Topic: Zoo should be banned

Against’s Thesis Statement

1/ Zoos conserve animals, saving endangered species from environmental threats
2/ Zoos educate the public about animals and conservation efforts
3/ Zoos create scientific research, preventing infectious diseases from animals to humans
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I need to clarify your 3 main points
I completely agree with your argument: "Zoos have saved animals from extinction and other
dangers from external environmental impacts such as hunting or climate change.. ." but that is
not entirely true because all zoos in the world do not always create reasonable living
conditions for animals. Are you sure that the zoo is really a safe place for animals? Or are
they just a place to "imprison" animal life and satisfy human pleasure?
Rebuttal: Especially wild animals, they have their habit of living in herds and adapting to
different environments and ecosystems. And when living in a captive environment like a zoo,
their health is clearly reduced. Specifically, the average lifespan of elephants If they live in
the natural environment for 56 years, when kept by humans in zoos, they only live 16.9 years.
At least 20 zoos in the US have stopped keeping elephants in captivity. partly because of
ethical concerns about keeping this species in captivity. So are zoos really places to maintain
populations and breed species like you said?
Moreover, it is completely unreasonable to say that zoos bring knowledge about biodiversity
to the public. In fact, even one study widely cited to justify the argument that zoos educate
the public stated that “no overall change in understanding of ecological concepts was see”
because visitors know a lot about ecology before coming to the zoo. And once again I dare to
assert that the zoo does not educate the public with any knowledge, it is just a justification for
keeping their animals in captivity. In a 2011 study, researchers asked visitors at four famous
zoos in the US including Cleveland, Bronx, Prospect Park and Central Park about their level
of concern for the environment and their thoughts on zoos. animal species. The results
showed that while 42% said the “main purpose” of the zoo was “to teach visitors about
animals and conservation,” 66% said the main reason they came was to “hang out with
friends.” or family” and only 12% said their intention was “to learn about animals”. And once
again I dare to assert that zoos are only places that provide entertainment and do not educate
the public with any knowledge, it is just a justification for their confinement of animals.
Last but not least, on what evidence do zoos create scientific research to prevent infectious
diseases from animals to humans? Because as far as I learn about, these studies are
completely tested directly on animals and pose a threat to their lives. This once again impacts
the issue of animal conservation. Accredited zoos have the potential to provide direct health
benefits to visitors, which may help reduce risk factors associated with chronic disease. For
example, recent studies explore the direct benefits that zoos provide to human health. In one
study, a visit to the zoo was shown to lower blood pressure and result in walking about 6,000
steps per visit.
For’s Thesis Statement
1/ Hoạt động chính của vườn thú không phải là bảo tồn.
2/ Thảm kịch của động vật bị nhốt trong vườn thú.
3/ Sở thú dạy trẻ em những bài học sai lầm.

1. Tôi đồng ý với bạn rằng, hoạt động chính của vườn thú không phải bảo tồn mà nó còn
bao gồm nhiều hoạt động khác. Chúng ta không nhất thiết phải xem vườn thú như một
hoạt động bảo tồn. Một sở thú có thể hoạt động với nhiều mục đích khác nhau bao
gồm nghiên cứu, giáo dục và khoa học. Và tôi có một câu hỏi muốn hỏi bạn rằng “
Bạn có chắc rằng việc không có sở thú thì động vật sẽ được bảo tồn, đảm bảo an toàn
không?”
 I agree with you that the main activity of a zoo is not conservation but it also
includes many other activities. We don't necessarily see zoos as a conservation
activity. A zoo can serve a variety of purposes including research, education, and
science. And I have a question to ask you: "Are you sure that without a zoo, animals
will be preserved and safe?"
2. Tôi đồng ý rằng động vật bị nhốt trong sở thú sẽ bị mất tự do. Nhưng bạn nghĩ thử
xem với của sống hiện đại ngày nay, diện tích đất tự nhiên ngày càng thu hẹp, không
nhờ có những sở thú, động vật hoang dã sẽ sống ở đâu?
 I agree that animals kept in zoos lose their freedom. But think about it, with today's
modern lifestyle, natural land areas are increasingly shrinking. Without zoos, where
would wild animals live?
3. Bạn nói rằng sở thú dạy trẻ em những bài học sai lầm. Vậy thì bạn có số liệu cụ thể
nào cho luận điểm của mình không?
Và tôi chắc chắn rằng sở thú không tồn tại thì việc mà chúng ta nhìn thấy những loài
động vật chỉ có thể là trên màn hình ti vi hoặc là trên Internet mà thôi. Bạn nghĩ thử
xem, không có sở thú thì trẻ em có học được những kiến thức từ động vật, hay là tận
mắt nhìn thấy chúng không?
 You say that zoos teach children the wrong lessons. So do you have any specific
data to support your argument? And I'm sure that if zoos didn't exist, we could only
see animals on TV screens or on the Internet. Think about it, without a zoo, would
children learn knowledge from animals, or see them with their own eyes?