Show of Hands

Sometimes it's the only way to preserve some species

I said no because it's an opportunity to learn about them close up to help preserve them in nature

Some animals are happy being domesticated. But you can obviously tell some animals are miserable in zoos and parks.

Depends on the situation. But in many cases, they're rescues or are being kept from extinction. Regardless of the reasons for any animal being in a zoo though, I think the most important things are that they have habitats that match as closely as possible to their habitats in the wild and that they have the proper amount of companionship.

Zoos are keeping endangered species alive. Instead of them being poached to extinction by humans, they're being studied and bred to survive.

For highly intelligent species, yes it is. Certainly it depends on the zoo, but they are still locked up.

Wonder why apes tend to throw their feces in zoos just like human prisoners often do?

Yes, unless those animals are endangered and we're trying to repopulate them.

They can be and in the past they often were, but today most of the animals have been bred in captivity or rescued from private owners who have no clue how to properly care for exotic animals. These animals can't survive in the wild so it would be cruel to take them back to the wild. Zoos today educate the public and the animals are well cared for. St Louis has a beautiful free zoo. The sea lions are my favorite and the most interactive.

Unethical?
I frequently have trouble understanding other people's definition of the word.

How's it unethical to raise animals in cages or to preserve their genetics, or study them or promote public interest in their wellbeing?

Personally I don't think animals are here for our entertainment. But they can be valuable for maintaining endangered species populations.. I think. I have no research to support that though.

Not if properly treated. If it weren't for zoos and natural preserves, many of the species would be extinct.

The animals are often given much better lives

If the Animal is endangered than it's ok but if it's not then no.

A lot of times zoos save animals from becoming endangered. Like pandas.

Not necessarily. If they're rescues, it's more ethical to rehabilitate them if you have the means than to not. But the issue is that many zoos do not actually have the means as we learn more and more about the complexities of each species' habitats and social dynamics. And in a lot of cases it's impossible to fulfill some animals' needs from within a zoo. This is becoming an issue with elephants especially because of the vast distances the need to travel daily in order to maintain healthy bone/joint function as well as mental stimulation. So I wouldn't say zoos are unethical, but they are inherently un-ideal.

A lot of animals in zoos are rescued animals and would probably be dead if it were not for those zoos. Some zoos rehab animals so that they can be released back into the wild. I enjoy going to zoos and seeing animals that otherwise would not have seen in the wild.

Zoos have been my life and the focus of my career for about 12 years now. There are accrediting institutions such as the AZA and WAZA that have strict requirements for husbandry and conservation. If they have one of these accreditations, you can bet on the fact that the animals are well cared for and that the zoo is participating in conservation. The sad fact of the matter is that, in many cases, zoos are going to be the last place to see much of the biodiversity on Earth. We are annihilating species at an unprecedented rate, and it is only going to get worse now that we have an anti-science, anti-environment administration taking over. If you don't support zoos, you are on the wrong side. Animal rights groups are well-intentioned, for the most part, but they are severely misinformed and ignorant when it comes to conservation science.

So long as it's enough space, zoos are great. Their conservation and research efforts improve and sometimes save entire species.

It absolutely is. This is my one "lefty" feeling.

Of course.

The animals get free food and get to lounge around all day.

Some larger animals kept captive - perhaps.
But zoos these days do a great job with breeding programs, reentry into the wild, conservation, and just overall awareness.

As others have said, it depends on the condition. Traditional zoos and menageries are certainly unethical. But modern ones that try to better mimic the animals natural habitat aren't necessarily.

I think it depends on the animal and the treatment and quality of life.. it can actually be beneficial if it's done humanely. I'm more worried about the 2 ton orcas being kept in pools. That's abuse.

Not inherently. It depends on conditions and, in some cases, is the only place the species survives as far as we are aware.

Not inherently. Keeping them in terrible conditions would be. The good ones focus on conservation and education.

Only if they're unethically cared for

On the one hand these are wild animals that were not meant to be in a cage

On the other hand you get an easy opportunity to show kids the wonders of nature and get them to support conservation

They'd do the same to us.

They give them a nice, easy long life.

They have a better chance of surviving in the zoo than in the wild.

Yes, totally. But reserves are great.

No, as long as they take care of them.

If you really want to look at something bad, farm animals are kept in cages where they can't even turn around before they get slaughtered.

But driving them to extinction is way worse.

Since we do both....

If the animals are being taken care of and given plenty of space, it's okay by me. I've had many a great time at the Bronx zoo and the Audubon zoo!

I love zoos! And zoos today are NOT the zoos of our forebears. Zoos are no longer rows of steel-barred cages, concrete floors with a little box in the back for sleeping, while these encaged animals nervously pace back-'n'-forth in a state of psychological catatonia. Zoos today reflect decades of study and research. What we learn we implement in their care, environments and captive settings, and become better stewards of their wild and native habitats, in conservation efforts, breeding programs, etc. Compared to the daily struggle to survive in the wild, today's zoo animals are better habituated, better fed, and healthier over all! Heck, I'd say they're cared for better than some actual folks!
I say we needn't be concerned about zoo animals, now, or going forward. They don't taste NEARLY as good, as farm animals do!
.

We keep people in cages
What's the difference?

Better than keeping them out in the wild to die

Yes. I am adamantly against zoos and have been for years. I started out boycotting aquariums, such as SeaWorld. Some zoos are good, however. The zoos that are focused on conservation over profit are the good ones. Before you go to a zoo, please research a little. If you have any questions, you can always message me. I've been an activist on this subject for years, and while I don't know everything, i know a lot. 😊

It would be unethical to release them. They'd die, get shot, and hurt people. They're among the weakest species and humans would eliminate them save they be protected by us.

No, animals are well-treated at zoos, and generally have enough space to do their thing...at least at the Toledo zoo. Easy life for them, education and experience for zoo-goers...win/win.

It must feel like prison to them.

Not in it of itself, but many zoos don't give animals nearly enough room to do their thing.

Depends on the zoo.

How can young children, (especially city dwellers) appreciate the beauty and value of animals, unless they can see and touch them? Only then will they grow up to value not hurting, and caring for God's beautiful creation. Zoos are important!

In many cases zoos rescue animals. Also, you can't own pets yourself and still say zoos are unethical without sounding slightly hypocritical.

I don't think it's unethical. A prime example is giraffes. They are now considered vulnerable to extinction because their numbers have been rapidly dwindling in the wild, however we can keep the species alive in zoos. It's certainly not ideal but is better than the alternative.

What? Of course not.

Often zoos serve to house animals that have been captured and brought from their habitat by less scrupulous individuals. But it can tend to create its own problems.

What do you do with some guy who gets a wild animal as a baby and cannot control it when it grows too large? Often it is impossible to release back into the wild, so how do you resolve it.

At the same time, if the zoo takes in enough of these rescues, should it not create habitats and allow the public to see? This generates revenue that allows for the upkeep.

Now that we have a zoo and attendees, it's easy to see why the zoo might encourage getting more animals to increase attendance. What was once a humanitarian effort begins to slip into exploitation.

It is almost by definition a slippery slope.

Probably kept many from being "eaten" by other animals in the wild🦌🐆🐐🐊🐃🐅❗