Japan, representing their problems as well as their merits.

Genesis of Ueno Zoo: The Early Years Ueno Zoo was established in March 1882 as part of the National Museum of Natural History. It was patterned after the Menagerie du Jardin des Plantes attached to the National Museum of Natural History in Paris, France. The Natural History Bureau (Hakubutsukyoku) of the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce administered the museum. Tanaka Yoshio (from Shinano, current Nagano-prefecture, 1838–1916) was hired at the bureau and created this first zoo in Japan. Tanaka had studied botany with Itō Keisuke of Owari province (current Nagoya), who was a student of the German naturalist and physician Philipp Franz von Siebold (1796–1866), in the Dutch colony in Nagasaki, southwestern Japan.3 Tanaka went to France in 1866–1867 as a member of the Japanese delegation to the second Universal Exposition (1867 Expo), held in Paris. The educator and promoter of “Civilization and Enlightenment,” Fukuzawa Yukichi (1834–1901), who also went to Europe in 1862, introduced the notion of the zoological museum and zoological garden as cultural institutions to the Japanese in Seiyō-jijō (Things Western) in 1866. Fukuzawa also coined the word dō-butsu-en (animated life garden) as a translation for the zoological garden.4 The National Museum of Natural History was originally built in Yamashita-chō, not in Ueno, in 1873. Its menagerie had thirty-two specimens of fifteen species of mammals, nineteen specimens of eleven species of birds, and fifteen specimens of two species of reptiles, as well as honeybees and snails. The museum initially belonged to the Ministry of Education. In 1875 its jurisdiction was transferred to the newly established Home Ministry, overseen by Ōkubo Toshimichi of Satsuma province (current Kagoshima-prefecture, 1830–1878; the first “home lord,” or de facto prime minister, in Japan), who planned to use the museum as a venue to promote the industrialization of

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 16

10/8/2010 7:42:22 AM

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

17

Japan. With Ōkubo’s sudden death (by assassination), however, the Home Ministry transferred the jurisdiction of the museum to the newly created Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce in 1881.5 The museum, especially its dirty, noisy, and smelly menagerie, was an unwanted “appendix” to the ministry from the onset. Tanaka was head-hunted by the new ministry and oversaw the transfer of the menagerie in 1882, along with the museum, to a new location in Ueno: thus, the birth of Ueno Zoo. Tanaka was promoted to Natural History Bureau director-general in October 1882. However, he was isolated. The ministry bureaucrats did not understand the need to create botanical and zoological gardens of the kinds that existed in the west. Tanaka resigned in May 1883.6 Prime Minister Itō’s Scheme Prime Minister Itō Hirobumi of Chōshū province (current Yamaguchiprefecture, 1841–1909), who was the first Japanese to hold this title and was also Imperial Household minister, suddenly transferred the jurisdiction of the museum to the Imperial Household Ministry in March 1886. The Itō cabinet concealed the reasons for the abrupt change; however, contemporary scholars concluded that it was part of Prime Minister Itō’s concerted efforts to establish the status of the Imperial Family. The Imperial Family did not have economic or political power during the Tokugawa and other feudal eras, and their political power had only been restored in 1868. Itō therefore tried to secure the family’s assets and status before the Japanese constitution was adopted and the parliamentary system was established.7 To this end, Prime Minister Itō procured most of the stock of the Bank of Japan and the Japan Shipping Company for the Imperial Family, making the family one of the largest stockholders in the world at the time. He also gave the gold mines on Sado Island to the family. In this context the Itō cabinet changed the nature of the National Museum of Natural History to a historical art museum for the purpose of collecting and preserving antique art objects for the Imperial Family. To the Imperial Household Ministry officials, the menagerie was nothing but a useless attachment to the museum. Consequently, the zoo’s raison d’étre was demoted to being a mere source of revenue (from its admissions), or a “cash cow,” according to an American observer.8 The history of the early years of Ueno Zoo illustrates that its establishment was toyed with by tarai-mawashi (political football), also involving bureaucratic turf battles and power struggles among

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 17

10/8/2010 7:42:22 AM

18


the four dominant hambatsu (old province-based cliques, made up of Satsuma [Kagoshima], Chōshū [Yamaguchi], Tosa [Kōchi], and Hizen [Saga]), in the formative era of the modern political system in Japan. Kyoto City Zoo director Sasaki Tokio (1913–1974; director 1962–1968) argues that this change in the mandate of Ueno Zoo seriously affected the nature of modern museums and zoos created afterward in Japan. The Japanese came to perceive zoos as amusement parks rather than as facilities for promoting education and the scientific study of animals, as well as for breeding animals for the preservation of species.9 First De Facto Zoo Director: Ishikawa Chiyomatsu Ueno Zoo gradually added its collection of large exotic animals, such as a pair of tigers (1887), a pair of elephants (1888; gifts from the Siamese emperor; current Thailand), and three camels (1895). The zoo did not have a veterinarian until 1892, and the male tiger died soon in 1888 and the female became sick in 1889. The female elephant died in 1893. The Imperial Household Ministry was benefiting enormously from the admission fees of the zoo. Nevertheless, the ministry tried to reduce the operating cost of the zoo and did not employ a full-time zoo director proper. The ministry instead appointed Tokyo Imperial University Agriculture College professor (zoologist) and the National Museum of Natural History’s Natural Collection Department director (Tensan-buchō kokoroe) Ishikawa Chiyomatsu (1860–1935, the registered year of his birth was 1861) to the post of administrator (de facto director) of Ueno Zoo in 1890. It was a common practice in those days to appoint a single person to multiple “full-time” positions simultaneously, as in the case of Prime Minister Itō, who was Imperial Household minister while being prime minister. Ishikawa had studied Darwinism under the German evolutionary biologist August Weismann, at Freiburg University in southwestern Germany. He also learned evolution theory from American zoologist Edward S. Morse (1838–1925) at Tokyo Imperial University. Ishikawa’s son, Kin’ichi (a graduate of Princeton University), translated and helped to publish Morse’s memoirs of Japan in 1929.10 In 1901 Ishikawa bought a number of animals from Carl Hagenbeck Jr. (1844–1913), the founder of the Hagenbeck Animal Park in Stellingen, a suburb of Hamburg, Germany. The first pairs of lions and polar bears arrived in January 1902, among twenty-three specimens of thirteen species. However, the female lion died the following November. The zoo acquired another lion from Sydney Zoo

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 18

10/8/2010 7:42:22 AM


19

in 1904, but it turned out to be a male. Thus, the zoo gave this male lion to Kyoto City Zoo in 1906. Then the first pair of giraffes arrived in March 1907, but they died in an inadequately heated building in early 1908. The giraffes were “mounted” (the term the zoo community uses for taxidermy) and displayed at the National Museum of Nature and Science in Ueno.11 Ishikawa’s Abrupt Resignation Two months after the arrival of the giraffes, Ishikawa abruptly resigned. The allegedly unauthorized purchase of the expensive giraffes was the ostensible reason; however, it was a mere excuse. Ishikawa had incurred the anger of Imperial Household Minister Tanaka Mitsuaki when Ishikawa rejected the appointment to a Tokyo Imperial University professorship of a botanist, Makino Tomitarō (1862–1957), whom Tanaka had recommended. Tanaka and Makino were from Tosa, one of the four dominant hambatsu that ruled the Meiji government. Although Makino was an accomplished botanist in his own right, he did not have the right credentials (no degrees whatsoever; he quit school after the second grade), and this appointment appeared to be favoritism. In retaliation, Tanaka delayed approving the purchase of the giraffe pair, which cost ¥8,000 plus ¥4,000 for transportation, an astronomical amount of money at the time. In comparison, a pair of lions cost ¥2,475, and a pair of polar bears cost ¥742.12 Because of Tanaka’s procrastination tactics, the giraffes arrived at Yokoyama port before the budget for the purchase was approved. Minister Tanaka accused Ishikawa of the oversight, forcing him to resign, while Tokyoites flocked to Ueno Zoo to marvel at the giraffes. With the “giraffe boom,” public attendance at the zoo jumped from 783,515 in 1906 to 1,055,118 in 1907. The admission revenue jumped from ¥26, 964 in 1906 to ¥48,602 in 1907 (one adult admission was 5 sen or ¥0.05). Thus, the revenue increase, about ¥22,000, grossly exceeded the cost of purchasing the giraffes, ¥12,000. Ishikawa also had the knowledge to translate the name giraffe as kirin, the Japanese pronunciation for qilin in Chinese. The name derives from an episode of Ming-dynasty warrior Zheng He (1371–1434), who sailed to Africa and brought back giraffes and other exotic animals to Emperor Yongle in 1419. Zheng introduced the giraffes as qilin, a mystical creature in Chinese literature, like a unicorn in Western legends, pleasing the emperor.13 After his resignation, Ishikawa toured Europe and the United States in 1908, visiting twenty-three zoos in fourteen months, and

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 19

10/8/2010 7:42:22 AM

20


met Carl Hagenbeck Jr. “in person for the first time.” As late as 1926, Ishikawa lamented that there was not a real zoo, or even a real museum for that matter, in Japan. He stated that what Japan had were mere kodomo-damashi (childish imitations) as compared to those in the West. Komori stated that with Ishikawa’s departure, Ueno Zoo entered a stagnation stage. Ishikawa had a grand master plan to turn the menagerie into real zoological gardens, in consultation with Hagenbeck. However, the plan ended up as “pie in the sky.”14 Impact of Ishikawa’s Resignation on Zoos in Japan The resignation of Ishikawa affected not only Ueno Zoo but also the overall development of modern zoos in Japan. According to Kyoto City Zoo director Sasaki, Ishikawa tried to improve animals’ living conditions, but the museum bureaucrats refused to appropriate the budget to build better animals facilities (all animal facilities were wooden then). Ishikawa also believed in the preservation of species and tried to save a rare Pere David deer, but the officials sabotaged his effort. Sasaki thinks that if Ishikawa had remained at the zoo, the tradition of a zoologist becoming the zoo director might have been established in Japan. Nevertheless, after Ishikawa’s departure, Japanese zoos were run by those from the applied fields, such as veterinary medicine and livestock science, instead of bona fide zoologists.15 Sasaki also states that it was unfortunate that new zoos in two large cities, Osaka in 1915 and Nagoya in 1918 (see table 2.1), were created during the stagnation stage, both in terms of facilities and guiding philosophy. New zoos run by local cities were modeled after Ueno Zoo, because it was the imperial national institution. Local governments could not create zoos that surpassed Ueno Zoo, and it was taboo to criticize the zoo, which was protected from the emergence of rivals. New zoos in Osaka, Nagoya, and even in Kyoto, which was opened in 1903 in Japan’s ancient capital to commemorate the wedding of the crown prince (later Emperor Yoshihito, father of Emperor Hirohito), were obliged to remain as second-rate zoos, like their prototype.16 Sasaki notes that this marks a stark contrast with zoos in the United States, where a new zoo was born as an antithesis of an existing one and then surpassed it. For instance, when the first zoo created in Central Park in New York City in 1864 was perceived as “not a real zoo,” the “first American zoo” was created in Philadelphia in 1874. The latter was then surpassed by Bronx Zoo in New York City in 1899. In contrast, the flaws of Ueno Zoo were passed on to new

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 20

10/8/2010 7:42:22 AM


21

zoos in Japan, which retained the distinctive characteristics throughout the prewar period. They included the disjuncture between zoos and zoological circles, the bureaucrats’ control of zoo management with only profit-making in mind, and the collection of exotic animals at the cost of indigenous animals. The sole criteria for adding a new facility was whether the animal would appeal to the public. Zoos collected exotic animals in order to increase revenues. They ignored such aspects as improving techniques for animal care and exhibiting animals, as well as breeding. Consequently, the public perceived zoos as amusement parks rather than as extensions of museums of natural history.17 Solitary “1,000-kan Elephant” and the Great Kantō Earthquake With Ishikawa’s resignation, a graduate of the Veterinary Medicine Division of Tokyo Imperial University’s Agriculture College, Kurokawa “Gitarō” (according to the Japan National Diet Library catalog; 1866–1935), became Ueno Zoo’s “principal engineer” (shuningishi, or de facto director) in June 1907. Unlike Ishikawa, Kurokawa was not a zoologist but a graduate of the “practical course” of veterinary medicine. He had come to the zoo in 1892 as its first veterinarian. Meanwhile, the zoo’s solitary fifteen-year-old male elephant from Thailand became aggressive, causing injuries to keepers and a drunken sailor. He was so large (to Japanese eyes) that they called him “1,000-kan elephant” (3.75 tons; 1 kan equals 8.25 pounds). A Malayan veteran trainer gave up on controlling the elephant’s behavior and resigned. Afterward, the zoo chained both of the animal’s front and hind feet. Foreign visitors, including Stanford University professor Edmond Dowling and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, protested the treatment. In response, the zoo decided to build a reinforced-concrete outdoor facility for the elephant in September 1923.18 Before that facility could be built, however, on September 1 the Great Kantō Earthquake hit the metropolitan region. The zoo itself was not damaged severely, except for the entrance gate and a toilet house as well as the waterline cutoff. There were no casualties to animals or visitors. The police designated the zoo as a temporary shelter for half a million evacuees, out of the total 1,570,000 evacuees, or 70 percent of the population of Tokyo. Almost 450,000 houses were burned down by fire associated with the earthquake as well as arson that was allegedly committed by an ethnic minority group, the “Korean residents in Japan” (this allegation was made by right-wing

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 21

10/8/2010 7:42:22 AM

22


groups as a pretext to massacre these Koreans in the aftermath of the earthquake). In this chaos, the plan to build the elephant outdoor facility was postponed.19 To take advantage of the situation, the Imperial Household Ministry decided to destroy the “1,000-kan elephant” secretly. The ministry officials asked Marquis Tokugawa Yoshichika (of the Tokugawa clan), who was dubbed “the lord of big game hunters,” to shoot him, as he was the ministry’s official hunting officer. However, he had known this elephant since his childhood visits to Ueno Zoo. Tokugawa opposed the plan, but the ministry bureaucrats insisted. Tokugawa then sought and obtained a pledge from Imperial Household Minister Makino Nobuaki (the second son of Ōkubo Toshimichi [above] and the postwar prime minister Yoshida Shigeru’s father-in-law) that the elephant would not have to be destroyed as long as it left the zoo.20 Tokugawa talked to Ōtaki Kingorō, the owner of an amusement park, Hanayashiki, in Asakusa, Tokyo, which had allegedly lost an elephant in an earthquake-related fire (Kurokawa’s journal recorded that Hanayashiki’s elephant, Jonny, survived the fire). Tokugawa succeeded in having Ōtaki request the “1,000-kan elephant” from the ministry. With extreme difficulty, the zoo transferred the elephant to Asakusa in December 1923. Thus, the Imperial Household Ministry managed to “get rid of the troublemaker.” The elephant was kept in a small cage, with all feet chained, at Hanayashiki. He died in October 1932 at the age of sixty. Eventually, Hanayashiki itself fell into financial difficulties, sold all of its animals to Sendai in northeastern Japan, and in March 1936 closed permanently—hence, the creation of Sendai City Zoo in April 1936 (examined below).21 A similar case occurred at London Zoo. The zoo “dumped” its popular African male elephant, Jumbo (born in French Sudan in 1861), as he became too strong and intractable. He weighed exactly six tons in January 1882 when the zoo sold him to P. T. Barnum, the American showman, for a profitable £2,000. Despite the public outcry, the decision was justified by the claim that the elephant could no longer be kept safely in the zoo. The “largest animal in the world” toured the United States and Canada until he was killed in a train accident in St. Thomas, Ontario, Canada, in September 1885, at the age of twenty-four. Although past events should be understood from the historical context of a given time, selling a dangerous animal because it has become a “problem” to the zoo, while the zoo was fully aware of the potential danger, appears to be a surprising act on the part of a reputable zoo. However, according to Ken Kawata, zoos routinely “surplused” (a term the zoo community uses as a verb)

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 22

10/8/2010 7:42:23 AM


23

“undesirables” at that time. Therefore, Kawata states, “What London Zoo and Ueno Zoo did was nothing new or surprising.”22 Ueno Zoo’s Transfer of Jurisdiction to Tokyo-city In January 1924, the Imperial Family “donated” Ueno Zoo to Tokyo-city to commemorate the wedding of the crown prince (soon to be Emperor Hirohito). The zoo’s official name thus became Onshi Ueno Zoological Gardens (onshi means “imperial gift”) in February 1924; however, the zoo is generally referred to as Ueno Zoo (and also hereafter in this book). This is a sanitized version of the zoo history regarding this further change in its jurisdiction. The real story, according to Komori, is that the Imperial Household Ministry wanted to pass along the zoo because managing the zoo had become a burden. It had tried to transfer the jurisdiction back to the Ministry of Education several times, but in vain. Then came the Great Kantō Earthquake.23 Kurokawa wrote that he had requested the Imperial Household Ministry to send for a few soldiers should aftershocks hit and animals escape from wooden cages. However, the ministry refused to help, saying they were consumed with salvaging the National Museum’s antiques from the fire. Kurokawa had no power over the bureaucrats at the museum, let alone the ministry. The ministry did not want to deal with the menagerie any longer. Komori states, “Taking advantage of the crown prince’s wedding, the ministry decided to transfer the jurisdiction of the zoo to Tokyo-city, which wanted to have its own zoo.” The ministry thereby dumped a “white elephant,” just as it had dumped a real elephant. Komori notes, “That is the true reason why the zoo became ‘Onshi’ Ueno Zoological Gardens in 1924.”24 In addition, the Imperial Household Ministry abolished the Natural Collection Section (Tensan-ka) of the National Museum of Natural History in 1925. Thus, the efforts to create a real museum of natural history, what Fukuzawa Yukichi called a “zoological museum,” died even before beginning. Paradoxically, Imperial Household Minister Makino gave away Ueno Zoo to Tokyo-city and abolished the Natural Collection Section, which had been created by his birth father, Ōkubo Toshimichi. The museum has remained a national institution to this day; however, in 1949 it became the National Science Museum (its English name was changed to the National Museum of Nature and Science in 2007). Sasaki stated in 1975 that Japan did not have a real national museum of natural history even a century after Fukuzawa wrote Seiyō-jijō.25

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 23

10/8/2010 7:42:23 AM

24


Tokyo Park Section Head Inoshita Kiyoshi Afterward, the Tokyo Park Section administered the zoo management, and Park Section head Inoshita Kiyoshi (1884–1973) reigned over Ueno Zoo until his retirement in the spring of 1946. Section head was a powerful position in the highly centralized Japanese bureaucracy then, equivalent to a current bureau director-general, which is two ranks higher than a section head, after a department director. The power of bureaucrats vis-à-vis politicians had dwindled over time. For instance, a section head reported at the “questions and answers” sessions of the national parliament back then, but now a bureau director-general does the job. Inoshita was a student of Tanaka Yoshio (above), who was president of Tokyo Agriculture College when Inoshita graduated from the school in 1905.26 First, Inoshita took charge of the reconstruction of parks in Tokyo that had been damaged by the earthquake. Then he toured Europe and the United States, studying parks and zoos there for a year from July 1925. Upon returning, he embarked on the renovation of Ueno Zoo in the fall of 1926. As part of the renovation project, the zoo built a new polar bear facility in 1927, with a barless enclosure and a swimming pool, modeled after the “Hagenbeck method.” This open enclosure, made of artificial rocks and surrounded by barless moats, was introduced to the world by Carl Hagenbeck Jr. in 1907. The polar bear exhibit was the first example of that architectural style in Japan. It was opened to the public in January 1928 with a fanfare.27

Koga Tadamichi Succeeds Kurokawa Since Kurokawa was not in good health, Inoshita recruited a fresh graduate of Tokyo Imperial University Agriculture College Veterinary Medicine Division, Koga Tadamichi (from Saga-prefecture, 1903– 1986), in June 1928. As was required for a graduate in veterinary medicine, Koga was soon enlisted in the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) First Cavalry Division in February 1929. He served the IJA Veterinary Department as a second lieutenant veterinarian on reserve. Koga was discharged in December 1929 and returned to Ueno Zoo, where he became the zoo’s principal engineer in May 1932 when Kurokawa fell ill.28 Meanwhile, on September 18, 1931, the “Manchurian Incident” (also known as the “9-18 Incident”) occurred, in which the Kwantung Army bombed the South Manchuria Railway near Mukden (present Shenyang), alleging that Chang Hsueh-liang (Zhang Xueliang), the

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 24

10/8/2010 7:42:23 AM


25

heir to the influential Manchurian warlord Chang Tso-lin (Zhang Zuolin), was the culprit. This conspiracy gave the army an excuse to expand its military control over the entire region of northeast China, paving the way for the second Sino-Japanese War of July 1937. The incident shook Japan, as well as the world (see chronology in appendix for the background). In 1933 the Hagenbeck Circus, based in Hamburg, Germany, soon to be Japan’s military ally, visited Japan as part of its worldwide tour. The troupe was led by Carl Hagenbeck Jr.’s second son, Lorenz. Their modern circus, with 130 four-legged performers (including 50 lions, tigers, polar bears, and elephants) as well as 150 two-legged ones, caused a sensation in Japan. It was the “greatest show on earth” that the Japanese had ever seen. After that, all the existing performing entertainments in Japan, mainly made up of horses and human performers, adopted the name “circus.” Meanwhile, Koga bought a giraffe pair from the Hagenbecks at the unprecedented price of ¥25,000 in 1933, whereas Koga’s annual salary was ¥1,800 in 1936.29

The Black Leopard Escape Incident The year 1936 was a dark one for Japan. On February 26 ultranationalist junior IJA officers (advocates of absolute imperial reign) staged an unprecedented coup d’état, leading more than fourteen hundred soldiers. They assassinated political leaders, including former prime ministers Takahashi Korekiyo (a civilian) and Saitō Makoto (an admiral), in what became known as the “2-26 Incident.” The insurgents seized the center of the nation’s capital, shaking all of Japan. Then, on July 25 a black leopard escaped from Ueno Zoo. The female leopard had just been brought from Thailand that May. She was wary of people and usually hid behind the high rocks near the ceiling of her cage. On a steamy hot night, a keeper left open the door to the aisle between the black leopard’s exhibit cage and its night cage in order to provide a breeze to the night cage. The leopard managed to squeeze herself out from the iron-barred cage top above the aisle after midnight. Looking back, it is not too difficult to realize that, coming from a tropical jungle, heat was not so much her problem as being confined in a cage. The zoo staff should have paid more attention to the fact that leopards liked to perch on high places and made the cage top more secure.30 About seven hundred men from the Ueno police and military police (MP) forces joined the search for the black leopard. After

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 25

10/8/2010 7:42:23 AM

26


fourteen hours of searching, she was found hiding in a manhole in the sewer system near the Tokyo Museum of Fine Arts, and appeared to be extremely “terrified.” The impact of her escape was huge and allegedly contributed to the Home Ministry’s decision to dispose of dangerous animals in 1943. The “Black Leopard Escape Incident,” along with the “2-26 Incident” and the “Abe Sada Incident” (on May 18, in which a female prostitute cut off her client’s genitals, out of love, and thus caused his death) are referred to as Japan’s three big news events of the year 1936. The black leopard returned to its confined life and died in May 1940.31 Taking responsibility for the leopard’s escape, Koga submitted his resignation. He was not dismissed but was charged with a token negligence penalty of ¥5. This incident made Inoshita and other city officials aware of the importance of the role of the zoo administrator, and he promoted Koga to zoo director in March 1937. It took the escape of a black leopard for Tokyo-city to create the position of director for Ueno Zoo, half a century after its opening. Meanwhile, public attendance at the zoo exceeded two million for the first time in 1936.32

Developmental Stage of Ueno Zoo and the Second Sino-Japanese War In July 1937 the Chinese National Revolutionary Army and the IJA fought in an event known as the “Marco Polo Bridge Incident,” which erupted in a suburb of Beijing. This incident ushered in the second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), expanding Japan’s invasion into the main part of China. Despite a general notion that zoo attendance might decrease in the initial stage of the war because of the uncertainty of its outcome, Ueno Zoo’s attendance in 1937 continued to be over two million. This was so primarily because the government used the zoo as an important venue for raising civilians’ war morale. The Home Ministry organized patriotic events such as exhibitions and performances of military horses, dogs, and pigeons to be held at the zoo, as well as award ceremonies for repatriated military animals with honors and memorial services for the fallen military animals. In addition, as early as September 1937, Ueno Zoo conducted air-raid drills.33 On July 11, 1937, the fourth day after the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, the zoo celebrated the birth of the first giraffe born in captivity in Japan. The mass media hailed the birth of Takao as a sign of war victory. Contrary to the bright news at Ueno Zoo, however, Japan was heading toward the darkest period in its modern history.

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 26

10/8/2010 7:42:23 AM


27

In December the IJA occupied Nanjing, the capital of the Republic of China (ROC), where the “Nanking Massacre” occurred. The Japanese government then planned to build large zoological and botanical gardens (165 acres) in Special City Xinjing (current Changchun), the capital of its puppet state Manchukuo in northeast China (Xinjing Zoo, hereafter). The Home Ministry sent Koga to supervise the construction of Xinjing Zoo in August 1938 and again in February March 1941. In turn, the Tokyo Summer Olympic Games and Tokyo Expo, which had been scheduled for 1940 as anniversary events for Imperial Year 2600, were cancelled.34 Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in December 1941 marked the expansion of World War II into the Pacific theater. The IJA moved rapidly over a vast area, ranging north from the Aleutian Islands (southwest of Alaska) and south to New Guinea (north of Australia) in the South Pacific. Meanwhile, with the increasing casualties and injuries of military personnel, Ueno Zoo had been opening its doors free of charge to invalid veterans since October 1938. Countless war veterans in traditional white kimono clothes (that invalids typically wore) with military hats visited the zoo, accompanied by IJA hospital nurses.35 Conscription of Zoo Personnel In September 1937, keepers at Ueno Zoo were conscripted and staff became scarce. Zoo director Koga was drafted to the IJA Veterinary School in Setagaya-ward, Tokyo, in July 1941. He was charged to train military dogs and pigeons and also taught military zoology. Subsequently, Koga was sent to the southern front, became sick, and was hospitalized in Taipei for two months. He was then sent to Saigon (current Ho Chi Minh City), to Special City Shōnan (current Singapore), back to Saigon and to Special City Shōnan again, and then to Burma and Java. After touring around Southeast Asia for a year (he was stationed at the regional headquarters and was never sent to the warfront), Koga returned to Japan in December 1942. During Koga’s absence, Fukuda Saburō (1894–1977), Keepers Section head (shiiku-kachō), took charge of the zoo’s management from August 1941 as acting director.36 The equivalent position of shiiku-kachō in terms of the chain of command in the current American zoo system might be general curator. However, as Ken Kawata wrote in 2001, “[T]he curatorial system in the European and American sense does not exist in Japanese zoos. . . . Instead of the curatorial system, Japanese zoos have

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 27

10/8/2010 7:42:24 AM

28


supervisors of varying ranks who are usually in a linear chain of command. These supervisors oversee keepers and the day-to-day care of the animals.” Therefore, there was no such position as general curator in Japanese zoos in 2001, let alone in 1943. Some American zoos, such as Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs, Colorado, used the term “head keeper” for deputy superintendant. When a superintendant resigned, a head keeper became an acting superintendant until the position of superintendant was filled (see chapter 8). Fukuda’s position corresponds to this head keeper position. However, elsewhere, the head keeper sometimes was in effect the superintendant for smaller zoos. Therefore, this book denotes shiiku-kachō by “Keepers Section head,” which is true to the original Japanese meaning of this position without any confusion. Fukuda was a protégé of Kurokawa (above) and worked at the zoo from August 1922 until his retirement in October 1952. Meanwhile, Ueno Zoo lost a keeper, Sasanuma Tadashi, in Burma (current Myanmar). The zoo’s veterinarian, Someya Susumu, died on Peleliu Island, part of the Palau Islands (current the Republic of Palau), in the Pacific Ocean.37 Conscription of Military Horses Animals, as well as people, were expendable during wartime. Domestic animals such as horses, dogs, and pigeons were conscripted along with soldiers. Being less available than men, horses were more valued resources than men. In fact, the IJA called horses “live weapons” and treated them better than men. The IJA Veterinary School senior veterinarians, such as Colonel Hashio Ichizō, exercised considerable power in charge of military horses.38 The government sent “green slips” for conscripting horses instead of the “red slips” that were used for men. If one received such a green slip, the owner should sacrifice his horse for the country. Farmers bid farewell to their horses in tears. Then they erected “horse tombstones.” A girl wrote: My horse, Ao, was conscripted with a tiny slip of paper, just like men, in the summer of 1941. We used him at the farm, but he was a fine chestnut-colored horse. I rode him on his bare back. I knew every details of his character. We were very close. The day before his departure, I gave him his favorite supper; wheat bran with salt mixed in rinsed-rice water (kome-no-togijiru). He slurped it up with a big noise and looked at me with gentle eyes. The next morning, I hurried to the horse stable but Ao was gone. Only his smell was there. My father took

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 28

10/8/2010 7:42:24 AM

29


him away while it was dark in the morning so that I would not have to see Ao leave.39

As the servicemen’s toll increased, so did that of military horses and dogs. It is estimated that more than a million IJA horses fell during the war. For instance, the IJA transferred thirteen hundred horses from China to Halmahera Island, the largest island in the Maluku Islands, in Indonesia, in May 1944. However, two out of five ships carrying the horses were destroyed by U.S. torpedoes off Luzon Island and in the northern Menado Sea. Only eight hundred horses actually landed on Halmahera Island. Then it turned out that horses were useless on the volcanic island without trails. The IJA division managed to transfer three hundred horses to Sebu Island in the Philippines and to Celebes (Sulawesi) Island. The remaining five hundred were isolated and left on the island with thousands of soldiers, as the U.S. forces took over the air and the sea. The horses suffered from malnutrition (the vegetation in the jungle was not suitable for them) and heat.40 Soldiers were also starved to death. Nevertheless, instead of killing horses to relieve their hunger, the servicemen did their best to look after their horses in the most adverse conditions. Veterinary officers treated sick horses and injected them with glucose-calcium water, made out of coconut juice and distilled rainwater. The coconut juice was sterile and was used for intravenous injections in the Pacific during the war. They conducted a necropsy (the postmortem examination of an animal) of each horse that fell, tried to determine the cause of death, and buried them. These were no easy tasks to accomplish in the tropical jungle, but the IJA considered horses more precious than men. In turn, soldiers considered horses as their “comrades,” who shared the hardships of war. Yet, horses fell one by one. When the last horse died, the veterinary officers were at a loss. These horses were taken to the southern warfront only to die in vain, along with thousands of soldiers.41 Meanwhile, in the south of Burma, the occupying British Army slaughtered 148 Japanese military horses in the Andaman Islands after Japan’s surrender in 1945. Despite pleas to save their lives by Japanese soldiers and local villagers, the army put blindfolds on the horses, which had been captured, stood them in front of a huge pit, and conducted summary shootings. The British Army did not allow Japanese prisoners of war (POWs) to collect a single horsehair from the corpses, which they wished to bring back to Japan as remembrances. A soldier wrote, “These horses worked for us in the worst

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 29

10/8/2010 7:42:24 AM

30


situations without ever complaining. Nobody would understand how sorry we felt for them. The war will not end until we erect a horse tombstone upon repatriation to pray for their souls.”42 “Commandeering” of Domesticated Animals The Japanese government also commandeered dogs not only as military dogs, but also as the material for making fur coats for military officers at the northern warfront. The Ministry of Military Requisition’s (Gunjushō’s) Chemistry Bureau director-general and the Ministry of Health and Welfare’s Public Health Bureau director-general issued a joint directive to intensify the nationwide “Drive to donate dogs (and cats)” in December 1944. They instructed local governments and police to have neighborhood associations ensure that each household donated their dogs and cats. Dogs were gathered in one place and were beaten to death. Cats were put into bags and clubbed to death. The mass media and community groups cooperated with the government in distributing war propaganda and promoting these drives.43 A girl carried her dog, Kuro, to the bunker whenever air-raid sirens went off. She held Kuro tightly and waited until the alert was over. They comforted each other in the darkness. However, her family was ordered to donate Kuro. She never forgot Kuro’s eyes looking at her when he was taken away. Another girl wrote that she tried to make her cat, Kuro (a popular name for dogs and cats then), run away when her family received the order in February 1945. But the cat refused to go outside, because it was snowing. Her mother put Kuro into a bag and told her to bring it to the collection site. The site was a scene from hell. The bodies of dogs and cats were piled up on the snowy ground, which looked like an endless carpet of blood. She begged the man in charge to spare Kuro’s life. He told her that she would be a traitor and would be ostracized from the village unless she cooperated. As she turned back, she saw the man striking the bag with Kuro in it. She has never forgotten the scream Kuro made.44 “Commandeering” of Zoo Animals Zoo animals were also “mobilized” to serve in the war. The two female elephants at Ueno Zoo, Tonki and Hanako, were summoned by the Yasukuni Shrine, which enshrined and honored the war dead, to perform for bereaved children nationwide to pay tribute to their deceased fathers. Tonki and Hanako were also ordered to appear at memorial services for military horses and dogs. They paid tribute

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 30

10/8/2010 7:42:24 AM


31

to deceased military animals by kneeling down in front of the altar (see photograph 1). In addition, the Ministry of Education banned the use of English, calling it an enemy language. Names of imported zoo animals and their species denominations (for which the original English terms had been used, as it was difficult to translate them into Japanese) were changed to awkward Japanese.45

National Mobilization for War As the second Sino-Japanese War broke out in July 1937, the Japanese wartime regime tightened its grip on civilians, in addition to conscripting all eligible males (the Military Service Law was enacted in April 1927). The Home Ministry and the Ministry of Education launched a National Spiritual Mobilization Movement in October 1937 in order to firmly implant patriotism among citizens and rally the nation into total war. The movement’s slogans, such as “Luxury is our enemy” and “Want nothing until victory,” were placed on every street corner. Anyone who disobeyed the government directives was labeled a traitor and put into jail or, worse, executed. The MPs had the power to arrest anyone who seemed unpatriotic without a warrant. The atmosphere in Japanese society then was such that one could not even utter a word that was critical of the government.46 In April 1938 the first Konoe cabinet, which was established by the civilian Konoe Fumimaro (1891–1945, a descendant of the ancient nobility and de facto rulers, the Fujiwara family, related to the Imperial Family) but controlled by the military, enacted the National Mobilization Law. The law authorized the government to mobilize the nation’s human and material resources for total war, including control over all civilian organizations, nationalization of strategic industries, price controls, rationing of basic commodities and food, as well as censorship of the mass media. The government drafted civilians to work in military industries, such as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Nakajima Aircraft, through the National Service Draft Ordinance. Students as young as middle-school age were also mobilized into the workforce through the Student Volunteer Corps Service.47 Fuel Rationing Subsequently, in October 1938 the government implemented control and regulation of fuel distribution, rationing kerosene and coal. As a result, zoos suffered from serious fuel shortages, but they still had to keep tropical animals warm in winter. Logs and charcoal that exude

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 31

10/8/2010 7:42:24 AM

32


soot were not suitable for animals that could easily develop respiratory diseases, such as chimpanzees. However, keepers had no choice but to use such fuels. The giraffe at Ueno Zoo gave birth to stillborn twins in March 1939. Then, in June and September of that year, the popular Vabena and Rheinhart, the zoo’s first pair of chimpanzees, which had come to the zoo in January 1938, died of tuberculosis. In July 1942 Ueno Zoo gave Takao (the giraffe born in the zoo) and other animals to a new zoo in western Tokyo that had opened in May, the Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Zoo (Inokashira Park Zoo, hereafter; examined below). However, Takao died three days after his arrival at his new home.48 Food Rationing As a result of the conscription of servicemen and the draft of civilians into military industries, Japan suffered a shortage of manpower and agricultural production drastically declined. Consequently, the government rationed basic foods and essential commodities. In 1940 the government adopted a “coupon system” for rice, miso, soy sauce, and sugar, as well as matches. The government also enacted the Essential Commodities Control Law in 1941 and the Food Control Law in February 1942, rationing all the basic foods, including flour, rice, salt, and sugar. The ration of rice, the staple food for the Japanese, was reduced to 322g (about 0.7 lb) of inferior quality per day for an adult and to less than 280g (about 0.6 lb) for a child. These measures made the food shortage even more serious, making only the black market prosper.49 The food rationing seriously affected zoos. Zookeepers had a hard time securing animal feed when people were suffering from food shortages. Large herbivores consume huge amounts of grass and vegetables. For instance, a hippopotamus gulps 100 pounds of potatoes and grass each day, while an elephant consumes 130–150 pounds of vegetables, potatoes, and hay each day. The herbivores’ feed changed from sweet potatoes, to potatoes, pumpkins, and bean bran, to pumpkin seeds. Afterward, the zoo staff began to grow vegetables on zoo grounds for animal feed. Feeding carnivores was even more difficult. A lion consumes about 22 pounds of meat per day. When the government began the ban on sales of meat for two days per month in May 1941, people panicked and flocked to the meat shops. Soon meat disappeared from the shops and zoos could no longer feed beef to their carnivores. Instead they fed them horse meat or rabbit meat and, later, as those supplies diminished, fish

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 32

10/8/2010 7:42:25 AM


33

or chicken heads. With the decreasing supplies of meat and fish, zoos even tried to formulate meat substitutes to feed the carnivores. When the substitute foods became scarce, zoos reduced the feeding frequency.50 In addition, the government requisitioned every available metal, including artificial gold teeth and beer bottle caps, from institutions and ordinary households in order to manufacture military machines, guns, and bullets. Zoos were no exception. The government had zoo staff remove guardrails, metal bars, iron entrance gates, benches, and even animal labels and feeding bowls. Only cages were spared. The bronze memorial plaques of animals of Ueno Zoo were taken down. The bronze statue of the famous Akita dog Hachikō (1923–1935; the Japanese Rin Tin Tin or Lassie; an English-language movie about the dog, Hachikō: A Dog’s Story, was released in 2009) also disappeared from Shibuya station, Tokyo.51

Yajima Minoru’s Recollections of War Japanese entomologist Yajima Minoru (1930– ; creator of Tama Zoo’s Insectarium in 1961 and Insect Ecological Land in 1988, and director of Tama Zoo, 1987–1990 [see chapter 9]) was seven years old and living in Tokyo when the second Sino-Japanese War broke out. He stopped catching cicadas and dragonflies because the tense atmosphere in the society did not allow even a little boy to do such leisurely things. Everyone had to cooperate with the war. The ration of rice was hardly enough to fill a growing stomach. War slogans were everywhere. Yajima learned new phrases, such as “Hakkō-ichiu” (the whole wide world) and “The Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere.” Schools were renamed as “national schools,” and young students were referred to as “little nationals.” They were mobilized into the Student Volunteer Corps Service and were taught to sacrifice their own life for the nation. All civilians wore khaki “national uniforms.” It looked as if the whole nation had become an army.52 Yajima advanced to middle school in April 1943. The school operated as if it were an army unit. Teachers told students that they were no longer children and made them engage in military exercises. Yajima became sick with jaundice and fever (later he found that he had lymphadenitis, an infection of the lymph nodes); however, teachers told him, “Think of the soldiers who are fighting to the death in the battlefields.” Despite his sickness, Yajima kept going to school, because he would be considered a traitor otherwise. That year, his class cultivated the banks of the Arakawa River in order to increase

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 33

10/8/2010 7:42:25 AM

34


food production. In his second year at middle school, “student mobilization into the workforce” began in earnest, and Yajima’s class was assigned the task of “forceful evacuation of buildings” (see chapter 10). The Tokyo government decided to destroy houses in congested areas in order to preempt the spreading fire in case of air raids. The residents of the designated areas were forced to vacate their houses on short notice. Yajima and his classmates moved around the emptied houses, removing gas lines.53 With the news of the fall of Saipan and the fall of Leyte in the southern warfront, the government propagated a desperate slogan, “Ichioku-isshin” (the 100 million population with one heart [for the war]), which later became “Ichioku-gyokusai” (the 100 million population to die in honorable defeat like a jewel shattered into pieces). The collective evacuation of elementary schoolchildren began in August 1944 (see chapter 10). Yajima’s younger brother was sent to a temple in Fukushima-prefecture in northeastern Japan. With his elder brother mobilized into work on a dairy farm, only Yajima and his parents were left in Tokyo. They were ordered to build a bunker and frequently engaged in fire drills.54

Establishment of Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums Meanwhile, confronted with the increasing difficulties with managing zoos during wartime, zoo directors established the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums in June 1940, consisting of sixteen zoos and three aquariums. Out of the sixteen zoos, two zoos were in Korea and Taiwan, which were under Japan’s rule (see chapter 6). Twelve of the sixteen zoos were public and four were privately owned (see table 2.1). JAZGA’s main purposes included creating a cooperative network for information and technology exchanges, as well as for joint procurement of animals and animal feeds. The preparatory meeting was held at the Guest House in Kyoto City Zoo in May 1939 and also included zoo directors from Seoul and Taipei.55 Xinjing Zoo (above) joined the JAZGA in 1941, followed by Inokashira Park Zoo, which opened in Musashino in western Tokyo in May 1942 (see map). Hanshin Park Zoo withdrew its membership from the association in April 1943 when the IJA took over its compounds to build military facilities. The JAZGA did not hold its annual meetings in 1944 and 1945 during the final years of the war. When the fifth annual meeting was held at the Takarazuka Zoological and

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 34

10/8/2010 7:42:25 AM


Table 2.1

35

JAZGA Member Zoos (1940)

Name*

Place (City)

Year Created

Sendai City Zoo Ueno Zoo Kōfu City Zoo Higashiyama Zoo Kyoto City Zoo Osaka City Zoo Takarazuka Zoo Hanshin Park Zoo Kobe City Zoo Ritsurin Park Zoo Itōzu Yūen Zoo Fukuoka City Zoo Kumamoto City Zoo Kamoike City Zoo Changkyungwon Zoo Taipei City Zoo

Sendai Tokyo Kōfu Nagoya Kyoto Osaka Takarazuka Nishinomiya Kobe Takamatsu Kokura Fukuoka Kumamoto Kagoshima Seoul Taipei

1936 1882 1919 1937 1903 1915 1929 1929 1927 1930 1933 1933 1929 1916 1909 1915

Founder/Owner**

(Tsurumai Park Zoo, 1918)

Hankyū Railway Hanshin Electric Railway Kagawa Shōtarō Nishi-Nippon Railroad

Source: Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo, ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo). (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982), 1:160–62. *Zoos are listed from northeast to southwest, according to Japanese custom. **A blank denotes that the zoo was founded by a city or other local government.

Botanical Gardens (Takarazuka Zoo, hereafter) in May 1946, only 12 zoos were members of the association. After the postwar rehabilitation and reconstruction, the JAZA (the new name for JAZGA) had 119 members in November 1981, consisting of 73 zoos (36 public, 37 private) and 46 aquariums (16 public, 30 private).56 *

*

*

As the war intensified in Europe and in the Asia-Pacific region, zoo directors anxiously followed the plight of zoos in Europe. They heard about the British Royal Air Force (R AF) bombing of Berlin Zoo in September 1941, as well as the “Blitz,” the sustained bombing of London by Nazi Germany between September 1940 and May 1941 (see chapter 7). Gravely concerned with the war situation, twenty zoo directors and representatives, including those from Seoul and Xinjing, attended the fourth annual meeting of the JAZGA in Nagoya in May 1943. This became the last meeting in the wartime period. The main agenda items were the issues regarding animal feed shortages and the means to secure sustainable feed supplies and substitute feeds. However, zoo directors could not avoid discussing the possibility of disposing of dangerous animals privately, anticipating the Home

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 35

10/8/2010 7:42:25 AM

36


Ministry’s decision. Although they could not talk about it publicly, they knew it was only a matter of time before they might be forced to take such actions.57 *

*

*

This was the historical background and political setting in which Japanese zoos disposed of their dangerous animals during World War II. The next chapters examine the actual execution of the disposal order in Japanese zoos, region by region. Hachikō mo tama to kawarite chiru sakura (The statue of Hachikō was also melted down to make bullets, falling like cherry blossom petals) —March 8, 2010, the 75th anniversary of Hachikō’s death

9780230108943_03_ch02.indd 36

10/8/2010 7:42:26 AM

CH A P T ER

3

Zoos in Eastern Japan and World War II

Three zoos in eastern Japan were members of the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums in 1943: Ueno Zoo and Inokashira Park Zoo in the Kantō region, eastern Japan, and Sendai City Zoo in the Tōhoku region, northeastern Japan (see map). With the rationing of food and essential commodities, zoos had to deal with the shortages of animal feed and fuel for heating animal facilities as well as a shortage of manpower due to the conscription. Nevertheless, that was not all zoos had to cope with during the war. What they had dreaded most was yet to come.

Ueno Zoo During the early stage of the Asia-Pacific War, Ueno Zoo’s attendance continued to increase, exceeding the record of three million (the number of visitors who paid admission) in 1940 and reaching a peak of 3,141,594 in 1941. Despite the outbreak of the Pacific War in December 1941, the actual total public attendance in 1942 exceeded that of 1941. This was because the attendance of military personnel, invalid veterans, and bereaved families, all of whom were exempt from admission, increased considerably.1 The exotic animals Imperial Japanese Army personnel brought from the warfront as war trophies also contributed to the increase in the zoo’s public attendance. These animals, such as a leopard named Hakkō from China and two Komodo dragons (monitor lizard family) from the South Pacific in 1942, were unexpected “spoils of war” for Ueno Zoo, which celebrated its sixty-year anniversary in March 1942. However, the situation reversed in June 1943, with the defeat in the Battle of Midway in the Pacific. The zoo could no longer expect a

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 37

10/8/2010 7:40:57 AM

38


supply of exotic animals from the warfront, and public attendance decreased.2 Culling and Cannibalism in Ueno Zoo In order to cope with the feed shortage, keepers at Ueno Zoo took goats to nearby parks and let them graze on fresh grass; they collected branches and leaves in parks and streets at the time of pruning; and they saved used tea leaves and grew vegetables on the zoo premises. For carnivores, when horse meat became unavailable, the zoo staff used mutton and venison, the meat of the dead sheep and deer in the zoo. Keepers raised rabbits, not as animals to display, but as feed. They also experimented with feeding large felids (cats) fish meat, with mixed results.3 Ueno Zoo even went so far as to cull its goats and sheep to feed lions and leopards in January 1940, choosing the lives of exotic animals over those of domestic animals. From this time, a sort of cannibalism in the zoo began, with animals fed to other animals. Further, the zoo shot to death three Himalayan black bears and a Japanese black bear on February 18, 1940, as a measure to “cull excessive ordinary animals,” of which the zoo had plenty. The lions donated by Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie I (1892–1975) were more precious than Asian bears for the zoo (see below). Thus, the zoo not only killed herbivores in order to feed exotic carnivores, but also killed bears in order to reduce the overall burden of feeding. The zoo staff’s desperate effort to prolong the lives of exotic large felids, however, would be defeated soon.4 Contingency Plan In August 1941 the IJA eastern regional headquarters veterinary department requested that Ueno Zoo submit a contingency plan for the zoo. Acting zoo director Fukuda Saburō drew up an “Outline of Zoo Contingency Measures,” which categorized zoo animals into four groups, based on the level of danger, as follows: Class-A (most dangerous animals): Siberian brown bear, polar bear, Malayan sun bear, brown bear, Japanese black bear, Ezo (Hokkaido) brown bear, Korean black bear, tiger, leopard, black leopard, coyote, striped hyena, cheetah, lion, “Manchurian wolf,” hippopotami, American bison, Asian elephant, Celebes black ape, pig-tailed macaque, Hamadryas baboon, rattlesnake, “mamushi” (Japanese pit viper), and python.

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 38

10/8/2010 7:40:58 AM

ZOOS IN EASTERN JAPAN AND WORLD WAR II

39

Class-B (relatively less dangerous animals): badger, fur seal, California sea lion, otter, fox, raccoon dog, monkeys (except for those in Class-A), giraffe, deer, boar, zebra, kangaroo, crocodilians (mostly American alligators), and so on. Class-C (domestic animals): water buffalo, sheep, goat, camel, donkey, pig, rabbit, ducks, turkey, domestic fowl, geese, and so on. Class-D (other animals): birds, tortoises, and other small animals.5 The outline stipulated that the zoo would (1) immediately prepare for disposal of Class-A and Class-B dangerous animals when an air-defense directive was issued; (2) complete the preparations for disposal of the Class-A and Class-B dangerous animals and stand by for action until an air raid began, and begin preparations for disposal of Class-C animals; and (3) implement disposal of Class-A and Class-B dangerous animals when the bombing and other dangers were imminent, and also dispose of Class-C animals when the dangers intensified. The outline also stipulated that in principle the zoo would poison these animals to death by the use of strychnine nitrate (which affects spinal cords, hardens muscles, and then suffocates to death; it has a bitter taste) and cyanide. They would shoot them to death as an alternative measure when the poisoning did not work.6 Ueno Zoo had forty-nine specimens of Class-A dangerous animals, while the Inokashira Park Zoo had three. Following the outline, Tokyo-city established the Citizen Department Park Section Special Defense Corps Ueno Zoo Division with Fukuda as the division head. Nevertheless, as of August 1941 the notion of an air raid was still unreal for the Tokyoites.7 First Air Strike Hits Tokyo The first air-raid alert was issued to Tokyo in March 1942. Thirteen North American B-25 Mitchell bombers, launched from the U.S. aircraft carrier U.S.S. Hornet and led by Lieutenant Colonel James Harold Doolittle, attacked Tokyo on April 18, 1942, while two B-25s headed to Nagoya and one to Osaka and Kobe. Although there was little damage to Tokyo overall, the psychological impact on civilians was huge. In fact, the purpose of the “Doolittle Raid” was to raise American morale, as well as to confuse the Japanese mind. The Ueno Zoo had thirteen hundred visitors that day but sustained no damage from the air strike. Afterward, the zoo conducted air-defense drills more frequently. The rationing of essential food and commodities

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 39

10/8/2010 7:40:58 AM

40


and requisition of iron began. The zoo staff took down guardrails in front of cages, benches, and animal labels.8 First Tokyo Governor-General, Ōdachi Shigeo In July 1943, Tokyo-city and Tokyo-prefecture were integrated and reorganized as metropolitan Tokyo in order to effectively execute the wartime policies. A career bureaucrat at the Home Ministry, Ōdachi Shigeo, became Tokyo’s first governor-general. This organizational change brought fatal consequences upon Ueno Zoo. As a result of the establishment of the new Tokyo administration, the raison d’être of Ueno Zoo changed from being a place for citizens to enjoy to being part of the national machine to carry out total war.9 Having served in the dual positions of mayor and IJA administrator-general of the Special City Shōnan in 1942, Ōdachi had witnessed the grim reality of the warfront, contrary to the military propaganda that Japan was winning. Earlier he had had disagreements with the military personnel of the Kwantung Army and resigned from his dual high-ranking administrative positions in Manchukuo in 1935 and in 1936. Therefore, Ōdachi tried to strengthen the security of the nation’s capital by informing Tokyoites of the truth about the warfront and of the inevitability of massive air strikes on Tokyo. He thereby tried to bolster the civilians’ resolve and solidarity for the defense of the nation (see chapter 10).10 It was in this context that Ōdachi conceived of the policy for the Home Ministry to dispose of dangerous animals throughout Japan as part of the wartime contingency policies. The pretext was to preempt the escape of zoo animals from cages destroyed by air strikes. The Home Ministry considered zoos a facility that was useless as a war resource (see chapter 10).11

Ōdachi Orders Disposal of Dangerous Animals No sooner had Ōdachi assumed the Tokyo governor-general position than he ordered Ueno Zoo to execute the disposal of its dangerous animals. According to acting zoo director Fukuda’s journal, Tokyo Park Section head Inoshita Kiyoshi summoned Fukuda to his office on August 16, 1943. Koga Tadamichi, zoo director on military leave, was already there. Koga had returned to Japan and was serving at the IJA Veterinary School in Setagaya-ward. He frequently

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 40

10/8/2010 7:40:58 AM


41

visited the zoo, accompanying veterinary school students, and kept in touch with Inoshita and Fukuda. Inoshita conveyed Ōdachi’s order to destroy dangerous animals in one month (Fukuda wrote on a different page of his journal that the disposal deadline was August 31, in half a month) despite the fact that air raids were not anticipated.12 Having sensed the purpose of the meeting, Fukuda brought a list of animals to be destroyed and gave it to Inoshita. The order was strictly confidential. Ōdachi had instructed Inoshita to poison the animals instead of shooting them. He did not want residents to hear shooting and find out about the clandestine execution plan. Thus, Ueno Zoo was to carry out “collective execution” of its animals. Keepers who looked after these animals daily had to destroy them. Fukuda wrote in his diary: “After the meeting, I went back to the zoo and walked around the compounds in a light rain. Recognizing my footsteps, tigers and elephants came toward me and rubbed their bodies against me. I could not look them straight in their eyes. I have never felt so depressed in my life. Next morning, I gathered all the staff and conveyed the order. I told them not to tell anyone, including their family members.”13 Fukuda revealed the truth about the disposal for the first time, after a quarter century, in 1968, saying that he could not tell the truth earlier because poisoning the animals, as he was ordered to do, had not worked. In fact, the majority of the animals did not die simply by poisoning. Some of them refused to eat poisoned meat; with others the dose of the poison was insufficient. Consequently, the inexperienced zoo staff had to use other methods that were too cruel to tell anyone about. Nevertheless, Fukuda reported to Governor-General Ōdachi in 1943 that zoo staff had poisoned most of the animals. Fukuda then needed to hide the animals’ bodies from visitors. The zoo could not keep the bodies for long in the summer heat. Therefore, Fukuda had keepers destroy animals in the evening after the zoo was closed. Then, the following morning, they carried the bodies to the IJA Veterinary School in Setagaya-ward by wagon (since the use of gasoline was controlled) for necropsies before the zoo opened.14 First Victim: John the Elephant Fukuda had actually already obtained a permission to dispose of John, a male elephant from India, on August 11, 1943. John was considered a “problem.” He had a history of dangerous behavior, and his hind legs were chained even in his night quarters. When John and Tonki came to the zoo in October 1924, the zoo had planned to train the

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 41

10/8/2010 7:40:58 AM

42


two young elephants to perform (a common practice at zoos worldwide then) and hired an Indian as their trainer. The trainer refused to take a bath after work (there were housing accommodations for zoo employees on the premises). He turned out to be a Russian criminal fugitive with his face painted black. He was arrested. Then the zoo hired a real Indian circus trainer, Vaisappu Jerma, in May 1925. Although John was known to be difficult, the elephant got along well with Jerma. During the elephant’s performance in April 1927, a visitor threw a sweet bun at the animal. As John tried to pick it up with his trunk, Jerma kicked it far away so that John would not be distracted from the performance. John did not react well to this and dashed toward Jerma, breaking one of his ribs. Although Jerma did his best, the relationship between John and Jerma was not the same afterward. John attacked Jerma again. Jerma left the zoo and John became a solitary elephant.15 In September 1931 an experienced circus trainer, Ishikawa Taijirō, became John’s trainer. At the end of the training on the second day, John showed a sign of disobedience. Ishikawa prodded John’s forehead with an ankus (a metal stick to handle elephants) that had sharp, pointed ends. With the tip of the ankus being thrust through his forehead, John pushed Ishikawa toward the fence. Koga, who was observing the training outside the fence, heard a scream. Ishikawa was bleeding heavily. Koga took Ishikawa to the hospital. Four ribs were broken. Ishikawa died two hours later.16 As for controlling John’s behavior, Sasaki Tokio at Kyoto City Zoo notes that John, Tonki, and Hanako (from Thailand; see below) were denied mating. John was never allowed to mate with Tonki and Hanako. The zoo stopped feeding John in order to suppress his sexual urges when he responded to Tonki’s hormonal changes. Zoo staff also reduced the amount of food given to Tonki when she was in oestrus in order to suppress her urges. Sasaki states that this practice showed that the zoo placed its priorities on the smooth operation of the female performances rather than on promoting healthy and natural development of the animals, also indicating the lack of awareness of the zoo’s function as a breeding facility in prewar Japan.17 According to a keeper in charge of elephants, Shibuya Shinkichi, John became aggressive toward his keepers when he was sexually aroused. Shibuya’s superior told him to poke John’s eyes with an ankus in order to control his behavior. However, Shibuya could not do so, because he was afraid of injuring the elephant’s eyes. Taking advantage of Shibuya’s hesitation, John became even more aggressive. As a last resort, Shibuya chained John, placed a pile of hay at

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 42

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM


43

the bottom of his belly, and burned the hay. The fire reached up and began to burn his genitals. Shibuya kept the fire going until John calmed down. Shibuya states that it was a cruel method but that there was no other way to suppress John’s sexual urges.18 On August 11, 1943, Park Section head Inoshita visited the zoo and consulted with Fukuda on how to dispose of John. Shooting was prohibited in order to conceal their plan. They decided to poison John with cyanide. Two keepers in charge of elephants, Sugaya Kitsuichirō and Shibuya, gave John his favorite food, sweet buns, some of which were injected with cyanide. However, John sensed something. He ate only the unpoisoned sweet buns and ignored the poisoned ones. Fukuda then decided to inject him with strychnine nitrate, using a syringe for horses, but the needle broke on the elephant’s thick skin. The staff then tried at the base of his ear, the softest spot on an elephant’s body; however, the needle broke again. The IJA Veterinary School staff, which had dispensed cyanide and strychnine nitrate to the zoo, gave up.19 Running out of choices, Fukuda decided to make John starve to death and instructed Sugaya and Shibuya to stop feeding, including water, for John on August 13. On the seventeenth day of no food or water, August 29, John collapsed to the ground, causing huge vibrations (see photograph 2). He was looking at the keepers with gentle eyes. When his foot chains were removed, John could no longer walk. After nineteen years of confinement, John died of starvation and dehydration. Later, the Tokyo Park Section used John’s indoor facility to store five hundred coffins in case of calamitous death tolls of citizens from air raids.20 Collective Disposal of Class-A Dangerous Animals Begins On August 16 Fukuda had keepers stop feeding the other dangerous animals in order to ensure that hungry animals would eat poisoned food. However, they did not actually know how to poison animals to death. The zoo had only one staff member who was licensed to dispense drugs. Their plan B was strangulation. Plan C was spearing. First, on the evening of August 17, a keeper fed a female Siberian brown bear, a gift from Prince Takamatsu (one of the younger brothers of Emperor Hirohito), her favorite food—steamed sweet potato— mixed with three grams of strychnine nitrate. The unsuspecting bear ate it immediately. She had convulsions in a minute and began tossing and turning with fierce force as if she would break the iron cage. She died after fighting and moaning with excruciating pain for twenty-two

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 43

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM

44


minutes. Then the zoo destroyed a male Japanese black bear, another gift from Prince Takamatsu, in the same fashion. Keepers buried the animals’ bodies. Thus, the collective disposal of dangerous animals began at Ueno Zoo.21 Table 3.1 (below) is primarily based on the two most reliable sources of information on the disposal of dangerous animals at Ueno Zoo: Fukuda Saburō’s “The True Record of Ueno Zoo” and “100Year History of Ueno Zoo” written by Komori Atsushi. It should be noted, however, that there were many discrepancies in the two sources for such critical information as the dates and methods of the disposals. To complicate the matter, Fukuda had written a deliberately inaccurate “official report” of the disposal. Generally speaking, Fukuda’s book appears to be more accurate and authentic than Komori’s. The latter’s description of the disposal is largely based on Fukuda’s book and was written much later. In fact, Komori states in a postscript that it was written under extreme time constraints. Nevertheless, Fukuda’s book is not free of errors. Thus, Akiyama Masami’s “Shōwa-era History of Zoos” was also used to determine the accuracy of the each data in question. Akiyama (1929–2001), a writer of wartime youth history, went through similar difficulties to this author in reading conflicting data and evaluating their accuracy. Akiyama tried his best to write a true record of the disposal at Ueno Zoo half a century later. Therefore, this table is a composite of the three most reliable sources of information available on the disposal at Ueno Zoo (see table 3.1).22 Leopard Hakkō On August 18, 1943, keepers poisoned to death an eight-year-old lioness born in Ueno Zoo, a male Korean black bear, and a male leopard named Hakkō. IJA Sergeant Major Naruoka Masahisa (1912–1992) had captured a leopard cub at the warfront in China in the spring of 1941. He and his men “adopted” the cub, which became their “mascot.” However, Naruoka decided to give it to Ueno Zoo, thinking the cub would be safer there. He named the cub Hakkō after one of the Japanese war slogans, “Hakkō-ichiu” (the whole wide world). Hakkō arrived at Tokyo in May 1942, being extremely “scared.” Four months later, one of Naruoka’s men who had looked after Hakkō, Yoshimura Shigetaka, visited the zoo after being recalled to Tokyo. He requested to see Hakkō in his exhibit cage. Hakkō was almost full-grown then, and the zoo staff persuaded Yoshimura only to have a picture taken of him with Hakkō, while Yoshimura stood in front

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 44

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM


45

of the cage, instead of letting him go inside the cage. Hakkō was poisoned to death a year later. He was two and a half years old.23 Unaware of Hakkō’s disposal, Naruoka himself called the zoo from the warfront in September 1943, asking how the leopard was doing. Naruoka’s mistake was that he believed the zoo was a safe haven for Hakkō. On August 18, 1943, the zoo sent three bodies to the IJA Veterinary School for necropsy. Hakkō’s body was mounted, while the two other bodies were flayed, meaning they were stripped of their skin. The Veterinary School provided the zoo with an additional ten grams of strychnine nitrate that day.24 Disposal of Bears In the evening of August 19, 1943, zoo staff fed a male Siberian brown bear, a gift from Prince Takamatsu (the mate of the female destroyed two days earlier), with a poisoned potato. However, he did not die in half an hour as the other bears did. He kept tossing and turning and moaning from the pain. Zoo staff then decided to use plan C (they could not use plan B, strangulation, because the bear was too strong for them) in order to shorten his suffering. They thrust several times at his carotid artery with poles that had scalpels attached at the tips. He moved violently like mad until he died one and a half hours later. Next morning, his body was taken to the Veterinary School for necropsy and then was flayed. On that day (August 20), Park Section head Inoshita submitted the Ueno Zoo Contingency Plan to Governor-General Ōdachi, which stipulated that the zoo would use strychnine nitrate to poison twenty-two specimens of eleven species by August 31, 1943. However, the zoo ended up disposing of twentyseven specimens of fourteen species, and more (see table 3.1).25 On August 20 (or August 21, depending on the source) the zoo destroyed a young female Korean black bear and an older female Japanese black bear. The young bear had just been donated by Prime Minister Tōjō Hideki and IJA chief of the general staff Sugiyama Hajime in February 1943 and was popular among visitors. After giving her poisoned meat, the keepers speared her to death. Fukuda decided to use strangulation for the older bear. They did not feed her for three days so that the weakened bear could be easily strangled. However, she was stronger than they had thought and fought back. Five men struggled to control the bear. In half an hour’s battle, she was caught by a rope and died in forty-five minutes. The death toll reached eight specimens in five days. Fukuda was depressed and had nightmares, but the hardest task was yet to come.26

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 45

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 46

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM

female male female male male male female female male female male female female male male n/a female female female female female

Siberian brown bear Japanese black bear lion leopard (Hakkō) Korean black bear Siberian brown bear Korean black bear

Japanese black bear

lion (Ali) lion (Katherina) tiger cheetah polar bear black leopard leopard rattlesnake python leopard Malayan sun bear black leopard American bison

Aug. 17 Aug. 17 Aug. 18 Aug. 18 Aug. 18 Aug. 19 Aug. 20 (or Aug. 21) Aug. 20 (or Aug. 21) Aug. 22 Aug. 22 Aug. 22 Aug. 22 Aug. 24 Aug. 26 Aug. 26 Aug. 26 Aug. 27 Aug. 27 Aug. 27 Aug. 27 Aug. 29

Sex

Name of Species

a. 1931 a. 1931 a. 1937 a. 1933 a. 1931 a. 1935 a. 1936 n/a a. 1939 a. 1936 a. 1934 a. 1935** a. 1933

a. 1935

a. 1940 a. 1934 b. 1935 a. 1942 a. 1935 a. 1940 a. 1943

Date of Arrival (a)/ Date of Birth (b)

Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Ueno Zoo (1943–1945)

Date

Table 3.1

poisoning poisoning/spearing poisoning poisoning starvation/strangulation poisoning poisoning stabbing/strangulation chopping/strangulation poisoning/strangulation poisoning poisoning/strangulation poisoning/axing/ hammering

poisoning/strangulation

poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning/spearing* poisoning/spearing

Method

taxidermy taxidermy taxidermy taxidermy flayed taxidermy flayed buried flayed flayed taxidermy flayed flayed (preserved skull)

flayed

buried buried flayed taxidermy flayed flayed flayed

Postmortem Treatment

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 47

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM

27 specimens of 14 species

Total


male female

male male female female male female

b. 1938 b. 1917

a. 1926 a. 1924 b. 1939 a. 1935 b. 1943 a. 1924

starvation*** starvation***

starvation/strangulation starvation*** poisoning/hammering starvation*** poisoning starvation***

flayed flayed flayed flayed sold flayed

*The method in boldface denotes the actual and/or additional methods that the zoo used but did not report to Governor-General Ōdachi. **The actual date of arrival was August 1935 (the same as the male black leopard), not August 1943 as listed in Fukuda. ***The actual date of death rather than the date the zoo stopped feeding.

Sources: Fukuda Saburō, Jitsuroku Ueno dōbutsuen (The True Record of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Mainichi-shimbunsha, 1968), 174–81; Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982), 1:173–89; Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 143–94.

Total

Additional Disposal (1945) Apr. 1 hippopotamus (Maru) Apr. 24 hippopotamus (Kyōko)

polar bear Asian elephant (John) American bison Asian elephant (Hanako) leopard Asian elephant (Tonki)

Aug. 29 Aug. 29 Sept. 1 Sept. 11 Sept. 11 Sept. 23

48


Execution of the King of Beasts On August 22, zoo staff poisoned a pair of lions, Ali and Katherina, gifts from Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie I to Emperor Hirohito in January 1931. Ethiopian royal guards had escorted them to the port at their departure. When the lions had arrived in Tokyo, Fukuda was impressed with their fit bodies and agility, compared to the “plump” zoo lions he was accustomed to seeing. He felt that these were true lions. Yet, in 1943 Fukuda had to destroy the magnificent pair. The keepers stopped feeding them on August 16 (they were fed half the daily diet on August 17 and 18) so that they would be hungry enough to eat poisoned meat. Keepers first gave Katherina horse meat, mixed with three grams of strychnine nitrate, in the evening. However, she was extremely sensitive, noticed the poison after one bite, and spat out the meat. The staff gave her more horse meat with the poison, but she would not touch it. She kept staring at the keepers in silence. After thirty-five minutes she began to show signs of the poison. The small amount of poison from the one bite circulated around her body, and she tossed and turned from the excruciating pain. In order to shorten her pain, the staff thrust a spear into her heart. She died after an hour and thirty-seven minutes of struggle.27 In contrast, Ali had a laid-back and lofty disposition and gulped down the poisoned meat. Signs of poisoning appeared in ten minutes, and he died in thirty-two minutes. The lioness that had been destroyed four days earlier was their daughter. The zoo staff also destroyed a male tiger and a female cheetah that evening. All four bodies were sent for necropsy and then were mounted.28 Continuing Disposal After destroying the king of beasts, the staff took a day off on August 23. Actually, Fukuda was busy with another matter on that day (examined below). On August 24 zoo staff strangled a female polar bear, because she refused to eat poisoned horse meat. It took half an hour to put a wire loop around her neck. The bear protested violently until the wire stopped her breathing. The death toll had reached thirteen. On August 26 the staff poisoned a male black leopard and a male leopard to death. Next was a rattlesnake. They could not poison it, however, because its diet was live animals. The keepers pierced wire into the rattlesnake’s head and strangled its neck with wires and twines. It took sixteen hours until it died.29

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 48

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM


49

On August 27 zoo staff strangled a female python’s neck and chopped off its head. Then they tried to poison a female leopard and female black leopard to death. These two female felids were extremely sensitive and refused to eat the poisoned horse meat. Thus, keepers strangled them with a wire loop on a pole. Nevertheless, the official cause of death was recorded as “poisoning” for both of them. Keepers also poisoned a female Malayan sun bear, a gift from the Sultan of Johor on the Malay Peninsula in Southeast Asia.30 On August 28, in anticipation of John the elephant’s death, Fukuda discussed how to dispose of his huge body with the veterinary school staff and prepared 140 pounds of wattle bark extract and 190 gallons of quicklime, necessary chemicals to flay an elephant. Then the zoo put out notices saying that “ferocious animals are not on display temporarily due to construction.” On August 29 five keepers strangled a male polar bear; but he resisted and fought back although he had not eaten for more than ten days. Zoo staff apparently had not learned the lesson from the unfed female black bear that fought back. The polar bear’s official cause of death was reported as “starvation.” In addition, keepers destroyed an eighteenyear-old female American bison by strangulation and by striking her with an axe and a hammer. She was one of three American bison donated by newspaper tycoon William R. Hearst from the Hearst Castle San Simeon, California, in December 1933 (the two others had died of pneumonia; they were the first bison that had crossed the Pacific Ocean). The official cause of death reported was “poisoning.” On the same day the polar bear and bison were killed, John died of starvation and dehydration.31 Zoo staff kept the bodies of John and the polar bear for necropsy on the premises because they were too big to be transported to the veterinary school. It took a whole month to dissect an elephant. On September 1 keepers struck the remaining American bison, the daughter of the bison destroyed three days earlier, with a hammer. She had been born in the zoo in September 1939. The official cause of death was “poisoning.” Thus, the zoo lost all of its American bison, a rare species in Japanese zoos at the time.32 Twenty-four specimens had thus far been destroyed, while two Asian elephants and a male leopard cub born in Ueno Zoo were being kept alive secretly. As noted earlier, the record of disposals reported to Governor-General Ōdachi lists the methods of disposal mostly as poisoning, but the zoo had actually used other methods because the poisoning did not work. The trials and errors on the part of the zoo staff aggravated and prolonged the pain of the animals. The ban on

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 49

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM

50


the use of bullets forced the zoo to destroy these animals in the cruelest fashion.33 Announcement of Disposal The Tokyo government abruptly issued a press release regarding the disposal of “twenty-seven” (three were still alive) animals on August 30. On August 31, unaware of the disposal, renowned zoologist Takashima Haruo (1907–1962) went to see Ueno Zoo’s rare arctic fox from Kiska Island in the Aleutian Islands (southwest of Alaska), which had been donated by the IJA and was on public view from August 24. He also wanted to see the new leopard cub at the zoo; however, the “ferocious animals” cages were closed with a sign saying, “closed temporarily due to construction.” Takashima found that strange, because this was not a time when the zoo could afford to undertake any construction. Two days later he heard about the disposal. He thought that zoo animals were not as ferocious as those in the wild and would not pose serious danger to people.34 The zoo received countless letters of protest, including many from children, asking why they had killed the animals, but it was too late. The press was censored. Governor-General Ōdachi held a funeral service in the zoo on September 4. Government dignitaries gave the eulogy, saying, “These animals sacrificed their lives for the sake of Japan.” Inoshita had told Fukuda to keep from Ōdachi the fact that the two female elephants were still alive. The zoo put a huge black-and-white-striped curtain on the elephant house to hide the two elephants. The disguise gave the appearance that the zoo was in mourning. In the fall of 1943 the zoo staff displayed mounted animals in their former exhibit cages. Ali and Katherina looked like “toy stuffed animals” and were devoid of any features of the majestic king of the jungle. The staff then put goats and pigs in the night cages of the destroyed animals. A couple of eagles perched on the high rocks where black leopards used to sleep during the day.35 Disposal of Tonki and Hanako Of the two surviving female elephants at Ueno Zoo, Tonki had come with John from India in 1924, and Hanako (formerly Wanli or Wangi; both names appear in the literature) had come from Thailand in June 1935. The elephant keepers, Sugaya and Shibuya, had opposed killing the elephants. Sugaya, who had learned how to train the two female elephants to perform from a Thai trainer named Noppakun Widra

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 50

10/8/2010 7:40:59 AM


51

(who had accompanied Wanli from Thailand in 1935), strongly protested it. In the end, Sugaya consented to destroying John, but he refused to destroy the two female elephants. In turn, Shibuya stated, John was “smart and high-strung,” whereas Tonki was “gentle and smart,” and Hanako was “quiet yet strong.”36 Tonki was the most popular animal among zoo visitors and was also Fukuda’s favorite. Fukuda, too, wanted to save the two elephants, especially Tonki. He knew that Sugaya had secretly fed them a small amount of food. Fukuda had negotiated with Sendai City Zoo (which had no elephant) to evacuate the two elephants, as well as the black leopard cub, to the zoo in northeastern Japan. Fukuda heard from the zoo, which agreed to accept Tonki on August 11. Inoshita, Fukuda, and Koga met on August 16 and prepared for the “evacuation mission” for Tonki. Fukuda made arrangements for Tonki’s transportation, scheduled for August 23.37 On the twenty-third, Sendai City Zoo deputy director Ishii Koreyori visited Tokyo to receive Tonki. Fukuda took him to the Tokyo Park Section office to introduce him to Inoshita. There, Inoshita told Fukuda that Governor-General Ōdachi was indignant. He had reprimanded Inoshita for planning the transfer, saying he had ordered Inoshita to kill the animals, not to save them. Actually, Fukuda had also written to Osaka City Zoo director Terauchi Shinzō, asking for Tonki’s transfer on August 17, only to be rejected. He meanwhile had been secretly negotiating with Higashiyama Zoo director Kitaō Hideichi in Nagoya on the possible evacuation of a pair of leopards and a pair of black leopards to that zoo, but in vain. Fukuda also unsuccessfully had planned to give the black leopard cub to Ritsurin Park Zoo in western Japan. All of these foiled attempts show Fukuda’s desperate efforts to save at least a few of the zoo’s animals.38 Fukuda instructed Sugaya and Shibuya to stop feeding Tonki and Hanako on August 25. When Fukuda went to the elephant house, Tonki stood up on her hind legs and performed in front of him, expecting bananas. Her body was conspicuously thin. Hanako was in worse condition. As the elephants grew weaker, Fukuda finally closed the elephant house on September 7. While healthy elephants usually sleep lying down, sick and weak ones sleep standing on four legs, because they know they cannot get up once they lie down. Fukuda no longer could bear to see Tonki and Hanako leaning on the metal bars all day long. Sugaya also stated: “They performed circus acts in front of me in such poor conditions, begging to be fed. Their quiet eyes were desperately appealing to be fed. I snuck out some food and

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 51

10/8/2010 7:41:00 AM

52


also gave my lunch, hoping that the war situation would improve before they died. However, the situation was hopeless. I could not feed them any longer, because feeding would only prolong their suffering. If I went to the elephant house and saw their gentle eyes, I would not be able to resist feeding them. Therefore, I could not go there anymore.”39 Later, in 1950, Sugaya’s daughter stated at his funeral: “Whenever my family received the ration of sweet potatoes during the war (there was no rice and people lived on potatoes), my father wrapped them up and brought them somewhere I did not know. We were constantly hungry. I thought that he was eating the potatoes alone, hiding. No matter how I begged, he took the potatoes away. Later, the zoo staff told me that he had given the potatoes to Tonki and Wanli [Hanako]. To my father, they were dearer than us.” For Sugaya and Shibuya, the two elephants’ gentle eyes were the heaviest punishment that they had ever received in their lives. Hanako died of starvation and dehydration, as well as of autointoxication (caused by constipation from dehydration), on September 11, 1943. It was the eighteenth day of no food or water in the late summer heat. Tonki stroked Hanako gently with her trunk. On the same day, keepers put strychnine nitrate in the mouth of the male leopard cub that had been born in the zoo in March.40 Death of Tonki Tonki was still hanging on to life. Being concerned that GovernorGeneral Ōdachi might punish the zoo if he found out that Tonki was still alive, Koga (on military leave) told Fukuda to “hurry up with Tonki” on the day Hanako died. Sugaya gave Tonki poisoned potatoes, but she threw them back at him. They gave her water, mixed with cyanide, but she refused to drink it. When Sugaya stroked her cheeks, Tonki put her trunk into his pocket, searching for food. Tonki kept standing on four feet, day and night, leaning on the metal bars. She died on September 23. It was the thirtieth day of her battle with hunger and thirst.41 Sugaya and Shibuya were depressed. Having lost their keeper positions, they became zoo custodians. Sugaya wrote to the Thai trainer Widra, who was then working at Higashiyama Zoo, saying he wished he could have evacuated the three elephants to northern Japan, having them engage in logging or other work. Shibuya, meanwhile, stated that keepers ate the meat of the animals that had been destroyed or died, in order not to waste their deaths. He thought that the meat of

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 52

10/8/2010 7:41:00 AM


53

bison, elephant, and hippopotamus tasted horrible, while fatty alligator meat tasted best. After the three elephants died, Shibuya began to have nightmares: “Tonki was stepping on me after the performance. I tried to tell her to stop, but I could not voice the word. I tried to run away from her, but I could not move. Then I woke up, covered with sweat.” Ever since the disposal, Shibuya said, “I carried the souls of the three elephants on my shoulders. It was too heavy a load to carry.”42 A heartbroken Fukuda wrote in 1968: “I have never missed walking around the zoo premises for a single day ever since I began working at the zoo in 1922. After destroying the animals, however, I could no longer do so. I lost sixteen pounds in a month. Some keepers did not come to work on the day the animal that they were in charge of was to be destroyed. I kept having nightmares about the animals and had many sleepless nights. I have never forgotten about these ‘guys’ after a quarter century.”43

Disposal at Inokashira Park Zoo Inokashira Park Zoo opened in Musashino, western Tokyo, in May 1942. Its precursor, the Inokashira Onshi Park, opened in 1917 and its menagerie opened in 1934. This smaller zoo did not escape the disposal. Inokashira Park Zoo destroyed two Japanese black bears and a polar bear in September, as well as three camels later. In October Inokashira Park also cut down fifteen thousand cedar trees over a tenacre area upon the emergency requisition of building materials. Thus, the park’s famous cedar forest was gone. These trees were used to make coffins for the air-raid victims. Thousands of coffins were piled up in the giraffe house (Takao from Ueno Zoo died in May 1942; see chapter 2), as well as in the elephant house at Ueno Zoo. As more military industry factories were built in the area surrounding Inokashira Park, air strikes intensified there, and the park’s branch zoo in adjacent Mitaka was hit in January 1945, causing minor damage.44

Massive Tokyo Air Raids The first U.S. B-29 air strikes began on November 24, 1944, totaling five attacks by more than 85 sorties during that month. Tokyo was hit again with a total of fifteen attacks by 136 sorties in December. The Japanese five-ton Zero fighter was no match for the powerful fifty-four-ton, fourteen-crew-member bomber, dropping eight tons’ worth of bombs per flight. The air strikes intensified in January

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 53

10/8/2010 7:41:00 AM

54


1945, with bombs being dropped indiscriminately over downtown Tokyo. These attacks culminated in the Massive Tokyo Air Raids of March 9–10, 1945, with about 350 B-29 sorties dropping a total of seventeen hundred tons of incendiaries. Tokyo became a sea of fire. The whole city was flattened. The death toll reached 105,000 overnight.45 On the morning after the raids, fourteen-year-old Yajima Minoru (see chapter 2) saw a woman putting a beautiful kimono on a charred body in a burnt-down lot. The unrecognizable body was her daughter. The woman held the body tightly and collapsed. Yajima then saw a dragonfly laying eggs on the morning dew that had collected on the galvanized iron board (which was used to cover a dead body). The tiny insect, conducting the business of life as usual, dictated by its instinct for life in the midst of the total destruction of the city, struck him with awe.46 Ueno Zoo was intact from the devastating air raids on Tokyo. Thousands of dead bodies were carried into the zoo and piled up for several days. The zoo had prepared seventy-six hundred coffins but made an additional order of ten thousand coffins. The zoo was closed and the remaining keepers were sent for rescue work.47 Disposal of Hippopotami at Ueno Zoo Ueno Zoo had a hippopotamus pair brought from Changkyungwon Zoo in Seoul, Korea, in 1919 (a female born in September 1917) and in 1927 (a male born in May 1925), a reminder of Japan’s imperialism on the Asian continent (see chapter 6). While the hippopotami were categorized as Class-A dangerous animals, they were not on the list for disposal submitted to Governor-General Ōdachi and escaped the disposal. A postwar zoo director Nakagawa Shirō wrote, “The hippopotamus pair, Daitarō and Kyōko, were the only consolation for the depressed keepers in the spring of 1945.” However, Daitarō had actually already died of gastrointestinal inflammation (due to malnutrition) in March 1944, at the age of eighteen. It was his sixyear-old son, Maru (born in the zoo in May 1938), that was alive, along with his twenty-seven-year-old mother, Kyōko, in the spring of 1945. The keepers did not want to talk about the destroyed animals. Nakagawa (who had begun working at the zoo in 1952 as a zoo veterinarian) learned that some of the senior keepers, who became uncontrollably drunk, had taken up drinking only after the disposal. Their trauma was so deep that they forced themselves to become drunk.48

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 54

10/8/2010 7:41:00 AM


55

Nevertheless, after the Massive Tokyo Air Raids, the zoo decided to destroy Kyōko and Maru because of the feed shortage. The keepers stopped feeding them on March 19 (see photograph 3). They also emptied the water from their pool. Maru died of dehydration and starvation on the fourteenth day with no food or water, on April 1. It was the day when the U.S. forces landed on Okinawa Islands (the Battle of Okinawa). Kyōko died on the thirty-seventh day with no food and water, on April 24. The zoo received a truckload of hay on that day.49 The deaths of the two hippopotami are not “natural” starvations to death, but were “deliberate and planned” deaths, as in the cases of the three elephants. This chapter therefore counts the deaths of the two hippopotami in the total number of animals that Ueno Zoo destroyed during the war (see table 3.1). After the war, in 1952, on the zoo’s seventy-year anniversary, the zoo acquired a new hippopotamus pair. While zoo officials and the public were elated, the keepers could not share the euphoria. It only brought back the haunting memories of the disposal. Shibuya, the elephant keeper, experienced the same trauma and emotional detachment. The zoo had acquired two elephants in 1949. However, Shibuya was not excited about their arrival (see chapter 9).50 Increasing Death Toll at Ueno Zoo On April 13, 1945, the U.S. B-29s struck the area surrounding Ueno Zoo and dropped 150 incendiaries. The zoo however incurred no severe damage. Only the elephant house was burned down, except for its brick foundation, also burning the five hundred coffins stored inside. There was no damage to the ferocious animal facilities. The last zebra had died of malnutrition on March 30, 1945, and the last sea lion starved to death on July 10. The only remaining chimpanzee (a female) died of digestive malfunction and nervousness on July 22 due to the recurrent air-raid sirens (her mate had died in May 1943). The zoo staff had planned to cull one of the four giraffes, but since the mother giraffe, Takako, died of pulmonary edema in January 1945, the remaining three giraffes escaped death. All the large imported exotic animals were dead, except for the giraffes.51 In 1944 the number of specimens that died at Ueno Zoo reached a peak of 977, whereas the previous numbers were 323 (in 1941), 262 (1942), and 270 (1943). The numbers declined to 67 in 1945 and 40 in 1946. The zoo looked empty and became eerily quiet. The collective evacuation of schoolchildren to the countryside began in August 1944, and visitors to Ueno Zoo became scarce.52

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 55

10/8/2010 7:41:00 AM

56


Zoo in Tōhoku Region: Sendai City Zoo Sendai City Zoo was the sole zoo in the Tōhoku region (northeastern Japan) in 1943. The zoo opened in Miyagi-prefecture’s capital in April 1936 with the donation of animals from the amusement park Hanayashiki in Tokyo due to its closure (see chapter 2). According to the official “50-Year History of Sendai City Transportation Projects,” Sendai City Zoo fell into financial deficit during the war, obliging the city to consider closing the zoo and turning the compounds into a farm in February 1944 in order to cope with the serious food shortage.53 With the mounting criticism of the zoo, the city decided to dispose of its dangerous animals in March 1944. In total, the zoo destroyed twelve specimens of six species by poisoning and shooting. The destroyed animals consisted of two polar bears, four black bears, two brown bears, two lions, a leopard, and a tiger. The exact dates of the disposals are not recorded, however, since it is known that the zoo conducted a memorial service for the animals on May 19, 1944, the disposals presumably took place between March and May 1944.54 With a further decrease in public attendance, Sendai City Zoo was in effect closed on September 1, 1944, opening only to those who wished to see whatever was left of the animals and charging only ¥0.05 uniformly regardless of age. However, visitors eventually stopped coming and the zoo was completely closed. It was burned down during the Sendai air raids in July 1945. In the postwar period, the zoo compounds were turned into a housing lot. Sendai City Zoo reopened in October 1957 and then moved to Yagiyama Park and became Sendai Yagiyama Zoological Park in October 1965. As of 1962, the zoo had 246 specimens of 60 species.55 Himawari ya ue to kawaki ni zō no yuku (The sunflower watches the elephant slowly starving to death in the summer heat) —August 29, 2010, the 67th anniversary of the day John starved to death

9780230108943_04_ch03.indd 56

10/8/2010 7:41:00 AM

CH A P T ER

4

Zoos in Western Japan and World War II

There were six zoos in western Japan that were members of the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums in 1943: Kyoto City Zoo, Osaka City Zoo, Takarazuka Zoo, Hanshin Park Zoo, Kobe City Zoo in the Kansai region (western region) and Ritsurin Park Zoo in the Shikoku-San’in region, which was located south and west of the Kansai region (see map). Soon after Ueno Zoo destroyed twenty-seven dangerous animals in August–September 1943, Japanese zoo directors met in Kobe to assess the gravity of the situation. However, only six (Higashiyama, Kyoto, Osaka, Takarazuka, Kobe, and Ritsurin) attended. Ueno Zoo acting director Fukuda Saburō was absent. The zoo directors hoped they could avoid the fate of Ueno Zoo because theirs were not in the nation’s capital. They decided to take extra security measures by reinforcing the facilities for dangerous animals, by strengthening their zoos’ readiness for emergencies (they even used smoke emitters during air-raid drills to provide a realistic atmosphere; see photograph on book cover), and by reassuring the public that they would not let these animals escape under any circumstances. Nevertheless, fate was approaching the zoos in western Japan.1

Osaka City Zoo Osaka City Zoo opened in Osaka, the second largest city and the commercial capital of Japan, in January 1915. The prototype of the zoo dates back to 1884 when a menagerie was built in the Osakaprefecture Museum of Natural History (created in 1875), housing bears, lions, tigers, and elephants from the Malay Peninsula. The menagerie expanded in 1903. Its jurisdiction was transferred to the city in 1913. Later the zoo was moved to Ten’nōji and opened as

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 57

10/8/2010 7:41:06 AM

58


Osaka City Zoo in 1915 (the opening ceremony was held in December 1914) with about 230 specimens of 60 species. The zoo changed its name to Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo in July 1964.2 A graduate of the Osaka-prefecture Agriculture College veterinary-livestock science program, Hayashi Saichi (1889–1967; director, 1913–1943), became Osaka City Zoo’s first director. The initial task Hayashi was charged with was to transfer 181 specimens to the new zoo site safely. The zoo staff carried the animals on wagons and carts pulled by oxen, except for the elephants, which were too big to be transported in these vehicles. The zoo gave away the female elephant, Tokiwa, to the amusement park Hanayashiki in Tokyo. In order to minimize the commotion and danger, the zoo decided to transfer the male elephant, Dampei, during the night. However, Dampei refused to move and stayed put like a huge rock. Then Hayashi came up with an idea. Before coming to the zoo, Dampei had been a circus performer; hence his handsome name in the style of Kabuki, the traditional all-male theatrical performances of drama, dance, and music. Hayashi therefore made a dozen staff members play musical instruments and dance. Near the climax of the performance, Dampei suddenly stood up. While conducting the music, Hayashi guided Dampei out to the street. It took Dampei ten hours to walk two miles, and it was dawn when the entourage arrived at the new zoo.3 “Rita Fever” Osaka City Zoo’s animal collection grew quickly. The zoo had purchased a number of exotic animals, such as a rare Sumatran rhinoceros (in 1921, the only one of its species that had ever landed on Japanese soil), a zebra (from Hagenbeck), a chimpanzee, and a Hamadryas baboon (these last two species both firsts in Japan), by 1928. The zoo saw a record public attendance of 2.5 million in 1934 and by 1935 had expanded its premises by twice its original size. The animal rush continued, and the zoo had bought another chimpanzee, a leopard, a pair of giraffes, a spotted hyena, four polar bears (from Hagenbeck), and many other animals by 1935. The first chimpanzee, Tarō, became an instant star, but within a month he died of complications from overexertion. The zoo then went out of its way to send a Japanese animal dealer/importer, Kagawa Isamu, to Africa to recruit Tarō’s replacement. Kagawa came back with the four-yearold Rita. The rest was history. Being exceptionally “smart,” she soon learned to eat with a knife and fork, brush her teeth, play Japanese chess with Hayashi, perform the traditional Japanese tea ceremony

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 58

10/8/2010 7:41:06 AM

ZOOS IN WESTERN JAPAN AND WORLD WAR II

59

in a kimono, and more. Rita became a national celebrity. The popularity of giant pandas and koalas in later years was no match for Rita’s. After Rita, the elephants attracted spectators. With the death of Dampei in 1926, the zoo had arranged for the female elephant Tokiwa (which the zoo had given to the Hanayashiki amusement park) returned to Osaka.4 As Rita’s popularity soared, the zoo trained her to perform more human-like acts in order to keep drawing large public attendance. Rita was made to walk around on her hind legs in an upright position, wearing a kimono and a heavy wig, looking like a geisha girl. She was even made to pose, smoking a cigarette. Some zoologists expressed concerns about this show-business approach, which had become prevalent in the zoo community in the Kansai region in recourse to corny animal performances and at the cost of neglecting the more serious purposes of zoos. In fact, Osaka City Zoo staff member Tsutsui Yoshitaka (1903–1989), who had studied zoology under Kawamura Tamiji at Kyoto Imperial University, stated in 1936 that zoos in the region fell into the type of low-class entertainment that was no different from that of street entertainers. He argued that zoos should abandon the anachronistic commercialism and that they should emphasize their educational aspects. However, both the city and zoo officials were “intoxicated” by the overwhelming popularity of Rita and did not listen to him. Tsutsui was ostracized and eventually left the zoo. He then joined a project to create the Osaka City Museum of Natural History and became its first director (1952–1965).5 Brief Directorship of Kawamura Tamiji Meanwhile, Kyoto Imperial University zoology professor Kawamura Tamiji (biologist; 1883–1964) became Kyoto City Zoo director in April 1934. He was a graduate of Tokyo Imperial University and a pioneer in ecology in Japan. He was also the editor of Dōbutsuen to suizokukan (Zoos and Aquariums), the first academic journal on zoos in Japan in 1926. His appointment was an epoch-making event (a scholar, rather than a veterinary graduate, to become a zoo director) in the Japanese zoo community (after the unfortunate precedent of Ishikawa Chiyomatsu at Ueno Zoo; see chapter 2). However, upon return from his zoo study tour to Europe and the United States, Kawamura clashed with the city officials and resigned in June 1935. He was the director for only fourteen months, including the sevenmonth overseas trip. Kawamura wrote in the 1936 article “Dōbutsuen no kinō to yōshiki” (Functions and Forms of Zoos) that the zoos in

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 59

10/8/2010 7:41:06 AM

60


the Kansai region created an atmosphere where people looked for entertainment immediately upon entering the zoos. He deplored the degradation of zoos.6 Thus, the collaboration between the zoo community and academia was brief for Kyoto City Zoo, as was the case for Ueno Zoo. Kyoto City Zoo director Sasaki Tokio (1913–1974; director 1962– 1968) states that even the “Imperial” Ueno Zoo could not be above such trends and succumbed to the temptation. Ueno Zoo already had elephant performances, but it acquired its new attraction: a chimpanzee pair that rode bicycles and motorbikes. However, the pair died of pneumonia a year and half after joining the zoo. The zoo had obtained this pair from a German trader in exchange for four redcrowned cranes, ignorant of the approaching endangered status of the bird. Sasaki writes that this was symbolic of the state of zoos in Japan then. He laments that Japanese zoos moved further away from being “zoological museums,” as envisioned by Fukuzawa Yukichi in 1866.7 In June 1935 Osaka City Zoo received one of the two female elephants that Thailand’s youth group had given to the Japan Youth League. That was Rampur (see photograph on book cover), who came with Wangi to Kobe port (Wangi went on to Ueno Zoo and was renamed Hanako; see chapter 3) . The zoo’s pair of giraffes, the first in the Kansai region, and polar bears also became very popular. With these exotic animals Osaka City Zoo flourished.8 Encroaching Effects of War Osaka City Zoo’s fortunes began to turn worse in 1940 when Japan was celebrating its victories in Singapore and the Philippines without envisioning the war’s disastrous ending. With the enactment of the National Mobilization Law in April 1938, the Home Ministry reorganized local governments. The jurisdiction of Osaka City Zoo changed from the Civil Engineering Park Section to the Education Department in 1940, to the National Mobilization Department in 1941, and then to the Civil Service Bureau in 1942.9 In order to raise war morale among civilians, Rita and Lloyd, who came to the zoo as Rita’s mate, were made to wear military uniforms and carry rifles with national flags (see photograph 4). The zoo also conducted air-raid drills using the elephant Rampur in April 1938 (see photograph on book cover). As the Ministry of Education had banned the use of English, the zoo changed the name of Lloyd to Katsuta (meaning “victory boy”) in December 1940 (Rita died in

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 60

10/8/2010 7:41:07 AM


61

July 1940 before the name change). It must have been confusing to him to be called by a different name.10 The zoo meanwhile suffered from shortages of staff, who were being conscripted one after another, and animal feeds. Then Rita died of post-partum complications the day after giving stillbirth in July 1940. Her death marked the end of the prewar glory of Osaka City Zoo. A giraffe died in December 1940 from lack of heat (due to a shortage of coal) and malnutrition. In January 1942 the elephant Rampur died, with Tokiwa following her in March. Both of them died of gastroenteritis and malnutrition, as well as lack of heating. With the loss of popular animals, the zoo lost its vital components.11 Director Hayashi Retires Early Then, in the midst of the hardest time, Director Hayashi retired in January 1943, earlier than expected. Some speculate that Hayashi decided to retire early because as director he could not bear to face the inevitable fate of the zoo. One of his fellow alumni and his right-hand man, Terauchi Shinzō, succeeded to the post (1943–1962). Thus, the burden of destroying dangerous animals fell to Terauchi. While Ueno Zoo had managed to foil the press, Osaka City Zoo could not escape attention from the paparazzi. The city authorities decided to conduct the disposal there in strict secrecy. The mayor gave Terauchi, who was also a captain in the IJA regional division’s veterinary department, the final authority to decide the date of the disposal. Charged with the difficult decision, Terauchi lost eleven pounds in several days.12 Confronted by reporters who sensed that the next disposal would be at Osaka City Zoo, Terauchi stated in early September 1943 (most likely on September 3) that the zoo would dispose of dangerous animals “in the near future.” The coverage appeared in the newspapers on September 4 and 5. Immediately afterward, Terauchi received letters asking him to save the animals. Citizens, young and old, wrote to the Osaka mayor and Terauchi suggesting alternative measures, such as evacuating animals to zoos in the countryside or to remote islands. Others even tried to dissuade the zoo from the disposal, noting the enormous cost of replacing animals after the war. A second grader enclosed his allowance in his letter, saying, “My schoolteacher took us to the zoo today because he wanted to show us the animals before they were killed. I felt sorry for them. Please feed them a feast with my allowance before they die.” A fifth grader sent her allowance, saying, “I pray that they go to heaven and be reborn as herbivores lest they should be killed again.”13

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 61

10/8/2010 7:41:07 AM

62


Disposal Begins Nevertheless, it was too late. Terauchi had deceived the mass media and the public. Osaka City Zoo destroyed a pair of Korean wolves and a pair of Ezo brown bears on September 4, the day the citizens read Terauchi’s announcement for the first time. The method was poisoning with strychnine nitrate, injected in scraps of beef that was hardly available. The zoo applied the same method to the other animals. However, on September 13 a female leopard refused to eat the poisoned beef and was strangled to death. In total, the zoo destroyed twenty-six animals of ten species between September 1943 and March 1944 (see table 4.1). The zoo’s alligators, python(s), hippopotami, and other species of animals escaped disposal.14 Mysteries Surrounding Disposal Wartime youth history writer Akiyama Masami believes the way the Osaka City Zoo destroyed its animals is full of mysteries. First, the zoo strangely destroyed its animals only five days after the disposal at Ueno Zoo was disclosed and apparently without an ultimatum from the authorities, the kind that Ueno Zoo had received from GovernorGeneral Ōdachi. The zoo also destroyed animals the day after director Terauchi told the reporters that it would take place “in the near future”—a phrase that does not usually mean the next day. In addition, Terauchi apparently had made no effort to evacuate some of the animals to safer places, as Fukuda at Ueno Zoo and other zoo directors had attempted.15 Moreover, while the zoo recorded that it had destroyed twenty-six animals of ten species, it did not document the species of two of them. Also, while the zoo recorded the value of each of the twenty-four specimens destroyed, it did not document the sex of four of them. This included the only tiger it had, which was mounted. Furthermore, unlike Ueno Zoo, Osaka City Zoo destroyed its animals at few-day intervals for over a month, keeping two polar bears and a leopard until October. Most strangely, the zoo kept a female polar bear for six months until March 1944. The polar bears were extremely expensive animals, each valued at ¥1,500, when people were making less than ¥100 a month. The zoo admission was 15 sen (¥0.15) for an adult and 5 sen (¥0.05) for a child in 1945.16 Meanwhile, according to zoologist Yoshida Heihachirō, the animals destroyed included “Siberian black bears” (Manshū-guma). Since they were not included in the list of the destroyed animals in the official zoo history, the two unknown specimens destroyed at the zoo might

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 62

10/8/2010 7:41:07 AM


63

Table 4.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Osaka City Zoo (1943–1944) Date

Name of Species

Sex

Sept. 4

Korean wolf Korean wolf Ezo brown bear Ezo brown bear lion lion leopard

male female male female female male female

125 125 20 50 600 50 265

Sept. 22 Sept. 23 Sept. 25

lion spotted hyena polar bear polar bear lion lion puma Japanese black bear Japanese black bear spotted hyena striped hyena tiger

female male male male n/a n/a n/a male female female male n/a

50 270 1,500 1,500 50 50 750 50 50 220 250 880

Sept. 27 Sept. 29

Japanese black bear lion

male female

120 50

Oct. 2 Oct. 18

polar bear leopard

female male

1,500 170

Mar. 15 n/a n/a

polar bear n/a* n/a*

female n/a n/a

1,500 n/a n/a

Total


Sept. 11 Sept. 13 Sept. 14 Sept. 16 Sept. 17 Sept. 18 Sept. 20

Sept. 21

Value (yen)

Method poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning/ strangulation poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning poisoning (taxidermy) poisoning poisoning (taxidermy) poisoning poisoning (taxidermy) poisoning poisoning poisoning

9,970

Sources: Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, ed., Osaka-shi Ten’nōji dōbutsuen 70-nen-shi (70-Year History of Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo) (Osaka: Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, 1985), 34–35; Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 218–19. *The specimen could be a “Siberian black bear” (Manshū-guma) according to Yoshida Heihachirō’s article in Kagaku-gahō (March 1944; see the text).

indeed have been Siberian black bears. However, Yoshida states that the total number of animals destroyed at the zoo was twenty-four, instead of twenty-six.17 Therefore, none of the sources of information available appears completely accurate. Osaka-mainichi-shimbun reporter Ueda Chōtarō criticized the disposal as much as he could in the form of questions under strict government censorship in February 1944. For instance, he questioned

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 63

10/8/2010 7:41:07 AM

64


the validity of disposing of dangerous carnivores by pointing out that in case of panic, herbivores, such as bison with horns and deer with large antlers, could cause as much or even more damage than lions and tigers. He also pointed out that animals, especially cautious felids, had a tendency to hide when they perceived danger and that those in captivity would stay in the back of their cages in that situation. Ueda also showed empathy for the keepers, who were obliged to lend a hand in the serial disposal of animals that they had looked after every day. They were too depressed to eat lunch after the disposal.18 During the Massive Osaka Air Raids of March 13–14, 1945, about two thousand incendiaries hit the zoo. They burnt down seventeen facilities, including the birds of prey house, and killed thirty-three birds of ten species, such as two Steller’s sea eagles and four black kites. Nevertheless, all the ferocious animal facilities were undamaged.19

Kyoto City Zoo Kyoto City Zoo, the second oldest modern zoo in Japan, opened in April 1903 with 24 mammals of 11 species, 214 birds of 50 species, totaling 238 specimens of 61 species. It was originally called Kyoto Commemorative Zoo because the zoo was created to commemorate the wedding of the crown prince (later Emperor Yoshihito; father of Emperor Hirohito). It dropped the term “commemorative” in 1964, and the zoo is commonly referred to as Okazaki Zoo because it is in Okazaki Park. Some people speculated that Kyoto, Japan’s ancient capital, adorned with historic and cultural heritages, would not be a target of massive U.S. air strikes and that Kyoto City Zoo would remain intact. This proved to be the case. Nevertheless, such an “aloof and irresponsible” attitude met with criticisms that Kyoto City Zoo should not be exempted from disposing of its animals.20 On April 8, 1943, the local police notified the zoo to close the facilities when air-raid alerts were issued from that time on. Zoo director Hara Ken’ichi (November 1942–March 1946) stressed to the police that there was no need to destroy dangerous animals in advance, because they would be locked in their night cages, made of reinforced concrete, during air-raid alerts, with little chance of escaping. Hara pointed out that if their night cages were bombed, the animals would be dead before escaping. Hara had enough confidence about the safety of the zoo to purchase a female elephant, Kalyani, a male giraffe, Wanjirō, and other animals from Hanshin Park Zoo

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 64

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM


65

as late as April–May 1943 (examined below). Hara would not have agreed to take in these animals at that time unless he was confident about the safety of the zoo.21 In line with the government’s propaganda slogans, the zoo changed Kalyani’s name to Tomoe (officially, Tomoe-gō) after the “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere”—the Japanese imperialistic concept to create an economically self-sufficient bloc in East Asia)—tomoe is another pronunciation of the word for “coprosperity” in Japanese. Wanjirō was renamed to the more patriotic Kōkoku (officially, Kōkoku-gō), meaning “imperial nation.” As the IJA regional division requisitioned the zoo’s front and rear iron gates in September 1943, zoo staff replaced them with wooden gates. The zoo staff also leased nearby land and cultivated bamboo groves in order to grow food for the animals. The animals in the zoo were intact in January 1944 when director Hara told reporters that he was not planning to dispose of dangerous animals for the time being. 22 Disposal of Dangerous Animals On March 12, 1944, the IJA regional division chief of staff paid an unannounced visit to Kyoto City Zoo to conduct air-raid drills. He then abruptly ordered the zoo to destroy dangerous animals at once at 3:00 p.m. without any directive from the police or city authorities. The zoo was under the jurisdiction of the Home Ministry, not the IJA, However, the chief of staff was adamant. Out of desperation, Hara pleaded with him to wait at least one day. Consequently, the zoo began executing the order the next day. Fourteen animals were destroyed between March 13 and March 25 (see table 4.2).23 As in the case of Ueno Zoo, Kyoto City Zoo destroyed its animals in a clumsy fashion, with trial and error, prolonging the animals’ suffering much longer, despite the fact that the zoo had sent its engineer Hoshino Toshikata to several other zoos in Japan to study methods for disposal in January 1944, First, after the zoo was closed, the zoo staff shot a brown bear, born in the zoo, in the presence of the chief of staff, police officers, and city officials. Next, they shot his mother, who, ironically, had been a gift from an army minister and IJA general chief of staff. Then the son suddenly stood up on his hind legs twelve minutes after being shot. The staff shot him again. The two bears could not stay on their feet any longer and were getting weak. The zoo staff, who were inexperienced at killing animals, did not confirm the bears’ deaths. They left the bears as they were, believing

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 65

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM

66


Table 4.2 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Kyoto City Zoo (1944) Date

Name of Species

Sex

Date of Birth (b) or Date of Arrival (a)

March 13

brown bear

male

b. January 1931

brown bear

female

a. July 1921

polar bear

male

a. September 1928

“honey bear”* Malayan sun bear lion lion Japanese black bear Japanese black bear lion Sumatran tiger lion (Asagiku) Siberian tiger leopard (Shippū)

male female male female female female male female female male male

a. June 1935 a. September 1935 b. October 1937 b. October 1937 a. April 1935 a. May 1935 b. August 1935 a. June 1937 b. May 1930 a. May 1942 a. July 1931

March 15

March 18 March 19

March 21 March 25

Total

Method shooting/ strangulation shooting/ strangulation shooting/ strangulation shooting shooting shooting shooting strangulation strangulation strangulation poisoning poisoning strangulation strangulation


Sources: Kyoto City Zoo, ed., Kyoto-shi dōbutsuen 80-nen no ayumi (80-Year History of Kyoto City Zoo) (Kyoto: Kyoto City Zoo, 1984), 33–34; Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 82–86. *It is most likely a sloth bear.

they would die soon. To their astonishment, however, the bears were still alive the next morning. The zoo staff ended the bears’ lives by strangling them with wire rope, with much struggle. The necropsy showed that the shooting had missed vital organs on both bears, prolonging their suffering.24 On March 15 the zoo staff destroyed three specimens: one male polar bear from Hagenbeck, a male “honey bear” (mitsu-guma, most likely a sloth bear) from Ceylon (current Sri Lanka), and a female Malayan sun bear. This time the staff members succeeded in shooting at vital organs, and the latter two bears died in less than three minutes. Once they got the hang of it, the keepers went on to destroying large felids. They shot two lion siblings on March 18 that had been born in the zoo. Next day they strangled two Japanese black bears that were well bonded with them, and a male lion that had been born in the zoo. On March 21 they used strychnine nitrate to poison a female Sumatran tiger and a female lion, Asagiku (meaning “morning chrysanthemum”), who had been born in the zoo in 1930. These female felids were cautious, and each ate only a mouthful of poisoned

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 66

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM


67

meat. They died after tossing and turning from excruciating pain for ninety minutes and seventy minutes respectively, as in the case of the lioness Katherina at Ueno Zoo.25 The keepers could not bear the sight of slow death by poisoning any longer. On March 25 they used wire rope to strangle a male Siberian tiger (“Manchurian tiger”), which the zoo had bought only two years earlier, and a male leopard, Shippū (meaning “gale”). Five out of the fourteen animals destroyed had been born in the zoo. One can only imagine how their keepers felt when they destroyed these animals that they had successfully bred in captivity and had looked after since their births. The zoo held a memorial service for the animals on November 23, 1944, according to the Buddhist custom. However, Kyoto City Zoo veterinarian Takizawa Akio, who wrote the official zoo history, states that such a service seems hollow, knowing the circumstances of their deaths.26

Evacuation of a Female Leopard Kyoto City Zoo had a pair of leopards. The zoo had given up the magnificent male leopard, Shippū, and destroyed him on the last day of the disposal. However, they wanted to save the female leopard, because she was pregnant with Shippū’s offspring. The zoo persuaded Ritsurin Park Zoo, in Takamatsu (see map), to evacuate the leopard there. The female leopard, as well as a male striped hyena (which was rare in Japanese zoos then), left Kyoto on March 24, 1944, crossed the Seto Inland Sea, and arrived in Takamatsu on March 26. The female leopard gave birth to healthy twins on April 4, but devoured them immediately. Specialists think it was probably due to the stress from the trip and the environmental change or an instinctive urge. Similar cases of infanticides were observed in captivity. Kyoto City Zoo’s effort to save the leopard’s offspring was foiled by the strange force of nature. At least the leopard cubs were not destroyed by humans.27 In April 1945 the zoo built a stockbreeding facility in order to secure food for people. Then the zoo was closed for a month in June 1945. When the zoo reopened in July, all the zoo employees, including zoo director Hara, were incorporated in the People’s Volunteer Corps. Meanwhile, large herbivores, such as hippopotami, zebras, and water buffalos, died of malnutrition, one by one. The zoo had 965 specimens of 209 species in May 1940, which was reduced to 274 specimens of 72 species in September 1945. Nevertheless, Hara kept his word to Hanshin Park Zoo and managed to keep alive the female

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 67

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM

68


elephant, the male giraffe, and other animals he had purchased from that zoo. Although they were extremely thin, these “adopted” animals consoled the zoo staff’s heavy hearts. Kyoto City Zoo escaped air raids, as the Allied forces exempted Japan’s ancient capital. The disposal was totally unnecessary.28

Kobe City Zoo Suwayama Zoo, a public zoo in Kobe, opened in May 1928. Its jurisdiction was transferred from Kobe-ward to the city in April 1937, with eighty-seven species of animals. By August 1941 the zoo had successfully bred five lion cubs. The zoo also had a male elephant, Danchi. He had a gentle disposition, and his performances were popular among visitors. The zoo put an enormous gas mask over Danchi’s head as part of a demonstration of air-raid drills (see photograph 5). In September 1942, however, Danchi died of hydropericarditis (a condition in which the pericardium around the heart fills with fluid), a complication of long-term malnutrition. Danchi had been reduced to almost a skeleton when he died. Animals at the zoo were being fed only a third of the normal diet in 1943.29 Zoo director Nishide Ken’nosuske was initially optimistic about his carnivores’ lives, because the zoo was located on a hillside surrounded by mountains, which made it geographically unsuitable for air strikes. Nevertheless, the Kobe City Education Bureau’s directorgeneral came to inspect the zoo with the disposal order in hand. Nishide and principal keeper (shiiku-shunin) Matsumura Toyokichi argued that their zoo was located in a “natural fortress,” that their cages were strong, and that a shooting squad patrolled the zoo premises daily with twelve-bullet revolvers. While stroking the “ferocious animals,” they pleaded that their lions were “as gentle as domestic cats” and that their bears (which had been trained at Hagenbeck Animal Park) were “as obedient as dogs.”30 The British game warden in Kenya, George Adamson (1906– 1989), wrote in his autobiography, My Pride and Joy (he lived with prides of lions, and his wife’s name was Joy), that each individual lion had distinctive characteristics, as in the case of humans, but that all of them were by nature designed and perfected to kill. However, captive lions were deprived of the opportunity to exercise their natural ability. The predatory nature of these magnificent animals was suppressed.31 Nevertheless, this suppressed behavior of these animals was what Nishide and Matsumura had to stress in order to save them.

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 68

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM


69

Nishide and Matsumura also appealed to the city government that the zoo’s mandate was to look after animals, not to kill them. However, they received the conventional response that they must cooperate with the war effort. Kobe City mayor Noda Bun’ichirō had succumbed to repeated pressure from the authorities. Then the military police (MP) visited the zoo, saying that if the zoo would not destroy its animals, they would do it. Despite the utmost resistance, the zoo could no longer protect its animals. Zoo staff considered the animals as if they were their own children and decided to take the animals’ lives themselves rather than allowing the MPs to destroy them.32 Disposal of Dangerous Animals According to its official “50-Year History,” the Kobe City Zoo destroyed its dangerous animals in late September 1943. It also states that the zoo selected twenty-four specimens of twelve species to be destroyed. However, although this history provides names of species to be destroyed, it does not give the number of specimens of each to be destroyed, leaving the details of the disposal ambiguous. In addition, the history simply states that the zoo chose the method of strangulation in order to shorten the animals’ suffering.33 As a reference to the disposal, the official zoo history carries a photocopy of the local newspaper, the Kobe-shimbun, dated September 19, 1943. According to this article, the zoo planed to destroy twenty specimens of thirteen species. These animals included a brown bear, Japanese black bear(s) (unnumbered), three lions, a tiger, a leopard, two polar bears, a dhole (Asian wild dog), a hyena, “two lynxes” (examined below), a dingo (Australian wild dog), three lion cubs, two pythons, and two alligators, in the order of disposal. However, the number does not add up to twenty. It would make a total of twenty-one specimens even if only one Japanese black bear were to be destroyed. It would make a total of thirteen species if lions and lion cubs were counted as different species, as the newspaper article seems to think. It should be noted that the date of this article is not a part of the photocopy of the article itself but was added by the editor of the official zoo history as a caption to the article. Therefore, it is uncertain that the article date is accurate.34 Meanwhile, the only resistance the zoo attempted was to secretly keep a Korean lynx, because it was a rare species in Japanese zoos then. The zoo kept it in a small cage away from public eyes. However, it was not fed sufficiently, suffered intestinal catarrh, and died in

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 69

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM

70


May 1945. In addition, for unknown reasons, a “Mississippi alligator” (an American alligator) escaped the disposal. It survived the war and lived a long life after the zoo moved to Ōji Park in March 1951.35 Mysteries Surrounding Disposal There are a number of discrepancies and inconsistencies regarding the record of disposal of animals at Kobe City Zoo. As mentioned above, the official zoo history provided a list of species of animals to be destroyed but did not document the number and species of animals that were actually destroyed. For instance, the history lists “two lynxes” among the animals to be destroyed. However, it appears that the zoo had only one lynx at the time of disposal. A pair of Korean lynxes came to Kobe City Zoo in 1936 as a result of an exchange agreement with Changkyungwon Zoo in Seoul, which acquired lions from the former. An Osakashimbun article dated May 12, 1940, reported that a lynx cub became sick, indicating that the pair had a cub. Almost eleven years later, a Kobe-shimbun article dated March 19, 1951, reported that several university laboratories in Tokyo and Kyoto had wanted the lynx at the time of its disposal, because it was a rare species. If the zoo had two lynxes then, the article would have mentioned it. Akiyama’s book also indicates that the zoo had only one lynx in September 1943. It appears that at least one of the original pair or their cub died due to unknown causes before the disposal, if the zoo had two lynxes at the time. The life expectancy of a lynx is about ten to twenty years (wild ones can live twelve years, while captive ones can live up to twenty years). Thus, it is uncertain whether the lynx alive at the time of disposal was a parent or a cub, but it is most likely that the sick cub had died earlier.36 Comparing the conflicting information, the Kobe-shimbun article seems to be more plausible overall than the official zoo history; however, if the zoo had two lynxes in 1943, what did zoo staff do with the other one? Did they destroy it while saving another? Or did they give it away while hiding the other? Zoo officials knew that university research laboratories that wanted the lynx would most likely kill it for an experiment. Therefore, they decided to hide it on the premises. Judging from all the available information above, it is more likely that the zoo had only one lynx in 1943. Then, the number in the Kobeshimbun article would correctly add up to “twenty specimens.” If two lynxes were alive then, it is most likely that the zoo had destroyed

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 70

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM


71

one and hid the other on its premises, only for it to die in May 1945. However, the truth remains a mystery. Contradictory Dates for Disposal More seriously, the date of the disposal recorded in Kobe City Zoo’s official history seems to be incorrect. Other sources suggest that the zoo destroyed its animals between July and September 1944 instead of in September 1943. For instance, zoologist Yoshida Heihachirō visited the zoo sometime between late 1943 and early 1944, after the disposals at Ueno Zoo and Osaka City Zoo. At the time of his visit, all of the animals at Kobe City Zoo were alive. He wrote that Kobe City Zoo had many rare species of animals, owing to Kobe port. It was the first port of entry for many animals from overseas, and sailors often brought back animals from exotic lands, some of them rare. Yoshida also wrote that some of the zoo’s dangerous animals were scheduled to be transferred to Xinjing Zoo in Manchukuo. He felt though that if the city allowed Kobe City Zoo to build secure bunkers for these animals in the neighboring mountains, the zoo would not have to transfer them to such a faraway place.37 Yoshida’s article, which appeared in the popular scientific magazine Kagaku-gahō in March 1944, indicates that none of the dangerous animals were destroyed in September 1943, contradicting the official zoo history. Yoshida’s article also shows that the zoo staff made the utmost efforts to save their animals. Other sources, including Akiyama’s book, state without any hint of doubt that the disposal took place sometime between July and September 1944. They also mention that the zoo strangled lions, a tiger, a leopard, and polar bears to death; however, the rest were poisoned with strychnine nitrate. This contradicts the description recorded in the official zoo history.38 After evaluating the conflicting information, it seems more likely that the disposal at Kobe City Zoo took place in July–September 1944, instead of September 1943. The record of the disposal in the zoo official history is brief without detailed information. The history’s date of disposal, late September 1943, also appears to be a little too early. This date seems inconsistent with the desperate attempts to delay the disposal on the parts of Nishide and Matsumura. It is also inconsistent with the zoo’s plan to transfer some of its dangerous animals to Xinjing Zoo, as described in Yoshida’s article. Besides, these animals were alive when Yoshida visited the zoo sometime between late 1943 and early 1944.

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 71

10/8/2010 7:41:08 AM

72


As Nishide had predicted, Kobe City Zoo sustained no damage, either direct or indirect, from the city’s extensive air raids of March 1945. The disposal was totally futile. At the end of the war, the number of specimens had decreased from 200 to just 90 due to the shortage of feed and fuel. The zoo had no popular animals. In March 1946, because of decreased public attendance (fewer than fifty visitors a day) and the resultant financial difficulty, the zoo was closed. The Humane Society International managed the facilities after that until the city built a new zoo in Ōji Park at the foot of the RokkōMaya section of the Setonaikai National Park in June 1950. Animals and some of the facilities were transferred to the new Kobe City Ōji Zoo, which opened in March 1951. As of 1962, the zoo had 716 specimens of 159 species.39

Private Zoos in the Kansai Region Hanshin Park Zoo Hanshin Park Zoo opened in Nishinomiya, between Osaka and Kobe, in July 1929. It was created by the Hanshin Electric Railway, next to the Kōshien, the company’s Hanshin Tigers major league baseball stadium. It was one of only a handful of private zoos in Japan at the time. Hanshin Park Zoo was famous for breeding “Cape penguins” (currently called African, or black-footed, penguins) in its earlier days. The zoo started with thirty-three specimens in 1935, and reached seventy (or one hundred, depending on the source) at its peak. In February 1943 the IJA regional headquarters decided to requisition the park compound as an airport construction site. In response, the zoo’s board of directors decided to transfer its location to a safer place in the fall. However, after reassessing the situation, they decided to close the zoo and sell its animals in the spring.40 In terms of economic costs, it was more difficult for private zoos, such as Hanshin Park Zoo, to destroy their animals than it was for public zoos, which did not have to make both ends meet. The latter’s operating budgets were allocated by the local governments. In contrast, a private zoo could not afford to lose exotic animals purchased from abroad. A private zoo also would not have been able to withstand the criticisms of citizens had it destroyed its popular animals. Therefore, Hanshin Park decided to relocate its animals as soon as possible. The zoo held a grand farewell party on April 11, 1943, and gave away mementoes at the gate to the first five thousand children

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 72

10/8/2010 7:41:09 AM


73

who visited the zoo on that day. The IJA took over the Hanshin Park compound afterward.41 Hanshin Park Zoo began transfer of its animals on April 15, 1943. First, the zoo staff put a tiger, kangaroo(s), “Humboldt penguins,” alligators, python(s), and other animals in cages and transported them by truck to Kobe City Zoo on April 15 while camels walked to that zoo. In turn, Osaka City Zoo, which had lost two elephants (Rampur and Tokiwa) in 1942, agreed to receive free of charge Tom, the eleven-year-old female elephant from Thailand, as well as kangaroo(s), monkey(s), crane(s), and other animals. Tom left the zoo at midnight on April 26 and walked along the Hanshin Highway all the way to Osaka for almost two days before arriving at Osaka City Zoo on April 27. In turn, Kyoto City Zoo agreed to purchase a female elephant, Kalyani, a male giraffe, Wanjirō, a pair of kangaroos, and ten “Humboldt penguins.” According to Kyoto City Zoo veterinarian Takizawa Akio, a pair of kangaroos and ten “Humboldt penguins” arrived at the zoo on April 17—Kalyani on April 28 and Wanjirō on May 2. However, no zoo wanted the lion because of the chronic shortage of meat. The Kiriguchi Circus in the end agreed to take the lion on April 25, 1943.42 Further, Hanshin Park Zoo sold most of its penguins to Takarazuka Zoo, where they became the zoo’s pride. The Hanshin Park Zoo successfully evacuated all of its animals within three weeks. The owner also transferred the zoo employees to other operations of the company and its subsidiaries, thus without firing any one of them. Nevertheless, Tom the female elephant soon died of malnutrition at Osaka City Zoo less than two months after her transfer, on June 24, 1943. The tiger was destroyed at Kobe City Zoo. The lion was killed at the Kiriguchi Circus, which was ordered to destroy its dangerous animals in October 1943 (see chapter 6). Furthermore, due to the food shortage, all the penguins that had been sold to Takarazuka Zoo died before the end of the war, thus disrupting the successful penguin breeding program at Hanshin Park Zoo. At least Hanshin Park staff themselves did not have to destroy their animals with their own hands. After the war, Hanshin Park reopened in April 1950 and renamed its zoo as Kōshien Zoological and Botanical Gardens.43

Takarazuka Zoo Emulating the Hanshin Electric Railway’s Hanshin Park Zoo, the Hankyū Railway built Takarazuka Zoo in Takarazuka in November 1929 (its prototype, Takarazuka Luna Park, opened in November

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 73

10/8/2010 7:41:09 AM

74


1913). Unlike Hanshin Park Zoo, which was located in a densely populated area, Takarazuka Zoo was located at the foot of a mountain, away from large cities. Nevertheless, when the Japanese navy requisitioned the Takarazuka Grand Theater, home to the popular Takarazuka Revue with its all-female theatrical performances in the compounds, in March 1944, the zoo was forced to destroy its dangerous animals. According to the official record of the JAZGA in 1962, the disposal took place on March 5, 1944, but the details of the disposal are unknown. Although the zoo and botanical gardens were kept open afterward, the zoo barely kept up its regular operations.44 To an inquiry of the writer Akiyama, Takarazuka Zoo director Rutō Tōji replied in 1994, “The zoo did not dispose of its dangerous animals during the war.” Rutō also stated, “Disposing only of ferocious animals would have been meaningless. Kangaroos could be also dangerous. In this sense, all animals are dangerous to people.” However, after being confronted with the JAZGA record, Rutō admitted that the zoo had indeed destroyed its animals on March 5, 1944, but he provided no details to Akiyama. Akiyama wondered whether the director did not know about the disposal or if the zoo that was directly run by the giant railway could not reveal the truth about it. In the proceedings of the 1950 meeting of ten zoo directors in Japan, Takarazuka Zoo director Yamauchi Yoshitarō stated: “We did not know how to deal with the disposal order. We did our best in postponing it and kept our animals alive up until June 1945. But the air strikes intensified then and we were forced to destroy them.”45 Yoshida Heihachirō, in his March 1944 article, stated that Takarazuka Zoo enjoyed the luxury of creating a “family oasis” backed by the huge capital of its owner. According to Yoshida, the zoo had lions, tigers, elephants, more than two dozen American alligators, and many other popular animals. The zoo was also famous for its permanent animal circus facility with high-quality training, claiming to be as good as the Hagenbeck Circus and the Bell Circus. Yoshida mentioned that the night cages of lions and tigers were enclosed by double barrier with iron bars. Therefore, there would be little chance that these animals would escape. Should bombs hit the cages and destroy them, the animals inside would also be destroyed. Accordingly, these animals would pose no danger to people. He hoped that the Takarazuka Circus would continue even if the Takarazuka Grand Theater were closed.46 Yoshida’s article suggests that after the disposal at Ueno Zoo and Osaka City Zoo, he was trying to save the animals at Takarazuka Zoo by writing as much as he could under the government’s strict censorship. Nevertheless, by the

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 74

10/8/2010 7:41:09 AM


75

time his article appeared, all the dangerous animals at the zoo had already been destroyed. In the postwar period, the Grand Theater and Takarazuka Zoo reopened in February 1947. The zoo was subsequently reorganized as Takarazuka Family Land but was closed in April 2003 due to the decreased attendance after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in January 1995. All the animals were given away to other zoos and aquariums. Thus, whatever information the zoo might have had on the wartime animal disposal was buried in the vault of history. Only a memorial stone at the former site of Takarazuka’s children’s zoo stood as a witness to the disposal. Carved with engravings of a lion and an eagle, the inscription simply states, “Erected in 1944.”47

Ritsurin Park Zoo Ritsurin Park Zoo was on Shikoku, the smallest of the four major islands that make up Japan (see map). It was the first zoo in the Shikoku-San’in region (south and west of the Kansai region), opening in January 1930 in the famous Ritsurin Park (actually it is a garden by Western definition). The zoo was founded by Kagawa Shōtarō and was privately owned by the Kagawa family. It was incorporated as a nonprofit organization in August 1951. As of 1962, it had 620 specimens of 132 species of animals. With decreased public attendance, the zoo was partially closed in April 2002 while still open to the public. It was officially closed in March 2004.48 According to Ritsurin Park administration personnel, the office had no record of the wartime disposal of the zoo’s animals. A local history record simply mentions that the zoo had destroyed all of the “ferocious animals,” yet the details are not documented. Another source notes that a lion was shot to death, whereas an Ezo brown bear, a python, and a “Yantzi River alligator” (a Chinese alligator) survived the war. The park staff member thinks the disposal most likely took place in late 1944. It should be recalled that the zoo had the luxury of accepting a female leopard and a male striped hyena from Kyoto City Zoo in March 1944; however, the park has no record as to whether they were destroyed or survived the war. The park staff member presumed these animals had died before the disposal took place. As the zoo compounds were turned into a parking lot in October 2006, the zoo records were buried underneath permanently.49 According to an Asahi-shimbun article in 1944, the female leopard escaped from the zoo on April 11, 1944 (the keeper forgot to lock the cage in the morning after feeding her), and ran onto the nearby

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 75

10/8/2010 7:41:09 AM

76


mountain. About 250 police force members searched for the leopard on the mountain. She caused an injury to one of them in the afternoon and was shot to death by a hunting club member in the evening. She was killed on the sixteenth day after her arrival.50 One cannot help but wonder why the police had not told the hunters not to shoot the leopard, but to catch it alive. Ritsurin Park Zoo was supposed to be her “safe haven.” The female black leopard at Ueno Zoo that escaped in 1936 had been caught and brought back to the zoo. In contrast, Kyoto City Zoo’s female leopard had just been transferred to an unfamiliar place where, upon arrival, she delivered twin cubs but devoured them, ran away to a mountain, and then was shot to death. *

*

*

Zoos throughout Japan lost their appeal without popular animals such as lions, tigers, and elephants, and visitors became scarcer day by day. Japan received a fatal blow in the Battle of Leyte in the Philippines in October 1944 and waged desperate attacks, sending kamikaze suicide bombers and heading on the final collision course to its total defeat. There was only one zoo (and possibly one more) left in Japan that had not conducted collective disposal of dangerous animals in the fall of 1944: Higashiyama Zoo and possibly Kōfu City Zoo in central Japan. Ritsurin no mesu-hyō utarete sakura chiru (The cherry blossom falls where the runaway female leopard was shot at Ritsurin) —April 11, 2010, the 66th anniversary of the day the leopard was shot to death

9780230108943_05_ch04.indd 76

10/8/2010 7:41:09 AM

CH A P T ER

5

Zoos in Central Japan and World War II

Two zoos in the Chūbu (central) region of Japan were members of the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums in 1943: Kōfu City Zoo and Higashiyama Zoological and Botanical Gardens (Higashiyama Zoo, hereafter) in Nagoya (see map).

Kōfu City Zoo Kōfu City Zoo was established in April 1919 and officially opened in April 1923. Although it claims it is the fourth oldest zoo in Japan, it is actually the fifth oldest (Kamoike City Zoo in Kagoshima created in 1916 is the fourth oldest; see table 2.1). Despite its relatively smaller size, Kōfu City Zoo was home to valuable animals, such as a female lion and a pair of red-crowned cranes, both of which were gifts from the Imperial Family (the cranes were donated in 1924 and the lion in 1925). The zoo did not publish any official history and did not leave any wartime record. The 1962 JAZGA directory simply states: “The zoo was burned by air raids in July 1945 and lost most of its facilities and animals. The zoo reopened in October 1952, and was renamed as Kōfu City Yūki Park Zoo in December 1957. As of 1962, the zoo had 173 specimens of 64 species.”1 JAZGA’s account does not mention whether the zoo had destroyed its animals before the air strikes. The collective disposal of animals in other zoos took place between August 1943 and December 1944, and the Kōfu air raids occurred in July 1945. The time in between is a vacuum. What was happening at the zoo during that time? Disposal of Dangerous Animals According to the official history of Kōfu City published in 1964, the zoo did destroy its dangerous animals. The record states, “The

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 77

10/8/2010 7:42:31 AM

78


zoo had birds, including red-crowned cranes, gifts from the Imperial Family, as well as ferocious animals, including a lion from “South Africa.” However, with the intensification of the Pacific War, the zoo disposed of its animals. Then the zoo was burned down in the air raids.”2 The history provides neither the date nor any details of the disposal. It gives the impression that the city does not want to talk about the disposal, quickly putting this chapter of the zoo history behind it. Whitewashing the Disposal of Dangerous Animals In 1990 Kōfu City published a new official history that states: “The zoo had a total of 405 specimens of animals in 1938, including an elephant [from Thailand], a pair of lions, a pair of leopards, a pair of brown bears, a pair of raccoons, a pair of baboons, a female wolf [shima-ōkami], a male kangaroo, four pairs of Japanese macaques, a female camel, seven deer, a pair of wild boars, a female hedgehog, and a pair of foxes.” The birds that were rare in Japanese zoos at the time included storks, white peafowl, pelicans, “Mongolian cranes” (Mōkozuru), golden eagles, “Ceylon(ese) parrots” (Seiron-inko), Guinea fowl, double-wattled cassowaries, and emus. With the food control in 1940, the keepers caught koi (nishiki-goi, colorful domesticated breeds of carp) in Yūki Park every morning and fed them to lions and leopards. They also collected eel heads and bones from the Eel Restaurants Association in the city and fed them to brown bears and waterfowl.3 The 1990 official city history also states that zoo director Kobayashi Shōkichi (1899–1963) was appointed the veterinarian for military horses of the Imperial Japanese Army Kōfu Division and military police. Military horses were “live weapons,” and officers were punished if the horses were injured or became sick. Accordingly, the officers had Kobayashi not record the treatments of the horses and gave him the food provided to the military in lieu of paying medical bills. Kobayashi fed the food to the zoo animals. The 1990 official city history states: “The ferocious animals of the zoo, such as the female [actually male] elephant, lion(s), and brown bear(s), died of old age or of malnutrition before U.S. air raids on Japanese territory proper began. Most of the surviving animals, such as the striped hyena [examined below], pelicans, double-wattled cassowaries, and red-crowned cranes, were burned to death in the Kōfu air raids of July 6–7, 1945.”4 In comparison, according to an article in a local newspaper, Yamanashi-nichinichi-shimbun, dated July 5, 1999, in 1925 the

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 78

10/8/2010 7:42:31 AM

ZOOS IN CENTRAL JAPAN AND WORLD WAR II

79

zoo had 15 species of mammals, including the female lion (a gift from the Imperial Family), a male lion, leopards, and bears, as well as 36 species of birds. In 1928 the zoo’s collection had grown to 67 mammals and 198 birds, totaling 265 specimens. And in 1938 it had 405 specimens. However, due to a feed shortage in 1940, the 7.5ton elephant Hanako (it is a girl’s name, but the elephant was male), which Kobayashi had purchased from the Arita Circus on tour in 1925, died of starvation. The zoo’s “Imperial-gift” lion (as she was called) died primarily of old age in 1944. The article then states that the zoo escaped the disposal of dangerous animals because zoo director Kobayashi guaranteed to the IJA authorities that the animal cages were safe. The article adds that all the surviving animals were burned to death in the air raids, except for the nimble macaques.5 Mysteries Surrounding Disposal The wartime record of Kōfu City Zoo is fraught with mysteries. First, there are wide discrepancies among the records available on the zoo during the war. The 1964 official city history states that the zoo disposed of its dangerous animals, but the 1990 official history whitewashes the disposal completely. Nevertheless, the latter history does not provide a convincing account of how the zoo’s dangerous animals died before the air raid of July 6–7, 1945, stating only that the elephant, lion(s), and brown bear(s) died of malnutrition or of old age before the air raids. It is not clear whether only one of the lion pair and the brown bear pair died, or that both of each pair died, as the Japanese language does not distinguish singular and plural forms. Further, the 1990 history does not account for how the rest of the dangerous animals died. The zoo had at least six other Class-A dangerous animals, such as a pair of leopards, a female wolf, a pair of baboons, and a striped hyena. Did all of them, except for the striped hyena that the 1990 history says was killed in the air raids, die of malnutrition or old age before the air raids? The record states that there were abundant koi in the pond to feed the animals. They also had the secret provision of food from the military. Mysteries about the Striped Hyena Another mystery is that the 1990 history does not list the striped hyena among the animals the zoo had. This hyena suddenly appears as “having been killed by the air raids.” When did the zoo acquire the hyena? Why did only this animal survive until the air raids, whereas

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 79

10/8/2010 7:42:31 AM

80


all the other dangerous animals had apparently died before them? It should be recalled that the hyena was an extremely rare species in Japanese zoos then, so much so that Kyoto City Zoo had evacuated its striped hyena to Ritsurin Park Zoo. Kōfu City might also have kept its striped hyena for the same reason while destroying other dangerous animals. In addition, the argument that the zoo escaped the disposal because of the durability of the animal cages is not convincing. Other zoos, including Kobe City Zoo and Higashiyama Zoo (examined below), made the same argument, but in vain. Higashiyama Zoo’s facilities were newer and much more durable than those of Kōfu City Zoo. It also seems implausible that Kōfu City Zoo, which is located closer to the nation’s capital, could escape the disposal, whereas Sendai City Zoo in the northeast and all the zoos in the remote southwestern Kyūshū did not escape the disposal (see chapter 6). The account of the 1990 official city history is all the more mysterious, given that it completely rewrote the 1964 zoo history without any explanation as to why the city changed the zoo history between the 1964 version and the 1990 version. The latter version should explain the reasons for the drastic revision. Nevertheless, it does not account for how most of the dangerous animals died before the air strikes. Unless the city provides convincing explanations as to why its 1990 official history rewrote that part of zoo history, it is difficult to discount the possibility that the zoo might indeed have destroyed some of its dangerous animals during the war. Meanwhile, a Japanese researcher made inquiries about this point to Kōfu City Zoo several times; however, the zoo did not respond at all. The zoo seemed to have decided to conclude that all the records, including those of a possible disposal of its dangerous animals before the air raids, were gone forever with the ensuing fire.6 It put the record in the vault of history and shut out researchers in search of the truth about the Japanese wartime zoo policy. “New” Evidence? On August 11, 2009, eighty-year-old Kobayashi Kimio, the son of zoo director Kobayashi, revealed what he claimed to be the truth in a local TV program marking the sixty-fourth anniversary of the end of the war. Kobayashi was a veterinary school student at the end of the war, helping his father at Kōfu City Zoo, and became the zoo’s veterinarian upon graduation. He stated: “As the feed shortage worsened,

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 80

10/8/2010 7:42:31 AM


81

we fed the lions our ration of whale meat, but the ration gradually became scarce. So we caught carp in the pond and fed them to the lions. We also went to the bank of the Arakawa River and cut grass once or twice a day, and fed the grass to the elephant.” Kobayashi went on to say: “The IJA Regional Division that was stationed in the city ordered the zoo to dispose of its dangerous animals. However, we did not kill them. We did not kill a single animal. My father rejected the order, arguing that cages were strong and that ferocious animals would die in their cages if the zoo were bombed.” On the Kōfu air raids, Kobayashi said: “Only the cages were left. Everything else was burned down. I saw a crab-eating macaque high in the cage. It was burned severely and died soon.”7 Regarding the account in the 1964 city history, Kobayashi stated that it was not true. He asserts that the circus that was on tour in Kōfu shot its lion on the bank of the Arakawa River. Kobayashi believes this is what led to the misunderstanding that the zoo destroyed its lion(s). He stated that in the 1990 history he corrected the mistake that had been made in the earlier version.8 Thus, it turns out that Kobayashi was the single source of the information for the account in the 1990 city history, as well as for the 1999 newspaper article and other local newspaper articles. However, Kobayashi’s testimony creates more questions than it solves. He was the zoo veterinarian and worked at the zoo for decades with his father, who died in 1963. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the editor(s) of the 1964 history asked the younger Kobayashi (or the elder Kobayashi before his death, depending on when they began writing the history, or both) to provide the account of the zoo history. Yet, the 1964 history states that the zoo disposed of its ferocious animals. It is difficult to assume that the city had consulted with the Kobayashis and still made that mistake. On the other hand, it is also difficult to assume that the city had not consulted with the Kobayashis for that publication. Nobody else could provide the information about the zoo better than the Kobayashis. Devotion of Director Kobayashi The elder Kobayashi undoubtedly had a strong commitment and devotion to the zoo and its animals. When the zoo became a shambles after the air raids, the city “loaned” (“dumped,” in effect) the zoo to him. The city’s priority was to rehabilitate the city and its

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 81

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM

82


citizens, not the zoo and its animals. Thus, Kobayashi privately took charge of the task of restoring the zoo without any assistance from the city. The Kobayashi family moved into the empty lion house (their house had been burned down), sharing it with the zoo vendor and her family. During the day, Kobayashi and his son made house calls to farmers in the suburbs, treating cows and horses, and received food in return (that was the only way they could have survived the early postwar years). Meanwhile, they repaired the zoo and guarded the compounds at night (people came in the darkness to steal the surviving trees to rebuild their houses). Upon completing the task of rehabilitation, Kobayashi “returned” the zoo to the city in October 1952.9 Judging from his devotion to the zoo, director Kobayashi might have resisted the disposal order. However, that does not prove he actually succeeded in doing so, as all the other zoo directors who had tried to do so in fact failed. Now his son is the sole living witness for the zoo in the wartime. Kobayashi is the best witness of the zoo in that he worked at the zoo for decades with his father and also after his father’s death. On the other hand, his version of events might not be objective, because he might have had a personal stake in denying the disposal of animals at the zoo, as some other zoo directors did. Insofar as there is no document to support Kobayashi’s testimony, it is difficult to determine that the zoo did not destroy any of its dangerous animals during the war. Moreover, if Kōfu City Zoo in fact did not destroy any of its dangerous animals, this fact would already have been known widely, as it would have been the only zoo that escaped the disposal in Japan. Nevertheless, there is no book or article on this, except for the documents examined above. Why did neither director Kobayashi nor his son write an account of it? It would have been a sensational story. The most fundamental and lingering question is how and why this zoo escaped the disposal (if that truly was the case) while all the other zoos in Japan did not, despite the desperate attempts on the part of many zoo directors to escape it. Did the Kōfu City Zoo manage to escape the disposal because of the special relations between director Kobayashi and IJA Regional Division officers and MPs, forged through the secret deal about the military horses? Could Kobayashi’s son therefore not tell the truth about it earlier? The bottom-line question is, what kept the younger Kobayashi from telling the “truth” for more than sixty-five years? In conclusion, despite Kobayashi’s testimony, the case of Kōfu City Zoo still remains a mystery.

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 82

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM


83

Higashiyama Zoo Higashiyama Zoo in Nagoya opened in March 1937. With its thirtyfive acres, four times larger than Ueno Zoo, it was dubbed “the largest zoo in the Orient.” It was also famous for having many species of carnivores and was referred to as “Higashiyama, the zoo of the feline family.” Because of its size and collection, the zoo would have been the prime target of the Home Ministry’s disposal order after Ueno Zoo. Nevertheless, Higashiyama Zoo resisted the order for a long time. It was the only major zoo that by the fall of 1944 had not conducted the collective disposal of its dangerous animals. It destroyed only two animals as “experiments” (sacrifices, in effect) in November 1943 in order to escape the collective disposal.10 Higashiyama Zoo was created by Nagoya-city in the eastern hills of Chikusa-ward to replace a smaller zoo in Tsurumai Park in midtown. The animal trader Imaizumi Hichigorō had created the first zoo in Nagoya in 1890, called Imaizumi Zoo. It was relocated in March 1906 and was renamed Namikoshi Educational Zoological and Botanical Gardens. Then Imaizumi donated his animal collection to the city in February 1918, which opened as Tsurumai Park Zoo in April 1918. It was renamed Nagoya City Zoo, as an independent institution from Tsurumai Park, in April 1929.11 Kitaō Hideichi Becomes Higashiyama Zoo Director After working briefly at Osaka City Zoo, a graduate of the Osakaprefecture Agriculture College veterinary-livestock science program, Kitaō Hideichi (born in Kyoto, 1900–1993), came to Tsurumai Park Zoo in May 1923 as its engineer (gishi). He became acting zoo director in December 1923 when the zoo’s first director, Iwata Shigeyoshi, retired. Kitaō became the director in February 1927 at the young age of 27 for such a position. The city then decided to create a larger zoo and charged Iwata with the task of recruiting a director for the new zoo, which was to become Higashiyama Zoo. Glancing at a scene of a tiger rubbing its body against Kitaō like a domestic cat, Iwata immediately decided, “he was the one.” Kitaō was appointed director of Higashiyama Zoo.12 Subsequently, the Manchurian Incident occurred in September 1931, paving the way for the second Sino-Japanese War of July 1937 (see chapter 2). On August 30, 1935, Nagoya City Union Defense Division created the Zoo Defense Division with Kitaō as its head. The city conducted comprehensive air-raid drills as early as September 1, 1935.13

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 83

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM

84


Road to Opening Higashiyama Zoo As the first director of Higashiyama Zoo, Kitaō oversaw the entire zoo transfer and expansion project. He employed the open “Hagenbeck method” in earnest for the first time in Japan, including the lion exhibit and the polar bear exhibit (Ueno Zoo had built a polar bear facility after this method in 1927). During his circus tour in Japan in March - September 1933, Carl Hagenbeck Jr.’s second son, Lorenz, visited Nagoya in May – June (see chapter 2). Kitaō saw Lorenz almost daily, consulting about the design of the new zoo. Lorenz recounted his visit to Nagoya in his memoirs. He ventured to put on a five-week, twice-daily show in Nagoya, whereas personnel concerned thought that four days would be the maximum in a local city, in the rainy season. Yet, Nagoya was then Japan’s largest industrial town, with Toyota Industries, which was to become “Japan’s Detroit” in the postwar era. People in the area were known to have entrepreneurial spirit and were fascinated with new ideas and things. Lorenz therefore believed that his “reckless” show schedule would work. The tickets were sold out to the very last seat. Almost all the citizens visited the menagerie, marveling at the giraffe, which had never been seen in Nagoya before. Lorenz could not have been happier.14 Nevertheless, the city councilors opposed Kitaō’s innovative plan of introducing the Hagenbeck method, fearing that animals might escape. To ease their misgivings, Kitaō decided to build larger-thanthe-original “27-foot wide, 15-foot deep” moats for the lion enclosure. The city councilors were still reluctant. They also opposed the installation of a large entrance gate and questioned Kitaō about what he would do if nobody visited the zoo. Yet, Kitaō persisted. The zoo staff transferred their animals from midtown to the new zoo site in twenty-eight installments. They took special care in the transfer of the female elephant, Hanako, from Thailand. The zoo hired Noppakun Widra, who worked at Ueno Zoo, specifically for Hanako’s transfer and training. Hanako was carried in a specially ordered iron cage at a speed of less than two miles per hour. During the opening days in March 1937, people flocked to Higashiyama Zoo. Every streetcar to the zoo was full, and those who could not get on a streetcar walked to the zoo. Thus, Kitaō succeeded with the grand opening of the “largest zoo in the Orient.”15 This author recalls visiting Higashiyama Zoo as a child and seeing a pride of lions lying in front of huge cliffs without realizing what a privilege it was to be able to see lions in an open enclosure in Japan.

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 84

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM


85

When she returned to the zoo in August 2008, the cliffs still stood majestically. Arrival of Four Elephants Higashiyama Zoo had only one elephant, Hanako, at its opening (but she soon died of pneumonia in 1939). Kitaō wanted more elephants, because they were the children’s favorite animals. He therefore asked the Kinoshita Circus, which was on tour in Nagoya in August 1937, to sell two of its elephants. The owner of the circus, Kinoshita Yukiharu, realized that it would be difficult for a private circus like his to maintain its operations during wartime. He felt that Higashiyama Zoo would be a better place for his elephants, and agreed on the condition that Kitaō buy all four of his elephants. Kinoshita believed his elephants should not be separated, knowing the strong bonds among them. Kitaō persuaded the city mayor and the city council to purchase four elephants instead of two. The city paid Kinoshita the handsome sum of ¥28,000 for the four elephants (Ueno Zoo director Koga’s annual salary was ¥1,800 in 1936).16 About ten showgirls of the Kinoshita Circus opposed the sale, because the elephants were a part of their family, touring the nation together. The girls were devastated. They prepared the elephants for the departure all night without any sleep. On December 24, 1937, they dressed up the elephants and accompanied them in tears to the zoo in the chilly morning. The elephants slowly walked in single file on the city streets, in the order of the matriarch, Kiiko; the only male, Adon; small Eldo; and smart Makani, with each animal’s trunk tied to the tail of the one in front. When it began to drizzle, with sleet and snow, the girls took off their coats and jackets and put them on the elephants. Kitaō, who accompanied the procession, was moved by the girls’ devotion toward the elephants and vowed that he would protect the elephants’ lives under any circumstances (see photograph 6).17 Effects of War In the early 1960s, whenever this author’s father took her to Higashiyama Zoo, the first thing she noticed was invalids in white kimonos occupying the wide entrance steps of the zoo, reminiscent of the Spanish Square in Rome, asking for donations. Visitors could not reach the ticket booths without passing through a crowd of these veterans. The war had been over for nearly two decades, but these veterans appeared to be in poor condition and looked like beggars.

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 85

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM

86


A man standing on one leg was playing the accordion, while a man with no legs was chanting a tune. In retrospect, this indicated that the Japanese government did not provide sufficient compensation for veterans then (despite the fact that it in 1953 restored the Military Pension Law, which had been suspended by the SCAP-GHQ, see chapter 10), so that they gathered at public places on Sundays for handouts from the general public. The war took a heavy toll not only on servicemen but also on civilians in Nagoya. Because major weapon-manufacturing factories, such as Mitsubishi Generators and Nagoya Machine Manufacturing (part of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries), were located in Nagoya, the city itself became a military-industry complex. In fact, the concentration of these factories was such that when the Home Ministry decided to enforce “evacuation of civilians and buildings” in January 1944, Tokyo and Nagoya were designated to be the first cities to execute the order (see chapter 10). The second “evacuation [relocation] of buildings” followed the next month. Consequently, the city sustained heavy air strikes by U.S. B-29s and was burned down. In this situation, Higashiyama Zoo ultimately could not escape the same fate as that of other zoos. Nevertheless, it managed to keep its dangerous animals as late as December 1944. It also saved the four elephants from disposal. These exceptional accomplishments were owed to Kitaō.18 To Save Animals Kitaō personally felt that Higashiyama Zoo would not pose any danger to people. The facilities were new, built with reinforced concrete, and the animals could be confined to their sturdy night cages during emergencies. Should incendiaries directly hit their night cages and cause damage heavy enough to destroy the cages, the animals inside would die instantly before being able to escape. However, this did not convince the government. To ease the concerns of the city officials, in October 1941 Kitaō conducted an unprecedented drill that no other zoos had attempted before. He had the Japan Hunters Volunteer Corps Chikusa Division, made up of about fifty local hunters, engage in target practice in front of the open lion enclosure with unloaded rifles. To create the realistic atmosphere of an air raid, the zoo staff set off a white smoke emitter (see the unsuspecting lions coming toward the hunters in photograph 7).19 The hunters experienced the taste of shooting lions for the first time, though it was a mock drill. Kitaō conducted air-raid drills many times as a gesture to demonstrate that the zoo was prepared for air

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 86

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM


87

strikes, hoping the zoo could escape its inevitable fate. Ironically, by demonstrating that the zoo could kill dangerous animals at any time, Kitaō hoped that the zoo staff could keep them alive. During one of these drills, two women (one in a fine kimono and another in plain farmwork clothes called mompe, which civilians were supposed to be wearing during wartime) visited the zoo, accompanying three children. Two members of the vigilante corps, made from the Japan Hunters Volunteer Corps Chikusa Division, stopped them at the entrance gate and told them that people who would visit a place like a zoo during wartime were traitors. Although they were admitted to the zoo, they left soon. Kitaō states, “I could not intervene. I despaired about the state of the zoo. Visitors to the zoo became scarce.”20 Disposal of Two Specimens as “Experiments” In the fall of 1943, after the disposals at Ueno Zoo and Osaka City Zoo, Kitaō could no longer ignore the pressure from the Home Ministry. The Home Ministry had no reason to exempt Higashiyama Zoo from the disposal. Nagoya city mayor Satō Masatoshi told Kitaō to carry out the disposal. Kitaō employed gradual and delaying tactics to counter the pressure. He first conceded to destroy only an Ezo brown bear and a lion, in the name of “experiments,” in order to save other animals from this fate.21 On November 4, 1943, a keeper fed an Ezo brown bear some bread (his favorite food) injected with strychnine nitrate. A rookie keeper, Asai Rikizō, who in March 1941 at the age of 18 had started working with the elephants at the zoo, vividly remembered the day. That morning, a coworker told Asai that an Ezo brown bear was suffering. The keeper in charge of the bear was not at the scene when Asai ran to the bear house. The bear was moaning with pain in an upright position with his front paws sticking out through the cage. It gradually became weak and fell to the ground. Asai was devastated by the fact that zookeepers had to kill animals. He later found out that the unsuspecting bear had eaten the poisoned bread without any hesitation. Within three minutes, the bear began to suffer from severe pain. Asai was witness to the rest.22 Asai’s despair did not end there, however. On that day (or possibly in late November, depending on the source), Asai was instructed to come to the lion exhibit after finishing the day’s work. The IJA Regional Division had ordered Kitaō not to shoot the lion, so as not to alarm the residents of the neighborhood. An instant shooting

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 87

10/8/2010 7:42:32 AM

88


to death by an experienced hunter would have been a “merciful” way of destroying it. Kitaō first had a keeper obtain meat (which was hardly available) and try to poison the male lion. However, the lion smelled the poison in the meat and refused to eat it. Kitaō then instructed his deputy, Murata, to strangle the lion to death (plan B). Having no experience with strangling animals, earlier the zoo staff had studied the precedent of the Japanese black bear destroyed at Ueno Zoo. They had decided to trap the lion in his night cage by installing an eight-millimeter-thick wire loop at the entrance with meat near it as a lure. They had made up an elaborate plan for the disposal.23 The lion was caught in the wire loop. Asai’s senior told him to help other men tighten the wire, hung around the lion’s neck, by cranking up a manual winch. As four men turned the handle together, two on each side, the wire strangled the lion’s neck. As he cranked the winch, Asai felt as if he were being dragged by the mighty lion. In the end, however, the lion succumbed to the power of the machine and died with his eyes wide open. Asai never forgot the white-blue sparks caused by the friction of the wire on the iron bars of the cage. For the case of the brown bear, Asai had been a mere observer, but this time he had become a killer of the lion. The image of the majestic lion’s fierce eyes kept Asai from sleeping for several days. Kitaō was not present at the scene of the disposal but stayed in his office, probably because he knew he could not bear the sight.24 Securing Animal Feed Securing animal feed for almost a thousand specimens was not an easy task. The feed ration was 951 gallons of wheat bran per month at best, and that was only enough to feed the four elephants for several days. Worse, even the ration of wheat bran was hard to come by. The zoo staff visited one flour mill after another as far as fifty miles away from the city, dragging a big cart in the midst of air raids (gasoline was being rationed). Kitaō was worried all day long until the staff came back. The staff also began farming in the zoo compounds. Flower beds and azalea-bush fields became sweet potato fields. Staff members also collected edible plants in the mountains. The carnivores were more miserable, because the zoo received no ration of meat. Animals fell to malnutrition one by one. The staff fed the dead animals’ meat to surviving ones. Kitaō felt shame in doing so, but there was no alternative for feeding the surviving carnivores.25

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 88

10/8/2010 7:42:33 AM


89

Defying the Inevitable After destroying the male lion, as a “sacrifice,” Kitaō searched for every possible way to evacuate the remaining lions to safe places. The best solution was to evacuate the animals in small numbers to different locations; however, transferring them to other zoos in Japan’s countryside was not a real solution. Those zoos also might have to destroy their animals, which proved to be the case. The real solution was to evacuate them abroad. For this reason, Kitaō looked overseas and managed to donate two lions to Zhangjiakou City, 113 miles northwest of Beijing, under Japan’s occupation, in December 1943. He hoped to keep the zoo’s five (the number differs depending on the source; examined below) remaining lions alive. Nevertheless, the situation worsened for Japan. Kitaō was fighting an unwinnable battle alone.26 U.S. forces defeated Japanese forces on the Marshall Islands, in the Pacific Ocean, in February 1944. By mid-1944, Kitaō heard that many zoos had destroyed dangerous animals, yet he was determined to save his animals as long as possible. He also felt there was no need to kill the elephants, because they were not carnivores. Meanwhile, he received letters demanding the disposal of the zoo’s dangerous animals. He was called “unpatriotic” and a “traitor.” Kitaō reported every month to the IJA regional division veterinary department that the zoo’s security was tight. The Hunters Corps members were in favor of destroying the animals—they were hunters, after all. They also wanted to go home to be with their families instead of guarding the zoo. If the zoo destroyed its dangerous animals, the hunters would be able to go home. They urged Kitaō to make up his mind, as they were becoming impatient with his delaying tactics. In October 1944 (or October 1943, depending on the source; see below), Kitaō sold a lion to the Japan Hunters Volunteer Corps Chikusa Division, in the name of target practice, in order to quell the hunger on the part of the hunters.27 U.S. B-29s Strike Nagoya The fateful day was approaching for Higashiyama Zoo. On December 7, 1944, a devastating earthquake and tsunami hit the region, with a death toll of 1,000 and destruction of 26,000 houses (the Tōnankai Earthquake). To make matters worse, on December 13 more than seventy B-29s flew in from the east and made intensive attacks on Nagoya for two hours. The whole city was in flames. The air raids burned down 264 houses and caused 330 deaths and 356 injuries in Chikusa-ward and Higashi-ward alone (Nagoya had about two dozen

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 89

10/8/2010 7:42:33 AM

90


wards). The U.S. air strikes continued on December 18 and 22 and January 3, 1945, during the New Year’s days (Japanese celebrate the first three days of January as official holidays), burning 3,588 houses and killing 70 people in the two wards.28 The hunters did not miss the chance. About fifty members of the Hunters Volunteer Corps gathered at the Chikusa police station on December 13, 1944. The police chief authorized them to shoot “dangerous big cats” at Higashiyama Zoo. However, the Hunters Corps head, Miyajima Teru (seventy-nine years old at that time), initially expressed his reservations, apparently for the sake of saving face. It was dishonorable for hunters to shoot animals in captivity. Thus, they waited for one and a half hours, watching the sky and being bombarded, until the Home Ministry’s disposal order came through. After that there was no reason to wait any longer.29 Accepting the Inevitable The hunters went straight ahead to the zoo, surrounded Kitaō, and urged him to make a decision. Mayor Satō had already authorized Kitaō to make the final decision, but Kitaō had kept that fact secret and insisted that he needed the mayor’s authorization. He also told them that the phone was out of order. Then a policeman informed Kitaō of the Home Ministry’s order. It was an ultimatum. Kitaō remained silent for a while, with his arms crossed tight and his eyes closed. In the end, Kitaō squeezed his voice out and told them to go ahead. He later wrote, “Thoughts of my affections and responsibilities toward animals were recoiling inside my head. Tears were running down my face.”30 As on the day when the zoo destroyed a male lion for the first time, Kitaō stayed in his office. The hunters shot a pair of leopards first, because they were in a cage and were easy to aim at. Next, they shot a tiger that was jumping around in its cage, scared of the sound of the air strikes. Then the hunters headed to the lion exhibit and shot four unsuspecting lions in their open enclosure. The hunters must have felt a kind of euphoria with the rare chance of shooting live lions. They were the last lions in Japan. Japanese zoos did not have a lion again until 1949. Disposing of the seven dangerous animals was over within forty-five minutes (the breakdown of the seven specimens differ depending on the source, examined below).31 The irony was that the zoo incurred no damage from the massive air raids on December 13. Several days after the disposal of the large felids, the hunters visited Kitaō’s office again and pressed him to permit them to shoot bears in the zoo. After the air strikes and

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 90

10/8/2010 7:42:33 AM


91

the Home Ministry’s order, Kitaō had no excuse to refuse. The zoo had eight bears of various species left after an Ezo brown bear was destroyed in November 1943. Kitaō had no luxury to remain in his office this time. The hunters urged him to come along to the bear house. Then they asked him to make a Japanese black bear (which had a white crescent marking around the chest like a sun bear) stand on its hind legs so that they could aim for its chest. As Kitaō approached the unsuspecting bear, it stood up on its hind legs, expecting to be fed. Suddenly blood splashed out of the white crescent. For the first time, Kitaō witnessed the scene of destroying an animal and even lent a hand to it. Kitaō was shaken and kept begging the bear’s forgiveness. That day, hunters shot all eight bears to death. Kitaō’s wife states that even long after the war had ended, Kitaō kept having nightmares.32 In total, the zoo destroyed fifteen specimens of six species (or more species if the zoo had more than four species of bears; examined below) in December 1944 (see table 5.1). Mystery about Species of Bears There is a mystery surrounding the species of the eight bears that were shot to death at Higashiyama Zoo in December 1944. As far as the available sources can verify, the zoo had an Ezo brown bear (which Table 5.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed at Higashiyama Zoo (1943–1944) Date

Name of Species

Method

Note

Nov. 4, 1943 Nov. 4, 1943* Oct. 1944

an Ezo brown bear (male) poisoning a lion (male) strangulation a lion (sex unknown) shooting

Dec. 13, 1944**

a pair of leopards a tiger (sex unknown)

shooting shooting

as “experiment” as “experiment” sold to hunting club for shooting practice collective disposal collective disposal

four lions

shooting

collective disposal

Dec. 18, 1944 circa

eight bears***

shooting

collective disposal

Total


Sources: Higashiyama Zoo, ed., “Dōbutsuen no rekishi” (Zoo History [detailed version], http:// www.higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/01_annai/01_04gaiyo/01_04-01history/01_04-01_02/ 01_04-01_02_08.html, July 2009; Asahi-shimbunsha-shakaibu, ed., Higashiyama dōbutsuen nikki (Diary of Higashiyama Zoo) (Tokyo: Peppu-shuppan, 1977), 86–87, 134–35. *The date could be late November 1943. **All the shootings on December 13 were done by hunting club members. ***The eight bears included a Japanese black bear, and presumably, a Malayan sun bear and five (or three) polar bears, but the exact names and numbers of species of the bears are unavailable.

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 91

10/8/2010 7:42:33 AM

92


was poisoned in November 1943), a Japanese black bear (which was shot to death in December 1944), as well as a Malayan sun bear and five (or at least three) polar bears before the disposal. However, no source mentions the disposal of the polar bears of the zoo. Therefore, it seems reasonable to consider that the polar bears were part of the eight bears destroyed around December 18, 1944.33 Kitaō had bought a pair of polar bears from Hagenbeck for Nagoya City Zoo in June 1931, which were transferred to Higashiyama Zoo in 1937. Kitaō built a new open enclosure for them, à la Hagenbeck, at the new zoo. He then bought a female polar bear in 1936, which arrived on March 30, 1937. The official zoo history also states that the zoo acquired a pair of polar bears from Hagenbeck in exchange for 8 cranes (three different species), 38 geese, and 150 chipmunks in February 1938. Thus, the zoo had five polar bears in 1938. The zoo’s photo magazine published in 1940 carried a picture of three polar bears swimming in their pool. The other two were apparently not in the outdoor exhibit at that time. Neither the official zoo history nor the official zoo chronology provides the dates of death of the polar bears. Polar bears can live up to thirty years in the wild and more than forty years in captivity. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that the zoo had five polar bears in 1944.34 Nevertheless, no source mentions the disposal of the polar bears. All the sources, including the official zoo history, only mention that the zoo had the hunters shoot eight bears to death. No breakdown of the species of the eight bears was recorded. Kitaō only briefly mentions the polar bears in his memoirs, published in 1956. Referring to the day just after the zoo had destroyed seven big cats on December 13, 1944, Kitaō states, “There were still [large] animals left, including three [actually four] elephants, polar bears, hippopotami, and a bison.”35 However, these animals no longer existed when the war ended, except for two elephants. Kitaō then only briefly mentions the disposal of the polar bears, long afterward, in the passage on the postwar reconstruction in his memoirs. He writes: “The dangerous animals that were shot to death included lions, a tiger, leopards, polar bears, and bears. I felt very sorry for them. They were most popular animals in the zoo; yet, they were mercilessly shot to death.”36 This is the sole account found that indicates that the zoo destroyed its polar bears. Was it too painful for Kitaō to describe how the zoo had destroyed the precious polar bears for whom he had built the special open enclosure? In summary, it seems most likely that the zoo had five polar bears in 1944, which were included in the eight bears shot to death around December 18, 1944.

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 92

10/8/2010 7:42:33 AM


93

Mystery about the Number of Lions There is also a mystery surrounding the total number of lions Higashiyama Zoo had, as well as the dates of the measures taken toward those lions. None of the records exactly match. All differ in one aspect or another. The official zoo history notes first that the zoo had five lions after the zoo sold a lion to the Hunters Volunteer Corps Chikusa Division in October 1943, for a practice shooting, due to the pressure from the city mayor. This would make the total number of lions the zoo had six. The official history goes on to state that Kitaō planned to send two lions to Xinjing Zoo in Manchukuo; however, this apparently did not work out. He donated the two lions to Zhangjiakou City instead in December 1943. The zoo also strangled one of the remaining lions to death, as an “experiment,” in November 1943. This would make the number of the lions shot to death on the day of the collective disposal on December 13, 1944, two. Nonetheless, the same official history states that Kitaō was forced to have the hunters shoot “a leopard, a tiger, a bear, and four lions” on December 13, 1944.37 Thus, the official history mentions all the measures taken with the lions: one used for practice shooting by the hunters, one strangled to death, two donated to Zhangjiakou City, and two or four shot as part of the collective disposal. Yet, the total number is inconsistent. According to this record, the zoo had either six or eight lions in total, but it does not mention either number. In turn, according to the “Higashiyama Zoo diary,” edited by a major national newspaper publisher, the Asashi-shimbunsha, the zoo had a total of seven lions. This book is based primarily on interviews with Kitaō and other zoo employees. It states that the zoo had seven lions, including two donated to Zhangjiakou City in 1943 (in an unspecified month), a lion sold to a hunting club for practice shooting two months before the collective disposal, and the four shot on the day of the disposal. The number adds up to seven correctly. However, this book omits the one that was strangled to death in November 1943 in the total count of the lions. This is a grave oversight on the part of the editor(s). The keeper Asai Rikizō had testified on the strangulation of the lion in the same book, but in a different chapter, titled “Testimony after 40 Years.”38 Meanwhile, according to Kitaō’s memoirs, the zoo had five lions. He writes, “I felt a little relieved after I donated two lions to Zhangjiakou City in December 1943, because the number of the lions had reduced to three from five.” Yet, a few pages later he writes, “Two leopards, a tiger, two bears, and two lions were mercilessly shot within forty-five minutes. The lives of these innocent animals were

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 93

10/8/2010 7:42:34 AM

94


terminated.” The number of lions does not add up in Kitaō’s account, and he mentions neither the one sold to the hunting club nor the one strangled to death by keepers.39 In contrast, Akiyama Masami wrote that the zoo had seven lions. Akiyama might have taken the number of lions given in the “Higashiyama Zoo diary” at its face value. Unlike the diary, however, Akiyama correctly includes the lion strangled to death in November 1943. Nevertheless, he omits the lion sold to the hunting club, considering the total number of lions also as seven. For the species of animals destroyed on December 13, 1944, Akiyama states that the zoo shot “a pair of leopards, a tiger, and four lions.” Aside from those examined above, there are no other reliable sources on Higashiyama Zoo. For instance, the “100-Year History of Ueno Zoo” mentions that Higashiyama Zoo disposed of two lions, probably in reference to Kitaō’s memoirs.40 Other Mysteries about the Lions In addition, no other sources, except for the official zoo history and the “Higashiyama Zoo diary,” mention the lion sold to the hunting club. However, they differ on the date. The former states that this took place in October 1943, while the latter states that it was in October 1944. There is no other document that could prove the accuracy of the two accounts, but the latter date seems to be more likely. It states that the zoo had seven lions without counting the lion strangled to death in November 1943. This means the zoo had five lions after donating two in 1943. Then the zoo destroyed four lions in December 1944. This leaves one lion unaccounted for, which must be the lion sold to the hunting club. This determines that the zoo sold the lion in October 1944 rather than October 1943. Furthermore, the species of animals shot to death on the first day of the collective disposal differs in each source, whereas all concur that the total number was seven. According to the “Higashiyama Zoo diary” and Akiyama, no bear was shot on December 13, 1944. In contrast, the zoo’s official history states that “a bear and a leopard, as well as a tiger and four lions,” were shot. In turn, Kitaō states that “two leopards and a tiger, as well as two bears and two lions,” were shot. It appears more likely that no bear was shot on that day. It would make sense that the hunters would want to shoot exotic large felids first, rather than bears. The police chief, in fact, authorized them to shoot “dangerous big cats” on December 13. Having shot the big cats, the hunters demanded to shoot bears next. Thus, they shot eight bears several days later (see table 5.1).41

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 94

10/8/2010 7:42:34 AM


95

In summary, a thorough examination of all the available records of the zoo establishes that the zoo had eight lions before November 1943 and that a total of six lions were destroyed between November 1943 and December 1944. This is a discovery that has not been recounted anywhere in the existing documents. The breakdown of the dates is as follows: The zoo strangled a male lion to death in November 1943. Kitaō donated two lions to Zhangjiakou City in December 1943. The zoo sold a lion to the Japan Hunters Volunteer Corps Chikusa Division in October 1944. Then Kitaō had the hunters shoot the remaining four lions on December 13, 1944. Absence of Reliable Records The existence of conflicting records is not unique to Higashiyama Zoo. The records of most of the zoos present similar discrepancies and inconsistencies. This indicates the poor record-keeping practices on the part of the zoos, deriving from intentional and/or unintentional loss of the original records. It might also reflect the pain of keeping the true records on the part of zoo directors who were directly involved in the disposal. For example, Kitaō always carried a briefcase full of zoo documents; however, he apparently lost it during the war.42 It is possible that he might have disposed of it because he could not bear to keep the true records. The lions and polar bears were the showpiece animals of Higashiyama Zoo. The pride of the kings of beasts lived in the first and only open enclosure for lions in Japan at that time. But all were gone in December 1944. Afterward there were no lions in Japan. This author asked a senior zoo staff member in person about the wartime record of the zoo on August 2, 2008. However, the staff member said that the zoo had no record of the disposal of dangerous animals and that he did not know anything about it. Perhaps he was one of the city personnel who were assigned to the zoo as an administrative supervisor, as part of the routine rotation of city officials among its organizations every few years. This has been the practice of public zoos run by local governments in Japan. Saving Elephants After shooting the eight bears to death, the hunters’ attitude became even bolder. Next, they wanted to shoot Higashiyama Zoo’s four elephants. Kitaō was determined to save the lives of the elephants, because they were not carnivores and had gentle dispositions. Moreover, Kitaō

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 95

10/8/2010 7:42:34 AM

96


owed their lives to Kinoshita Yukiharu, who had entrusted the wellbeing of his elephants to Kitaō. Kitaō did not forget the tears of the showgirls of the Kinoshita Circus, either. All the other elephants in Japan had already been destroyed or had died except for one (Tomoe, a refugee at Kyoto City Zoo, see chapter 4).43 Kitaō visited the IJA Regional Division headquarters and police station every day, asking to spare the elephants’ lives. He stressed that these elephants were well trained and that they were domesticated animals in their indigenous places in India and Thailand. Kitaō conceded that he would put iron foot chains on them. He even pleaded that if the authorities wanted to kill the elephants, they should kill him first, or words to that effect. In the end, the authorities stopped short of ordering Kitaō to destroy the four elephants immediately. Thus they escaped the hunters’ guns.44 Asai, the keeper in charge of elephants, was conscripted at the age of twenty (the Military Service Law then stipulated that all males serve in the military at the age of twenty) in December 1943 and enlisted in an IJA Infantry Division. Before Asai’s departure, Noppakun Widra, the Thai trainer who used to work at Ueno Zoo, asked Asai to translate a letter from Sugaya Kitsuichirō at Ueno Zoo. Widra had come to Ueno Zoo in June 1935 with the female elephant Wangi and trained Wangi (renamed as Hanako), Tonki, and John. After an injury incident with John, however, Widra’s relationship with Ueno Zoo was strained. Widra began working at Higashiyama Zoo in July 1936, helping with the zoo opening. Widra taught Asai how to train elephants. Later, after the disposal of the three elephants at Ueno Zoo, Sugaya needed to confide his sorrow to someone who could understand his feelings and wrote to Widra in Nagoya (see chapter 3).45 Three days before the enlisting on December 25, Asai snuck into the elephant house late at night. The four elephants seemed elated to see Asai, who carried apples in both hands. He stroked each of their bodies and trunks and said good-bye to them. Asai did not expect to see them again. This was a time when U.S. submarines torpedoed Japanese transport ships and several thousand soldiers perished in each ship. He was stationed in Kowloon, north of Hong Kong, in southeastern China. Gazing upon the night sky, the clouds floating toward Japan looked like Eldo and Makani to Asai.46 Deaths of Kiiko and Adon Although Kitaō managed to keep the four elephants from being shot to death, Kiiko and Adon succumbed to malnutrition and cold. In

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 96

10/8/2010 7:42:34 AM


97

mid-January 1945 keeper Yogo Seiichi noticed that Kiiko had collapsed and could not get up. The other three elephants were surrounding her in a circle, closely watching over her. Kiiko died of pneumonia that day, at age thirty. Then Adon followed the matriarch in February 1945, at age twenty-four. Some documents, such as the shorter version of the official zoo history and Kitaō’s memoirs, state that Kiiko died in February 1944 and Adon in January 1945.47 However, these dates do not fit with the other accounts of the zoo history. The remaining two elephants, Eldo (twenty-five years old) and Makani (twenty-eight years old), were barely alive. They had lost so much weight that they looked like huge shrunken balloons. Kitaō disclosed in 1977 an episode from March 1945 where soldiers stationed at the zoo brought bales of military horse feed, called mairo (a kind of millet or kibi millet), to the zoo and left the piles in the aisles of the elephant house. Nobody used it, except that soldiers ground it to make flour, made dumplings out of the flour, boiled them, and ate them. Kitaō considered the millet a “gift from heaven” and decided to feed it to the two surviving elephants.48 Keeper Andō Jisuke “stole” the millet, while Yogo Seiichi stood on guard. Then Andō boiled the millet as fast as he could, together with hay and other dry plants, in a huge pan at the back of the elephant house. The soldiers could not have helped noticing this; however, nobody questioned it. Eldo and Makani could not have survived the war without this “gift from heaven.” Later, in 1980, it was revealed that the “gift” actually came from IJA Tōkai regional headquarters veterinary department captain Mitsui Takaosa, who was one of the eleven Mitsui zaibatsu (financial clique/gigantic business conglomerate) household heads at the time. Mitsui was transferred to oversee Higashiyama Zoo in March 1945. After the war, Mitsui confided to his close friends that he had instructed soldiers to stockpile bags of millet in the elephant house, against military rules, in order to save the elephants. He did not tell the soldiers the real reason for that. A friend of Mitsui revealed the truth after his death: Kitaō had had a helpful secret admirer.49 Closing of Higashiyama Zoo On January 13, 1945, another large-scale 7.1 magnitude earthquake, known as the Mikawa Earthquake, hit the Chūbu region, claiming a death toll of 1,961 people. When Higashiyama Zoo was temporarily closed because of the earthquake, the IJA regional division decided to use the premises as storage space for military horse feed. Nagoya city

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 97

10/8/2010 7:42:34 AM

98


mayor Satō protested this decision, but in vain. About ten military officers and forty soldiers moved into the zoo on January 16.50 Then, on February 15, 1945, about sixty B-29s attacked the area surrounding the zoo. Kitaō, who lived in accommodations in the zoo compounds, usually had his family evacuate to the ticket booths at the main entrance whenever an air raid began, because they were made of concrete. However, sensing the gravity of this particular air raid, he had his family evacuate to a bunker on the nearby hillside. The bombs hit the roof of the administration office of the zoo and broke several thousand glass windows of the animal facilities. Nevertheless, the dangerous animal facilities were undamaged. The only casualty from the air raids involved one that hit the area between the bison house and the llama house. A “bison” (species unspecified; according to zoologist Takashima Haruo, the zoo had bought a female “American bison” in March 1936. Therefore, it could be this American bison) and a llama in the open enclosure with a wooden fence fell to the blast. According to the “Higashiyama Zoo diary,” the injured bison ran away from the enclosure. The Hunters Corps head Miyajima soon caught up with the bison in the zoo compound and shot it. However, the conference proceedings of the fifth annual meeting of the JAZGA, held at Takarazuka Zoo in May 1946, which fifteen zoo directors (including Kitaō) attended, simply states that the bison at Higashiyama Zoo died instantly. In his 1956 memoirs Kitaō also writes that the bison was hit by a bomb and died instantly at the corner of the outdoor yard of the bison house. This appears to be another instance of sanitizing the wartime zoo record.51 With the ceiling and all the windows gone from the facility of a chimpanzee called Bamboo, Kitaō decided to move him to one of the empty ferocious animal facilities. Bamboo was actually a refugee from Hanshin Park Zoo in 1943 (see chapter 4). Bamboo could not survive a night without heat, and Kitaō had secretly used a stove for him. Since Bamboo behaved himself when he rode a bicycle, Kitaō let him ride one for his move. The chimpanzee riding his bicycle as he tried to catch up with the running Kitaō and Bamboo’s keeper, Shibata Seiichi, was a comical scene, rare in the wartime. However, it did not lift Kitaō’s heavy heart at all. As soon as the zoo closed the next day after the air raids, the IJA Nagoya Division and the Chūbu regional headquarters took over the zoo. The empty cages were turned into military storage. Kitaō and his staff still kept working daily, taking care of the surviving animals.52

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 98

10/8/2010 7:42:35 AM


99

Massive Nagoya Air Raids On March 12 Nagoya was struck again by 285 sorties of B-29s, flattening the whole city, in what became known as the “Massive Nagoya Air Raids.” Meanwhile, many of the surviving animals at Higashiyama Zoo fell to hunger and cold, including the two elephants (Kiiko and Adon), two giraffes, two hippopotami, an “African rhinoceros” (the source does not specify whether it was a black rhino or a white rhino), deer, zebras, ostriches, pythons, alligators, and double-wattled cassowaries. Worse, considering the zoo “totally useless for the war,” officers and soldiers were rude to the animals and keepers. They were drunken and behaved badly toward them. Some of them even swung their Japanese swords at zoo staff, including Kitaō. Officers took over Kitaō’s office and called him “Hey, you.” Soldiers put boxes in the aisles of Bamboo’s cage, deliberately blocking the door so that Shibata could not feed the chimpanzee. Kitaō asked the officer to leave some space in the aisle; however, the aisle was soon blocked with boxes again. He heard soldiers saying, “Get rid of the animals.” Disheartened by the state of the zoo, and being at the mercy of the military establishment, Kitaō resigned in June 1945 and returned to his hometown of Kyoto.53 *

*

*

Only two administrative staff and six keepers still worked at Higashiyama Zoo when the war ended in August 1945. The zoo had lost 97 percent of its animals during the war. Only two extremely thin elephants (Eldo and Makani), a chimpanzee (Bamboo), two “crowned cranes” (kan’muri-zuru, which were rare in Japanese zoos then), a swan, and twenty ducks survived the war. This indicates that the fractional death toll of the captive animals far outweighed that of humans during the war.54 Raion no kieshi rakuen tsuru no naku (The crane cries in the paradise where the lions had disappeared) —December 13, 2009, the 65th anniversary of the disposal of the lions

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 99

10/8/2010 7:42:35 AM

9780230108943_06_ch05.indd 100

10/8/2010 7:42:35 AM

CH A P T ER

6

Zoos in Southwestern Japan and Japan’s Exterior Territories and World War II

Zoos in Kyūshū (one of the four major islands that make up Japan), in southwestern Japan, were not immune from the Home Ministry’s disposal order. Zoos were created in the region one after another from the late 1910s to the early 1930s only to face their inevitable fate less than two decades later. Four zoos in Kyūshū were members of the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums in 1943: Itōzu Yūen Zoo, Fukuoka City Zoo, Kumamoto City Zoo, and Kamoike City Zoo (see map).

Itōzu Yūen Zoo Nishi-Nippon Railroad, a private railway that operated in the northern Kyūshū region, created an amusement park and zoo, Itōzu Yūen, in Kokura (current Kita-Kyūshū-city) in July 1932. It completed building the zoo facilities in 1934. The zoo closed its operations in May 2000. The management was transferred from the railroad to Kita-Kyūshū-city, and the zoo opened as Itōzu Forest Park in April 2002. The official “50-Year History” of the zoo, published in 1982, simply states that it has no record of the wartime disposal of its animals. However, it mentions that the only information available on this subject was a column written by wartime zoo director Anami Tetsurō (1903–1979) in the Nishi-Nippon Railroad newsletter in August 1975.1 The same page of the history carries a picture of a Japanese black bear cub standing on its hind legs, trying to reach for an object in the trainer’s hand, in front of spectators. The caption reads, “The Japanese black bear that used to charm the visitors with its cute performances.”

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 101

10/8/2010 7:41:14 AM

102


This caption suggests that this bear had been destroyed. Another photo on the page shows an elephant lying down, with the caption, “The elephant that tried to overcome the winter cold by covering itself with dead leaves and hay during the wartime.”2 Disposal of Dangerous Animals In the Nishi-Nippon Railroad newsletter column of 1975, Anami states that Itōzu Yūen Zoo decided to destroy its dangerous animals, following the contingency policy of the Home Ministry. Nevertheless, he only states that “the zoo poisoned a bear to death.” This could be the Japanese black bear in the picture shown in the official history. Anami does not mention any other disposal at all, whereas the zoo apparently did destroy other animals (examined below). He gave no date for the disposal, either. Anami’s column is sketchy and appears to have deliberately left out many critical facts. The new Itōzu Forest Park administration office that opened in 2002 however has a chronology of the zoo, which lists the date for the disposal as September 1943. Unfortunately, it has no other record of the disposal.3 Aside from the reference to the poisoning of the bear, Anami reported in 1975 that “a tiger died on the train during the transfer to Shikoku, while a hyena died of injury.” The tiger was presumably being transferred to Ritsurin Park Zoo in Shikoku, which also destroyed its animals (see chapter 4). Nonetheless, the proceedings of the 1950 meeting of ten zoo directors, including Anami, documented that the zoo had in fact destroyed the hyena. Anami states in this meeting that “[our staff] gave the hyena one thrust of a Japanese sword. It made an enormously loud scream and died.” This passage accompanied a picture of the hyena with the caption, “The hyena that was stabbed by a Japanese sword.” Anami did not identify whether it was a spotted hyena or a striped hyena. However, judging from the old photo, it appears to be a striped hyena.4 Fabrication of Facts Anami changed the story about the hyena from 1950 to 1975. This is clearly a fabrication of the facts, or rewriting of history. What happened to Anami’s mind in a quarter century to change the story? Did he try to whitewash the record of the disposal at Itōzu Yūen Zoo because he thought the whole truth was too cruel to be absorbed by the younger generations? This fabrication about the hyena opens the

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 102

10/8/2010 7:41:15 AM

SOUTHWESTERN AND EXTERIOR TERRITORIES

103

possibility of other cases of concealment or fabrication in the disposals at the zoo. In the 1950 meeting Anami had also stated, “We gave the elephant to the Arita Yōkō Circus, but I heard that it was destroyed in Korea.”5 But in 1975 he changed his story, writing, “We gave an elephant away to a circus, but it died during a performance.” This could be the elephant that covered itself with dead leaves and hay in the “50-Year History.” Again, Anami sanitized his story twenty-five years later. Mysteries about Lions Further, Anami wrote in 1975, “A male lion, the sole survivor left among the dangerous animals in the zoo, died of natural causes, as if he realized his imminent fate.” This statement inadvertently suggests that the zoo was planning to destroy the lion in September 1943 if by that time he had not died of “natural causes.” Was Anami telling the truth about this lion? In addition, he wrote in 1975, “The zoo gave away three two-month-old lion cubs to an individual, but they died soon.”6 But none of the records of the zoo mentioned the existence of a lioness. Where did the lion cubs come from? Did the mother of the three cubs die after giving birth? Or was she destroyed? Anami did not mention either the death or the disposal of the lioness either in 1950 or in 1975. Was it too painful for Anami to confess the disposal if the zoo in fact destroyed the lioness? While Anami’s fabrications might reflect his agony and remorse as the zoo director who oversaw the disposal, one could not help but wish that he had left an accurate record of the disposal for the sake of knowing the truth about the Japanese wartime zoo policy. Anami had no choice but to destroy the dangerous animals at Itōzu Yūen Zoo as the other zoo directors had done at their zoos. Anami apparently tried to save some of the animals by giving them away to another zoo and a circus. Therefore, he did not have to feel ashamed of the disposal three decades later. He did not have to whitewash the facts, especially after he had told the truth about the disposal, at least partially, in 1950. Nobody would blame Anami for the disposal. The public knew how much Anami, who wrote children’s books upon retirement, cared about his animals. Anami tried his best to feed the animals, defying the food rationing, as he stated in 1950: “We were told not to feed potatoes to the elephant when people were desperately searching for potatoes [as rice was unavailable]. We fed the elephant cucumbers instead. The elephant kept urinating afterward, causing us big trouble.”7

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 103

10/8/2010 7:41:15 AM

104


Itōzu Yūen Zoo was closed to the public on January 10, 1944, as the newly organized Fukuoka-prefecture police corps (to defend the Kita-Kyūshū region) decided to use the zoo premises as its headquarters. The zoo was completely closed down on March 31. On June 17 sixty U.S. bombers struck Kita-Kyūshū, burning the region. A year later, on June 19, 1945, U.S. air strikes hit Fukuoka and burned down the central part of the city, including the Nishi-Nippon Railroad headquarters. After the war, the zoo reopened in August 1946. The zoo was expanded in 1953. As of 1962, Itōzu Yūen Zoo had 532 specimens of 115 species. The zoo reopened as Itōzu Forest Park in April 2002.8

Fukuoka City Zoo Encouraged by the opening of Itōzu Yūen, Fukuoka City created Fukuoka Commemorative Zoological and Botanical Gardens (Fukuoka City Zoo, hereafter) in East Park in June 1933 to commemorate the coronation of Emperor Hirohito in 1926. The construction of the zoo, costing ¥150,000, was made possible by the donation of citizens in the region. The front gate was modeled after that of the world famous Hagenbeck Animal Park. The zoo had seven hundred specimens, including lions and elephants, as well as sea lions and fur seals, which were rare in Japanese zoos then.9 Disposal of Dangerous Animals With the worsening of the war situation and increasing feed shortages, Fukuoka City Zoo was closed on May 20, 1944. According to the official “50-Year History” of the zoo, it destroyed its large animals on June 6, 1944. However, the document does not record an accurate number of animals destroyed. It simply states, “The zoo disposed of lion(s), tiger(s), hippopotamus, and others.” That’s all. It does not even give a total number of animals it destroyed. The zoo held a funeral service for the victims on the day after the disposal, June 7, 1944. According to the zoo’s official web home page, the zoo had 164 mammals of 65 species and 500 birds of 124 species, as well as reptiles and fish, at its opening in 1933. The home page also carries a picture from 1933 with at least three recognizable elephants and possibly more, but no record mentions the elephants. After the war, Fukuoka City created a new zoo in South Park in June 1953. At its ten-year anniversary in 1963, the zoo had 683 specimens of 163 species.10

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 104

10/8/2010 7:41:15 AM


105

Kumamoto City Zoo Kumamoto City Zoo was created at the east side of Suizenji Park in Kumamoto Castle, the feudal lord Hosokawa’s residence, in July 1929 and was commonly known as Suizenji Zoo. It was hailed as the fourth largest zoo in western Japan when it was opened to the public. Zoologist Takashima Haruo noted that the zoo not only had a collection of rare animals but also had a successful record of breeding. For instance, six separate sets of cubs were born to the Bengal tiger pair in the zoo between May 1932 and June 1939. This record was a notable exception because it occurred at a time when tiger breeding was rare in zoos throughout the world.11 Disposal of Dangerous Animals In order to cope with the feed shortage, in 1942 the zoo rented an adjacent lot in order to raise rabbits. Although the zoo “consumed” ten rabbits a day, this was hardly enough to satisfy its demand. The zoo was forced to skip feeding its animals every other day in 1943, and zookeepers could not stop shedding tears watching their animals suffering from hunger. Takashima was concerned with the possible disposal of dangerous animals at the zoo and made an inquiry to the zoo in 1944. In response, the zoo replied in October 1944 that it had disposed of its ferocious animals between December 1943 and June 1944. Thus, the parent tigers and the youngest daughter, born in 1939, that were at the zoo in 1943 were all destroyed. Nevertheless, the zoo did not provide Takashima with any further information on the disposal. The zoo’s reply simply stated that it was a matter of time before it would no longer maintain the status quo of the zoo.12 Kumamoto City Zoo documented an accurate record of the disposal in its “60-Year History” in 1989. Zoo director Hayashi Rokurō received the order to immediately dispose of its ferocious animals from the Imperial Japanese Army local division in December 1943. No matter how much the zoo staff wanted to save the animals, the order was absolute. Since it did not specify the method of the disposal, however, the zoo staff considered various methods of euthanizing, rather than poisoning and shooting as other zoos had done, and decided to electrocute the animals. First, the zoo staff tried this on a tiger in January 1944. A keeper offered the tiger a piece of meat tied to the tip of a bamboo pole, which was connected to an electric wire. The tiger gave a gentle look at him. The keeper could not bear the animal’s look and ran away. The moment the tiger jumped on the

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 105

10/8/2010 7:41:15 AM

106


meat, the power switch was turned on. The tiger was thrown up in the air and died instantly.13 In total, Kumamoto City Zoo electrocuted fifteen specimens of nine species between January and the fall of 1944. They included three tigers, two lions, two Japanese black bears, an Ezo brown bear, a brown bear, a Malayan sun bear, a black leopard, a leopard, and three wolves. The zoo held a funeral service for the animals quietly. The zoo’s python, hippopotamus, and elephant, Ellie, escaped the disposal, because Hayashi and the other staff strongly argued that they were not “ferocious animals.” That was the utmost resistance the zoo could make against the IJA. The local newspaper, the Kumamotonichinichi-shimbun, carried an article on March 3, 1944, stating “the zoo had disposed of its ferocious animals due to the possible extreme danger for people in case of air raids, as well as the serious feed shortage when people could not eat meat.”14 Meanwhile, keepers were either conscripted or forced to retire. The remaining thirteen staff members desperately tried to secure animal feed, collecting vegetable trash at the market and growing vegetables on the zoo premises. The day director Hayashi was drafted on January 7, 1945, the two-ton hippopotamus died of malnutrition. Then sea lions and fur seals died of starvation. The python and other snakes died of cold due to the shortage of fuel. The caracal (a small cat that had been thought to be related to a lynx), which was rare in Japanese zoos then and was the pride of the zoo, also died. Penguins’ (unspecified species) deaths followed. Eventually the IJA local division took over a part of the zoo premises, and Kumamoto City Zoo was closed to the public on March 31, 1945.15 Disposal of Ellie the Elephant Subsequently, the IJA local division notified the new zoo director, Ibaraki Shigeharu, of its decision to use Ellie the elephant in its workforce in April 1945. Ibaraki warned the officer of the danger of inexperienced people handling elephants. The IJA division decided to kill Ellie to feed servicemen instead. Thus, Ellie, who had escaped the disposal, ended up being destroyed a year later. Ibaraki and the IJA local division commander in chief, as well as the keeper in charge of Ellie, Kanazawa Tarō, and his family, were at the disposal. First, they tried to make Ellie go into a pool to which high-voltage electricity was connected. However, sensing something unusual, Ellie refused to go in and kept screaming. They gave up that idea. Then they made Kanazawa put a stick with potatoes into her mouth. The

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 106

10/8/2010 7:41:15 AM


107

stick was connected to an electric wire. Ellie was electrocuted. Her body was dissected in the pool. The water ran red for a very long time. This took place most likely in mid-May 1945. Ellie was only ten years old.16 Ellie had come to the zoo in March 1938 at the age of three, and Kanazawa had taken care of her as if she were his own daughter. In fact, the Kanazawa family lived in the housing right next to the elephant house. Ellie was part of the Kanazawa family, and Kanazawa had taught Ellie many tricks. She also gave rides to children and became a star of the zoo. After her disposal, Kanazawa shut his mind and stopped talking about her. Three months after her death, the war ended. The zoo’s sixteen hundred specimens had almost disappeared and only three staff members remained when the war ended.17 As of 1962, Kumamoto City Zoo had 485 specimens of 125 species. The zoo was closed in February 1969 and reopened as Kumamoto Waterfront Zoo at nearby Lake Ezu in April 1969. It became Kumamoto City Zoological and Botanical Gardens in April 1991.18

Kamoike City Zoo Kamoike Zoo, in Kagoshima, was created by the Kagoshima Electric Railway in 1916 on the former hunting grounds of the feudal lord of the Shimazu family. It was the first of its kind where a railway company built a zoo. Private railways built zoos and amusement parks as attractions at the terminals of new railroads. It was their marketing strategy to “kill two birds with one stone.” The railways built new amusement facilities and communities in order to expand their operations. The railways built the railroad in order to carry the public to the new amusement facilities they had built. Private railways in the Kansai region used the same strategy (see chapter 4). Tama Zoo, in western Tokyo, was also created in collaboration with a giant private railway (see chapter 9).19 Disposal of Dangerous Animals In July 1928 Kagoshima City bought the railway, and the zoo became the Kamoike City Zoo, managed by the city transportation department. The zoo destroyed most of its dangerous animals during the war and was in ruins. After the war, the city built a new Hirakawa City Zoo in October 1972, transferring the animals from the old zoo. According to the official “30-Year History” of Hirakawa City

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 107

10/8/2010 7:41:16 AM

108


Zoo, Kamoike City Zoo destroyed two lions, seven bears, four alligators, and two pythons, totaling fifteen specimens of four species, from October 6 to October 31, 1943. The zoo had a memorial service for the animals on November 6, 1943. However, no details of the disposal were provided in the record.20 According to a 1986 book based on interviews with Hirakawa City Zoo director Kawahata Suminori and others, all fifteen animals were electrocuted. The zoo staff initially tried to poison them with strychnine nitrate. However, the animals sensed something unusual and refused to eat the poisoned food. Then the zoo staff connected high-voltage electricity from the nearby streetcar station early in the morning before the trains began to run and electrocuted the animals. The keepers did not have the heart to destroy the lively alligators and tried to save them. They carried the alligators in a cart, but one of them escaped, causing a commotion on the street.21 After the war, the city renovated the zoo and then created an aquarium in 1958. As of 1962, the zoo had 1,678 specimens of 207 species. Then, the new Hirakawa City Zoo was built in October 1972.22

Zoos in Japan’s Exterior Territories There were three zoos in Japanese-held territories in East Asia that were members of the JAZGA: Changkyungwon Zoo in Seoul, Korea; Taipei City Zoo in Taiwan; and Special City Xinjing Zoo (Xinjing Zoo, hereafter) in Manchukuo’s capital in northeast China. All are reminders of Japanese imperialism.

Changkyungwon Zoo Changkyungwon Zoo, in Seoul, Korea, was created by the last king of the Yi dynasty (Joseon dynasty), King Soonjong, in November 1909. At its beginning, the zoo had 361 specimens of 72 species. According to Kim Fang, a Korean resident in Japan and a writer of animal stories for children, King Soonjong tried to relieve his agony of being under Japan’s rule (Korea was de facto under Japan’s control from 1904) by raising animals. With Japan’s annexation of Korea in 1910, however, the authority of the Yi dynasty fell. Then, the Japanese governor-general in Korea demolished Changkyung Palace, except for the main building, turning the palace into a public zoo. Kim states that the Japanese government treated the Yi family as part of the Japanese Imperial Family, creating a section in charge of the Yi family within the Japanese Imperial Household Ministry. Thus,

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 108

10/8/2010 7:41:16 AM


109

Changkyungwon Zoo fell under the jurisdiction of Japanese Imperial Household Ministry along with Ueno Zoo.23 Consequently, a Japanese, Shimokōriyama Seiichi, became the zoo’s first director. The royal palace (Changkyung-goong) was demoted to a zoological garden (Changkyung-won), open to the public. The number of cherry trees that the Japanese workers kept planting in the garden in the end reached two thousand. After the war, the name Changkyung-won (garden) was changed back to Changkyung-goong (palace) in 1984 and restoration to its original design began. The zoo was relocated to a suburb of Seoul.24 Disposal of Dangerous Animals There is little information available on the disposal of dangerous animals at Changkyungwon Zoo either in English, Japanese, or Korean. The zoo lost its early records in fires resulting from bombings during the Korean War. In an interview with the Korean writer Kim, Park Yongdal, the sole Korean employee of the zoo during Japan’s rule, stated that the zoo’s accounting section head had ordered the zoo staff to dispose of all dangerous animals on July 25, 1945. The section head stated that Tokyo had already done so in anticipation of air raids. Then he distributed poison to the staff. They mixed the poison in the animal feed that evening. Park said, “I have never experienced greater pains in my heart than when I poisoned to death the animals that I had looked after as if they were my own children.”25 According to Park, the number of animals destroyed at the zoo amounted to 150. This number, however, includes those animals whose facilities were closed down and whom the staff stopped feeding. This had been done in stages since 1943. Park did not remember the exact number of dangerous animals destroyed on July 25, 1945. In addition, Kim states that the two elephants at the zoo were presumed to have starved to death, as in the case of Ueno Zoo, because elephants would refuse to eat poisoned food. The zoo had earlier bought an Asian elephant from Hagenbeck in 1912. However, it died of sickness at age twenty in 1924. Then the zoo acquired two more elephants. The zoo recorded in 1926, 1940, and 1943 that it had two elephants; however, there was no record as to where they came from. Kim thinks they came from Japan. There were precedents of animal exchanges between Changkyungwon Zoo and Japanese zoos. For example, lion(s) were transferred from Kyoto City Zoo to Changkyungwon Zoo in 1910. A hippopotamus was transferred from Changkyungwon Zoo to Ueno Zoo in 1919 and another in

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 109

10/8/2010 7:41:16 AM

110


1927 (examined below). Also, Changkyungwon Zoo and Kobe City Zoo exchanged lions and a pair of lynxes in 1936 (see chapter 4).26 Mystery about Two Elephants Actually, the very first elephant that came to Japan in 1408 was given to Korea in 1411. A Spanish/Portuguese ship that had been routed via Southeast Asia, carrying an elephant among many other things, drifted to Wakasa province (current Fukui-prefecture), north of Kyoto, in June 1408. The elephant was donated to the fourth Ashikaga Shogun Yoshimochi (1386–1428; reigned 1394–1422). However, the upkeep of the elephant turned out to be difficult, and the elephant stomped a government worker to death. When Yoshimochi’s father, the powerful third Ashikaga Shogun Yoshimitsu (1358–1408; reigned 1368–1394), died, the government wanted to obtain a copy of the Korean version of Daizōkyō (Da Zang Jing, the Buddhist canon of scriptures that originates in India) to conduct a funeral service for the shogun properly. The Korean version of Daizōkyō—Tripitaka (meaning “three baskets” in Sanskrit) Koreana—was the most comprehensive and oldest intact version of the Buddhist canon in Chinese script and was (and still is) considered the best version. Thus, the government requested a copy of the sutra from the Yi dynasty in 1409. In return, the government conveniently gave away the elephant to the Yi dynasty as a thank-you gift in 1411.27 After having what Kim calls the “exiled elephant,” Korea did not have an elephant again for five hundred years until Changkyungwon Zoo bought an elephant from Hagenbeck in 1912. After the one from Hagenbeck had died, Kim says, there was no need for Changkyungwon Zoo to purchase elephants from Hagenbeck any longer. Since Korea had become Japan’s colony, the zoo was able to send to Japan for elephants. Besides, under Japan’s rule Korea had no sovereignty to make international trades. After an intensive investigation of available documents, Kim believes the two elephants that Changkyungwon Zoo acquired in 1926 were the first two elephants at Kyoto City Zoo. Kyoto City Zoo had bought them from Siam (current Thailand) via the Siamese minister to Japan on September 16, 1907 (sex unknown), and the other on August 23, 1913, which was a female named Bharma. However, that is the only record of the two elephants available at Kyoto City Zoo. They mysteriously disappeared from the records of the zoo.28 Kyoto City Zoo veterinarian Takizawa Akio also states that there is no further record of the first two elephants the zoo bought, whereas the zoo has detailed records of all the other elephants, including

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 110

10/8/2010 7:41:16 AM


111

the dates of their deaths. For instance, the zoo purchased its third elephant, a seventeen-year-old male, from the Arita Yōkō Circus on November 26, 1922, for the sum of ¥15,000. He was named Bharma II. At the same time, the zoo hired an Indian mahout to train him, and the zoo opened Bharma II’s performances to the public on October 13, 1924. This elephant remained at the zoo until his death on September 9, 1934. Other major zoos in Japan that had elephants at that time have clear records of their elephants.29 Kim believes Kyoto City Zoo returned the first two elephants to the animal dealer/broker, referred to as Mr. N, because they could not perform shows. Mr. N was known to have made deals for animals from Korea with zoos in the Kansai region, but his name suddenly disappears from the records in the 1940s. Kim considers that Mr. N sent the two elephants to Changkyungwon Zoo after the one from Hagenbeck died in 1924. Regardless of their provenances, the two elephants at Changkyungwon Zoo ended up being destroyed, as were most of the elephants in Japan.30 Hippopotamus Pair to Ueno Zoo In addition, Changkyungwon Zoo played an important role in breeding hippopotami. The zoo bought a three-year-old hippopotamus pair from Hagenbeck in 1912. The two had a total of twelve calves between 1924 and 1937. Five of them died soon after birth, whereas four of them were sent to Japan. The remaining pair and its offspring were popular at Changkyungwon Zoo; however, only one of them was alive at the end of the war. According to director Shimokōriyama, the pair’s eldest daughter was sold to a Japanese circus and died in a traffic accident during a tour in 1922. Their sixth daughter was sold to Hanayashiki in Tokyo around 1925 but died soon after.31 Their second oldest daughter, born in September 1917, was donated to Ueno Zoo in August 1919. Ueno Zoo officials named her Kyōko. The zoo also sent a male hippopotamus, born in May 1925, which became Daitarō. Their first calf was prematurely born and died within five minutes of birth in May 1930. A healthy calf was born in July 1936. However, being inexperienced and unaware of the fact that hippopotamus mothers nurse their calves in the water, the zoo staff emptied the water from the pool lest the calf be drowned. The calf died of malnutrition in eight days. The pair’s third calf, born in May 1938, was named Maru and grew up remarkably well. Nevertheless, Ueno Zoo had the mother and son starved to death in March–April 1945, ending the line of hippopotami from Changkyungwon Zoo (see chapter 3).32

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 111

10/8/2010 7:41:16 AM

112


Taipei City Zoo China ceded Taiwan to Japan in the Shimonoseki Treaty in 1895 that ended the first Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895. There is little information available, either in Chinese, English, or Japanese, on the disposal of dangerous animals at Taipei City Zoo, in Taiwan’s capital. The zoo lost its records during the U.S. air raids on Formosa (Taiwan) except for the few pieces of information remaining. Only the online home page of the zoo in Chinese mentions the disposal in its zoo history section. Its home page offers an English translation, but that version omits the history of the three decades between 1916 and 1945 altogether. The English zoo history simply states that a Japanese by the name of Ōe founded private zoological and botanical gardens in Yuanshan, in the northern suburb of Taipei, in April 1914. The Japanese government in Taiwan purchased the property in 1915 and named it Taipei City Zoo. The zoo had 148 specimens of 70 species at its opening. The English version then fast-forwards three decades and states that after World War II, the zoo was formally taken over by Taipei City in 1946.33 That is all of the account up to 1946. Meanwhile, Taiwan entered into a state of war, when the U.S. air raids on Formosa and the Pescadores began on October 12, 1944. This densely populated island served as a critical way station along the strategic shipping lanes to the southern part of the Japanese empire, encompassing East Asia and the southwest Pacific. Taiwan was also a critical part of Japan’s wartime economy, producing rice and sugar. Sugar was converted to produce fuel alcohol, butanol, which was an important component of aviation gasoline. Consequently, the island had been the target of a sweep by carrier aircraft and had been bombed by B-29s. The reduction of the island’s strategic potential was then left to the Fifth Air Force, which started round-the-clock B-24 and B-25 air raids in late January 1945.34 Disposal of Dangerous Animals The Chinese version of the zoo’s official history states that Taipei incurred U.S. air strikes in many places, including Taipei City Zoo, during the air raids on Formosa. City officials were concerned that animal cages might be destroyed and that escaped animals might injure or even kill people. Consequently, the city personnel electrocuted bears and other animals in 1944. They took photographs of all the animals that were destroyed. However, all the pictures were lost. The only primary source available now is the record of a gun license, dated March 3, 1945, which states that seven bullets were used to

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 112

10/8/2010 7:41:16 AM


113

shoot two lions to death. The zoo lost information on both the number and species of animals destroyed and the dates of the disposals.35 The Chinese version of Taipei City Zoo’s official history also states that there was little damage to the animal facilities from the air strikes. After the war, in 1946 there were only 178 specimens of animals and only four staff members. In 1952 the zoo purchased a large quantity of animals, including elephants, leopards, bears, and lions, and built a veterinary office and an entrance gate. The zoo began exchange programs with Japanese zoos in 1961. Meanwhile, the zoo organized performances and exhibitions of popular animals such as monkeys, lions, bears, blue magpies, and parrots between 1951 and 1979. Because the zoo compounds were constrained in size in the congested area, the zoo moved to Mucha (Muzha), in the southern part of the city and was renamed as Mucha Zoo in October 1986. After much controversy, the zoo received a pair of giant pandas, Tuan Tuan and Yuan Yuan (“tuan-yuan” means “reunion” in Chinese), as a gesture of unity, from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 2008.36 Lin Wang, the Elephant War Hero There is a twist in history concerning the IJA and an elephant that spent his postwar life at Taipei City Zoo. The IJA commandeered work elephants in Burma during its April 1942 offensive to attack British colonies in Southeast Asia. The Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, the KMT) generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek formed the Chinese Expeditionary Forces to fight in the Burma campaign. They captured thirteen elephants in a Japanese camp in 1943. The expeditionary force was recalled back to China in 1945, and these elephants marched along the Burma road, with six of them dying on the difficult trek. After the war, the remaining seven elephants were used to build monuments for the war martyrs and in other projects. Then, in 1947 KMT Army general Sun Li-jen was transferred to Taiwan to train new troops. He took the three remaining elephants with him. One of them died during the trip across the Taiwan Strait. The other two elephants were engaged in transporting logs near the army base in Kaohsiung in southwestern Taiwan. When one elephant died in 1951, Lin Wang (meaning “forest king”) became the sole survivor of the original thirteen elephants from Burma.37 The KMT Army donated Lin Wang to Taipei City Zoo in 1954. There he was treated as a “war hero” and became the most famous animal in Taiwan. Lin Wang died in February 2003, allegedly at the unusually old age of eighty-six. During his weeks-long funeral

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 113

10/8/2010 7:41:17 AM

114


service, Lin Wang was posthumously awarded honorary Taipei citizenship by mayor Ma Ying-jeou. American zoo experts doubted the age of Lin Wang, because the maximum longevity of Asian elephants is considered to be around seventy. They debated “evidence,” such as the condition of his body and skin, and felt that he must have been at most a little over seventy years old. However, they decided not to dispute the zoo, leaving the legend as it was.38

Xinjing Zoo Japan created a puppet state in northeast China, Manchukuo, in March 1932 with Pu Yi, the last emperor of the Qing dynasty (deposed in 1912), as its nominal ruler. Unlike Korea and Taiwan, which had been annexed by Japan and were directly administered by the Japanese government, Manchukuo was at least nominally an independent state. However, it was in effect Japan’s colony, occupied by the mighty Kwantung Army. There the Japanese administrators built a large zoo in Manchukuo’s capital, Special City Xinjing (current Changchun), which was formally named Special City Xinjing Zoological and Botanical Gardens.39 The idea to create a grand cultural facility in Xinjing was conceived by Manchukuo governor-general Hoshino Naoki and Special City Xinjing deputy mayor Sekiya Seizō. The city mayor was a Taiwanese (the Japanese government transferred many Taiwanese to Manchukuo). The mayor had nominal authority, as in the case of Emperor Pu Yi of Manchukuo. The compounds of the zoo were huge, with 71.8 hectares (179.5 acres). The construction of the zoo began in August 1938, and part of the compound was opened to the public in 1940. The zoo joined the JAZGA in 1941, whereas the official opening of the zoo took place in October 1942. Nevertheless, the zoo existed for only several years, as Manchukuo ceased to exist in August 1945.40 The Japanese Home Ministry sent Ueno Zoo director Koga Tadamichi to Xinjing twice, in August 1938 and February–March 1941, to give advice on how to create a zoo suitable to a cold climate. With Koga’s recommendation, Sendai City Zoo director Nakamata Mitsushi, in northeastern Japan, was appointed the first Xinjing Zoo director to supervise the construction of the zoo full-time. The zoo primarily employed the barless open enclosure method and created a monkey island and facilities for mammals, including tigers, lions, deer, and camels, as well as a large aviary. The zoo collected more than a dozen Siberian tigers and also experimented with breeding lions in the cold climate.41

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 114

10/8/2010 7:41:17 AM


115

Takasaki Tatsunosuke In addition, Manchuria Heavy Industries Development Corporation president Takasaki Tatsunosuke (1885–1964) created Xinjing Zoo’s reptile house by donating alligators and other animals from his own private collection (he had rented a space at Takarazuka Zoo and created his own zoo called Takarazuka Tropical Zoo, see chapter 4). He also provided the central heating system for the facility so that alligators and python(s) could survive the severe weather there. Takasaki always had business in mind no matter what projects he embarked upon, even when he was dealing with animals. Consequently, Xinjing Dairy Corporation created a dairy farm at Xinjing Zoo as well as a restaurant where visitors could eat beef and ice cream fresh from the premises. Further, the zoo created a chicken farm, a free-range ranch for ducks, and a silver fox farm, in order to foster development of industry. Meanwhile, the building of the botanical gardens was delayed and only an herb garden was completed. Nevertheless, no sooner had Xinjing Zoo opened than it would have to face its inevitable fate.42 Takasaki was left behind in Manchuria with the other 1,550,000 civilian Japanese at the end of the war. The Kwantung Army had abandoned the defense of Manchukuo and withdrawn to the south near the Korean border before the Soviet Army invaded Manchuria on August 9, 1945. The Soviet Army declared war on Japan on August 8 in violation of the neutrality treaty between the Soviet Union and Japan, which was still in effect. The Soviet Army plundered Japanese settlement villages in Manchukuo and massacred settlers. The survivors became displaced persons in a hostile territory, controlled by the Soviet Army as well as by the Chinese authorities—the KMT Army and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Army—that were fighting the civil war. In this predicament, Takasaki became president of the Northeast Region Liaison General Meeting to Save the Japanese, the association to coordinate self-help groups of Japanese refugees left behind in Manchuria.43 Upon repatriation in 1947, Takasaki contributed to the resumption of Sino-Japanese economic relations in the postwar period when their diplomatic relations were disrupted. He concluded the LT (an acronym for Liao Chengzhi, chairman of the International Trade Promotion Committee of the PRC, and Takasaki) trade agreement, or the memorandum concerning Sino-Japanese long-term comprehensive trade, in 1962. Takasaki also became the second president of the Tokyo Zoological Park Society in December 1951 and assumed the position until his death in February 1964.44

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 115

10/8/2010 7:41:17 AM

116


Disposal of Dangerous Animals There is little information in Chinese, English, or Japanese on the disposal of dangerous animals at Xinjing Zoo. Also, neither the current Changchun Zoo (which replaced Xinjing Zoo) nor Changchun City provides a wartime history of the zoo on its online homepage, either in Chinese or in English. The official history of Manchukuo, published in 1970, does not even have a section on Xinjing Zoo per se, let alone on the disposal of animals. It instead states that Special City Xinjing established the Park Section in 1937 and appointed Satō Masaru as the first section head in order to complete the first-phase construction of public facilities. Subsequently, the city completed fourteen parks, as well as a golf course(s), athletic tracks and fields, and zoological and botanical gardens (Xinjing Zoo). That is all the reference to the zoo.45 In turn, according to the official history of park construction in Manchukuo, written by Satō Masaru, the Park Section was established in 1937 at the engineering department of Special City Xinjing, with Satō as its head. Satō writes that Xinjing Zoo became a popular place in the city with many visitors, as soon as it opened in 1940 (the official opening of the zoo was in 1942). However, by the end of 1941 it became difficult to obtain animal feed, and the zoo supplemented its meat by slaughtering wounded military horses of the Kwantung Army. Then, Satō states, “With the Soviet Army invasion of Manchukuo in August 1945, the zoo poisoned all the ferocious animals to death.” That is the only reference to the disposal of animals at Xinjing Zoo found in the official history. Koshizawa Akira also refers to the poisoning of the dangerous animals at the zoo in his book on city planning in Manchukuo; however, his source is Satō’s book.46 The only other reference found to the disposal at Xinjing Zoo was in an obituary of Takasaki (above). Zoo director Nakamata states that visiting the zoo was the only consolation for Takasaki’s demanding job. His favorite was a Siberian tiger, called Pino. Whenever he visited the zoo, he went right inside the tiger cage and stroked Pino. Takasaki suffered from encephalitis lethargica and was unconscious for ten days at the end of the war. When he regained consciousness, the first thing he asked Nakamata was, “What happened to Pino? How is Pino?” Nakamata replied, “We poisoned him to death.” The Soviet Army crossed the border on August 9, 1945. The army had declared war on Japan a day earlier, at the very end of World War II, and invaded Manchuria in violation of the Soviet-Japan neutrality treaty. It was also three days after the U.S. atomic bomb demolished Hiroshima and the day a U.S. B-29 dropped another atomic bomb on Nagasaki. The Kwantung Army had already retreated to Tonghua

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 116

10/8/2010 7:41:17 AM


117

in the south near the Korean border, abandoning the defense of Manchukuo. Therefore, it was only a matter of time for the Soviet Army to reach the capital, Xinjing.47 According to the prominent writer Murakami Haruki’s Nejimakidori kuronikuru (The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle), Xinjing Zoo was closed on August 9 at the news of the Soviet Army invasion. The Kwantung Army ordered the zoo director to poison the animals in order to save precious bullets. However, the army did not deliver the poison. A lieutenant and his armed men entered the zoo with the disposal order. The zoo’s principal veterinarian told him that the amount of poison the zoo had was barely enough to kill a single horse. Thus, the lieutenant was forced to have his men shoot the animals. They began with two tigers. They missed the vital organs and the tigers tossed and turned with excruciating pain. They had to shoot again. While the gunfire reverberated, all the rest of the animals, even the cicada, held their breath. Next the soldiers shot the leopards. The other animals began protesting the shootings in the only way they knew—by shrieking, howling, and flapping their wings. Then the soldiers went on to shoot wolves and bears. The bears were the most difficult. Despite dozens of bullets being shot at them, they were still resisting. After destroying the two bears, the soldiers were exhausted. They did not know what to do with the two elephants, because they were huge, and they decided not to destroy them. The soldiers felt that they would rather kill people (enemy) instead of killing animals, even if killing people was more dangerous for them. They justified killing the animals by believing Russian soldiers would kill the animals tomorrow if they did not.48 The zoo’s Chinese janitors asked the principal veterinarian to give them all the dead bodies of the animals in exchange for cleaning up the remains for him. They knew that the hides, the meat (especially bear meat), and the organs of bears and tigers (used to make Chinese medicine) would sell well. The veterinarian consented because it would be difficult to dispose of the dead bodies in the summer heat when the Soviet Army’s attack on the capital was imminent, and because the animals belonged, after all, to the Chinese (Japan had taken over Manchuria). The janitors then told the veterinarian that if he had allowed them do the job of killing the animals, they would have done it better without ruining the animals’ pelts. The Japanese soldiers shot the animals so many times that the animals’ pelts were damaged in terms of their value as merchandise. The janitors brought in more men, and together they efficiently carried the bodies off in carts and disappeared. Only the empty cages were left. That’s how the “clumsy slaughter of animals” at Xinjing Zoo ended.49

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 117

10/8/2010 7:41:17 AM

118


The brief summary of the account in Murakami’s book is given here in the absence of official records of the disposal. Murakami is known for using historical events in his work and cites Koshizawa’s book as a reference. In fact, the boundary between reality (history) and fiction in Murakami’s work has been a subject of in-depth analysis in the discipline of contemporary literature both in Japan and abroad. Murakami is considered a contender for a Nobel Prize in literature in the near future.50 With Emperor Hirohito’s unconditional surrender on August 15, accepting the Allied Powers’ Potsdam Declaration, Manchukuo, the “illusory empire” created by the monolithic war machine and grandiose war propaganda, collapsed. The zoo ceased its operations after Japan’s defeat and was destroyed on the eve of the “liberation of Changchun” during the civil war between the KMT and the CCP. After the establishment of the PRC, Changchun City planned to rebuild the zoo; however, the lot was left unused for years. The reconstruction was only completed in 1984, and the zoo opened to the public in September 1987.51

Total Number of Dangerous Animals Destroyed in Japan The examination in chapters 3–6 indicates that all fourteen zoos in Japan (except for possibly one), as well as three zoos in Japan’s colonies that were members of the JAZGA in 1943, destroyed dangerous animals during the war. Hanshin Park Zoo, which the IJA requisitioned in April 1943 prior to the disposal order, is not included in the fourteen zoos (see chapter 4). The results of this in-depth investigation of each of these zoos bring the total number of dangerous animals destroyed in Japanese zoos to at least 170 specimens, excluding those in Japan’s exterior territories (see table 6.1). This number, 170, only includes dangerous animals whose disposal was confirmed through the zoos’ official history records or in other documented records. Since the numbers of the specimens destroyed were incomplete or completely missing for three zoos that are known to have destroyed their animals, the actual number of destroyed animals is substantially more than 170, and would easily exceed 200 (see table 6.1). Disposal by Circuses In addition, circus operations did not escape the disposal order. According to Akune Iwao, as of 1942, there were thirty-three or

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 118

10/8/2010 7:41:17 AM

119


Table 6.1 Dangerous Animals Destroyed in Japan (1943–1945) Name of Zoo

Date Begun

Sendai City Zoo Ueno Zoo Inokashira Park Zoo Kōfu City Zoo Higashiyama Zoo Kyoto City Zoo Osaka City Zoo Takarazuka Zoo Kobe City Zoo Ritsurin Park Zoo Itōzu Yūen Zoo Fukuoka City Zoo Kumamoto City Zoo Kamoike City Zoo

c. March 1944 August 17, 1943 September 1943 December 13, 1944 March 13, 1944 September 4, 1943 March 5, 1944 July 1944 c. late 1944 September 1943 June 6, 1944 January 1944 October 6, 1943

Total Changkyungwon Zoo Taipei City Zoo Xinjing Zoo

No. of Specimens 12 29 (+4)* 6 0? 15 (+3)** 14 26 many 24 1 + many*** 2 + ?**** 3 + many*** 16 15

No. of Species 6 15 3 0? 7 9 10 many 12 1+ 2+? 3+ 10 4

163 (+7) = 170 July 25, 1945 1944–March 3, 1945 August 1945

many many many

many many many

Sources: Official publications of zoos and cities, books by zoo directors and zoologists, newspaper articles, and other related materials. *The zoo destroyed three Himalayan black bears and a Japanese black bear on February 18, 1940, as part of “culling of excessive animals.” **Two specimens were destroyed on November 4, 1943, as “experiments,” and one was sold to a hunting club for target practice. ***denotes that additional specimens were destroyed, but an accurate number is unavailable. ****denotes the likelihood and/or possibility of additional disposal.

thirty-four circuses in Japan: “seventeen or eighteen circuses with horses and fifteen or sixteen circuses without horses.” However, performers and young employees were conscripted for the war, and the circus business was on the decline. The big three were the Arita Circus, the Kinoshita Circus, and the Shibata Circus. They tried to hang on, but on October 21, 1943, the police agency notified twenty-eight groups that were affiliated with the Japanese Association of Performing Organizations’ Temporary Facility Performing Organizations Section to destroy their animals by 10:00 a.m. on October 28, giving them only a week. The method was “voluntary” (at the discretion of each circus). As a result, circuses destroyed a total of 133 specimens of six species, either by poison or by gun. The destroyed animals consisted of fifty-two lions, eight leopards, two tigers, six bears, and seven Asian elephants, as well as fifty-eight snakes.52

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 119

10/8/2010 7:41:18 AM

120


Losing their animals was a great blow to the circuses; it was as if their hands and legs had been ripped off. Animals were their precious “commodities.” However, these circuses continued entertaining performances for the soldiers with what was left of the four-legged and two-legged (including human) performers during the rest of the wartime period.53 The disposal of 133 specimens by the circuses makes the total documented and confirmed number of dangerous animals destroyed in Japan during the war at least 303, but the actual number is substantially more. Additional Animals That Died during the War Furthermore, a number of animals in Japanese zoos died of malnutrition and/or insufficient heating. Zoos could not feed them the normal amount of their diets and animals succumbed to the cold during the winters of the war years. These were not intentional deaths of animals, as opposed to the deliberate starvations to death, as in the case of the three elephants and two hippopotami at Ueno Zoo. If the number of the deaths due to the feed and fuel shortages were included, the death toll of animals during the war would be staggering. Furthermore, many animals died after the war ended due to continuing food and fuel shortages (see chapter 9). The numbers in table 6.1 are only those of the dangerous animals that were destroyed by the zoos deliberately, essentially pursuant to the order of the Home Ministry. *

*

*

With the drastically decreased animals and staff, how did Japanese zoos fare after the war ended on August 15, 1945? Before examining their postwar rehabilitation stage, it is worthwhile to study zoos in Europe and examine the effects of the war on them. Haiena ya katana hitotsuki manjushage (The hyena was stabbed with a Japanese sword, blood splashing like a red spider lily) —September 30, 2010, the 67th anniversary of the day the hyena was destroyed

9780230108943_07_ch06.indd 120

10/8/2010 7:41:18 AM

CH A P T ER

7

Zoos in Europe and World War II

Japan sustained heavy air raids by the U.S. forces during World War II; however, it was not involved in ground battles, with the exceptions of the Okinawa Islands in the south, on which U.S. forces landed in April 1945, and Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands in the north, where the Soviet Army landed in August–September 1945, after Japan’s surrender to the Allied Powers. In contrast, Europe was the main front of the war, becoming the largest theatre in ground battles. Consequently, the war damaged zoos in Europe to the extent that they required complete rebuilding in the postwar years. Examination of zoos in Europe during the war provides an important comparative perspective for assessing Japanese wartime zoo policy. However, a comprehensive survey of cases in Europe is beyond the scope of this book. Therefore, only selected cases are examined in this chapter.

Zoos in the United Kingdom London Zoo The Zoological Society of London had two zoos in its care: one at Regent’s Park established in 1828 (London Zoo, hereafter), and another in Whipsnade, located about thirty miles outside London in Bedfordshire, opened in May 1931 (Whipsnade Zoo, hereafter). The latter was created as a “country branch” of the town zoo, serving mainly as a breeding center. In April 1939 the society’s council appointed a special War Emergency Committee in order to define the society’s position and formulate plans for immediate and future action. With the Nazi invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, and the outbreak of World War II, the two zoos were closed on September 3, by order of the government.1

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 121

10/8/2010 7:41:23 AM

122


Initial Disposal The New York Times reported on September 2, 1939 that all poisonous snakes, insects, and the deadly black widow spider at London Zoo had been destroyed in case they should obtain their freedom during an air raid. All the zoo’s valuable animals were evacuated to Whipsnade Zoo. Ba-Bar, the baby elephant, also made the journey there. Two giant pandas, four of the eight chimpanzees who had amused children with their daily tea parties, the zebras, and the orangutans were already safely in their new home. The article also reported that “thousands of Londoners had pets destroyed at clinics, particularly dogs, which would be terrified by gunfire.”2 According to an official document of the Zoological Society of London, London Zoo transferred some of its rare and most valuable animals, including two giant pandas, three Asian elephants, two orangutans, four chimpanzees, and an ostrich, to Whipsnade for safety in early September 1939. At the same time, the zoo destroyed all of its venomous animals in order to remove the possibility of having dangerous animals escape if the zoo were bombed. As many as sixty-five snakes, including cobras, rattlesnakes, and puff adders, as well as huge constrictors, such as pythons and anacondas, had their heads cut off. In addition, five poisonous Gila monsters (lizards) and some black widow spiders suffered the same fate. However, the zoo saved some reptiles, such as a Komodo dragon and Chinese alligators. The zoo also built two large wooden boxes, eight feet long by four feet wide and two feet deep, to accommodate a pair of pythons.3 More precisely, according to the detailed record by Clinton H. Keeling (1932–2007), the zoo destroyed seventy-three specimens (sixty-five snakes and eight lizards) on September 1–3, 1939. Keeling recorded that on September 1 the zoo beheaded thirty venomous snakes, including cobras, vipers, and rattlesnakes, as well as five Gila monsters. Then, on September 3, the zoo destroyed thirty-five snakes, such as pythons, common boas, and anacondas, as well as three lace monitors, owing to “war conditions.” This makes the total number of reptiles destroyed on the two days seventy-three. While conceding to the killing of venomous reptiles, Keeling casts doubt about the disposal of nonvenomous ones, stating, “I just cannot see the reasoning—if indeed there was any—behind the destruction of many of these perfectly harmless creatures.” During the same period, Kursaal Zoo, at Southend in southeastern England, shot all of its dangerous animals, including seven lions, bears, wolves, a tiger, monkeys, apes, hawks, and eagles.4

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 122

10/8/2010 7:41:23 AM

ZOOS IN EUROPE AND WORLD WAR II

123

More Disposals Nevertheless, these were not all the animals destroyed at London Zoo. Keeling recorded that the zoo also destroyed “an incredible number of animals” for “reasons not immediately obvious” between September 4 and 14. They included “the manatees, two Nile crocodiles, four spectacled caimans, two American alligators, no less than seven common iguanas, a lace monitor, and six Indian fruit bats,” totaling at least twenty-three specimens. Keeling states, “[W]hile these animals would not pose any threat to people, they were destroyed apparently because of concerns for the coming shortage of fruits and vegetables.” Furthermore, the zoo also destroyed eight mammals, including two lion cubs, a “hybrid common X plains wolf,” an eland, a Reeves’s muntjac, a zebu, a red deer, and a golden palm civet, as well as sixteen birds—a lorry, two magpies, seven jackdaws, and six crows—and two bull frogs, totaling twenty-six specimens.5 These were not mentioned in the official documents of the zoo. However, the zoo destroyed a plethora of animals, and the listing goes on page after page in Keeling’s book until 1944, with a total of at least 188, plus many fish. Keeling notes in some passages “k.b.o.,” which seems to indicate “killed by order”; however, there is no way to ascertain which authorities issued the order, if “k.b.o.” indeed meant “killed by order.” Keeling passed away in 2007 and the Zoological Society librarian did not have the information. One would only hope that the Zoological Society library would have compiled a complete list of the animals destroyed for the sake of a true war record, as three major Japanese zoos did. In its absence, such a table was made here (see table 7.1, below). This table records all the specimens known to have been destroyed at London Zoo during the war. All the other available documents, except for Keeling’s, state that the zoo destroyed only snakes or reptiles, probably in reference to the official zoo record. According to the official zoo document, London Zoo reopened on September 15, 1939; however, the aquarium remained closed due to potential danger from broken glass in the event of an air raid and the high cost of running the facility. The zoo emptied tanks and destroyed many of the fish, keeping only the most valuable fish in tubs and tanks in the tortoise house, where the glass was criss-crossed with sticky tape to prevent it from shattering. The zoo also released some of the carp into the Three Islands pond, where flamingos lived. The aquarium did not reopen until May 1943 when the freshwater hall was reconstructed and restocked with fish caught by the aquarium director himself. In addition, due to the feed shortage, the zoo put

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 123

10/8/2010 7:41:24 AM

124


down manatees that lived in the aquarium, because they consumed large quantities of lettuce.6 Continuing Disposals London Zoo continued destroying its animals. According to Keeling, it destroyed a “stairs monkey,” a ruffed lemur, a coypu, and two rockhopper penguins on September 15, 1939. It destroyed four alligators, four mouflon (sheep), two “Hangul deer,” two Indian wolves, six foxes, a hairy-rumped agouti, a severe macaw, a red and blue macaw, a greater sulphur-crested cockatoo, a ringneck parakeet, and a Quaker parakeet on September 19–20. Then it destroyed a lion, a Siberian tiger, a binturong (Asian bearcat), a fishing cat, a beech marten, a two-spotted palm civet, two golden agoutis, and an emu, totaling nine specimens, “for unclear reasons,” on September 28. Keeling suspects that the zoo destroyed these animals for fear of the pending shortage of horse meat, as the British Army forbade the sale of such meat. Again, these were not mentioned in the official zoo documents. The zoo also released five birds (including Egyptian kites and a cormorant), anticipating a shortage of fish, as trawlers had been already utilized as minesweepers in the North Sea.7 Further, in the first half of October 1939, Keeling wrote, the zoo destroyed another plethora of animals, including a wapiti, a cheetah, a chimpanzee, a European badger, a fennec fox, a pale fox, an “Argentine grey fox,” a “hybrid timber X plains wolf,” a golden agouti, two black-footed penguins, a Kolbe’s griffon vulture, two wild boars, two Sumicrast’s night mice, and a greater sulphur-crested cockatoo, totaling seventeen specimens. In addition, the zoo sold a chimpanzee, released three herons and two kestrels, and sent several mammals (including an American bison, a dingo, and sun bears) on loan to “G. T-D.” “G. T-D.” appears to be Sir Hugh Garrard TywhittDrake (1881–1964), longtime mayor of Maidstone, Kent, southeast England, who had a private menagerie there. It became the Museum of Kent Life, open to the public, in 1985. Further, the zoo destroyed a condor, two common goats, and a Komodo dragon on October 22.8 In 1940 the Zoological Society of London initiated an “Adopt an Animal” drive in order to save some of its animals. The program met with great success, despite the evacuation of many Londoners to the countryside. Mammals and birds curator D. Seth-Smith and librarian F. Martin Duncan agreed to take early retirement on pension, while the society accepted secretary Julian S. Huxley’s suggestion to forgo

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 124

10/8/2010 7:41:24 AM


125

half his salary, provided that he could work half-time. Meanwhile, London Zoo evacuated more animals to Whipsnade, continued to release many birds into the open ponds, sent many species of animals to other zoos on loan, and sold some of its specimens to circuses and individuals. For instance, the zoo sent a pair of California sea lions on loan to the National Zoo in Washington, D.C., for safekeeping.9 The Blitz The Blitz, the sustained bombing of London by Nazi Germany from September 7, 1940, to May 10, 1941, started with fifty-seven consecutive nights of bombing. By the end of May 1941, more than forty-three thousand civilians, half of them in London, had been killed by bombing, and more than a million houses had been destroyed or damaged in London. London Zoo was bombed several times during the Blitz, sometimes suffering no more than shattered panes of glass, while on other occasions whole buildings were blown up. On September 27, 1940, for example, several high-explosive bombs fell, damaging the rodent house, the civet house, the zebra house, and the gardener’s office, as well as all the propagating sheds and the north gate. There were no injuries to any animals, although a zebra and a wild ass with her foal managed to escape. They were later found and rounded up. On the same night, thirty-five incendiary bombs fell, setting fire to the main restaurant and destroying the Tunnel Bar. Upon the discovery of an unexploded bomb, the zoo was closed for over a week. Despite the bombings, the zoo tried to carry on as normally as possible and remained open during the war, notwithstanding the shortages of staff and animal feed, as well as the serious financial difficulties.10 The zoo destroyed a Himalayan bear in November 1940 after she was severely injured by a sun bear in a fight. The destruction at the zoo continued in 1941. The zoo destroyed a lion in January. It destroyed another lion after a short illness in March 1941. Then a lioness died suddenly in the same month. Further, the zoo destroyed a brown bear, a Syrian bear, and a “thar” (related to the wild goat, called and spelled “Himalayan tahr” more recently) on April 21, 1944. The zoo destroyed a giant panda, Ming, who had been sick, in December 1944; however, it reported that Ming had died and kept the fact from the public for several years. In total, the zoo destroyed at least 188 specimens, as well as many fish, primarily for reasons related to “war conditions” from September 1939 to December 1944 (see table 7.1).11

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 125

10/8/2010 7:41:24 AM

126


Table 7.1 Animals Destroyed at London Zoo (1939–1944) Date

Number of Specimens and Main Species

Reasons

Sep. 1, 1939

35 specimens (30 snakes and 5 Gila monsters) 38 specimens (35 snakes and 3 monitors) 23 specimens (manatees, crocodilians, iguanas, a monitor, and fruit bats) 26 specimens (8 mammals, 16 birds, and 2 bullfrogs) many fish 5 specimens (3 mammals and 2 penguins) 24 specimens (4 alligators, 15 mammals, and 5 birds) 9 specimens (3 big cats and 6 smaller mammals) 17 specimens (cheetah, wolf, chimpanzee, other mammals, and birds) 4 specimens (1 condor, 2 goats, and 1 Komodo dragon) 1 Himalayan bear 1 lion 1 lion 3 specimens (2 bears and 1 “thar”) 1 giant panda (Ming)

“war conditions”

Sep. 3 Sep. 4–14 Sep. 4–14 Sep. 15 Sep. 15 Sep. 19–20 Sep. 28 early Oct.

Oct. 22 Nov. 1940 Jan. 1941 Mar. 1941 Apr. 21, 1944 Dec. 1944

“war conditions” concerns for shortage of vegetables & fruits concerns for shortage of meat maintenance difficulty unspecified unspecified pending shortage of horse meat unspecified

unspecified injury due to a fight unspecified illness unspecified sickness

Total: 188 + many fish Sources: Zoological Society of London, ed., “The Zoo at War,” April 6, 2009, 1–3; Zoological Society of London, “Annual Reports for 1939,” 1940, 4–6; Clinton H. Keeling, They All Came into the Ark: A Record of the Zoological Society of London in Two World Wars (London: Clam Publications, 1988), 129–91.

Deaths Caused by War Overall, in comparison to the damage to the facilities, the animal casualties were small in number. The New York Times reported that during the bombing of London, several zebras and ravens escaped from damaged zoo buildings, but all of them were recaptured without injury to the animals or to the public. When a bomb fell between the raven aviary and the camel house on November 12, 1940, two ravens, Jack and Jill, were bombed out of their “old home.” Jack stayed but Jill vanished. They were caught and rehoused in the eastern aviary. The keepers also found two camels placidly chewing their cud among the wreckage. Only a Barbary sheep died on the same day, being hit

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 126

10/8/2010 7:41:24 AM


127

by shrapnel. Then, in August 1944, two sulphur-crested cockatoos, a silver pheasant, and a Sonnerat’s jungle fowl fell to bombs. This makes a total of five specimens killed as a result of enemy actions.12 It should be noted, however, that the casualties would have been much larger had the zoo not destroyed many specimens earlier. Further, the New York Times reported on July 28, 1944 that it was officially disclosed that day that a robot bomb had fallen recently on the banks of a canal running through London Zoo. As a result, an unused aviary was destroyed and a large area of glass was shattered in the zoo, but none of the animals suffered injury.13

Whipsnade Zoo Meanwhile, Whipsnade Zoo sustained heavy bombings on August 30, 1940; thus, “Whipsnade’s War” began. The zoo destroyed a “nylghai” (blue bull, or large Indian antelope, spelled “nilgai” more recently) on September 5, and brown bear cubs, a hog deer, and three “fallow does” later in the month. The zoo reopened on September 10, 1939. Then the zoo’s African elephant, Jumbo II, was shot “because of housing difficulties” on September 25. The zoo was closed again from October 31, 1939 to March 1940 due to the lack of staff (many men having been called up for military service) and for the project to cultivate at least one tenth of the two hundred acres of undeveloped land to grow wheat and other crops to feed people as well as herbivores. A “female” giant panda, Sung, that had been evacuated to Whipsnade fell ill and was returned to London Zoo for treatment only to die on December 18, 1939. The necropsy revealed, “Miss Sung should have been Master Sung.”14 Whipsnade Zoo destroyed three more elephants in January 1941. Keeling states that since none of them had been recorded as being unwell, “it can only be assumed this was a particularly drastic method of reducing the number of animals with hearty appetites and the need for well-heated quarters.” The zoo also destroyed a lion, a brown bear, and a female sambar deer. Then it killed a Shetland pony, for “animal feeding,” in 1943. This makes the number of animals destroyed at the zoo at least fifteen (see table 7.2). In addition, the zoo lost many specimens of a variety of species as a result of air raids.15

Maidstone Zoo The New York Times reported on November 10, 1940, that a London Times investigator had been studying animal behavior under fire at

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 127

10/8/2010 7:41:24 AM

128


Table 7.2 Animals Destroyed at Whipsnade Zoo (1939–1943) Date

Number of Specimens and Main Species

Reasons

Sep. 5, 1939 Sep. [no date] Sep. 25 Jan. 1941 Jan. 1941 1943

1 “nylghai” (Indian antelope) 6+ specimens (brown bear cubs and 4 does) 1 African elephant (Jumbo II) 3 elephants 3 specimens (1 lion, 1 bear, and 1 deer) 1 Shetland pony

unspecified unspecified “housing difficulties” feed and fuel shortage unspecified “animal feeding”

Total

15+ specimens

Sources: Clinton H. Keeling, They All Came into the Ark: A Record of the Zoological Society of London in Two World Wars (London: Clam Publications, 1988), 135–37; Clinton H. Keeling, Whipsnade’s War (London: Clam Publications, 1990), 35, 45, 70, 91.

Maidstone Zoo in the “invasion corner” of southeast England. In general, the animals at Maidstone showed no reaction to the most violent air activity or antiaircraft fire. However, there were exceptions. Two chimpanzees stampeded and shrieked at the howling of the siren but did not mind the guns at all. A twenty-year-old cow elephant hurried to her quarters when the antiaircraft barrage caught her in the open; however, once indoors she was unconcerned. One of the zoo’s two emus was indifferent to noise, but the other rushed about so violently during the barrages that her keepers were afraid she would kill herself against her cage. In addition, many of the leading wild birds were “disturbed” by the sounds of bombs or guns. Most songbirds and “birds of passage” (it is unclear whether these were migratory birds in captivity or migratory birds passing by at the zoo) seemed to be afraid of airplanes, regarding them as hawks, and they scattered downward and crouched on the ground to avoid being seen. Some parrots “definitely disliked the noise and screamed loudly and hysterically” when a raid was on.16

Belfast Zoo Belfast Zoo in Northern Ireland, founded in March 1934, was not immune from the effects of the war. According to the zoo’s official history, the Ministry of Public Security ordered the zoo to destroy thirty-three animals in April 1941 because of public safety fears, just after North Belfast came under aerial attack during the “Belfast Blitz” of April 1941. The destroyed animals included a vulture, two raccoons, a puma, a tiger, a black bear, two brown bears, a hyena, six wolves, two polar bears, five lions, two lionesses, two lion cubs,

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 128

10/8/2010 7:41:24 AM


129

a lynx and a “giant rodent” (believed to be a coypu), as listed in the Belfast Telegraph newspaper on April 19, 1941. The zoo itself sustained no damage from the air raids. The collection was not restored until around 1947.17 The record also states that several elephants survived the air strikes. A woman who was believed to be a local in North Belfast had taken home a baby elephant, Sheila, who was supposed to be euthanized. This “elephant angel” looked after Sheila in her back garden during the war. However, the details of the story, including the woman’s identity, were lost in the postwar years. The zoo could not locate her despite many attempts to trace her and her family. The zoo launched a public search for this “mystery lady” in March 2009, as part of the zoo’s seventy-five-year anniversary celebrations. It worked. The “elephant angel” was Denise Weston Austin, who was one of the first female keepers at the zoo when men were called to war. However, she had passed away in 1997.18

Zoos in Germany Berlin Zoo Moving to the continent, zoos in Germany incurred the most severe damage, with a number of major zoos physically destroyed along with their animals. According to an official publication of Berlin Zoo (former West Berlin Zoo), the zoo is one of the oldest and finest zoos in Europe. Founded in 1841, it was considered by some to be the largest in the world in terms of its animal collection by 1939. However, within a few hours, all the work of a hundred years was virtually destroyed in a series of heavy air raids on the nights of November 22–23, 1943; January 29–30, 1944; and the last days of April 1945 when the zoo compounds themselves became battlegrounds between the German Army and the Soviet Army. Inventories exceeded 12,300 specimens of 2,150 species when the war began. Only 91 specimens survived the war. That was all of the account of the war in the official zoo publication in English, while the same author, Heinz-Georg Klös, wrote a more detailed account of the bombings in German.19 A New York Times correspondent reported on November 24, 1943 that the British Royal Air Force (R AF) attack on Berlin on Tuesday, November 23, was as disastrous as that of the night before, with many more explosions than on Monday. An eyewitness stated that there must have been eight hundred bombers over Berlin Tuesday night and that fires were still raging all over the city on Wednesday

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 129

10/8/2010 7:41:25 AM

130


afternoon. Among many major buildings destroyed, Berlin Zoo was smashed, and the freed elephants and other animals roamed Berlin streets. A Swedish refugee encountered an elephant and a giraffe wandering the street. This refugee stated that people did not seem to be concerned with the escaped animals. They were preoccupied with their own survival in the blazing inferno.20 The newspaper also reported on November 27, 1943 that the R AF attacked Berlin again on Friday night (November 26), targeting the northwestern area of Siemenstadt, where the factories of the huge German electrical concern Siemens were smashed. The night’s attack seemed as heavy as those of Monday and Tuesday nights, according to the refugees who flew to Stockholm. As many as five hundred thousand people were bombed out of their homes during these attacks, and many had not been out of their clothes since Monday. The city’s shelters were jammed with people who had occupied them since Monday night. Berliners who could not get into shelters were spending nights in the Tiergarten (Berlin Zoo), which became a big tented camp. The municipal open-air kitchens along Unter den Linden were cooking the animals killed after escaping the bombed Berlin Zoo. A Stockholm Tidningen reporter dined on zebra haunch, and elsewhere elephant meat was served.21 Further, on January 8, 1944, the New York Times correspondent quoted a young man who had left Berlin a few days earlier. He stated that he saw people he had known coming out of shelters quite transformed—white hair, indifferent, insane—wandering about or running away, not knowing where to go. He also witnessed animals in the zoo being shot by the police, because they were attacking wounded people. More than 1.8 million people left town the first day, roaming about the country to seek shelter.22 Mystery Surrounding Berlin Zoo However, that was not the whole story. Japanese zoo officials were anxiously following the situation of zoos in Germany. Germany and Japan were Axis partners. Germany and Japan had concluded the Anti-Comintern Pact in November 1936. Italy had joined the pact in November 1937. Then, they concluded the Tripartite Treaty in September 1940, forming the Axis Alliance. Therefore, the Japanese were paying close attention to Germany’s moves. For instance, an Asahi-shimbun reporter informed Ueno Zoo acting director Fukuda Saburō that the elephants at Berlin Zoo had been killed in the air raids of September 7–8, 1941 and that the zoo had destroyed animals

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 130

10/8/2010 7:41:25 AM


131

at that time. Fukuda then wrote, “When the R AF struck Berlin during the night of September 7–8, 1941, three bombs hit Berlin Zoo, killing elephant(s), camel(s), and a keeper. The zoo destroyed many animals in order to prevent danger to the public.”23 The “Ueno Zoo 100–Year History” states that Berlin Zoo was bombed for the first time in September 1941 and that a female eland became the first victim of the air raid. It records that elephant(s) and camel(s) were burned to death and carnivores were shot to death. Referring to the British R AF’s air raids on Berlin Zoo of November 22–23, 1943, it states that the R AF dropped more than a thousand incendiaries and bombs over Berlin Zoo during that night, destroying many animal facilities and burning dozens of animals to death. They included seven elephants, three lions, two tigers, a rhinoceros, an orangutan, a chimpanzee, and a “liger” (a hybrid between a lion and a tiger), as well as many sheep and deer. According to the zoo’s history, as many as twelve thousand animals were killed in Berlin Zoo during bombings in World War II.24 Takizawa Akio, the veterinarian at Kyoto City Zoo, was also aware that European zoos destroyed their animals. He wrote that when World War II erupted in Europe, both Berlin Zoo and London Zoo destroyed some of their dangerous animals prior to the air raids, either by poisoning or shooting.25 Nevertheless, to the best of this author’s knowledge, no official record of the disposal of dangerous animals at Berlin Zoo is available in English. For that matter, no comprehensive study of war damage of zoos in Germany has been made in English. What exist are brief references to the destruction of the zoos in books on the history of world zoos or in encyclopedias of zoos. Harro Strehlow’s chapter on zoos in Western Europe in Vernon N. Kisling Jr.’s Zoo and Aquarium History has a short section titled “Wartime Experiences of Western European Zoos” that begins with the French Revolution. Nevertheless, it only mentions the damage incurred from enemy actions. It does not mention the animals destroyed by zoos and the authorities themselves during World War II. The zoo historian Herman Reichenbach of Hamburg, Germany, also states that there is no comprehensive study on this subject for German zoos, neither in German nor in English.26 As an exception, the “Cheyenne Mountain Zoo History,” among the zoo literature published in the United States, does mention the war damage to Berlin Zoo. It states that with the total destruction of about forty buildings, Berlin Zoo became the only major zoological park to suffer damage on this scale. Like the rest of Berlin, the Allied bombings pounded the zoo into rubble and a few free-standing walls. It was the scene of one of the fiercest last street battles between

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 131

10/8/2010 7:41:25 AM

132


Russians and Germans just as the city fell. During the first of these terrible days, a few animals ran loose in the streets until they were caught and destroyed, but the final fate of most of them is unknown. The “Cheyenne Mountain Zoo History” also states that most of the major zoos stayed open as long and as fully as possible because of their unsurpassed and unique morale and recreational value and that this was especially so in the war-menaced and war-torn cities in Europe, as well as in Japan.27 In September 2009 an article by German sinologist Frederick S. Litten referred to the memoirs of wartime Berlin Zoo director Lutz Heck, published in 1952. Heck states that the military ordered all lions, tigers, leopards, and bears in “West German zoos” to be shot soon after the outbreak of the war. Heck also writes that the general public was afraid of a possible escape of lions, tigers, and poisonous snakes, whereas the zoo staff was more concerned with bears and elephants running loose. However, according to Litten’s article, Heck mentioned that an antelope (eland) was the sole animal to die in the air strike in 1941, contrary to the records cited above. Heck also stated that elephants and many other animals were killed during the air raids of November 22–23, 1943; however, he denied the BBC report that the escaped animals on the loose were machine-gunned in the streets.28 With these sporadic accounts, neither Heck’s memoirs nor Litten’s article clarify how many animals Berlin Zoo actually destroyed during the war. In addition, the actual execution of the disposal order in other zoos in Germany seems to have been carried out inconsistently. For example, referring to other German sources, Litten states that Wuppertal Zoo shot five lions, three brown bears, and two polar bears on May 15, 1940, by the order of the city administration before any air strikes hit the city. On the other hand, Munich Zoo and Frankfurt Zoo shot lions after air strikes occurred.29

Frankfurt Zoo Frankfurt Zoo, another major zoo in the world at that time (opened in 1858), experienced its worst setback during World War II. The U.S. Army Air Force (USAAF) bombed Frankfurt during the daylight in January 1944. The following March a British R AF attack destroyed the old part of Frankfurt, killing more than a thousand residents. Rosl Kirchshofer wrote that the German Army had requisitioned the Zoological Society building in 1939, installed an antiaircraft battery on the roof, and established a department for censoring letters on

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 132

10/8/2010 7:41:25 AM


133

the premise. Consequently, not surprisingly, four-fifths of the zoo was destroyed by bombs and nine-tenths of the animals were killed during the March 1944 bombing. The damage was such that the city authorities (under the military government) decided in 1945 not to reopen the zoo. However, Kirchshofer does not mention the disposal of the animals at the zoo, while Litten noted that the zoo shot lions after air strikes occurred.30 Kirchshofer then wrote that at the private initiative of zoo director Bernhard Grzimek the city decision was subsequently rescinded. He was appointed director on condition that he would make no demands on the city finances for reconstruction and management. Thus Grzimek rebuilt the zoo to prominence almost singlehandedly, to the extent that the destruction of the zoo, which seemed an almost fatal disaster at that time, “proved to have been a blessing in disguise.” The zoo would never have been reconstructed and modernized so rapidly “had it not been for the tabula rasa created by the war, and had the opportunity not been taken by such a zoological enthusiast and imaginative director as Grzimek.” Grzimek became a towering figure in the zoo world as well as the wildlife conservation field. He was the world’s “Mr. Zoo” from the 1950s to the 1970s.31 Colin Rawlins describes the destruction of Frankfurt Zoo, with its facilities having turned into “a wasteland of craters, rubble, and charred and broken trees.” The zoo’s aquarium, which was “worthy of a visit by the Kaiser,” was demolished, while its large community building was reduced to an empty shell. The zoo lost more than 90 percent of its animals as a result of the bombing and subsequent looting. Rawlins does not mention how many animals the zoo destroyed during the war, either.32

Carl Hagenbeck’s Animal Park Moving to northern Germany, Carl Hagenbeck Jr. (1844–1913), a son of a fish dealer, created the famed Hagenbeck Animal Park in Stellingen, a suburb of Hamburg, the nation’s second largest city and its largest port, in 1907. He introduced barless, moated enclosures, as well as mixed-species exhibits, to modern zoos. Hagenbeck obtained a patent for the zoo panorama in 1896 and built a series of enclosures as “stages,” each staggering over the next elevation. With the enclosures separated by moats and hedges, the design created an illusion of a spectacular panorama, as if all the animals in separate enclosures were in the same open space.33

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 133

10/8/2010 7:41:25 AM

134


When the animal park opened in May 1907, there were only two such moated exhibits: Africa and Arctic. Yet, people rushed to see lions in a barless enclosure, causing a sensation difficult to appreciate today. Hagenbeck was also a circus showman, and his sons succeeded to the family business. Because of the circus operation, the family was not invited to become a member of the venerable Zoo Directors Association until Hagenbeck’s great-grandson took over. The Hagenbeck Animal Park is unique not only in its design but also in that it has been owned by a single family for six generations to this day, keeping the family heritage going strong.34 Bombing of Hamburg With the paucity of detailed accounts in English of zoo animals in Germany during the war, the memoirs of Hagenbeck’s second son, Lorenz, offer a vivid picture. In July 1943 the British R AF struck Hagenbeck Animal Park, destroying 80 percent of its facilities and the winter quarters of the circus in ninety minutes and burning eight staff members and 450 specimens to death, forcing the zoo to close. Lorenz wrote: “We took the bombing of the Deutschland Hall as a grim warning, and at Stellingen instituted all the air-raid preparations we could think of. But the catastrophic assault which was visited on Hamburg only a few months later exceeded anything in the way of bombing that had previously been humanly conceivable.” Unlike Berlin Zoo, Hagenbeck Animal Park was not in the central area of the city, or near railway stations, being well out in the greenbelt on the outskirts. The lakes in the park seemed to offer an ample supply of water against incendiaries. Also, Lorenz’s elder brother, Heinrich, had a staff air-raid shelter constructed.35 Lorenz wrote: “[T]he midnight of July 25, 1943 was the catastrophe that has gone down in history as the Great Fire of Hamburg, dimming the earlier catastrophe of 1842.” A hail of inflammable phosphorus bombs totally destroyed a city of over a million residents. “The lurid glow of innumerable flares bathed walls, trees, and the rock-mountains of the Animal Park in a ghostly light. And then hell broke loose.” Three hundred thousand dwelling houses were totally or partially destroyed, and no less than forty thousand men, women, and children were torn to pieces by bombs or crushed by falling walls. “Only those who went through that inferno of a city in flames can picture what took place that night.” Lorenz’s family and household staff took refuge in the basement of their house when a heavy bomb hit the grounds and the blast destroyed the house above. The sky was as bright as day. About

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 134

10/8/2010 7:41:25 AM


135

halfway through the bombing, which lasted an hour and a half, a tornado of fire broke out. Lorenz saw a zebra and a wounded wild horse galloping by, which was enough to tell the plight at the animal park. A hail of incendiaries came down on the park grounds. At the same time, down came thousand-pounders, tearing sixteen deep craters between the outer wall and the animal houses. Four blockbusters one after the other then brought all the buildings down in ruins.36 Lorenz recounted that the worst part was the fire, which was beyond control. Heinrich, and his son, Carl Heinrich (who happened to be home on leave), and keepers moved the carnivores’ cage wagon out into the open. Nevertheless, these animals were burned to death the next night in the Hamburg goods station marshalling yard before being transferred to the family’s Vienna circus quarters. At one blow, bombs had disrupted the water supply system, and the fire spread at increasing speed. Everything was ablaze. “Animals were crouching in terror in the corners of their cages.” It had become clearly impossible to save them. In order to spare them from a horrible death by burning, Heinrich and Lorenz steeled their hearts and decided to shoot them. Thus, “at our own hands, lovely Siberian tigers, black leopards, jaguars, pumas, bears, hyenas, wolves, and all their lion pit—creatures we had assembled through long years and treated with much love— had to perish. It was an animal-lover’s agony as the shots rang out, destroying stock it would take tens of years to build up again.” That night, they lost 450 valuable animals.37 Two tigers managed to escape their cage. Carl Heinrich found them beneath the ripped-up floor where they had crept to be out of the way of the flames. Lorenz wrote that they also “had to destroy the terrified big cats, because we had absolutely nowhere to keep them.” Lorenz noted that it was a “wild exaggeration to say that lions, elephants, and rhinoceroses broke loose that night and brought new terror to the ruined streets of Hamburg. The truth was that, while most of their walls were down and many animals could have gotten out, they actually did not.” On the contrary, “those that were at liberty clung to the snug area which was familiar to them.” There was the case of their last wild horse, which had an eye put out by a bomb splinter and galloped frantically away, but even this was later found close to its ruined home, peacefully cropping the grass, together with the zebras. There was also a distracted chimpanzee that knocked at the balcony door of a house in Stellingen, but that was soon fetched back by a veteran staff member.38 In addition to the near total destruction of the animal park, the Hagenbecks lost their circus winter quarters. Three groups of performing

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 135

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM

136


lions and tigers and an invaluable group of horses were also killed by the bombs. Heartbroken, Heinrich took his leather-bound copy of the first edition of his father’s biography and in it wrote, “And all this was destroyed in ninety minutes.” Nevertheless, the brothers were not beaten. Heinrich went to Stellingen at once to start rebuilding the animal park, working with surviving elephants and pony teams. As soon as the clouds of smoke over Hamburg diminished, it became clear that “there was nothing further to be destroyed in the dead city.” However, the constant agitation, the alarms, and all the depressing responsibility of those terrible days took a toll on Heinrich, who was already seventy. He died three months before the unconditional surrender of Germany. Lorenz was left alone in managing the family business. When Carl Heinrich narrowly escaped being taken as a POW and returned home, he helped his uncle to rebuild all that the family had lost.39 Incarceration of Erich Hagenbeck in the United States Meanwhile, Lorenz’s youngest son, Erich, had been working in the United States since 1938 in charge of the family office there. When the war had ruined the international trade in animals, Erich traveled for a year as a sea lion trainer in the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey (RBBB) Circus in 1941. Calling on his grandfather’s legacy, Erich, who originally had wanted to be an architect, designed the Sarasota, Florida winter quarters with barless hippopotamus grottos and pools and a barless monkey island with a water moat surrounding it. The work was completed over the summer, and the winter quarters were almost ready to receive the animals when the show returned at the end of that tour.40 As the United States entered the war in December 1941, sentiment among Americans ran high against their enemies, and all aliens from enemy countries were eventually rounded up, including Erich. In April 1942 Erich was incarcerated in an internment camp for the duration of the war. Lorenz wrote that when frightful air attacks were threatening to destroy the life work of three generations of Hagenbecks, Erich was behind barbed wire at Fort Tennessee in North Dakota. Another German RBBB trainer, Fritz Schultz, was also interned. After the United States declared war, Schultz used the pseudonym of Frederick Olson. However, he was arrested by the FBI on June 4, 1942, as an enemy alien when he was appearing with the RBBB circus in Philadelphia. After the war, Lorenz had trouble getting a visa to the United States as late as 1950, because he was still on a black list for alleged connections to Nazi Germany.41

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 136

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM


137

Dresden Zoo At a late stage of World War II, Dresden Zoo, the fourth oldest zoo in Germany, founded in 1861, became a victim of one of the worst bomb attacks during the war. The Bombing of Dresden on February 13–14, 1945 by the British R AF and USAAF demolished the cultural institutions of the “Florence of the Elbe,” as the city in eastern Germany was referred to, including the zoo. This bombing became controversial in the postwar era because Dresden was a cultural landmark of little military significance, and it was indiscriminate area bombing, not proportional to the commensurate military gains. A resident there heard a rumor that half of the zoo animals were killed instantly while the rest of the animals were running around in the street.42 A famous animal trainer, Otto Sailer-Jackson, at Dresden Zoo was under orders that if human life was endangered, all carnivores must be shot. Before he had to face that horrible decision, however, a wave of bombing set the zoo ablaze. He later stated: “The elephants gave spine-chilling screams. Their house was still standing, but an explosive bomb of terrific force had landed behind it and lifted the dome of the house, turning it round and putting it back on again. The baby cow elephant was lying in the narrow barrier-moat on her back, her legs up to the sky. She had suffered severe stomach injuries and could not move.” Three hippopotami were drowned when iron debris pinned them to the bottom of their water basin. In the ape house, Sailer-Jackson found a gibbon that had no hands, only stumps, when it reached out to him. Nearly forty rhesus monkeys escaped to the trees, but were dead by the next day from drinking water polluted by the incendiary chemicals. For those animals that made it to the next day, the assault was far from over. A U.S. aircraft pilot came in low, firing at anything he could see that was still alive. “In this way,” Sailer-Jackson said, “our last giraffe met her death. Many stags and other animals which we had managed to save became victims of this hero.”43

Zoos in the Netherlands and Surrounding Regions Along with zoos in Germany, zoos in the Netherlands suffered serious damage. When the Germans invaded on May 10, 1940, a short but fierce war with heavy bloodshed ensued in the period May 10–15. Rotterdam Zoo (the old zoo in the center of town) and Rhenen Zoo (Ouwehands Dierenpark) were those most affected by this war in the

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 137

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM

138


Netherlands, whereas Amsterdam Zoo escaped bombings. As in the case of Germany, however, no comprehensive study of the war damage to zoos in the Netherlands is available in English, or in Dutch for that matter, according to the country’s zoo specialists. For instance, a longtime staff member at Rotterdam Zoo, Lex Noordermeer, knows of only two publications on the war and zoos in the Netherlands. One is Dieren (Animals) magazine, published by Artis (the common name for Amsterdam Zoo) and Blijdorp (a local name for Rotterdam Zoo on a new site) in May–June 1985. Another is a booklet on Ouwehands Dierenpark in Rhenen in May 1940. The prominent zoologist and research associate at the prestigious National Museum of Natural History in Leiden, A. C. van Bruggen, has some records on this subject, but only in Dutch.44

Rotterdam Zoo In Rotterdam the old zoo was closed in 1940 and was being replaced by a new zoo built in Blijdorp. The new zoo opened on July 7, 1940. However, the war wreaked havoc on the old zoo just before the animals were transferred to the new location. The German military bombed the city, hitting the zoo, and many animals died. Those that survived were brought to Blijdorp. According to the documents provided by the Dutch zoo specialists, Dutch military authorities closed Rotterdam Zoo and destroyed most of the large carnivores at the zoo on the first day of the German invasion (May 10) in order to prevent any dangerous animals from getting loose. The zoo was able to keep alive only four young lions, a three-year-old lion, and a tigress with two cubs. The battle between Dutch marines (charged with defending the city) and German airborne troops began when Germans bombed the city on May 12. The old zoo in the center of the city was hit hard, and many animals were killed during the battle. The Germans felt that the city had to be bombed into submission, and it was bombed again on May 14 and was in flames. The zoo’s large carnivore facility was burned down. The four young lions and the tigress with her cubs died as a result of the fire.45

Rhenen Zoo Another zoo hit hard was Rhenen Zoo, in the central part of the country. Most of the large carnivores at the zoo were destroyed on the first day of the German invasion (May 10) by order of the Dutch military authorities. This was done partly by the military and partly

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 138

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM


139

by the zoo director himself, who succeeded in secreting a female polar bear and her young twins in underground accommodations so that all three survived. The zoo was right on the front lines, being situated almost in the main line of resistance (Grebbelinie). In fact, the final battles took place in the zoo, where a last stand was made, in some of the administrative buildings. A monument and a military cemetery commemorating the Dutch soldiers killed in May 1940 stand next to the zoo.46

Amsterdam Zoo Amsterdam Zoo (Artis) destroyed four poisonous snakes at the outbreak of the war. Although the zoo escaped German bombings, it suffered from a shortage of supplies. As Nazis reduced animal feed, Artis director A. L. J. Sunier “shouted back at them even louder, demanding animal feed” (according to zoo secretary Lida Koning in 1985). With the destruction of Rotterdam Zoo, Sunier promised Koenraad Kuiper, his colleague at Rotterdam Zoo (1888–1971; director 1924–1947), new lions and tigers at a reasonable price on May 20, 1940. Those people kept their zoos going.47 Meanwhile, Arnhem Zoo, in the central part of the country, was for a long time on the front lines between September 1944 and April 1945. When the Netherlands was liberated, what was left of potentially dangerous animals at the zoo were killed by the German military. Rhenen Zoo (or what remained of it) was wholly evacuated in the last stages of the liberation in the spring of 1945; however, potentially dangerous animals had already been destroyed in May 1940. By the liberation on May 5, 1945, the Dutch zoos were much depleted by a shortage of animal feed, lack of replacements for animals that had died, and destruction of facilities. In addition, Antwerp Zoo in Belgium (which gained its independence from the Netherlands in 1931) was bombed, though not totally. The animals were destroyed in stages as the situation worsened, the meat eaters first, then the fish eaters, and so on.48

Zoos in Central and Eastern Europe When Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, ushering in World War II, its troops not only destroyed cities and towns but also cultural institutions, including zoos, in Central and Eastern Europe. Nazis plundered and confiscated cultural treasures from museums, as well as zoo animals, as war trophies. However, no comprehensive

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 139

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM

140


study of the war and zoos in Poland and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe is available in English. A polish veterinarian, Leszek Solski, recounts the war experiences of some of the major zoos in Central and Eastern Europe in a chapter of Kisling’s book; therefore, this chapter does not reiterate the same cases.49

Warsaw Zoo A recent book related to this subject is Diane Ackerman’s The Zookeeper’s Wife: A War Story (2007). It portrays how Warsaw Zoo director Jan Zabinski (1897–1974) and his wife, Antonina, saved Jewish refugees by hiding them in animal cages in the zoo, vacated by animals that had been destroyed by the Nazis. D. T. Max reviewed this book under the title “Antonina’s List,” echoing “Schindler’s List.” As the couple witnessed the Nazi officers destroying the zoo and shooting its four-legged occupants, they foresaw what was to come for the Polish Jews. The Zabinskis hid them in the zoo cages, having them share space with the surviving animals. Max concludes his review by stating that Antonina’s work deserves more attention, as “a voice like hers should not be allowed to fade into the silence.”50 While this book chronicles how the Polish couple saved about three hundred Holocaust victims, not animals, in Warsaw during the war, it suggests the plight of zoos in other parts of Europe plundered by the Nazis. Solski states that Zabinski was a good zoo director and an excellent educator. After his early retirement from the zoo at age fifty-four, probably due to misunderstandings with members of the city council under Communist rule, Zabinski devoted himself to zoos and animals, through radio broadcasting and writing books, along with his wife.51

Tallinn Zoo Zoos in Eastern Europe suffered not only by direct and indirect damage from the war but also from the succeeding political and ideological convolutions. For example, Tallinn Zoo in Estonia opened two days after the signing of the notorious Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union) on August 23, 1939. When the Soviet Union annexed Estonia in 1940, the zoo came under the jurisdiction of the Tallinn city council. The war soon broke out, interrupting future plans for the zoo. The zoo’s very first animal, a lynx named Illu (which became the

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 140

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM


141

emblem animal of the zoo), was hit by shrapnel and died during the war.52 After the war, the zoo became an institution alternately headed by Soviet KGB (Committee for State Security) or Communist Party officials who had committed some kind of offense and were assigned to the zoo as punishment. Being concerned only for their banishment to end, these zoo directors obeyed the directives from Moscow in the spirit of Ivan V. Michurin’s (1855–1935) biology, which demanded, among other things, that new species be created by means of hybridization. The zoo suffered from mismanagement on the part of these incompetent directors. This lasted until 1961 when a Hungarian-born zoologist, Károly Stern, became zoo director, ending the hybridization program.53

Chemnitz Zoo Regarding European communism and its effect on zoos, Ken Kawata noted conditions during his visit to Chemnitz in eastern Germany (the city was called Karl-Marx-Stadt under East German rule) in August 2008. According to Chemnitz Zoo (locally known as Rabenstein Tierpark) curator Auja Dube, when the zoo opened in 1964 the focus of the animal collection was on domesticated stock and animals from the Soviet Union. Only after the 1990s did the collection expand to worldwide scope to include endangered species such as golden tamarin (a small South American primate), lowland anoa (a small Asian bovid), Somali wild ass, and pygmy hippopotamus. While this case might not be representative of zoos in European communist nations (for instance, East Germany built a first-class, huge zoo in East Berlin after World War II, and Prague was known for an excellent zoo that continues to be first rate), it illustrates a unique aspect of the zoos in the region in the postwar years.54

Leningrad Zoo In the Soviet Union on September 8, 1941, German troops closed the ring around Leningrad and the siege began, lasting until January 27, 1944. Leningrad Zoo had managed to evacuate some of its animals to Kazan, whereas others, including the elephant Betti, died during the initial German attacks in September 1941. Some animals survived the war, such as several carnivores and a hippopotamus called Krasavica (meaning “beautiful”). While about one million people died in Leningrad from hunger, cold, and injuries during the siege,

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 141

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM

142


Krasavica’s keeper kept her alive, bringing water from the nearby Neva River.55

Zoos in Southern Europe There is little information available in English on the effects of World War II on zoos in Southern Europe. Italian zoo expert Spartaco Gippoliti, at the Instituto Italiano di Antropologia, states that it is very difficult to find references on zoos during the wartime period even in the original language, let alone in English. In fact, Gippoliti could not locate any English sources at all, but managed to find some pieces of information on zoos in Italy, in Italian.56

Rome Zoo, Italy Rome Zoo in central Italy opened in January 1911. It was built in consultation with and to designs provided by the firm of Carl Hagenbeck Jr. and therefore had many outdoor and rock enclosures for lions, tigers, hyenas, and other animals. According to Gippoliti, no animal was purposely killed for security reasons at Rome Zoo during World War II. However, a different decision was taken at Genoa Zoo in northern Italy. It was closed down at the end of 1940, and all animals that could not be sold or donated to other zoos were destroyed. The bodies were preserved in the Museum of Natural History.57 As noted earlier, Germany, Italy, and Japan formed the Axis in September 1940. Rome received less bombing from Allied forces than other Italian or European cities. One of the few occurred on July 19, 1943, in which a white egret was killed by a bomb splinter at Rome Zoo. Considerably more damage was caused by a shortage of fuel and food at the zoo. By the end of 1941, sea lions and penguins had gone, because fishing along the Italian coast was prohibited and these animals could not survive without fresh fish. The two black rhinoceroses died of the shortage of food and fuel during the winter of 1943–1944. The same fate overtook the reptiles and most tropical birds. During that time, dangerous animals, such as big cats and bears, were evacuated to the small zoo of Salsomaggiore and to the Corpo Forestale dello Stato (CFS, Italian for State Forestry Department, which is a national police agency that acts as a park ranger force) in Sabaudia, south of Rome.58 After the armistice of September 8, 1943, Rome was occupied by the German Army, which fought against Operation Slapstick, a part of the Allied Powers’ invasion of Italy. According to Silvano Leonardi,

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 142

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM


143

son of the then head keeper at Rome Zoo, Germans promised fuel and a permit to transport by vehicle dead animals, such as cows or horses (that were victims of bombing), to Sabaudia to feed the evacuated carnivores there. The situation remained poor during 1945. At the end of 1945, the zoo collection had fallen from thirty-eight hundred specimens to two thousand. Oral keeper lore reported that Giulia, the zoo’s mother orangutan, was killed by fire caused by cigarettes thrown into her cage by Allied soldiers. The situation remained difficult even after the war. In 1947 an epidemic of anthrax spread by infected horse meat caused the death of some of the few felids left, including the last Amur leopard.59 *

*

*

After examining zoos in Europe during World War II, another major question is, what was the plight of zoos in the United States during the war? Berurin no dōbutsu kiete bara ichirin (A single autumn rose blooms in the ruins of Berlin Zoo where the animals were no more) —November 22, 2009, the 66th anniversary of bombings of Berlin Zoo

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 143

10/8/2010 7:41:26 AM

9780230108943_08_ch07.indd 144

10/8/2010 7:41:27 AM

CH A P T ER

8

Zoos in the United States and World War II

Comparing the damage of World War II to zoos in Europe and the Untied States, it could be argued that American zoos suffered from deprivation while European zoos suffered from destruction. Despite the initial panic and paranoia for possible air strikes on North America during the period following Pearl Harbor and the U.S. declaration of war in December 1941, American zoos were not really in danger of physical damage. Nevertheless, the war significantly affected them in myriad ways. Although there were few documented cases of animals being destroyed in zoos in the United States during the war, some instances were noted by zoo experts. Overall, constant turnover of skilled keepers and a shortage of labor in general due to the conscription, as well as restriction and scarcity of animal feeds, were the major effects of the war on zoos in the Unites States. In addition, the importation of animals from overseas was suspended, as all means of transportation were used for the military and supplies. New construction ceased, and only the most necessary repairs to physical facilities were made.1 As with the cases in Europe, a comprehensive survey of cases in the United States is beyond the scope of this book. The purpose of this chapter is to provide comparative perspectives on the wartime contingency plans and the plight of zoos in the United States during World War II. Moreover, the sources of information on this subject were limited. Few zoos in the United States detailed their wartime history in their official history records. Therefore, selected cases for major American zoos, to the extent that archival newspaper and other research allowed, are presented in this chapter in the order from northeast to southwest.

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 145

10/8/2010 7:42:40 AM

146


Boston Zoo No official record was found regarding history during World War II at Franklin Park Zoo, commonly known as Boston Zoo. A newspaper archive search did not yield any articles regarding wartime contingency plans at the zoo. However, according to the prominent American zoo historian and longtime registrar at the San Diego Zoological Soceity, Marvin Lee Jones, Boston Zoo destroyed all of its primates. Jones accumulated enormous amounts of zoo data over the decades. He was respected by his peers for his meticulous method and accuracy in research. Jones wrote: “The uninitiated in the audience may cringe at the thought of zoos killing dangerous animals in World War II [referring to the case of Japan], but they should be aware that similar moves were made by zoos in many parts of Europe and even in the USA. All of the primates at Boston were for instance killed as fuel was not available to heat the building.” In a letter of July 4, 1989, Jones noted that in 1942 the then Boston Zoo superintendent first offered its primates to other zoos, but there were no takers, and the zoo destroyed them.2 Other than that, the only article found that was relevant concerned the wartime diet at the zoo. The article stated that lions at Boston’s Franklin Park Zoo went on a horse-meat diet on July 27, 1942, as a result of the New England beef shortage. Curator Daniel J. Harkins explained that “the animals would have to accustom themselves to the meat, as the huge quantities of beef usually fed to them had been cut off by the shortage.”3 There has been no reply to this author’s inquiry to the zoo regarding its war contingency plans and any related matters.

Bronx Zoo With the outbreak of the Pacific War in December 1941, officials of four existing zoos in New York City (Bronx Zoo, Central Park Zoo, Prospect Park Zoo, and Staten Island Zoo) met and discussed their contingency plans. Bronx Zoo decided against destroying any of its animals, at least for the present, on December 17. The decision was guided by the experience of London Zoo, on which more than fifty bombs had fallen “without a single animal being killed or any dangerous animal escaping.” It should be recalled, however, that the zoo had destroyed at least 181 specimens and many fish prior to the Blitz. Bronx Zoo officials believed that the air-raid precautions that had been developed would prove adequate to meet any situation that

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 146

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM

ZOOS IN UNITED STATES AND WORLD WAR II

147

might arise. For instance, the zoo locked up its big cats in their steeland-concrete night cages at night and chained all the elephants down every night. The zoo also assigned its keepers and maintenance men to patrol the zoo on a 24/7 basis.4 In addition, the zoo also issued three 44-caliber game rifles to keepers to “shoot on sight” any dangerous animal set loose by explosions. The keepers would receive marksmanship training at a police armory. The fate of nondangerous animals, such as deer and other large animals that would not attack people but might cause panic to the public if they went racing through the city streets, was left to the discretion of the keepers. The zoo decided to leave its 476 reptiles untouched at least for the rest of the winter. Raymond L. Ditmars, curator of reptiles and insects at the zoo, stated that poisonous snakes would present no hazard at this season of the year, because “once outside their steam-heated shelters, the snakes would be ‘immobilized’ by the cold in a few minutes.”5 The zoo also announced that it would acquire additional firefighting apparatus and give special training to maintenance men, who would act as fire wardens. Captain Jean Delacour, a member of the council of the London Zoological Society, who was then a technical consultant at Bronx Zoo, pointed out that the problem of controlling an escaped animal in the Bronx would be simpler than in London, because the zoo was surrounded by a high fence and the area within the fence was about 180 acres, giving animals plenty of room to roam and settle down. Under this guiding eye of the war-experienced zoologist, the New York animal experts turned Bronx Zoo into an armed camp.6 New York City Conducts Blackout Drills The New York Times reported on April 9, 1942 that the upper fourfifths of the Bronx, which so far had had no occasion to put its lights out, received the charge to do so at 9:00 p.m., including for the first time the elevated subway platform. It was an air-raid test, covering an area of thirty square miles and affecting 895,000 residents, and was the latest of New York City’s series of blackout drills. The lower fifth of the Bronx had already conducted a similar drill a week earlier. Mayor Fiorello La Guardia announced that this drill would be, for the first time in the recent series of practice blackouts, accompanied by a fire alarm and by mobilization of a zone section of the emergency medical rescue division of the Office of Civilian Defense.7 This article demonstrates the degree of the sense of panic that American

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 147

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM

148


citizens felt immediately after Pearl Harbor and the preparations the city authorities had made in response. The authorities did not expect that this drill would affect Bronx Zoo, because its gates closed before dark and no lights were normally on in the animal buildings at night. Nevertheless, the New York Zoological Society, which oversaw Bronx Zoo, announced detailed plans for control of the zoo animals in case of an aerial raid. The zoo maintained a night watch with four men on duty all night, specially trained to handle escaped animals and well up on their incendiarybomb control technique. The zoo also instructed thirty-five other employees who lived nearby to report to the zoo at once in case of an aerial attack. The zoo worked out a new technique to round up escaped animals by employing a series of twenty-five-foot canvas walls, each of which could be manipulated by four keepers to corral animals toward safe quarters. The zoo also made a detailed plan to guide all visitors safely outside the zoo compounds in case of a daytime raid, including plans “to round up stray children.”8 Additional Measures New York Zoological Society curator of publications emeritus William Bridges also writes that when the United States entered the war, Bronx Zoo did not form a home guard as it had done during World War I. However, the zoo took note of the public uneasiness when air-raid sirens sounded practice alerts. Keepers and maintenance men took turns sleeping in the zoo for a few weeks. Keeper teams with unloaded rifles also engaged in air-raid drills in the spring of 1942, demonstrating their readiness for any catastrophe. Meanwhile, due to the concerns about bombing immediately after Pearl Harbor, the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco sent nine of its research flock of Galápagos finches to Bronx Zoo for safekeeping in February 1942. The ancestors of these rare birds were captured on the Galápagos Islands off the west coast of Ecuador by a British ornithological expedition in 1939. This time, they were flown by air express to La Guardia Field and were to be studied as one of the links in Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution at Bronx Zoo. Bridges stated that it was the first time animals were shipped for safekeeping reasons, but he believed these rare birds were worth studying, as Darwin had thought.9 Bridges points out that the fears of direct attack on both coasts, however, soon faded. Aside from gasoline restrictions and rainy weather, zoo operations were normal. The greatest problem was

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 148

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM


149

locating acceptable food substitutes, such as horse meat for beef and sweet potatoes for bananas. By the end of the war, eleven trustees and sixty-two zoo employees had been drafted, and two of the latter did not come home alive. The zoo and circus animal historian (one the three founders of the Zoological Society of Atlanta, currently Zoo Atlanta, and a former president of the Circus Historical Society), Richard J. Reynolds III, adds that for zoos in the United States the war meant a dearth of new animals, as the supply from Asia and Africa was cut off. There is an episode of Bronx Zoo’s John TeeVan’s adventure in bringing giant pandas from China to New York in late 1941. They were out of the Philippines on the high seas west of Hawaii when the Japanese navy attacked Pearl Harbor and were therefore subject to attack by enemy forces. The captain ordered that camouflage paint be applied to the ship. The pandas were up on deck to play and get some exercise while the paint job was being done, and one of them got into the paint. Officials of the zoo spent several anxious days until they heard from Tee-Van that they had arrived at San Francisco safely.10

Central Park and Prospect Park Zoos Meanwhile, the jointly managed Central Park and Prospect Park Zoos presented another approach to the war. The zoos ruled out destroying any of their animals without special orders. Joint director Harry Nimphius argued that even if bombs hit the zoos and buildings were crumbling, animals confined in their cages should be left unharmed by the keepers. Even if foxes, deer, and kangaroos were set free by explosions, they should not be shot. He insisted that the animals would not want to do any harm. Even tigers and lions would not do any harm if they got loose, because they were always well fed and would not attack a human being for food or for any other purpose. Nimphius nevertheless issued orders that as soon as tigers, lions, bears, mountain lions, elephants, or hippopotami got loose, they were to be destroyed by the 30-30 and 40-57 rifles on hand at each zoo. About 25 of the 150 mammals at Central Park were defined as “dangerous” and 20 of the 120 mammals at Prospect Park.11

Staten Island Zoo In contrast, Staten Island Zoo drew up a stricter policy. Zoo director Carol Stryker announced that he had already instructed his staff that as soon as enemy planes were seen overhead or bombs were seen to

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 149

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM

150


fall anywhere in the vicinity by the zoo’s air-raid observer, all the dangerous mammals, reptiles, and insects were to be put to death in their cages. A list of those to be destroyed had been given to the keepers. The list included four of the 150 mammals: a leopard, a black leopard, a hyena, and a large chimpanzee. They would be shot in their cages. Ninety of the zoo’s 400 reptiles, such as cobras, rattlesnakes, copperheads, and Gila monsters, were also on the death list. Ash sticks to kill them by clubbing were already installed in their cages. Stryker stated that cold would stiffen up the snakes in short order but that if a choice had to be made between human beings and snakes, he believed the latter would have to go. Stryker also stated that he personally would immediately destroy the zoo’s four black widow spiders, which he kept on exhibition on his desk in tightly corked bottles. He would “spill them on the floor and step on them.”12 The zoo felt the shadows of war in August 1941 when the zoo donated a prairie falcon, a sparrow hawk, and a red-tailed hawk to Lieutenant Thomas MacClure of the First Pursuit Squadron of the Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. They trained the hawks to intercept enemy carrier pigeons. How the birds were to be taught to distinguish enemy pigeons from friendly ones was a military secret. Several zoo staff members, including Zoological Society vice chairman Harold J. O’Connell, also served on military duty. The zoo changed the focus of its educational lecture program to one more attuned with the war efforts. For instance, in 1938 the famed naturalist Ernest Thompson Seton had talked about his life-changing tragic saga of the wolf-pack leader Lobo and the story of teeming wildlife depleted at the turn of the century. In 1942 he talked about how thirty species of animals, including dogs, horses, and elephants, were helping to win the war.13

Philadelphia Zoo Philadelphia Zoo is considered the oldest zoo in the United States (see chapter 2). There is no official record of wartime contingency plans at the zoo, as was confirmed by current zoo administrators. A newspaper archive search yielded some articles from local newspapers. According to one of these articles, in February 1942 zoo director Freeman M. Shelly drew up a list of animals regarded as dangerous in the event of escape and assigned men with rifles to every vantage point on the zoo grounds. He listed thirty animals to be put to death if air raids over the city were to weaken or destroy their cages

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 150

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM


151

enough to permit escape. Crack shots among zoo attendants held daily rifle practice in preparation for execution squad duties if the city was bombed. Shelly posted the list of dangerous animals where guards would see them daily and memorize the locations and types to be destroyed. Topping the list were the African buffaloes, quartered in the antelope house. “The vicious horned beasts were to be killed on sight if they escaped.” The zoo’s African elephant, Josephine, and its hippopotamus, Jimmy, were also on the death list.14 The zoo contingency plan stipulated, “[S]hould bombs wreck the Lion House, only the maned wolf and the hyena are to be recaptured. The cats are all to be killed on sight. All small cats, such as bobcats, lynx, ocelots, civets [actually they are not cats], and golden cats, are to be destroyed. Gibbons and other animals in the Small Cat House are to be recaptured.” All “great apes,” adult male baboons, rhesus macaques and Japanese macaques in the monkey house were to become targets if they were freed. In addition, all bears were to be shot on sight. The male gaur (a wild ox native to Asia) and male Indian water buffalo were to die if they escaped the deer paddocks. Further, all foxes, wolves, and wild dogs were on the execution chart. The zoo would attempt to capture snakes if they escaped during winter months. The zoo would draw up other orders for warmer weather.15 In addition, the zoo had difficulties from the shutting off of its supply of animals, as well as in feeding animals, as fishing on the East Coast had been placed under regulations by the U.S. Coast Guard. Substituting sweet potatoes for bananas caused headaches at the zoo for the monkeys, but the shortage of beef was not a problem, as the zoo used horse meat instead. The zoo began to grow its own food, and chimpanzees helped to plant the victory garden. Further, an army of rattlers were mobilized at the zoo to join in war efforts. Their venom was urgently needed for the production of antivenin (anti-snake-bite serum).16

National Zoo The National Zoo in Washington, D.C. was created by an Act of Congress in 1889 and is the only federal zoo in the United States. According to a Washington Post article, the zoo met with strong pressure from citizens in the wake of Pearl Harbor. Residents in the neighborhood of the National Zoo had complained that all those wild animals and snakes would be worse than demolition bombs if

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 151

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM

152


they got loose in an air raid. The world-famous collection of poisonous snakes, the inhabitants of the lion house, and the bears worried nearby residents most. In response, Zoo director William M. Mann stated on December 8, 1941, the day after Pearl Harbor, that a twothousand-dollar collection of prized poisonous snakes faced extermination if the nation’s capital became threatened with immediate attack.17 Then, on January 11, 1942, Mann announced that three king cobras would be destroyed the next spring if the zoo were damaged during an air raid. Mann stated that he had “oiled up the old shotgun and taken other steps to eliminate the snakes and poisonous insects.” He added that there was absolutely no danger at that time (because the snakes would be immobilized in the cold weather should they escape) and that all proper precautions would be taken in the spring. Mann had been constantly harassed with phone calls and letters from worried Washingtonians. Besides Mann oiling his shotgun, park attendants at the zoo were observing all blackout precautions and had equipped the grounds with a chemical fire spray, sand, shovels, and other air-raid necessities.18 By March 1942, news correspondent Jack Stinnett reported that without making any announcements to alleviate the neighborhood’s fears, Mann had taken some precautions. He had traded off the zoo’s most venomous snakes, such as cobras, rattlesnakes, and vipers in order to prevent their escape in case of a bomb attack on the nation’s capital. According to zoo reptile curator James B. Murphy, the zoo’s 1942 annual report mentions that the majority of the venomous snakes were removed from the collection; however, it neither states that they were sent to other zoos nor how they were removed. But the arrival of a pair of Scottish highland cattle, a pair of spider monkeys (natives of South America), and other animals from “the New York Zoo” at the National Zoo in February 1942 indicated that Mann had engineered a trade to save the venomous snakes from being put to death. The zoo’s pythons and other nonvenomous snakes were exempt from the trade.19 In addition, the zoo was blacked out from dust to dawn. Stinnett reported that the “keepers and watchmen were equipped with guns that would stop anything from a guinea hen to a bull elephant. Any bomb close enough to blast open stone walls and iron bars that held the animals inside would leave the more dangerous animals in no condition to attack anyone.” Stinnett felt that probably the worst thing that could happen to the keepers would be for the monkeys to get loose. They are hard to catch.20

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 152

10/8/2010 7:42:41 AM


153

Detroit Zoo In the Midwest, the war affected Detroit Zoo in many ways. In order to allay the concerns of government officials and the public about the possible escape of its animals in case of enemy air strikes and attacks, the zoo issued a bulletin in early 1942. It stated that its dangerous animals were safely confined in their cages and enclosures. It also stated that in collaboration with the local Office of Civilian Defense, zoo director Frank G. McInnis was authorized to order an air-strike squad to destroy any animals should they become loose. However, the public was in a state of panic and the zoo conducted a number of serious drills in 1943 in order to assuage their fear. The zoo canceled its annual preview for 1942 and 1943, because it seemed out of place. The zoo also curtailed landscape activities and maintenance work, as a number of regular employees were inducted into the armed forces or resigned to enter the war industry. Given the extreme difficulty of procuring temporary seasonal employees, the zoo even obtained permission to employ sixteen-year-old boys, which turned out to be unsuccessful. The zoo discontinued all major improvement programs, and its operation was reduced to simply maintaining the park on a day-to-day basis.21 Eventually, fuel oil became scarce and rationed, and all buildings using fuel oil were surveyed. Whenever possible, buildings were left unheated. In the 1942 winter a significant percentage of the administration building was without heat. Fuel oil rationing continued to be a problem approaching crisis dimensions, and in many cases, coal-burning stoves were installed. The zoo also constructed a victory garden to show the basic principles of beauty and utility of this government-encouraged activity for the purpose of alleviating wartime shortages of food in the civilian populace. In reality, however, the produce from the garden, primarily carrots and cabbages, were fed to the animals during the wartime rationing. The cost of feeding the animals sharply escalated and acting zoo director John T. Millen reduced the number of certain types of animals on exhibition. However, even with this restriction it became exceedingly difficult to keep within its budget limits. Further, due to wartime shortages, it became at times impossible to produce certain types of food. The day-to-day feeding was a “catch as catch can” operation, with many substitutions for the animals’ normal feed being made.22 Another effect of the war on the zoo was a serious increase in juvenile vandalism, attributed to the effects of the war on the social

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 153

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM

154


structures of the country, which was occurring to an alarming degree during the 1942 season. As a result, Millen and zoological park commissioner Ivan Ludington were authorized to take legal remedies to correct the situation. Also, legislation was enacted to provide penalties to assist in the prevention of similar occurrences in the future. Nevertheless, a wave of juvenile vandalism continued. Consequently, Huntington Woods City deputized five zoo staff members as special police officers to make arrests within the park and to file the complaints when deliberate destruction of property and other offenses were committed by youngsters in the park.23

Lincoln Park Zoo Meanwhile, the potential for a massive problem loomed large for Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago in February 1942. Director Floyd S. Young was facing the possibility that an air strike could decimate the zoo, setting its inhabitants free to run through the streets. Many who lived near the zoo might have nightmares about lions and tigers coming to their doorsteps. In order to alleviate the public’s concerns, Young reassured Chicagoans by stating that “they would be safe if the animals escaped because most of the animals would be more frightened of the bombings than the people” and that the zoo had an arsenal of rifles in readiness and would shoot the animals as a last resort. Young went so far as to state, “Baboons and other fierce muscular primates would better be shot dead than risk their getting loose in a war-stricken city.” This aroused the public’s concern about the fate of the animals, putting them in a dilemma. Newspaper articles anthropomorphizing zoo animals in order to appeal to public sentiment intensified this concern. However, the zoo never actually had to shoot any of its animals.24 A significant consequence of the war for the zoo was that the Chicago Park District opened one hundred jobs to women for the first time in its history in 1942 in order to fill the wartime labor shortage. The job descriptions included animal keeper, garage attendant, gardener, stationary engineer, and traffic analyst. This was an unprecedented move because zoo work had been men’s work until then. The park district kept its promise that women would receive the same pay and benefits as their male counterparts but only until the men returned and reclaimed their prewar jobs. The district did not object to women who were willing to work at the zoo as “volunteers” afterward.25

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 154

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM


155

Brookfield Zoo Brookfield Zoo, in a western suburb of Chicago, was no exception in suffering the loss of keepers to the war effort. It further depressed morale, which had been down already at the zoo due to the drop in attendance and revenue. Unlike the other zoo in Chicago, Lincoln Park Zoo, which was then run by tax levy (park district) with no admission charge, the newer Brookfield Zoo was (and still is) run by a nonprofit organization and depended on the gate and concession revenues. Many experienced keepers left to join the military or to find higher-paying jobs in the war industry, as there were artillery shell factories and other war-related jobs in neighboring communities. Zoo director Edward Bean and the trustees tried to keep up by continuously raising pay scales, but they could not keep pace. Bean reported that in the three years after July 1941, when the first keeper left the zoo to enter military service, the zoo hired fifty-one people. Some stayed a year and others only a few hours. “Most of the new employees did not know a hawk from a handsaw when they came and many did not when they left.”26 Consequently, the zoo priority was reduced to sheer maintenance and existence, rather than growth and improvement. The zoo sold “excess animals” in 1943 in its effort to decrease the amount of food and keepers. Even a pair of hippopotami, a pair of giraffes, five black bears, thirty baboons, and one wildebeest, were put on sale. However, the practice of selling animals, common in zoos then, was soon discontinued except to properly accredited and responsible organizations. The zoo closed its small mammal house in 1943 due to the difficulty in securing and retaining keepers.27 Tire restrictions and gasoline rationing did not help the attendance problem, as many school group visits were eliminated. The children’s polio epidemic that hit Chicago in 1943 further discouraged parents and schools from bringing their children to a public place. The scrap-rubber drive even hit the gorilla house in July 1942 when three ancient tires that the three gorillas toyed with for their diversion were removed from their cage while they slept. A private citizen even wrote a letter to the government, suggesting that the zoo dismantle its cages and donate the scrap metal to the war effort. In order to deal with the animal feed shortage, the zoo made maximum use of its twenty-three-acre farm in the compounds. It produced 110 tons of green fodder, 13 tons of soybean hay, 12 tons of corn fodder, and 4.5 tons of pumpkins in 1943, contributing to attaining self-sufficiency. Thus, while the zoo could no longer give bananas to

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 155

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM

156


the monkeys, substituting sweet potatoes instead, the health of the animals was not impaired. Not knowing how long the war would last, the zoo’s board of trustees set aside a contingency fund, which grew to nearly five hundred thousand dollars, a testimony to the board’s frugality and careful planning.28

Washington Park Zoo Elsewhere, Washington Park Zoo in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, announced on December 19, 1941 that all carnivores would be destroyed in the event an actual bombing was threatened. Zoo authorities studied the possibility of sheltering other animals in case of an air attack.29

Vilas Park Zoo At Vilas Park Zoo in Madison, Wisconsin, director Fred Winkelmann declared on December 28, 1941 that beasts would not run at large at the zoo. “You’re walking along the capitol square in the midst of a blackout and aerial bombardment. Suddenly you run right smack into a lion or a tiger or some other jungle beast whose acquaintance you have previously made in Vilas Park Zoo. ‘Don’t be scared.’ ” Those are the words of Winkelmann, who says, “The lion or the tiger or what have you will probably be more frightened at your appearance than you will be at his. For[,] like the Boy Scouts, the motto of zoo directors here and other American cities is ‘Be Prepared.’ ”30 Winkelmann also announced that results of the New York study (at Bronx Zoo) were passed on to other zoos throughout the country, and he might adopt the good points. He declared that a real live lion, fresh out of the blitzkrieged Vilas Park Zoo, would undoubtedly never even reach Regent Street much less the capitol square. Winkelmann said, “It’s hardly likely that any animal would ever escape alive from a bombed cage, and if one should—well, we have among our employees out here at the zoo more good marks-men than anywhere else in the city.”31

Omaha Zoo As noted earlier, there were few documented cases of mammals being destroyed in zoos in the United States during World War II. Nevertheless, according to Erik Trump at Saginaw Valley State University in Michigan, Omaha Zoo, in Nebraska, killed several lions in 1942 because of the meat shortage.32

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 156

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM


157

Cheyenne Mountain Zoo In the west, the most serious wartime problem at Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs, Colorado, was the general labor shortage. Again and again the executive committee minutes note that there was a “long discussion on wages.” From December 1941 until August 1946, the committee raised the wages of some or all of the zoo employees an average of 10 percent six different times. Undoubtedly, these raises held the turnover down somewhat; however, they did not solve the problem. Such an institution as the zoo could not hope to compete with the drafting of men by the armed services or the lure of government or industrial jobs for those not eligible for the draft. In October 1942 Superintendent Herbert E. Wallace resigned to take a government job and head keeper Henry L. Bourne became acting superintendent for about two months until he, too, was drafted.33 George Manzer was hired as superintendent in mid-December 1942 to replace Bourne. Then a new head keeper left two months later. Manzer remained throughout the war, but there was a constant coming and going of keepers and general laborers, with a special crisis in September 1943. The very low wages being paid at the zoo at the beginning of the war proved to be a decided disadvantage when wage stabilization went into effect. Trustee board chairman Robert Menary had to apply to the Regional War Labor Board for permission to raise salaries, which he received. Since the zoo was not an establishment that could be shut down and simply opened up again, the necessary effort was made to keep it going fairly well. The two main factors in keeping the zoo alive during the war were the diligent interest of the executive committee and the assumption by Menary himself of more and more of the necessary work.34 A secondary problem, less serious than the labor shortage but still one that required constant attention, was the scarcity and cost of most animal food. “While few animals went to bed without their suppers, their rations were reduced in amount, substitutes were often used, and favorite delicacies were not obtainable.” Even if animals could have been imported, which was impossible in wartime, few would have been purchased because of the feeding problem. The only acquisition of any importance during the war years was a pair of blackfooted penguins, the first at the zoo, purchased from Louis Ruhe in May 1942, for $250, very likely a prewar order. On the other hand, a number of animals were sold, especially monkeys. In June 1943 three Sumatran tiger cubs born at the zoo were sold for $500, the largest

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 157

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM

158


single amount the zoo had received from the sale of animals up to that date.35 The “largest casualty of the war” for the zoo was an elephant, Shirley Temple. The continued turnover of keepers and inexperienced care affected Shirley’s disposition and she was “getting out of hand.” The zoo sold her to Arthur Brothers Circus in the fall of 1943, for twenty-five hundred dollars, with the purchaser paying for her transportation. The money was to be earmarked specifically to buy another elephant when conditions became normal. The zoo was without an elephant, a fact remarked upon with disfavor and some amazement by visitors, for the next five years. Other animals sold during these years included a Siberian tiger, an old llama, and other miscellaneous specimens. The war, as it did to all cultural and scientific institutions, marked a turning point in the fortunes of the zoo. The trustees could have easily abandoned the zoo during the war years; however, so far as is known, they never even contemplated such a step, and the zoo survived the war.36

Woodland Park Zoo Perceiving the threat of Japanese air strikes as real in the wake of Pearl Harbor, cities on the West Coast had zoos draw up contingency plans to prevent the escape of dangerous animals. These measures affected the collections and raised the possibility of more serious consequences. For example, according to Erik Trump, Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle disposed of all its venomous snakes, presumably giving them to other zoos. The zoo also de-antlered its male deer. Zoo director Gus Knudson sent keepers instructions about how to secure the animals in the case of a bombing attack. He wrote that dangerous animals could be put down with one of the zoo’s three firearms should the need arise. Knudson also warned his keepers to be on the lookout for marauders or parachute troops with machine guns. Even enemy spies were a potential danger. He instructed all keepers to keep a watchful eye on suspicious characters who might try to poison the animals or set fire to the buildings.37 When suggestions were made to reserve all hay for cattle in the state of Washington, Knudson indignantly defended the patriotic value of feeding the zoo elephant, named Wide Awake. The zoo had purchased him with donations from Seattle’s children, who were then grown and serving in the military. Knudson asked, “How would they like it when they come home to learn we have shot their elephant?”38

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 158

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM


159

San Diego Zoo The death of the San Diego Zoological Society’s first president, Harry Wegeforth, in July 1941 foreshadowed the war era at San Diego Zoo. Then, in March 1942, a sixteen-year-old gorilla, Mbongo, brought by the famed Martin and Osa Johnson from the Belgium Congo, died from a fungus, Coccidioides immitis, which destroyed his lungs and other organs. In February 1943 noted animal trainer Richard Havemann died of wounds inflicted by a three-year-old Himalayan black bear that he had trained from a cub. “Havemann received the fatal wounds when he interceded to protect a carpenter from the attack of the frightened bear.” By early 1943 the zoo had adjusted itself well to the exigencies of wartime operation. Answering the government’s call to attain food self-sufficiency, the zoo set up several victory gardens under the direction of grounds superintendent Milton Leeper. “Alfalfa was grown for birds, Swiss chard for emus, and carrots and sweet corn for gorillas and other mammals. Peanuts, sweet potatoes, and other staple vegetables were also harvested as a major part of the zoo menu.”39 The zoo contributed to the war effort, providing amusement and instruction to the hundreds of thousands of military personnel training in and in transit through San Diego. However, gasoline and tire rationing threatened the zoo’s educational program for children, placing zoo buses in garages for some time. “Zoo Educational Department Chairman Lena Crouse decided that if school children could not come to the zoo, she would take the zoo to the children. She did so, with a collection of hundreds of colored slides of zoo animals and birds.” Meanwhile, the war brought its compensations by way of American GI’s bringing exotic animals home from all over the world, including a wallaby from Australia. “Another compensation of the war was the induction of the female into the last citadel of men-only animal keepers.” A veteran of animal show work, Georgia Dittoe, signed up to fill the man shortage and took over twenty cages of animals.40 Annual attendance wavered between five hundred thousand and six hundred thousand through most of the war, hampered by tire and gas rationing, but increased by the hundreds of military personnel brought in groups to visit the zoo by their officers. Though the war crippled the market for surplus zoo specimens, thus decreasing one type of income, the increasing paid attendance made the zoo budget equal to rising food costs and expenses. The zoo made a shift in emphasis, which typified the war problems. Two horses that had

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 159

10/8/2010 7:42:42 AM

160


been marked for slaughter and feed were reprieved to pull a plow in the victory garden. The necessity for economy in food and manpower during war operation led to a gradual decrease in the number of specimens on exhibit at the zoo. By June 1943 there were 653 mammals, 1,407 birds, and 556 reptiles, totaling 2,616 specimens, intentionally the smallest inventory in several years. In January 1944 Mbongo’s companion, Ngagi, died of coronary thrombosis. With the birth of a male giraffe, named “D-Day,” in June 1944, the zoo celebrated the Allied forces’ launching the historic invasion of the European continent.41 The San Diego Zoo history written by Wegeforth and Morgan (1969) does not mention any contingency plans of the zoo during World War II. The only relevant passage concerns the postwar-era calls from zoos in Europe for help in reestablishing their collections. The zoo was able to answer an S.O.S. from London Zoo for reptiles to refill their war-emptied snake pits. San Diego youths also helped answer the call by bringing in native snakes, which were shipped to London along with specimens from the zoo.42 A newspaper archive search did not yield any relevant articles on war contingency plans at the zoo. However, San Diego Zoo was the only zoo in the United States that has promptly responded to this author’s inquiry. Zoo public relations administrator Christina Simmons replied that their records do not mention any animal evacuations related to the war and that the zoo continued to operate normally. She also stated that the zoo became a bivouac for soldiers preparing for deployment. The zoo essentially found itself in the middle of a military boot camp. Their tradition of offering free admission to all military personnel began at that time. As the war progressed, these soldiers brought animals from their deployment back to the zoo. She adds that the zoo was very much affected by rationing and shortage of personnel. The zoo maintained a liberty garden in Mission Valley to grow food for the animals and also, for the first time, hired women as animal care staff.43 Shinju-wan Bei mo dōbutsu koroshikeri (After Pearl Harbor, the U.S. zoos also destroyed their animals) —December 7, 2009, the 68th anniversary of Pearl Harbor

9780230108943_09_ch08.indd 160

10/8/2010 7:42:43 AM

CH A P T ER

9

Zoos in Japan in the Early Postwar Years

World War II caused unsalvageable damage not only to humans but also to animals. In the early postwar years, zoos in Germany and Japan especially lagged behind in reconstruction and rehabilitation. Reconstruction of zoos in Germany was slow because many of them were physically demolished, along with their animals, by air raids and ground battles. Recovery of zoos in Japan was slow because almost all the showpiece animals had been destroyed and many of the other animals had died due to malnutrition and cold. Emperor Hirohito’s acceptance of unconditional surrender on August 15, 1945, asking his subjects to “to bear the unbearable and to endure the unendurable,” shocked the Japanese, because they had been led to believe that they were winning the war. Japan was totally devastated. Major cities throughout the country, from Aomori in the north to Kagoshima to the south, were in ruins with U.S. air strikes, as well as two atomic bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Millions of people in the war-torn cities had lost homes and were starving to death. Zoos’ compounds were turned into farms, growing potatoes and vegetables for human consumption. Ironically, there was little damage to dangerous animal facilities, and these facilities became chicken coops and pigsties to relieve the hunger of the people. With the disposal of the dangerous animals, few popular animals remained in zoos in Japan. When the war ended, only three elephants (soon to be reduced to two), four giraffes (soon to be reduced to three), and one chimpanzee were alive in Japan. Severe postwar feed shortages took a further toll on the zoo animals that had survived the war. People were consumed with their own survival, and few people visited zoos.1

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 161

10/8/2010 7:41:32 AM

162


Occupation of Japan Japan lost its sovereignty. The U.S. occupation forces, led by the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers (SCAP), General Douglas MacArthur, took charge of administering Japan in September 1945. The SCAP took over the Daiichi-seimei (a life insurance company) Building in Tokyo, overlooking the Imperial Palace. The SCAP General Headquarters (GHQ) was dominated by American New Dealers from the time of the Roosevelt administration. They came to Japan with the mission to “reinvent Japan” by installing drastic democratic reforms in all aspects of Japanese systems, including political, economic, and social, as well as demobilizing the Imperial Japanese Army. The New Dealers’s ambitious undertaking went too far, to the extent that they collaborated with Japanese communists, as they shared the same goal of democratization and liberalization of Japan.2 The SCAP-GHQ enforced the breakup of Japanese zaibatsu, such as Mitsubishi, Mitsui, Sumitomo, and Yasuda (the Big Four). It also implemented a sweeping “purge” of countless Japanese politicians and bureaucrats who had been thought to have any involvement with the wartime regime, referred to as the “Purge from Public Offices.” This meant pretty much everyone in the government and bureaucracy, even including the smallest village firefighters’ squad head. Everyone had cooperated with the war effort in order not to be labeled as a traitor. The exceptions were diehard communists and socialists who had openly opposed the war. Many of them were tortured in prison under the National Security Maintenance Law. The survivors among the antiwar activists were “resurrected” after the war and collaborated with the SCAP-GHQ.3 In this context, a revised election law accorded suffrage to Japanese women for the first time. Female candidates, running on the Japanese Communist Party (JCP) ticket and the Japan Socialist Party (JSP) ticket, were elected to the Japanese parliament for the first time in its history. With the women’s sudden empowerment, they demanded, among many other things, restoration and creation of zoos for the sake of children, contributing to the postwar reconstruction boom of zoos in Japan.4

Postwar Rehabilitation at Ueno Zoo No sooner did Japan sign the formal surrender on September 2, 1945, than U.S. forces occupied the nation’s capital and American

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 162

10/8/2010 7:41:32 AM

ZOOS IN JAPAN IN THE EARLY POSTWAR YEARS

163

soldiers visited Ueno Zoo (they had free passes), bringing back a cheerful atmosphere to the zoo. Ueno Zoo director Koga Tadamichi was released from service at the IJA Veterinary School in September 1945 and resumed his position at the zoo in October 1945. In contrast to the rest of the city, which was totally burned down by U.S. B-29 air raids, there was no major damage to the zoo, except for the elephant house. The number of zoo animals had been reduced to 340 specimens of 97 species (lowest number), from 1,114 specimens of 328 species in 1940 (highest). Children flocked to the giraffe house because its three giraffes were the only popular large animals the zoo had left.5 Coping with Feed Shortage Koga wrote that, while there were ways to obtain animal feed during the war (although not easy), the zoo could no longer purchase feed after the war. Using his connection with the defunct IJA, Koga procured freight carriers full of wheat bran for military horses. In addition, the zoo’s planning principal engineer (kikaku-shunin), Hayashi Jurō (1912–1986), a graduate of Tokyo Imperial University Science Department, used his “ingenuity” to obtain food for the zoo’s animals. He saw an occupation forces soldier burning leftover food and table scraps in a drum can. At a time when the Japanese would kill for a grain of rice, this soldier’s leftovers included edges of bread and chicken legs used for making soup stock. Hayashi made an arrangement with the soldier in charge so that the zoo could receive the occupation forces’ leftovers, twice a day. The high-calorie diet of American soldiers became essential sources of nutrients for the zoo animals. In fact, the zoo depended on SCAP-GHQ’s commissary for half of its animal feed from 1945 to 1949.6 The keepers who were in charge of collecting the leftovers enjoyed “fringe benefits” as they ran around the city in search of animal feed while enduring their own hunger. Komori Atsushi confessed in 1997 that several keepers, including himself, would have died of malnutrition without the leftovers they had collected from komensu (commissary). The provisions of the occupation forces, however, were hardly enough to feed animals when people were eating pumpkin leaves and wheat bran, which was animal feed in a normal time. In this predicament, Koga asked for donation of pumpkin seeds nationwide in exchange for free admission to the zoo. With the newspaper article titled “One Adult Admission for Two Cups of Dried Pumpkin Seeds,” people flocked to the zoo, carrying bags of pumpkin seeds. Pumpkin

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 163

10/8/2010 7:41:32 AM

164


seeds became essential sources of nutrients to sustain monkeys and other animals until 1955.7 Reinstallation of Zoo Animals Koga gradually reinstalled large animals, beginning with a Japanese black bear in 1946. Nevertheless, the SCAP-GHQ considered importing carnivores outrageous when Japan had to import food for people. After years of negotiations, Koga obtained permission from General MacArthur to exchange animals between Ueno Zoo and Hogle Zoo in Salt Lake City, Utah, in 1949. There was a reason why this zoo, among many larger zoos in the United States, agreed to donate its animals to Japan. The Japanese and Japanese-Americans on the West Coast were considered enemy aliens during the war and suffered persecution and damage from the U.S. government, such as arrests, property seizures, and forcible relocation. They were interned in makeshift relocation camps (mostly horse stables), and many were sent to the Salt Lake City area. The local communities, dominated by Mormons, treated the internees well, and some of the internees stayed there after the war. In appreciation, Japanese volunteers, with the help of Japanese corporations, sent two pairs of enormous Japanese stone lanterns to Salt Lake City in 1947 to commemorate the centennial of the city’s foundation.8 In this context, Salt Lake City mayor Earl J. Glade (first elected mayor there in 1944; 1885–1966) wrote to SCAP General MacArthur, asking for permission for the exchange. Therefore, the donation from Hogle Zoo was the fruit of friendship, forged by local residents of Salt Lake City and Japanese and Japanese-American internees there during the war. The first postwar shipment of animals abroad arrived at Ueno Zoo in April 1949, consisting of four mud turtles and four box turtles. This was followed by the shipment of two female lions, a pair of pumas, a pair of coyotes, a pair of striped skunks, and two macaws in June 1949, which were distributed to some of the twelve operating zoos in Japan at that time. Ueno Zoo received a lion, a puma, a coyote, and a skunk. Higashiyama Zoo received a lion in July. Japanese zoos sent their indigenous animals to Hogle Zoo in return.9

Japanese “Hundred Flowers Movement” As New Dealers in the SCAP-GHQ engineered the sweeping political reforms in Japan, democracy flourished in Japanese society. It was a rebound to the totalitarian wartime regime. All of a sudden,

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 164

10/8/2010 7:41:32 AM


165

women’s suffrage was accorded and female politicians were massproduced. Everybody spoke out, including children, and some even advocated the abolition of the imperial system. Nevertheless, this burst of freedom of expression was short-lived (as was true for the case of the Hundred Flowers Movement in China in the late 1950s) and was soon replaced by a “reverse course.” In this liberal atmosphere, President Ōhata Toshiki and Vice President Atsuta Naoko (both seventh graders) of the Children’s Congress of Taitō-ward, where Ueno Zoo was located, submitted an unprecedented request to the House of Councillors (HC, the nominal upper house of the Japanese parliament, similar to the House of Lords in the British parliament) and to the Tokyo government to import Asian elephants in May 1949. Touched by the children’s initiative, an Asahi-shimbun reporter, Shimura Takeo, in collaboration with the Tokyo government, mobilized a campaign to import an elephant from India in June 1949. However, it was a “mission impossible”; any international trade must be approved by the SCAP-GHQ.10 Japanese Children Move Prime Minister Nehru Trading company Kyōwa Kōekisha (a pseudonym for the Mitsubishi International Corporation that was disbanded as part of the SCAP’s breakup of Japanese zaibatsu) employee Emori Morihisa proposed the idea of importing an elephant to Calcutta Chamber of Commerce merchant N. H. Niyogi, who was a nephew of the Bengali minister of commerce. Niyogi knew Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru personally. The Tokyo government collected 1,500 (815 in the official record) letters from children addressed to Prime Minister Nehru. A seventh grader in Meguro-ward, Segawa Hisae, joined the letter-writing campaign and collected about 50 letters. The reporter Shimura gave all the letters to Niyogi the day he returned to India.11 A member of the group Ryokufū-kai, made up of independents in the HC, Kōra Tomi went out of her way to establish the JapanIndia Association in Tokyo in the absence of the diplomatic relations between the two countries (Japan’s sovereignty was not restored yet). Kōra then delivered a picture captioned, “An imaginary elephant drawn by children who have never seen a live elephant,” to the “unofficial Indian Embassy.” She later broke the “bamboo curtain” and visited China in 1952, twenty years before China and Japan resumed diplomatic relations. The SCAP-GHQ finally gave permission to the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) to

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 165

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM

166


import Asian elephants in July 1949. Touched by the pleas of children, Prime Minister Nehru agreed to donate an elephant to Japan on the condition that Japan assumed the shipment cost, which was $2,000 (or ¥720,000) when the average Japanese annual salary was $76 (¥27,360).12 India had just become independent from England in 1947 and was riven by ethnic and religious conflicts, resulting in the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi in 1948. Nevertheless, Prime Minister Nehru waived war reparations toward Japan and decided to give Japan an elephant as a messenger of peace. Nehru chose an exceptionally “smart” fifteen-year-old female elephant from a southern province, Mysore. She had four toenails each on both the front and hind feet (Asian elephants usually have five toenails on the front feet and four toenails on the hind feet), which was considered a symbol of good luck. She had worked in a logging operation since age twelve, when she was captured, and was well-trained.13 Prime Minister Nehru named the elephant after his daughter, Indira (meaning “goddess of fortune”), and sent her as a gift from the children in India to the children in Japan. His letter dated September 1, 1949 states, “I hope that when the children of India and Japan grow up, they will serve not only their own countries, but also the cause of peace and cooperation all over Asia and the world. So you must look upon Indira as a messenger of affection and goodwill from the children of India . . . The elephant is a noble animal . . . It is wise and patient, strong and yet gentle. I hope all of us will also develop these qualities.”14 Ueno Zoo sent Sugaya Kitsuichirō, who was heartbroken by the loss of three elephants in 1943, to India to escort Indira. Indira’s entourage left Calcutta in late August 1949, but the ship was hit by monsoons and then typhoons, and Indira got seasick. With special permission from the U.S. forces, the ship stopped over near Okinawa Islands to collect fresh food (bananas and coconut leaves) for Indira. The ship arrived at Yokohama port on September 23, the same date as Tonki’s death six years earlier. Sugaya felt that Indira was a reborn Tonki. Fukuda Saburō felt exactly the same.15 Arrival of Gachako Meanwhile, President Noma Shōichi of a major publisher, Kōdansha, was promoting a project to have an elephant sent from Thailand before Indira arrived. Thailand agreed to donate a two-and-half-ayear-old female elephant, Gachako (gacha means “young elephant” in

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 166

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM


167

Thai, and gaja means “elephant” in Sanskrit), to Japan in late August. Gachako arrived at Kobe port on September 2. Shibuya Shinkichi was assigned to go to Kobe to escort Gachako. However, he was not excited about the arrival of Indira and Gachako. Shibuya’s reaction was different from Sugaya’s and that of zoo officials. He was bitter and cynical. After the war, the zoo gradually regained its liveliness. However, Shibuya felt it was selfish of men to have destroyed three elephants during the wartime and then to be elated with the arrival of two others, forgetting what they had done to the three elephants. Shibuya did not want to see elephants anymore. He wrote: “I did not find any significance in this project. But I went to Kobe to receive the elephant only because it was an order. My heart was at the coolest point.”16 Japan National Railways (JNR) under SCAP-GHQ supervision ran a special freight train to transport Gachako from Kobe to Tokyo. Shibuya slept with Gachako in the freight car. Children flocked at every major train station to see Gachako. The station personnel asked Shibuya to make Gachako get off the train even at midnight so that people could have a closer look at her. The elephant was exhausted and “terrified” from a long journey alone. Yet, she was forced to greet the excited public, young and old, at every station. She had diarrhea from stress. Shibuya’s anger came back. He kept asking himself, “Why did my elephants have to be killed?” Thinking of the selfishness of men, Shibuya’s distrust of men grew deeper. After arriving at Shimbashi station in Tokyo, Shibuya had planned to transport Gachako in a truck to Ueno Zoo. However, more than fifty thousand Tokyoites flocked to see Gachako, and Koga was obliged to make Gachako walk on the streets to Ueno Zoo. It was a nerve-racking trek for Gachako and Shibuya. At the zoo, they were surrounded by more people and the mass media.17 Thus, Gachako was the first elephant that arrived in postwar Japan. However, the “tiny” Gachako was soon eclipsed by the arrival of the enormous Indira. Being still a calf, Gachako suffered from cold in the first autumn in Japan, and keepers began heating her indoor facility in October. Japanese children renamed her Hanako after the disposed Hanako (formerly Wangi) from Thailand. All the elephants that came to Japan prior to March 1953 were Asian. Many of them were named Hanako because it was a popular name for girls then (meaning “flower girl”). Also, an elephant’s trunk is called hana (nose) in Japanese.18 Thus, elephants returned to Ueno Zoo after six years of absence. The arrival of the elephants signaled the arrival of peace in Japan.

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 167

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM

168


“Indira Fever” The official presentation ceremony for Indira was conducted in October 1949 with a fanfare, with the attendance of Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru (1878–1967), who was known to dislike reporters and cameras. The zoo officials were concerned whether he would actually show up. Contrary to their misgivings, Prime Minister Yoshida was in a good mood and even joked that “this is the real zō-tei-shiki (elephant-presenting-ceremony [zō means both “elephant” and “present” phonetically in Japanese]).” In return, Ueno Zoo sent a pair of raccoon dogs, a pair of mandarin ducks, a pair of Japanese giant salamanders, and other presents, to Mysore Zoo in southern India.19 The training of Indira to perform, which was an important attraction event at zoos worldwide at that time, began. This turned out to be a herculean task. Although Indira had been trained in India to carry logs for a lumberjack, teaching her to perform shows was a quite different matter. Beside, she was already fifteen years old. Sugaya and Shibuya had to learn commands in Kannada, the local language in Mysore, before the two Indian mahouts who had accompanied Indira left. The four men trained Indira every day, after the zoo was closed and into the night, for two months until November 1949.20 Children’s Zoo and “Monkey Train” Ueno Zoo also opened a children’s zoo for the first time in Japan in April 1948. It also began the “Monkey Train” in October of the same year in order to attract visitors, given the paucity of popular animals among children. The Monkey Train, with a simian conductor carrying children in an open train, became an institution at the zoo (the handle was actually controlled electrically and was safe). Hayashi, the “idea man,” designed this program and supervised the actions of the female crab-eating macaque as the conductor. This popular attraction continued until June 1974 when the zoo accepted criticisms, domestic and foreign, that chaining the crab-eating macaque to the train for over an hour, making it perform as a conductor, ran counter to the fundamental mandate of the Animal Protection and Control Law that Japan had legislated in 1973. At any rate, owing to Koga’s leadership and Hayashi’s creativity, Ueno Zoo recovered in 1951 almost to its wartime peak in 1940, registering 1,196 specimens of 232 species.21

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 168

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM


169

New Contingency Plan during Korean War With the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950, Ueno Zoo drew up a contingency plan in January 1951. This time the plan stipulated that the zoo would evacuate dangerous and expensive animals (two elephants, three lions, two black leopards, two leopards, a tiger, a puma, and a giraffe) to Izu-Ōshima, an island southwest of Tokyo. However, in April 1951 U.S. President Harry Truman dismissed General MacArthur, who had advocated the expansion of the war, and held a truce conference in Kaesong in July (the actual armistice was in July 1953), and the zoo did not have to actually execute its contingency plan this time. Instead, Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty in September 1951 and regained its sovereignty. Its economy began to recover due to the war through the “Korean Special Demand.” Consequently, Ueno Zoo officials quickly forgot about the contingency plan and engaged in preparation for the seventy-year anniversary in 1952.22 Traveling Menagerie In late April 1950 a large caravan carrying eighteen specimens of thirteen species, including Indira, hit the road to tour over a dozen cities. Ueno Zoo embarked on a “traveling menagerie” for the people who could not travel to Tokyo to see Indira. Japanese were demoralized and were in the depths of poverty. They were in dire need of some attraction to brighten their spirits. Director Koga was under pressure to take Indira, a gift from India to Japan (not to Ueno Zoo per se), around the country. He chose to tour the eastern part of Japan because Higashiyama Zoo in central Japan had two elephants (see below). Thus, the troupe, led by former IJA colonel veterinarian Hashio Ichizō, traveled as far north as Hokkaidō on three freight trains. Representing the cosponsor, Asahi-shimbun reporter Shimura was assigned to accompany the troupe. His supervisor told him never to let Indira die at the cost of Shimura’s own life. He said, “There are many people who could replace you, but there is no replacement for Indira.”23 On the night of departure, Indira was to leave the zoo on foot for the nearby JNR station. Sensing the tense atmosphere, Indira became nervous. Then, out in the street, Indira suddenly screamed and bolted. The headlights of a truck had frightened her. Shimura ran and banged on the door of a closed sweet shop and bought some caramel candies. When Sugaya gave Indira the caramels, she finally calmed down. Then, at the railway station, Indira refused to get into

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 169

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM

170


the freight car. Sugaya and Shibuya hit Indira with an ankus. Her rump began bleeding, but they kept hitting her. She screamed each time, but they kept hitting her until she gave up. They had to show her who was in charge. Once they stopped demonstrating their authority, she would stop listening to them. Shimura learned the iron rule that men should not make any compromises in order for men and captive wild animals to coexist. It was a solemn lesson for Shimura, who had known nothing about elephants before.24 When they got off the train at the first destination, Shizuoka, west of Tokyo, Suyaga and Shibuya were covered with Indira’s feces. She kept having diarrhea due to distress. Shibuya told Shimura, “I knew this would happen. There are no more nervous animals than elephants.” In fact, Shibuya had turned down this assignment when Koga had asked him, because he knew it would impose unreasonable demands on Indira and the men. On the second stop, in Kōfu, the local police had notified the packhorse drivers to cover the horses’ faces when they encountered Indira’s procession in order that she not scare the horses. It was a comical sight to see horses’ faces covered with the drivers’ aprons during Indira’s procession. Indira, however, turned in the opposite direction when Kōfu City Zoo director Kobayashi Shōkichi rode on her back. People behind Indira panicked and fell like dominos, causing many injuries.25 On the third stop, in Matsumoto, Indira refused to cross the mud bridge in Matsumoto Castle. Sugaya and Shibuya encouraged her to cross the bridge by adding extra soil at every step as she proceeded. Then Indira fell ill and suffered indigestion and constipation. Local people kept treating her with special feasts. The supervisor’s order, “Never let Indira die,” reverberated in Shimura’s head. After a oneday break, Indira participated in a sweets-eating contest. Strangely, she refused to eat a certain sweet bun, her favorite food. It turned out that the buns had been made with saccharine instead of sugar. In the next stop, Nagano, Indira entered a soba-eating contest, for which people bet how many servings of the buckwheat noodles Indira would eat. She finished thirty servings. Afterward, the staff decided to stop the eating contests in order not to make Indira sick again.26 Indira continued to receive an enthusiastic welcome at each destination. In the end, the troupe covered twenty-two hundred miles, visiting seventeen cities. A total of 4,025,823 (2,386,902 in the official record) people paid admission to come to see the traveling menagerie. Shibuya later told Shimura, “It was a miracle that there was no fatal accident during the trip. It was possible only because of Indira. There

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 170

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM


171

was no elephant like Indira, before or after.” Indira made a triumphant return to Ueno Zoo in September 1950.27 Indira’s Death In October 1957 Prime Minister Nehru made a state visit to Japan, accompanying his daughter, Indira. The first thing the prime minister wanted to see in Japan was his daughter’s namesake, Indira the elephant. His visit to Ueno Zoo highlighted the media coverage, being hailed as a symbol of friendship between India and Japan. Later, former Prime Minister Yoshida visited the zoo at the tenth anniversary of Indira’s arrival in 1959, accompanying his daughter, Asō Kazuko. He joked, “I wanted to name the Ezo brown bear, the Japanese gift to India, ‘Kazuko,’ following Prime Minister Nehru’s precedent. But my daughter refused, because she did not like the bear very much.” Yoshida became the third president of the Tokyo Zoological Park Society in July 1964 when the second president, Takasaki Tatsunosuke, passed away (see chapter 6). Yoshida assumed the position until his death in October 1967.28 In March 1967 Indira was injured and broke her leg when she had a fight with a younger female elephant, Jumbo (purchased with a part of the revenue of the traveling menagerie), and Jumbo pushed Indira down into the concrete moat. Indira could not climb out of the ninefoot-deep moat by herself while Jumbo was overlooking her. Indira instead climbed up the iron fence on the spectator’s side, anchoring her trunk on the fence. With Indira out past the fence, the spectators panicked. Indira was not herself either. The noise from the mass media’s helicopter added to the panic. The police could not handle Indira. In desperation, the zoo called the principal elephant keeper, Ochiai Seigo, who had been hospitalized with stomach cancer. Ochiai dashed to the zoo in hospital garb and gave Indira commands with an ankus. Indira followed Ochiai to her quarters. Ochiai died eight days later.29 After the injury, Indira refused to lie down to sleep (elephants will not lie down when they know they can no longer get up). This incident triggered the decline of Indira’s health. In the wild, it would have been fatal. Then she fell down while she was sleeping. After that she slept leaning against a wall. With the arrival of a pair of giant pandas, Kang Kang and Lan Lan, in October 1972, after the resumption of Sino-Japanese diplomatic relations a month earlier, Indira lost her star status. She died in August 1983 at the age of forty-nine. Indira was a “messenger of peace” and had watched the Japanese recovery

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 171

10/8/2010 7:41:33 AM

172


for over three decades. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi sent a message of condolence. She then sent two young female elephants to Japan in September 1984. She was assassinated a month later. In 1995 Indira the elephant’s skeleton was reconstructed and was exhibited at the National Museum of Nature and Science in Ueno.30 Jumbo Kills Her Keeper Meanwhile, in August 1974, a thirty-year-old female elephant, Jumbo, killed her young keeper at Ueno Zoo. Apparently she was just trying to play with him. Shibuya states that the job of elephant keeper is considered dangerous even for veteran keepers. When he was transferred to the elephant house from the giraffe house, he was terrified. Elephants are extremely alert and will test the new keeper’s ability by deliberately pushing him to the wall. They will learn immediately if he is capable of handling them. The first rule Shibuya was taught was not to disturb elephants while they are eating and drinking. They become irritated if they are disturbed while feeding and will throw the keeper out with their trunk. Two keepers lost their lives while trying to help feeding elephants in zoos in the Kansai region.31

Inokashira Park Zoo and Hanako II In comparison to Indira, the life of Hanako II (Gachako) was not as glorious. While Indira was majestic and talented, Hanako was too young and small to become a star in the zoo. Hanako was transferred to Inokashira Park Zoo in March 1954. Being separated from her “big sister” (Indira), Hanako became a solitary elephant. Then misfortunes ensued for Hanako. In June 1956 she killed a drunken man who had snuck into the elephant house at night. She then accidentally killed her keeper in April 1960. Hanako had been chained by the front legs, whereas elephants at Ueno Zoo and Tama Zoo (see below) were chained by the hind legs. While the keeper was feeding Hanako, he was entangled in the chain and fell. Hanako was startled and accidentally stepped on him. The reporter Shimura felt that Hanako’s tragedy began when she was separated from Indira. Hanako was young and shy, yet she did not have any “playmate” at Inokashira Park Zoo.32 Afterward, visitors yelled at Hanako, “killer elephant” and “murderer.” They demanded her death and threw stones at her. Hanako was depressed and lost weight to become skin and bones. She lost all her upper teeth from stress and malnutrition. A veteran keeper at Tama Zoo, Yamakawa Seizō, was sent for to rescue her. Yamakawa

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 172

10/8/2010 7:41:34 AM


173

cut potatoes and carrots into small pieces (it took two hours) and fed Hanako with them every day. He stroked her and talked to her every day. It took Yamakawa six years to make Hanako regain confidence enough to walk in front of the spectators again. After his retirement, Yamakawa never visited the zoo so that Hanako could get used to the new keeper. He died five years later.33 Another keeper, Kanai Kinsaku, who looked after Hanako for twenty-four years along with Yamakawa, states: “Of all the animals I had dealt with, elephants are the most difficult. Elephants are extremely alert and sensitive. Whenever airplanes flew or thunder roared, Hanako was frightened, moving around restlessly, raising her trunk. That was very dangerous to people. Elephants are also observant and memorize other animals and people by the smell and voice. When I had arguments with my wife, Hanako sensed my mood immediately and refused to listen to me. Therefore, I had to maintain a calm state of mind in order to handle Hanako. By so doing, Hanako saved my marriage.” Currently, Yamakawa’s son, Kōji, looks after Hanako. When Umeko at Odawara Castle Ruins Park Zoo died in September 2009, at the age of sixty-five, Hanako, at sixty-two, became the oldest elephant in Japan.34

Recovery Stage of Ueno Zoo In November 1950 Emperor Hirohito and Empress Nagako visited Ueno Zoo for the first time in the postwar era, boosting the morale of the zoo staff. In June 1951 director Koga attended the sixth general meeting of the International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens (IUDZG) in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and was accepted as a member. This happened before Japan was admitted to the United Nations in 1956. Koga advocated his motto, “zoo is peace” (meaning zoos cannot prosper without peace) at international meetings.35 In Emperor Hirohito’s second postwar visit, in April 1956, a chimpanzee, Susie, got off her bicycle and stretched out her hand toward the emperor after her public performance in his presence. The emperor at first seemed bewildered but shook hands with Susie. Actually, Susie did not stretch out her hand in order to shake hands with the emperor. It was Susie’s routine reward after her show to stretch out her hand to ask for ¥10 (a dime) from a staff member, and then buy a snack at a kiosk, return the change to the staff member, and eat the snack. The emperor never knew Susie’s real motive when she stretched out her hand toward him. This unscripted scene became the news scoop of the day.36

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 173

10/8/2010 7:41:34 AM

174


Expansion Stage of Ueno Zoo Ueno Zoo celebrated its seventy-year anniversary in March–May 1952, marking the end of the postwar recovery stage and ushering in the expansion stage of the zoo. As one of the main attractions, the zoo invited American lion show trainer Dick Clemens and his eight lions. In addition, the zoo sent Hayashi to the British Colony Kenya in September 1951 for two months to collect “star animals” for the occasion. However, he encountered multiple difficulties there. The shipment of animals was impossible, as British soldiers were being transferred from Kenya to Korea as part of the United Nations Army in the Korean War. Hayashi’s visa expired, and he had to extend his visa through the U.S. Consulate-General (Japan had no sovereignty). Then, in February 1952, foot-and-mouth disease spread over Kenya, which required the Carr Hartley Big Game Farm (where Hayashi purchased animals) to quarantine all the animals. Hayashi did not want to return home empty-handed, and he stayed with one of the local Indians after his money ran out.37 When the quarantine was lifted in May 1952, Princess Elizabeth’s sudden departure from Kenya due to the death of her father, King George VI, caused telegram jams, barring Hayashi’s communication with Japan. Despite all of these difficulties, Hayashi left Mombasa in June with forty-eight specimens of an impressive variety of animals, including a black rhinoceros, giraffes, hippopotami, cheetahs, Grant’s zebras, and spotted hyenas. By the time he returned home, Hayashi had lost a considerable amount of weight. Shibuya was in awe of Hayashi’s willpower.38 Nevertheless, when Hayashi and the animals arrived at Yokohama port in July 1952, the anniversary was over with unsatisfactory attendance and revenue. Hayashi became the scapegoat for the financial loss. His over-budget and overextended trip irked Tokyo government officials, putting Koga in a bind. Paradoxically, the seventy-year anniversary celebration, the symbol of the zoo’s postwar rehabilitation, as well as the culmination of collaborations between Koga and Hayashi, caused a rift between them. Hayashi became Keepers Section head in November 1952 upon Fukuda’s retirement from the post, and then became zoo director in July 1962 upon Koga’s retirement of the post. However, Hayashi prematurely resigned the post of director in March 1966 because of a traffic accident. Hayashi hit a motorcyclist fatally during his feasibility study trip for a safari park, Fuji Nature Zoo. His innocence was proven

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 174

10/8/2010 7:41:34 AM


175

later, but it was too late. In contrast to Koga’s retirement, which was celebrated with countless accolades and honors, including the National Cultural Decoration, Hayashi’s was unfortunate. Komori writes that the postwar recovery of Ueno Zoo was owed to Koga’s leadership and Hayashi’s creativity. Both Koga and Hayashi died in 1986, less than three months apart.39

Creation of Tama Zoo In order to accommodate the growing need for a larger zoo in the Tokyo metropolitan area, the Tokyo government, with the cooperation of the Keiō Electric Railway, created the “second zoo” on a western hillside of Tokyo. Tama Zoo opened in May 1958. Hayashi became the first director, although his grandiose blueprint for the zoo had been rejected. Shibuya became Keepers Section head. In the Tokyo government hierarchy, Tama Zoo was originally a sub-organization of Ueno Zoo. Then it became an independent institution in August 1964 and continued to grow.40 During the construction of Tama Zoo, Shibuya moved dirt from early in the morning to the late afternoon. He stayed over several nights in a row. The only thing that went home were his clothes full of dirt. Earlier he had stayed many nights at Ueno Zoo, tending sick animals. He also stayed at the zoo for a couple of nights when animals gave births, whereas he did not go to the hospital when his wife was giving birth. Yet, his wife did not complain. He had never heard her say, “Animals are more important to you” or “You love Tonki more than me.” Shibuya believes Hayashi was as bad as himself when it came to ignoring his own family for the sake of the zoo. Shibuya states that the postwar rehabilitation of Ueno Zoo and the success of Tama Zoo was owed to Koga and Hayashi, as well as their wives, who supported them without due recognition.41

Osaka City Zoo In western Japan, the number of animals in Osaka City Zoo was reduced from 2,315 specimens of 299 species in 1940 to 447 specimens of 127 species in September 1945. The popular large animals were gone, and domestic animals occupied the dangerous animal facilities. Peafowl roosted in the lion house while pigs resided in the tiger house and chickens cooped in the bear house. The first postwar winter was another trying time for the animals that had survived the

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 175

10/8/2010 7:41:34 AM

176


war. For instance, eleven remaining red-crowned cranes were reduced to mere skin and bones covered with lice. They died one by one, eventually to become a single crane. Animal feed was scarce, and “cannibalism” among zoo animals became conspicuous. The zoo depended on the leftover food of the occupation forces for five years until 1949. Nevertheless, the zoo’s animal population further declined to 223 specimens of 99 species in August 1946. Due to the lack of materials, the broken cage of the monkey house remained unrepaired, and monkeys enjoyed a free pass in the zoo compounds. Some citizens ridiculed the zoo as being a sei-butsu-en (still-life-garden, a pun on dō-butsu-en, “animated-life-garden,” or zoo), while others called it a chicken farm or a potato garden.42 Postwar Rehabilitation With director Terauchi Shinzō’s discharge from his second tour of duty and return to the zoo in February 1946, Osaka City Zoo engaged in recovery in earnest. The first priority was to increase feed production and repair facilities. The staff also went on field trips to collect wild animals, such as rabbits, boars, foxes, Japanese serows (a goat antelope), and seals. When the general meeting of the Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums resumed in May 1946, zoo directors agreed on the joint procurement of animals from abroad. As a result, Osaka City Zoo acquired two California sea lions in October 1950.43 Meanwhile, when Ueno Zoo acquired its two elephants, children in Osaka also wanted their zoo to have an elephant. The zoo’s negotiation to purchase an elephant from India, however, had failed in 1949. With the assistance of the city mayor and a trade merchant, the zoo succeeded in acquiring a female elephant from Thailand instead. Two-year-old Haruko arrived at the zoo in April 1950 with a record sixty thousand citizens welcoming her at the zoo enthusiastically. She was the first animal from abroad coming to the zoo in the postwar period. People queued up to buy admission tickets at the zoo, and ticket scalpers had a field day. As Haruko’s companion, Thailand also sent a one-year-old female elephant, Yuriko, in June 1950. Because of the “elephant fever,” public attendance at the zoo in 1950 more than doubled from the previous year to 1,570,000. The zoo also acquired a chimpanzee, a lion, a tiger, and a leopard in 1951. The number of animals increased to 1,871 specimens of 227 species in 1959 when it purchased a pair of giraffes. Osaka City Zoo had almost recovered to its prewar level.44

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 176

10/8/2010 7:41:34 AM


177

Kyoto City Zoo Meanwhile, Kyoto City Zoo had only 274 specimens of 72 species in September 1945. Tomoe (the female elephant) and Kōkuku (the male giraffe)—evacuees from Hanshin Park Zoo—had survived the war. However, Kōkoku died in October 1945 and Tomoe died in January 1946, both from malnutrition. The Kyoto basin is known for cold winters, and the freezing days without heat quickened her death. One of three camels also died in October 1945. Then the SCAPGHQ took over the southern part of the zoo’s compounds in April 1946 until May 1952. This obliged the zoo to close temporarily for a month in order to demolish animal facilities and relocate animals.45 Effects of U.S. Occupation Kyoto City Zoo had many architecturally valuable buildings (including seven animal houses and seven facilities) that were a fusion of Japanese culture and Western technology. The zoo staff did their best to preserve important buildings and gardens as much as possible; however, they were demolished. For instance, the zoo employed a total of one thousand man-days and used 110 pounds of dynamite just to demolish the bear house, which was made with reinforced concrete. Yet, the zoo still had to request an extension of the handover date to the SCAP-GHQ until May. In addition, gardens with three hundred venerable trees (the zoo was famous for cherry blossoms) were turned into a parking lot for the occupation forces.46 The only thing the zoo succeeded in saving was the pine tree that had been planted by Emperor Yoshihito (father of Emperor Hirohito) in 1903 at the opening ceremony of the zoo. The zoo staff told the SCAP-GHQ (which had contemplated deposing Emperor Hirohito and abolishing the imperial system altogether) that the pine tree was designated a “natural cultural asset.” Soon the SCAP-GHQ planned to requisition the rest of the zoo. This time, however, the zoo stood up. Zoo officials submitted a plea to cancel the plan in June 1946, even mobilizing schoolchildren. When the GHQ’s military police came to monitor the public attendance at the zoo, the zoo called nearby schools and had children visit the zoo twice in the same day in order to increase the public attendance numbers. The zoo managed to avoid the second requisition.47 Another unfortunate aspect during the occupation was that the zoo became a center for street prostitution for the occupation forces. Soldiers who had free passes visited the zoo, accompanying Japanese

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 177

10/8/2010 7:41:34 AM

178


prostitutes, and engaged in sexual conduct in broad daylight. With part of the premises taken over by the SCAP-GHQ and the number of animals reduced almost to the level of the opening in 1903, it was the lowest period for the zoo. The zoo also suffered from a serious feed shortage worse than in wartime, when it had received some limited rations. In March 1947 the zoo concluded an agreement with the SCAP-GHQ to receive the occupation forces’ leftover food.48 Based on the exchange agreement with Hogle Zoo in Salt Lake City through Ueno Zoo (see above), Kyoto City Zoo sent a pair of Japanese black bears, a pair of Japanese green pheasants (Japan’s national bird), two pairs of raccoon dogs, and a pair of Japanese giant salamanders in January 1950. In return, the zoo received a lion, a puma, and a coyote (all females) from Hogle Zoo in June 1950. The new animals were greeted with a big fanfare with flotillas of flower trucks and buses. Two months later the zoo acquired a female elephant and a pair of pythons from Thailand. Children on summer vacation flocked to the zoo. By the time the SCAPGHQ ended the requisition of the zoo compounds in May 1952, the zoo also had acquired a tiger, a pair of leopards, and three black leopards.49 Other zoos in the Kansai region had been gradually restored, rebuilding animal facilities and acquiring new animals. In addition, Hanshin Park Zoo, which had been closed since April 1943, reopened in April 1950. Kobe City Zoo bought an elephant (at the price of ¥1 million) and a black leopard (¥0.9 million) in September 1950. The zoo moved to a new site in March 1951 and became Kobe City Ōji Zoo. The postwar rehabilitation and revitalization of zoos in the Kansai region took off during the 1950s. With the restoration of zoos, children in the region rejoiced at the coming of peacetime.50

Higashiyama Zoo In central Japan, Higashiyama Zoo in Nagoya was in a shambles when the war ended, also having been used by the IJA regional division. While dangerous animals were shot to death, other animals had died of feed shortage and cold during the winter. Out of 961 specimens of 279 species the zoo had in 1943, only two elephants, a chimpanzee, and twenty-three birds survived the war. Bamboo was the only chimpanzee in Japan, while Eldo and Makani became the only two elephants in Japan after Tomoe died in January 1946 (see above). With this dismal record, Kobe City Ōji Zoo director Yamamoto

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 178

10/8/2010 7:41:35 AM


179

Shizuo hailed the fact that the two elephants had survived through the hardest time at Higashiyama Zoo as “a landmark in Japanese zoo history.”51 Eldo and Makani were alive only because of the extraordinary resolve of director Kitaō Hideichi and his staff, who were inspired by his devotion to the animals. Kitaō, who had resigned the position in June 1945, was summoned to rehabilitate the zoo in October 1945. He was at a loss, standing in the desolate zoo compound. He deeply regretted that he had destroyed the dangerous animals. Kitaō was determined to feed the remaining animals sufficiently so that they would survive the coming winter. Kitaō and only a handful of zoo staff members worked day and night for the reopening of the zoo in March 1946. At the reopening, families flocked to the zoo to see the animals that had endured the war.52 Asai, the “Elephant Man” The elephant keeper, Asai Rikizō, was discharged from his two-anda-half-year service in China in April 1946. Having been posted in Kowloon, north of Hong Kong, Asai escaped from internment in Siberia or death in the South Pacific. On the repatriation ship, many soldiers were dying of an epidemic of cholera. Asai did not think he would return to Japan alive until he saw Mt. Fuji from the ship. Upon arriving at Uraga port, veterans were quarantined and kept on the ship for a month. They were permitted to land only after repeated bathing and generous doses of DDT. Asai then got on the repatriation train and arrived at Nagoya in May. The city was in ruins. His family had rented a room in a house that had escaped fire from the air strikes. Asai stayed in bed for two days, staring at the ceiling, suffering from what is now known as posttraumatic depression syndrome (PTDS).53 Asai had heard of the disposal of animals at Ueno Zoo and Osaka City Zoo before leaving for China in December 1943 and had been resigned to the idea that the elephants at Higashiyama Zoo had also been destroyed. He mustered his courage and asked his mother-inlaw what had happened to the elephants. She told him in a matterof-fact manner, “I hear they are alive,” as if it were a natural thing. Asai jumped up from the futon mattress and headed to the zoo. He saw the backsides of two huge bodies in the elephant house. He knew immediately that they were Eldo and Makani. Although elated with joy, Asai reminded himself not to scare them and called their names gently in a low voice. Hearing the voice, they turned around and

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 179

10/8/2010 7:41:35 AM

180


dashed toward Asai, flapping their ears wide-open (a sign of uneasiness). Asai figured out that the military uniform he was wearing was the problem. The elephants might have had unpleasant experiences with soldiers, because the personnel of the IJA regional division mistreated animals and zoo staff members.54 Having observed the elephants’ reaction, Asai retired to their indoor facility and began eating rice balls while watching the elephants’ moves. They soon calmed down and took the rice balls from Asai with their trunks. Then Asai used an ankus and gave them a command to “sit.” Eldo sat down first and Makani followed. The bond between the man and the two elephants was immediately restored. Asai resumed working at the zoo in June 1946. Taking care of Eldo and Makani, Asaki finally felt the end of the war, appreciating the peace. Afterward, Asai looked after the two elephants day and night. He sometimes woke up when stars in the sky were disappearing, finding his head on top of the elephant’s trunk. Asai was determined to recover the weakened elephants’ health and tried various ways to strengthen them. He took them for a long walk daily. He kept a large Japanese bathtub filled with water at all times so that they could drink water whenever they wanted. Finding spare time, Asai went to flour mills, dragging a wagon, and bought any feed available. Eldo and Makani gradually regained their health.55 Strong Bond of Elephants Eldo and Makani were still the only elephants in Japan in the spring of 1949 when the Children’s Congress of Taitō-ward in Tokyo decided to petition for the loan of an elephant from Higashiyama Zoo. The children were dying to have an elephant at Ueno Zoo. Their enthusiasm escalated to the extent that Tokyo governor Yasui Seiichirō (1891–1962) sent a telegram to Nagoya mayor Tsukamoto Zō (the first popularly elected mayor of Nagoya; 1889–1952), requesting the loan. Director Koga visited Nagoya and delivered the unanimous resolution of the Taitō-ward Children’s Congress to Tsukamoto and Kitaō. Kitaō even received threatening mail from street vendors near Ueno Zoo, saying it was unfair that Tokyo had no elephant and that they would put the elephants at Higashiyama Zoo to sleep unless Kitaō loaned one of them.56 However, Eldo and Makani were in their forties, and it would be physically hard on either of them to be transported to Tokyo. Moreover, they were inseparable. Asai, the “Elephant Man,” strongly opposed separating Eldo and Makani. Through his devoted work,

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 180

10/8/2010 7:41:35 AM


181

Asai observed that Eldo and Makani were like true sisters. When he tried to take one of them out, both of them protested. They obeyed his commands as long as they were together. When a car drove by outside the elephant house (the zoo was surrounded by the scenic Higashiyama Driveway) with a noisy sound of honking, they drew close to each other and huddled together. Kitaō had also witnessed how Eldo and Makani had supported each other during the air raids. Kitaō declined the offer when Koga visited Nagoya in January 1949 asking Kitaō to exchange one of the giraffes at Ueno Zoo with one of the elephants.57 This author also observed in the same Asian elephant house in August 2008 that an elephant in the outdoor yard appeared to be eager to join another elephant in the indoor facility. She just stood in front of the door. Her trunk was touching the door as if she wanted to open the locked door. The zoo management might have felt obligated to show at least one elephant to visitors and left one outside while keeping another indoors in the summer heat. But visitors only saw the elephant’s back. Visitors were scarce besides this author and her daughter until the evening, when the special “Night Zoo” (the event when the zoo was open to the public until 8:00 p.m., instead of the usual closing time of 5:00 p.m.) began. Elephant Train In May 1949, the children in Tokyo did not give up and sent their representatives to Nagoya. Kitaō welcomed them with the utmost hospitality; however, he was determined to protect the well-being of the two elephants and demonstrated the strong bond between them in front of the children (see chapter 1). Kitaō wrote that he could no longer bear the idea of using animals as tools to serve human pleasure. Kitaō nevertheless wanted to realize the children’s wish and conceived of an idea to have children visit the zoo instead of sending an elephant to Tokyo. Mayor Tsukamoto concurred. However, the JNR was controlled by the SCAP-GHQ’s Civil Transportation Section (CTS). It did not allow the JNR to run even a single ad hoc train. The JNR staff in Nagoya and Tokyo repeatedly solicited the CTS and its Railways Transportation Office (RTO) until they obtained the approval. Thus, began the “Elephant Train.” The first chartered Elephant Train left Hikone (between Nagoya and Kyoto) on June 18, 1949, carrying about fourteen hundred children, under the auspices of the JNR, the Japan Travel Bureau, and the Tokyo-nichinichi-shimbun (the present Mainichi-shimbun), bound to Nagoya.58

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 181

10/8/2010 7:41:35 AM

182


The “Elephant-gō” from Tokyo was supposed to run on May 22. However, it was canceled due to difficulties with transportation arrangements. The train instead left Ueno Station at night on June 26, carrying about 1,150 children, and arrived at Nagoya the next morning. That was the sole Elephant Train from Tokyo, because children in Tokyo were simultaneously negotiating to acquire an elephant from India for Ueno Zoo. Meanwhile, private railroad companies, such as the Kinki Nippon Railway (based in Osaka), joined this project. In total, the Elephant Train carried 15,000 children to Nagoya, running through war-torn cities. Eldo and Makani welcomed the children in front of the zoo’s main entrance, waving little flags with their trunks. They carried children on their backs and gave various performances for the children, who were in awe. Eldo and Makani played an invaluable role in brightening the people’s hearts in the dark years of the early postwar era. Kitaō visited the elephants every night, thanking them.59 Eldo and Makani The real world is not a fairy tale. A new assistant keeper was working at the elephant house in addition to Asai in June 1955. Asai was off-duty on June 17. However, the zoo was his family and Asai was in the administration office in the zoo near the elephant house. Zoo staff members heard an unusual noise nearby in the afternoon and dashed to the elephant house. Asai saw the new keeper, who had been feeding Eldo and Makani, in the sewer gutter. He soon realized that they had pushed the keeper into the gutter. Asai carried him into an ambulance car, but he died before arriving at a hospital.60 The two elephants, each weighing four tons, did not accept the new keeper and stomped him to death. The zoo canceled elephant performances and walks in the zoo at once. Asai was devastated. Had he been present with the assistant keeper, the accident might have been avoided. However, the elephants had decided to remove the new keeper before he could establish a bond with them. Asai continued to look after Eldo and Makani until “November 1957” (actually November 1959), when he was transferred to the gorilla house (see below).61 In August 1963 Makani’s legs had swollen, festering from hitting a nail left from outdoor yard-repair work. She was diagnosed with septicemia and could no longer get up. Asai went to the elephant house after his work with gorillas and helped in the care of Makani, cleaning up festering areas, disinfecting her legs, and treating them

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 182

10/8/2010 7:41:35 AM


183

with Vaseline. Soon Eldo developed the same symptoms and lay down by the side of Makani. “Kitaō” (he had actually retired on July 31, 1957 and was succeeded by Kanō Yoshio, director August 1, 1957–March 31, 1964) sanctioned the use of penicillin, costing several million yen, while people were barely making a million yen per year. However, the elephants’ conditions did not improve. From lying on the floor, their skin began to fester. With the help of other staff members, Asai lifted Eldo’s body up and cleaned the festering areas. He also gave them their favorite foods, such as sweet buns, apples, and pears, but he could not help them any longer.62 Makani died in September 1963 at age sixty-six. Eldo followed her “big sister” next month at age fifty-eight. Two days before her death, Eldo, in critical condition, responded to Asai’s call by raising her trunk a little, as if to say good-bye. It was a time when the Japanese were elated in preparing for the Tokyo Summer Olympics of 1964, thinking that the “postwar era” was finally ending. The zoo conducted a funeral service for Eldo and Makani on October 26, 1963. In June 1964 the zoo erected a memorial stone for them. Ever since, the zoo has conducted a memorial service every year in front of the memorial stone on the “memorial day” during the nation’s Animal Week (September 20–26). The zoo also erected a new memorial stone in 1999 in front of the Asian elephant house to commemorate the fifty-year anniversary of the Elephant Train. Eldo and Makani rest in peace side by side in their graveyard in the zoo compound. They lived through the prewar, wartime, and postwar eras in Japan. They gave hope and dreams to the Japanese, who started from scratch to rebuild the nation.63 Asai, the “Gorilla Man” In November 1959 Asai was suddenly removed from his post as the elephant keeper without explanation. He was devastated and depressed at being separated from Eldo and Makani. Asai soon found out why. He was assigned to look after three western lowland gorillas, Gonta (male), Oki (female), and Puppi (female). The young trio had come from Cameroon on September 6, 1959. The zoo bought them for ¥2,720,000 per specimen. Asai disciplined the trio to follow a strict regimen of regular daily routines so that they would follow his instructions and take medicine when they became sick (as was the case when they arrived). That was the initial reason for their training. However, with Asai’s dedication and perseverance, the trio learned more than two dozen routines for performance. The rest was history.

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 183

10/8/2010 7:41:35 AM

184


While the gorilla trio’s show received national media attention, the old “stars” of the zoo, Eldo and Makani, quietly passed away in the fall of 1963.64 An American writer, Emily Hahn, was awestruck with the performance of the three gorillas in 1966. She witnessed the three nearly full-grown “giant apes” walking in single file with their hands on the shoulders of the one ahead, following Asai. She wrote: “I’d never before seen one man on such familiar terms with a trio. Chimpanzees are generally said to be difficult actors after the age of eight, or even six, but gorillas are believed to be difficult at any age. Yet these three went through their paces without any friction at all.” Hahn also observed Asai washing their faces one after the other with a wet towel as they sat in a row. He gave them hats, which they put on. Then they had a tea party at a table. Hahn’s colleagues back in the United States did not believe what she had seen at Higashiyama Zoo. When a documentary film about Higashiyama Zoo was shown at the American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA) meeting in San Diego in 1966, the audience watched the same show Hahn saw in Nagoya. The chairman said, “Those are the biggest chimpanzees I’ve ever seen in my life!”65 *

*

*

Thus, zoos throughout Japan recovered from the wreckage of the war, put behind them their “rehabilitation and reconstruction stage,” as identified by Ueno Zoo’s Komori Atsushi (see chapter 2), and began their “expansion and mushrooming stage” during the 1950s and 1960s. Afterward, Japanese zoos entered the “maturing stage” and have continued to prosper to this day. Ajisai ya yume o hashirase Zō-ressha (The Elephant Train runs alongside hydrangea bushes, carrying dreams for children) —June 18, 2010, the 61st anniversary of the Elephant Train

9780230108943_10_ch09.indd 184

10/8/2010 7:41:36 AM

CH A P T ER

10

Conclusion: Assessment of Japanese Wartime Zoo Policy

Man, when perfected, is the best of animals, but when separated from law and justice, he is the worst of all. —Aristotle (384 B.C.–322 B.C.) The most destructive animal of all, man. —George Adamson (1906–1989), My Pride and Joy

World War II took an unprecedented toll on mankind. More than 60 million people died in the war. About 416,800 American, 382,700 English, 5,533,000 German, and 2,120,000 Japanese military personnel died in action. About 1,700 American, 67,100 English, 840,000 to 2,800,000 German, and 580,000 Japanese civilians were killed during the war. Further, over 671,000 American, 476,000 English, 4,000,000 German, and 4,616,000 Japanese in the military were injured during the war.1 While their physical and psychological wounds inflicted by the war could not be healed by financial compensation alone, Japanese war veterans at least received military pensions and other compensation from the postwar government; in 1953 the Japanese government restored and revised the Military Pension Law that had been suspended by the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers General Headquarters (SCAP-GHQ) in 1946. While countless mothers and wives lost their sons and husbands, these bereaved families eventually received a generous military pension from the government, as the Japan War Bereaved Families Association successfully lobbied the government to enact a series of laws to provide military pensions for them in the 1950s and 1960s. One Japanese woman referred to her

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 185

10/8/2010 10:07:48 AM

186


aged mother-in-law as a “precious income source.” The mother had lost her husband in the war and received a military pension for a bereaved family. While civilian survivors of the war suffered unspeakable pains, both physical and psychological, they too could at least appeal to or sue the government. Some of the civilian war victims, such as the atomic bomb victims and the former “comfort women,” stood up, requesting compensation. The postwar government provided financial compensation to some of the victim groups, albeit belatedly and insufficiently.2 In contrast, zoo and circus animals destroyed during the war had no say in the matter. Nobody represented their interests or stood up for them. They had no recourse to appeal for recompense for what had been done to them. In this sense, they were the most neglected victims of the war. Most of the Japanese zoos that had destroyed their animals held memorial services and erected memorial stones in order to atone for their deaths according to the Buddhist custom. That was all the local governments and zoos did for the animals. Besides, these measures primarily served to relieve the guilt feelings on the part of the people who destroyed the animals, but did little good for the dead animals. As Kyoto City Zoo veterinarian Takizawa Akio noted, these services seem hypocritical (see chapter 4).3 Captive animals are at the mercy of humans. George Adamson wrote, “It is the plain duty of man to guard and to protect what is at his mercy, and at the same time guarantee the survival of creatures which have so much to contribute to his knowledge and pleasure.” Lawrence Anthony, who initiated the Baghdad Zoo Rescue, also states that since humans put wildlife in cages, humans are responsible for their well-being. Further, Vernon N. Kisling Jr. quotes Zoological Society of London president William H. Flower’s (1879–1899) jubilee address to the society published in 1887: “We have a responsibility to our captive animals, brought from their native wilds to minister to our pleasure and instruction.”4 Nevertheless, dangerous animals in Japan during World War II fell to the march of human folly.

U  D  D A  J The Japanese government had zoos destroy dangerous animals during World War II for reasons that are not fully comprehensible. The official pretext was to preempt the possible escape of zoo animals during air raids. However, the disposal took place much earlier than the air strikes on major cities in Japan. Japan had been hit only once

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 186

10/8/2010 10:07:48 AM

CONCLUSION

187

by B-25s in April 1942. This “Doolittle Raid” was basically a bluff, being intended to raise American morale just after Pearl Harbor, as well as to confuse the Japanese mind. No air strikes hit Japan afterward for over two and a half years until November 1944. The Massive Tokyo Air Raids occurred in March 1945. Nevertheless, Ueno Zoo destroyed its animals in August 1943, more than fifteen months before B-29 air strikes on Tokyo began in November 1944. Similarly, the Massive Osaka Araids took place in March 1945. Nevertheless, Osaka City Zoo began destroying its animals in September 1943, almost fifteen months before B-29 air strikes on Osaka began in November 1944. It is true that many European zoos also destroyed their animals. Zoos in the United Kingdom, such as London Zoo and Belfast Zoo, destroyed a number of specimens before and during the Blitz. Zoos in Germany, including Berlin Zoo and Hagenbeck Animal Park, destroyed their animals when they were attacked by the British Royal Air Forces and other Allied Powers’ forces. Nevertheless, to the knowledge of this author, no zoos in Europe destroyed their animals much more than a year in advance before air raids were predicted, notwithstanding the fact that they were at the epicenter of the war. London Zoo began destroying its animals in September 1939, although the Blitz did not begin until a year later. It should be noted, however, that England felt the immediate effects of the war on the European continent when Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, ushering in World War II. Belfast Zoo destroyed its animals in April 1941 during the Belfast Blitz. In contrast, the threat of U.S. air strikes on Japanese territories proper was much less imminent in August 1943 when Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi Shigeo ordered the disposal of dangerous animals at Ueno Zoo. Moreover, this order was extended to all the other zoos throughout Japan and was executed. In addition, to the extent that the information and literature available to this author can attest, none of the authorities in Europe enforced the disposal of zoo animals as systematically as the Japanese government. The decisions in European countries were made primarily by individual zoos, zoological societies, or local authorities. The available documents sporadically suggest that some zoos in Germany and the Netherlands destroyed their animals by the order of the military authorities. However, unlike the Japanese case, the order in Europe was not uniformly enforced throughout the whole country. Meanwhile, many zoos in the United States, such as Bronx Zoo and Philadelphia Zoo, drew up elaborate war contingency plans, including destroying their dangerous animals. However, the implementation

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 187

10/8/2010 10:07:49 AM

188


was at the discretion of the zoo or the zoological society, not the government. In summary, no country conducted as nationwide and systematic a disposal of zoo animals as Japan, where the animal disposal was executed as a national policy. The Japanese Home Ministry uniformly enforced the disposal for all fourteen zoos that were members of JAZGA in August 1943, with the possible (although doubtful) exception of Kōfu City Zoo (see chapter 5). The order was also enforced for twenty-eight circuses affiliated with the Japanese Association of Performing Organizations, as well as for three zoos in Japan’s colonies, all three of which were members of JAZGA. This makes the case of Japanese disposal extraordinary and unique. Possible Alternative Measures That Zoos Could Have Taken As many observers noted, if prevention of animals from escaping during air strikes was the real reason for the disposal, zoos could have taken more practical measures. For instance, the Home Ministry could have instructed zoos to reinforce their cages and/or build bunkers to confine these animals during air raids. Neither measure was that difficult to implement, even in wartime, and would not have cost much. Nevertheless, that was not an option. Why? Akiyama Masami points out that although the government requisitioned all available metal to manufacture military weapons, the facilities of the destroyed animals in Ueno Zoo were left intact. If the Tokyo government could afford to keep the empty iron cages and fences, the zoo could have made safe shelters for animals. Zoos could have done so in 1943, long before U.S. B-29 air strikes began, instead of destroying the animals at that time. This measure not only would have protected citizens from dangerous animals but also would have saved captive animals. However, saving animals was not an option. In addition, before going as far as destroying their animals, zoos could have closed the facilities to the public and thereby minimized the danger that their animals would pose to the general public. Nonetheless, all the zoos were kept open unless and until the Imperial Japanese Army took over their compounds.5 Why? Zoos also could have evacuated their dangerous animals to the countryside or remote islands, where air raids were much less likely. In fact, some zoo directors tried this measure, as a last resort. Ueno Zoo acting director Fukuda Saburō managed to make all the arrangements to transfer the elephant Tonki to Sendai City Zoo. However,

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 188

10/8/2010 10:07:49 AM

CONCLUSION

189

Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi rejected the plan. Kyoto City Zoo evacuated a leopard and a striped hyena to Ritsurin Park Zoo. Kobe City Zoo apparently planned to transfer some of its dangerous animals to Xinjing Zoo in Manchukuo. Higashiyama Zoo director Kitaō Hideichi did succeed in evacuating two of the zoo’s lions by donating them to Zhangjiakou City in China. All of these measures were not unrealistic but were practical measures that zoos in major cities could have taken before air strikes hit those areas. However, Japanese zoos could not take these practical and realistic measures, which would have protected both animals and people. Why? In addition, it should be mentioned that the food shortage was not the reason for the Home Ministry’s decision to destroy dangerous animals in zoos. The ministry was not concerned with the welfare of the animals. Moreover, while zoos suffered from serious feed and fuel shortages, they made every effort to attain feed self-sufficiency during the wartime. In fact, Ueno Zoo director Koga stated that it was after the war in the devastation of the whole Japanese system that attaining feed self-sufficiency became much more difficult and eventually impossible.6

R R  D  A In assessing the disposal of captive animals in zoos and circuses in Japan, the most important aspect to keep in mind is that the decision was made by the Home Ministry, not by the military establishment as is generally thought. This decision was made by the political institution rather than by the military establishment. The Home Ministry had jurisdiction over the entire internal affairs of Japan, overseeing all the local governments. During the wartime the police under the supervision of the Home Ministry was in charge of internal security. The IJA deferred to the authority of the Home Ministry when it came to the matter of “homeland security.” Komori Atsushi states that the government tried to shift its responsibility to the military in the postwar period. It attributed everything that went wrong during the war to the military. The uninformed general public under censorship believed it. However, Komori stressed, as far as the disposal of dangerous animals during the war was concerned, there was no such thing as a “military order.”7 The disposal order was instead issued by the Home Ministry. The “special police” under the jurisdiction of the ministry arrested those

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 189

10/8/2010 10:07:49 AM

190


who did not cooperate with the war efforts without warrants and tortured them. Those who appeared uncooperative were labeled traitors and imprisoned. In this political context, if the Home Ministry’s Air Defense Bureau considered it necessary to destroy dangerous animals in the name of public safety, local governments that supervised public zoos could not oppose the decision.8

T G-G Ō S Actually, the decision to destroy dangerous animals has been attributed to a single person. There is a consensus among scholars, zoo directors, and zoo specialists that Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi conceived the idea. Ōdachi’s previous position was permanent vice home minister. He was soon to become home minister. Ōdachi made the decision to destroy dangerous animals for political reasons rather than from a necessity for public safety. Experts concur that Ōdachi made this decision in order to heighten the awareness of war among citizens, intensify citizens’ hatred toward the enemy countries, and raise the war morale among the citizens. First, destroying dangerous animals in advance had a psychological effect to alarm civilians and make them believe that air raids were really coming. Second, destroying dangerous animals in advance would preempt alleged foreign spies’ attempts to disturb civilians by spreading “demagoguery” that beasts had escaped the zoos. If these animals had already been destroyed, there would be no room for such demagoguery to spread, which was allegedly intended to encourage defeatism among scared citizens. Destroying zoo animals could also have an effect of turning people’s sympathy for animals into hatred toward enemy countries. It would induce civilians to blame United States and other Allied Powers for the dead animals. Thus, GovernorGeneral Ōdachi used captive zoo animals essentially as a tool for scare tactics to heighten war spirit.9 This accounts for why evacuating animals was not an option. To achieve Ōdachi’s purposes, these animals had to be destroyed in order to have a big impact on citizen’s psyches. Saving animals was the furthest thing from his mind. This explains why he indignantly said, “I told you to kill animals, not to save them,” to Park Section head Inoshita Kiyoshi when Inoshita sanctioned Fukuda’s evacuation plan for Tonki (see chapter 3). In essence, Ōdachi took this extraordinary measure for political reasons. Preempting potential danger to civilians was the pretext for the disposal. Ōdachi issued the disposal order as an integral part of the propaganda tactics on the part of the Home

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 190

10/8/2010 10:07:49 AM

CONCLUSION

191

Ministry to mobilize civilians into total war, in terms of national defense. For this, animals must die. Expert Views Because of his position, Ueno Zoo director Koga could not be as candid as he might have liked. However, he still wrote that having seen the real war situation in Special City Shōnan (current Singapore), Governor-General Ōdachi must have felt the need to make civilians realize the gravity of the situation and chose to alarm civilians by destroying dangerous animals. Therefore, Ōdachi adamantly refused the compromise plan to save at least the herbivores, such as elephants, by evacuating them to the countryside. This was so, Koga wrote, because destroying dangerous animals was “not the end itself, but the means” for Governor-General Ōdachi.10 In turn, Kyoto City Zoo veterinarian Takizawa wonders why the disposal order Kyoto City Zoo received was so extremely forceful. Takizawa believes the order was intended to direct the citizens’ hatred toward enemy countries, as well as to solidify the nation’s war effort. For these reasons, the authorities propagated the ostensible reason that disposals were necessary in order to preempt demagoguery that animals had escaped the zoo and would attack people. He also considers that the zoo was forced to use drastic methods of disposal, such as poisoning and shooting, in order to make a bigger impact on citizens. Starving animals to death would not have had as effective a psychological impact. It even would have been counterproductive, triggering public protest against zoos.11 American historian Ian J. Miller also argues that having witnessed the Japanese warfront as Special City Shōnan mayor, GovernorGeneral Ōdachi “knew that the triumphalist news stories of the day were woefully out of touch with reality.” Ōdachi perceived “the need to concoct a novel way” to mobilize a population that had been misled and “numbed by years of propagandist exaggeration and exhausted from long-term material deprivation.” His answer was “the mass-mediated ritualized slaughter of Tokyo’s wildly famous zoo animals.” Miller writes, “The slaughter was choreographed to shock depleted Tokyoites into a higher level of ideological compliance, suppress dissent, and instill a heightened sense of emergency through a conscious rupture of everyday conventions.” He goes on to say, “Ōdachi’s diaries and official memos illustrate not only the logic of sacrifice in a society in crisis but also the sacrifice of logic to the dictates of blinkered military strategy and illusory victory.”12

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 191

10/8/2010 10:07:50 AM

192


T W A  T G-G Ō What were Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi’s own views about the war and the disposal policy? An official biography of Ōdachi Shigeo (1892–1955) was published by a committee made up of 211 members who knew him closely. The actual author, Takamiya Tahei (see below), and another leading committee member state in the preface and postscript that Ōdachi “neither left diaries nor memos nor other forms of writing like these.” Therefore, the committee members collected “documents and other written materials from those who knew him very closely” at various governmental ministries and agencies, as well as from family members, alumni, and so on.13 Ōdachi’s secretaries also state that he did not like to write. He did not write or use memos. He did not write journals. As an exception, he wrote a “prison diary” while he was incarcerated as a war criminal suspect at Sugamo Prison in December 1945, because there was not much else to do there (examined below). However, the diary simply chronicles the daily life at the prison. There was nothing about the disposal order or his policy as Tokyo governor-general in the diary. Ōdachi has a single publication titled Watashi no mita Nikkyōso (My Views on the Japan Teachers Union). However, it is merely a record of his statements on education while he was education minister, published posthumously in November 1955 (two months after his death)—it has nothing to do with the disposal order or his policy as Tokyo governor-general. Thus, in 1955–1956 the members of the committee to publish his biography met twenty times. The purpose was “to write a candidate biography of Ōdachi, but not the kind to glorify him as is common in biographies,” to the extent that Takamiya was relieved when Ōdachi’s family members and close friends did not object to the content of the manuscript.14 Ōdachi, the “Decider” The two-volume biography in fact is a collection of “testimonies” that only those who were the core of Ōdachi’s inner circle and his immediate family members could have known. They reveal that Ōdachi was a quintessential bureaucrat; however, he was not a mere implementer of policy, but an ultimate decision maker. He had a mind of his own. He was unusually candid and decisive for a bureaucrat. He had the ability to quickly turn his decision into actual policy and implement it. He occasionally collided with the military establishment, including the IJA general and Kwantung Army chief of staff Itagaki Seishirō

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 192

10/8/2010 10:07:50 AM

CONCLUSION

193

(1885–1948). On several occasions he voluntarily resigned from his high-ranking positions, including the one in Manchukuo (General Affairs Agency director-general) in December 1936, due to differences in opinions. He did not cling to his positions. He carried his letter of resignation in his pocket on other occasions. Backed by his beliefs and decisiveness, Ōdachi challenged bureaucratic inertia and carried out difficult policies.15 For instance, when Ōdachi was serving as Special City Shōnan mayor, the local IJA military-political bureau issued an order to replace the enemy language, English, with Japanese in Singapore and Malay under Japan’s occupation. Ōdachi felt the order was absurd because English was the “common language” in the region. He came up with an excuse that there was not enough paint to change the traffic and store signs. He also strongly argued against the order being applied to local newspapers and mail. He postponed the implementation so many times that it was never actually executed. Meanwhile, some districts in Malay had already changed the traffic signs, in fear of the IJA authorities. A local driver could not read the sign in Japanese, and a Japanese official in the car was fatally injured.16 When Tokyo-prefecture and Tokyo-city were integrated into one administration in July 1943 in order for the nation’s capital to effectively deal with the war situation, Ōdachi, as the first Tokyo governor-general, took the initiative and did just that. Yoshitake Eichi (1903–1988), who had worked at the Home Ministry as Ōdachi’s junior and became Personnel Section head in the Tokyo government, states that Ōdachi saw the grim reality of the warfront as mayor of Special City Shōnan. He was indignant about the behavior of some of the IJA personnel. The military was deceiving the Japanese into believing that the nation was winning the war. Ōdachi came home to discuss the war situation with top officials in the government. Then he was appointed as the first Tokyo governor-general. Anticipating inevitable air raids, Ōdachi enforced the collective disposal of dangerous animals at Ueno Zoo, as well as the collective “evacuation of schoolchildren and buildings” (examined below). Yoshitake states that these decisions derived from his foresight and commitment to defend the nation’s capital.17 Ōdachi Decides to Dispose of Animals A prominent journalist on wartime history, Takamiya Tahei (1897– 1961; president of a newspaper, Keijō Nippō, which was published in Seoul under Japan’s rule) writes that schoolchildren were whispering

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 193

10/8/2010 10:07:50 AM

194


to each other in the early October 1943. “I hear the lions were killed at Ueno Zoo.” “So were bears and tigers.” “Elephants might have been killed, too.” “Enemy spies killed them.” Governor-General Ōdachi decided to destroy ferocious animals at Ueno Zoo after much deliberation for a person who was known for his quick decision making. He made the decision carefully because he was concerned with possible negative reactions to the disposal by citizens, especially by children who enjoyed watching these ferocious animals at Ueno Zoo. Feeding these carnivores was not easy when people were desperately looking for their own food. However, the feed shortage was not the problem for Ōdachi. His concern was the escape of these animals should their cages be destroyed by air raids. Although escapes might not actually cause many casualties among people, the psychological impact upon them would be enormous. Takamiya writes that people were instinctively more afraid of a tiger on the loose than of a bomb that could kill hundreds of people instantly.18 According to Takamiya, Governor-General Ōdachi was concerned with Tokyoites who were not informed of the truth about the war. The military regime was hiding the truth that defeat was imminent and that the nation’s capital might be bombed into ashes. On the contrary, the military was spreading that it would not let a single enemy airplane attack the capital. Therefore, civilians had no sense of urgency about air strikes. Yet, Ōdachi could vividly visualize in his head the scene of a formation of B-29s flying over Tokyo. Others who knew the real situation at the warfront also foresaw the fate of the capital. Nevertheless, everyone shut their mouths. The military police would arrest them if they uttered such an unpatriotic thing (it would mean accepting Japan’s defeat). Therefore, nobody dared to draw up administrative measures against air raids under the premise of largescale air strikes on the capital.19 In this context, Takamiya states, Governor-General Ōdachi summoned Inoshita to his office in mid-August 1943. Ōdachi asked Inoshita about the situation of the zoo. Instinctively realizing that it was about the disposal of animals, Inoshita answered, “The zoo was prepared for the disposal. The zoo would poison them in case of air raids. It would shoot them if necessary.” Then Ōdachi asked, “What if people were hit first before animals?” Inoshita could not answer that. Ōdachi told Inoshita, “The animals would have to be destroyed sooner or later. The zoo had better destroy them in a clever fashion [insinuating ‘secretly’] now before any contingencies occur.” Inoshita asked how he could keep it from the military and the police. Ōdachi told Inoshita, “If they found out about the plan in advance,

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 194

10/8/2010 10:07:50 AM

CONCLUSION

195

they might object to it. You do not have to tell them. Leave it up to me.”20 According to Takamiya, Inoshita then consulted with Fukuda. They decided to poison the animals, because people would find out it if they shot them. On the night of August 17, Fukuda had a keeper poison a Siberian brown bear. They decided to tell the zoo gardeners that the bear died of malnutrition, because if they found out about the disposal the next morning, they would spread the news. However, Fukuda would not be able to keep concealing the disposal of animals. Fukuda therefore decided to tell all the zoo employees and ordered strict confidentiality about the disposal. Sensitive animals refused to eat poisoned food and the staff used other methods. They finished destroying twenty-seven specimens on September 23 (the last one was Tonki the elephant). Police Agency officials complained about the disposal, after the fact, because they were not informed in advance. Thinking that Ōdachi had informed the police superintendent in advance, Inoshita told them that it was done by prior consent with the police superintendent and rejected their complaint. Ōdachi told Inoshita, “Since we did a poor thing to the animals, let’s have a funeral service for them.” Thus, they held a service, inviting the grand priest of Sensō Temple to the zoo.21 *

*

*

Another striking fact was that other zoos throughout Japan executed the disposal order immediately following the disposals at Ueno Zoo. This indicates that Governor-General Ōdachi presided over not only Tokyo but also all the local administrations in Japan. The position of Tokyo governor-general was not popularly elected at the time. The Home Ministry was in charge of administering all the local governments, including Tokyo, as well as internal security affairs. Having been number two at the Home Ministry (and soon to become number one), Ōdachi’s power extended beyond Tokyo to all the other local governments of Japan. Backed by this omnipotent power, Ōdachi destroyed more than 303 showpiece animals (substantially more, in fact) in Japanese territories proper and many more animals in Korea, Taiwan, and Manchukuo.

D  J, B M Meanwhile, a week after Pearl Harbor, on December 15, 1941, Tungku Makhota, heir to Sultan Ibrahim of Johor, part of British

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 195

10/8/2010 10:07:51 AM

196


Malay on the Malay Peninsula in Southeast Asia, had the carnivores at Johor Zoo destroyed for fear that bombings might open the cages and free tigers and leopards. The IJA had landed on British Malay in December 1941 and was fighting with the British Army, which culminated in the Battle of Singapore of February 7–15, 1942. Johor and Singapore had been ruled by the Sultan of Johor until they were ceded to Great Britain in 1824. In 1826 they became part of the British colony known as the Straits Settlements, which was an outlying residency of the British East India Company. Johor and Singapore were two of the most important collection points for wild animals in the world. For years Johor Zoo had been the main interest of the sultan’s eldest son and one of the major attractions of southern Malaya. The area was referred to as the “Gibraltar of the Orient.” With Japan’s victory, Japan renamed Singapore as Special City Shōnan (Shō from the imperial era “Shōwa” and nan meaning “south”). The Japanese Home Ministry appointed Ōdachi as the first mayor and IJA administrator general of Special City Shōnan in February 1942.22 Earlier, in March 1934, the Sultan of Johor had sent a Malayan sun bear to Ueno Zoo as a gift, but it was destroyed on August 27, 1943 (see chapter 3). It is this author’s view that in addition to all the reasons explained above, the disposal at Johor had a strong impact on Ōdachi and contributed to his decision to destroy dangerous animals in zoos in Japan. The disposal at Johor happened right before Ōdachi left for Singapore in February 1942 to assume the dual positions there. Even if Ōdachi had not arrived at Singapore at the time of the disposal, it is highly likely that he had heard of the disposal and its aftermath. Ōdachi also might have heard about the disposal at London Zoo in 1939 as well as that at Berlin Zoo in 1941; however, these were events far away. In contrast, the event at Johor was much closer and just before Ōdachi’s appointment to Singapore, and it might have had an immediate impact on him.

“E  S  B” Anticipating the inevitable air raids, Governor-General Ōdachi also enforced collective “evacuation of schoolchildren and buildings” in 1944. The “evacuation of schoolchildren” involved from third graders to sixth graders and was intended not only to protect these children from air raids in cities, but also to preserve next-generation soldiers in order to complete the war objectives. More than 671,000 children in total were sent to local areas under this program, while about

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 196

10/8/2010 10:07:51 AM

CONCLUSION

197

327,000 children did not evacuate, partly because their family could not afford to pay the necessary cost for the evacuation, such as ¥10 for the food (15–20% of the average monthly salary then), and provide a futon mattress. The “evacuation of buildings” was a euphemism for forcible relocation of houses in cities. This policy was designed to create a buffer zone to preempt air-raid-borne fire from spreading to strategically important facilities, such as military factories. After the military destroyed these “buildings,” residents and students were mobilized to clean up the debris (see chapter 2). Ōdachi’s deputy, Matsumura Mitsuma (the last Tokyo-prefecture governor before the integration of 1943; 1894–1970), states that despite the escalation of the war, neither the national government nor the military formulated any effective policy for internal security; the defense of the nation. Civilians were ill-equipped to face air raids. However, few realized the urgency of the matter, and the authorities were reluctant to take decisive measures against air strikes (because it would mean an acceptance of defeat). Ōdachi then single-handedly decided to go ahead with the evacuation of schoolchildren in Tokyo. With Tokyo’s precedence, the Home Ministry and the military began a large-scale “evacuation of schoolchildren and buildings” throughout Japan.23 Matsumura also saw many influential people visiting Ōdachi’s office, having secret meetings in 1944. Ōdachi was discussing how to end the war. According to Matsumura, that Ōdachi became the home minister in July 1944 (in the Koiso cabinet; July 1944–April 1945) had something to do with the fall of the Tōjō cabinet that month. Matsumura states that Ōdachi was a man of action. He turned his beliefs into real policy and acted on them. He was a true “decider.”24 Ōdachi’s son-in-law, Sakai Tokitada, writes that Ōdachi was hoping that the Tōjō cabinet would resign voluntarily. He gave up hope of this in early 1944 and began working on overthrowing the Tōjō cabinet. Ōdachi submitted his resignation from the post of Tokyo governor-general to the Home Ministry in March 1944. However, vice home minister Karasawa Toshiki did not accept his resignation. Meanwhile, Ōdachi continued to discuss with several influential politicians how to dismiss the Tōjō cabinet that spring. Before Ōdachi’s plan materialized, the Tōjō cabinet collapsed from within in July 1944. Ōdachi was then appointed as home minister but resigned from the post in April 1945.25 In summary, Yoshitake writes, such drastic policies as the disposal of dangerous animals and the “evacuation of schoolchildren and buildings” startled citizens at that time. However, Ōdachi carried out these policies in order to effectively defend the nation’s capital. One of

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 197

10/8/2010 10:07:51 AM

198


Ōdachi’s colleagues, Saka Nobuya, states that Ōdachi’s ultimate goal was to defend the nation for the sake of the emperor. As Takamiya notes, all the Japanese people at that time were loyal subjects of the emperor, whom they revered as a deity.26 Every subject was supposed to sacrifice his or her life for the emperor. With all things considered, aside from the validity of destroying dangerous animals, it seems fair to take into account that Ōdachi tried to defend the nation as well as possible, as a civilian, often clashing with the IJA leaders, including Prime Minister Tōjō.

Ō’ P C After the war, Ōdachi was appointed as counselor to the Home Ministry in September 1945. On December 6, the SCAP-GHQ issued a directive to imprison nine members of the wartime cabinets, including former prime minister Konoe Fumimaro and Ōdachi, as war criminal suspects, by December 16. This was the second round of incarceration of war criminal suspects. Ōdachi reported to Sugamo Prison on December 16. Konoe committed suicide at his house that day. Ōdachi, however, was not tried and was released twenty-one months later, on August 31, 1947. This was so largely because the SCAP-GHQ came to realize that Ōdachi had unequivocally opposed the Imperial Rule Assistance Association created by Prime Minister Konoe in October 1940, which transformed Japan into a totalitarian single-party state. Association secretary-general-designate Arima Yoriyasu solicited Ōdachi to become a bureau director general of the association, but he flatly declined. While many politicians rushed to join the association, “in order not to miss the bus, Ōdachi refused to join the club.”27 Nevertheless, Ōdachi was dismissed from his position of Home Ministry counselor in May 1946 as part of the “Purge from Public Offices” (see chapter 9), undertaken by the SCAP-GHQ. After his release from the purge in April 1952, Ōdachi was elected to the upper house of the Japanese parliament, the House of Councillors, in April 1953. He was soon appointed as education minister in the fifth Yoshida cabinet in May. It was unprecedented for a first-term HC member to be appointed as state minister. As education minister, Ōdachi wrote two controversial education bills: (1) to prohibit teachers from educating schoolchildren into supporting or opposing a certain political party, and (2) to restrict political activities of schoolteachers to the equivalent level of restrictions imposed on national government employees. The Japan Teachers Union rallied against the bills

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 198

10/8/2010 10:07:52 AM

CONCLUSION

199

and even blocked the entrance of Ōdachi’s office at the Ministry of Education building. Despite the vehement opposition from the leftist political parties, the parliament passed the two bills in May 1954.28 This legislation was part of the “reverse course”; reversing “excessive” democracy and liberalism implanted by the New Dealers in the SCAP-GHQ upon regaining Japanese sovereignty in April 1952. Thus, this influential bureaucrat, who had destroyed captive animals during the war for the sake of the defense of the nation, suppressed the freedom of speech of public schoolteachers for the sake of their “political neutrality” in the postwar era. Afterward, Ōdachi’s health deteriorated. He had been consumed with passing the education bills and its turbulent aftermath, as well as the political turmoil involving the resignation en masse of the fifth Yoshida cabinet (which Vice Prime Minister Ogata Taketora and Ōdachi favored, while Prime Minister Yoshida and his close aides opposed and instead tried to dissolve the parliament). The “Yoshida era” ended in December 1954. Ōdachi died of stomach cancer in September 1955 at the age of sixtythree.29

V  D P Understanding the reasons, real or ostensible, for the disposal policy still poses many questions concerning its validity. First, the logic of destroying “ferocious big cats” is questionable. Large felids are extremely cautious animals. If they were on the loose in unfamiliar territory, their instinct would guide them to hide, as the “Black Leopard Escape Incident” at Ueno Zoo in July 1936 had demonstrated. Lorenz Hagenback also observed during the air raids of Hamburg of July 1943 that big cats were crouching in the corners of their cages or hiding in the rubble. They did not run loose and attack people (see chapter 7). In addition, as many observers, including Ueda Chōtarō, have noted, herbivores with horns and antlers, such as bison and deer, could cause more damage to people than ferocious big cats. Therefore, destroying large felids would not be as effective to protect people as to alarm them. However, public safety was not the real reason for the disposal policy. Moreover, the incendiaries dropped from B-29s were extremely powerful. One would burn an area of twenty-five hundred square meters, at two thousand degrees Celsius. They burned down major parts of Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya, and other large cities. As many zoo directors, including Kitaō, argued, these incendiaries would destroy not only iron cages but also the animals inside them instantly had

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 199

10/8/2010 10:07:52 AM

200


they hit animal facilities. Therefore, there was no need to destroy animals in advance if one was concerned with the possibility of animals escaping their cages during air strikes. The fact was that Ueno Zoo was intact from the devastating Massive Tokyo Air Raids of March 9–10, 1945. Only the elephant house was burned on April 13, 1945. No damage was caused to the ferocious animal facilities. If John, Tonki, and Hanako had been in the elephant house at the time, they might have burned to death. Then Ueno Zoo could have blamed the U.S. air raids for their deaths. Ironically, in retrospect, there was no need for Ueno Zoo to destroy its dangerous animals in advance in 1943.30 Meanwhile, the Massive Osaka Air Raids of March 13, 1945 burned down seventeen facilities and killed thirty-three birds at Osaka City Zoo. However, none of the ferocious animal facilities were damaged. Therefore, in hindsight, there was no need for Osaka City Zoo to destroy its dangerous animals in 1943–1944. Furthermore, Kyoto, the ancient capital, was exempt from air strikes. Accordingly, there was no need for Kyoto City Zoo to destroy its dangerous animals in 1944. In addition, Higashiyama Zoo escaped the heavy air attack on Nagoya on December 13, 1944, and no ferocious animal cages were damaged when the zoo was hit on February 15, 1945. Only a bison that was kept in an open enclosure ran loose, but it was shot immediately. Therefore, there was no need for Higashiyama Zoo to destroy its dangerous animals in 1944. Overall, there was little physical damage to zoo facilities throughout Japan. There was no single case in which an iron cage was damaged to the extent that a ferocious animal inside could escape. There was no damage to the public from dangerous animals running loose during air raids as many zoo directors had assured the authorities. The paradox was that not a single ferocious animal escaped its iron cage during the air strikes, because there were no animals left.

F A In a final assessment, the disposal was unnecessary in terms of public safety. This was also true for zoos in Europe during the war. Despite the sustained bombings during the Blitz, no ferocious animal cages were damaged at London Zoo. Despite the devastating damage to zoo facilities, no animals were reported to have harmed people at Berlin Zoo, Hagenbeck Animal Park, or elsewhere, except for in rumors. Those animals that got loose were destroyed by the zoo personnel before they had a chance to harm the public.

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 200

10/8/2010 10:07:52 AM

CONCLUSION

201

Notwithstanding all the reasons to support the contrary decision, the Japanese Home Ministry destroyed dangerous animals with their real purpose being to strengthen the defense of the nation, not the public safety. Furthermore, anticipating a public outcry for such extreme measures, Governor-General Ōdachi had Ueno Zoo destroy its animals with strict confidentiality and kept it from the press. Once having established a fait accompli in Tokyo, Osaka City Zoo openly destroyed its animals despite the opposition from the public, including pleas from children. Then other zoos followed suit. Higashiyama Zoo resisted the order as long as possible but succumbed to the pressure on December 13, 1944, the day of the large-scale air attack on Nagoya. In retrospect, it was ironic that the first zoo policy undertaken by the new metropolitan Tokyo government, established in July 1943, was to destroy its animals. Since Governor-General Ōdachi prohibited the use of guns in order to conceal the disposal from the public, Ueno Zoo ended up destroying its animals in a most clumsy and cruel manner, prolonging the pain of their deaths. A few zoos succeeded in saving at least some of their dangerous animals. Higashiyama Zoo succeeded in saving two lions by donating them to Zhangjiakou in China. With extraordinary resolve and tenacity, Kitaō Hideichi also resisted destroying four elephants to the end and saved them from the disposal. Thus, two of them survived the war while the other two succumbed to malnutrition before the war ended. In addition, Kitaō had kept a chimpanzee alive so that it became the sole chimpanzee in Japan when the war was over. Elsewhere, Kyoto City Zoo kept an elephant from Hanshin Park Zoo alive until she died in January 1946. These are the only exceptions. All the other dangerous animals were destroyed. The fact was that zoo directors had little leverage vis-à-vis the Home Ministry, which presided over local administrations. Japanese government was highly centralized, and local governments had little autonomy, a far cry from the states in the U.S. federal system. Most of the major zoos in Japan were public then, run by local governments. Zoo directors reported to local administrations’ Park Section heads, who in turn reported to the Home Ministry. Ueno Zoo was under the thumb of Park Section head Inoshita, whose own power was no match for that of bureaucrats at the Home Ministry. Tokyo governorgeneral Ōdachi, who climbed up the bureaucratic ladder to permanent vice home minister and would soon become home minister, was at the pinnacle of this pyramid. In this rigidly hierarchical system, zoo directors had no choice but to execute the Home Ministry’s policy in order to save their own positions in the wartime regime.31

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 201

10/8/2010 10:07:52 AM

202


C In summary, the Japanese Home Ministry was responsible for destroying more than 170 popular zoo animals and 133 circus animals in the Japanese territory proper, as well as many animals in its colonies, during World War II. Although historical events must be understood within their political, economic, and social context of a given time, the Home Ministry’s disposal policy was misguided at best. It was part of the government propaganda tactics to mobilize civilians into strengthening the defense of the nation during wartime under a disguise of ensuring public safety. Backed by the omnipotent power of the Home Ministry, Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi enforced the disposal order throughout Japan in order to defend the nation for the sake of the emperor. However, the disposal policy did little for the nation. In the midst of the war hysteria, the Japanese military establishment drove the people into a desperate mass suicidal course under the banner of “Ichioku-gyokusai” (the 100 million population to die in honorable defeat, like a jewel shattered into pieces) and to the eventual defeat. *

*

*

In closing, the examination of the Japanese wartime zoo policy demonstrates that zoos cannot flourish in wartime. The zoo’s cardinal mandate to ensure the well-being of captive animals was compromised and violated in wartime. Peace is a prerequisite for a zoo’s survival and prosperity. Ueno Zoo director Koga believed in the motto “zoo is peace.” A zoo is a reflection of the society, good or bad. Let us not forget Mahatma Gandhi’s axiom, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”32 It is to be hoped that mankind has learned its lesson from the march of folly during World War II and other wars in recent years, in which countless animals have perished. It is also to be hoped that animal protection groups and wildlife conservationists in the world will gather their resources to further raise public and governmental awareness of a responsibility toward animals in times of war and disaster on the part of humans. It is further to be hoped that in the near future international organizations, such as the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), will mobilize their forces to lobby governments to ratify an international treaty concerning the protection and care of captive animals in times of war and disaster. This

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 202

10/8/2010 10:07:52 AM

CONCLUSION

203

application to animals of the 1949 Geneva Convention concerning the treatment of noncombatants would mark the moral progress of mankind, as suggested by Mahatma Gandhi, even if belatedly. Kariwatashi hakutōwashi no kaeritari (The bald eagle pair flew back to the old pine tree on the autumn wind) —September 23, 2010, the 67th anniversary of the day Tonki starved to death and the 61st anniversary of the day Indira arrived in Japan

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 203

10/8/2010 10:07:53 AM

9780230108943_11_ch10.indd 204

10/8/2010 10:07:53 AM

A ppendi x

Chronology of Major Events, Policy, and Measures Regarding “Disposal Order” (1931–1945) Dates

Major Events

Sep. 1931

Kwantung Army bombs South Manchuria Railway (Manchurian Incident)

Mar. 1932

Japan creates Manchukuo

Mar. 1933

Japan decides to withdraw from League of Nations

Nov. 1936

Germany and Japan conclude Anti-Comintern Pact

Jul. 1937

Marco Polo Bridge Incident; Outbreak of second Sino-Japanese War

Nov. 1937

Italy joins Anti-Comintern Pact

Sep. 1939

German invades Poland; Outbreak of World War II

Sep. 1940

Germany, Italy, and Japan conclude Tripartite Treaty (Axis Alliance)

Dec. 1941

Japan attacks Pearl Harbor; United States declares war

Apr. 1942

U.S. B-25 “Doolittle Raid” on Japan

Policy and Measures

Aug. 1943

Tokyo governor-general Ōdachi Shigeo orders disposal of dangerous animals at Ueno Zoo; Ueno Zoo destroys animals*

Sep. 1943

Osaka City Zoo destroys animals*; Inokashira Park Zoo destroys animals; Itōzu Yūen Zoo destroys animals

Oct. 1943

Kamoike City Zoo destroys animals Continued

9780230108943_12_app.indd 205

10/8/2010 7:42:48 AM

206 Dates

APPENDIX

Major Events

Jan. 1944

Kumamoto City Zoo destroys animals* Takarazuka Zoo destroys animals; Kyoto City Zoo destroys animals; Sendai City Zoo destroys animals Fukuoka City Zoo destroys animals Kobe City Zoo destroys animals*

Mar. 1944

Jun. 1944 Jul. 1944 Nov. 1944 Dec. 1944

U.S. B-29 air raids on Japan begin B-29s strike Nagoya

Late 1944

Mar. 1945

Apr. 1945 May 1945 Jul. 1945 Aug. 1945

Policy and Measures

Higashiyama Zoo destroys animals** Ritsurin Park Zoo destroys animals; Taipei City Zoo destroys animals*

Massive Tokyo Air Raids; Massive Nagoya Air Raids; Massive Osaka Air Raids U.S. forces lands on Okinawa Islands (Battle of Okinawa) Germany surrenders Changkyungwon Zoo destroys animals U.S. atomic bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; Soviet Army invades Manchukuo; Japan surrenders; Soviet Army invades Sakhalin

Xinjing Zoo destroys animals

Sources: Official publications of Japanese zoos and cities, and other related materials. *The dates are those of the beginning of collective disposal of animals. **Higashiyama Zoo destroyed two specimens in November 1943, but this was not part of the official collective disposal.

9780230108943_12_app.indd 206

10/8/2010 7:42:48 AM

No tes

Dates for online sources are those of retrieval, unless the source provides the date of publication.

Chapter 1 1. Jennifer Vlegas, “Fate of Haiti’s Zoo and Animals Remain Uncertain,” Discovery News. http://news.discovery.com/animals/fate-of-haitiszoo-and-animals-remains-uncertain.html, January 15, 2010. 2. “Zoo in Haiti,” http://www.fouye.com/messages.php/2332/0/1, December 27, 2009; “Animal Info: Haiti.” http://www.animalinfo. org/country/haiti.htm, last updated on November 8, 2005. 3. Vlegas. 4. ASPCA, “Crisis in Haiti: How the ASPCA Is Helping,” http:// www.aspca.org/news/help-the-animals-of-haiti.html, January 17, 2010, and updates. 5. “Iraqi Troops Slaughtered Zoo Animals,” San Diego Union, March 11, 1991; “A Triumphant Army? (Iraqi Troops Eating Animals at Kuwait Zoo),” Nutrition Health Review, http://www.encyclopedia. com/doc/1G1-9164662.html, September 22, 1990. 6. “Rescuing the Baghdad Zoo,” http://www.cbsnews.com/ stories/2007/04/29/sunday/printble2739181.shtml, Sunday Morning, April 29, 2007. 7. Mort Rosenblum, “Kabul’s Desperate Little Zoo Runs Only on Faith, Hope,” Staten Island Advance, November 21, 2001; Stephen Grey, “Wounded Animals at Bay in Kabul’s Zoo of Horror,” London Times, January 25, 1998. 8. Grey; Stentor Danielson, “Conditions Improving at Kabul Zoo,” National Geographic News, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ news/2002/06/0610_020610_kabulzoo.html, June 10, 2002. 9. Higashiyama Zoo, ed., Dōbtsuen no rekishi (Zoo History [An Overview]), http://www.higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/01_annai/01_ 04gaiyo/01_04-01history/01_04-01_01/01_04-01_01_03.html, July 2009. 10. Ibid. 11. Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, ed., Ōdachi Shigeo (Ōdachi Shigeo, Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956), 153–66, 500–11.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 207

10/8/2010 7:42:54 AM

208

NOTES

12. Ibid.; Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 309–14. 13. R. J. Hoage and William A. Deiss, eds., New Worlds, New Animals: From Menagerie to Zoological Park in the Nineteenth Century (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996); Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens (London: CRC Press, 2001); Nigel Rothfels, Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002); Herman Reichenbach, e-mail to author, March 21, 2009. 14. Jesse Donahue and Erik Trump wrote The Politics of Zoos: Exotic Animals and Their Protectors (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2006). 15. Lawrence Anthony and Graham Spence, Babylon’s Ark: The Incredible Wartime Rescue of the Baghdad Zoo (New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2007); Danielson; Diane Ackerman, The Zookeeper’s Wife: A War Story (New York: W. W. Norton, 2007). 16. Irène Nèmirovsky, Suite Française, trans. Sandra Smith (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006); Elie Wiesel, Night Trilogy: Night, Dawn, Day (New York: Macmillan, 2008); H. G. Adler, The Journey, trans. Peter Filkins (New York: Random House, 2008); George Hicks, The Comfort Women (New York: W. W. Norton, 1995); Mayumi Itoh, Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). 17. Ken Kawata, “Zoological Gardens of Japan,” in Kisling, 295–330; Kawata, e-mail to author, March 3, 2009; Frederick S. Litten, “Starving the Elephants: The Slaughter of Animals in Wartime Tokyo’s Ueno Zoo,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 38, no. 3 (2009): 1–14 (e-journal), http://www.japanfocus.org/-Frederick_S_Litten/3225. 18. Ian Miller, “Didactic Nature: Exhibiting Nation and Empire at the Ueno Zoological Gardens,” in Gregory M. Pflugfelder and Brett L. Walker, eds., JAPANimals: History and Culture in Japan’s Animal Life (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2005), 273–313. 19. Yamamoto Shizuo, in Rosl Kirchshofer, ed., The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer, trans. Hilda Morris (New York: Viking Press, 1968), 269–73. 20. Akiyama. 21. JAZGA, ed., Nihon dōbutsuen suizokokan yōran (Directory of Zoos and Aquariums in Japan) (Tokyo: JAZGA, 1962); “Dōbutsuen towa” (Defining Zoos), Gifu University Applied Biology Department, http://www1.gifu-u.ac.jp/~doi/zoo.htm, July 7, 2009. 22. Herman Reichenbach, e-mail to author, March 21, 2009. 23. Komori Atsushi, Mō hitotsu no Ueno dōbutsuen-shi (Another History of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1997), 135–39; Kawata, e-mail to author, October 31, 2009.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 208

10/8/2010 7:42:54 AM

NOTES

209

24. Higashiyama Zoo. 25. Ken Kawata, “Trouble by the Ton: Our Elephant Dilemma,” paper presented at the AAZPA Great Lakes Regional Conference, St. Louis, MO, April 27, 1987, 6.

Chapter 2 1. For detail, see Richard J. Samuels, “Rich Nation, Strong Army”: National Security and the Technological Transformation of Japan (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994). 2. Komori Atsushi, “Ueno dōbutsuen no ayumi” (History of Ueno Zoo), Dōbutsu to dōbutsuen (Animals and Zoos) 32, no. 5 (1980): 18/162. 3. Sasaki Tokio, Dōbutsuen no rekishi: Nihon ni okeru dōbutsuen no seiritsu (History of Zoos: Establishment of Zoos in Japan) (Tokyo: Nishida-shoten, 1975), 37–128. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid.; Komori Atsushi, Mō hitotsu no Ueno dōbutsuen-shi (Another History of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1997), 3–4. 6. Sasaki, 37–128. 7. Ibid.; Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo (Ueno Zoo, hereafter), ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo), Vol. 1 (Tsūshi-hen [History]) (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982), 1–7, 36–42; Komori Atsushi, Hanako ga nigeta: Watashi no dōbutsuenshi (Hanako Escaped: My Zoo History) (Tokyo: Tokyo Zoological Park Society, 2002), 190–92, 203–06. 8. Ueno Zoo, 36–42; Komori (2002), 190–92, 203–6; Ian Miller, “Didactic Nature: Exhibiting Nation and Empire at the Ueno Zoological Gardens,” in Gregory M. Pflugfelder and Brett L. Walker, eds., JAPANimals: History and Culture in Japan’s Animal Life (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2005), 298. 9. Sasaki, 129–35. 10. Ueno Zoo, 49–52, 73; Komori (1997), 28–29. 11. Ueno Zoo, 69–74; Sasaki, 163–88. 12. Komori (1997), 30–32. 13. Komori (2002), 181–84; Ueno Zoo, 74–77; Sasaki, 191–96. 14. Komori (2002), 181–84; Ueno Zoo, 74–77; Sasaki, 191–96. 15. Sasaki, 184–217. 16. Ibid., 229–33. 17. Ibid. 18. Ueno Zoo, 49–53; “National Diet Library Digital Archive Portal,” http://porta.ndl.go.jp/service/servlet/Result_Detail?meta_item_ no=I000121684&meta_repository_no=R000000008, February 23, 2010. 19. Ueno Zoo, 96–99. 20. Ibid.; Fukuda Saburō, Jitsuroku Ueno dōbutsuen (The True Record of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Mainichi-shimbunsha, 1968), 20–25.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 209

10/8/2010 7:42:54 AM

210

NOTES

21. Ueno Zoo, 96–99; Fukuda, 20–25. 22. John Edwards, London Zoo: From Old Photographs, 1852–1914 (London: Self-published. 1996), 66–96; Emily Hahn, Animal Gardens (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967), 66–67; Ken Kawata, e-mail to author, October 2, 2009. 23. Komori (2002), 191–95. 24. Ibid. 25. Sasaki, 229–38. 26. Ibid., 239–41; Ueno Zoo, 104–5. 27. Sasaki, 239–41; Ueno Zoo, 104–5. 28. Sasaki, 240–41; Ueno Zoo, 105, 141–42. 29. Akune Iwao, Sākasu no rekishi (History of Circuses) (Tokyo: Nishidashoten, 1977), 75–83, 251–56; Ozaki, Hirotsugu, Nihon no sākasu (Circuses in Japan) (Tokyo: Sanga-shobō, 1958), 52–59. 30. Ueno Zoo, 137–42; Fukuda, 109–10. 31. Ueno Zoo, 137–42. 32. Ibid. 33. Ueno Zoo, 140–42, 151–52; Sasaki, 263–64. 34. Ueno Zoo, 129, 147–53. 35. Ibid. 36. Ibid., 155, 182; Fukuda, 139, 195. 37. Ken Kawata, “Zoological Gardens of Japan,” in Vernon N. Kisling, Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens (London: CRC Press, 2001), 308; Ken Kawata, e-mails to author, October 2, 2009 and October 17, 2009. 38. Mori Tetsuo, “Gumba no matsuro: ‘Dōbutsu o sensō de shinasenai tameni’ ” (Fate of Military Horses: For Not Victimizing Animals for War Any More), Journal of Japan Veterinary Medical Association 60, no. 3 (2007): 180–81. 39. Shōwakan, “Senchū sengo o tomonishita dōbutsu-tachi” (Animals That Shared the Wartime and Postwar Years [with Humans]) Shōwakan, 2008, 5. 40. Mori Tetsuo, “Senjika nampō no shima deno gumba no yukusue” (Fate of Military Horses on the Southern Front during the War), Journal of Japan Veterinary Medical Association 58, no. 11 (2005): 728–29. 41. Ibid. 42. Mori (2007). 43. “Gunjushō chōtatsu: ‘inu (neko) no ken’nō undō” (Ministry of Military Requisition Directive: “Drive to Donate Dogs [and Cats]”), http://museum-jiten.com/old-zoo/009/03-1, July 2009. 44. Emu namae, “Inu no kieta hi” (The Day Dogs Disappeared), http:// www.emunamae.com/emu_kando/nekono_me/16nhk_journal. htm, June 11, 2006. 45. Ueno Zoo, 155, 182; Fukuda, 139.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 210

10/8/2010 7:42:54 AM

NOTES

211

46. “Shōwa to sensō” (Showa [era] and War), Chūnichi-shimbun, July 3, 2009. 47. Ibid. 48. Fukuda, 126; Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, ed., Inokashira Shizen Bunkaen 50-nen no ayumi to shōrai (50-Year History of Inokashira Nature and Culture Park) (Musashino: Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, 1992), 47. 49. Ueno Zoo, 154. 50. Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos). (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 118–31. 51. Fukuda, 133; “Hachi,” www.hachi-movie.jp, August 2009. 52. Yajima Minoru, Mushi ni deaete yokatta (Glad I Met Insects). (Tokyo: Frēberu-kan, 2004), 16–21, 192–97. 53. Ibid., 25–30. 54. Ibid. 55. Ueno Zoo, 158–60; Yamamoto Shizuo, “Zoos in Japan,” in Rosl Kirchshofer, ed., The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer (trans. Hilda Morris) (New York: Viking Press, 1968), 269–70; Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 74–75. 56. Ueno Zoo, 160–62; Inokashira Nature and Culture Park, 33–35. 57. Kitaō Hideichi, Dōbutsu no shiki (Four Seasons of Animals) (Tokyo: Bungei-shunjū-shinsha, 1956), 227–28; Yamamoto, 269–70.

Chapter 3 1. Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo (Ueno Zoo, hereafter), ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo), Vol. 1 (Tsūshi-hen [History]) (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982), 164. 2. Ibid., 157, 167. 3. Ibid., 151, 154; Fukuda Saburō, Jitsuroku Ueno dōbutsuen (The True Record of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Mainichi-shimbunsha, 1968), 137–39. 4. Ueno Zoo, 151, 154; Fukuda, 137–39; Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 129–30, 296–97. 5. Fukuda, 141–42. 6. Ibid., 142–48; Ueno Zoo, 165–66. 7. Fukuda, 142–48; Ueno Zoo, 165–66. 8. Fukuda, 131–32, 170; Ueno Zoo, 166–67. 9. Ueno Zoo, 168. 10. Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, ed., Ōdachi Shigeo (Ōdachi Shigeo, Vol. 1, hereafter) (Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956), 103–37, 167–97, 507–11; “Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, ed., Tsuisō

9780230108943_13_not.indd 211

10/8/2010 7:42:55 AM

212

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39.

40. 41. 42.

NOTES

no Ōdachi Shigeo (Remembering Ōdachi Shigeo) (Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956), 134–36. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 235–38. Ueno Zoo, 169–71; Fukuda, 174, 217. Fukuda, 174. Ibid., 174–75. Ibid., 33–44, 84–87. Ibid., 84–87. Sasaki Tokio, Dōbutsuen no rekishi: Nihon ni okeru dōbutsuen no seiritsu (History of Zoos: Establishment of Zoos in Japan) (Tokyo: Nishida-shoten, 1975), 259–60. Shibuya Shinkichi, Zō no namida (Tears of Elephants) (Tokyo: Nichigeishuppan, 1972), 55–56. Ibid., 41–42; Ueno Zoo, 177–79. Fukuda, 177–79; Ueno Zoo, 170. Fukuda, 174–75. Fukuda; Ueno Zoo; Akiyama. Fukuda, 133; Ueno Zoo, 173; Akiyama, 149–52. For detail, see Naruoka Masahisa, Hyō to heitai (Leopard and Soldiers) (Tokyo: Fuyō-shobō, 1967). Fukuda, 133; Ueno Zoo, 173; Akiyama, 149–52. Ueno Zoo, 173–74; Shibuya, 42. Ueno Zoo, 174; Fukuda, 176; Akiyama, 156–59. Ueno Zoo, 126, 174; Fukuda, 176–77. Ibid. Ueno Zoo, 175–76; Fukuda, 175–76; Shibuya, 62. Ueno Zoo, 175–76; Fukuda, 175–76, 181; Akiyama, 169–70. This is not the female black leopard of the Black Leopard Escape Incident (which died in May 1940). This one had come to the zoo with a male black leopard in August 1935 (Fukuda’s book states that she came in “August 1943,” but this appears to be a typographical error). Ueno Zoo, 176; Akiyama, 170–72, 187; Takashima Haruo, Dōbutsu monogatari (Tales of Animals) (Tokyo: Yasaka-shobō, 1986), 107–8. Ueno Zoo, 176; Akiyama, 170–72, 187; Takashima, 107–8. Akiyama, 144–46, 167–75; Shibuya, 43, 61–62. Takashima, 74–75. Fukuda, 180; Akiyama, 187–88, 285–86. Fukuda, 178; Ueno Zoo, 131, 171–73; Shibuya, 52–57, 61–62. Fukuda, 178. Ibid.; Ueno Zoo, 171–73; Akiyama, 180–82. Fukuda, 179–80; Shimura Takeo, “Heiwa no shisetsu”: Indira monogatari (“Ambassador of Peace”: The Story of Indira) (Tokyo: Kōseishuppansha, 1996), 126–28. Shimura, 128–29; Akiyama, 190–92; Fukuda, 179–80. Fukuda, 179–80; Shimura, 126–28. Shimura, 126–28; Shibuya, 43, 62–64.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 212

10/8/2010 7:42:55 AM

NOTES

213

43. Fukuda, 179–80. 44. Ueno Zoo, 181; Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, ed., Inokashira Shizen Bunkaen 50-nen no ayumi to shōrai (50-Year History of Inokashira Nature and Culture Park) (Musashino: Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, 1992), 47. 45. Yajima Minoru, Mushi ni deaete yokatta (Glad I Met Insects) (Tokyo: Frēberu-kan, 2004), 32–47. 46. Ibid. 47. Ueno Zoo, 129, 147. 48. Ibid., 193–94; Takashima, 102–4; Nakagawa Shirō, “Ueno dōbutsuen kaba no gashi” (Starvation to Death of Hippopotami at Ueno Zoo) Bungei-shunjū (February 2005): 266–67. 49. Ueno Zoo, 193–94; Akiyama, 195–97. 50. Nakagawa, 266–67; Shibuya, 34–37, 43–45. 51. Fukuda, 188; Akiyama, 197; Ueno Zoo, 129, 147, 195. 52. Ueno Zoo, Vol. 2 (Shiryō-hen [Statistics]), 432. 53. “Senjichū no dōbutsuen” (Zoos in Wartime), http://museum-jiten. com/old-zoo/cat19/01-3, August 2009; “Yagiyama Zoological Park,” http://www.city.sendai.jp/kensetsu/yagiyama/index.html, February 2010. 54. “Senjichū no dōbutsuen”; “Yagiyama Zoological Park.” 55. “Senjichū no dōbutsuen”; “Yagiyama Zoological Park”; JAZGA, ed., Nihon dōbutsuen suizokokan yōran (Directory of Zoos and Aquariums in Japan) (Tokyo: JAZGA, 1962), 18–19.

Chapter 4 1. Kitaō Hideichi, Dōbutsu no shiki (Four Seasons of Animals) (Tokyo: Bungei-shunjū-shinsha, 1956), 227–28. 2. Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo (Osaka City Zoo, hereafter), ed., Osaka-shi Ten’nōji dōbutsuen 70-nen-shi (70-Year History of Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo) (Osaka: Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, 1985), 3–16; Miyashita Minoru, e-mail to author, March 24, 2010. 3. Osaka City Zoo. 4. Ibid., 19–26; Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 200–201. 5. Sasaki Tokio, Dōbutsuen no rekishi: Nihon ni okeru dōbutsuen no seiritsu (History of Zoos: Establishment of Zoos in Japan) (Tokyo: Nishida-shoten, 1975), 252–55. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 8. Osaka City Zoo, 21–26. 9. Ibid., 31–32. 10. Ibid., 30–35; Miyashita, e-mail to author, March 25, 2010. 11. Ibid., 31–32, 189. 12. Ibid., 30–35; Akiyama, 200–12.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 213

10/8/2010 7:42:55 AM

214 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29.

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36.

37. 38.

39.

40.

NOTES

Akiyama, 210–16. Osaka City Zoo, 34–35. Ibid.; Akiyama, 218–20. Osaka City Zoo, 34–35; Akiyama, 218–20. Yoshida Heihachirō, “Kei ⋅ han ⋅ shin dōbutsuen ni hirou” (“Strolling Zoos in Kyoto, Osaka, and Kobe), Kagaku-gahō (March 1944): 70. Akiyama, 220–24. Osaka City Zoo, 32. Kyoto City Zoo, ed., Kyoto-shi dōbutsuen 80-nen no ayumi (80-Year History of Kyoto City Zoo) (Kyoto: Kyoto City Zoo, 1984), 10–11; Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 50. Kyoto City Zoo, 32; Takizawa, 81, 142. Takizawa, 80–82. Kyoto City Zoo, 33. Takizawa, 82–84. Ibid., 84–86; Ken Kawata, e-mail to author, October 25, 2009. Takizawa, 84–86. Takizawa, 85; Akiyama, 236–37. Takizawa, 86–87; Kyoto City Zoo, 33–34. Kobe City Ōji Zoo (Kobe City Zoo, hereafter), ed., Suwako to ayunda 50-nen (50-Year History of Kobe City Ōji Zoo with Suwako) (Kobe: Kobe City Ōji Zoo, 2001), 2–3; Ishikawa Osamu, letter to author, March 12, 2010. Kobe City Zoo; Akiyama, 239–40. George Adamson, My Pride and Joy: An Autobiography (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987), 12–13. Kobe City Zoo, 3; Akiyama, 241. Kobe City Zoo, 3–4. Ibid., 4. Ibid.; “Sensō no higeki” (Tragedies of War), Kobe-shimbun, March 19, 1951. “Sensō no higeki”; Akiyama, 241–43; e-mail to author dated August 22, 2009; Kim Fang, Sakura: Nihon kara Kankoku e watatta zō-tachi no monogatari (Tale of Elephants That Went to Korea from Japan) (Tokyo: Gakushū-kenkyūsha, 2007), 35. Yoshida, 71. Akiyama, 241; “Suwayama dōbutsuen mōjū shobun” (Disposal of Ferocious Animals at Suwayama Zoo), Kobe-shimbun, March 15, [1951; “Senjichū no dōbutsuen”] (Zoos in Wartime), http://museumjiten.com/old-zoo/cat19/01-3, August 2009. Kobe City Zoo, 4; JAZGA, ed., Nihon dōbutsuen suizokokan yōran (Directory of Zoos and Aquariums in Japan) (Tokyo: JAZGA, 1962), 76. JAZGA, 70; Takashima Haruo, Dōbutsu monogatari (Tales of Animals) (Tokyo: Yasaka-shobō, 1986), 266–67; Ken Kawata,

9780230108943_13_not.indd 214

10/8/2010 7:42:55 AM

NOTES

41. 42.

43. 44. 45.

46. 47.

48. 49. 50.

215

“Hanzaki, Elephants, and Amusement Rides: A Visit to Fourteen Collections in Japan,” International Zoo News 55, no. 5 (2008): 263. JAZGA, 70; Akiyama, 225–27. Akiyama, 228–29; Yoshida, 69–71; Osaka City Zoo, 189; Takizawa, 81, 142. Kawata believes that there were no “Humboldt penguins” at Hanshin Park Zoo (his e-mail to author, October 25, 2009). Akiyama, 228–29; Takashima, 267; and JAZGA, 70. JAZGA, 72–73; Akiyama, 229–31. Akiyama, 229–31; Mainichi-chūgakusei-shimbun-henshūbu, ed., Dōbutsu kidan: Zenkoku dōbutsuen-chō zadankai (Strange Stories of Animals: Discussion of Zoo Directors in Japan) (Tamba, Nara: Yōtokusha, 1950), 126. Emphasis added by author. Yoshida, 72. JAZGA, 72–73; “Dōbutsu-hi” (Memorial Stone for Animals), http:// www.asahi-net.or.jp/~rn2h-dimr/ohaka2/80zoo/85kinki/takaraduka.html, August 2009. JAZGA, 80. “Senjichū no dōbutsuen,” http://museum-jiten.com/old-zoo/cat19/ 03, August 2009. “Mesu-hyō dassō, shasatsu” (Female Leopard Escaped and Was Shot to Death), Asahi-shimbun, April 12, 1944.

Chapter 5 1. JAZGA, ed., Nihon dōbutsuen suizokokan yōran (Directory of Zoos and Aquariums in Japan) (Tokyo: JAZGA, 1962), 46–47. 2. Kōfu City, ed., Kōfushi-shi (History of Kōfu City) (Kōfu: Kōfu City, 1964), 1,857. 3. Kōfu City, ed., Kōfushi-tsūshi (History of Kōfu City) (Kōfu: Kōfu City, 1990), 791–92. 4. Ibid., 792–93. Emphasis added by author. 5. “Godaime no ninki-zō wa ‘kataru’ ” (The Popular Fifth Elephant “Speaks”), Yamanashi-nichinichi-shimbun, July 5, 1999; “Kōfu-shi 100-sai” (100 Years of Kōfu City), series 15, Yamanashi-nichinichishimbun, May 31, 1989; “Kōfu-shi dōbutsuen 70-nen no ayumi” (70-Year History of Kōfu City Zoo), series 3, Yamanashi-nichinichishimbun, September 23, 1987. 6. E-mail to author dated August 5, 2009. 7. “64-nen-me no shōgen: Dōbutsu-tachi o mamori . . .” (64th-Year Testimony: Protecting Animals . . .), TV Yamanashi (UTY), August 11, 2009. 8. “Kōfu-shi dōbutsuen 70-nen no ayumi” (70-Year History of Kōfu City Zoo), series 4, Yamanashi-nichinichi-shimbun, October 4, 1987; Yamanashi-nichinichi-shimbun (1989). 9. Yamanashi-nichinichi-shimbun, series 6, October 8, 1987.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 215

10/8/2010 7:42:55 AM

216

NOTES

10. Higashiyama Zoo, ed., Dōbutsuen no rekishi (Zoo History [Detailed Version], “Higashiyama Zoo History,” hereafter), http://www. higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/01_annai/01_04gaiyo/01_04-01 history/01_04-01_02/01_04-01_02_08.html, July 2009. 11. Ibid.; Gifu University Applied Biology Department, “Dōbutsuen towa” (Defining Zoos), http://www1.gifu-u.ac.jp/~doi/zoo.htm, July 1, 2009. 12. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; “Chūbu eiketsu-den” (Biographies of Heroes in the Chūbu Region), http://hicbc.com/radio/ kibun/2000asapon/hero/000904/index.htm, September 2007. 13. “Higashiyama Zoo History.” 14. Ibid.; Lorenz Hagenbeck, Animals Are My Life, trans., Alec Brown. (London: Bodley Head, 1956), 162–64. 15. “Higashiyama Zoo History.” 16. Ibid.; “Biographies of Heroes.” 17. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; “Biographies of Heroes.” 18. “Higashiyama dōshokubutsuen 50-shūnen (50-Year Anniversary of Higashiyama Zoological and Botanical Gardens), series 43, Chūbunihon-shimbun, March 8, 1987. 19. Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 41, March 6, 1987; Kitaō Hideichi, Dōbutsu no shiki (Four Seasons of Animals) (Tokyo: Bungei-shunjūshinsha, 1956), 228–29. 20. Kitaō, 228–29. 21. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 41, March 6, 1987. 22. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 41, March 6, 1987; Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 248–51. 23. Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 42, March 7, 1987; Akiyama, 251–62. Asai stated in his interview with Akiyama in 1994 that it was “the same day as the disposal of the brown bear” (p. 251); however, other sources indicate that the day was sometime later in November. 24. Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 42, March 7, 1987; Akiyama, 251–62. 25. Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 43, March 8, 1987. 26. “Higashiyama Zoo History.” 27. Kitaō, 229–30. 28. Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 44, March 10, 1987. 29. “Higashiyama Zoo History.” 30. Kitaō, 230–31. 31. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Asahi-shimbunsha-shakaibu, ed., Higashiyama dōbutsuen nikki (Diary of Higashiyama Zoo) (Tokyo: Peppushuppan, 1977), 86–87. 32. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Asahi-shimbunsha. 33. “Higashiyama Zoo History.” 34. Ibid.; e-mail to author dated August 22, 2009. 35. “Higashiyama Zoo History.”; Kitaō, 231. Emphasis added by author.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 216

10/8/2010 7:42:55 AM

NOTES

36. 37. 38. 39. 40.

41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47.

48. 49. 50. 51.

52. 53.

54.

217

Kitaō, 234–35. Emphasis added by author. “Higashiyama Zoo History.” Emphasis added by author. Asahi-shimbunsha, 86–87, 134–35. Kitaō, 229, 231. Emphasis added by author. Akiyama, 271–76; Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo, ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo), Vol. 1 (Tsūshi-hen [History]) (Tokyo: Daiichi hōki-shuppan, 1982), 196. Emphasis added by author. Asahi-shimbunsha, 86–87; Akiyama, 270–76; “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Kitaō, 231. Emphasis added by author. Akiyama, 249. “Biographies of Heroes.” Ibid. Chūb-nihon-shimbun, series 40, March 5, 1987; series 42, March 7, 1987; Akiyama, 263–65. Akiyama, 265. Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 45, March 11, 1987; “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Higashiyama Zoo, ed., “Dōbutsuen no rekishi” (Zoo History [An Overview]), http://www.higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/ 01_annai/01_04gaiyo/01_04-01history/01_04-01_01/01_0401_01_03.html, July 2009; Kitaō, 231. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Asahi-shimbunsha, 88. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; “Biographies of Heroes”; Chūbu-nihonshimbun, series 47, March 13, 1987. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 44, March 10, 1987. “Higashiyama Zoo History”; Asahi-shimbunsha, 87–88; Kitaō, 232; JAZGA, ed., Nihon dōbutsuen suizokukan kyōkai daigokai kyōgikai no kiroku (Conference Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting) (Tokyo: JAZGA, May 1946), 7; Takashima Haruo, Dōbutsu monogatari (Tales of Animals) (Tokyo: Yasaka-shobō, 1986), 108–9. Kitaō, 231–32, 235; Asahi-shimbunsha, 34–36. Kitaō, 227, 231–32; Asahi-shimbunsha, 88; Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, series 46, March 12, 1987. “African rhinoceros” seems mistaken; as Takashima writes (pp. 91–93), Japan acquired its first African rhinoceros in 1952. Higashiyama Zoo’s first rhinoceros came from India in 1974. Kitaō, 235–36; “Higashiyama Zoo History.”

Chapter 6 1. Nishi-Nippon Railroad, ed., Itōzu Yūen 50-nen no ayumi (50-Year History of Itōzu Yūen) (Fukuoka: Nishi-Nippon Railroad, 1982), 18. 2. Ibid. Emphasis added by author. 3. Anami Tetsurō, “Sensō no gisei to natta dōbutsu-tachi” (Animals That Became Victims of the War), “Itōzu Yūen monogatari” (Tales

9780230108943_13_not.indd 217

10/8/2010 7:42:56 AM

218

NOTES

4.

5.

6. 7. 8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

20. 21. 22.

of Itōzu Yūen), No. 7, Nishitetsu news, August 1975, n.p.; “Senjichū no dōbutsuen” (Zoos in Wartime), http://museum-jiten.com/oldzoo/cat19/04, August 2009. Anami; Mainichi-chūgakusei-shimbun-henshūbu, ed., Dōbutsuen kidan: Zenkoku dōbutsuen-chō zadankai (Strange Stories of Zoos: Discussion of Zoo Directors in Japan) (Tamba, Nara: Yōtokusha, 1950), 125–26. Anami; Mainichi-chūgakusei-shimbun-henshūbu, ed., Dōbutsuen kidan: Zenkoku dōbutsuen-chō zadankai (Strange Stories of Zoos: Discussion of Zoo Directors in Japan) (Tamba, Nara: Yōtokusha, 1950), 125–26. Anami. Mainichi-chūgakusei-shimbun, 126. Nishi-Nippon Railroad, 18; Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums (JAZGA, hereafter), ed., Nihon dōbutsuen suizokokan yōran (Directory of Zoos and Aquariums in Japan) (Tokyo: JAZGA, 1962), 90. “Kyū-Fukuoka-shi dōshokubutsuen seimon-ato” (Former Fukuoka City Zoological and Botanical Gardens’ Front Gate Ruin Site), Asahishimbun, Fukuoka/Kita-Kyūshū edition, May 22, 2007. Fukuoka City Zoo, ed., Fukuoka-shi dōbutsuen 50-shūnen kinenshi (50-Year History of Fukuoka City Zoo) (Fukuoka: Fukuoka City Zoo, 2003), 6–7; “Fukuoka-shi dōbutsuen no rekishi” (History of Fukuoka City Zoo), http://zoo.city.fukuoka.lg.jp/sougou/history/ index.html, August 2009. Kumamoto City Zoological and Botanical Gardens, http://www. ezooko.jp/index.html, February 2010; Takashima Haruo, Dōbutsu monogatari (Tales of Animals) (Tokyo: Yasaka-shobō, 1986), 70. Kumamoto Dōbutsuen 60-shūnen kinenshi henshū-iinkai, ed., Kumamoto Dōbutsuen 60-shūnen kinen Dōbutsuen monogatari (60-Year History of Kumamoto Zoo) (Kumamoto: Kumamoto Zoo, 1989), 21–22; Takashima, 77. Kumamoto Zoo, 21–22. Ibid., 22. Ibid., 22–24. Ibid., 24–25. Ibid., 25. JAZGA, 102; Kumamoto City Zoological and Botanical Gardens. Kagoshima City Hirakawa Zoo, ed., Hirakawa dōbutsuen kaien 30-nen no ayumi (30-Year History of Hirakawa Zoo) (Kagoshima: Kagoshima City Hirakawa Zoo, 2003), 6–7. Ibid. Inoue Omikata and Yoshino Jirō, eds., Omoide no Kamoike dōbutsuen (Recollections of Kamoike Zoo) (Kagoshima: Mokuyōsha, 1986), 24. Kagoshima City Hirakawa Zoo, 7; JAZGA, 104.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 218

10/8/2010 7:42:56 AM

NOTES

219

23. Kim Fang, Sakura: Nihon kara Kankoku e watatta zo-tachi no monogatari (Tale of Elephants That Went to Korea from Japan) (Tokyo: Gakushū-kenkyūsha, 2007), 31–32; Komori Atsushi, Mō hitotsu no Ueno dōbutsuen-shi (Another History of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1997), 31–32. 24. Kim, 31–32. 25. Ibid., 33, 43. 26. Ibid., 33–38, 43. 27. Ibid., 28–30, 44; Kawazoe Yū, Edo no misemono (Shows in Edo) (Tokyo: Iwanami-shinsho, 2000), 95–96; Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 140. 28. Kim, 35–41. 29. Takizawa, 140–42, 195–97. 30. Kim, 39–44. 31. Takashima, 102–5. 32. Ibid. 33. Taipei City Zoo, ed. (English version), http://english.taipei.gov.tw/ zoo/index.jsp?categid=4025&recordid=5248, October 2009. 34. “World War II Bombing Raids against Taiwan,” Forumosa (“Forum on Formosa”), http://www.forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?f= 12&t=45238, October 2009. 35. Taipei City Zoo, ed. (Chinese version), “Zoo History,” http://www. zoo.gov.tw/manage/history.shtml, October 2009. 36. Taipei City Zoo (Chinese version); Taipei City Zoo (English version). 37. Chang Meng-jui, “Beloved Elephant Lin Wang Passes Away,” Taiwan Panorama, http://taiwan-panorama.com, April 2003, 65–69. 38. Mark Rosenthal, e-mail dated March 5, 2003; Ken Kawata, e-mail dated August 13, 2003; Richard J. Reynolds III, letter dated September 4, 2004. 39. Satō Masaru, Manshū-zōenshi (History of Park Construction in Manchukuo) (Tokyo: Nihon-zōen-shūkei-kyōkai, 1985), 90. 40. Ibid.; Koshizawa Akira, Manshūkoku no shuto-keikaku (City Planning in Manchukuo) (Tokyo: Nihon-keizai-hyōronsha, 1988), 160–61; Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo (Ueno Zoo, hereafter), ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo), Vol. 1 (Tsūshi-hen [History]) (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982), 160–62. 41. Satō, 90; Koshizawa, 160–61; Ueno Zoo, 147–53. 42. Satō, 90; Koshizawa, 160-61; Tokyo Zoological Park Society, ed., “Takasaki-kaichō to dōbutsu-tachi” (President Takasaki and the Animals), Dōbutsu to dōbutsuen (Animals and Zoos) 16, no. 6 (June 1964): 6/126-14/134; Nihon-keizai-shimbunsha, ed., Watashino rirekisho: Keizaijin 1 (My Biography: Economists 1) (Tokyo: Nihonkeizai-shimbunsha, 1980), 439.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 219

10/8/2010 7:42:56 AM

220

NOTES

43. Manshūkokushi hensan-kankōkai, Manshūkokushi (History of Manchukuo), Vol. 1 (Sōron [An Overview]) (Tokyo: Man’mō-dōhōengokai, 1970), 761–68, 795–803. 44. Yoshihide Soeya, Japan’s Economic Diplomacy with China, 1945–1978 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), 45–59, 80–105. 45. Manshūkokushi hensan-kankōkai, Manshūkokushi (History of Manchukuo), Vol. 2 (Kakuron [Specific Issues]) (Tokyo: Man’mōdōhō-engokai, 1970), 1,020–21. 46. Satō, 90, 98; Koshizawa, 161. 47. Tokyo Zoological Park Society, ed., 10/130; Manshūkokushi hensankankōkai (An Overview), 755–76. 48. Murakami Haruki, Nejimakidori kuronikuru (The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle), Vol. 3 (Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1995), 110–17, 123–24. 49. Ibid., 124–25. 50. Michael Seats, Murakami Haruki: The Simulacrum in Contemporary Japanese Culture (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2006), 1–15, 284–90. 51. Manshūkokushi hensan-kankōkai (An Overview), 768–69; Koshizawa, 160–61. 52. Akune Iwao, Sākasu no rekishi (History of Circuses) (Tokyo: Nishidashoten, 1977), 257–58; Ueno Zoo, 181. 53. Akune, 258.

Chapter 7 1. Zoological Society of London, ed., “The Zoo at War,” no publication date, provided by Society Librarian Ann Sylph, April 6, 2009, 1; Zoological Society of London, ed., “Annual Reports for 1939,” 1940, 4–5. 2. “London Kills Zoo Snakes Lest Air Raid Free Them,” New York Times, September 3, 1939. 3. Zoological Society of London, 2009 and 1940. 4. Clinton H. Keeling, They All Came into the Ark: A Record of the Zoological Society of London in Two World Wars (London: Clam Publications, 1988), 131–34. 5. Ibid., 132–33. 6. Zoological Society of London (2009), 1 and (1940), 6. 7. Keeling, 134–35. 8. Ibid., 135–36; Ann Sylph, Zoological Society of London Library, e-mail to author, November 17, 2009. 9. Ibid., 136; Zoological Society of London (2009), 2 and (1940), 7–9. 10. Zoological Society of London (2009), 2–3. 11. Keeling, 152–55, 191. 12. “Zoo Animals Unhurt,” New York Times, July 29, 1944; Keeling, 151–52, 189–90. 13. New York Times, July 29, 1944; Keeling, 151–52, 189–90.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 220

10/8/2010 7:42:56 AM

NOTES

221

14. Keeling, 134–37; Clinton H. Keeling, Whipsnade’s War (London: Clam Publications, 1990), 35. 15. Keeling (1990), 35, 45, 70. 16. “Animals in Air Raids,” New York Times, November 10, 1940. 17. Belfast city administrator’s e-mail to author, August 8, 2008; “History of Belfast Zoo,” http://belfastzoo.co.uk/aboutbelfastzoo/history ofbelfastzoo.aspx, August 2008. 18. “Search for the ‘Elephant Angel,’ ” http://www.belfastzoo.co.uk/ newsandevents/archivenewsitem.aspx?id=21, March 16, 2009; “ ‘Elephant Angel’ Found,” http://www.belfastzoo.co.uk/newsandevents/ archivenewsitem.aspx?id=22, March 20, 2009. 19. Heinz-Georg Klös, Guide Book to the Zoological Gardens of Berlin, trans. Hans Frädrich, 7th rev. (Berlin: Berlin Zoological Gardens, 1984), 8; Harro Strehlow, “Zoological Gardens of Western Europe,” in Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens (London: CRC Press, 2001), 107. 20. George Axelsson, “Zoo Animals Roam Berlin Streets: Heat of Fires Fells Pedestrians,” New York Times, November 25, 1943. 21. “Siemens Plants Hit Hard: Berliners Eat Animals That Got Out of Bombed Zoo,” New York Times, November 28, 1943. 22. “Berlin Chaos Described: People in Apathetic Terror, Says Witness to R AF Attacks,” New York Times, January 9, 1944. 23. Fukuda Saburō, Jitsuroku Ueno dōbutsuen (The True Record of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Mainichi-shimbunsha, 1968), 81, 146. 24. Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo, ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100Year History of Ueno Zoo), Vol. 1 (Tsūshi-hen [History]) (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982), 166, 183. 25. Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 80. 26. Strehlow, 106–8; Herman Reichenbach, e-mail to the author, March 21, 2009. 27. Helen M. Geriger, The Zoo on the Mountain: A History of the Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Park (Colorado Springs: Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Park, 1968), 26–27. 28. Frederick S. Litten, “Starving the Elephants: The Slaughter of Animals in Wartime Tokyo’s Ueno Zoo,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 38, no. 3 (2009): 2 (e-journal), http://www/japanfocus.org/Frederick_S_-Litten/3225. 29. Ibid. 30. Rosl Kirchshofer, “Frankfurt Zoo, New Ideas in Animal Housing,” in Rosl Kirchshofer, ed., The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer (trans. Hilda Morris) (New York: Viking Press, 1968), 288. 31. Ibid., 288–89; Ken Kawata, e-mail to author, January 10, 2010. 32. Colin Rawlins, “Frankfurt: Zoologischer Garten der Stadt Frankfurtam-Main,” in Solly Zuckerman, ed., Great Zoos of the World: The Origins and Significance (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1980), 78–79.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 221

10/8/2010 7:42:57 AM

222

NOTES

33. Herman Reichenbach, “Hagenbeck at 150,” International Zoo News 45/8, no. 289 (1998): 469–71. 34. Ibid. 35. Lorenz Hagenbeck, Animals Are My Life, trans., Alec Brown (London: Bodley Head, 1956), 216–17. 36. Ibid., 217. 37. Ibid., 218–19. 38. Ibid., 219. 39. Ibid., 220–24. 40. Ibid., 224; Richard J. Reynolds III, e-mail to author, October 18, 2009. 41. Hagenbeck, 224; Reynolds. 42. Author interview with former resident of Dresden, December 1, 2009; Frederick Taylor, Dresden: Tuesday 13 February 1945 (London: Bloomsbury, 2005), 409. 43. “Dresden Zoo in Germany,” http://www.elephant.se/location2.php? location_id=33, February 2008. 44. Lex Noordermeer, e-mail dated April 16, 2009; A. C. van Bruggen, e-mail dated April 4, 2009; Strehlow, 91–92. 45. Noordermeer; van Bruggen; Strehlow, 104. 46. Van Bruggen. 47. Kawata, e-mail to author, April 19, 2009. 48. Van Bruggen; Geriger, 26. 49. Leszek Solski, “Zoological Gardens of Central-Eastern Europe and Russia,” in Kisling, 122–24. 50. D. T. Max, “Antonina’s List,” New York Times Book Review, September 9, 2007. 51. Solski, 121–23. 52. Mati Kaal, International Zoo News 55/8, no. 369 (2008): 496. 53. Ibid., 496–97. 54. Kawata, e-mail to author, March 5, 2009. 55. Litten, 9. 56. Spartaco Gippoliti, e-mail to author, January 9, 2010. 57. Kirchshofer, 311; Spartaco Gippoliti, La Giungla di Villa Borghese, Il Giardino Zoologico di Roma (1908–1998), Edizioni Belvedere, Latina, Italy, 2010 (in press). 58. Gippoliti. 59. Ibid.

Chapter 8 1. Helen M. Geriger, The Zoo on the Mountain: A History of the Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Park (Colorado Springs: Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Park, 1968), 26–27. 2. Marvin Lee Jones, letter to Ken Kawata, July 4, 1989; Ken Kawata, e-mail to author, February 1, 2010.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 222

10/8/2010 7:42:57 AM

NOTES

223

3. “Lions in Boston Zoo on War Diet, Eat Horse Meat,” Brainerd (Minnesota) Daily Dispatch, July 27, 1942. 4. “Bronx Zoo Ready for Air Raid in City,” New York Times, December 18, 1941. 5. “Jungle Law,” New York Herald Tribune, January 18, 1942. 6. “Bronx Zoo Ready.” 7. “Blackout Tonight in Upper Bronx,” New York Times, April 9, 1942. 8. Ibid. 9. William Bridges, Gathering of Animals: An Unconventional History of the New York Zoological Society (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), 456–59; “Rare Birds Flown Here,” New York Times, February 12, 1942. 10. Ibid. (Bridges); Richard J. Reynolds III, e-mails to author, March 17, 2009, October 18, 2009, and January 13, 2010. 11. Ken Kawata, New York’s Biggest Little Zoo: A History of the Staten Island Zoo (Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt, 2003), 36–37. 12. “Jungle Law,” New York Herald Tribune, January 18, 1942. 13. Kawata, 24, 25–38. 14. E-mails to author, December 2 and 15, 2009; “Prepare to Shoot Zoo Animals if Air Raids Should Weaken Cages,” New Castle (Pennsylvania) News, February 13, 1942. 15. “Prepare to Shoot.” 16. “Supply of Animals Shut off due to War,” Philadelphia Inquirer, March 22, 1942; “No Bananas Causing Headaches at the Zoo,” Evening Bulletin, August 17, 1942; “Army of Rattlers Mobilizes at Zoo to Join in War Effort,” Daily News, May 2, 1944. 17. “Zoo’s Snakes to Die if D.C. Faces Attack,” Washington Post, December 9, 1941. 18. “3 Giant Cobras at Zoo to Die: Death of Snakes Decreed as War Precaution,” Charleston (West Virginia) Daily Mail, January 11, 1942. 19. Jack Stinnett, “The Capital in Wartime,” Fitchburg (Massachusetts) Sentinel, April 3, 1942; James B. Murphy, e-mail, December 30, 2009; Gerald G. Gross, “Meet Lopez and the Scottish Highland Cattle,” Washington Post, February 28, 1942. 20. Stinnett. 21. William A. Austin, The First Fifty Years: An Informal History of the Detroit Zoological Park and the Detroit Zoological Society (Detroit: Detroit Zoological Society, 1974), 39–42. 22. Ibid. 23. Ibid. 24. Mark Rosenthal, Carol Tauber, and Edward Uhlir, The Ark in the Park: The Story of Lincoln Park Zoo (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003), 73–74. 25. Ibid., 78–81. 26. Andrea Friederici Ross, Let the Lions Roar! The Evolution of Brookfield Zoo (Chicago: Chicago Zoological Society, 1997), 74–78; Ken Kawata, e-mail to author, January 7, 2010.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 223

10/8/2010 7:42:57 AM

224

NOTES

27. Ross, 74–78. 28. Ibid., 78–79. 29. “County-Wide Blackout Set for Dec. 29th,” (Madison, Wisconsin) Capital Times, December 19, 1941. 30. “Vilas Zoo to Be Prepared for Air Raids,” (Madison, Wisconsin) Capital Times, December 28, 1941. 31. Ibid. 32. Erik Trump, e-mail dated March 17, 2009; Minutes of New Orleans Zoological Society, September 15, 1941, Audubon Park Commission Records, 56–155, in Minutes of the New Orleans Zoological Society, July 1941–September 1942, Earl K. Long Library, University of New Orleans. 33. Geriger, 25–27. 34. Ibid., 26–27. 35. Ibid., 27. 36. Ibid. 37. Trump, e-mail dated March 3, 2009; Gus Knudson, “Air Raid Defense at the Woodland Park Zoological Gardens,” 1942, folder 50/51, Woodland Park and Zoo, 1906–1949; “Gus Knudson to All Keepers at the Zoo,” December 15, 1941, folder 6/20, Defense Plans, Don Sherwood Parks History Collection, Seattle Municipal Archives. 38. Stuart Whitehouse, “Zoo Curator ‘Rages’ at Hay Ration Rumor,” Seattle Star, October 8, 1943, folder 16/6, Woodland Park and Zoo 1940–1951, Ben Evans Recreation Program History Collection, Seattle Municipal Archives. 39. Harry M. Wegeforth and Neil Morgan, It Began with a Roar! The Story of the World-Famous San Diego Zoo (San Diego: Zoological Society of San Diego, 1969), 159–66. 40. Ibid., 166–67. 41. Ibid., 168–74. 42. Ibid., 179. 43. Christina Simmons, e-mail to author, October 19, 2009.

Chapter 9 1. Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 323–24. 2. Mayumi Itoh, The Hatoyama Dynasty: Japanese Political Leadership through the Generations (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), 75–77. 3. Ibid., 80–81. 4. Ken Kawata, “Zoological Gardens of Japan,” in Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens (London: CRC Press, 2001), 301-2. 5. Koga Tadamichi, Dōbutsu eno aijō (Affection for Animals) (Tokyo: Tsukudo-shobō, 1957), 76–78; Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo (Ueno

9780230108943_13_not.indd 224

10/8/2010 7:42:57 AM

NOTES

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11.

12.

13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

225

Zoo, hereafter), ed., Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo), Vol. 1 (Tsūshi-hen [History]) (Tokyo: Daiichi-hōkishuppan, 1982), 198; Ueno Zoo, Vol. 2 (Shiryō-hen [Statistics]), 432. Koga, 76–78; Shibuya Shinkichi, Zō no namida (Tears of Elephants) (Tokyo: Nichigei-shuppan, 1972), 82–83. Koga, 78; Komori Atsushi, Mō hitotsu no Ueno dōbutsuen-shi (Another History of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1997), 70–71. Koga, 80; Komori, 89–93; Ueno Zoo, 238–40. Ueno Zoo, 238–40. Ibid., 243–52; Shimura Takeo, “Heiwa no shisetsu”: Indira monogatari (“Ambassador of Peace”: The Story of Indira) (Tokyo: Kōseishuppansha, 1996), 17–19. Shimura, 16–34; “Shōwa-shi saihō: Zō Indira no rainichi” (“Revising Shōwa History: Arrival of Elephant Indira), Asahi-shimbun, September 19, 2009. Shimura, 16–34; Komori Atsushi, Hanako ga nigeta: Watashi no dōbutsuen-shi (Hanako Escaped: My Zoo History) (Tokyo: Tokyo Zoological Park Society, 2002), 102–4; “Sengo shōwa-shi: GNP to kokumin shotoku no suii” (Postwar Shōwa-era History: Changes in GNP and National Income), http://shouwashi.com/transition-gnp. html, September 2010. Shimura, 27–31; Ueno Zoo (History), 244–45. Ueno Zoo (History), 244–45, 262. Ibid., 246–53; Shimura, 38–41. Shibuya, 34–35, 42–44; “Sayōnara Indira . . .” (Good-bye, Indira . . .), Asahi-shimbun, August 12, 1983. Shibuya, 36–37, 44–45. Ibid.; “Zō-ressha to Hanako-san” (Elephant Train and Hanako-san), Chūnichi-shimbun, June 9, 2009. Ueno Zoo (History), 245–51. Ueno Zoo (History), 251–22; Komori (2002), 70–73. Ueno Zoo (History), 208–15; Ueno Zoo (Statistics), 433. Ueno Zoo (History), 284–85. Shimura, 57–60; Ken Kawata, “History of Traveling Menageries of Japan,” Bandwagon, November–December 2005, 49–50. Shimura, 57–66. Shimura, 66–80; Shibuya, 156–59. Shimura, 81–95. Shimura, 158–61, 169; Shibuya, 160–62. Ueno Zoo (History), 348–49, 563; Komori (1997), 97–98. Shimura, 32, 174–81. Shimura, 184–97, 202–7; “Sayōnara Indira . . .” “Ueno dōbutuen, zō shiikuin o satsugai” (Elephant at Ueno Zoo Killed a Keeper), Tokyo-shimbun, August 23, 1974; Shibuya, 49–55.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 225

10/8/2010 7:42:57 AM

226

NOTES

32. Shimura, 171–73 ; “Zō no Hanako, nido-me no satsujin” (Elephant Hanako Killed a Man for the Second Time), Asahi-shimbun, April 15, 1960. 33. “Yume to kibō o kureru ‘Hanako’ ” (“Hanako” Gives People Dreams and Courage), Asahi-shimbun, November 21, 2009. 34. Ibid.; Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, ed., Inokashira Shizen Bunkaen 50-nen no ayumi to shōrai (50-Year History of Inokashira Nature and Culture Park) (Musashino: Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, 1992), 83. 35. Ueno Zoo (History), 267–68, 362. 36. Ibid., 273–74; Komori (1997), 122–24. 37. Ueno Zoo (History), 296–310. 38. Ibid.; Shibuya, 83–84. 39. Komori (1997), 115–19, 159; Komori (2002), 209–14. 40. Komori (2002), 177–80, 212; Ueno Zoo (History), 363–77, 400. 41. Shibuya, 224–27. 42. Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, ed., Osaka-shi Ten’nōji dōbutsuen 70-nenshi (70-Year History of Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo) (Osaka: Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, 1985), 36–37, 140. 43. Ibid., 37–43, 140–41. 44. Ibid. 45. Kyoto City Zoo, ed., Kyoto-shi dōbutsuen 80-nen no ayumi (80-Year History of Kyoto City Zoo) (Kyoto: Kyoto City Zoo, 1984), 34–44; Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 86–92, 142–43. 46. Ibid. 47. Ibid. 48. Takizawa, 86–92. 49. Ibid., 100–101. 50. Akiyama, 337–38; Kobe City Ōji Zoo, ed., Habataki: Kobe City Ōji Zoo Pictorial 63 (October 2008): 4; Ueno Zoo (History), 438. 51. Kitaō Hideichi, Dōbutsu no shiki (Four Seasons of Animals) (Tokyo: Bungei-shunjū-shinsha, 1956), 234–35; Yamamoto Shizuo, “Zoos in Japan,” in Rosl Kirchshofer, ed., The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer (trans. Hilda Morris) (New York: Viking Press, 1968), 269. 52. Kitaō, 234–35. 53. Akiyama, 326–27. Akiyama’s account of Asai is based on his interview with Asai in 1994. 54. Ibid., 326–28. 55. Ibid., 328, 333–34. 56. Higashiyama Zoo, ed., “Dōbtsuen no rekishi” (Zoo History [An Overview]), http://www.higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/01_annai/01_ 04gaiyo/01_04-01history/01_04-01_01/01_04-01_01_03.html, July 2009. 57. Ibid.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 226

10/8/2010 7:42:58 AM

NOTES

227

58. Ibid.; Kushima Tsutomu, “Zō-ressha to Hanako-san” (Elephant Train and Hanako-san), Chūnichi-shimbun, June 9, 2009. 59. Ibid.; “Zō-san mo demukae” (Elephants Also Came to the Gate to Welcome), Chūbu-nihon-shimbun, June 19, 1949. 60. Akiyama, 340–41; “Ueno dōbutuen, zō shiikuin o satsugai” (Elephant at Ueno Zoo Killed a Keeper), Tokyo-shimbun, August 23, 1974 (this article also mentions the case at Higashiyama Zoo). 61. Akiyama, 342–43. 62. Ibid., 343–44; Hashikawa Hisashi, e-mail to author, June 5, 2010. 63. Ibid., 345; Higashiyama Zoo; Asahi-shimbunsha-shakaibu, ed., Higashiyama dōbutsuen nikki (Diary of Higashiyama Zoo) (Tokyo: Peppu-shuppan, 1977), 58–59. 64. Higashiyama Zoo. 65. Emily Hahn, Animal Gardens (New York: Doubleday, 1967), 203–4.

Chapter 10 1. Peter Young, ed., World Almanac Book of World War II (New York: World Almanac Publications, 1981); Akiyama Masami, Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-era History of Zoos) (Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995), 288. 2. Kōseishō 50-nenshi henshūiinkai, ed., Kōseishō 50-nenshi (50-Year History of Ministry of Health) (Tokyo: Kōsei-mondai-kenkyūkai, 1988), 1459–65; author interview, August 2, 2009. 3. Akiyama, 289, 350–51. 4. George Adamson, A Lifetime with Lions (Bwana Game) (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968), 14; Vernon N. Kisling Jr., “Preface,” in Kisling, ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens (London: CRC Press, 2001), unnumbered, fifth page of preface. 5. Akiyama, 302–5. 6. Koga Tadamichi, Dōbutsu eno aijō (Affection for Animals) (Tokyo: Tsukudo-shobō, 1957), 78. 7. Komori Atsushi, Mō hitotsu no Ueno dōbutsuen-shi (Another History of Ueno Zoo) (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1997), 61–62. 8. Akiyama, 290–92. 9. Ibid., 293–94. 10. Koga Tadamichi, 170–71; Komori, 62. 11. Takizawa Akio, Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo) (Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986), 85–86. 12. Ian J. Miller, “The Great Zoo Massacre: Odachi Shigeo and the Logic of Sacrifice in Wartime Japan,” paper delivered at the Association for Asian Studies Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, April 3–6, 2008 (abstract available at http://www.aasianst.org/absts/2008abst/ Japan/j-217.htm., 2008).

9780230108943_13_not.indd 227

10/8/2010 7:42:58 AM

228

NOTES

13. Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, ed., Ōdachi Shigeo (Ōdachi Shigeo, Vol. 1, hereafter) (Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956), 3–4, 521. 14. Ibid., 3–4, 276–24, 521; Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, ed., Tsuisō no Ōdachi Shigeo (Remembering Ōdachi Shigeo, Vol. 2, hereafter) (Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956), 137, 171, 209–10. 15. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 2), 47–48, 86–87, 165–68, 253–54. 16. Ibid., 124–28. 17. Ibid., 135–39. 18. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 235–36. 19. Ibid., 236. 20. Ibid., 236–37. 21. Ibid., 237–38. 22. “Ferocious Animals in Zoo Near Singapore Destroyed,” Washington Post, December 16, 1941; Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 167–97, 510. 23. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 2), 132–35; “Gakudō sokai” (Evacuation of School Children), Chūnichi-shimbun, August 15, 2010; “Sengo 65-nen” (Sixty-five Years After the War), Chūnichi-shimbun, August 15, 2010. 24. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 2), 132–35. 25. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 140, 247, 512. 26. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 435–40; (Vol. 2), 139, 177. 27. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 267–73, 456, 512–13. 28. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 324–30, 391–98, 513–17; (Vol. 2), 229–30, 242–43. 29. Ōdachi Shigeo (Vol. 1), 413–33, 517–19; (Vol. 2), 225–26, 253–54, 263–64. 30. Akiyama, 299–301. 31. Ibid., 309–14. 32. “Quotations of Mahatma Gandhi,” http://thinkexist.com/quotes/ mahatma_gandhi, September 3, 2009.

9780230108943_13_not.indd 228

10/8/2010 7:42:58 AM

Bibl io gr a ph y

I. Sources in English Official Zoo Publications Austin, William A. The First Fifty Years: An Informal History of the Detroit Zoological Park and the Detroit Zoological Society. Detroit: Detroit Zoological Society, 1974. Geriger, Helen M. The Zoo on the Mountain: A History of the Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Park. Colorado Springs: Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Park, 1968. Klös, Heinz-Georg. Guide Book to the Zoological Gardens of Berlin. Translated by Hans Frädrich, 7th rev. Berlin: Berlin Zoological Gardens, 1984. Rosenthal, Mark, Carol Tauber, and Edward Uhlir. The Ark in the Park: The Story of Lincoln Park Zoo. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003. Ross, Andrea Friederici. Let the Lions Roar! The Evolution of Brookfield Zoo. Chicago: Chicago Zoological Society, 1997. Wegeforth, Harry M., and Neil Morgan. It Began with a Roar! The Story of the Famous San Diego Zoo. San Diego: Zoological Society of San Diego, 1969.

Books (including memoirs) Ackerman, Diane. The Zookeeper’s Wife: A War Story. New York: W. W. Norton, 2007. Adamson, George. A Lifetime with Lions (Bwana Game). Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968. ———. My Pride and Joy: An Autobiography. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987. Ames, Eric. Carl Hagenbeck Sr.: Beasts and Men. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2009. Anthony, Lawrence, and Graham Spence. Babylon’s Ark: The Incredible Wartime Rescue of the Baghdad Zoo. New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2007. Attenborough, David. The Zoo Quest Expeditions. Cambridge, UK: Lutterworth Press, 1980. Bell, Catharine E., ed., Encyclopedia of the World Zoos. 3 vols. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 2001.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 229

10/8/2010 7:41:49 AM

230

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bix, Herbert, P. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York: HarperCollins, 2000. Bourke, Anthony, and John Rendall. A Lion Called Christian: The True Story of the Remarkable Bond between Two Friends and a Lion. London: Collins, 1971. Bridges, William. Gathering of Animals: An Unconventional History of the New York Zoological Society. New York: Harper and Row, 1974. Calder, Kent E., and Francis Fukuyama, eds. East Asian Multilateralism: Prospects for Regional Stability. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008. Curtis, Gerald L., ed. Policy-Making in Japan: Defining the Role of Politicians. Washington, DC: Japan Center for International Exchange, 2002. Edwards, John. London Zoo: From Old Photographs, 1852–1914. London: Self-published, 1996. Hagenbeck, Carl. Beasts and Men. Translated by Hugh S. R. Elliot and A. G. Thacker. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1911. Hagenbeck, Lorenz. Animals Are My Life. Translated by Alec Brown. London: Bodley Head, 1956. Hahn, Emily. Animal Gardens. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967. Hancocks, David. A Different Nature: The Paradoxical World of Zoos and Their Uncertain Future. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. Hansen, Elizabeth. Animal Attractions: Nature on Display in American Zoos. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002. Hoage, R. J. Animal Extinctions: What Everyone Should Know. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1985. ———, ed. Perceptions of Animals in American Culture. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989. Hoage, R. J., and William A. Deiss, eds. New Worlds, New Animals: From Menagerie to Zoological Park in the Nineteenth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996. Hoage, R. J., and Katy Moran, eds. Culture: The Missing Element in Conservation and Development. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt, 1998. Hrebenar, Ronald J., ed. The Japanese Party System. 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992. ———, ed. Japan’s New Party System. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000. Itoh, Mayumi. The Hatoyama Dynasty: Japanese Political Leadership through the Generations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. ———. Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Johnson, Chalmers A. Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2007. Johnson, Osa. I Married Adventure. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1940. Kawata, Ken. New York’s Biggest Little Zoo: A History of the Staten Island Zoo. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt, 2003. Keeling, Clinton, H. They All Came into the Ark: A Record of the Zoological Society of London in Two World Wars. London: Clam Publications, 1988.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 230

10/8/2010 7:41:50 AM

BIBLIOGRAPHY

231

———. Whipsnade’s War. London: Clam Publications, 1990. ———. Skyscrapers and Sealions. London: Clam Publications, 2002. Kirchshofer, Rosl, ed. The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer. Translated by Hilda Morris. New York: Viking Press, 1968. Kisling, Vernon N., Jr., ed. Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens. London: CRC Press, 2001. Krauss, Ellis S., and T. J. Pempel, eds. Beyond Bilateralism: U.S.-Japan Relations in the New Asia-Pacific. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004. Pflugfelder, Gregory M., and Brett L. Walter, eds. JAPANimals: History and Culture in Japan’s Animal Life. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2005. Richards, Dick. Life with Alice: Forty Years of Elephant Adventures. New York: Coward-McCann, 1944. Robinson, Michael H., and Lionel Tiger, eds. Man and Beast Revisited. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991. Rothfels, Nigel. Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002. ———, ed. Representing Animals. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002. Ruoff, Kenneth James. The People’s Emperor: Democracy and the Japanese Monarchy, 1945–1995. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asian Center, 2001. Samuels, Richard J. “Rich Nation, Strong Army”: National Security and the Technological Transformation of Japan. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994. Seats, Michael. Murakami Haruki: The Simulacrum in Contemporary Japanese Culture. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2006. Seton, Earnest Thompson. Lives of Game Animals. 4 vols. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1925–1928. Williams, J. H. Elephant Bill. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1950. Zagoria, Donald S. ed. Breaking the China-Taiwan Impasse. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003. Zoological Society of London. ed. International Zoo Yearbook. London: Zoological Society of London, 1959–current. Zuckerman, Solly. ed. Great Zoos of the World: The Origins and Significance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1980.

Book Chapters Kawata, Ken. “Zoological Gardens of Japan.” In Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens. London: CRC Press, 2001, 295–330. Miller, Ian. “Didactic Nature: Exhibiting Nation and Empire at the Ueno Zoological Gardens.” In Gregory M. Pflugfelder and Brett L. Walker, eds., JAPANimals: History and Culture in Japan’s Animal Life. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005, 273–313.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 231

10/8/2010 7:41:50 AM

232

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rawlins, Colin. “Frankfurt: Zoologischer Garten der Stadt Frankfurt-amMain.” In Solly Zuckerman, ed., Great Zoos of the World: The Origins and Significance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1980, 75–82. Reichenbach, Herman. “A Tale of Two Zoos: The Hamburg Zoological Garden and Carl Hagenbeck’s Tierpark.” In R. J. Hoage and William A. Deiss, eds., New Worlds, New Animals: From Menagerie to Zoological Park in the Nineteenth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, 51–62. Solski, Leszek. “Zoological Gardens of Central-Easter Europe and Russia.” In Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens. London: CRC Press, 2001, 117–46. Strehlow, Harro. “Zoological Gardens of Western Europe.” In Vernon N. Kisling Jr. ed., Zoo and Aquarium History: Ancient Collections to Zoological Gardens. London: CRC Press, 2001, 75–116. Yamamoto, Shizuo. “Zoos in Japan.” In Rosl Kirchshofer, ed., The World of Zoos: A Survey and Gazetteer (trans. Hilda Morris). New York: Viking Press, 1968, 269–73.

Journal Articles Kawata, Ken. “Don’t Hit An Elephant, It’s Cruel!” Alive (June 1983): 2–6. ———. “History of Traveling Menageries of Japan.” Bandwagon (November– December 2005): 44–51. ———. “Hanzaki, Elephants, and Amusement Rides: A Visit to Fourteen Collections in Japan.” International Zoo News 55, no. 5 (2008): 262–81. Litten, Frederick S. “Starving the Elephants: The Slaughter of Animals in Wartime Tokyo’s Ueno Zoo.” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 38, no. 3 (2009): 1–14 (e-journal), http://www/japanfocus.org/-Frederick_S_Litten/3225. McNeely, Jeffrey A. “The Importance of Elephants in Burmese Forestry: A Proposal for World Bank Support.” Elephant Interest Group, ed., Elephant 1, no. 4 (1980): 29–32. Reichenbach, Herman. “Hagenbeck at 150.” International Zoo News 45/8, no. 289 (1998): 468–75.

Conference Papers Kawata, Ken. “Trouble by the Ton: Our Elephant Dilemma.” Paper presented at the AAZPA Great Lakes Regional Conference, St. Louis, MO, April 27, 1987. Miller, Ian J. “The Great Zoo Massacre: Odachi Shigeo and the Logic of Sacrifice in Wartime Japan.” Paper delivered at the Association for Asian Studies Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, April 3–6, 2008 (abstract available at http://www.aasianst.org/absts/2008abst/Japan/j-217.htm., 2008).

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 232

10/8/2010 7:41:50 AM

BIBLIOGRAPHY

233

II. Sources in Japanese Government Publications, Zoo Official Publications, and Equivalent Documents Asahi-shimbunsha-shakaibu, ed. Higashiyama dōbutsuen nikki (Diary of Higashiyama Zoo). Tokyo: Peppu-shuppan, 1977. Fukuda Saburō. Jitsuroku Ueno dōbutsuen (The True Record of Ueno Zoo). Tokyo: Mainichi-shimbunsha, 1968. Fukuoka City Zoo, ed. Fukuoka-shi dōbutsuen 50-shūnen kinenshi (50-Year History of Fukuoka City Zoo). Fukuoka: Fukuoka City Zoo, 2003. Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, ed. Inokashira Shizen Bunkaen 50-nen no ayumi to shōrai (50-Year History of Inokashira Nature and Culture Park). 2 vols. Musashino: Inokashira Nature and Culture Park Management Office, 1992. Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums (JAZGA), ed. Nihon dōbutsuen suizokukan kyōkai daigokai kyōgikai no kiroku (Conference Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting). Tokyo: JAZGA, May 1946. ———, ed. Nihon dōbutsuen suizokukan yōran (Directory of Zoos and Aquariums in Japan). Tokyo: JAZGA, 1962. Kagoshima City Hirakawa Zoo, ed. Hirakawa dōbutsuen kaien 30-nen no ayumi (30-Year History of Hirakawa Zoo). Kagoshima: Kagoshima City Hirakawa Zoo, 2003. Kobe City Ōji Zoo, ed. Suwako to ayunda 50-nen (50-Year History of Kobe City Ōji Zoo with Suwako). Kobe: Kobe City Ōji Zoo, 2001. Kōfu City, ed. Kōfushi-shi (History of Kōfu City). Kōfu: Kōfu City, 1964. ———. Kōfushi-tsūshi (History of Kōfu City). Kōfu: Kōfu City, 1990. Kōseishō 50-nenshi henshūiinkai, ed. Kōseishō 50-nenshi (50-year History of Ministry of Health). Tokyo: Kōsei-mondai-kenkyūkai, 1988. Kumamoto Dōbutsuen 60-shūnen kinenshi henshū-iinkai, ed. Kumamoto Dōbutsuen 60-shūnen kinen dōbutsuen monogatari (60-Year History of Kumamoto Zoo). Kumamoto: Kumamoto Zoo, 1989. Kyoto City Zoo, ed. Kyoto-shi dōbutsuen 80-nen no ayumi (80-Year History of Kyoto City Zoo). Kyoto: Kyoto City Zoo, 1984. Manshūkokushi hensan-kankōkai, ed. Manshūkokushi (History of Manchukuo). 2 vols. Tokyo: Man’mō-dōhō-engokai, 1970. Nishi-Nippon Railroad, ed. Itōzu Yūen 50-nen no ayumi (50-Year History of Itōzu Yūen). Fukuoka: Nishi-Nippon Railroad, 1982. Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, ed. Ōdachi Shigeo. Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956. ———. ed. Tsuisō no Ōdachi Shigeo (Remembering Ōdachi Shigeo). Tokyo: Ōdachi Shigeo denki-kankōkai, 1956. Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, ed. Osaka-shi Ten’nōji dōbutsuen 70-nen-shi (70-Year History of Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo). Osaka: Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, 1985.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 233

10/8/2010 7:41:50 AM

234

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Tokyo-to Onshi Ueno Zoo, ed. Ueno dōbutsuen hyakunen-shi (100-Year History of Ueno Zoo). 2 vols. Tokyo: Daiichi-hōki-shuppan, 1982. Satō Masaru. Manshū-zōenshi (History of Park Construction in Manchukuo). Tokyo: Nihon-zōen-shūkei-kyōkai, 1985. Takizawa Akio. Kyoto Okazaki dōbutsuen no kiroku (Record of Kyoto Okazaki Zoo). Kyoto: Rakuhōdō, 1986. Yamamoto Shizuo, ed. Shiritsu Ōji dōbutsuen goan’nai (Guide to City Ōji Zoo). Kobe: Kobe Ōji Dōbutsuen-kyōkai, 1958.

Journal Articles and Other Forms of Primary Sources Anami Tetsurō. “Sensō no gisei to natta dōbutsu-tachi” (Animals That Became Victims of the War). “Itōzu Yūen monogatari” (Tales of Itōzu Yūen), No. 7, Nishitetsu news, August 1975. Higashiyama Zoo, ed. “Dōbtsuen no rekishi” (Zoo History [An Overview]). http://www.higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/01_annai/01_04gaiyo/01_0401history/01_04-01_01/01_04-01_01_03.html, July 2009. Higashiyama Zoo, ed. “Dōbutsuen no rekishi” (Zoo History [Detailed Version]). http://www.higashiyama.city.nagoya.jp/01_annai/01_04gaiyo/ 01_04-01history/01_04-01_02/01_04-01_02_08.html, July 2009. Kobe City Ōji Zoo, ed. Habataki: Kobe City Ōji Zoo Pictorial 63 (October 2008).

Books (including memoirs) Akiyama Masami. Dōbutsuen no shōwa-shi (Shōwa-Era History of Zoos). Tokyo: Dēta-hausu, 1995. Akune Iwao. Sākasu no rekishi (History of Circuses). Tokyo: Nishida-shoten, 1977. Asahi-shimbunsha, ed. Asahi kuronikuru (Asahi Chronicle). Tokyo: Asahishimbunsha, 2001. Asai Rikizō. Gorira o sodateru (Raising Gorillas). Tokyo: Mainichi-shimbunsha, 1968. Inoue Omikata and Yoshino Jirō, eds. Omoide no Kamoike dōbutsuen (Recollections of Kamoike Zoo). Kagoshima: Mokuyōsha, 1986. Ishikawa Chiyomatsu zenshū-kankōkai, ed. Ishikawa Chiyomatsu zenshū (Collection of Works of Ishikawa Chiyomatsu). Tokyo: Kōbunsha, 1936. Kawazoe Yū. Edo no misemono (Shows in Edo). Tokyo: Iwanami-shinsho, 2000. Kim Fang. Sakura: Nihon kara Kankoku e watatta zo-tachi no monogatari (Tale of Elephants That Went to Korea from Japan). Tokyo: Gakushūkenkyūsha, 2007. Kitaō Hideichi. Dōbutsu no shiki (Four Seasons of Animals). Tokyo: Bungeishunjū-shinsha, 1956.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 234

10/8/2010 7:41:50 AM

BIBLIOGRAPHY

235

Koga Tadamichi. Dōbutsu eno aijō (Affection for Animals). Tokyo: Tsukudoshobō, 1957. Koide Takashi and Mita Genjirō. Zō-ressha ga yattekita (Elephant Train Arrives). Tokyo: Iwasaki-shoten, 1983. Komori Atsushi. Hanako ga nigeta: Watashi no dōbutsuen-shi (Hanako Escaped: My Zoo History). Tokyo: Tokyo Zoological Park Society, 2002. ———. Mō hitotsu no Ueno dōbutsuen-shi (Another History of Ueno Zoo). Tokyo: Maruzen, 1997. Koshizawa Akira. Manshūkoku no shuto-keikaku (City Planning in Manchukuo). Tokyo: Nihon-keizai-hyōronsha, 1988. Mainichi-chūgakusei-shimbun-henshūbu. ed. Dōbutsu kidan: Zenkoku dōbutsuenchō zadankai (Strange Stories of Animals: Discussion of Zoo Directors in Japan). Tamba, Nara: Yōtokusha, 1950. Matsuoka Shigeru. Niji no hashi o watatta zō (The Elephant That Crossed the Rainbow Bridge). http://ncode.syosetu.com/n1836g/novel.html, 2009. Murakami Haruki. Nejimakidori kuronikuru (The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle). Vol. 3. Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1995. Naruoka Masahisa. Hyō to heitai (Leopard and Soldiers). Tokyo: Fuyōshobō, 1967. Ozaki Hirotsugu. Nihon no sākasu (Circuses in Japan). Tokyo: Sanga-shobō, 1958. Sasaki Tokio. Dōbutsuen no rekishi: Nihon ni okeru dōbutsuen no seiritsu (History of Zoos: Establishment of Zoos in Japan). Tokyo: Nishidashoten, 1975. Sasaki Tokio and Sasaki Takuji, eds. Zoku dōbutusen no rekishi: Sekai-hen (History of Zoos II: World Edition). Tokyo: Nishida-shoten, 1977. Shibuya Shinkichi. Zō no namida (Tears of Elephants). Tokyo: Nichigeishuppan, 1972. Shimura Takeo. “Heiwa no shisetsu”: Indira monogatari (“Ambassador of Peace”: The Story of Indira). Tokyo: Kōsei-shuppansha, 1996. Sugiura Hiroshi. Dōbutsu-tachi no shi o mitsumete (Observing the Death of Animals). Tokyo: Kōbundō, 1993. Takashima Haruo. Dōbutsu monogatari (Tales of Animals). Tokyo: Yasakashobō, 1986. Tanabe Mamoru (illustration; Kaji Ayuta). Soshite, Tonki mo shinda (Then, Tonki Also Died). Tokyo: Kokudosha, 1982. Tsuchiya Yukio (illustration; Takebe Motoichirō). Kawaisō na zō (Poor Elephants). Tokyo: Kin-no-hoshi-sha, 1970. Ueda Chōtaro. Osaka no dōbutsuen (Zoos in Osaka). Osaka: Kibunkan, 1944. Yajima Minoru. Mushi ni deaete yokatta (Glad I Met Insects). Tokyo: Frēberukan, 2004. Yamada Kōichi. Zō-san shinanaide: Higashiyama dōbutsuen no kiseki (Please Do Not Die, Elephants: The Miracle at Higashiyama Zoo). Inuyama: Tōkai-shuppansha, 1990.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 235

10/8/2010 7:41:51 AM

236

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Journal Articles Kawata Ken. “Idō-dōbutsuen no ayumi o furikaeru: ‘Indira’ ya raion-shō ga nokoshita isan” (Reflecting on Traveling Menagerie: Legacy of “Indira” and Lion Show). Dōbutsu to dōbutsuen (Animals and Zoos) 59, no. 2 (Spring 2007): 22/076–27/081. Koga Tadamichi. “Dōbutsu to Watashi” (Animals and I). Tokyo: Tokyo Zoological Park Society, 1951. Komori Atsushi. “Ueno dōbutsuen no ayumi” (History of Ueno Zoo). Dōbutsu to dōbutsuen (Animals and Zoos) 32, no. 5 (1980): 18/162– 19/163. Mori Tetsuo. “Gumba no matsuro: ‘Dōbutsu o sensō de shinasenai tameni’ ” (Fate of Military Horses: For Not Victimizing Animals for War Anymore). Journal of Japan Veterinary Medical Association 60, no. 3 (2007): 180–81. ———. “Senjika nampō no shima deno gumba no yukusue” (Fate of Military Horses on the Southern Front during the War). Journal of Japan Veterinary Medical Association 58, no. 11 (2005): 728–29. Nakagawa Shirō. “Ueno dōbutsuen kaba no gashi” (Starvation to Death of Hippopotami at Ueno Zoo). Bungei-shunjū (February 2005): 266–67. Shōwakan. “Senchū sengo o tomonishita dōbutsu-tachi.” (Animals That Shared the Wartime and Postwar Years [with Humans]). Shōwakan, 2008, 1–8. Tokyo Zoological Park Society, ed. “Takasaki-kaichō to dōbutsu-tachi” (President Takasaki and the Animals). Dōbutsu to dōbutsuen (Animals and Zoos) 16, no. 6 (June 1964): 6/126-14/134. Yoshida Heihachirō. “Kei ⋅ han ⋅ shin dōbutsuen ni hirou” (“Strolling Zoos in Kyoto, Osaka, and Kobe). Kagaku-gahō (March 1944): 69–72.

9780230108943_14_bib.indd 236

10/8/2010 7:41:51 AM

Inde x Page numbers in bold face denote photographs or tables

“1,000-kan elephant,” 21–22 “2–26 Incident,” 25–26 Abe and Yonai cabinets, 7 Ackerman, Diane, 9, 140 Adamson, George, 68, 185, 186 Adon, xix, 5, 85, 96–97, 99 air-raid drill, 26, 57, 60, 65, 68, 83, 86, 148 Akiyama Masami, 10–11, 44, 62, 70–71, 74, 94, 188 Akune Iwao, 118–19 Aleutian Islands, 27, 50 Ali, 46, 48, 50 Allied Powers, 6, 118, 121, 142, 162, 185, 187, 190 American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA), 184 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), 2 American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), 1–2 Amsterdam Zoo, 138–39 Anami Tetsurō, 12, 101–103 Andaman Islands, 29 Andō Jisuke, 97 Animal Protection and Control Law, 168 Animal Relief Coalition for Haiti (ARCH), 2 “Animal Week,” 183 ankus, 42, 170–71, 180 Anthony, Lawrence, 3, 9, 186 Anti-Comintern Pact, 130, 205 Antwerp Zoo, 139

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 237

Arima Yoriyasu, 198 Arita (Yōkō) Circus, 79, 103, 111, 119 Arnhem Zoo, 139 Asagiku, 66, 66–67 Asai Rikizō, 5, 87–88, 93, 96, 179–84 Ashikaga Yoshimitsu, 110 Ashikaga Yoshimochi, 110 Atsuta Naoko, 165 Axis Alliance, 130, 142, 205 Baghdad Zoo, 3, 9, 186 Bamboo, 98–99, 178 Barnum, P. T., 22, 136 Battle of Okinawa, 55, 121, 205 Bean, Edward, 155 “Belfast Blitz,” 128, 187 Belfast Zoo, 128–29, 187 Bell Circus, 74 Berlin Zoo, 10, 35, 129–32, 134, 143, 187, 196, 200 Bharma, 110–11 Bharma II, 111 “Black Leopard Escape Incident,” 25–26, 76, 199 “Blitz,” 35, 125, 146, 187, 200 “Bombing of Dresden,” 137 Boston Zoo, 146 Bourne, Henry L., 157 Bridges, William, 148–49 British Army, 29, 124, 196 British East India Company, 196 British Royal Air Force (R AF), 35, 129–34, 137 Bronx Zoo, 20, 146–49, 156, 187 Brookfield Zoo, 155–56

10/8/2010 12:34:28 PM

238

INDEX

Burma (current Myanmar), 27–29, 113 Burma campaign, 113 California Academy of Sciences, 148 Carr Hartley Big Game Farm, 174 Central Park Zoo, 20, 146, 149 Chang Hsueh-liang (Zhang Xueliang), 24–25 Chang Tso-lin (Zhang Zuolin), 25 Changchun, 27, 114, 116, 118 Changchun Zoo, 116, 118 Changkyung Palace, 108–109 Changkyungwon Zoo, 35, 54, 70, 108–11, 119, 205 Chemnitz Zoo, 141 Cheyenne Mountain Zoo, 28, 131–32, 157–58 Chiang Kai-shek, 113 Chinese Communist Party (CCP), 115, 118 CCP Army, 115 Chinese Expeditionary Forces, 113 Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, the KMT), 113, 115, 118 KMT Army, 113, 115 Chinese National Revolutionary Army, 26 Clemens, Dick, 174 collective evacuation of buildings, 34, 86, 193, 196–97 collective evacuation of schoolchildren, 34, 55, 193, 196–97 “comfort women,” 9, 186 “commandeering” of animals of domesticated animals, 30 of zoo animals, 30–31 conscription of animals, 28–30 Crouse, Lena, 159 Daitarō, 54, 111 Daizōkyō (Da Zang Jing), 110 Dampei, 58–59 Danchi, xix, 68

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 238

Delacour, Jean, 147 Detroit Zoo, 153–54 Ditmars, Raymond L., 147 Dittoe, Georgia, 159 Donaldson, William V., 14 Doolittle, James Harold, 39 “Doolittle Raid,” 39, 187, 205 Dresden Zoo, 137 “Drive to donate dogs (and cats),” 30 Dube, Auja, 141 Eldo, xix, 5–6, 85, 96–97, 99, 178–84 “Elephant Train,” 6, 181–84 Ellie, 106–107 Emori Morihisa, 165 Emperor Haile Selassie I, 38, 48 Emperor Hirohito, 20, 23, 43, 48, 64, 104, 118, 161, 173, 177 Emperor Mutsuhito, 15 Emperor Pu Yi, 114 Emperor Yongle, 19 Emperor Yoshihito, 20, 64, 177 Essential Commodities Control Law, 32 “evacuation of buildings and schoolchildren,” see collective evacuation of buildings; collective evacuation of schoolchildren Flower, William H., 186 Food Control Law, 32 food rationing, 31, 32–33, 37, 39, 103 Frankfurt Zoo, 132–33 fuel rationing, 31–32, 37, 88, 153, 155, 159 “Fukoku-kyōhei” (“Rich Nation, Strong Army”), 15 Fukuda Saburō, 12, 27–28, 38–41, 43–45, 48–53, 57, 62, 130–31, 166, 174, 188, 190, 195 Fukuoka City Zoo, 35, 101, 104, 119, 205 Fukuzawa Yukichi, 16, 23, 60

10/8/2010 12:34:29 PM

INDEX

Gachako (renamed Hanako II), 166–67, 172 Galápagos Islands, 148 Gandhi, Indira, 166, 171–72 Gandhi, Mahatma, 1, 14, 166, 202–203 Geneva Convention, 203 Genoa Zoo, 142 German Army, 129, 132, 142 Gippoliti, Spartaco, xi, 142 Glade, Earl J., 164 Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, 75 Great Kantō Earthquake, 21–23 “Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere,” 33, 65 Grzimek, Bernhard, 133 Hachikō, 33, 36 Hagenbeck Animal Park, 18, 25, 58, 66, 68, 92, 104, 109–11, 133–36, 187, 200 Hagenbeck Circus, 25, 74, 134–36 “Hagenbeck method,” 24, 84, 92, 133–34 Hagenbeck, Carl Heinrich, 135–36 Hagenbeck, Carl, Jr., 18, 20, 24, 84, 133–34, 142 Hagenbeck, Erich, 136 Hagenbeck, Heinrich, 134–36 Hagenbeck, Lorenz, 25, 84, 134–36, 199 Hahn, Emily, 184 Haiti Zoo, 1–2 Hakkō, 37, 44–45, 46 “Hakkō-ichiu,” 33, 44 Halmahera Island, 29 hambatsu (old province-based cliques), 18–19 Hanako (formerly Wanli or Wangi), xvii, 30, 42, 47, 50–52, 60, 96, 167, 200 Hanako II (formerly Gachako), 167, 172–73 see also Gachako

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 239

239

Hanako at Higashiyama Zoo, 84–85 Hanako at Kōfu City Zoo, 79 Hanayashiki, 22, 56, 58–59, 111 Hankyū Railway, 35, 73 Hanshin Electric Railway, 35, 72–73 Hanshin Park Zoo, 11, 34, 35, 57, 64, 67, 72–74, 98, 118, 177–78, 201 Hara Ken’ichi, 64–65, 67 Harkins, Daniel J., 146 Haruko, 176 Hashio Ichizō, 28, 169 Havemann, Richard, 159 Hayashi Jurō, 163, 168, 174–75 Hayashi Rokurō, 105–106 Hayashi Saichi, 58, 61 Hearst, William R., 49 Heck, Lutz, 132 Higashiyama Zoo, xix, xx, 5–6, 10, 13–14, 35, 51–52, 57, 76, 77, 80, 83–99, 119, 164, 169, 178–84, 189, 200–201, 205 Hirakawa City Zoo, 107–108 Hogle Zoo, 164, 178 Holocaust, 9, 140 Home Ministry (Naimushō), 7–8, 16–17, 26–27, 31, 35–36, 40, 60, 65, 83, 86–87, 90–91, 101–102, 114, 120, 188–91, 193, 195–98, 201–202 Hoshino Naoki, 114 Hoshino Toshikata, 65 House of Councillors (HC), 165, 198 Huxley, Julian S., 124–25 Ibaraki Shigeharu, 106 “Ichioku-gyokusai,” 34, 202 “Ichioku-isshin,” 34 Imaizumi Hichigorō, 83 Imaizumi Zoo, 83 Imperial Household Ministry, 17–19, 22–23, 108–109

10/8/2010 12:34:30 PM

240

INDEX

Imperial Japanese Army (IJA), 24–29, 34, 37–38, 40–41, 44–45, 50, 61, 65, 72–73, 78–79, 81–82, 87, 89, 96–98, 105–106, 113, 118, 162–63, 178, 180, 188–89, 192–93, 196, 198 IJA Veterinary School, 27–28, 40–41, 43, 45, 49, 163 Imperial Rule Assistance Association, 198 Indira, 166–72, 203 Inokashira Park Zoo, 32, 34, 37, 39, 53, 119, 172–73, 205 Inoshita Kiyoshi, 24, 26, 40–41, 43, 45, 50–51, 190, 194–95, 201 International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), 2, 202 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2, 202 International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens (IUDZG), 173 internment of Japanese and Japanese-Americans, 164 Ishii Koreyori, 51 Ishikawa Chiyomatsu, 18–21, 59 Ishikawa Taijirō, 42 Itagaki Seishirō, 192–93 Itō Hirobumi, 17–18 Itō Keisuke, 16 Itōzu Yūen Zoo, 12, 35, 101–104, 119, 205 Iwata Shigeyoshi, 83 Japan Hunters Volunteer Corps Chikusa Division, xx, 86–87, 89–96, 98 Japan-India Association, 165 Japan National Railways (JNR), 6, 167, 169, 181 Japan Socialist Party (JSP), 162 Japan Teachers Union, 192, 198–99 Japan War Bereaved Families Association, 185–86

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 240

Japanese Association of Performing Organizations, 119, 188 Japanese Association of Zoological Gardens and Aquariums (JAZGA), 11, 34–35, 37, 57, 74, 77, 98, 101, 108, 114, 118, 176, 188 Japanese Association of Zoos and Aquariums (JAZA), 11, 35 Japanese Communist Party (JCP), 162 Jerma, Vaisappu, 42 John, xvii, 41–43, 47, 49, 50–51, 56, 96, 200 Johnson, Martin and Osa, 159 Johor, 49, 195–96 Johor Zoo, 196 Jones, Marvin L., 146 Jumbo II, 127, 128 Jumbo at London Zoo, 22 Jumbo at Ueno Zoo, 171–72 Kabul Zoo, 4, 9 Kagawa Isamu, 58 Kagawa Shōtarō, 35, 75 Kagoshima Electric Railway, 107 Kalyani (renamed Tomoe), 64–65, 73 see also Tomoe Kamoike City Zoo, 35, 77, 101, 107–108, 119, 205 Kanai Kinsaku, 173 Kanazawa Tarō, 106–107 Kang Kang and Lan Lan, 171 Kanō Yoshio, 183 Karasawa Toshiki, 197 Katherina, 46, 48, 50, 67 Kawahata Suminori, 108 Kawamura Tamiji, 59–60 Kawata, Ken, xi, 9–10, 13–14, 22–23, 27, 141 Keeling, Clinton H., 122–24, 127 Keiō Electric Railway, 175 KGB (Committee for State Security), 141 Kiiko, xix, 5, 85, 96–97, 99

10/8/2010 12:34:30 PM

INDEX

Kim Fang, 108–11 King George VI, 174 King Soonjong, 108 Kinki Nippon Railway, 182 Kinoshita Circus, 85, 96, 119 Kinoshita Yukiharu, 85, 96 Kirchshofer, Rosl, 10, 132–33 Kiriguchi Circus, 73 Kisling, Vernon N., Jr., xi, 8–9, 131, 140, 186 Kitaō Hideichi, 5–6, 51, 83–99, 179–83, 189, 199–201 Knudson, Gus, 158 Kobayashi Kimio, 80–82 Kobayashi Shōkichi, 78–82, 170 Kobe City Ōji Zoo, xix, 10, 70, 72, 178 Kobe City Zoo, xix, 35, 57, 68–72, 73, 80, 110, 119, 178, 189, 205 Kōfu City Yūki Park Zoo, 77 Kōfu City Zoo, 35, 76, 77–82, 119, 170, 188 Koga Tadamichi, 24–27, 40, 42, 51–52, 85, 114, 163–64, 167–70, 173–75, 180–81, 189, 191, 202 Koiso cabinet, 7, 197 Kōkoku (Kōkoku-gō; formerly Wanjirō), 65, 177 see also Wanjirō Komori Atsushi, 15, 20, 23, 44, 163, 175, 184, 189 Konoe Fumimaro, 31, 198 Konoe cabinet, 31 Kōra Tomi, 165 Korea, 6, 8, 11, 34, 54, 103, 108, 110–11, 114, 174, 195 “Korean residents in Japan,” 21–22, 108 “Korean Special Demand,” 169 Korean War, 109, 169, 174 Koshizawa Akira, 116–17 Kuiper, Koenraad, 139 Kumamoto City Zoo, 35, 101, 105–107, 119, 205

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 241

241

Kuomintang (KMT) Army, see under Chinese Nationalist Party Kuril Islands, 121 Kurokawa Gitarō, 21–24, 28 Kursaal Zoo, 122 Kuwait Zoo, 3 Kwantung Army, 24, 40, 114–17, 192, 205 Kyōko, xviii, 47, 54–55, 111 Kyoto City Zoo, 5, 18, 19, 20, 34, 35, 42, 57, 59, 60, 64–68, 73, 75, 76, 80, 96, 109, 110–11, 119, 131, 177–78, 186, 189, 191, 200–201, 205 Kyōwa Kōekisha, 165 La Guardia, Fiorello, 147 Leeper, Milton, 159 Leningrad Zoo, 141–42 Liao Chengzhi, 115 Lin Wang, 113–14 Lincoln Park Zoo, 154, 155 Litten, Frederick S., 10, 132–33 Lloyd (renamed Katsuta), 60–61 London Zoo, 22–23, 121–27, 131, 146, 160, 187, 196, 200 LT Trade Agreement, 115–16 Ludington, Ivan, 154 Ma Ying-jeou, 114 MacArthur, Douglas, 6, 162, 164, 169 Maidstone Zoo, 127–28 Makani, xix, 5–6, 85, 96–97, 99, 178–84 Makino Nobuaki, 22, 23 Makino Tomitarō, 19 Manchukuo, 6, 8, 11, 27, 40, 71, 93, 108, 114–16, 118, 189, 193, 195, 205 Manchuria Heavy Industries Development Corporation, 115 “Manchurian Incident” (“9–18 Incident”), 24, 83, 205 Mann, William M., 152 Manzer, George, 157

10/8/2010 12:34:30 PM

242

INDEX

“Marco Polo Bridge Incident,” 26, 205 Maru, xviii, 47, 54–55, 111 “Massive Nagoya Air Raids,” 99, 205 “Massive Osaka Air Raids,” 64, 187, 200, 205 “Massive Tokyo Air Raids,” 53–55, 187, 200, 205 Matsumura Mitsuma, 197 Matsumura Toyokichi, 68–69, 71 Mbongo, 159, 160 McInnis, Frank G., 153 Meiji Restoration, 15 Menary, Robert, 157 metal requisition, 33, 40, 65, 188 Michurin, Ivan V., 141 Mikawa Earthquake, 97 Military Pension Law, 86, 185–86 military police (MP), 25, 69, 78, 82, 177, 194 Military Service Law, 31, 96 Millen, John T., 153–54 Miller, Ian, 10, 191 Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce, 16–17 Ministry of Education, 16, 23, 31, 60, 199 Ministry of Health and Welfare, 30 Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), 165–66 Ministry of Military Requisition (Gunjushō), 30 Mitsui Takaosa, 97 Miyajima Teru, 90, 98 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, 140 Mombasa, 174 Monkey Train, 168 Morse, Edward S., 18 “mounted,” 13, 19, 45, 48, 50, 62 see also taxidermy Mucha (Muzha) Zoo, 113 Mukden (present Shenyang), 24 Munich Zoo, 132 Murakami Haruki, 117–18 Murphy, James B., xi, 152

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 242

Mysore, 166, 168 Nagoya City Zoo, 83, 92 Nakagawa Shirō, 54 Nakamata Mitsushi, 114 Namikoshi Educational Zoological and Botanical Gardens, 83 “Nanking Massacre,” 27 Naruoka Masahisa, 44–45 National Mobilization Law, 31, 60 National Museum of Natural History (Japan’s), 16–18, 23 National Security Maintenance Law, 162 National Service Draft Ordinance, 31 “National Spiritual Mobilization Movement,” 31 National Zoo (Washington, D.C.), 125, 151–52 Nazi Germany, 35, 121, 125, 136, 139–40 necropsy, 13, 29, 41, 45, 48–49, 66, 127 Nehru, Jawaharlal, 165–66, 171 Neutrality Treaty between the Soviet Union and Japan, 115–16 New Dealers, 162, 164, 199 New York Zoological Society, 148 Nimphius, Harry, 149 Nishide Ken’nosuske, 68–69, 71–72 Nishi-Nippon Railroad, 35, 101–102, 104 Niyogi, N. H., 165 Noda Bun’ichirō, 69 Noma Shōichi, 166 Noordermeer, Lex, xi, 138 Northeast Region Liaison General Meeting to Save the Japanese, 115 O’Connell, Harold J., 150 Ochiai Seigo, 171 Ōdachi Shigeo, 7–8, 12, 40–41, 45, 49–52, 54, 62, 187, 189–99, 201–202, 205

10/8/2010 12:34:30 PM

INDEX

Ogata Taketora, 199 Ōhata Toshiki, 165 Okinawa Islands, 55, 121, 166, 205 Ōkubo Toshimichi, 16–17, 22, 23 Omaha Zoo, 156 Osaka City Ten’nōji Zoo, xviii, 57–58 Osaka City Zoo, xviii, 35, 51, 57–64, 71, 73–74, 83, 87, 119, 175–76, 179, 187, 200–201, 205 Ōtaki Kingorō, 22 Pacific War, 37, 78, 146 Park Yongdal, 109 Pearl Harbor, 27, 145, 148–49, 151–52, 158, 160, 187, 195, 205 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), 1 People’s Republic of China (PRC), 113, 115, 118 Philadelphia Zoo, 14, 20, 150–51, 187 posttraumatic depression syndrome (PTDS), 179 Potsdam Declaration, 118 Prince Takamatsu, 43–45 prisoner of war (POW), 29, 136 Prospect Park Zoo, 146, 149 “Purge from Public Offices,” 162, 198 Qing dynasty, 114 Rampur, 60–61, 73 Rawlins, Colin, 133 Reichenbach, Herman, xi, 13, 131 Republic of China (ROC), 27, 113 “reverse course,” 199 Reynolds, Richard J. III, xi, 149 Rhenen Zoo, 137–39 Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey (RBBB) Circus, 136 Rita, xviii, 58–61 Ritsurin Park Zoo, 35, 51, 57, 67, 75–76, 80, 102, 119, 189, 205

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 243

243

Rome Zoo, 142–43 Roosevelt administration, 162 Rotterdam Zoo, 137–38, 139 Royal Air Force (R AF; British), 35, 129–31, 132, 134, 137, 187 Rutō Tōji, 74 Ryokufū-kai, 165 Sailer-Jackson, Otto, 137 Saitō Makoto, 25 Saka Nobuya, 198 Sakai Tokitada, 197 Sakhalin Island, 121, 205 Salt Lake City, 164, 178 San Diego Zoo, 146, 159–60 San Francisco Peace Treaty, 169 Sasaki Tokio, 18, 20, 23, 42, 60 Sasanuma Tadashi, 28 Satō Masaru, 116 Satō Masatoshi, 87, 90, 98 Schultz, Fritz, 136 Sekiya Seizō, 114 Sendai City Zoo, 22, 35, 37, 51, 56, 80, 114, 119, 188, 205 Seton, Earnest Thompson, 150 Shelly, Freeman M., 150–51 Shibata Circus, 119 Shibata Seiichi, 98–99 Shibuya Shinkichi, 42–43, 50–53, 55, 96, 167–68, 170–72, 174–75 Shimokōriyama Sei’ichi, 109, 111 Shimonoseki Treaty, 112 Shimura Takeo, 165, 169–72 Shippū, 66, 67 Shōnan, see Special City Shōnan Simmons, Christina, xi, 160 Sino-Japanese War (first), 112 Sino-Japanese War (second), 25–26, 31, 33, 83, 205 Solski, Leszek, 140 Someya Susumu, 28 South Manchuria Railway, 24, 205 Soviet Army, 4, 115–17, 121, 129, 205

10/8/2010 12:34:30 PM

244

INDEX

Special City Shōnan (current Singapore), 27, 40, 191, 193, 196 Special City Xinjing (current Changchun), 27, 114, 116 Staten Island Zoo, 9, 146, 149–50 Stellingen, 18, 133–36 Stern, Károly, 141 Straits Settlements, 196 Strehlow, Harro, 131 Stryker, Carol, 149–50 Student Volunteer Corps Service, 31, 33 Sugamo Prison, 192, 198 Sugaya Kitsuichirō, 43, 50–52, 96, 166–70 Sugiyama Hajime, 45 Suizenji Zoo, 105 Sultan Ibrahim, 195–96 Sun Li-jen, 113 Sunier, A.L.J., 139 Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers General Headquarters (SCAP-GHQ), 6, 86, 162–67, 177–78, 181, 185, 198–99 Civil Transportation Section (CTS), 181 Railways Transportation Office (RTO), 181 Susie, 173 Suwayama Zoo, 68 Sydney Zoo, 18 Taipei City Zoo, 35, 108, 112–14, 119, 205 Taitō-ward Children’s Congress, 5, 165, 180 Taiwan, 6, 8, 11, 34, 108, 112–14, 195 Takahashi Korekiyo, 25 Takamiya Tahei, 192–95, 198 Takao, 26, 32, 53 Takarazuka Zoo, 34, 35, 57, 73–75, 98, 115, 119, 205

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 244

Takasaki Tatsunosuke, 115–16, 171 Takashima Haruo, 50, 98, 105 Takizawa Akio, 67, 73, 110–11, 131, 186, 191 Tallinn Zoo, 140–41 Tama Zoo, 33, 107, 172, 175 Tanaka Mitsuaki, 19 Tanaka Yoshio, 16–17, 24 Taronga Zoo, 4 taxidermy, 13, 19, 46, 63 Tee-Van, John, 149 Terauchi Shinzō, 51, 61–62, 176 Tōjō Hideki, 45, 198 Tōjō cabinet, 197 Tokiwa, 58–59, 61, 73 Tokugawa clan, 15, 17, 22 Tokugawa Yoshichika, 22 Tokyo Zoological Park Society, 116, 171 Tomoe (Tomoe-gō; formerly Kalyani), 5, 65, 96, 177, 178 see also Kalyani Tōnankai Earthquake, 89 Tonki, 30, 41–42, 47, 50–53, 96, 166, 175, 188, 190, 195, 200, 203 “Traveling Menagerie,” 169–71 Truman, Harry, 169 Trump, Erik, xi, 156, 158 Tsukamoto Zō, 180–81 Tsurumai Park Zoo, 35, 83 Tsutsui Yoshitaka, 59 Tungku Makhota, 195–96 Tywhitt-Drake, Hugh Garrard, Sir, 124 “U.S. Air Raids on Formosa (Taiwan) and the Pescadores,” 112 U.S. Army, 3 U.S. Army Air Force (USAAF), 132, 137 Ueda Chōtarō, 63–64, 199

10/8/2010 12:34:31 PM

INDEX

Ueno Zoo, xi, xvii, xviii, 5–6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 16–28, 30, 32–33, 35, 37–56, 57, 59, 60–62, 65, 67, 71, 74, 76, 83–85, 87–88, 96, 109, 111, 114, 119, 120, 130–31, 162–75, 176, 178–79, 180–82, 184, 187–89, 191, 193–96, 199–202, 205 Umeko, 173 van Bruggen, A. C., xi, 138 victory garden, 151, 153, 159–60 Vilas Park Zoo, 156 von Siebold, Philipp Franz, 16 Wallace, Herbert E., 157 Wanjirō (renamed Kōkoku), 64–65, 73 Warsaw Zoo, 9, 140 Washington Park Zoo, 156 Wegeforth, Harry, 159 Whipsnade Zoo, 121–22, 125, 127, 128 Widra, Noppakun, 50–52, 84, 96 Winkelmann, Fred, 156 Woodland Park Zoo, 158 World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), 2, 4, 9 Wuppertal Zoo, 132

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 245

245

Xinjing, see Special City Xinjing Xinjing Zoo, 27, 34, 71, 93, 108, 114–18, 119, 189, 205 Yajima Minoru, 33–34, 54 Yamakawa Kōji, 173 Yamakawa Seizō, 172–73 Yamamoto Shizuo, 10, 178–79 Yamauchi Yoshitarō, 74 Yasukuni Shrine, 30 Yi dynasty, 108, 110 Yogo Seiichi, 97 Yoshida Heihachirō, 62–63, 71, 74–75 Yoshida Shigeru, 22, 168, 171, 199 Yoshida cabinet, 198–99 Yoshimura Shigetaka, 44–45 Yoshitake Eichi, 193, 197 Young, Floyd S., 154 Yuriko, 176 Zabinski, Antonina and Jan, 140 zaibatsu, 97, 162, 165 Mitsubishi zaibatsu, 86, 162, 165 Mitsui zaibatsu, 97, 162 Zhangjiakou, 89, 93, 95, 189, 201 Zheng He, 19 Zoological Society of London, 121–22, 124, 147, 186

10/8/2010 12:34:31 PM

9780230108943_15_ind.indd 246

10/8/2010 12:34:31 PM

Japanese Wartime Zoo Policy: The Silent Victims of World War II

Japanese Paratroop Forces of World War II

The Pacific War Papers: Japanese Documents of World War II

Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II

Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II

Japanese Naval Vessels at the End of World War II

Deceptions of World War II

Fighters of World War II

Atlas Of World War II

Atlas of World War II

Atlas of World War II

World War II

World War II

World War II

World War II, Biographies

World War II

World War II

World War II: The Autobiography

World War II 1943-1945: World War II, 1942-1945

World War II: Almanac (World War II Reference Library)

Japanese Army Air Force Camouflage and Markings World War II

Japanese Apologies for World War II (Routledge Contemporary Japan Series)

The War of Our Childhood: Memories of World War II

Silent War

THE SILENT WAR

The Silent War

The Silent War

Flames of war. The world war II miniatures game

Back to World War II

World War II. Almanac 2

The Long War: A New History of U.S. National Security Policy Since World War II

Japanese Wartime Zoo Policy: The Silent Victims of World War II

Japanese Paratroop Forces of World War II

The Pacific War Papers: Japanese Documents of World War II

Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II

Japanese War Orphans in Manchuria: Forgotten Victims of World War II

Japanese Naval Vessels at the End of World War II

Deceptions of World War II

Fighters of World War II

Atlas Of World War II

Atlas of World War II

Atlas of World War II

World War II

World War II

World War II

World War II, Biographies

World War II

World War II

World War II: The Autobiography

World War II 1943-1945: World War II, 1942-1945

World War II: Almanac (World War II Reference Library)

Japanese Army Air Force Camouflage and Markings World War II

Japanese Apologies for World War II (Routledge Contemporary Japan Series)

The War of Our Childhood: Memories of World War II

Silent War

THE SILENT WAR

The Silent War

The Silent War

Flames of war. The world war II miniatures game

Back to World War II

World War II. Almanac 2

The Long War: A New History of U.S. National Security Policy Since World War II

Recommend Documents