A recent column by Antonia Russo makes this point powerfully. In the Alaska Zoo gave in and let go of Maggie, because the public was raged that Maggie was in a small indoor enclosure for numerous days without any means of exercise like an elephant-sized treadmill.
What if veterinary care is provided or extra food as in many reserves or as part of conservation projects.
According to the North County Times of San Diego, "Zoos are built for human entertainment and don't seriously consider the animals' quality of life, animal advocates said.
Along with being taken care of, the animals are given food for them and they do not have to work for it. Many zoos also work directly to educate conservation workers in foreign countries or send keepers abroad to contribute their knowledge and skills to zoos and preserves helping to improve conditions and reintroductions all over the world.
Some of the debaters had even discovered that the animals are harmed by the cages because they are cleaned with various chemicals. These shows allow viewers to see animals in their natural habitat- the way it should work.
Lastly, the people would agree that zoos help preserve animals and their species. Not only do they take in animals but the Bronx Zoo also gave 3 million towards conservation projects in central Africa. There are over 10, zoos worldwide; under register their animals on an international endangered species database.
They said the elephant euthanized June 19 should have been sent to an animal sanctuary instead and that the park's mistreatment of the animal was what caused her foot problems and degenerative joint disease.
So which is it? In that, the animals should be free. The first menagerie is thought to have existed circa B. Depending on your point of view, though, zoos are either sanctuaries of education and entertainment or unnecessary prisons. There are children here, lots of them, and their enthusiasm is infectious.
At the same time, well-intentioned attempts to protect the habitats of animal species on the edge of extinction lead to the creation of wild, "people-free" areas. How is this "helping animals"? Does going to the zoo and looking at animals make you feel superior?
Excuse me, but what the hell are penguins doing within walking distance of gorillas?! A bateleur, the elegant tightrope walker of African skies, confined to a cage. Parrots put on mimi-bikes and in toy cars at the Glasgow Zoo. Tourist playgrounds are manufactured environments, usually cleared of people.
The information they gather helps them to develop new medicines and techniques to improve animal health [source: Moreover, some of these collapses have been sudden, dramatic and unexpected or were simply discovered very late in the day.
Call it what it is. Lastly, the people would agree that zoos help preserve animals and their species. Con First, I would like to say that she wanted to be called "IT" to conceal gender, oops The Global Animal points out that looking at the reintroduction programs only 16 out of the animals were able to survive back in the wild.
A zoo dosn't do anything else that a wild life preserve can't. Kids are falling further and further into lives devoid of contact with nature.
If nature was appropriately preserved, we would not need zoos. There are over 6, endangered species; only are in breeding programs, only 12 have been returned to the wild Also, out of captive bred Golden Lion Tamarins that have been released into the wild, only 30 have survived. The natural instincts and behavior of these animals are suppressed by force.
Captive breeding programmes should be undertaken in large nature reserves, not within the confines of a zoo. Are zoos good or bad? With the help of zoos, these animals are kept safe. Adults and children visiting zoos will be given the subliminal message that it is OK to use animals for our own ends, however it impinges on their freedom or quality of life; thus zoos will encourage poor treatment of animals more generally.
And please, as I have stated before, the "Pwned noob" statement is unneccesary. These cages are also to small and the animals lack in exercise.
In addition, many animals have precise needs that zookeepers are just beginning to understand. These chemicals can be toxins that harm the animals.
This was an area where zoos were previously poor and are now increasingly sophisticated in their communication and outreach work.
Con To refute my opponent's points:Here are the main reasons why Zoos do more good than harm. 1) It educates Children and others of animals in the world that are not native to their country.
2) Endangered animals would otherwise be extinct without zoos. 3) Zoos provide revenue for cities as well as for the zoo itself to expand programs to help the animals. Zoos offer people a chance to see different types of wildlife up close and personal without coming into harms way. It gives people an opportunity to learn about many animals in one place.
As long as the animals are being properly cared for within the zoo, I see that zoos do not cause more harm than good. Do Zoos do More Harm Than Good? Advantages of Zoos Questions and Answers Q: How do zoos get their animals? A: The animals can be shipped,caught in the wild and brought to the zoo, born in captivity, rescued from people who kept them as pets but didn't do a good job of it, given by people who couldn't keep them, or found injured and brought in.
Zoos: The Historical Debate Adapted from an article on palmolive2day.com For hundreds of years, people have flocked to zoos to see wild animals up close. But many others say that zoos do more harm than good. So which is it? Are zoos good or bad? One Side of. The Benefits of Animal Zoos - Tigers, lions, giraffes, and other exotic animals are rarely seen in the wild.
However the public, without humans and/or animals being harmed at the same time, can see exotic animals when a zoo opens. If you ever needed a reason to boycott theme parks that hold animals captive, we have five!
One for you and four to share!Download