Should we shut down all zoos? Watch

Cherub012
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
Not trying to be PETA or anything but surely keeping animals in captivity like this is wrong?

Penguins in the South Pole:
Spoiler:
Show




Penguins in the London Zoo:
Spoiler:
Show


0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
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...
0
reply
Asolare
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
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.
0
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
Then we'd have to shut down TSR.
3
reply
SoulfulTwist
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
No
0
reply
Cherub012
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#6
(Original post by Inexorably)
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.
(Original post by 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...
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...=.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.
0
reply
Cherub012
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by starfab)
No
Why not?
0
reply
_gcx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
I oppose the existence of all zoos that do not have the intention to preserve.
1
reply
SoulfulTwist
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(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?
0
reply
Cherub012
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#10
(Original post by starfab)
Because I am going to go to visit a zoo one day. Now if they ALL close, how can I do that?
You can visit a national reserve. Better experience too.
0
reply
Amusing Elk
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
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
0
reply
username1221160
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
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.
2
reply
Count Bezukhov
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
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).
0
reply
Mr Dee Mented
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
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!
0
reply
SoulfulTwist
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(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?
1
reply
JamesN88
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by 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...
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.
1
reply
Cherub012
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by starfab)
And do I get to see all the animals that are in zoos?
Erm... which ones do you want to see? Safari parks are better as well.
0
reply
Amusing Elk
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
(Original post by Quantex)
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.
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
0
reply
SoulfulTwist
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by Cherub012)
Erm... which ones do you want to see? Safari parks are better as well.
Penguins
Giraffes
Monkeys and the like (orangutan, chimps)
Elephants
Seals...

Been safari. Didn't enjoy. Car dizziness and all that.
0
reply
Cherub012
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by Quantex)
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.
Would you be against capturing/rearing an animal if not for conservation purposes?

(Original post by starfab)
Penguins
Giraffes
Monkeys and the like (orangutan, chimps)
Elephants
Seals...

Been safari. Didn't enjoy. Car dizziness and all that.
Go to national reserves. Bit more expensive.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

- Have you considered distance learning for any of your qualifications?

Yes! I'm on a distance learning course right now (4)
7.02%
Yes, I've thought about it but haven't signed up yet (4)
7.02%
No, but maybe I will look into it (15)
26.32%
No and I wouldn't consider it (34)
59.65%

Watched Threads

View All