Zoos Should Be Abolished

hey i would be so much grateful if anyone can list the reasons why zoos should be/not be abolished. (any anecdotes, examples that back reasons are more than welcome)

thank you,,

you can also contact me here : my mail is at hotmail dot com and the id is the same one as the TSR's.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Agent Smith

Within a century they will be the only places you can see certain wild animals. If we can't keep the natural populations alive, the least humanity can do is keep a token stock in captivity for posterity.

I suppose an argument against zoos - at least the old-fashioned London Zoo types - is that it is cruel to the animals to put them in cages. But even setting aside the above point (whereby even being imprisoned is better than death), that is no longer the case with many zoos. The animals are well-treated, have plenty of space and are kept in an environment designed to imitate their natural habitat as closely as possible.

Reply 2

TSR Community Staff

Many zoos have an important part to play in the conservation and breeding of endangered species, they also educate visitors by allowing them to see such great animals they otherwise would not be able to and, perhaps more importantly, allow people see these amazing creatures which could be lost without action - encouraging many to support causes which try to protect these animals in their natural environments.

Many zoos are invovled in conservation projects with series of other zoos to ensure the best chance of survival of all species on the planets.

Some speices which can pretty much own their current existence to zoos include the Père David's Deer and Przewalski's Horse.

Reply 3

Bismarck

There's also the fact that if you abolish all zoos today, what do you do with the animals that are currently there? Most of them can no longer survive in the wild...

Reply 4

The_Bear

Meh, some animals should not be in zoos. Others live well and happily. I think there are enough restrictions available to maintain a good medium.

More national parks.

Keeps n will keep endangered animals from complete extinction.
However
they Should try to really duplicate natural habitat, but money comes into it, so they cant.
Societies Fault

Reply 7

FadeToBlackout

34 person

More national parks.

So you'd let tigers loose in the New Forest, and penguins in the Lake District? :p:

Reply 8

Wez

They're great tourist attractions and help the local economy?

Reply 9

Zerforax

People are destroying natural habitats too... sooo need to make artificial ones?

Reply 10

TSR Community Staff

The_Bear

Meh, some animals should not be in zoos. Others live well and happily. I think there are enough restrictions available to maintain a good medium.

Which animals should not be in Zoos then?
Which ones are happy in Zoos?

Just curious!

Reply 11

TSR Community Staff

34 person

More national parks.

More national parks to do what?

Save more natural environments?

Where would have these nationla parks? UK? Elsewhere?

How would they save endangered species? How would they encourage increased breeding? They'd simply leave the animals alone in the national park to live by themselves and not encourage their numbers to grow into other areas.

Reply 12

person 34

I meant more national parks in foreign countries where the animals came from. So they can have alife of their own but can be kept a watch on etc.

Reply 13

MatPreel

We should concentrate on conserving the animals' natural environments. While there are conservation arguments for keeping animals in captivity, in the end it's not natural. While the animals may be cared for well, I still believe that it's not right to keep them in captivity. I don't agree with keeping animals in zoos purely so we can enjoy seeing them.

Reply 14

The_Bear

Roger Kirk

Which animals should not be in Zoos then?
Which ones are happy in Zoos?

Just curious!

I don't think big cats should be in zoos and migrating animals have a question mark over them. Some animals are destined for extinction however, I think it isn't our duty to save them but for human interest stories we should keep a few alive. Pandas fall into this category.

Monkeys, lizards, llamas etc are ok in zoos. Essentially the animals under "prey" do well whereas the predators don't.

Reply 15

Arminius

I think Zoos are fine as long as the well being of the animals comes before profit/entertainment.

Zoos have an important role in informing the public about wildife, saving endangered species etc.

The original victorian idea of a zoo being some sort of museum with live animals that you can make money out of, i find very distastefull.