Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Bailey Jackson
Malcolm Campbell
English 1104
May 1, 2018
The debate over whether or not confining animals in zoos is ethically correct has been a
popular one throughout the last few decades. Zoos arose centuries ago, for the purpose of higher
class citizens showing their power by enclosing animals. However, in the last century, zoos have
increased in numbers due to the increased interests in science and natural history, which
facilitates up-close animal studies and provides a chance for entertaining and educating the
public. Nevertheless, confining animals for entertainment or monetary gain is inhumane and
unethical, and other approaches can be taken to ensure rehabilitation and provide similar
Zoos are one of the most popular tourist attractions around the world. They are a billion
dollar industry due to the millions of people of all ages visiting annually. Among the many
reasons that people attend these facilities include entertainment, the opportunity to get away from
their houses and the occasional trip for education. Many pro-zoo advocates believe that zoos are
considered “ethical” because they serve a greater good for the human race. Often, zoos are
thrown into the educational category because they offer visitors the chance to learn from their
experience. However, as will be discussed further, the harmful realities of these centers often
outweigh any educational benefits. Additionally, there are ways to provide these same learning
chimpanzee, Edith, who was a chimp born in the zoo. Edith was a discarded zoo baby who fell
into the wrong hands. She was born in the 1960s at the Saint Louis Zoo and was a big draw for
visitors. However, just after her third birthday, she was ripped away from her family and passed
around to at least five different facilities (PETA). After years of being sold, traded, and living in
horrible conditions, she landed at a Texas roadside zoo called the Amarillo Wildlife Refuge
(AWR). During a PETA undercover investigation of the AWR roadside zoo, they found Edith in
a filthy, concrete pit. She was hairless and had been living off of rotten produce and dog food for
years.
In 2007, a Siberian tiger escaped her enclosure at the San Francisco Zoo and was shot to
death after she killed one person and injured two others (PETA). Jabari the gorilla was also
fatally shot after he tried to escape from an enclosure in the Dallas Zoo by jumping over moats
and walls and evading electrified wires (PETA). A witness later reported that teenagers were
harassing the animal with rocks prior to his escape. In 2005, two polar bears both died within
five weeks of one another after one ingested something thrown into his enclosure and another
contracted an infection caused by two dead fetuses left in her uterus (PETA). Ten prairie dogs
died at the Virginia Zoo when their tunnel collapsed, a rhinsorus drowned in a moat in his
enclosure, and a zebra barely escaped death after jumping into a lion exhibit. A separate zebra
was not as fortunate and lost her life after she took off from her holding pen, hit a fence, and
Examples and encounters are endless when researching “animals in zoos” because these
animals are so prone to death, disease, and suffering due to being enclosed in zoos. That is why I
Jackson 3
am strongly against animals being confined in zoos or enclosures. Zoos often claim to be for
educational purposes, however, most visitors only spend a few minutes, if that, at each display
and seek entertainment rather than enlightenment. Normal animals behaviour is seldom
discussed, rather species, diet, and their natural ranges are displayed because their natural needs
are rarely met and are hardly observed. Aquatic animals often go without adequate, clean water,
birds’ wings are sometimes clipped to prevent them from flying, and many animals who
Zoos drastically vary in size and quality--from large zoos to drive-through parks to tiny
roadside menageries that use iron bars and concrete slabs to enclose their animals. Over millions
of people visit zoos annually, however, most zoos operate under losses and need to find ways to
cut costs and find attractions to lure in visitors. Funds from zoos are often used as cosmetic
improvements such as landscaping, refreshment stands, and gift shops when they should be used
to create more humane conditions for these animals kept in zoos. Animals often suffer from
disorders due to space and the food provided, as well as the less-than-ideal temperatures in and
around their enclosure. Funds should be going towards making animals’ enclosures as much like
their natural environments as possible to ensure their quality of life be as great as it possibly can.
During the 2016 Memorial Day weekend, a toddler fell into a gorilla enclosure at the
Cincinnati Zoo. Fearing the fate of the child, a zoo worker shot and killed Harambe the gorilla,
who was a 17-year-old western gorilla. The child was unharmed, and even up until recent days,
there has been an ongoing debate among animal welfare advocates who condemn the killing of
Harambe. There have been uproars about the parenting of the toddler and opinions expressing a
lack of carelessness about the parents. As to many peoples’ beliefs, the child nor the gorilla
Jackson 4
would have ever been harmed or in risk of harm if there was no enclosure for the child to fall
into. Harambe was killed for the safety of a human because he was living in an enclosure that a
There are various counter-arguments, of course, to the idea that all zoos are more
destructive than they are beneficial. Some researchers and scientists point to the fact that zoos
can improve the lives of animals and serve as a step for wounded or threatened animals before
they are reintroduced into the wild. In 2016, after the death of Harambe, Dr. Robin Ganzert,
president and CEO of the American Humane Association wrote an op-ed piece for Time
Magazine in which she stated that “sweeping indictments of zoos and aquariums fail to account
for how ethical institutions enrich and ultimately protect the lives of animals, both in human care
and in the wild (Time Magazine).” Ganzert argued that zoos actually help injured animals
survive and can operate as rehabilitation centers for certain species. According to Ganzert,
“Using robust and sophisticated breeding programs, these institutions fund and facilitate
countless initiatives to propagate species and preserve genetic biodiversity, and then reintroduce
critically endangered or extinct species into the wild.” Still, Ganzert fails to address the harsh
Ganzert’s argument represents just one beneficial argument for the preservation of zoos.
However, these concepts should be weighed against the values on the opposite end of the
spectrum. Animal welfare is paramount, and the main concern, above all else, should be the lives
that these animals are forced to live. These “safe havens” or sanctuaries mentioned above can
certainly be beneficial environments for endangered species or animals who need medical
attention before being released back into their natural habitat. However, in many cases, these
Jackson 5
facilities look less like welfare centers and more like unnatural rows of cages and crates--a setup
that does lasting damage to animals’ well-being. Therefore, one must look at the realistic
For example, zoos leave animals vulnerable to a variety of threats for which they have no
defense or opportunity to escape. Animals have been poisoned, left to die, deprived of veterinary
care, and even burned alive in fires. Some animals have even died by consuming objects thrown
into their cages such as coins, plastic bags, and other various items. During natural disasters, like
floods and wildfires, there may be no way for them to escape, often leading to fatal injuries. At
the Niabi Zoo in Illinois, a 3 month-old cub was killed when his spinal cord was crushed by a
falling exhibit door. A bear starved to death at the Toledo Zoo after zookeepers locked her up to
hibernate without food or water, not knowing that her species does not hibernate (PETA).
Much like a young child being placed in “time-out” these animals suffer from sadness,
anxiety, and boredom. I believe that there are other alternatives to learn about animals rather than
making them suffer for years for our own personal entertainment. Much like animals in zoos,
animals swimming in tiny tanks suffer from the same effects. Aquatic life often live in conditions
worse than those that live on land. The ocean is very hard to replicate because of its vastness and
depth. The food is in abundance and species that live in oceans often travel miles to
environments that they are most likely to survive. In aquariums, they do not have the opportunity
to change their living conditions and yet have to endure what humans provide for them.
In 2017, an orca named Lolita was left in her aquarium during hurricane Irma. She was
vulnerable to a number of deathly possibilities including the roof caving on her or the glass
shattering from the pressure (One Green Planet). It is a heart-wrenching thought of what Lolita
Jackson 6
must have been thinking and feeling as the storm raged around her. Fierce winds, loud noises,
and heavy waves of rain above her and no one was there to reassure that she would be okay (One
Green Planet). The facility was able to relocate the smaller animals but because of her size, she
was left to fend for herself with all of the odds against her. The orca could have been relocated to
a safer location by a stretcher, but the Seaquarium left her and put her at risk of death (One
Green Planet).
For decades now, animals have been mistreated, abandoned, and most importantly,
confined to small spaces--much like a prison. I agree that animals are a vital part of who we are
as humans, but there are countless of opportunities to understand and see animals that do not
involve them suffering such great costs. Almost every city in the United States has an
endangered species facility where they nurse animals back to health that may not be able to
return to the wild. Here, they are treated kindly with great food and plenty of space. These
facilities usually offer tours for the general public much like a zoo experience without the
horrible conditions that animals are put through at any for-profit, local zoo.
Another counter-argument given by zoo arguments is that these facilities offer important
learning environments for children and the public. In a piece by J. Weston Phippen for The
Atlantic, the notion is put forth that “perhaps what pro-zoo people mean … was that zoos are a
type of consciousness expander. They expose people young and old to something they’d never
otherwise be able to see (The Atlantic).” Phippen goes on to point out that these experiences can
lead children to become more involved with zoology later in their lives. “A child’s parents may
take her to the Cincinnati Zoo and years afterward she might remember that moment and dream
of a job working alongside animals—and achieve that goal (The Atlantic).” Phippen brings up
Jackson 7
the idea that education is paramount and is the fundamental reason why zoos should remain in
operation around the world. He admits that more should be done to remake the traditional zoo
environment and make them more closely mimic natural habitats, but overall, he asserts that the
learning opportunities outweigh the costs to animals. Phippen’s argument is an important one,
but it is also one that can be rebutted by pointing to more sustainable solutions that have arisen in
Animals are amazing and can adapt and survive in many different environments.
Confining them to small spaces when they are born to live freely seems very inhumane. There is
now an industry providing a real-life experience with animals in their natural environments. An
alternative to zoos that allows people to experience wildlife are Eco-vacations, which provide
up-close encounters with animals in their natural habitats. There are many companies that span
all over each continent that guide visitors through animals’ real environments without disturbing
them. Most of these companies in this industry have stringent operational practices and are
heavily involved in conservation efforts. These opportunities provide the many educational
important counterclaims and solutions that are both sustainable and serve animals’ best interest.
The final conundrum, however, is the problem of what to do with current operational zoos and
how animals should be reintroduced. These questions appear complicated at first, but there have
been many solutions posed by environmentalists and researchers. The organization “Center for
Humans and Nature” has proposed slowly phasing out zoos by shifting priorities. “What
distinguishes a sanctuary from a zoo? Priorities. In a zoo or aquarium, the priority is the visitor
Jackson 8
experience, which, in the end, translates into revenue. In a sanctuary, the priority is the health
Current zoos should be transformed into sanctuaries and should work to reintroduce
current animals in captivity into the wild. Some zoos, according to the center, have “started the
process of moving [animals] from places of entertainment and spectacle to authentic centers of
restoration, education and conservation (Center for Humans and Nature).” This would slowly
phase out zoos by shifting away from financial models that currently rule supreme. Eventually,
all animals in captivity would be released, large-scale zoos would be closed and nonprofit
Each year, accredited sanctuaries have to turn down hundreds of exotic and wild animals
made homeless by roadside zoos, circuses, and the animal trade. A few zoos such as the Detroit
Zoo and California Oakland Zoo, have made the decision to provide these animals with refuge
(PETA). Most zoos, however, reject these animals in need. The zoo industry as a whole must
change itself from a prison to a refuge where the rights and welfare of these animals are their
main priorities. As long as people support these zoos from a financial standpoint, such as simply
buying a ticket to visit a local zoo, these animals will continue to suffer. Zoos will be forced to
stop breeding and capturing more animals from the wild if their financial support diminishes.
Pro-zoo arguments, specifically those that point to animal welfare and public education,
are important acknowledgements, but they stand weak against the evidence on the other side that
highlights the fact that these things can be achieved in more sustainable and environmentally
friendly ways, such as those discussed above. Education, monetary gain, and other pro-zoo
benefits have many other alternatives rather than depriving these animals of their natural
Jackson 9
environments and the lives that they should be living. Animal welfare is paramount, and because
of the consequences and ethical issues that zoos present, these for-profit facilities should be
replaced by sustainable, humane rehabilitation centers or programs that foster the maintenance of
natural habitats.
Jackson 10
Works Cited
Baird, Bonnie A., et al. "Program animal welfare: using behavioural and physiological measures
to assess the well-being of animals used for education programs in zoos." Applied Animal
2018
Ganzert, Robin. “Zoos Are Not Prisons. They Improve the Lives of Animals.” Time, 13 June
Marino, Lori. “Emphasizing Animal Well-Being and Choice: Why Zoos and Aquariums Should
www.humansandnature.org/emphasizing-animal-well-being-and-choice. Accessed 22
April 2018
Phippen, J. Weston. “Do We Need Zoos?” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 2 June 2016,
2018
Rich, Nadine. “Why These Animals Shouldn’t Be Kept in Captivity.” One Green Planet, 12
“We Believe in a Better Future for All Living Things.” Association of Zoos & Aquariums:
"Zoos: Pitiful Prisons." PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Jackson 11
http://www.huntleywriters.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/PRO-3-Zoos-Pitiful-Prisions.