Should we shut down all zoos?

Not trying to be PETA or anything but surely keeping animals in captivity like this is wrong?

Penguins in the South Pole:

Spoiler

Penguins in the London Zoo:

Spoiler

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Drewski

Zoos tend to be a misnomer. Most of them are really wildlife rehabilitation centres, housing animals who either can't be set free or are being nursed back to health before being set free.

Getting rid of such places means nothing more than a death sentence for all of them.

Not quite the pro-animal slant you want...

Reply 2

Asolare

I agree to an extent, zoos should really only be used to keep animals in captivity that are dangerously threatened in the wild.

Tbh though that penguin enclosure looks rather large so I certainly don't think that's one of the worst.

Reply 3

Plantagenet Crown

Then we'd have to shut down TSR.

Original post by Inexorably

Original post by Drewski

I don't know if you ever see these youtube videos where the animals are behind a glass window with a very small living space.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/mauling-escapes-and-abuse-6-small-zoos-80-sick-or-dead-animals/2015/09/18/dff46f10-2581-11e5-b77f-eb13a215f593_story.html?utm_term=.cfbce2f49c22

It's seems a bit unfair (unless it is for rehabilitation/respite). A lot of people where angry about the fact that 'Harambe' was locked up in the first place, let alone shot dead.

Why not?

I oppose the existence of all zoos that do not have the intention to preserve.

Reply 8

username1339858_

Original post by Cherub012

Why not?

Because I am going to go to visit a zoo one day. Now if they ALL close, how can I do that?

Reply 9

Cherub012

You can visit a national reserve. Better experience too.

Reply 10

Amusing Elk

I was thinking about this the other day. As a previous post hinted (or from what I at least inferred), it is a bit of a moral dilemma. I am far from an expert on zoo logistics but I'll give my two cents on the matter.

On the one hand, if we're being black-and-white about it, then it is undeniably captivity of some description. But on the other hand, given the right treatment, it can perhaps act as a safe-haven for some animals if the intention is to preserve. In my opinion, it depends on how zoos are 'marketed'.

What irks me is how some large-scale zoos are primarily considered only as a form of entertainment (in a similar way to going to the cinema or a sports match). In some zoos (London Zoo for instance), it's clear that certain animals probably don't belong somewhere like London and it's likely a huge potential strain on resources trying to maintain the animals' survival (dietary requirements, location/appropriate living arrangements etc.) even with the best of intentions from zoo personnel.

I haven't been to a zoo for a long time and in all honesty I wouldn't rush to go back to one any time soon (at least big ones that are simply zoos and not sanctuaries of some description). This might sound naïve but the thought of animals from far away countries being shipped over (however 'ethically' the transportation is marketed as) is at the very least grossly inappropriate on behalf of the animals' wellbeing. Most people would wince at the idea of capturing/poaching a large animal from somewhere in Africa but you have to wonder how city zoos are able to attain such amazing creatures.

I really don't know much about how zoos operate so this is only an admittedly uninformed opinion :colondollar:

Reply 11

username1221160

I don't particularly like the idea of gawking at animals in enclosures but....

1. Most mammals currently in zoos come from established breeding programmes. They would likely not survive in the wild if the zoo was closed.

2. Zoos are vital research centres that allow us to study animals in ways that are just not feasible in the wild. Studying fungal pathogens in penguins Is far easier in a zoo than the Antarctic. This doesn't just add to our knowledge of basic science but allows us to develop better conservation strategies.

Reply 12

user 42005

I would support closing zoos down that simply exist for the spectacle, but keeping those open that actively participate in conservation (as the paying public help to support such efforts).

Reply 13

Mr Dee Mented

No they benefit the economy (yes this sounds cruel and sad), but yes people will come from around the world just to see a zoo!
Yes its cruelty towards the animals but it gives people and especially children a good time to visit and see these animals!

Reply 14

username1339858_

Original post by Cherub012

You can visit a national reserve. Better experience too.

And do I get to see all the animals that are in zoos?

Reply 15

JamesN88

Original post by Drewski

This.

I know my local pet shop owner who's dealt a lot with Chester Zoo. He said for a long time they functioned as a dumping ground for unwanted exotic pets until they were banned from accepting them.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 16

Cherub012

Erm... which ones do you want to see? Safari parks are better as well.

Reply 17

Amusing Elk

Original post by Quantex

I completely accept the importance (and potential ethical/scientific benefits) of these two points. And I suppose if zoos are open to the public, it can help fund resources/maintenance etc. I just wish that culturally people would appreciate this kind of thing a bit more and not simply go to the zoo because they want/expect to see some new "cool" animals for a few seconds before moving onto the next. Since I haven't been to a zoo since I was considerably younger (making my views on zoos not particularly valid), I just hope that 21st century zoos provide enough opportunity for preservation and research and are not simply the modern day equivalent of circuses without the clowns :tongue: