The Instigator
Rockylightning
Con (against)
Losing
20 Points
The Contender
CrysisPillar
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points

Zoos do more good than harm

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 9 votes the winner is...
CrysisPillar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2010 Category: Education
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 26,056 times Debate No: 11279
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (9)

 

Rockylightning

Con

Resolved that zoos do more good than harm
CrysisPillar

Pro

Here are the main reasons why Zoos do more good than harm.
1) It educates Children and others of animals in the world that are not native to their country.
2) Endangered animals would otherwise be extinct without zoos.
3) Zoos provide revenue for cities as well as for the zoo itself to expand programs to help the animals.
4) Zoos are great recreational spots.
Debate Round No. 1
Rockylightning

Con

Rockylightning forfeited this round.
CrysisPillar

Pro

Alright...I will not be refuting any of my opponent's points. Instead, I will build up on my own.

1) It educates Children and others of animals in the world that are not native to their country.
~You don't get a Zebra running wild in the United States. With zoos, children can get an hands-on or visual experience of nature and what life is like for these animals that they do not get to see running in the wild.
2) Endangered animals would otherwise be extinct without zoos.
~Animals such as the bald eagle or Pandas are endangered. With the help of zoos, these animals are kept safe. Pandas, for example, are being housed at zoos and rescue centers in China, according to ChinaNews, a Hong Kong local newspaper.
3) Zoos provide revenue for cities as well as for the zoo itself to expand programs to help the animals.
Especially those with endangered animals, zoos earn revenue from visitors and can use some of that money to expand land and supplies for the care of the animals. The Oakland Zoo in California is putting in a nice chunk of their funds, 20% of their revenue, to help their elephants.
4) Zoos are great recreational spots.
~Families and children alike visit zoos, especially during vacation times. according to newsdesk.si.edu, a total of 2.2 million people visit the United States National Zoo every year.
Debate Round No. 2
Rockylightning

Con

To refute my opponent's points:
1) It said that it educates children: I can refute that with that it teaches animals that it is ok to imprison them, for example a child will see all these beautiful animals in the zoo imprisoned then go into his backyard and see a beatle and trap it.
2) It said that "endangered animals would be extinct without zoos. A zoo dosn't do anything else that a wild life preserve can't. A zoo, on the contrary imprisons animals. A wild life preserve keeps animals in their habitats AND protects them. (Pwned noob)
3) It said that zoo's provide revenue for cities. But really when you think about it, is making animals do tricks and perform shows a justified reason for revenue? Cities are reaping the benefits of abusing animals!
4) A recreational spot should not not be a place where people can look at animals doing everyday activities so they can feel superior. When you go to a zoo and see a monkey playing with it's poop, you see yourself as superior, and this is NOT how we want people to view themselves!

Point 1: Mistreatment of Animals
1.According to "animal-rights.org", "Zoos often mistreat animals, keeping them in small pens or cages. This is unfair and cruel. The natural instincts and behavior of these animals are suppressed by force. How can anyone observe wild animals under such circumstances and believe that one has been educated?
2.According to KCBS, "An animal rights group says it has video evidence that proves animals are being mistreated at the San Francisco Zoo."
3.According to bornfreeusa.com, "While zoos and aquariums may appear to be educational and conservation-oriented, most are designed with the needs and desires of the visitors in mind, not the needs of the animals. Many animals in zoos and aquariums exhibit abnormal behavior as a result of being deprived of their natural environments and social structures."
4.According to debatapedia.com, "Despite good intentions of zoo-keepers, animals in zoos suffer. They are inevitably confined in unnaturally small spaces, and are kept from the public by cages and bars. They suffer psychological distress, often displayed by abnormal or self-destructive behaviour. Aquatic animals do not have enough water, birds are prevented from flying away by having their wings clipped and being kept in aviaries.
5.Zoos need visitors to help keep animals healthy, so they often take out baby animals and force others to do tricks so crowds will come. (Eg. Parrots put on mimi-bikes and in toy cars at the Glasgow Zoo.)
6.An Oxford University report said that zoo elephants die at a youger age than that of wild elephants.
Point 2: Don't preserve Endangered Species
1.According to the North County Times of San Diego, "Zoos are built for human entertainment and don't seriously consider the animals' quality of life, animal advocates said. They said the elephant euthanized June 19 should have been sent to an animal sanctuary instead and that the park's mistreatment of the animal was what caused her foot problems and degenerative joint disease. "The zoo is not a sanctuary," said Florence Lambert, founder of the La Jolla-based Elephant Alliance. "On the contrary, it's a prison.""
2.According to debatapedia.com, "Zoos exist simply to amuse the paying public. Call it what it is. Zoos exist to entertain and amuse the paying customer. They are about serving humans, not serving animals.
3.According to debatapedia.com, "Zoos give the message that animals have no rights. Adults and children visiting zoos will be given the subliminal message that it is OK to use animals for our own ends, however it impinges on their freedom or quality of life; thus zoos will encourage poor treatment of animals more generally.
4.According to debatapedia.com, "The main purpose of zoos is to entertain the public and make money. People do not go to zoos for educational reasons they simply go to be entertained and diverted by weird and wonderful creatures seen as objects of beauty or entertainment. As a form of education the zoo is deficient: the only way to understand an animal properly is to see it in its natural environment – the zoo gives a totally artificial and misleading view of the animal by isolating it from its ecosystem."
5.There are over 6,000 endangered species; only 120 are in breeding programs, only 12 have been returned to the wild (Also, out of 100 captive bred Golden Lion Tamarins that have been released into the wild, only 30 have survived.)
6.There are over 10,000 zoos worldwide; under 500 register their animals on an international endangered species database.
Point 3: We should Preserve Nature Instead
1.If nature was appropriately preserved, we would not need zoos. Michael Fox, Sierra, November-December 1990 - "Zoos are becoming facsimiles - or perhaps caricatures - of how animals once were in their natural habitat. If the right policies toward nature were pursued, we would need no zoos at all."
2.People can use TV shows and interactive DVDs instead of going to zoos. These shows allow viewers to see animals in their natural habitat- the way it should work.
3.Research into animals (when it respects their rights and is not cruel or harmful) may be valuable, but it does not need to happen in the context of confinement and human entertainment. Also, the only way really to understand other species is to study them in their natural habitat and see how they interact socially and with other species of flora and fauna.
4.There are two problems with the claim that zoos are beneficial because they help to conserve endangered species. First, they do not have a very high success rate – many species are going extinct each week despite the good intentions of some zoos. This is partly because a very small captive community of a species is more prone to inter-breeding and birth defects. Secondly, captive breeding to try to stave off extinction need not take place in the context of a zoo, where the public come to look at captive animals and (often) see them perform tricks. Captive breeding programmes should be undertaken in large nature reserves, not within the confines of a zoo.

For these points you should

-=VOTE CON=-
CrysisPillar

Pro

Firstly, I would like to say that I find it VERY inapporpriate that my opponent is referring to me as "it" and constantly saying "pwned noob," as stated at the end of his second refutation in his introduction. This is unprofessional and completely unneccesary.

Now, to refute his points:
1) Some animals need to be in zoos to survive, as I have cleary stated before. Zoos do NOT teach children to imprison animals; according to my opponent, zoos are so cruel that cleary we should not put animals in cages, clearly contradicting his own point.
2) A wildlife reserve costs more money and recieves less revenue than a zoo, which means less money to help the animals. How is this so? The reserve, as the opponent has stated, is in the actual habitat of the animal. Most places where thee wildlife reserves rest are not located near places of trade, places of commerce, or places of human population. And please, as I have stated before, the "Pwned noob" statement is unneccesary.
3) Since when did zoos have animals perform? These are cases at circuses and amusement parks, not at zoos. At zoos, the animals are given food. I don't see how this is abusing animals.
4) Let me ask you, the public. Does going to the zoo and looking at animals make you feel superior? Does looking at a bird the way that you see any other bird make you feel superior?

Refutations to my opponent's main points:
1) Zoos are given revenue, as I have stated before, to better improve the amount of space and resources for the animals. They are caged to be transported to a better place, not kept in cages all their lives. Some animals such as pandas must remain in a place where they cannot escape and cause harm, but not neccessaruly in a cage.
~According to KCBS, they hear that an animal rights group has video evidence that proves animals are being mistreated at the San Francisco Zoo. Did they show any video? No. All they said was that they HEARD that a group had video.
~It is at amusement parks where animals are made to do tricks, and those tricks are not abusive. Abusive tricks would be ones such as starvation of the animal and then tormenting them with food.
2) The zoo is not a prison! The zoo is meant to help the animals recover, and there are programs being created by the revenue to help them! Zoos are not to entertain the public, of "make the human race feel superior" according to my opponent. Zoos were built to help animals that need it!
~Also, he has stated that we should be watching DVD's of animals in their natural habitat. However, humans are invading the habitats of these animals in the wild. Would you rather learn from an animal in real life or sit on the couch and never leave the house to learn?
My opponent has also stated all these facts and has said, "Research has shown this, research has shown that," and has listed no sources to back it up.

here are my points that I have stated before; all of my other points were in the refutations I have just stated:
1) It educates Children and others of animals in the world that are not native to their country.
~You don't get a Zebra running wild in the United States. With zoos, children can get an hands-on or visual experience of nature and what life is like for these animals that they do not get to see running in the wild.
2) Endangered animals would otherwise be extinct without zoos.
~Animals such as the bald eagle or Pandas are endangered. With the help of zoos, these animals are kept safe. Pandas, for example, are being housed at zoos and rescue centers in China, according to ChinaNews, a Hong Kong local newspaper.
3) Zoos provide revenue for cities as well as for the zoo itself to expand programs to help the animals.
Especially those with endangered animals, zoos earn revenue from visitors and can use some of that money to expand land and supplies for the care of the animals. The Oakland Zoo in California is putting in a nice chunk of their funds, 20% of their revenue, to help their elephants.
4) Zoos are great recreational spots.
~Families and children alike visit zoos, especially during vacation times. according to newsdesk.si.edu, a total of 2.2 million people visit the United States National Zoo every year.

For all these reasons, and mine, Zoos clearly do more good than harm.
Debate Round No. 3
Rockylightning

Con

First, I would like to say that she wanted to be called "IT" to conceal gender, oops...
and saying owned noob does not have to do with this at all, it's an inside joke!

In a refutation my opponent stated that I contradicted myself, do not see how this is true because my points that you brought up are in accordance with one another.
2. My opponent stated that wildlife reserves cost more money and receive less revenue: People, we have to decide to do what's better for the animals, or what's better for our wallets, my opponent also stated that it's less money to help the animal, but why would you need a lot of money to "help" the animal if "helping" it is imprisoning it, feeding it fancy foods, and giving them special care? An animal can take care of itself, so obviously a wildlife reserve is far better than a zoo!
3. Zoos have ALWAYS made animals do tricks! At the SF zoo, i watched on youtube as a keeper held a peice of meat over a wild-cat's head as it tried to jump and get it. At the NYC zoo I watched as penguins did tricks through hoops. How is this "helping animals"? It's simply reaping the benefits of wild animals that were unfairly caught and imprisoned!

Refutations to my opponents refutation to my main points:
1) Zoos may spend their revenue to help the animals, yes this is true. But zoos also have to pay their employees. Zoos are BUSINESSES they run for the money, they have to pay their zoo keepers, mascots, food sellers, and the bosses and everything else that costs money, when it comes down to the animals, they get a tiny share!
2) In fact a zoo IS a prison, the size and conditions of the jail cell do NOT matter. According to mermiriam webster dictionary- A jail is defined as "a state of confinement or captivity". So if the jail cell is a pond, a large forest like area, a cave, or a glass chamber, these are jail cells, and the zoo is a prison.
3) One more think- you have only stated a few sources, it is KCBS, china news, OK those are reliable but it's only a few, and I HAVE stated sources by the way.
===============================================================
To refute my opponent's points~
1) "You don't get a zebra running wild in the US: FOR GOOD REASON! Zebras are native to some parts of Africa! Even in the town I live in right now, there are wild boars running around that are native to Spain! It is not right to have foreign, exotic, animals in the US!
2) Bald eagles and pandas need to be saved, yes, but isn't it also true, we take he pandas into our zoos, but we keep destroying their habitat! We KEEP cutting down the bamboo forests and we repeatedly tresspass on land dedicated to pandas just for economical means! The human race is being hypocritical if we do a good action like saving pandas, then take away their land! It's like just moving them out of the way!
3)- Refuted above
4) Yes, but dictionary.com defines recreation as "a pastime, diversion, that offers enjoyment. " Lets get something straight, exotic, rare, and endangered animals should not be "A diversion that offers enjoyment" if enjoyment is watching an animal do tricks then yes, it's recreation.

Let me restate my points:
Point 1: Mistreatment of Animals
1.According to "animal-rights.org", "Zoos often mistreat animals, keeping them in small pens or cages. This is unfair and cruel. The natural instincts and behavior of these animals are suppressed by force. How can anyone observe wild animals under such circumstances and believe that one has been educated?

Point 2: Don't preserve Endangered Species
1.According to the North County Times of San Diego, "Zoos are built for human entertainment and don't seriously consider the animals' quality of life, animal advocates said. They said the elephant euthanized June 19 should have been sent to an animal sanctuary instead and that the park's mistreatment of the animal was what caused her foot problems and degenerative joint disease. "The zoo is not a sanctuary," said Florence Lambert, founder of the La Jolla-based Elephant Alliance. "On the contrary, it's a prison.""

Point 3: We should Preserve Nature Instead
1.If nature was appropriately preserved, we would not need zoos. Michael Fox, Sierra, November-December 1990 - "Zoos are becoming facsimiles - or perhaps caricatures - of how animals once were in their natural habitat. If the right policies toward nature were pursued, we would need no zoos at all."

-=VOTE CON=-

http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
CrysisPillar

Pro

I would like to start by refuting all of Rockylightning's points, and thank him for making this debate possible. It has been nice debating you.

1) Getting money to help the animals is helping. Keeping them in a reserve with absolutely no resources, however, is not. As I have clearly hammered in during this debate, some animals need help to survive and not become extinct.
2) Considering that these animals are better off with the help of humans and our resources than being in the wild, I'm sure that zoos aren't being "unfair" to them.
3) Zoos do have to pay their employees and owe some money to the city. However, at wildlife reserves, animals only get resources from donations. If there was a sharp decrease in the amount of donations, they would all be doomed. A zoo, on the other hand, brings in constant revenue.
4) If a jail is a "state of confinement of captivity," is keeping a pet hamster that cannot be found and will not survive on its own in the wild considered animal abuse?
5) Is China News not a valid source? I'm not sure that YouTube or "I have seen" anecdotes are very valid sources, either. Besides, it is foolish to debate over sources, so I will end this point here.

1) I would like to say that there are not wild boars running around in your town considering that we live within 2 miles of each other in the same city. Also, are you implying that we should not have certain kinds of unnative dogs in our country? Should we send all of our pets back to where their ancestors came from?

2) We are not debating over China's actions; it is their choice to cut down the bamboo forests. Zoos are trying to help these pandas. It isn't the zoos that are cutting down their habitats.

3) Zoos are recreational. A pastime could be learning about animals. Visiting monuments to learn are pastimes, too.

Let me restate my arguements:
Here are the main reasons why Zoos do more good than harm.
1) It educates Children and others of animals in the world that are not native to their country.
2) Endangered animals would otherwise be extinct without zoos.
3) Zoos provide revenue for cities as well as for the zoo itself to expand programs to help the animals.
4) Zoos are great recreational spots.

And for these reasons, zoos clearly do more good than harm to the animals and to humans.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by CrysisPillar 7 years ago
CrysisPillar
Votebombing truce? :P
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
dang
Posted by CrysisPillar 7 years ago
CrysisPillar
AAaand you forfeited a round.
Posted by CrysisPillar 7 years ago
CrysisPillar
I made a killing rebuttal; good luck.
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
pwned noob
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by popculturepooka 7 years ago
popculturepooka
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by True2GaGa 7 years ago
True2GaGa
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Vote Placed by DylanFromSC 7 years ago
DylanFromSC
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by CrysisPillar 7 years ago
CrysisPillar
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Vote Placed by redbrave70 7 years ago
redbrave70
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by mpthemaster 7 years ago
mpthemaster
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by moeinc 7 years ago
moeinc
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70