Although zoos are believed to play a crucial role in wildlife conservation, some people argue that caging animals is so unethical that zoos should be shut down. Personally, I strongly believe that zoological gardens offer wild species a sanctuary.
It is currently easy to find a zoo as there are many of them around the world. However, it is doubtable if they treat animals well or just want to make money out of it. As it is hard to be known, should a place be trusted to protect wildlife in danger or not? Let's analyse both points and I'll give my point of view to conclude it.
It is argued that there should be no zoo because locking up animals in cages for their entire life is inhuman. Nevertheless, a portion of society says that zoos can help prevent wild animals from danger. This essay will look at both arguments and conclude that zoos provide great protection for wildlife and keep them away from extinction.
Some people think that zoos are cruel and should be closed down. Others, however, believe that zoos can be useful in protecting wild animals. While the development of breeding programmes contributes to the preservation of endangered species, I believe that the poor conditions that many animals held in captivity are kept on making the existence of zoos unacceptable.
Some would argue that zoos should be shut down because of their inhumanity, while others say that they preserve wildlife. Although they protect the life of animals, I strongly believe that they should be removed due to their brutality towards the innocent animals under their control.
It is often said that animals that live in the zoo had been forced from living under negative conditions by humans for this reason zoos should be banned. However, the issue is not entirely straightforward, and arguments can also be made against the idea. Zoos can aim to care for wildlife. This essay will discuss the debate and give a concluding view.
Keeping animals in zoos is generally believed to be merciless as it deprives animal's form freedom. However, this behaviour can simultaneously be favourable in terms of protecting wildlife. This essay will endeavour to shed some light on both perspectives and explain the reasons why I stand by the second belief.
Nowadays, visiting and enjoying in zoos is a common activity but some people argue that animals in the zoo are trapped and prisoned which is a bad thing snd it should be banned now. While other contradict, saying that it is a better way to save wildlife from extinction. Hence it should be flourished. From my perspective, it has both positive and negative aspects. In this essay, I will shed light on the argument with my own opinion.
Some people argue that zoos help to preserve wild creatures, while others say that they are inhumane and should be abolished. While the development of breeding programmes contributes to the preservation of endangered species, I believe that the poor conditions that many animals held in captivity are kept in make the existence of zoos unacceptable.
It is often argued that wildlife parks are inhuman whilst other people disagree and think that they benefit the saving of wild animals. These parks create an artificial atmosphere to the wild animals and they lose the freedom of living in the forest. On the other hand, these parks help to protect the wild animal extinction, also they will in doing research. This essay supports the closing of these parks.
Some people argue that zoos play an important role in protecting all kinds of species, while others say that keeping animals in the wild park is cruel and unnecessary. In my opinion, animals should not be kept inside the animal parks and do not destroy their habitats.
It is often argued that menageries are barbaric towards creatures and must be shut down , whereas some agree to it being helpful in shielding them. In virtue of increasing the breeding , many animals are subjected to captivity without required necessities.
The opinion is divided on the existence of zoos and rights of wild animals, where one group believes animals should not be kept hostage in zoos, others are convinced that monitored spaces for animals would protect them from illegal hunting. This essay will discuss both views and will shed light on my opinion in conclusion.
It is sometimes argued that public places like zoos should be abolished as they carry the harmful effects for animals. While some people contradict this statement, I think that it has its drawbacks as much as advantages.
hand, some people think, it’s cruel and should be closed down. In that essay I want to describe some arguments for bouth point of wiew and understand what statment better. I guess, if endangered spicies have protection, it will help to reborn this type of animals.
Some consider zoos as a place where animals are beaten brutally whilst others have a contrasting viewpoint. Those who oppose this statement that zoos should be closed down state that this is place for their protection. Although in a few zoos animals are not treated well, I believe these should be remained open to provide them shelter and care.
There is a long-running debate between people who think that zoos are brutal and should be shut down. While others assume that zoos are suitable for sheltering wild creature. This essay will discuss both points of view and argue in favour of the latter.
In the last decade more and more arguing have happened between zoo fans and people who fight for animal rights. While the first group supposes that caving wild species is vital for saving them, the second one claims that zoos only harm animals.
In the 21st century, zoos are widely used for entertainment and study purpose. However, one group of people ponder that they are the symbol of violence but other group opines that it is inevitable for the protection of extinct animals .In this essay, I will explain both views and I strongly believes that human beings not needed various zoos.
Do you want to check your essays?
Submit an unlimited number of essays. Subscribe right now and start improving your writing skills.