Zoos or no Zoos? Where do i stand on them?

 The question of whether zoos are ethical or not is a deeply complex one. For many, zoos evoke memories of childhood wonder and fascination, while for others, they represent a troubling history of exploiting animals for entertainment. Personally, my stance on zoos is nuanced: I am generally against them when they function primarily as entertainment centres, but I strongly support facilities that prioritize conservation, education, and the rehabilitation of wildlife.

The traditional zoo model often centres on providing entertainment for visitors. Animals are kept in enclosures that may simulate their natural habitats but often fall short of providing the space, stimulation, and social structures these creatures need. This raises ethical questions about whether it is justifiable t
o confine animals for human amusement. Some zoos have faced widespread criticism for their poor practices, including inadequate enclosures, lack of proper care, and prioritizing profit over animal welfare. These zoos serve as stark reminders of how captivity can harm animals, leading to physical and psychological distress.

However, not all zoos fit this mould. Some, like the San Diego Zoo, have made incredible strides in conservation. For example, San Diego Zoo’s work on rhino conservation is a testament to how zoos can contribute meaningfully to the preservation of endangered species. Their rhino program is particularly remarkable. Their research and efforts have paved a brighter future for the Northern White Rhino Reproduction Programme. With only two northern white rhinos left in existence—both females and unable to reproduce naturally—the zoo has spearheaded groundbreaking efforts to use advanced reproductive technologies. They’ve developed techniques such as artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization, using genetic material from deceased rhinos to create embryos. These embryos are being carried by southern white rhino surrogates, offering a glimmer of hope for bringing this nearly extinct subspecies back from the brink. Such initiatives highlight how zoos when focused on conservation, can play a crucial role in addressing the biodiversity crisis.

As a volunteer at Two Oceans Aquarium, I’ve witnessed firsthand how much good can be done when an organization is committed to rehabilitation and release. One of the aquarium’s standout programs focuses on rescuing and rehabilitating sea turtles. These turtles are often found stranded on beaches, injured by boat strikes, entangled in fishing gear, or suffering from ingesting plastic pollution. The aquarium’s team provides intensive medical care, including surgeries, antibiotics, and nutritional support, to nurse these turtles back to health. Once they are strong enough, they are released back into the wild, often after months or even years of recovery. Watching a rehabilitated turtle return to the ocean is an incredibly moving experience, a testament to the power of compassion and expertise in action. These efforts are not only about saving individual animals but also about raising awareness of the broader threats facing marine ecosystems.

While I can appreciate the conservation efforts of certain zoos and aquariums, I am firmly against facilities like SeaWorld. The captivity of dolphins, orcas, and other marine mammals for entertainment purposes is, in my view, inherently cruel. These animals are highly intelligent and social, with complex communication systems and wide-ranging natural habitats. At SeaWorld, however, they are confined to small tanks that are a fraction of the size of their natural ranges. They are often forced to perform tricks that have no resemblance to their natural behaviours, subjected to stress, and separated from their family groups. The psychological toll on these animals is immense, leading to abnormal behaviours such as aggression, self-harm, and even premature death. The 2013 documentary "Blackfish" shed light on these issues, sparking a global conversation about the ethics of keeping marine mammals in captivity. Despite public outcry, facilities like SeaWorld continue to operate, prioritizing profit over the well-being of their animals.

Ultimately, I believe there is a middle ground when it comes to zoos and aquariums. The key lies in their purpose and practices. Are they prioritizing animal welfare, conservation, and education? Are they transparent about their efforts and results? Do they actively work toward releasing animals back into the wild when possible? If the answer to these questions is yes, then I believe such institutions have a place in our society. As individuals, we can also make informed decisions about which facilities to support. By choosing to visit and volunteer at organizations that are committed to ethical practices, we can encourage the shift away from exploitation and toward conservation.

In an ideal world, there would be no need for zoos because wildlife would thrive in its natural habitat, free from threats like habitat destruction, climate change, and poaching. Until we reach that point, I’m in favour of supporting institutions that are part of the solution rather than perpetuating the problem. So, where do I stand on zoos? I stand for ethical practices, for conservation over entertainment, and for a future where all animals are treated with the respect they deserve.