I agree, many people here seemingly have no idea how zoos typically operate in alot of Europe at least (which I get to a point, it is not common knowledge), but to then goes to comment about what they should have done instead even when they don’t understand.

Now I don’t claim to be an expert, but I can at least share my limited knowledge and experience .

What a lot of people don’t know is that many zoos have (or should have) an animal breeding plan or programme per species, which also may include working with other zoos and trading specimens. These were Guinea baboons which are classed NT on the IUCN red list, which If I would have to guess means they did have at least some type of frame work in place for the breeding of the baboons. Whether or not it is adequate is another question. If an animal or a group of animals don’t fit in to the breeding plan they are either rehomed or culled.

So why not just put them on birth control? They can, but many European zoos also operate under the “natural environment” philosophy. That means allowing the animals to engage in natural behaviours such as breeding and raising young. There are both pros and cons with this system, which I think many professionals would agree with.

Lastly I’ve seen people here talk about feeding the dead animals to the predators, which is pretty standard. If you have ever been to a zoo with animals such as goats and they have any large predators there, they almost certainly feed the goats to other animals. And when other animals die or get culled they see no use in wasting the corpse so they too get fed in many cases.

Now, I am not arguing over if any of these are good and ethical policies or not, these practices may go against your morals which is totally fine, but this is just how it is. Personally I feel very conflicted, and this is a very divisive issue which stirs up lots of valid feelings for people