Some people believe in the indispensable significance of zoos in preserving wild creatures, while others disagree with this and argue that its benefit is incomparable with the suffering animals are under. From my point of view, I lean towards the latter despite the success of breeding programs at zoos.
On the one hand, there have been many existing projects at zoological gardens succeeding in the reproduction process of animals facing extinction. This is of paramount importance for animals under threat from poaching and the destruction of the natural environment. For example, there were only 600 one-horned rhinos seen in the wild, but this number has substantially increased to over 3000 since humans staged an intervention to breed them in captivity.
On the other hand, a significant percentage of animals are living in poor living conditions at safari parks. In other words, they are housed in cramped cages with limited space to move around, and even deprived of food and drinking water. To illustrate, Panda Lele tragically died due to physical abuse and improper care at Memphis Zoo. This incident is among the most severe cases raising people’s concerns about the practical application of zoos. Moreover, despite all the efforts to replicate the natural habitats of captive animals, the border must be restricted to guarantee the observation of visitors, which serves the recreational purpose of many zoological gardens. As a result, animals in captivity would become distressed and depressed, and eventually die out.
In conclusion, although zoos do prevent the dwindling population of animals on the brink of extinction, the suffering caused by the unsuitable conditions that animals are experiencing makes safari parks unacceptable.