are zoos a good thing?

Answer 1

I love going to the zoo but I always feel guilty, there is an ecological argument which makes me feel a bit better but essentially if we were doing it for purely environmental reasons then they wouldn't be designed with human entertainment in mind, ie small enclosures which ensure animals can be seen most of the time, surely we would be better off funding the many projects to protect animals in their country of origin? Only then we wouldn't get to gawp at them would we? Then there's the argument that they raise awareness amongst people / children so they want to protect them in future but I don't really see that people care more for an animal after seeing it behind bars than say seeing a David Attenborough documentary.

So selfishly I like them but I still doubt that they are the best thing for the animals

Answer 2

Zoos used to be places where animals were placed in cages for the public to gaze upon.
Todays zoos are a far different story, and the first concern of any decent zoo is the welfare of the animals.
If it wasn't for some European zoos, some species of animals would be gone - extinct.
A classic example is the panda. Zoos are fighting to improve their numbers.
Before the age of television, the only chance a child had of seeing certain animals was at a zoo.
Thanks to people like David Attenborough and Steve Erwin, wildlife is now brought to our living rooms, and we no longer need to keep animals in cages.

So - the answer to your question is that zoos have served a useful purpose in the past, and still serve a useful purpose to educate young children - but not with large wild animals.

Do wildlife parks serve a useful purpose?

Answer 3

Most of the answers here refer to zoos in the more enlightened countries,at the end of the cold war the conditions in some east european zoos were found to be horrific.Also countries in the middle east where the populace has little respect for animals have been found to keep animals in terrible conditions for profit.In more modern societies where zoos breed and study endangered species and provide good healthy
enviroments for the animals they could be said to be good though I think the non endangered species would be far better off where they belong in the wild.

Answer 4

Some zoos can be good, if they aim to habilitate animals which are endangered and save them from extinction. Alternatively they may just be keeping the animals for public viewing, but this is still a good thing if the animals are kept in a wild-like environment. It also helps with the understanding of less well known species.

Other zoos, such as in Russia, use the animals for the entertainment of the public. The animals are kept in inhumane conditions and often end up physically and psycologically damaged- those zoos are not good.

Answer 5

I am an ex zoo keeper and have very mixed feeling on this subject. In one way, yes they are good. They conserve a species, allow the animal to thrive without having to forage for food and suffer no threat from predators. Some (not all) have conservation programmes in-situ, helping to conserve the animals in their natural habitat. In another way, no, because from my experience zoo's do tend to lie about their actions... how many examples can u find of zoos ACTUALLY releasing these animals back into the wild?? not many I bet. Animals bring in money. Another downfall that not many people realise is that many many healthy endangered animals are put down in zoos - why? - because they are surplus to the breeding programmes requirements i.e. too many males in the programme. i have actually seen this done several times. the excuse - you have to sacrafice one individual animal somethimes for the sake of the whole species..This is one reason I am no longer a zoo keeper.

Answer 6

Yes and no, I always think that animals like big cats look very miserable and downcast in zoos, I've seen big cats roaming in the wild and even in a good Safari Park like Longleat its still not the same as being free. That said tigers are disappearing so rapidly that its getting to the point where zoos and safari parks could end up being the only place you can see them so they are guaranteeing their survival. It's the lesser of 2 evils I guess, live in less than ideal conditions or possibly disappear altogether.

Edit: just another quick thought, go and see wild animals in their natural habitat - it'll open your eyes a lot.

Answer 7

Yes because of the fact we are reducing the habitats the animals in zoo's would normally live. If we put a bit of a stop to the slow and steady exciton of other spiecs then there would be no need for zoo's.

Answer 8

They are in the sense that they educate people on importance of conservation, fight against poaching endangered species and keep a gene bank for certain species. If the zoo is about conservation and having the animals in as natural environment as possible instead of just making money, they can be a good thing!

Answer 9

It depends on what you call `Zoos`. On 1 hand, those whom are endangered are well + good, Zoos are beneficial. Safari Parks are good, however, mans encroachment need to be culled.

Answer 10

for endangered species yes. But I visited the zoo the other month and couldn't help feeling sorry for the animals. Its not natural and I think it is really cruel. They should be in their own environment and country.