The debate about whether to keep animals in zoos is beneficial or detrimental has been ongoing for ages. From my perspective, I partly agree that it would offer numerous advantages, however being nurtured in artificial surroundings may negatively affect the animals’ well-being.
It is widely acknowledged that zoos are a great contribution to both animal conservation campaign and educational purposes. Firstly, some zoos are specialized for the use of protecting species facing threats of dying out from environmental issues such as global warming, climate change and ozone depletion, which make their natural homes uninhabitable. Secondly, in terms of education, zoos are undoubtedly invaluable as they offer practical experiences with animals which are only normally seen via books, especially for the city dwellers, where seeing the wildlife is nearly impossible if not at all. As a result, direct observation may significantly boost the effectiveness of studying. These arguments may hold water; nevertheless, I still hold the position against this point of view.
On the other hand, zoos can also be an enormous downside, harming the captured animals instead of shielding them. Although animal parks tend to replicate the natural environments, they are unlikely to be flawless, especially poorly managed zoos. Such discrepancies between natural and artificial environments may result in erosion of their natural instincts and engraved behaviors over generations. Recent studies indicate that hunting skills disappearance can be found in wild animals after a prolonged period of being fully supplied with foods.
To put it in a nutshell, zoos can serve either as a shelter or just detrimental cages to wildlife. Despite being in consonance with both ideas, I strongly believe the latter is more convincing.