Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

I'm suddenly against certain animals in zoos

I can understand why the Victorians and pre-tv age people thought it was a good idea to bring bears, lions, large fish etc into captivity but now I think we are better showing children these creatures in the wild ... we have led the way in wildlife filming so zoos should only be for creatures that aren't really affected by a confined environment ... one's that live in one anyway ... there are plenty to choose from.

Reply 1

Blondie987

I totally disagree with zoos as well and sea world :frown:

animals aren't here for our entertainment

Reply 2

TaintedLight

The virus is spreading isn't it :biggrin:

My emotional attachment with animals is at it's highest today. Caging animals deep down bothers me a lot.

Reply 3

NJA

It was a picture of a polar bear standing on it's hind feet looking longingly at a photo of it's natural environment that tipped me.

Reply 4

Asolare

I kinda agree, I do find it very cute to look at such animals but I believe Zoos should only really be housing endangered animals which they have in a conservation/breeding programme. It's not really fair to keep animals in captivity for such a long time IMO.

But then again, you can question whether the animals are actually aware they are in captivity - they probably don't have experience of being in the wild so realistically it's not going to affect them... plus, they're animals...so...I don't think they'd have that level of rational thought.

Reply 5

NJA

Original post by Inexorably

I kinda agree,...

The conservation / last resort reason is ok but comparing with clips of them in the wild it seems they are less healthy and happy, therefore less enjoyable and inspirational which defeats the argument for bringing them to zoos.

Reply 6

Thomb

Free range zoos are the answer. Or going on safari in africa if you can afford that kind of thing.

Reply 7

NJA

Original post by Mathemagicien

Even humans are used for our entertainment. Ban musicians, actors etc. if you want to ban zoos.

You mage a caged mind if you really think that.

Reply 8

Trapz99

I don't really care tbh

Reply 9

NJA

Original post by Mathemagicien

Well, what about child actors? And babies being used in films and TV? Why is that okay, when zoos are not?

Kids are queueing up to be actors!
Babies know no different but if the parents get £500 to put in a savings account for them would you not want it?

Reply 10

Blondie987

Original post by Mathemagicien

Even humans are used for our entertainment. Ban musicians, actors etc. if you want to ban zoos.

Yeah, cos actors and musicians are forced into working and have to live in cages right?

Reply 11

NJA

Original post by Trapz99

I don't really care tbh

What do you care about?

Reply 12

Trapz99

Original post by NJA

What do you care about?

Stuff that affects me

Reply 13

Andy98

Safari is the way forward

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 14

NJA

Original post by Andy98

Safari is the way forward

hmm, for a small minority with pots of money

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 15

NJA

Original post by Mathemagicien

You obvioulsy know little about child-rearing ... they are inquisitive and endanger themselves when not supervised.

Original post by Mathemagicien

So zoos would be okay if we paid the animals, or gave them rewards e.g. food?

I have better things to do than have silly arguments with you.

Reply 16

Andy98

Original post by NJA

hmm, for a small minority with pots of money

There's that Woburn

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 17

Blondie987

Original post by Mathemagicien

Your argument was 'we should ban zoos cos animals aren't for our entertainment' - but musicians and actors are animals who exist for our entertainment.

Child actors are often very heavily pressured by their parents

Also,

So zoos would be okay if we paid the animals, or gave them rewards e.g. food?

We should ban zoos because wild animals, unable to consent, are forcefully taken from their habitat and paraded around in front of us for the sole purpose of entertainment which is neither necessary nor fair, I agree with these habitats being protected by conservation organisation to assist in the survival of these animals but places like zoos and seaworld (where animals are often mistreated and forced to breed) are cruel. Also, no way can you compare a crib, for babies to protect them from getting hurt to a cage where a grown animal cannot be free to live it's life as it could out in the wild

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 18

Sephiroth

This will be the next big thing for campaign groups now that the Sea World orca issue has been half taken care of. I say half as they are just the biggest name keeping orcas, there's other parks around the world doing the same.

I've been to a number of zoos and I can see where people come from on this. Keeping large mammals in small enclosures isn't ideal. But in countries like the UK there's no real alternative. Sure we could open some large safari park with square miles of space for people to see them in a more natural environment but winter would be a problem.