Zoos are poor alternatives to a natural environment – Zoos are sometimes seen as a necessary but poor alternative to a natural environment. Is it necessary to keep animals in zoos?
Zoos are poor alternatives to a natural environment
Zoos are poor alternatives to a natural environment
In the modern society, zoos are almost indispensable places in large cities though many of them are poor replicas of the natural environment which fail to serve their purpose. In my opinion, it is necessary to keep animals in zoos for the purpose of preservation of animals, not for the sake of entertainment.
To begin with, it is generally seen that many animal species are endangered and many others have already become extinct due to excessive hunting and habitat destruction. Zoos can be used to protect such animals. In zoos, such animals could enjoy good care and protection away from any hurt.
However, along with the stronger natural environmental protection consciousness, many people think that to put animals into small cages will change their living instincts, and therefore break the ecological balance. Viewed from the basic relation between animals and human beings, animals should have equal freedom to human beings.
In addition, each species has a role to play in the biological chain of nature. Removing a certain species from the chain will affect the entire ecological balance. For example, birds are nature’s pest killers. If birds in a region are locked into cages by human beings the pests will eat out all crops, and snakes will lose a large part of the food.
From the above discussion, it is clear that it is necessary to keep animals in zoos for the purpose of protection, teaching and study. To make the earth a better place to live in by maintaining the ecological balance, it is very important to protect our own living environment.
