The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Zoos should be indefinitely banned.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/28/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,497 times Debate No: 23252
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




In this debate, I will argue that zoos should not be indefinitely banned. My argument will comprise of four main points: the joy they bring, the protection to endangered species they offer, their benefits to society, and their rightful place in society.

Simply put, zoos create memories. There is nothing more fascinating to children, adolescents, and adults alike than to see a variety of exotic and familiar animals. With visitations to zoos comes multifarious benefits, including revenue and traffic. However, perhaps the most significant benefit is the information it provides. With this information, people are more like to respect the environment and seek a stable and healthy ecosystem.

Therefore, it is only logical to keep this very important component of society around for generations to come.


Zoos take animals out of protected parks in their natural habitat.

Most zoos get their exotic animals not from highrisk zones were they can be poached, but from protected national parks. This means we have an animal leaving a park were it can reproduce and eventually re-enter its natural habitat, to go to a zoo where it offers nothing to its eco-system and global population. Endangerd animals usually can't be rehabilitated into the wild if they've been kept in zoos, it is too much of a drastic change, they'll starve.

Do zoos increase interest and respect in the environment?

I don't see how knowing the lifespan of a norweigan ostrich is going to mke you stop littering. The interest is generated mostly by the diets of the carnivouros cats and other exotics, the sort of information given has nthing to do with a healthy envirnoment.

Are zoos cruel?

Yes, no habitat is ever big enough. Animals need miles of terrain and constant stimulation which zoos don't provide. See pacing tiger syndrome.
Debate Round No. 1


Pro states that zoos gather their animals from protected parks and their natural habitat, but offers no evidence to back this claim. The truth is that zoos gather their animals from other zoos who have an excess of animals, or from areas that have an abundance of the species already. Additionally, zoos will sometimes save species near extinction by relocating them and giving them a fighting chance at survival. By keeping them in zoos, the species is able to repopulate easily, thus saving the species.

Pro's second claim is that zoos do not increase interest and respect for the environment. However, this is purely a personal opinion, which many people would disagree with. The truth is that when people understand that such a wide array of organisms exist, they seek to learn more about them and their environment. Additionally, many zoos have environmental campaigns targeted to a variety of ages.


Vote Con!


Do zoos save species from extinction?

Nope, once an animal is in a zoo it quickly loses its instinct and ability to survive in the wild. Absolutely mundane to put animals in zoos. No species can be saved by zoos, their offspring have no ability to survive in the wild.

Do zoos save the environment?

As con said, it depends on the person. I don't think that a lesson on the lifespan of an ostrich will stop anyone from littering and con hasn't told us why it will. Zoo education teaches about animals, not sustainable living.

All other contentions have been dropped.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.