Around the world, people have differing opinions about zoos. Some people
believe that keeping animals in captivity is wrong, while others contend
that it is necessary, and that we need zoos. In this essay I will explore both
of these views, as they each have some merit, before drawing a conclusion.
Proponents of zoos tend to argue that these places are intended to educate
the public about animals. They claim that people can go to zoos and
become more aware of serious environmental issues, and that therefore
zoos are essential in raising awareness of serious issues. For example,
children can visit zoos and learn about the majestic elephant, and then
adapt their behaviour to become more responsible people in the future.
However, this argument assumes that all zoos treat their purpose as education,
when in fact many zoos are geared towards entertainment, and
many people come away from a zoo visit having learned relatively little.
Opponents of zoos claim that it is cruel to keep animals in captivity, and
that therefore they belong in the wild. They point to numerous studies
that show the suffering experienced by animals in even the best zoos. It is
clear from this evidence that many large animals require extensive space
to roam that is just not available for them in their artificial enclosures,
and so they suffer serious psychological and even physical damage. The
fact that animals almost always live shorter lives in zoos is further proof
of this fact.
In conclusion, although there are some good reasons for the existence
of zoos, they probably should not be allowed to continue into the twenty-
first century. Despite the positive efforts of some zoos, the suffering
experienced by animals in captivity is simply unacceptable.
Around the world,
people
have differing opinions about zoos.
Some
people
believe that keeping
animals
in captivity is
wrong
, while others contend
that it is necessary, and that we need zoos. In this essay I will explore both
of these views, as they each have
some
merit,
before
drawing a conclusion.
Proponents of zoos tend to argue that these places
are intended
to educate
the public about
animals
. They claim that
people
can go to zoos and
become more aware of serious environmental issues, and that
therefore
zoos are essential in raising awareness of serious issues.
For example
,
children can visit zoos and learn about the majestic elephant, and then
adapt their
behaviour
to become more responsible
people
in the future.
However
, this argument assumes that all zoos treat their purpose as education,
when in fact
many
zoos
are geared
towards entertainment, and
many
people
come
away from a zoo visit having learned
relatively
little
.
Opponents of zoos claim that it is cruel to
keep
animals
in captivity, and
that
therefore
they belong in the wild. They point to numerous studies
that
show
the suffering experienced by
animals
in even the best zoos. It is
clear
from this evidence that
many
large
animals
require extensive space
to roam
that is
just
not available for them in their artificial enclosures,
and
so
they suffer serious psychological and even physical damage. The
fact that
animals
almost always
live
shorter
lives
in zoos is
further
proof
of this fact.
In conclusion
, although there are
some
good
reasons for the existence
of zoos, they
probably
should not be
allowed
to continue into the twenty-
first
century. Despite the
positive
efforts of
some
zoos, the suffering
experienced by
animals
in captivity is
simply
unacceptable.