The Instigator
Gohan12345
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Incognito13
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Animals should be kept in zoos

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Incognito13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2013 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,199 times Debate No: 41344
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

Gohan12345

Pro

First round my opponent shall go first
Incognito13

Con

My arguments:

Contention 1: Zoos harm animals
http://www.veganpeace.com...
The animals who live there are kept in cages that don't allow them to live their lives in a natural way such as move around like in the wild. No matter how big some zoos try to make the enclosures, no matter how many branches they put in them, no matter how beautiful they make the background paintings on the wall, they don't compare with the natural habitat the animals were meant to be in. Zoo animals have to spend day after day, week after week, year after year in the exact same enclosure. This makes their lives very sad and boring. It is not a good way to keep animals like that. It cruelty to keep animals in cages for their whole life. Animals in zoos are forced to live in artificial, stressful, and really boring conditions. Removed from their natural habitats and social structures, they are confined to small, restrictive environments that deprive them of mental and physical stimulation says http://www.lcanimal.org.... Moreover, while zoos generally claim to take in only the neediest of animals, most of the animals in zoos are not endangered, orphaned, or injured at all. A great many are captured from the wild. Those that are in breeding programs seemed destined for a life in captivity, for they are accustomed to an artificial environment where food, shelter, and protection from predators are provided for them. Natural conditions such as climate, habitat, and feeding cannot be properly recreated, and zoos lack sufficient space to reproduce a natural Brown bearenvironment, provide a normal social equilibrium of the species, or maintain a healthy gene pool ordered by natural selection. Zoos thus compromise captive animals" chances of successful introduction into the wild. Additionally, there may be no wilderness left for zoo-bred animals, as humans are destroying their natural habitat at such an alarming rate. The only way to realistically stop extinction is to preserve the world"s habitat and ecosystems.

Impact: What if you were caught in the wild and was sent to a caged home in where you have to live their the rest of your life? It cruel just like the animals

Contention 2: Zoos kills animals for food
http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
In this website a workers from a zoo: Food is included in the contract and Niclas, another former employee, revealed that the guest workers were fed animals that had been put down in the park, giving examples of a goat and hens.
He reveals he once butchered a pig at the zoo to give the workers meat, adding: "They were so hungry and hadn't had any nutritious food for weeks.'
Anna added: "They often had to eat monkey food. Old bread and old fruit which had been donated to the park by local grocers on the island, or nearby Kalmar on the mainland.'
The stories from behind the cheery facade of the zoo, which welcomes visitors with a sign of two playing chimpanzees, has horrified and sickened the nation and animal lovers worldwide.

Also on the website: On Wednesday Pia Westen, 19, revealed that the park had refused to let carers bottle feed a litter of lion cubs ignored by their mother.
Two of them starved to death before carers were allowed to feed the other two.
Staff were ordered to hide the suffering lion cubs behind tarpaulin sheets, with Westen saying: '[Supervisors] didn"t want visitors seeing them lying there, dying. The animal caretakers really wanted to save them but they weren't allowed until two of them had starved to death."
Caroline Ryding worked at the park for two months in 2011 and claims she quit her job after witnessing 'permanent maltreatment of the animals'.
She said: 'A coati - a Brazilian aardvark - was beaten to death with a baseball bat or a crowbar. And we were told afterwards not to tell the zoo vet.

Soo people, the poor animals are experiencing jail as a home for them. The animal's right are being taken away while they are experience, death. So this is why you should vote for me.
Debate Round No. 1
Gohan12345

Pro

Animals must be kept in zoos for many reasons and here are why

1. Many animals are becoming exstinct from poachers and have been traded or selled at black markets and black markets sell illigel items animals in the other hand must be kept safe from harm of harmful poachers. About zoos not letting animals go outside in the wild life doesnt really mean anything but keeping there coupd keep them out of exstinction and from poachers and from being traded to markets for there skins and other parts of there body for money.
2.Zoos do not always have a negetive effect on our animals. My opponent gives a senerio about being caught in the wild and sent to prison. The reason they do that is because a animal population will become exstinct and it unbalances the food chain which is part of our life. Manatees have been dying from canals and by humans who kill them rapidly.Many people do this because they want to which is not fair.
3. Animals are losing there habitat from human population. The komodo dragons who once roamed in there habitats but there is a few of them now because of human population. Its ok to kill animals but not to the point where they would become exstinct.
4. Zoos help people find animal easier without traveling and are good friends with zookeepers. You must be mistakend for a farm.
I hope my reasons help
Incognito13

Con

To attack my opponent case:

He said:
1. Many animals are becoming exstinct from poachers and have been traded or selled at black markets and black markets sell illigel items animals in the other hand must be kept safe from harm of harmful poachers. About zoos not letting animals go outside in the wild life doesnt really mean anything but keeping there coupd keep them out of exstinction and from poachers and from being traded to markets for there skins and other parts of there body for money.

Fist first of... There are sancuaries.... Zoos are too much of a pain for them. Sacntaries have been successful and that is my other way how animals can be kept safe and that totally destroys his first point.

He also said: 2.Zoos do not always have a negetive effect on our animals. My opponent gives a senerio about being caught in the wild and sent to prison. The reason they do that is because a animal population will become exstinct and it unbalances the food chain which is part of our life. Manatees have been dying from canals and by humans who kill them rapidly.Many people do this because they want to which is not fair.

But it says to not always. So It has some which is a lot for a life. They do have negative effects and i have shown you that zoos kill animals and sell them! He also says that is unbalances the food chain but No, there are sancuatries which basically destroy every argument because the topic says only that zoos but i define another way.

My opponent also says:
3. Animals are losing there habitat from human population. The komodo dragons who once roamed in there habitats but there is a few of them now because of human population. Its ok to kill animals but not to the point where they would become extinct.

But my opponent says it is ok to kill animals but as ia said Sanctuaries also help. Well to go on, Sacntuaries destroys my opponents case...
Debate Round No. 2
Gohan12345

Pro

First of all when I mean its ok to kill animals I mean its ok to kill but humans should limit the amount they kill because humans are also part of the food chain and they have to kill some animals but they should only kill a few not a lot that they will become extinct. I will attack my opponents cases with these reasons.
Resources:
http://wiki.answers.com...
http://www.whyguides.com...?
http://www.globalanimal.org... http://www.wisegeek.com...
Now I will attack my opponents case with some rebuttal
1.My opponent says zoos are much more pain for them.
This statement is not true as in the resources above zoos help animals who are injured, lost of habitat, or poachers. In the world now elephants have been traded for there ivory. Studies also showed that animals kept in captivity live a more longer lifespan then how they would do out there in the wild life.
2.He tries to rebuttal my statement
'But it says always. So it has some which is a lot for a life. They do have a negative effects and I have shown you that zoos kill animals and sell them!'
True that they do kill and sell them and trade, but don't forget zoos and sanctuaries are basically but sanctuaries give more space, but zoos do not harm animals rapidly as how a poacher would. Zoos do beneficial things for animals like breeding programs, animal donations, Help injured animals who are on the verge of extinction. Zoos are educational to people and lets them see animals up close so scientist are able to make studies easily without going to another country.
3.Like I said from before its ok to kill them but not like a lot each day that they would become extinct. And yes of course it could unbalance the food chain in many ways if animals like tigers are decreasing there would be more and more of there prey and it unbalances the food chain.
4. I stated a fourth reason and it has not been rebuttal.
Anyway good debate and now after my opponents argument the voters will choose
Incognito13

Con

My opponent says that:
First of all when I mean its ok to kill animals I mean its ok to kill but humans should limit the amount they kill because humans are also part of the food chain and they have to kill some animals but they should only kill a few not a lot that they will become extinct. I will attack my opponents cases with these reasons.

Will first off, my opponent is actually agreeing with my argument saying that Zoos kill animals. Well Since that happened my argument still stands.

Now going on to attack my opponent other case:

My opponent said:
As in the resources above zoos help animals who are injured, lost of habitat, or poachers. In the world now elephants have been traded for there ivory. Studies also showed that animals kept in captivity live a more longer lifespan then how they would do out there in the wild life.

Well first off, i have eight sites in which animals are treated poorly and have been used for entertainment while being abused severely.

Here are the sites:
http://www.peta.org...

This site explains that animals in zoos are treated poorly as for entrainment and a loss of space

http://www.animalequality.net...

This site explains that animals have lost their freedoms because of zoos.

http://www.liberationphotography.org...

This site explains how animals suffer in zoos and gives many specific examples.

http://www.petaasiapacific.com...

This site is saying that animals are behind bars everyday in zoos as prisoners and shouldn't be behind bars

http://www.sfgate.com...

This site explains that Animals suffer in zoos.

This destroyed my opponents first argument.

My opponent also says that:
True that they do kill and sell them and trade, but don't forget zoos and sanctuaries are basically but sanctuaries give more space, but zoos do not harm animals rapidly as how a poacher would. Zoos do beneficial things for animals like breeding programs, animal donations, Help injured animals who are on the verge of extinction. Zoos are educational to people and lets them see animals up close so scientist are able to make studies easily without going to another country.

Well first of this again shows you that my opponent agrees with my argument saying that zoos kill animals and sell them. But first of he contradicts himself agains saying that zoos do not harm animals. Well, in the beginning he just admitted that zoos do kill animals. So my opponents second arguments fails to stand. But my opponent also says that Zoos are educational to people but first off, http://www.psychologytoday.com... explains that Zoos do not accomplish what they claim such as educational purpose. Fail, Zoos are not educational but instead read the site.

My Opponent also says:

.Like I said from before its ok to kill them but not like a lot each day that they would become extinct. And yes of course it could unbalance the food chain in many ways if animals like tigers are decreasing there would be more and more of there prey and it unbalances the food chain.

Well that argument is kind of saying that we should keep animals in zoos. Well, first off their are sanctuaries which is part of my plan which Sancuraries are better and more efficient and have other better purposes than zoos which basically destroys my opponents third and fourth argument.

My Opponent also says that:
Zoos help people find animal easier without traveling and are good friends with zookeepers. You must be mistakend for a farm.

First off, well as i said there are other ways to find animals such as GOOGLE.... Well you could take a picture and look at it from GOOGLE images and YOUTUBE. While watching the animal like it is in real life. Youtube is basically like looking at an animal at a zoo.

Since my opponent arguments no longer stand, I'll go over my case....

My first argument is that:
Contention 1: Zoos harm animals
http://www.veganpeace.com......
The animals who live there are kept in cages that don't allow them to live their lives in a natural way such as move around like in the wild. No matter how big some zoos try to make the enclosures, no matter how many branches they put in them, no matter how beautiful they make the background paintings on the wall, they don't compare with the natural habitat the animals were meant to be in. Zoo animals have to spend day after day, week after week, year after year in the exact same enclosure. This makes their lives very sad and boring. It is not a good way to keep animals like that. It cruelty to keep animals in cages for their whole life. Animals in zoos are forced to live in artificial, stressful, and really boring conditions. Removed from their natural habitats and social structures, they are confined to small, restrictive environments that deprive them of mental and physical stimulation says http://www.lcanimal.org....... Moreover, while zoos generally claim to take in only the neediest of animals, most of the animals in zoos are not endangered, orphaned, or injured at all. A great many are captured from the wild. Those that are in breeding programs seemed destined for a life in captivity, for they are accustomed to an artificial environment where food, shelter, and protection from predators are provided for them. Natural conditions such as climate, habitat, and feeding cannot be properly recreated, and zoos lack sufficient space to reproduce a natural Brown bearenvironment, provide a normal social equilibrium of the species, or maintain a healthy gene pool ordered by natural selection. Zoos thus compromise captive animals" chances of successful introduction into the wild. Additionally, there may be no wilderness left for zoo-bred animals, as humans are destroying their natural habitat at such an alarming rate. The only way to realistically stop extinction is to preserve the world"s habitat and ecosystems.

Impact: What if you were caught in the wild and was sent to a caged home in where you have to live their the rest of your life? It cruel just like the animals

Well first off in my opponent last speech he admits that Zoos kill animals and trade or sell them which Basically means that my argument is still staring and this is why you should vote for me.....
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
I am the worst debater in the world
Posted by Incognito13 3 years ago
Incognito13
Common guys vote :D
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
Sorry for spelling mistakes I was on my phone doing this
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
Sorry for spelling errors brcuz wheb u on phone its hard
Posted by Incognito13 3 years ago
Incognito13
kk i got that
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
So this debate goes by fast
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
Post your comment so I can post mine
Posted by Incognito13 3 years ago
Incognito13
hi oppoenent
Posted by Gohan12345 3 years ago
Gohan12345
Hello opponent
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
Gohan12345Incognito13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G was close, but Con was slightly better. Remember to use spell-check, guys! Con managed to prove that 1) animals are harmed in zoos and 2) zoos are not necessary to keep animals from extinction, as that role can be filled by animal sanctuaries. Because of this, Con wins arguments. Also, Pro loses the conduct point for creating a poorly-worded resolution that implies that *all* animals should be kept in zoos.