Nguyễn Tuấn Sơn

11CA – 16

Topic: Zoos are sometimes seen as necessary but poor alternative to a natural environment.
Discuss some of the arguments for or against keeping animals in zoos.

There is an increasing number of zoos being built throughout the world as a consequence of the
destruction of natural habitats. However, there have been controversies surrounding the idea of
keeping animals in zoos, either for conservation or recreational purposes. In my opinion, zoos
are not adequate to replace natural environment for the following reasons.

Firstly, animals kept in zoos may gradually lose their instinct and surviving skills due to the lack
of exercise. Most of the things they need to survive is provided at hand so they do not have to
hunt for food which consequently reduce their agility and strength. Moreover, animals are kept
separately in zoos so they are free from the fight for survival against others and therefore
increase their vulnerability when released back into the wild.

Secondly, the environment in most zoos does not meet the requirements for animals to develop
normally. Caged animals are taken away the right to roam freely, while “free” animals can only
move around very limited areas. More seriously, the safety systems of some zoos are inadequate,
which has led to tragic results to both human and the animals themselves.

There is a common fallacy that zoos are essential to protect endangered animals from the edge of
extinction. However, this is only a short-term solution to the problem. In order to thoroughly
solve this issue, there should be stricter laws to penalize poachers for hunting wild animals.
In conclusion, despite having some minor advantages, zoos should not be considered an
alternative to natural environment. Instead, the government should build national parks or
conservation areas to create a suitable environment for wild animals to live.