Some people believe that wild animals be kept in man-made zoos in the 21st century. Do you agree or disagree?

Opinions differ with regards to what kind of animal should to be kept in a zoo. While some people believe that ferocious ones should be kept in man-made reserves, others, argue that these beasts should instead, be left in the wild. This essay agrees that dangerous animals ought to be kept at their natural habitat. Firstly, the idea of keeping brute animals at zoological sites is one that disrupts the natural food order. For example, lions, if left to roam the forests may exercise their propensities by hunting or preying hon the weaker ones. What's more, this "predator - prey" symbiosis, besides keeping a balance in the eco-system; maintains the order of food chain. Conversely, this could trigger an inbalance in the ecological world as vegetations will decrease, owing to the increased number of herbivorous such as deers. To add up, the circumstances pertaining to the capture and transport of many are at times abhorring. Forested cats, for instance, leopards are poached from their various hide-outs, caught and confined to metallic cages before being transported to stranger places. This inhumane act could cost a cub to lose its mother and habitat through separation. Subsequently, a number of these, that are often captured are restricted by movements to a confined space which tends to pose challenges in exploring and adapting to their new home. Moreover, the cost involved in the feeding of some is extravagant to bear. To illustrate, the average adult elephant may consume about 50 tonnes of food every year. This figure clearly shows the amount of money being invested in zoo parks. To sum up, I believe the financial constraints involved, together with disturbance to the food cycle and adaptability difficulties are enough reasons to argue that wild beasts should be left to roam in the wild.