The larger ethical question is: Should zoos even exist? Do they have a real purpose?

[Yavin4]

Do we need to put animals into prisons for our amusement and entertainment?

I don't have an answer. I don't know all of the facts, but I'm putting that question out there.

[montanacowboy]

1. No we do not need zoos

It's time

[Nye Bevan]

2. Protecting endangered species from hunters, poachers, and disease? (nt)

[JonathanRackham]

3. They can serve as a safe haven.

A safe haven for endangered species, injured wild animals or animals who wouldn't make it without help. To catch healthy ones in the wild and contain them is wrong.

[Scootaloo]

4. Yes, they do in fact serve a purpose: preservation

A shift of zoos towards that purpose, with display and entertainment being secondary or even tertiary (after all, the zoo can't rely on government or philanthropic largess) would suit ethics, I think.

[reddread]

23. not really.

without habitat preservation, a bottlenecked relic is simply an extant, extinct species.
Maybe a thin selection of chromosomes is adequate or better than none, but without
a relentless commitment to wildlife and wild lands, Zoos are simply a window into a vanishing world,
and a cash cow for those who are less worried about long term trends.

[X_Digger]

5. Purposes like breeding programs for endangered species?

Providing genetic stock for re-introduction programs? Conducting research on wildlife conservation?

When's the last time you went to your local zoo and saw what programs they were working on?

[reddread]

24. you have it backwards

they cannot create genetic stock, they can only limit it.

[Mojorabbit]

26. Ii watched a program years ago

detailing the secondary market for all those babies that are born. Many ending up as pets, roadside attractions, or on canned hunt grounds. I had not thought before what they do to all those youngsters born in the zoos before that.

[dilby]

6. Nope zoos should go.

Much like making elephants dance and whipping lions at the circus they have exceeded their usefulness. At a time it was useful for educational purposes with children, now they can get all the same information via the internet. As far as protecting Animals, i would rather invest money into protecting Animals in the wild over putting them in cages with the knowledge they will never go back into the wild.

[TipTok]

7. Yes and Yes....

That was easy...

[Democat]

8. Those gorillas would all be dead by poachers

What is your solution?

[Bucky]

18. We should teach them to defend themselves before releasing them into the wild

and establish weapons depots all through the jungle so they can rearm when needed

[Democat]

19. A good plan

Let them know they need to kill the poachers before they kill you.

[Bucky]

21. just like Florida

[Rhiannon12866]

9. My immediate thought was the Western North Carolina Nature Center

The animals there are those who, for whatever reason, can no longer survive on their own in the wild. My grandmother retired to Black Mountain, NC, so we visited the Nature Center many times. I even adopted the corn snake for her since she seemed to hit it off with the reptile guy who was quite friendly, took the snake out and let her hold it, told her all about that snake and the others. IMO, that's the kind of place that protects animals rather than exploiting them - and educates at the same time.


http://www.wildwnc.org/

[Bluenorthwest]

10. Should the California Condor exist? It would not if it were not for captive breeding programs at

San Diego and Los Angeles zoo facilities. In the late 80's they had just 27 California Condors left, they took them all into breeding programs. Today there are over 400 California Condors living in the wild where there would have been zero for the rest of time.

Do you think that's bad? Condors should have been 'let go'? Lead poison was a big part of what was killing them and that was our fault. But hey, it's a world meant for humans, right?

[Orrex]

11. Yes they should, but it would be funnier if we called them zooz.

[Bucky]

15. That would be off the hizook... off the hizook, indeed

[The2ndWheel]

12. Zoos exist to make us feel better about ourselves

A physical manifestation of human vanity. Look, we're saving them. Be it from the bullets in a gun, or the need for roads and cities to be built. Either way, look at us, doing a good thing.

[Bucky]

13. They make for great subplots in earthquake movies

[Orrex]

22. And post-apocalyptic time-travelling virus movies

[whatthehey]

14. Well there's zoos and zoos.

Breeding programs, research, protection from poaching or habitat loss etc are valid reasons. The problem is the zoos that are best at that tend to be less visitor-friendly therefore more dependent on other income sources. There's also something special about being able to see unfamiliar creatures in real life. Documentaries can show far more detail and more aspects of natural life, but they are still not as visceral and emotive as standing just a few fee from a living, smelly, flea-ridden rhinoceros. People react more emotionally to animals they can and have experienced.

We also have to be careful not to anthropomorphize. Sure most humans would be bored in a 150' enclosure all day with no stimulus, but you have to remember lions for example sleep 18+ hours a day and hunt only out of necessity. There is little evidence of a capacity for either boredom or introspection in the great cats, but it's quite possible their idea of heaven would be a nice field with no encroaching rivals where somebody chucks a ready-skinned dinner over the wall every day. It's pretty unlikely they are scouring the Serengeti out of a passionate desire to taxonomically classify every grass species; they are merely looking for territory and food when they move, and zoos provide both without effort.

[DetlefK]

16. We need zoos for breeding.

[GOLGO 13]

17. I like my zoo.

I hope they fill it with Pandas, polar bears & unicorns.

[Bucky]

20. unicorns do NOT belong in zooz

[One_Life_To_Give]

25. Business by Mail is not the same as Face to Face buisiness

For the same reasons people won't have that same connection when only viewing animals on Youtube. Does any picture of a Kodiak Bear really give the same impression as being up close. We are already terribly isolated from nature as is. Further severing our link with the natural world will only make it seem more like a Nintendo World out there. Our understanding (collectively) of the world, it's natural processes and even where our food comes from will be lost if we isolate ourselves from connecting with the world around us. And Zoo's are one of the tools used to help build that connection.

[liberal N proud]

27. A Zoo's purpose is to educate people and promote preservation of nature's creatures

There are much better methods than cages and pits surrounded by moats. Wild Animal parks such the one San Diego Zoo has are a start.

[The2ndWheel]

28. Whatever it is that we call nature

doesn't even always promote the preservation of nature's creatures.

[Johonny]

29. I agree

If people never see a lion, elephant or other animals not native to their immediate surroundings they seemed to be less inclined to worry about losing them.

[TampaAnimusVortex]

30. Sure, as long as there are reasonable steps taken to...

make sure their environment matches their native one - minus any aggressors obviously.

What exactly would you call a cage? 10x10ft? 100ftx100? 20 miles x 20 miles?

Certainly at some point you can't consider them squeezed into some claustrophobic pen.