More and more wild animals are being kept in the zoo these days. Do the advantages of this trend outweigh its disadvantages?

In this modernized era, the wildlife conservation authorities have resorted to making the zoo home for non-domestic animals. This has majorly come as a safety measure to both the public and the animals. In my perspective, I believe that this is rather positive. In this article, I intend to defend my thesis statement. First and foremost, the public is protected from attack by wild animals; for example, animals such as lions, hyenas and tigers are dangerous to the community as they may injure the citizens. As a result, a lot of cash will be spent taking care of the medical bills of the victims; this, in turn, will create fear in public hence it is a good idea to keep these animals at a wildlife centre. In addition, keeping wild animals in a designated area will prevent hunters from killing them; to illustrate, a number of animals in East Africa have been hunted down for food. If measures are not taken into consideration to keep these creatures, they will become extinct as a result of hunting. Furthermore, the zoo has a number of wild animals which will eventually attract tourists; to illustrate, a number of tourists have come all the way to Uganda Wildlife Centre in Entebbe due to see the wild creatures; this, in turn, has improved the tourism industry. In fact, these creature's well-being is paramount at the designated area where they are kept; to cite an example, all basic needs are provided which seems a better option for these creatures. Nonetheless, keeping creatures in a designated area encroaches on their freedom. This, however, is not an issue because of all the benefits as mentions above. In conclusion, it is my opinion that the merits outweigh the demerits of keeping animals at the zoo. Hence, the authorities need to consider making this development compulsory to make life better.