Animal Captivity - Sad ? - Page 3

Originally posted by: Dabulls23

Qwert love that song dear 😛 Now Are you a PETA...Guy or is PETA after you???? 😉 😆

😆😆... haddes I know its a veri cool song..just that if she had kanda, lahsoon... the breath would also kill .....😆.. I am a PITA guy... always on veggie PITA bread sandwiches.. u know...😆

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Sometimes captivity is the best thing that can happen to animals. Many animals are threatened or vulnerable in the wild. Despite conservation laws animals are poached, hunted, killed (intentionally as well as accidentally) in the wild. There are species like the Wyoming Toad and Barbary Lion that are extinct in the wild and found only in captivity. Aquariums, zoos are important because they provide a safe environment for the animal to breed and survive. The purpose of a zoo or aquarium is to conserve educate and research. Having an aquarium or zoo gives a more available resource for education, if people had to rely only on wild far less people would be interested in learning about the wild. No one wants to go through the effort. This way we can at least create awareness in urban masses. These places also research on animals and animal behaviors and can bring us valuable information on how to protect the species or help humans learn and adapt from the species.

That being said not all zoos or aquariums are good and some are in pathetic condition and some are merely for human amusement rather than the real purposes.

While it is true that under special circumstances a zoo might provide severely endangered species with a better chance of survival than if they were left in the wild, there are far more zoos around than there is a need for them. In a lot of these instances, sanctuaries too would be a far better option for these endangered animals than zoos primarily because zoos are often unable to effectively recreate the ecological niche that the animal thrives in. Sanctuaries that are created with the intention of allowing the animal to stay within its original habitat while keeping man out are often more successful at reestablishing the population than zoos which take the animal out of its environment and forces a fragile species to adapt to yet another environment.

Also, when one particular zoo offers a highly endangered species on display, it starts a competition of all sorts among other zoos to also try and acquire this rare commodity for their own exhibits.

And yes, it's true that many zoos take advantage of the animal in captivity to conduct research, but a lot of the behavioral studies conducted on an animal in captivity are hardly reputable simply because scientists remain skeptical as to whether the animal would exhibit the same behavior were it not in captivity.

From an education standpoint, yes zoos offer the chance for the common man to get up and close with the animals on exhibit, but I hardly think it is fair for the animals on display. They're often on display in cramped quarters, hardly anything close to their natural environment. The end does not justify the means. You want to learn more about animals, watch Animal Planet or visit websites to learn more about them, watch educational movies. You want to get up and close with them, go out into the woods, go camping, go to the big national parks where the big wildlife is, take a safari to Africa or go search for tigers in India. Oggling at neurotic animals in a zoo is hardly an educational experience.

This isnt to say that all zoos are necessarily bad and we shouldnt have ANY zoos at all. I just think that there are waaay too many zoos out there than there is a REAL need for them. I mean, a lot of the zoos have the same animals anyway - they're all hung up on lions and bears and camels. Having lived in Africa, I know for a fact that some very "reputable" zoos here in America actually offer a bounty to hunters in Africa who can get them a valuable exhibit of some severely threatened animals. It is one thing to have an orphaned animal that cannot take care of itself, raise it within a zoo setting and perhaps have it on display for educational purposes. But the truth is there just arent enough "orphaned" animals available to supply all the zoos of america and beyond.

Perhaps there ought to be fewer zoos, and more specialized zoos. Fewer zoos with enough resources to sustain the animals brought into their protective care and to study what can be studied of these animals in captivity. Having a zoo around every neighborhood corner angers me.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

As for vegetarianism, I think humans have consumed meat since the dawn of time. If someone is vegetarian well and good, but any human can be a threat to the environment vegetarian or not. The best possible thing is conscious consumption of any environmental products or products impacting the environment so that we cause minimum adverse effect. It is impossible to do everything, but every little bit counts.

Very well said. 👏