From Apply Now,
Your Guide to Animal Rights.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!

One of the basic tenets of animal rights is that animals deserve to live freely, not being held captive by humans. Zoos are the primary culprit of keeping wild animals in captivity and are one of the major targets of the animal rights movement.

Arguments in Support of Zoos

Captive Breeding Programs. One of the strongest arguments in support of zoos is the captive breeding programs to save species that are faltering in the wild from going extinct. Often billed as the modern-day Noah’s ark, the Species Survival Plan (SSP) program was started in 1981 for North American zoos and aquariums to boost the population of wild populations of endangered and threatened species. This wildlife conservation program is focused primarily on genetically diverse captive breeding and reintroduction efforts.

For example, the black-footed ferret was on the brink of extinction in the early 1980s, largely due to human influence. Ranching operations were killing the ferret’s primary food source (prairie dogs), which were being poisoned to reduce their impact on livestock grazing. The ferret’s prairie grassland habitat also was being decimated by cattle grazing operations. In addition, ferret populations suffered from outbreaks of canine distemper and sylvatic plague.

In 1985, there were only 18 ferrets still alive in the United States. All of those animals were captured and placed in a captive-breeding program at participating zoos and governmental wildlife conservation facilities. By 1998, the program boasted more than 300 surviving ferret kits, more than 200 of which were reintroduced into the wild in South Dakota, Montana, Colorado, Utah, Arizona and Chihuahua, Mexico. Today, the black-footed ferret is still endangered, just as it has been since 1967, but the population is rebounding. As of 2005, there were an estimated 400 black-footed ferrets in the U.S., and biologists hope to have 1,500 ferrets in the wild by the year 2010.

There are more than 150 different species that are part of the Species Survival Plan program. Other animals that are part of captive breeding programs include some of the most recognizable wild animals of the world, such as gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, snow leopards, reticulated giraffes, Asian and African elephants, African lions, giant pandas, Mexican gray wolves, African penguins and Siberian tigers.

From an animal rights perspective, captive-breeding programs themselves may not be the worst aspect of zoos. since these programs are intended to operate in the best interest of the animals, rather than humans. However, these same programs could be carried out by animal sanctuaries and wildlife centers that do not have public exhibits. In many cases, reducing contact with people actually increases the chances for successful breeding.

Public Education. Another argument in favor of zoos is that they expose a wide audience of people to wildlife for educational purposes. There is no evidence that zoos are the most effective means of educating the public about wildlife and increasing the level of appreciation humans have for their wild neighbors. It is possible that these goals could be achieved through facilities and exhibits that do not include captive wild animals.

Arguments Against Zoos

Animals that are caught in their wild habitats often become part of zoo exhibits. Even some of the most reputable zoos, such as the San Diego Zoo, import wild-caught animals for their displays. The cruelty involved in capturing and transporting wild animals is well documented.

Zoos send the message that it is acceptable to maintain wild animals in captivity, and this contributes to animal cruelty at roadside zoos and circuses, as well as in the backyard breeding and exotic pet industries. Wild animals are dangerous and do not make suitable pets, as demonstrated by several recent high-profile cases, including the tiger attack on Roy Horn of Sigfried & Roy in Las Vegas.

Most zoos, even those accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, provide substandard facilities and care that do not meet the needs of wild animals. Their focus is on human entertainment, rather than wildlife conservation.

For example, elephants in captivity display chronic health problems associated with confinement, including arthritis, foot diseases, skin ailments, psychological problems, and reproductive difficulties. Captive wild animals do not live as long as those in the wild, and they are confined to areas far too small to meet their needs for exercise and natural behaviors.

The Bottom Line

Those who support animal rights believe that the harm caused by zoos outweighs the benefits that the facilities provide to animals and to society. The positive accomplishments of zoos in captive-breeding and wildlife reintroduction programs could be achieved at other facilities better equipped to care for the animals with minimal human interference.