My Extended Project Qualification - Animal Captivity

Is it morally and ethically sound to hold animals captive for human benefit? (e.g. zoos, aquariums and circuses)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This essay achieved an A at AS level. Written by Katie Lois Hutchinson in 2015. Reading back on this now in 2020 makes me cringe and it shows me just how much my writing style has changed throughout my degree. Nonetheless, I hope it helps some of you :)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before I fully begin my extended project, I would like to address my view on the factor in question. I believe that holding animals captive for any other reason apart from one which would benefit the species or individual animal is unjust. I also believe that if animals are being held captive for a reason which does benefit the species or animal, then it should be away from the public eye, and in an enclosure which is large enough for the animal to have the best life possible and the enclosure being the best replica possible of the species' natural environment or habitat. Throughout this essay I will discuss the idea of holding animals captive and aim to cover the positives and negatives on the topic in question.

Definitions

Zoo:

• an establishment which maintains a collection of wild animals, typically in a park or gardens, for study, conservation, or display to the public.

Captivity:

• the state or period of being held, imprisoned, enslaved, or confined.

• the situation in which a person or animal is kept somewhere and not allowed to leave.

Zoochosis:

• stereotypical behaviour often shown by animals in captivity. Stereotypical behaviour is defined as a repetitive, invariant behaviour pattern with no obvious goal or function.

Zoonosis:

• a disease which is transferred from an animal in captivity to a human.

'We can put a man on the moon, so surely we can move an animal out of a concrete life.'

'The beast may not always be in the cage, but instead standing in front looking in.'

In recent years, there has been huge controversy as to whether keeping animals captive is acceptable, but very little has been done in changing the situation. I often see shocking news articles about how poorly animals are treated in zoos and circuses and it appals me that no action is taken and some of the most powerful people in the world look over this issue that myself and so many others strongly disagree with. 

One of the main reasons I based my essay on this topic is because of an orca male called Tilikum who has been held captive since 1983. He is the largest orca in captivity, stretching to 22 feet in length. He has been moved from park to park and the stress has taken it's toll on him – he's had  severe stomach ulcers as a result. He has also played a major part in three peoples deaths: Keltie Byrne (1991), Daniel Dukes (1999) and Dawn Brancheau (2010). Even after Tilikum’s aggressive side was shown, Sea World still choose to use him as their main sperm supply, collecting sperm and artificially inseminating female orcas. Tilikum has fathered 21 orcas, only 10 of whom are alive now.

When I was 11 years old I saw a group of orcas (Skyla, Kohana, Keto, Tekoa, Morgan and Adan) perform for me and hundreds of other people at a show in Loro Parque, Tenerife. Loro Parque opened their ‘Orca Ocean’ in 2006 with the help of Sea World Orlando and San Antonia, who loaned them 4 whales. At the time, I was fascinated and amazed by what I was seeing, and it wasn’t until a few years later that I would feel awful about how I felt that day watching them perform. Looking back, it seems as though they were performing degrading tricks in a concrete box, which would one day become their coffin. Whilst conducting my research, I discovered that in 2009, the summer before I visited Loro Parque, Keto had killed one of his trainers, Alexis. There was no information on this anywhere around the park – and it seems that this incident was swept under the rug as a ‘freak occurrence’ in a bid to keep visitor numbers up. This not only seems disrespectful towards Alexis, but if Keto has done this once, is it that unlikely that it wont occur again? 

The documentary ‘Blackfish’ also inspired me to base my essay on this topic, as the main bulk of the programme is based on Tilikum and the truth behind how he is 'cared' for by Sea World. Tilikum is now dying from a chronic lung infection. Five marine mammals have died in Sea World parks since the summer of 2015. Globally, people are fighting against Sea World and their ability to hold animals captive, with the petition #DontBuyATicket taking place as I write this. Sea World claim to care for their orcas but can captivity even begin to measure up to freedom?

          In the wild, male orcas can live for up to 80 years, and females can live for over 100. The average age of death for an orca at Sea World is a mere 7 years old. Early death for all animals is not the case for all animals in captivity -in many zoos animals can live for much longer than they would in the wild, but if the animal is unhappy surely this cannot be a good thing? If an animal is showing signs of zoochosis, the animal is being kept alive purely for the entertainment of humans and as a source of income for the captivity centre.

            In addition, despite sharing the ocean for many hundreds of years, there has never been a reported injury or fatal attack from an orca to a human being in the ocean, but in Sea World parks there have been 3 deaths since 1991 and over a hundred reports of injury and broken bones. This occurs because the animals are frustrated and angry. Moreover, all male orcas in captivity have collapsed dorsal fins; a sign of an unhealthy orca. In the wild, orcas can swim in excess of 100 miles in 24 hours, and that is equal to 1200 laps of the largest Sea World tank. In comparison to the world’s oceans, the tanks are the size of bathtubs.

             In captivity, orcas grind their teeth down on the bars and sides of their enclosures in the hope of escape and this often requires painful dental procedures. Orcas are very friendly, social, family-orientated animals who stay with their mother for a large portion of their life. Captivity centres often snatch baby orcas from their mothers in the ocean and throw them into chlorinated pools with other whales. Orca fighting rarely happens in the ocean as the different groups can swim away from one another, but it is a different story when it comes to whales in tanks. It is a common occurrence for older whales to attack younger whales in captivity, especially when they are being crammed into enclosures in close proximity to each other. The whales are left in small tanks overnight for 14 hours whilst waiting for the parks to open the next day so that they can perform their demeaning tricks for deluded onlookers.

Even under the best zoo conditions in the world, captivity cannot begin to compare to animals living in their natural habitat. Zoos teach people that it is acceptable to interfere with an animals natural lifestyle and instincts, and keep them locked up behind bars, where they are bored, cramped, lonely, and deprived of all control of their life. Imagine not being able to control a single aspect of your life – when you eat, what you eat, when you sleep, where you sleep, or who you start a family with. That’s a reality for animals in zoos, who are turned into living exhibits. Some zoo animals are kept in enclosures far too small for them, while others are forced to perform tricks. Even under the best conditions, a life of captivity is no life at all.

One of the main arguments that zoos use for keeping animals held in captivity is the claim that they are ‘needed for education’. Although this may seem like a legitimate argument, this reason alone is not enough to deprive animals of their normal lives. The conditions under which animals are kept in zoos typically distort their behaviour significantly and observing an animal behind glass or behind bars in zoo conditions will not show you an animals true behaviour. The majority of people who go to zoos are not going for educational purposes anyway; they are going simply for entertainment. A large proportion of those who visit zoos are families, and this teaches future generations that zoos are acceptable.

There are many other, more ethical ways to view wild animals and to learn about them without having to look at them behind bars. In this day and age, informative television programmes and documentaries are readily available. International travel is also relatively easy and this would teach a much more realistic view of the behaviour of a wild animal. Learning about or viewing animals in their natural habitats can be as simple as a flick of a switch or a hike up a mountain. It is often forgotten that we in fact are wild animals, and although more advanced than some other species, we all have a right to freedom and life, and just because we have developed ways of keeping animals captive, it is not a necessity. People argue that animals can provide vital knowledge on how medicine will affect humans, however just because they come across weaker than us, doesn't mean we own the right to test on them.

Another common argument that zoos often use to justify keeping wild animals in captivity is the claim that they are trying to protect species from extinction. This may sound like a valid point, but many zoos do not care for near extinct animals, they care for exotic animals that are plentiful as they attract crowds and publicity. Most animals housed in zoos are not near extinction – so they would thrive in the wild, however they will probably never be released back into their own habitats. 

Some zoos say that releasing animals back into the wild is not as easy as it seems, and although this is true, it can be overcome. Humans themselves cause a large number of issues with habitat reintroduction, with problems such as poaching (involving elephants, rhinos, pandas, bears and more) and chemical contamination (for example bird species vulnerable to pesticides) still being prominent in today’s society. The longer that these threats exist, the longer that animals are going to have to live in cages, and the less adapted animals will become to their natural habitat as many generations will be born in captivity.

In addition to the issue above relating to generations having no idea about their natural habitat, there are other issues including human imprinting, where an animal relies on a human to feed and care for them, as well as the need to teach animals to fly, hunt and raise their offspring. If humans hadn’t had interfered with nature and wild animals in the first instance, these issues wouldn't exist. Hundreds of years ago animals and humans lived in harmony together before we interfered, but the longer this issue goes on, the more irreversible our actions will become. Just because we are so called ‘domesticated and modernised’ does this give us the right the interfere with nature and those who live on the planet with us?

Zoos often keep no more than 2 large animals of the same species, meaning that these two animals must mate for life producing very similar offspring and limiting the size of the gene pool of that species globally. If the two animals are not a successful mating pair, one of the animals is normally transported to another zoo to be introduced to more animals of the opposite sex. This experience is a very stressful one for the animal and the long distance travelling can be very traumatic, increasing the animal’s probability of mental health issues.

Zoos are not only bad for the animals they hold, but there is also a risk to zoo visitors and staff. Zoonosis is a growing concern worldwide. Captive animal facilities such as zoos can play a major role in the spread of zoonotic diseases. Capture from the wild, handling, transportation and feeding all cause increased stress in animals, which can damage their immune system and make them more susceptible to disease and illness. In 2005, six children received hospital treatment for a stomach bug after visiting a Scottish zoo. It is thought that contact with animals led to 24 reported cases of cryptosporidium. At the same time more than 27 people were hit with a kidney infection after visiting a handling zoo in the USA. British zoos have been inundated with reports of possible outbreaks of the dangerous e-coli intestinal infection, with people being hospitalised. Although visitors and staff are more likely to be at risk through direct contact with animals or their faeces, many of the illnesses are airborne and can be carried around on clothes, shoes and hair etc. Many people are unaware of these problems, as I was before I began my project; it has been speculated that zoos and captivity centres choose to ignore this issue in order to keep visitor numbers high. I’m certain that if more people had knowledge of this risk, there would be a much lower demand for zoos.

Disease isn't the only risk that people face when visiting zoos. There have been many cases where wild animals in zoos have escaped and attacked visitors and staff. Again I can refer back to Tilikum -  one man chose to sneak into Sea World overnight and sleep in the orca enclosure. When the trainers returned in the morning to reopen the park, they found him stripped naked and lying dead across Tilikum’s back. The San Francisco Zoo was closed to visitors on December 26, 2007, as police investigated a tiger attack they say may have been provoked by visitors' taunting the animal, leaving one man dead and two brothers injured. One witness said at least one of the victims had provoked the tiger. The same tiger also ripped the flesh off a zoo keeper's arm just before Christmas 2006.  If I haven’t made it clear enough before, we must learn again: wild animals are wild and capable, at any time, of aggressive, and even fatal attacks. Mark Bekoff, a former professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado, had this to say about wild animals being kept in zoos: “These animals are bored. They're smart, they're agile, they're emotional and they're working 24/7 to get out of their prison because that's what they're in: a prison cell."

It is also common occurrence for many animals to hurt themselves in the process of trying to escape. It is often seen in apes and other primate species. Spectators will taunt the animals by beating at their chests or knocking on the glass, and the animals will run and throw themselves into the glass in hope of an escape. In addition to this chilling behaviour, some captive animals will even copy the motions of their spectators – possibly to increase their chance of release, or maybe because they are so used to doing what they are told by zookeepers.

Keeping animals captive can have many negative effects on an animal's body, both mentally and physically. In the wild, animals react to their surroundings, avoiding predators, seeking food and interacting with others of their species. Consequently, even what might seem 'larger' or 'better' enclosures may be completely impoverished in terms of the animals' real needs. Frustration and boredom are commonplace amongst animals in zoos and can lead to obsessive and repetitive behaviours in the form of pacing, swaying, and even self-mutilation. This is known as stereotypical behaviour and such pointless, repetitive movements have also been noted in people with mental illnesses. With nothing to do, animals in zoos go out of their minds. Even diets are unnatural, with zebras in zoos becoming overweight as the grass they are given is higher in calories than the grasses of the African Savannah. The resulting obesity can affect fertility. Some animals suffer such serious behavioural problems in zoos that they are given anti-depressants, tranquillisers and anti-psychotic drugs to control their behaviour.

Whilst conducting my research on this topic, I discovered the world of zoochosis. This is the repetitive behaviour of an animal in captivity which shows no obvious goal or aim. There are many different ways that an animal can show this, such as:

• pacing/circling - big cats/wolves

• tongue playing/bar biting - giraffes/primates

• neck twisting - giraffes/llamas/bears

• head bobbing/weaving/swaying - bears/elephants

• rocking - ape species

• over grooming/self-mutilation - apes/bears/parrots/big cats

• vomiting/regurgitating - ape species

• coprophilia (abnormal passiveness) - primate apes

• killing or harming offspring - grey langers/lions

As zoo animals grow older and become less "cute" in the eyes of the visitors, the elderly animals are sometimes carelessly discarded by zoo officials and often handed over to the wrong people. In some cases, unwanted animals are found neglected and abandoned. In January 2016, a Japanese aquarium put a great white shark into a tank. The animal died just 3 days after being caught. Great Whites need to swim all the time to maintain their body temperature, and this was impossible for this shark. The aquarium said that the shark’s death is still under investigation, but in my opinion the cause is clear: captivity.

In the UK there are at least 250 licensed zoos, and many more unreported captivity facilities. Whilst writing my EPQ, there has been a TV series called ‘The Secret Life of the Zoo’ – which was filmed over 10 months at Chester Zoo in the UK. This TV show was very interesting and informative. It showed the birth of many new babies, the transportation of animals to other zoos and the day to day life of many species. However, this series was only 6 hours long and it leaves me wondering what went on for the rest of the time the filming crew were at the zoo. I will admit that when watching this programme, I didn’t see any zoochotic behaviours or any animal attacks but I am certain this would not be the case if you went to a less prestigious zoo somewhere else in the country. The animals at Chester appeared to have relatively large, sufficient enclosures compared to some (but they still cannot compare to the animal’s natural habitats) and they appeared to be well looked after and fed properly.

I decided to visit one of my local zoos in order to see how it compared to some of the facilities that I had been researching. Upon arrival I found 4 grey wolves, 2 of which were pacing backwards and forwards – a zoochotic behaviour often shown by wolves. When walking round I found myself feeling guilty at the fact that I had just paid to watch animals locked up in cages. I was particularly appalled at the owl enclosure – there was nothing for the animals to do and very little space for them to fly. The tiger enclosure wasn’t much better, with only a wooden structure in the centre of the small area. 

At the back of the zoo where all the big cats are housed, I came across two lions who were pacing back and forth along the back of the enclosure, not leaving each other’s side. I then read the information board on these two majestic animals and I discovered that they were rescued in 2011 from a French circus who forced the two to perform. Although I do agree that zoos are immoral and unethical, I believe that these animals will have a better quality of life here in a zoo than in a travelling circus. The zoo states on the information board that these 2 have deep mental health issues and this is not hard to see when observing the animals. They looked terrified of humans and chose to keep as far away as possible – a trait that would be never be shown in the wild, where the lion would dominate. This alone supports my views – leave nature alone and don’t interfere with the lives of animals.

      Unfortunately, here in the UK it is still legal to use animals in circuses and performing shows, even though luckily, it is very rare. This is not the case worldwide; 17 countries have taken it upon themselves to ban the exploitation and involuntary involving of animals in circuses. These countries are: Austria, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, El Salvador, Greece, Israel, Malta, Mexico, The Netherlands, Paraguay, Peru, Singapore and Slovenia. Most countries globally still need to embrace their sympathy and compassion for these animals and bring an end to the degradation of them. Even here in England, 96% of people said they would never visit a show where animals were forced to perform, and 98% of people from Scotland said the same - so why has a ban not been implemented yet? If the most powerful people worldwide don’t come together and begin protecting animals and their welfare, nothing will change.

     As further research for my project, I emailed a questionnaire to zoos all across the UK and a man named Blair Cockburn replied to me from Edinburgh zoo with a very detailed response. Blair is the educations officer at the zoo. He told me that he didn’t feel guilty at the fact that wild animals were being held captive at the zoo as they were being well looked after. He also said that when returning animals to the wild, it should be treated as individual by individual, not species by species. “Some it may be appropriate for, but for many it is not, but even for species that we are engaged in a reintroduction effort, you need to be careful about choosing animals that have the best chance of success (e.g. not hand reared, able to find own food) and we are currently involved, through our WildGenes genetics lab, in selecting such a population for a reintroduction of the Scimitar Horned Oryx.”

Blair also said that he had seen unusual behaviour in animals in the zoo, but that this was not as a result of being held captive, but instead of the stress of being moved around and being mentally scared from their previous owners. “We have a pair of rescue Sun Bears who have been seen to pace. This behaviour is known as a stereotypy, and is a sign of stress. However, this is not the result of zoo life, rather than a significant disruption in their development, as, as cubs, both Somnang and Rotana, our sun bears were taken from the wild for the pet trade. Kept in small cages barely larger than they were, Somnang still has scar tissue from where his skin repeatedly scraped the cage he was kept in during this time, and the pacing within a 2m length began (representing all of the space he had available to him at the time). Fortunately, both bears, (unrelated) were recovered, found in cages in a back garden in Sri Lanka. They were transported to a Cambodian Bear Sanctuary run by the charity Save the Bears, which houses such rescues. Often they cannot be re-released into the wild, as, taken at around 6 months when completely dependent on their mothers, the animals have never learnt how to survive on their own”

      One of my questions asked whether it was thought that the animals in a zoo were happy, and the response I got was “yes, although to attach a human emotion such as happiness to an animal may be debatable (their mental cognition is very different and inevitably differs from species to species), the animals within our zoos are healthy and certainly appear content”. The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, which runs Edinburgh Zoo and the Highland Wildlife Park, has a mission statement which sums this up: “'Safeguarding Species from Extinction. Connecting People with Nature'. This is in line with our 4 charitable objectives: Conservation (both ex-situ through captive breeding programmes and in-situconservation projects it funds and staffs – we have a staff member in the Budongo rain forest in Uganda aiding in chimpanzee conservation in the natural habitat and another in Brazils Pantanalworking on the conservation of the Giant Armadillo), Education (helping to foster a connection between the human population and these animals from a young age and in a meaningful way), Research (learning more about the animals within captivity and the wild so that we are better placed to maximise their welfare in captivity and conserve them effectively in the wild), all funded by our 4th objective, maintaining ourselves as a top visitor attraction (we receive no government funding, so the funding of our work comes only from visitors and the support of the local human population)"

      I also asked Edinburgh Zoo if they held any endangered species. Blair said that there were far too many to list, but some highlights would be the Critically Endangered cotton-top Tamarin, Sumatran Tiger, Amur Tiger, Bali Starling, Amur Leopard and Scottish Wildcat, Blair explained how the last two have specifically designed, off-show captive breeding sites at the Highland Wildlife Park, as there is a need to get these animals mating and their population larger. With less human contact the intention would be that any kittens/cubs produced would be ideal candidates for reintroduction. He said how the zoo has recently bred Socorro Doves, a species that is extinct in the wild and only survives today because of the captive breeding programme in zoos. These animals, descendants from a founder population rescued as a last resort from their native island of Socorro prior to their extinction caused by invasive species, are being bred and now hundreds await reintroduction. They are currently however awaiting a green light from the in-situ conservation team who are restoring their natural habitat through the removal of invasive feral cats and rats which led to the doves’ population crash. This breeding also occurs off show, as does their breeding of partula snails, also extinct in the wild. They actually have the entire known world’s population of one such species here at Edinburgh zoo, being carefully managed and conserved in an ex-situ environment following their extinction in the wild.

        One of my questions was ‘how many animals bred at the zoo have been returned to their natural habitats in the last 2 years?’, Blair’s response was as follows: ‘0-10. Though I might point out that in many cases reintroductions would be inappropriate, as the threats that have led the animals to become endangered, yet to be addressed, would lead to these animals potentially struggling. Some would say it would be irresponsible to release a rhino into the wild while rhino poaching in on the increase (check WWF figures of white rhino poaching in last 10 years in South Africa). These animals however are alive and well in zoos, protected from these threats, and available for reintroduction once these threats are removed, as with the Socorro Dove’

         I researched the WWF Rhino Poaching figures, and was astounded at what I found. Between 2007 – 2013, rhino poaching had increased 5000%! Blair also told me that animals from the zoo are not sold, but equally shared throughout international organisations such as EAZA and BIAZA. They are not owned by individual zoos. Animals are moved between these organisations to avoid inbreeding and maintain appropriate groupings, and this is orchestrated by an independent stud-book keeper (a zoo keeper within a single zoo who works with the species daily and manages the entire population of the international breeding programme). This guarantees the prioritisation of the animal’s welfare and species conservation, as opposed to potentially selfish wishes of individual collections.

  Globally, thousands of wild animals are still forced to perform demeaning and unnatural tricks to entertain the public. They are exploited in travelling circuses, side-shows and within zoos, and used in advertising, film and television. Animals are often made to perform ‘stunts’ and ‘humanised’ behaviours that are completely against their nature. Parrots riding bicycles, elephants standing on their heads or walking a tightrope, chimpanzees smoking cigarettes, seals dancing, and tigers jumping through hoops of fire are just a few of the examples. The training of wild animals often relies heavily on physical domination and fear, and withdrawal of food until the animal complies, in an attempt to ensure the constant attention and compliance of the animal in front of an audience or camera. There have been numerous undercover investigations and reports from ex-trainers revealing evidence of systematic mistreatment and animal abuse.

In circuses, animals are transported from location to location, repeatedly loaded and unloaded, kept in small ‘beast-wagons’ or chained within trucks. Similarly, animals used in the film industry are also routinely confined to cages between 'takes'. Research has shown that spending many hours travelling or confined to a small and unnatural environment can cause heightened stress responses in an animal, resulting in serious negative welfare impacts. Training, boredom and the frustration in trying to cope with these unnatural conditions often result in an animal developing abnormal behaviours. 

One of the most shocking news articles I have ever seen about animals used in circuses appeared in the papers on the 22nd February 2016. It described the sickening acts that polar bears were made to perform – singing and dancing for crowds whilst wearing muzzles. The magnificent creatures who normally freely roam the vast expanses of the arctic circle are trapped in a Russian travelling circus. Under secret investigation, it was found that the animals were trained by being burnt by cigarettes to keep them attentive, and being hit with metal poles to ensure their cooperation. The bears are taught to stand on their hind legs so that they can ‘sing’ into a microphone by being chained around their neck to a wall, so that if the bear tries to return to its natural position of all fours, it will be strangled. This article angered me so much.

A famous example of a circus animal rebelling is Tyke the elephant. On August 20, 1994, during a performance, she killed her trainer, Allen Campbell and injured her groomer, Dallas Beckwith. Tyke then escaped the arena and ran through the streets for more than thirty minutes. Police fired 86 shots at her, she eventually collapsed and died. The majority of the attack in the arena was recorded on consumer videotape by spectators. Very little of what someone sees in a circus is educational – the animals are in a completely different environment to their natural one and they have been trained to perform. On the contrary, I am aware that captivity can keep animals away from harm. For example, the lions held at my local zoo are now out of harm’s way and they will be safe for the rest of their lives. 

Now that I have reached the end of my EPQ, I want to review some of my earlier thoughts on the factor in question. Before I had fully began researching the subject, I was set in my ways that holding animal’s captive was completely wrong, however now I have altered my view slightly. After all of my research and learning, I now understand that holding animal’s captive can have its benefits – such as preventing a species extinction. Although, I still believe that holding them captive for human entertainment is wrong and I am still completely and utterly against animals being used in circuses. I have also found that there are other captivity centres that hold animals for human benefit and I am against these too. An example of which being theme parks where animals are kept as another attraction and they are mostly looked over.

I am still fully against holding sea creatures captive – and I am disgusted at what some of the human race deem okay. Thanks to the ignorance, selfishness and cruelness of some individuals, thousands of animals will continue to live uncomfortable, tedious lives in tiny tanks and cages because people are still deluded and believing that aquatic entertainment parks care for their animals.

       Throughout the duration of writing my project, from my introduction about Tilikum and Sea World, up until now, there have been some drastic changes. In March 2016, Sea World released a statement saying that the current generation of orcas they are holding captive will be the last, apart from one baby due to be born later in the year (Kyana). All breeding programmes have been stopped in order to support this. Also in March 2016, Sea World said that they are ‘changing’ - they said that orca performances will be phased out by 2019 and that the way people will see the orcas will be a completely different experience. Although I was over the moon at this statement, I was also sad because the animals there are going to have to endure their lives in concrete tanks until their time comes. Though, in contrast, it is a huge breakthrough that I thought would never come – no more orcas to be caught and captured by Sea World. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for every other captive animal facility…

      So to refer back to my title, ‘is it morally and ethically sound to hold animal’s captive for human benefit?’, I do believe that it is immoral and unethical to keep animals for human benefit, however I can see the positives of animal conservation and protection under human control. I believe that businesses that hold animals purely to make money are completely wrong, but charities that hold animals to help educate people on animals are essential to an extent, especially for conserving near extinct and threatened animals.

#DontBuyATicket

Donate Here