Zoos are not ethical in any way shape or form. You can slightly justify their existence in the name of conservation and the money they often raise for it but realistically none of these ‘breeding’ programs are doing much for the wild population. All well and good preventing the rhino becoming extinct overall but it’s still extinct in the wild so what’s the point in breeding them for zoos? Entertainment?
Once you get passed a certain point, zoo breeding programs mean nothing because the gene pool is simply too small to bring back the wild population.
Just another excuse for humans to destroy and exploit tbh
Once you get passed a certain point, zoo breeding programs mean nothing because the gene pool is simply too small to bring back the wild population.
Just another excuse for humans to destroy and exploit tbh
Original post by ALEreapp
Zoos are not ethical in any way shape or form. You can slightly justify their existence in the name of conservation and the money they often raise for it but realistically none of these ‘breeding’ programs are doing much for the wild population. All well and good preventing the rhino becoming extinct overall but it’s still extinct in the wild so what’s the point in breeding them for zoos? Entertainment?
Once you get passed a certain point, zoo breeding programs mean nothing because the gene pool is simply too small to bring back the wild population.
Just another excuse for humans to destroy and exploit tbh
Once you get passed a certain point, zoo breeding programs mean nothing because the gene pool is simply too small to bring back the wild population.
Just another excuse for humans to destroy and exploit tbh
I think you are missing a bigger picture and that is one of education. One of the reasons so many animals are under threat is because of a lack of understanding of how habitat loss impacts on wild animals. Whereas the future for mammals in general is pretty bleak there are some rays of hope. Pandas for example were massively endangered but thanks to publicity from zoos, this is now very much in decline and Pandas are no longer on the extremely endangered species.
I think to discount them as pure money making ventures is to be ignorant of what the good zoos actually do do.
https://www.chesterzoo.org/what-we-do/
Since they are often (albeit not always unfortunately) centres for research and conservation efforts, they are potentially quite important. I do think they should be formally required to be attached to some kind of research process or conservation effort or maintain status as a charity and not be for-profit, in order to maintain the welfare of the animals and ensure animals held in them are obtained legally and humanely.
Also the above comments about breeding in captivity in zoos "not bringing animals back in the wild" betrays such a lack of understanding of the entire premise of breeding programmes and reintroduction schemes that it's farcical. For example Przewalski's horse was reintroduced to the Asian steppe as a result of such a programme.
Also the above comments about breeding in captivity in zoos "not bringing animals back in the wild" betrays such a lack of understanding of the entire premise of breeding programmes and reintroduction schemes that it's farcical. For example Przewalski's horse was reintroduced to the Asian steppe as a result of such a programme.
Original post by artful_lounger
Since they are often (albeit not always unfortunately) centres for research and conservation efforts, they are potentially quite important. I do think they should be formally required to be attached to some kind of research process or conservation effort or maintain status as a charity and not be for-profit, in order to maintain the welfare of the animals and ensure animals held in them are obtained legally and humanely.
Also the above comments about breeding in captivity in zoos "not bringing animals back in the wild" betrays such a lack of understanding of the entire premise of breeding programmes and reintroduction schemes that it's farcical. For example Przewalski's horse was reintroduced to the Asian steppe as a result of such a programme.
Also the above comments about breeding in captivity in zoos "not bringing animals back in the wild" betrays such a lack of understanding of the entire premise of breeding programmes and reintroduction schemes that it's farcical. For example Przewalski's horse was reintroduced to the Asian steppe as a result of such a programme.
The prezwalskis horse literally proved my point, there is around 1200 wild individuals from captives of around 400… the program has not run long enough to see the effects of such a small gene pool however a gene pool of 400 is much larger than that of less than 10 we see from some species (eg northern white rhino). If you are going to call my claim farcical atleast find a case study to back up your statement (I don’t actually think there is one). If you allow a species to get so low it’s extinct in the wild you will 99% of the time not have enough captive individuals to 'bring them back' long term and sustainably.
(edited 3 months ago)
Original post by hotpud
I think you are missing a bigger picture and that is one of education. One of the reasons so many animals are under threat is because of a lack of understanding of how habitat loss impacts on wild animals. Whereas the future for mammals in general is pretty bleak there are some rays of hope. Pandas for example were massively endangered but thanks to publicity from zoos, this is now very much in decline and Pandas are no longer on the extremely endangered species.
I think to discount them as pure money making ventures is to be ignorant of what the good zoos actually do do.
https://www.chesterzoo.org/what-we-do/
I think to discount them as pure money making ventures is to be ignorant of what the good zoos actually do do.
https://www.chesterzoo.org/what-we-do/
You don’t need to exploit animals to raise awareness for habitats loss, there’s no ‘good zoo’ although some do ‘better’ than others.
Chester zoo is one of the more exceptions to the rule, but zoos are businesses generally not charities (again Chester ‘zoo’ is a charity).
A bit like sea world technicality does ‘good’ stuff it doesn’t take away from the heinous atrocities they condone and profit from.
https://deannadeshea.com/zoos-profit-driven-entertainment-over-conservation/
(edited 3 months ago)
I find the whole subject hypocritical.
People are jam packed into unsuitable housing or are forced to work for food money but there are those more concerned about zoos or animals working in a circus.
People are jam packed into unsuitable housing or are forced to work for food money but there are those more concerned about zoos or animals working in a circus.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
