Persuasive Essay About Zoos

With wings aching to fly and feathers destined to be ruffled in the wind, a fraction of bald eagles can be found sitting in a depressing setting of enclosed walls. Ironically, this gracious creature provides the symbol for freedom in our country, yet some sit in cages their whole life. Unfortunately, enclosures and trained performances still exist. The taming and caging of animals in zoos, aquariums, and circuses needs to be discontinued because they strip the freedom and rights of animals to entertain people for money. Animals are not created for the sole purpose of entertaining the human race or to bring in cash; they experience pain, despair, and familial bonds too. Gracious birds need the sky to soar, not a box to clip their wings.
King Henry I obtained the first known menagerie, his own personal zoo (Grech 2). Hopefully, he treated his pets as royalty. From then on, the love of exploiting animals for the interest of humans has only increased. However, with increased popularity of animal entertainment, comes an increased desire of more complicated acts to be performed, which means crueler training (Wilson 87). They could at least provide positive incentives. Wild creatures forced into performing

or caged in enclosures goes against natural instincts, which mentally affects the animal, but no one seems to be noticing.
As roughly as treatment goes, animal welfare is more significantly noted nowadays, but it did not start out that way. In fact, people considered animals soulless up until the eighteenth century (Wilson 23). To go back even further, archaeological remains prove animals as entertainment existed during the rise of the Greek and Roman era, but they killed animals on a sickeningly massacre scale (Wilson 5). In the third and fourth century B.C., animals amused people with their fear and pain alone, entertaining crowds at festivals. Bears danced, and trained bulls and horses involuntarily swam in arenas quickly filled with water (Wilson 6-8). People must have lacked morality in the early days.
Intentionally inflicting pain on any animal, even soulless, should be a crime. However, it was not until the early twentieth century convictions and crimes for mistreatment of animals were recorded. Some inhumane actions included Les Marcellis in 1914 for petrifying a dog by compelling it to mount a ladder while in motion. In 1916, James Westray riled up a lioness by poking something in her face. In 1917, Alfreda Rossi coerced an elephant with pneumonia into a performance, and it later died. Fear and anger should not be the only incentives. In 1919, ‘Dandy George’ left his performing dog behind in a cage for over twenty-four hours at a railway station, and Thomas Moore hurled a pigeon at a wall during an illusion act. Most of these people were only fined; the punishments should have been much crueler (Wilson 190).
Considering the treatment recorded in the past, fortunately, certain laws have been passed since then. Two significant laws passed in the 1970s, but these laws would not be needed if the keeping of animals against their will ceased to exist. Passed in 1970, the American Welfare Association requires animals in captivity maintain sufficient health and well-being and receive fair treatment (Grech 3). These creatures could do that for themselves if they lived in the wild or oceans. The Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species ensures the trading and transportation of animals does not threaten the lives of animals (Grech 14). Unless the species faces extinction and remain under strict, healthy supervision, there should be no need to pluck them from their habitats and place them elsewhere; travel has not always been safe for animals. For example, on a rough voyage in 1881, thirty-three of forty-two ostriches’ legs were broken on the trip and thrown overboard (Wilson 125). Apparently, the simpler solution consisted of killing the ostriches after enduring torture rather than healing them, which should have been done.
People, not animals, enjoy zoos, aquariums, and circuses.

As if being caged in all his life was not enough, the Copenhagen Zoo again deprived Marius, the two-year-old giraffe, of a normal life. They considered him a “surplus” and murdered him with a shotgun in 2014. Marius’s perfectly healthy, two-year-old body, not even fully grown, fed the zoo’s felines. Not only was this choice irrational and ridiculous, the zoo even immorally declined offers from other zoos to adopt and an offer of over half a million dollars from a person to take Marius off their hands (Schwartz 1-2). In 1982, the same zoo cruelly killed three innocent tigers, saying no other zoos would give them a home (Stoner 36). Even with offers, they still killed Marius, so it sounds like nothing stops

them.
Even though Marius did not get to experience life outside of his enclosure, at least he did not live long enough to go insane like his fellow animals locked in against their will. What many people are unaware of is keeping animals confined goes against natural instincts, destroys neurotransmitters in brains, and slows lifespans (Stoner 34-35). Captivity in all zoos, aquariums, and circuses deprives these animals of things such as the knowledge and teachings of familial ties, social structures, and hunting (Wilson 141). In fact, scientists have discovered elephants may even have stronger emotions when it comes to their families (Stoner 35). Tearing a mother from her child instigates a broken heart, no matter the species.
Furthermore on hunting problems that could be solved without the existence of zoos, the AZA requires certain supplements to be in foods fed to their zoos and aquariums, however, these processed foods repulsively and unrealistically lack bone, cartilage, and tissue (Hartstone-Rose et. al 1). In addition, animals still possess the motivation to hunt, but they cannot fulfill it in captivity. This may also result in psychological damage, such as excessive grooming or lethargy, or physical, such as dental, palatal, or cranial changes (Hartstone-Rose et. al 2). To deprive them from the way of nature is morally wrong.
Moreover, captivity and mistreatment can lead to more permanent problems in general. Preventing an animal from its natural instincts can cause them to have stereotypies, a small, repetitive habit, such as pacing or biting and licking enclosures. In fact, a report in 2002 showed eighty million captivated animals undergo stereotypies (Stoner 35). These animals might also succumb to other types of mental illness, feelings of defeat, boredom, and frustration (Wilson 141). Understandably, any creature living out their lives in depressing confinement might experience awful outcomes. If the AZA cares about its creatures, it would free them.
Not only do problems appear with the animals, but the observation of wrong treatment can affect children. In the early 1900s, children understandably thought circuses as humorous. Assumptions of permanent disrespect to animals developed, as well as these kinds of observations resulting in cruel treatment towards pets at home, maybe trying to force the animals into the tricks seen performed (Wilson 87). Cruel treatment at public events and facilities spread into homes.
Fortunately for animals today, the handling and care of animals has improved greatly, however, it will always be unfortunate the awareness of animal welfare came too late for those miserable animals before the 1970s. Earlier statements prove the importance of health for animals kept in zoos, aquariums, and circuses, and today, enclosures prove to be more natural. This persists of importance specifically to endangered species. Thankfully, attempts are being made to conserve the creatures facing extinction by both protecting them and securing the reproduction of them (Turkowski 468). For example, the sea turtles species has dwindled, specifically the hawksbill, who has faced an eighty percent decline. However, the AZA made, and still make, attempts to conserve the turtles. In 2013, eighty-nine AZA zoos and aquariums spent over three and a half million dollars in order to help maintain the turtles and other chelonians (“Sea Turtles” 1). Chelonians, the beautiful, tolerant, and gracious creatures, privilege the world with their existence, and it would be an incredible shame for them to die out. Thankfully, the AZA works hard to prevent their extinction.
The AZA also has specific rules on how to care for specific creatures. They made various handbooks available on their websites, which consist of several pages in length. One of the first on the website presents the chimpanzee, an endangered species (“Chimpanzee” 6). Some of the rules, in depth, include the temperature, humidity, and light of the enclosure. They require good air and water quality, so there must be ventilation and drinkable water at all times (“Chimpanzee” 8-9). Space, exhibit size, and foliage are also mentioned, as well as other needs of the chimp to take into consideration, such as the physical, social, and psychological needs (“Chimpanzee” 12). Chimps usually travel in packs of three to seven, so company remains important, and daily enclosure cleanings are a must (“Chimpanzee” 15-16). They also mention the importance of maintaining pest control, emergency safety, and weather (“Chimpanzee” 18). Chimps and other threatened species probably remain the safest in carefully cared for zoos.
The main purposes of zoos, aquariums, and circuses is to entertain people, make money, and increase tourism towards specific places, like how the placement of zoos in Utah drew crowds and improved life for its citizens (Weisberg 1). Those can easily be used against their purpose, however, organizations aim for another point of interest: education. Many zoos and aquariums offer educational backgrounds with their enclosures, such as history of the species, adaptations, and geographic range and distribution (Turkowski 469). Many also offer school tours for schools or programs for learning, such as zoology, biology, animal management, history, and aquarium keeping (Turkowski 472). Some may even go as far as offering animal contact. This can enhance the interest and learning about the creature, and more specifically, offer a more personal involvement with the creature, and maybe even create a feeling of obligation to protect that observations and reading cannot (Hotchkiss 15). Hopefully, people feel protective anyway. A study by David Nathanson with special education students at the Dolphin Research Center showed students appeared up to ten times more likely to participate and answer questions correctly when interacting with the dolphins (Hotchkiss 16).
However, a study in the 1970s by Stephen Kellert showed people who go to zoos and aquariums are no more likely to increase affection for animals than those who do not. In addition, the animal being forced into the interaction in places of animal contact has still been stripped of its freedom, and the action might only stress out the animal (Hotchkiss 16). Moral people can form a protective feeling of animals with their pets, who feel more comfortable being in homes and hands of people than wild animals.
For those against the captivity and performances of animals, most are only aware of the misery of the caged-in creatures or trained animal performances. They do not understand the depth of how much it can also destroy the mental stability of these animals. Animals did nothing to deserve a life denied of freedom; they do not deserve any less than humans. No matter how refreshingly clean, carefully cared for, or securely protected zoos, aquariums, and circuses allow, animals belong in the jungle or the ocean. Soulless or not, animals still experience pain and human-like emotions, amplified by the effects of captivity and mistreatment, and if we get to choose a life not behind bars, then animals should too, as well as enjoy a life where they are supposed to live: the wild.