The Issue Of Banning The Captivity Of Wild Animals

One of the reasons why we should keep animals in captivity is because animals are simply safer in zoos than in the wild as said in the article, Animals Locked Up. Another one of the reasons why we should keep animals in captivity is because the zoo and safari park are great places for people to explore the animal kingdom that is close to their homes. For example, if I wanted to go to see

One of the most fun, visually amazing functions to visit are zoo's. Growing up as a kid going to the zoo was so much fun and basically guaranteed a great day out. People have been complaining and questioning the role of zoo's for a long time now. Some claim that it actually kills the animals off faster. Others claim that zoo's actually help protect and preserve the lives of these animals. Only one can make a reasonable argument by studying sources, and finding out statistics. Based off of the articles, "The Stripes Will Survive", "The Zoos Go Wild", and "Our Beautiful Macaws and Why They Need Enrichment", we can truly get in-depth analysis about the role zoo's play.

Zoos across the world claim to be safe, suitable homes that replicate habitats of animals that are usually found in the wild. However, there is no possible way for wild habitats to be replicated well enough for animals in captivity to thrive, animals are often separated and withheld from living as they would in the wild. Despite their argument of being educational for visitors, the only thing they are teaching the public is that it is ok to take animals out of the wild and lock them up for their own enjoyment. Regardless of these claims, zoos are inhumane.

There have been many discussions about the welfare of animals since the first zoos were created. Some people agree that animals should be kept in zoo’s, they argue that it benefits the animals because their every need is catered to. However, in some zoo’s they are treated the exact opposite of being catered to. Sometimes the animals are also deprived of a natural environment that the zoo’s fail to recreate. However, zoo’s can be helpful educationally to kids. It gives them a close up on the beauty of the animals, but it comes at the animals expense.

It is said that in order to protect the wildlife, we need to be educated about the wildlife that inhabits our planet. As humans, and the superior species on Earth, we put exotic animals, aquatic and terrestrial, in zoos or aquariums where people can go to see them to learn more about them in order to protect them. It just so happens that by putting these animals into captivity, we are causing more damage to them, just as damage is occurring in the wild and more species are becoming extinct. Animals should not be held in captivity; it does not save them from going extinct, but helps kill them off.

The second reason animals should not be held in captivity is because the exhibits they live in are too small and not natural to them. Zoos do not provide animals with the proper habitats they need to survive. The habitats are designed to imitate the animal’s natural habitat, but are usually not natural. There are large animals, such as, elephants, that do not have the large space they need. Animals that are in

To argue against the use of animal captivity I will use Utilitarian, Peter Singer, who wrote an essay named ‘All Animals are Equal.’ Within this, Singer argues that humans are animals but language makes us forget this. Conventions and attitudes that we find hard to drop move us away from the idea that humans and non-humans are both equal and that we should not treat animals like they are any different to us. Singer wants a liberal rights movement for the rights of animals. This has to be about interests and the amount of pleasure or pain we feel. Furthermore, Utilitarian John Stuart Mill can also be used as an argument against animal captivity. He argues for the minimizing of suffering and pain and maximizing of pleasure and happiness of all interested parties. Including that of

The controversial issue of animal testing isn’t a top priority for most Americans, but it is for the animal rights activist that have established brand boycotts and loyalty. Animal testing has been around for decades; however, most Americans do not know if their household cleans or beauty products are tested on animals. Companies like Fabreze, Lysol, and even Comet are still tested on animals as of 2017 but have a standing consumer boycott by animal rights activist. “A study published in the Journal of Medical Ethics (February 2015) found that from 1997 to 2012, the total number of laboratory animals increased by 73%, but due to inadequacies in recordkeeping on the use of animals in experimentation, the number may be even higher (“Animals,”

There are different opinions on the subject matter. Some people support the rights of animals to the extent, that they find it extremely cruel to keep them in captivity, comparing it to imprisonment, whilst others say captivity of animals is essential to their further existence and well-being. Many neutral analyst on this debate topic have pointed to the fact that acting in accordance to moral and emotional notions is not the most ideal approach on such a complicated and ambiguous problem such as this. Rather the important question that should be emphasized upon, is what manner of living would be most beneficial for animals?

The topic of zoos and whether or not they’re humane have quickly become one of the biggest controversial topics in the past twenty years. There is not much of a ‘middle’ perspective in this debate, rather people tend to lie on two completely opposite ends of the spectrum when displaying their beliefs pertaining to the zoo debate. I chose to research this topic because though I have strong beliefs, I think that, on this matter specifically, people often jump to a certain side without any prior research or actual education on the subject. I think that it’s important to understand both sides of the argument of zoos before sustaining a side. Another reason why I chose this topic was to moreso educate myself and to make sure that the knowledge I

Animals are not safe in zoos. Abigail Hauslohner, who wrote the article “Giraffe Suicide? Bear Riot? It's a Zoo Unlike Any Other” for the Washington Post, reveals that animals are dying in the Giza Zoo in Egypt. According to the article, a young giraffe strangle herself to death from a wire. Animals under the supervision of people should not be able to hurt or kill themselves. Another horrifying truth in “Giraffe Suicide? Bear Riot? It's a Zoo Unlike Any Other” is that zookeepers kill camels for the purpose of selling the meat for profit. Those zookeepers have no right to kill those camels. The purpose for the camels is to educate the public. Those two examples are not the only tragedies. “…three black bears died in a single night under mysterious circumstances” (Hauslohner). This example shows that zoos need to be better monitor. The caretakers are more of a threat than anything else for those creatures.

Many people think we should ban animals in captivity, and others may think we should not ban the animals. Honestly we should not ban animals. There's plenty of reasons why we should not ban animals from zoos and other exhibits. In "Myth And Reality" it says as long as the animals are kept in captivity they are suppose to get treated humanly, because studies have shown that animals suffer mentally, emotionally, and even physically. It also says that zoos claim to teach visitors about the wild life conservation and habitat protection. Its not so much that the animals aren't in their natural habitat because the zoos make their large cages look and seem like if they are in their natural habitat. On the other hand people think we should ban the

"Zoo's: Myth and Reality" it mentions that the environment of a polar bear is made of unreal ice, they make it for the entertainment of people. Some animals like the cheetah, tigar, lion, giraffe, and zebras are animals that like running ans exploring, but yet zoo's don't bother to put them in at least 1 acre of land, zoo's put the animals in spaces that are equivalent to a class room. In source 3 "Danish zoo kills healthy giraffe, feeds body to lions," it mentions that the zoo that killed

Zoo may have educational exhibits to learn about the natural wildlife. It can be a safe environment to have, a personal encounter, with one of the animals you might have seen in television. But those animals don't belong there, there homes are in the wilderness. So by animals being in there natural environment people can study how they behave, and what they like to do. Being kept in captivity can change the animals natural form of behavior. According to CNN news, "Copenhagen zoo said it euthanized the male, named Marius, on Sunday because of a duty to avoid inbreeding," meaning they kill a giraffe to feed feed a lion. Also this giraffe was a healthy giraffe why would they kill it, they couldn't pick a more older giraffe not one that was about 2 years old. Plus just cause they were oversized population of giraffe in the zoo, they were going to kill, to feed others.

In conclusion, animals shouldn't be in captivity. Although zoos can provide benefits for animals such as nutrition and medical services.Animals don't need this benefits because they were born without them. Animals have their own ways to survive. We shouldn't have to put an animal in captivity in order to make research. Scientists can make them in the wild where they can obtain better results. Animals were born free and they should live in freedom. Mother nature has given them instincts to survive in the wild. Humans should not interfere with