Which Side Of The Zoo Debate Are You On.

The zoo is a time honored tradition that most of us remember fondly back into our childhood. However times they are a changing and we are now more aware than ever that keeping animals in a zoo environment may not be the best choice for the animal. There is an ongoing debate about whether zoos should exist or not. So which side of the zoo debate are you on?

It may not be feasible for zoo animals to be released into their natural environment however we are beginning to see zoo’s in a whole new light and pressure is being put on management of these facilities to change the way zoos are managed.

There is no question that the modern zoo does more than offer entertainment to the visitors at the expense of the animals. The modern zoo is often involved in recovery of injured animals and returning them to health, animal research, and a host of other services that ultimately benefit the animals.

Zoos are very organized business enterprises with excellent marketing strategies. There goal is to increase market share and bring more visitors to the zoo which means more profits. But is this right or wrong?

Well I guess that depends whether the profits are used to feed big business or whether the profits go back into caring for the animals, research and development for animals in the wild, and to sustain species that may other wise become extinct.

Some feel animals are better off in the zoo then they are in their natural environment. After all they are safer right? Well they may be safer but a zoo is an unnatural environment that often exposes the residents to dangers that they wouldn’t face in the wild. For example some zoos house their animals in close proximity that is stressful and becomes a breeding ground for disease.

Animals in zoos are also exposed to unnatural elements like chemicals and solvents that they would not be exposed to in their natural home environment. And animals are often provoked by visitors.

Many believe that zoos educate the general public about animals that they would not otherwise have a chance to learn and understand. While it is true that exposure to various species of animals can give us a better understanding and awareness of the challenges these animals face in their natural habitat.

The question becomes does that make confinement legitimate? Does that give us the right to force these animals to do a life sentence behind bars? Heck even our most notorious criminals don’t spend a lifetime behind bars. Is there not a better way that we can educate people? Are they contained solely for educational value or are they also contained for their entertainment value?

Some would say that the animals really don’t know any better. This statement in itself would indicate that animals are not very smart. Yet studies have shown that animal infact are intelligent and they do have a range of emotional experiences. Many animals develop abnormal habits such as head bobbing which is associated with the stress of confinement.

Many believe that zoos are a great place to preserve endangered species. Most zoos have no legitimate role in the conservation of animals although a few of the reputable ones do. The problem is even if we preserve an endangered species within a zoo over time they lose their genetic variables that allow them to survive so even the young born in captivity cannot be released back into the wild. The only viable way to preserve an endangered species is to protect it in its natural environment.

Animals born in the zoo are seldom released to the wild. Reintroduction programs seldom work and have a very high failure rate. Even if they are reintegrated into their natural environment their survival rate is minimal because these animals no longer have the skills required to survive.

Many believe zoos will never be abolished. It is quite true that zoos are a powerful group and that it is unlikely that they will be forced out of business. However the population is also a powerful group and as a whole they can initiate changes within the zoo structure and even force zoos to close. A prime example of this was the Stanley Park Zoo in Vancouver BC. In 1994 a plan to upgrade the zoo was defeated by the residents of Vancouver. The zoo was forced to relocate it’s animals and get out of the zoo business.

Not all zoos are created equal. Many are reputable organizations that even employ full scientific teams that work towards better understanding of animals so that more can be done to protect their home lands and keep them from becoming endangered. Many of these large reputable zoos are involved in programs to care and heal injured animals, to relocate animals back to their natural environment, and to work with government and other officials to ensure that natural wildlife habitats are not destroyed.

Sadly the disreputable zoos are usually the ones that get all the attention for their inhumane treatment of animals. These are the ones that should certainly be closed down. They use their animals strictly for the purpose of entertaining and making a profit. They care little as to the quality of life the animal as or whether its environment even remotely resembles the natural habitat.

The debates about zoos are certain to go on for years to come. Where that leads we can only guess. So what side of the zoo debate are you on?

Deon Melchior is the Editor and Publisher of Article Click. For more FREE articles for your ezine and websites visit ArticleClick.com. Article Click is a free content article directory. This means that as a publisher you may reprint the articles that are included in our site, as long as the article is unedited and the author box is included with it's live hyperlinks.