Wildlife In Captivity

To answer this complex question, philosophy professor Bryan Norton poses some additional concerns relevant to this issue. He notes that if in fact keeping these animals in captivity is ethical, then we must also discuss what specifically humans want to conserve (Norton 15). Is it limited just to animal species, or can it extend to populations, ecosystems, and natural processes? If we simply identify wild animals, then we must ask ourselves if we are preserving a wild species if the animals themselves are forced to spend their lives in captivity? He mentions a common analogy used among zoo professionals who refer themselves to a modern day Noah’s ark, preserving each species by removing individuals for conservation. If zoos represent a sanctuary from extinction, then we must also address if there will ever be a natural habitat to reintroduce the animals into, or if they be forced to remain on the zoos “Ark” indefinitely (Norton 16). Though the work of various ethical scholars and philosophers may not be able to provide a concrete answer to all of the respective questions, I will discuss the concept of reintroduction when analyzing the third argument of this essay.

There are numerous different types of animals in the world. Coming from amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds. All of these animals are born to run free and hunt without relying on a human. Sadly, things aren’t the way it’s supposed to be. There are other animals who are taken away from their home and are locked up in cramped spaces; in other words, the zoo. The zoo may seem like an enjoyable activity for children, but many do not know the half of what goes on behind the glass window. Animals wish they can be free and end the nightmare of being captive. Even though both animals that lie in the wild and animal captivity are one, in the group of animals, there are many differences between them.

Scientists, zoologists, and the staff at zoos all agree that by keeping species in captivity, the species is benefiting from it. For some species, captivity is the only reason why their species is surviving. For example, the amount of tigers that are owned by private individuals

Animals in captivity should be allowed because they can get healthy. The first reason they get healthy is there are rehabilitation programs. According to The Current, “Rehabilitation programs take ill or injured animals and nurse them to health so that they may be reintroduced back to the wild” ( Should Animals Be Kept In Captivity n. pag.). Rehabilitators learn to recognize and treat many kinds of medical and surgical problems (Duke et al. 97). Wildlife rehabilitation saves lives and returns many animals

Although keeping animals in captivity is bad because they don't get to be themselves they should keep animals in zoos or captivity because it helps the species not go extinct, it brings happiness to families that go to the zoo, and zoos bring in enough money to build better exhibits. Even though zoos still have negative impacts on animals lives they should still keep animals in

You may be asking yourself why should exotic animals be in captivity and does this benefit them in any way? The short answer yes let me explain for example the Panamanian golden frog have been extinct in the wild since 2007 because of a fungal disease thats been in Panama also with destruction of its natural habitat. This frog would not of lived if it wasn't for captivity and the Panamanian people would of been devastated they have frog on every from t-shirt to cups this

The zoo is packed with children, running everywhere. They laugh and smile as they watch the animals at the zoo sleep. What these children do not realize is that these animals are dying on the inside. Animals that live at the zoo are extremely depressed. These animals can suffer severe psychological disorders from being out of their natural environment. But others argue that keeping these animals in captivity will help keep endangered species alive. However, the disadvantages of keeping animals in captivity are becoming more and more serious, and more people are beginning to believe that animals should not be held captive. Animals should not be kept in captivity because of the negative impact it can have

Several animal rights oriented critics of captive breeding insist that breeding in captivity involves only the breeding of “cute” animals that merit value from the public, rather than breeding for conservation purposes, and in the process of such breeding, animals reproduced in excess are allocated to subpar establishments for means of exploitation (Minteer and Collins, 2013). Simultaneously, there is a large number of the public that believes zoos are a place where animals are treated optimally, and a place where populations can be conserved (Davey, 2007). The public desires to be reassured by scientific data, in order to constitute the operation of captive breeding programs to improve conservation of the wildlife population (Davey,

Some people believe animals should be taken care of in captivity because it is to dangerous for them in the wild. Animals do not truly belong in a cage. It is not fair for the animal to live in captivity because the animal would not be able to roam freely like it could if it lived in the wild. If an animal can not make it in the wild, it needs to either adapt to the wild or die which is a way of the population controlling itself. Animals are meant to live in the wild. Once you put a animal in captivity and then decide to release it, the animal will probably die because it does not know how to hunt for food, and will not be able to defend itself against other animals. If animals do not have enough room to roam around, they can become sick and depressed.

Before the observations in the presence of visitors is to be undertaken, a preliminary observation using ad-libitum sampling would be used, to gain an informal/ non-systematic recording of all relevant behaviours to see how the orangutans interact with each other and their environments before the zoo opens. This also has a primary purpose to help the individuals within the enclosure get used to an observer being present. These results can be used to compile an ethogram, which will be used as a basis for other observations. The group will be observed using instantaneous sampling (also known as point sampling) for three hours each day during morning, mid-day and afternoon (between opening hours of 10am-4pm) to gain different frequencies of behaviours in accordance with different visitor times, this will be conducted over 6 months to around 100 hours, allowing the most dense visitor times to become apparent and to see if these will affect the orangutans behaviour positively or negatively. The group will be studied for one hour samples with behaviours recorded for the entire group in minute intervals (30 seconds per individual). This sampling was used in Downs (2002) on a mixed bird species enclosure, and also in Carder and Semple (2008) on two groups of captive lowland gorillas. This sampling method is useful as it allows a large number of behavioural categories to be measured as well as a large number of individuals to be studied. This also allows for a rapid scan of all three individuals per sample point. This sampling method places no systematic constraints on what is being recorded and when whilst also allowing the inclusion of the visitor density variable (Martin and Bateson, 2007) allowing all relevant behaviours to be

A study was published in Conservation Biology, an academic journal, where “researchers interviewed over 2,800 children after they had visited the London Zoo, and 62 percent of them showed no indication of having learned new information about animal or environmental conservation” (Cronin). The London Zoo has claimed to have a strong education program but clearly they do not because children are leaving their zoo with no new knowledge about animals or how to conserve them. If many zoos’ purposes are to educate children about conservation and animals but they are showing no signs of doing so, these zoos are providing no benefit for anyone, especially the

What happens if we keep them in captivity? For zoos “the increase of animal tourism is further solidified as disney animal kingdom

Many people wonder why it’s good to have zoos in the world. For this reason this issue focuses on why animals in captivity is beneficial for scientific reasons and one of those reasons is because we can study their characteristics, if there are going to be extinct we should help them reproduce to get them out of extinct, and so we can learn how zoos help the animals.

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