Zoos can occasionally help in preserving an endangered group of animals (think pandas). Zoos can also help educate the public to the plight of animals in the wild - you can't relate to something you can see, smell, and almost touch.
However, contrary to the person who thinks that most zoos are great, many many many are not. They simply have the animals to make money. They spend minimal amounts on enclosures. They don't do any protection/conservation research. Even the best zoos are having major problems with their animals - it's hard to take an animal like and elephant that can cover hundreds of miles in a day and put him in an acre large cage. They literally go crazy and die.
This isn't even accounting for the roadside zoos that cast off animals are given to. 10x6 cages for many animals. No social interacting with others of their species. Hard concrete with some straw. Yet, people who "love" animals visit them - giving the 'zoo' money that doesn't go to the animals.
Some zoos are ok. Most are not. Even water parks are sketchy. There need to be stricter laws all the way around to ensure the care of these animals in a humane and gentle way.
2006-06-29 05:09:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Some of them are kept there to try to keep the species from going extinct. The zoos also teach people of animals that they may never see or know they exist otherwise. They help zoologists learn and study animals to help them. I think zoos are great. I do however think they should be alot bigger so the animals would feel more at home.
2006-06-30 04:04:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by noseygirl 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would say so. Some people may say that it's cruel to pen up animals, but on the other hand, most zoos are trying to give the animals a more natural setting, making it easier on them, and often they have more success breeding them there than they do in the wild. As an example of this, my husband raises tropical fish, and has a friend who "collected" a fish from Florida. The feds came down on him for collecting an endangered species, but then he pointed out that the fish wasn't listed as an endangered species--it was listed as extinct! And there is no law against collecting extinct fish (don't laugh--he got away with it) By the time the feds got to him, he and other members of the tropical fish community had been able to breed hundreds of them. The man may have single-handedly saved that species of fish.
2006-06-29 00:31:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by cross-stitch kelly 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some animals are kept in zoos for environmental reasons and the lack of habitat that is left due to humans taking over their territory. Some animals are kept is zoos because they're indangered species and people just want to help them reproduce and increase their population. Otherwise, animals should be in their natural habitat where they belong, if they're safe. :)
2006-06-29 17:45:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
thats a very contradictory question....i dont think animals shud b kept in the zoo....they r better off in their natural surroundings....where they can interact with the environment & lead a balanced life......
however v sometimes hv to preserve these genotypes from becoming extinct......eg. if there is a catastroph somewhere.......or some disease....all the animals will b wiped out.....so v got to preserve a part of the population of these amazing creatures in our zoos as well....u shud take proper care of them....
2006-06-29 00:29:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by mansi_detective 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
possibly by using the indisputable fact that is human nature to nurture; properly, per chance no longer each individual yet maximum persons for certain. i'm no longer certain about hissing cockroaches or snakes or fish yet bushy pets? there is something medicinal this is supported by clinical information that having one round improves your properly-being so even as our initial impulse to introduce a dogs or a cat contained in the domicile may be selfless, there is genuinely an outstanding income to having a puppy round. contained in the fall of 2009, we lost our Yellow Lab which we had for 15 years. guy, were we heartbroken and doubted shall we get yet another dogs by using loss we felt. A 3 hundred and sixty 5 days went by and we desirous to undertake from Lab Rescue. am i able to allow you to comprehend that is way less difficult to undertake slightly one for sale than to get a Lab from those persons? We then desirous to pass the SPCA route. We happened there as a kin became returning an adoption that did not workout recurring...and it became a Yellow Lab. We had to leap by some hoops yet a week later she got here domicile with us. She were abused and had severe separation pressure so the first 2 months were incredibly demanding yet now she feels proper at domicile and our existence will be a lot less enriched were she no longer in it. (((RQ))) Peace, bill P.S. Oh, and three months when we followed her she were given a tumor in a really comfortable spot that we had to pass to a professional to get rid of which fee us way more desirable than you would possibly want to likely guess yet we did no longer ought to imagine two times about our determination.
2016-11-29 23:16:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by charyl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No they shouldn't be kept in zoos ...........I can't imagine myself being like all those poor animals without their freedom.
2006-06-29 00:25:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by ~*Just me*~ 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No there should be large national parks so that the animals can roam around freely.
2006-06-29 05:09:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no because here in africa they roam freely
2006-06-29 00:27:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
probably so they dont end up in our backyards
2006-06-29 00:22:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋