Web Earth Online

1000angles wrote:

Kazz wrote:They're terrible but necessary.

How are they necessary??

Breeding Programs for Endangered Animals, protection from poachers, and spreading awareness about enviromenal destruction.

Kazz wrote:

1000angles wrote:

Kazz wrote:They're terrible but necessary.

How are they necessary??

Breeding Programs for Endangered Animals, protection from poachers, and spreading awareness about enviromenal destruction.

Well.. that's good and bad. Good: Endagered species less endangered Bad: Forcing things to mate.

Breeding Programs for Endangered Animals, protection from poachers, and spreading awareness about enviromenal destruction.

Well.. that's good and bad. Good: Endagered species less endangered Bad: Forcing things to mate.

They're actually rarely "forced" to mate. They're just slowly introduced to each other, and usually some romance forms. The exception is artificial insemination, but then you have to decide whether the species or the individual is more important.

Kazz wrote:

Breeding Programs for Endangered Animals, protection from poachers, and spreading awareness about enviromenal destruction.

Well.. that's good and bad. Good: Endagered species less endangered Bad: Forcing things to mate.

They're actually rarely "forced" to mate. They're just slowly introduced to each other, and usually some romance forms. The exception is artificial insemination, but then you have to decide whether the species or the individual is more important.

I'm just saying, rare or not, it isn't right. Now, lets get back to zoo topic shall we?

Zoos have a new role.
They are now a depository of DNA for rare and endangered species.
Zoos now have a role of holding species that are endangered until at some future time when mankind is wise enough to allow them to live in the wild.

Good of course...bad on a smaller scale and to those who do not know the whole motive. I know its not nice to trap an animal in a cage and to restrict their freedom,yet it's a necessary evil if an animal is to be preserved on this Earth.

webearthonline wrote:Zoos now have a role of holding species that are endangered until at some future time when mankind is wise enough to allow them to live in the wild.

Until some future time when mankind is wise enough to make the wild suitable for them to live in once again.

Humanity is quite skilled at making mistakes. Perhaps we should start fixing them.
(generic call to action is generic)

Zoos Are Good But Sometimes They Get Boring

I think the idea is pretty sound, but we've got arctic animals in hot, sunny countries, or desert animals in cold countries. Also, the animals have fairly small, boring cages and pens.

Grep42 wrote:I think the idea is pretty sound, but we've got arctic animals in hot, sunny countries, or desert animals in cold countries. Also, the animals have fairly small, boring cages and pens.

Another good point. People need to think. If they were in the cage, would they like it?

Grep42 wrote:I think the idea is pretty sound, but we've got arctic animals in hot, sunny countries, or desert animals in cold countries. Also, the animals have fairly small, boring cages and pens.

They adjust the temperture of the animals enclosure. You can not really call them cages or pens anymore. Thats because the are not cages or pens. They got rid of those years ago. The adjust the size for the animals welfare. Elephents are kept in extremly large enclosures. Wolves are kept in somewhat large enclosures. penguins are kept in smaller enclosures but not too small. Also its not that boring. Animals are often given home made toys to entertain themselves. In fact soon it will be a walrus's at my local zoos 30th birthday. They are giving him a special home made fish cake. Also zoos are criticle to animal survival. For example the red wolf. My local zoo just had red wolf pups. It will help in the future.

Here is there current wild population.

there are said to be just about 100 red wolves in the wild.


here is their population in the 1970's



heere is the number of zoos trying to protect and preserve them.





If anything zoo's are good for their protection and preservation. Its hard to complain about small cages when most of them are fairly large and it is against the rules to have cages that small.

Well atleast the animals get to live. It can also be good if you don't want the species to go extincts, since there have sometimes been a naturecatastrophe like a volcano, typhoon, tsunamis etc. and sometimes human interaction, which had made a lot of species go extinct in spesific areas. If there are some of the same species on a zoo somewhere else, they might eventually be reintroduced, to keep the balance in the ecosystem or something like that. Btw species dying because of human interaction probably still happends, without the people doing even knowing there was an animal there ( like forexample if you were to crush a snail under your shoe when taking a walk).
But idk what I'm writing I'm a bit tired been up since 4 am today, so what I'm writing might not make any sense. And I just finished editing my story.

Zoo's protect biodiversity. They are also educational and entertainment centers for humanity.
Although, I stress the conservation of biodiversity.
http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/bi ... diversity/

Unlike the mass extinction events of geological history, the current extinction challenge is one for which a single species - ours - appears to be almost wholly responsible.

I want to say something on this topic, but most everything has been said already.

Zoos are bad.

Zoos are good.

Zoos are important.

Zoos are inhumane.

It all depends on the individual zoo, you cannot base something on all of them.
Much like people, you cannot say 'because your cousin twice removed killed my
sister's roommate, you're a horrible person.'

No.

That's quite true, Slueth. Individual zoos have positive qualities or negative qualities. However, I believe the overall concept of a "zoo" is what we're attempting to discuss as "good" or "bad".
What do you think makes an individual zoo quality?