The Ethics and Economics of Keeping Animals in Zoos

This essay delves into the multifaceted debate surrounding the practice of keeping animals in zoos. It explores the economic benefits zoos provide to local communities through tourism and job creation, while also highlighting their role in conservation efforts, including captive breeding programs and species reintroduction. The essay contrasts these benefits with the arguments against zoos, focusing on concerns about animal welfare, including limited space, potential for behavioral issues, and the ethical implications of captivity. Furthermore, it examines the impact of zoos on research, comparing the quality and accuracy of studies conducted on animals in their natural habitats versus those in captivity. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of striking a balance between conservation efforts and animal welfare, suggesting that while zoos can play a vital role in preservation, there is a need for strict regulations to prevent animal mistreatment and ensure their physical and mental well-being.

Running Head: ANIMALS KEPT IN ZOOS 1
Animals Kept in Zoos
Student Name
University Affiliation
Date

ANIMALS KEPT IN ZOOS 2
Animals play a very important in the role of human existence. Wild animals are expected
to live in their natural habitat and have a spacious environment. However, some of these wild
animals have been denied such freedom and are kept in zoos and wildlife parks. It is majorly as a
form of entertainment and money collection from the tourists. According to Virginia Mckenna, a
star in the standard movie “Born Free”, wild animals belonged to the forests (Tribe & Booth,
2003). Confiscation in zoos leads to both physical and mental torture due to lack of freedom. A
research recently issued in Scientific reports reveals that 80% of all animals have a longer life
expectation in zoos as compared to those in the wild. However, a government-sponsored
research on elephants in the UK exposed that 75% of elephants in zoos were obese and only 16%
could walk properly as compared to those in the wild (Powell & Watters, 2017). As of 2019,
countries such as Australia, Germany and France among others formally recognized non-human
animal sentience. As a result, the United Nations passed the first resolution that recognized
animal rights. Therefore, both arguments against and for animals in zoos will be examined.
Zoos provide an economic boost to the local community. These parks can either be a
local, national or an international tourist attraction site. The sites offer opportunities for
employment, encourage entrepreneurship in the society and as well boost local businesses.
Presence of zoos in a community ensures proper infrastructure such as decent roads, easy access
to social amenities and proper governance. According to a 2008 national survey, 79% of
Americans believe that zoos ensure the growth of local economies (McMullen, 2016).
Development of sustainable infrastructure helps in the maintenance of biodiversity and allows
ecosystems to function effectively. It is also evident that zoos generate significant economic
benefits to their host jurisdiction, thus expanding the economy through contributions to the Gross
domestic product and other Gross state products (Tribe & Booth, 2003). For example, the

ANIMALS KEPT IN ZOOS 3
Cincinnati zoo has an annual economic influence of $143 million from tourists, thus benefiting
the local economy. This also enhances the profile and reputation of the Cincinnati city, leading to
increased attendance for new and existing tourists.
Zoos primarily ensure various aspects of conservation, namely practice, advocacy and
research. Preservation and protection of animals involve captive breeding, the reintroduction of
species, and species survival plans (Colléony et al., 2017). It is clear that revenue collected is
used in the conservation programs. The main aim of zoos is to endorse animal preservation,
educate individuals and fund wildlife study. Zoos provide the best welfare standards to the caged
animals through suitable housing, proper food regimes and husbandry. As a result, animal
survival is as natural as possible, but inside the zoos (Powell & Watters, 2017). It is significant to
note that various animals have been saved from extinction through conservation. For example,
the Arabian Oryx was hunted to extinction, but conservation programs in the Phoenix zoo and
other zoos ensured that the species is present today. The Eastern Bongo, a large antelope, almost
faced extinction due to poaching and habitat loss. Today, there is a viable population because
zoos across the world worked together to maintain a viable population through breeding
programs. Between 1970 and 2012, a 58% decline in vertebrate population was experienced
(Colléony et al., 2017). Despite such statistics, endangered species are revived from zoo
conservation programs.
As much as zoos provide conservation for wild animals, (Banks, 2019) states that some
animals experience cruelty while in captivity, unlike in the wild. According to the World
Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA), many animals kept in zoos are mistreated. For
example, big cats such as tigers and leopards are exposed to gladiator shows, elephants forced to
play ball games and chimpanzees in diapers forced to ride scooters. A government-funded study

ANIMALS KEPT IN ZOOS 4
in the UK revealed that lions and tigers have approximately 18000 times lesser space than in the
wild. As a result, 48% of lions and 54% of elephants showed signs of behavioral and mental
problems. According to Wilkinson, the shock of captivity and behavioral issues depresses the
animals, and as such, some act hysterically and hurt people near them (2018). For example; in
2008 at the Singapore zoo, three tigers mauled a cleaner to death. Such incidences happen
because the natural needs of the animals are seldom met, and they are also forced to live in
climates not adaptable to them. Animals such as lions and tigers which are supposed to live in
dense and forested areas are forced to live in man-made cages is an act of cruelty and injustice
(Wilkinson, 2018).
Supporters of zoos claim that caged animals contribute towards effective research.
However, according to Mellish et al., (2019) these studies would be more accurate, extensive and
analytical in the wild, unlike in zoos. Animals in the wild have natural survival tactic as opposed
to those in zoos. Banks (2019) argues that Wild animals hunt better, mate naturally and interact
with other animals and the environment typically. It is evident that observing animals in the wild
is more engaging and provides more productive literature. In addition, maintenance of species
diversity in zoos is limited leading to insufficient literature. Animals in zoos have been
conformed to adapt to new things; thus, originality is lost. For example, animals meant to hunt
are fed inside the cages (Mellish et al., 2019). This in turn, leads to challenges if the same
animals are let to go back in the wild since survival tactics are not ingrown. From the above
information, it is evident that research conducted on animals in their natural habitat provides
more informed data and analysis.
In conclusion, the most persuasive argument on animals kept in zoos is the ability of
preservation and conservation of animals. It has a positive effect on today’s wildlife as it has

ANIMALS KEPT IN ZOOS 5
ensured in-extinction of animals. If not for the zoos, people in today’s generation would not be
aware of animals that existed in the past such as the polar bears and this, not only benefits the
host country but the world at large. In relation to the well-documented arguments against the
preservation of animals in zoos, it is evident that animals need proper care and protection to
ensure that the animals are healthy both physically and mentally. Therefore, relevant authorities
ought to enforce laws and regulations against the mistreatment of animals in zoos and prohibit
related activities. From the above information, it is evident that zoos are more beneficial due to
the impacts they have on society. In addition, human beings and national economies benefit from
the existence of the zoos.

ANIMALS KEPT IN ZOOS 6
References
Banks, C. (2019). Partners in conservation. Wildlife Australia, 56(1), 22.
Colléony, A., Clayton, S., Couvet, D., Saint Jalme, M., & Prévot, A. C. (2017). Human
preferences for species conservation: Animal charisma trumps endangered
status. Biological Conservation, 206, 263-269.
McMullen, S. (2016). Animals and the Economy. Palgrave Macmillan.
Mellish, S., Ryan, J. C., Pearson, E. L., & Tuckey, M. R. (2019). Research methods and
reporting practices in zoo and aquarium conservation‐education evaluation. Conservation
biology, 33(1), 40-52.
Powell, D. M., & Watters, J. V. (2017). The evolution of the animal welfare movement in US
zoos and aquariums. Der Zoologische Garten, 86(1-6), 219-234.
Tribe, A., & Booth, R. (2003). Assessing the role of zoos in wildlife conservation. Human
Dimensions of Wildlife, 8(1), 65-74.
Wilkinson, T. (2017). Animal Sculptors: And the Evolution of Zoos. Sculpture Review, 66(1), 8-
19.