It is claimed that the concept of keeping animals in zoos is harsh and inhumane, which is why they should be shut down. Other commentators, however, argue against this, suggesting that zoos are beneficial as they help humanity maintain the balance of biodiversity. While it seems to me that both sides have solid bodies of evidence to support their arguments, I personally feel that a balance between these two viewpoints ought to be struck—limiting the number of zoos and the variety of animals kept in them. This, along with thorough monitoring of zoo conditions, staff training, and visitor behavior, would effectively address the concerns of both parties .
There have been numerous cases where zoos were found to treat animals unprofessionally and even immorally. Many zoo staff do not undergo sufficient training to know how to handle the animals entrusted to them. The most salient example of this is Lisa (9), a female panda, one of the very few endangered animals of its kind, who was caged in an isolated, remote corner of the zoo. Unique to a panda’s nature, they suffer from solitude, which is why, despite being well-fed and medically taken care of, Lisa passed away. It was only after a closer examination by external animal experts that the staff realized it was their misconduct. Such incidents, although not always deliberate, raise the question of whether it is fair for zoos to house animals at all.
With that said, animals still play a crucial role in maintaining biodiversity levels and reviving groups of endangered species, which would otherwise be in severe danger in the wild. Capybaras are a good case in point. These animals, related to the rodent family, constantly fall prey to menacing predators, including alligators and jaguars, in their natural habitats. Ignoring their massive predation would come at the expense of crop failures in the area, and even worse—soaring numbers of insects that carry deadly diseases. To prevent this, zoos often safely capture them and try to simulate a better environment for them to thrive and breed until there are enough of them to be successfully reintroduced into the wild.
To reiterate, while both views seem valid, they might be overgeneralized. The optimal action to take, in my opinion, is to limit the number of zoos a country can operate. This would ensure that quality is prioritized over quantity, as funds and qualified personnel would be directed to fewer facilities, thus preventing unfortunate incidents involving animals. Another suggestion is to bring in animals exclusively from groups vulnerable to various hazards. This step would ensure that zoos work to sustain wildlife rather than monetizing flora and fauna for profit. Finally, I believe the aforementioned measures could be ineffective if regular inspections are not carried out on housing standards, employee work ethics, and, perhaps most importantly, policies regarding acceptable behavior for zoo visitors.