Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Reasons to Possibly Oppose Zoos: A Review of Literature

Jessica Duran
Rhetorical Writing Skills 1302
University of Texas at El Paso
Riley Holyoak Welcker

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 2

Reasons that Possibly Oppose Zoos: A Review of Literature

Introduction
Many times in society humans try to fight for their rights and liberty. Others on the other
hand feel that those who do not have a voice of their own need us humans to help them. This is
when we get those whom fight to get animals out of captivity and do not accept the ideas of zoos
which are located in many cities in the United States as well all over the world. Zoos were not
always designed the way they are today. Evidence for the start of zoos can go back to 2500 BCE
by Egyptians and Mesopotamia. They were once called menageries and they were only private
collections by wealthy people to show how much wealth they had. It wasnt until the Age of
Enlightenment when public zoos started to appear (zoo, n.d).
People wanted to study animals and their behaviors and during this time they tried to
make the animals enclosures as similar to their natural habitat to be able to easily observe those
qualities. There are actually different types of zoos. There are the urban zoos that are located in
large cities, Safari Parks which are larger and people can drive in their own cars to observe the
animals, Game reserves are mainly for protected species, and petting zoos (zoo, n.d.). This essay
will try to show different positions of this view about animals in captivity to try to answer the
reasons why those oppose zoos and answer two questions:
1. Why to people not like the idea of having animals in captivity especially in zoos?
2. What hypothesis do people have about how animals act in captivity compared in the
wild?

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 3

Why do people frown upon the idea of having animals in captivity especially in zoos?
Groups of people today have organized groups or activist to try to overrule the idea and
practice of animals in captivity. We may hear that their reasons may be that they belong in their
own habitats and shouldnt be left in small enclosures that look like jail cells. We know now that
zoos have been changing for many years. During the Age of Enlightenment people were trying to
include science into politics and therefore become more curious in different areas such as
zoology (zoo, n.d). Jeffery Cohn wrote an article in 2006 from the journal BioScience titled Do
Elephants Belong in Zoos? He tries to show or explain how zoos are trying to improve the ways
they are trying to care for their animals. Its primary animal that they mention is the Elephant.
They are trying to argue that yes having elephants in captivity is not always best. Although zoos
are trying to improve and put the animals care first. Cohn () writes, Beyond walking their
charges, most zoos now encourage natural behaviors. Keepers at the Reid Park Zoo in Tucson,
for example, often hide treats around the elephant yard, forcing the animals to search for food
(p. 714). In summary the Reid Park Zoo is aware that their elephants might gain negative effects
by just standing around so they try to find ways to keep the elephants busy and active similar to
how they would be in the wild. Therefore Cohn is defending that zoos are trying to improve and
change for the better.
Likewise, a book titled Politics of Zoos: Exotic Animals and their protectors by Jesse
Donahue and Erik Trump (2006) tries to tell the same view. Donahue and Trump (2006) say that
zoos wanted to limit the number of animals taken form the wild (p. 77). What they are trying
to show is when modern zoos were developing, they were trying to change things for the better
and wanted to protect animals by trying to stop capturing animals in the wild and start breeding
them in captivity and this shows how zoos today are trying to create an effort to help improve

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 4

their ways. They continue to talk about how zoos continue to change the design and ways they
direct and conduct their zoos to help change the negative views of zoos and help better
themselves. This book tries to persuade its readers to think this by using much ethos to create its
credibility by using other sources to help support their claims.
In contrast, Last Chance for Animals (LCA), an animals rights activists group, maintains
a website that is open to the public whom may have accessibility to the internet. They post blogs
such as one titled Zoo (n.d). The websites states, zoos are completely different from sanctuaries
which are non-profit and zoos are only concerned with the money they are gaining from the
public (LCA 2014). In other words zoos are only interested in their profits more so than the care
of their animals while the sanctuaries try to base everything they do to protect and care for their
animals. The blog continues to say that animals get zoochosis. This term refers to those
animals that start showing strange behaviors as a result from depression, lack of mental activity
or exercise, maybe even from being removed from its natural habitat. It also gives zoos a, for
lack of a better word, compliment that zoos do try to show conservation efforts but reverses it by
stating zoos are doing it incorrectly. They are trying to convey a message that if they were truly
trying to preach conservation, they should be more concerned with habitat conservation rather
than entertaining their guests with lectures that they will not remember afterwards.
Overall, what the LCA means is zoos exist for the wrong reasons. This type of practice is
something that should be discontinued or completely changed to resemble sanctuaries. Nonprofit and that way they are not concerned with how much money they make but how well they
are taking care their animals. Because of how this group talks about the way animals are being
treated, the blog is very good in using the emotional appeal to try to persuade their readers.

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 5

Similarly, B.D. Johnson (2013) also states the issues of having animals in captivity in an
article titled A killer whale gone very bad. Johnson mentions, Blackfish suggests whale slavery
is a crime that cant be regulated, and that the stress of captivity creates psychotic behavior
(Johnson, 2013). What he is trying to say here is that the documentary is proposing the idea that
keeping animals, for this example whales, in captivity should be considered a crime because of
the negative effects it plays on their mental health. The term slavery is used and could be
interpreted as suggesting that this so called crime is unfortunately hard to control just like other
types of slavery not associated with animals like, to put in perspective, human trafficking. He
also mentions what the documentary is about and the sad terrifying history of the homicidal
whale Tilikum. This whale was captured and separated from his mother when he was young and
lived the rest of his life in pools as Johnson puts it. He was first located into Sealand, which
doesnt exist anymore after the first incident with Tilikum.
Even though Johnson seems to only talk about what the documentary is about, he still shows
the position of how animals in captivity is not healthy. Not only do the conditions the animals are
in affect their mental health, but the entire process affects them. In this case it is believed the
problem all started when Tilikum was separated from his mother. This can also show a strong use
of emotional appeal, but he also uses ethos by using a documentary to help support his message
about animals in captivity.
Differently an article titled Animal Welfare and Wildlife in Captivity: A perspective on
Veterinary Ethics and Responsibilities by H.D. Martin shows an interestingly different position
than the other three sources. Martin tells us that people do oppose keeping wildlife in captivity
and that as vegetarians they should do their best to ensure that captive wild animals are
maintained in a professional, humane, and healthy manner (Martin 1992). In other words even

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 6

though others may oppose the idea and practice of having animals in captivity, it is a
veterinarians job to make sure the animals are not being harmed and are taken care of the best
ways possible. Martin continues that veterinarians should also take in consideration the exotic
animals kept as pets which is also another way to keep wild animals in captivity. This can create
problems for an animals because their owner may not have the full knowledge to maintain them
and keep them healthy. This is why a veterinarian must help those animals even though keeping
them in captivity may be considered as wrong to others (Martin 1992). This articles position
seems to lean more on the side that keeping an animal in captivity may raise issues, although
they must be able to take care of the animals and make sure they are not being mistreated. Martin
(1992) also mentions that keeping animals in zoos and aquariums is much better and easier
because the animals then are required to be checked upon while those captured as pets are not
really required by their owners. Even though their position may seem against having captive
animals, this source seems to show how zoos are much more better places to keep those animals
rather than having people keep them as pets. This literature uses more logos to convey their
message because throughout the document, Martin is talking about what is logical to do in
certain situations as a veterinarian.
Johnson and the LCA show the position and argument that there is evidence that keeping
animals in captivity can affect an animals mental health which can harm others involved with
them. On the contrary Cohn tries to demonstrate that things can and are being done to help the
animals and those who keep animals in captivity are trying to change their reasons for doing so.
Most differently Martin tries to demonstrate that the issues appear more so when exotic animals
are captured as pets and not for zoo purposes, but still can be an issue.

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 7

What do people and experts say about how differently animals act in captivity and how
that affects their life style?
We can now understand that activist not only are opposed to animals in captivity because
they are taken away from their natural habitat and put in small enclosures, but their mental health
as well as their overall health may be compromised. Not only the lives of the animals are in
danger but the lives of the people taking care of and associated with those animals as well as
Martin has mentioned in his article about the killer whale Tilikum.
When asked about this issue about animals in captivity, Rebecca Gutierrez says,
whenever I go to the zoo, the animals do seem to be taken care of, but I also notice how some of
the animal seen anxious or always walking back and forth within their enclosures and it makes
me think what are the thinking or are they ok? (R. Gutierrez, personal communication, March
13, 2015). What Gutierrez is trying to say is she can notice how the animals health is a concern
to the people working in the zoos because of their physical appearance, although their behavior
does seem concerning. In summary others besides the experts or the scholars, like Gutierrez,
notice some things that may raise questions and issues. Even though Gutierrez doesnt encounter
these animals every day, she still is able to notice things that occur with the animals and is why
she is concerned with the wellbeing of the animals held in captivity.
A news article titled Animals in zoos 'being driven mad by captivity': Survey finds
widespread evidence of hypnotic, repetitive type of behaviour caused by confinement by Nicholas
Schoon was published in 1994 by The Independent Newspaper located in Britain discusses
animal behavior in captivity. Schoon writes about a survey that was done in fifteen zoos located
in England and Wales. This survey found that animals that included bears, big cats, and elephants
kept in zoos are exhibiting hypnotic behavior that seems to be normal among mammals such

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 8

as those. This behavior includes pacing and head swinging (Schoon 1994). Plainly what Schoon
is saying is that there is evidence that animals, in this case mammals that are being affected
mentally because of their confined enclosures. Schoon continues to discuss how British zoos are
unfit to bear the animals they possess. He also mentions that zoos are trying improve to change
how other views zoos and their expectations, but he also mentions that zoos do nothing to
preserve natural habitats of those animals.
His position is leaning towards the negative aspects of a zoo, especially in British zoos.
Throughout his article he mentions how the survey taken criticized many zoos and even
though they are trying to improve themselves, still are not meeting the expectations of others and
ultimately the expectations of the animals. Because of the plain reason of how the animals are
behaving which is unusual to how they usually behave, Schoon is trying to convey how because
they are kept enclosed, these behaviors begin. Schoon uses more pathos because of the survey
used which helps create his credibility of how animals do behave differently when held captive.
Similarly, returning to Johnsons claim, the whales show exactly how keeping those in
captivity have major negative effects on them. The whale being featured has killed multiple
people and this may not be an issue of mental health but it is a behavior issue. Keeping this
animal in captivity is costing others lives, and yet these animals are still being kept the way they
are (Johnson 2013). Johnson is trying to say that these animals are not being kept in the correct
conditions and are behaving negatively because of that result. He is trying to convey his position
on the matter because of the lost lives that have gone because of the result of these animals being
kept the way they are, in this case in pools.

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 9

On the contrary, going back to what Cohn says, zoos are trying to prevent these things
from happening by putting enrichments to keep the animals busy and keep their minds off the
fact that they are enclosed and not have much to do (Cohn 2006). He is trying to say that maybe
the animals do have differences in their behaviors between captivity and out in the wild, but
those things can and are changing. Zoos are trying to help those animals stay active and not do
the same routines every day.
Gutierrez, School (1994), and Johnson (2013), all have a similar view and position on
how keeping animals captive may affect the way animals behave where Cohn (2006) shows a
much more different position. Animals do try to help relieve the stress of staying in an enclosed
space and therefore not have the effects of having different behaviors of wild versus captive
animals.

Conclusion
To put it briefly, the reasons why activists and others oppose the ideas of zoos is because
it is not humane to keep animals locked up so to speak. Also their mental health is also at risk,
they can become very anxious or stressed with the conditions they are living in which cannot
only affect the individual animals but also the other animals around them and the people taking
care of them. Their behavior affects the way they live as well because adjustment may be needed
to help protect others but also the extra steps that are needed to take to help them not behave so
erratically or unusual.

Running Head: REASONS TO OPPOSE ZOOS

Duran 10

References:

Cohn, J.P., (September 2006). BioScience. Do Elephants Belong in Zoos?, 56, pp. 714-71
Gutierrez, R. Rebecca Duran n.t. Jessica Duran, Facebook, March 13, 2015
Johnson, B.D. (2013). A killer whale gone very bad. Macleans 126(27), 1.
Martin, H.D. et. al. (1992). Animal Welfare and Wildlife in Captivity: A perspective on
Veterinary Ethics and Responsibilities. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 23, 273-

275. Retrieved from http://0- http://0-www.jstor.org.lib.utep.edu/stable/20095227

Donahue, J., Trump, E. (2006). Politics of Zoos: Exotic Animals and Their Protectors.

DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press.

Schoon, N. (1994, March 22). Animals in zoos 'being driven mad by captivity': Survey
finds widespread evidence of hypnotic, repetitive type of behaviour caused by

confinement. The Independent.

Zoo. (n.d.). Retrieved March 14, 2015, from

http://education.nationalgeographic.com/education/encyclopedia/zoo/?ar_a=1
Zoos. (n.d.). Retrieved March 3, 2015 from
http://www.lcanimal.org/index.php/campaigns/animals-in-entertainment/zoos