Zoos: Should they continue to exist or animals better off in the wild?

Added by: Anna Maria Lavis It is a fact that zoos exist in major cities of the world. Nowadays, while many people are in favor of zoos, others claim that zoos should not exist and the animals should live in their natural habitat. I would like to put some pros and cons of zoos and let each person decide on their own what they believe. Here are some arguments against zoos. First of all, animals should not be held in captivity in big cages because they are living creatures and they need to be free. According to a recent research, animals in zoos live less than those that live in the wild. Moreover an enormous amount of money is needed for the animals care, thus sometimes zoos dont make any profit at all, and since a zoo is a business...the less money they have the less care they can offer the animals. Another point is that some animals lose their natural instinctive attributes. For example, animals such as lions need to hunt; however in zoos they dont have this choice. The ideal solution for the endangered species would be for the experts to be able to help and protect them in their natural environment. But unfortunately this is far from reality. Here are some arguments in favor of zoos. Everybody knows that organized zoos do their best to save animals that are endangered. They make a great effort to help endangered animals reproduce to keep their species alive. They make visitors more aware of the problems of endangered species. Furthermore, visiting zoos allows zoos to collect money to continue their efforts while at the same time it offers family entertainment and education which cannot be offered in the wild. Many zoos find injured or hurt animals and bring them back to health where as in the wild they would have died. Also zoos come to the rescue of abused animals and offer them a better home. In conclusion, my initial reaction is animals should not be a prisoner of zoos, this is not their natural habitat. But on the other hand, a well organized zoo that has rules and regulations can offer a good home for animals. It can also offer a safe haven to endangered species that otherwise might not be around if certain zoos did not care to protect these species. The finally decision if zoos are good or bad is for you and your conscious to make!

Zoo Pros: Education, Conservation, Entertainment

Zoos have improved significantly in the last 4,000 or so years. Gone are the old steel-bar enclosures and cold cement cages. Most zoos these days use natural-looking barriers like moats or ditches to separate animals from people, and have mini-habitats that resemble the animals' natural environment. Adding another point for zoo pros, the procedure for acquiring animals has also changed. Whereas zoos previously captured most of their specimens directly from the wild, they now get many animals throughcaptive breeding programs and other zoos. Some breeding programs also help to restore threatened species. After 10 years of working to strengthen the population numbers of the endangered Californiacondor, a type of vulture, the Los Angeles and San Diego zoos were able to rebuild a population of fewer than two dozen birds to around 170 birds [source: Encarta]. Successful breeding programs brought the Pere David's deer back from extinction. Though this Asian deer ceased to exist in the wild, Chinese and European zoo programs enabled four of the deer to be released back into the wild in 1985, where they're now self-sustaining [source: Encarta]. Some zoos also take in abandoned animals that wouldn't otherwise have a home. Both the Baltimore Zoo and the Detroit Zoo have taken in polar bears rescued from a traveling circus, and the Bronx Zoo took in an orphaned snow leopard from Pakistan in 2007. The cub, Leo, now spends his time frolicking and chasing small animals that wander into his enclosure [source: Majkowski]. And although zoo animals aren't treated quite like guests at a four-star hotel, their care has improved tremendously. Zookeepers now understand that many animals, such as monkeys, bears and elephants, need engaging activities to prevent boredom and mental deterioration. This is why you'll often see chimpsplaying with toys or tigers "hunting" for a meal. Aside from taking care of captive animals, many zoos also contribute to the care of their wild counterparts. The Toledo Zoo, in conjunction with the Nature Conservancy, is helping to restore butterfly habitats in Ohio, and the Bronx Zoo has channeled more than $3 million toward conservation projects in central Africa [source: Fravel]. Zoos also present an opportunity for scientists to conduct research. In 2002, zoos participated in 2,230 research and conservation projects in more than 80 countries. The information they gather helps them to develop new medicines and techniques to improve animal health [source: Fravel]. Beyond the positive impact zoos try to have on animals, they often affect the people visiting as well. Zoos don't just entertain, they also aim to educate. With a variety of programs geared toward children and adults, zoos teach people about the needs of animals and the importance of conservation. And if people get excited enough, the thinking goes that they'll be more inclined to donate money to conservation efforts -- another zoo pro. The fact that zoos impact people in a positive way is nice, but it's not the people critics worry about -- it's the animals.

Pro: Saving Endangered Species

Supporters of zoos argue that they help save endangered species. Zoos provide a safe place for endangered or threatened species to live. Zoos also encourage the reproduction of endangered and threatened animals, helping ensure that these species don't die out. For example, according to GoodZoos.com, zoos have saved some species of bison and oryx, as well as the Jamaican boa, Hawaiian goose and Mauritius pink pigeon.

Pro: Educational Opportunities

Zoos educate children and adults about animals and biology, inspiring people to study science and promoting an awareness of ecological and conservation efforts. Observing animals is more inspiring and memorable than reading a textbook or watching videos. Zoos also provide educational material, offer demonstrations and provide internship opportunities, and they make it possible for scientists to perform research on animals.

Con: Animals Suffer

Animals suffer in zoos. Many are kept in small enclosures to ensure that they are close enough to the visitors. They don't get to hunt for their food and may have to live in a different climate than they are accustomed to. Birds may have their wings clipped, while aquatic species may not have enough water to swim freely, according to Dr. Thomas Dixon. Making animals suffer for our enjoyment and entertainment is unethical, according to zoo critics.

Con: Zoos Don't Counter Habitat Loss

Even if zoos provide a safe place for endangered species, they do little to counter habitat loss, the leading cause of endangerment. In addition, zoos may distract from other conservation efforts that have more of an impact, such as land conservation programs. Finally, according to Dr. Thomas Dixon, breeding animals in zoos often involves inter-breeding, because of the small animal population, which causes birth defects.

Con: Research and Education are Limited

Although scientists may perform research at zoos, they can also perform research in the wild. Research performed in the wild may be more accurate than research performed on animals in captivity, because zoos change how animals act. In addition, according to critics, some zoos focus more on entertainment thaneducation; many zoos do not perform much research and may design programs in order to captivate and entertain visitors, not educate them.

Read more: Pros & Cons of Zoos | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_8231447_pros-conszoos.html#ixzz1kyKSviHE